Skip to main content

Home/ Indie Nation/ Group items tagged sharing

Rss Feed Group items tagged

John Lemke

File-Sharing Boosts Creation of New Hit Music, Research Finds | TorrentFreak - 0 views

  • It is clear that file-sharing encourages the distribution of existing music, and in a paper titled “A Case Study of File Sharing and Music Output” the professor examines what the connection is between music piracy and the creation of new music.
  • The paper provides empirical evidence that file sharing did not reduce the creation of new hit songs. Instead, more new music entered the hit charts, an effect that’s driven by existing artists.
  • The data shows that the output from existing artists increased, while new artists appeared less frequently in the hit charts. However, since the new material from existing artists was greater than the loss from new artists, the “creation” of new music increased overall.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • “Specifically, the [result] suggests that the 58.92 percent decline in record sales would be associated with a net increase of 20.6 new songs in the study’s sample annually, all else constant,” Professor Lunney writes.
John Lemke

Personal file-sharing is legal in Portugal, prosecutor says | Ars Technica - 0 views

  • Portugese prosecutors have declined to press charges against individuals accused of file sharing
  • “From a legal point of view, while taking into account that users are both uploaders and downloaders in these file-sharing networks, we see this conduct as lawful, even when it’s considered that the users continue to share once the download is finished.” The prosecutor adds that the right to education, culture, and freedom of expression on the Internet should not be restricted in cases where the copyright infringements are clearly non-commercial. In addition, the order notes that an IP-address is not a person.
John Lemke

Switzerland Questions Crazy Hollywood Claims About File Sharing... Ends Up On Congressi... - 0 views

  • Last December, we wrote about a report put out by the Swiss executive branch noting that, based on their research, it appeared that unauthorized file sharing was not a big deal, showing that consumers were still spending just as much on entertainment, and that much of it was going directly to artists, rather than to middlemen. In other words, it was a market shift, not a big law enforcement problem. At the time, we wondered if Switzerland had just bought itself a place on the USTR's "Special 301 list" that the administration uses each year to shame countries that Hollywood doesn't like.
John Lemke

David Byrne and Cory Doctorow Explain Music and the Internet | culture | Torontoist - 0 views

  • Byrne and Doctorow were there to talk about how the internet has affected the music business. While that was certainly a large part of the discussion, the conversation also touched on all the ways technology and music interact, from file sharing to sampling.
  • Doctorow pointed out that two of the best-selling and most critically acclaimed hip-hop records of the 1980s—Public Enemy’s It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back, and the Beastie Boys Paul’s Boutique—would have each cost roughly $12 million to make given today’s rules surrounding sample clearance.
  • “In the world of modern music, there are no songs with more than one or two samples, because no one wants to pay for that,” Doctorow said. “So, there’s a genre of music that, if it exists now, exists entirely outside the law. Anyone making music like Paul’s Boutique can’t make money from it, and is in legal jeopardy for having done it. Clearly that’s not what we want copyright to do.” When the conversation turned to downloads and digital music distribution, both men were surprisingly passionate on the topic of digital rights management, and how it’s fundamentally a bad idea.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • Doctorow argued that the way humans have historically shared music is totally antithetical to the idea of copyright laws. He pointed out that music predates not only the concept of copyright, but language itself. People have always wanted to share music, and, in an odd way, the sharing of someone else’s music is embedded in the industry’s business model, no matter how badly some may want to remove it.
  •  
    "Doctorow pointed out that two of the best-selling and most critically acclaimed hip-hop records of the 1980s-Public Enemy's It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back, and the Beastie Boys Paul's Boutique-would have each cost roughly $12 million to make given today's rules surrounding sample clearance."
John Lemke

US Court Secretly Lets Government Share Megaupload Evidence With Copyright Industry | T... - 0 views

  • Apparently part of the issue for the original filing to reveal this information was that some copyright holders are getting antsy that as the case drags on, they won't also be able to file civil cases against Megaupload before the three-year statute of limitations expires. However, as Megaupload's lawyers point out, there is no urgency here since the government itself made no move to share this information over the past two years. If it really wanted to share the information it had ample time to make the request and allow Megaupload's lawyers to review and take part in the process, rather than trying to route around them entirely. I'm guessing the recent successes against IsoHunt and Hotfile may have contributed to the timing as well. The MPAA pretty clearly thinks it can use those two cases to go after Megaupload as well, outside of the criminal case which will continue.
John Lemke

