"jason schultz"

Terrorist sympathizer Andy Griffith rails against Patriot Act

Sheriff Andy Taylor lectures Opie on the ethical and legal issues around unauthorized eavesdropping in this clip from the Andy Griffith Show. Link (Thanks, Jason Schultz!)

Reader comments: Guilherme Roschke from epic.org says.

I shared the video with my colleagues here at the Electronic Privacy Information Center. With some digging, one of my colleagues figured out that this show aired on October 30, 1967.

That's two weeks after the Supreme Court heard the oral arguments in Katz vs. United States. The FBI had tapped a phone booth without a warrant, and convicted a gambler based on that. The Katz court overturned the conviction, stating that the 4th amendment prohibits this sort of a wiretap without a warrant.

For more on Katz, see wikipedia: Link.

Read the rest

Ethan Ackerman schools us on DMCA and ISPs' obligations

Griefer Madness continues! Responding to BoingBoing posts (1, 2) about serial internet bully Michael Crook -- and coverage on Wired's 27BStroke6 security blog -- Washington, DC attorney and tech law specialist Ethan Ackerman offers legal insight. He reminds us that the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA), not Crook, is the real bad guy here, and points out that ISPs and photo or video-hosting services have more options when sent a DMCA notice here than they may realize:

Regarding your coverage of the so-richly-deserved EFF suit filed against Michael Crook on 27b/6 & boingboing, you both repeat the assertion that an ISP has to (BoingBoing) "take immediate action, even before proof of copyright ownership was examined" or (27b/6) "act immediately to have an image removed, even before they check if the claim is correct."

An ISP has to act "expeditiously" under the Act, and the Act was totally designed to work just like you describe, BUT this doesn't prevent the ISP from notifying her client/subscriber BEFORE pulling the content . This might seem like nitpicking, but it can be vital because it can let lawyers get involved to enjoin the takedown, all without risking the ISP safe harbor.

Say Laughing Squid gets a DMCA notice from the DoJ in the email Monday morning over Xeni's scoop publication of the "Pentagon 2" papers - critical stuff for free press and democracy - if they notify Xeni, saying they're pulling at 5pm, she can call Jason Schultz, who can get an injunction at the courthouse that very afternoon telling Laughing Squid to ignore the DMCA notice.

Read the rest

Michael Crook sends bogus DMCA takedown notice to BoingBoing

If this were a movie, they'd call it Griefer Madness.

(Story background here). Serial internet bully Michael Crook, whom the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is suing for sending phony DMCA takedown notices to critical blogs in an attempt to silence them, has issued a phony DMCA takedown notice to BoingBoing in an attempt to silence us.

Here is a copy of the bogus DMCA notice: Link.

Crook (an assumed and self-chosen name, according to this website) is most recently known for copying fellow "griefer" Jason Fortuny: both Fortuny and Crook posted fake, sexually explicit ads on Craigslist, to trick sexually adventurous guys into sharing their photos and personal information. Then, Fortuny -- and later, Crook -- posted the victims' photos and data on the internet.

The homemade DMCA takedown notice (sent as an MS Word email attachment) which Crook sent to BoingBoing's ISP (based in Canada, where the DMCA don't shine) pertains to this image, which is a screengrab from Crook's appearance on the Fox News channel program, "Hannity and Colmes." Crook appeared on that show to talk about websites he'd made -- on those sites, he denied the existence of the Holocaust, said soldiers who die in Iraq get what they deserve, and police in the US deserve the same, among other things.

The notice is bogus for a number of reasons. First, fair use. Second, the image was produced by Fox, not Crook. Third, the image in this BoingBoing post is not hosted on boingboing.net Read the rest

Free talk on copy-friendly biz-models, Tuesday in LA at USC

Next Tuesday at 7PM, I'm hosting a public talk at USC by Revver co-founder Steven Starr. Revver is a company that helps video creators add commercials to their short films, which creates a situation where the more a video is copied, the better it is for the creator. this is in marked contrast to the Hollysaurs, who are still pursuing improbably businesses that only work if they can make the Internet worse at copying bits.

Steven's talk is part of my ongoing series of talks by copyright scholars, engineers, security experts, policy wonks and other people with interesting things to say about the copyright wars. We podcast every one, and they're attended by a really eclectic mix of artists, hackers, international development types -- even lawyers from major studios.

Steven's talk fits in by talking about new platforms for creativity that embrace the Internet's fundamental nature as a machine for copying bits fast and freely -- business models that don't try to change the world, but rather, capitalize on it.

Where: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, main campus, Annenberg School, Room 207

When: Tuesday, October 17, 2006, 7PM-9PM


Audio from previous talks:

Wendy Seltzer, ChillingEffects/Digital TV Liberation Front Bruce Schneier Bruce Sterling