Recording Industry Rep Suggests Parents Should Slap Their Children To Stop Piracy | Tec... - 0 views

  • A ruling handed down yesterday by Germany's highest court represents a blow to rightsholders in their quest to clamp down on illicit file-sharing. The court ruled that the parents of a teenager who had made available more than 1,100 songs on file-sharing networks can not be held responsible for their son's infringements, nor be required to monitor or hinder his online activities.
  • The Court ruled that the parents had met their parental obligations when they informed their child of "basic do's and don'ts" including that file-sharing copyrighted content online is illegal. Furthermore, the Court ruled that the parents were not required to monitor their child's online activities nor install special software to restrict his online behavior. This would only be required should the parents have "reasonable grounds" to presume that their child would engage in infringing activities online.
John Lemke

File-sharer will take RIAA case to Supreme Court | Ars Technica - 0 views

  • Jammie Thomas-Rasset
  • the first US file-sharer to take her RIAA-initiated lawsuit all the way to a trial and a verdict back in 2007. Five years, three trials, and one appeal later, she owes $222,000 to the recording industry for sharing songs on the Kazaa file-sharing network, but she doesn't plan to quit fighting.
  • Thomas-Rasset will follow Joel Tenenbaum, the second US resident to take his file-sharing case that far. Tenenbaum—who reached the Supreme Court first because he had only one jury trial instead of three—tried to convince the justices that they should take his case to stop the music label plan to create, in his lawyer's words, "an urban legend so frightening to children using the Internet, and so frightening for parents and teachers of students using the Internet, that they will somehow reverse the tide of the digital future." The Supremes showed no interest, denying Tenenbaum's petition back in May.
John Lemke

Court: Fining Jammie Thomas $9,250 Per Song Infringed Motivates Creative Activity | Tec... - 0 views

  • This is hardly a surprise, but similar to the Joel Tenenbaum case, Jammie Thomas-Rasset (the other person sued for copyright infringement for using a file sharing system), has lost again. The appeals court (8th Circuit) has ruled that $9,250 per song infringed is perfectly reasonable and that the judge in the case, Michael Davis, erred in calling for a new trial after the initial jury verdict (the first of three). There were a number of procedural issues here, and it's worth pointing out that Thomas-Rasset herself more or less asked the court to bring back this first verdict and focus on the Constitutionality of the damages amount. So, the whole mess with the three separate district court trials sort of gets swept under the rug. However, the court simply isn't buying Thomas-Rasset's claim that the statutory damages are unconstitutionally punitive and a violation of due process. Basically, it says that the fact that statutory damages are completely out of whack with actual damages doesn't matter, because the point of statutory damages is that they're disconnected from actual damages on purpose (because, in theory, they're put in place because actual damages are difficult to assess).
John Lemke

A Social Networking Site For Criminals Lands Two Teens In Jail « The Blade by... - 0 views

  •  
    Most of us are familiar with Facebook, but has anyone heard of 'Crimebook'? The novel social networking site was set up by two British teens to entertain the criminal element of society. These teens were raking in the money to the tune of some $26M with some 8,000 crooks using the social site to exchange stolen credit card information. The teens also shared the bank accounts of some 65,000 customers who had their accounts hacked by the thieves.
John Lemke

Researchers discover that cars can be hacked with music - Hack a Day - 0 views

  •  
    ome car entertainment systems were susceptible to specially-crafted MP3 files. The infected songs allowed them to inject malicious code into the system when burned to a CD and played. While this sort of virus could spread fairly easily with the popularity of P2P file sharing, it would likely be pretty useless at present.
John Lemke

FCC to buy out TV broadcasters to free up mobile spectrum | Ars Technica - 0 views

    • John Lemke
       
      I had my first issue at step one, "asks broadcasters to tell the FCC how much it wold take for the agency to buy them out".  They claim that this is a way to keep cost down by hopefully grabbing the least popular via low bids.   I see two issues immediately.  Number one by asking them what they want they are going to immediately INCREASE the bids.  Two, if you are asking me what I want for my business to change how it broadcasts why would I not include any expense to make the switch. By asking them what they think a fair bid would be, they are, more or less, giving them a blank check.
  • the commission will put the newly-freed blocks of spectrum up for auction. If, as expected, the spectrum is more valuable when used for mobile services than broadcast television, then the FCC should reap significantly more from these traditional auctions than it had to pay for the spectrum in the original reverse auctions, producing a tidy profit for taxpayers.
    • John Lemke
       
      The objective at an auction is to purchase the object at the lowest possible cost.  How much mobile providers are willing to pay will determine how high bids will climb.  Based on how our current mobile providers already provide poor service when compared to the rest of the world, how much is that bandwidth actually worth to these companies that, more or less, have a lobbied stranglehold on the consumer?
  • ...6 more annotations...
  • Bergmayer also praised an FCC proposal to update its "spectrum screen," a set of rules that prevent any single provider from gaining too large a share of the spectrum available in a particular market. The current scheme, he said, "treats all spectrum alike, even though some spectrum bands are better-suited to mobile broadband than others." As a result, he argued, it has become ineffective at preventing Verizon and AT&T from gaining enough spectrum to threaten competition. He urged the FCC to revise the rules to ensure the new auctions don't further entrench the dominance of the largest incumbents.
    • John Lemke
       
      It is the stuff like this that worries me, on one hand they want a high bid, and on the other it is going to be regulated.
  • Over the last decade, it has become increasingly obvious that America's spectrum resources are mis-allocated. The proliferation of cell phones, and more recently smartphones and tablets, has given mobile providers a voracious appetite for new spectrum. But a big chunk of the available spectrum is currently occupied by broadcast television stations. With more and more households subscribed to cable, satellite, and Internet video services, traditional broadcast television is looking like an increasingly outmoded use of the scarce and valuable airwaves.
  • incumbent broadcasters have controlled their channels for so long that they've come to be regarded as de facto property rights. And needless to say, the politically powerful broadcasters have fiercely resisted any efforts to force them to relinquish their spectrum.
  • incentive auctions
  • The plan has three phases. In the first phase, the FCC will conduct a reverse auction in which it asks broadcasters to tell the FCC how much it would take for the agency to buy them out. Presumably, the least popular (and, therefore, least profitable) channels will submit the lowest bids. By accepting these low bids, the FCC can free up the maximum possible spectrum at the minimum cost
John Lemke

Inside NZ Police Megaupload files: US investigation began in 2010 | Ars Technica - 0 views

  • Further evidence of overeager and illegal police work emerged Thursday in New Zealand as Inspector General of Security and Intelligence Paul Neazor released a report on the illegal bugging of Kim Dotcom and Megaupload programmer Bram van der Kolk. Two GCSB officers were present at a police station nearby Dotcom’s mansion as the raid took place.
  • Police weighed several options for the raid named “Operation Debut,” undertaken at the behest of US authorities, and sought to take Dotcom and associates with the “greatest element of surprise” and to minimise any delays the in executing the search and seizure operation should the German file sharing tycoon’s staff be uncooperative or even resist officers on arrival.
  • The police planners also noted that “Dotcom will use violence against person’s [sic] and that he has several staff members who are willing to use violence at Dotcom’s bidding” after a U.S. cameraman, Jess Bushyhead, reported the Megaupload founder for assaulting him with his stomach after a dispute. Based on Dotcom’s license plates such as MAFIA, POLICE, STONED, GUILTY, and HACKER, police said this indicates the German “likes to think of himself as a gangster” and is “described as arrogant, flamboyant and having disregard for law enforcement.” However, the documents show that Dotcom had only been caught violating the speed limit in New Zealand. The request for assistance from the STG notes that the US investigation against Mega Media Group and Dotcom was started in March 2010 by prosecutors and the FBI. According to the documents, US prosecutors and FBI “discovered that the Mega Media Group had engaged in and facilitated criminal copyright infringement and money laundering on a massive scale around the world.” FBI in turn contacted NZ Police in “early 2011," requesting assistance with the Mega Media Group investigation as Dotcom had moved to New Zealand at the time.
John Lemke

Dotcom Thanks RIAA and MPAA for Mega's Massive Growth | TorrentFreak - 0 views

  • That’s more than 10,000 files per minute….
  • The continuing debate about the NSA’s mass-surveillance is also likely to have helped Mega. Unlike other popular cloud hosting services, Mega encrypts all stored files so they can’t be snooped on. Similarly, the fact that former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice joined Dropbox may have also had an impact according to Dotcom.
John Lemke

New Zealand Launched Mass Surveillance Project While Publicly Denying It - The Intercept - 0 views

  • Documents provided by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden show that the government worked in secret to exploit a new internet surveillance law enacted in the wake of revelations of illegal domestic spying to initiate a new metadata collection program that appeared designed to collect information about the communications of New Zealanders.
  • Those actions are in direct conflict with the assurances given to the public by Prime Minister John Key (pictured above), who said the law was merely designed to fix “an ambiguous legal framework” by expressly allowing the agency to do what it had done for years, that it “isn’t and will never be wholesale spying on New Zealanders,” and the law “isn’t a revolution in the way New Zealand conducts its intelligence operations.”
  • Snowden explained that “at the NSA, I routinely came across the communications of New Zealanders in my work with a mass surveillance tool we share with GCSB, called ‘X KEYSCORE.”" He further detailed that “the GCSB provides mass surveillance data into XKEYSCORE. They also provide access to the communications of millions of New Zealanders to the NSA at facilities such as the GCSB facility in Waihopai, and the Prime Minister is personally aware of this fact.”
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • Top secret documents provided by the whistleblower demonstrate that the GCSB, with ongoing NSA cooperation, implemented Phase I of the mass surveillance program code-named “Speargun” at some point in 2012
  • Over the weekend, in anticipation of this report, Key admitted for the first time that the GCSB did plan a program of mass surveillance aimed at his own citizens, but claimed that he ultimately rejected the program before implementation. Yesterday, after The Intercept sought comment from the NSA, the Prime Minister told reporters in Auckland that this reporting was referring merely to “a proposed widespread cyber protection programme that never got off the ground.” He vowed to declassify documents confirming his decision.
  • That legislation arose after it was revealed in 2012 that the GCSB illegally surveilled the communications of Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom, a legal resident of New Zealand. New Zealand law at the time forbade the GCSB from using its surveillance apparatus against citizens or legal residents. That illegal GCSB surveillance of Dotcom was followed by a massive military-style police raid by New Zealand authorities on his home in connection with Dotcom’s criminal prosecution in the United States for copyright violations. A subsequent government investigation found that the GCSB not only illegally spied on Dotcom but also dozens of other citizens and legal residents. The deputy director of GCSB resigned. The government’s response to these revelations was to refuse to prosecute those who ordered the illegal spying and, instead, to propose a new law that would allow domestic electronic surveillance.
    • John Lemke
       
      The Dotcom raid was ruled illegal.  Yet the Dotcom spying was exactly the type of activity of this plan.
  • n high-level discussions between the Key government and the NSA, the new law was clearly viewed as the crucial means to empower the GCSB to engage in metadata surveillance. On more than one occasion, the NSA noted internally that Project Speargun, in the process of being implemented, could not and would not be completed until the new law was enacted.
John Lemke

Feds confiscate investigative reporter's confidential files during raid | The Daily Caller - 0 views

  • A search warrant obtained by TheDC indicates that the August raid allowed law enforcement to search for firearms inside her home.
  • The document notes that her husband, Paul Flanagan, was found guilty in 1986 to resisting arrest in Prince George’s County. The warrant called for police to search the residence they share and seize all weapons and ammunition because he is prohibited under the law from possessing firearms. But without Hudson’s knowledge, the agents also confiscated a batch of documents that contained information about sources inside the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration, she said.
John Lemke

New Theory Suggests Parallel Universes Interact With And Affect Our Own Universe | IFLS... - 0 views

  • This new theory suggests that all of these infinite multiple worlds overlap and occupy the same region of time and space simultaneously, just like a quantum state. 
  • Under this new interpretation, some worlds in parallel universes would be nearly identical. In others, the “Butterfly Effect” is responsible for completely different outcomes. Each universe is equally real; it isn’t that one universe is the truth while others are bizarre copies or lesser in any way. Wiseman also believes that the quantum forces responsible for driving this shared existence are also responsible for causing quantum interactions between the worlds.
1 - 19 of 19
Showing 20 items per page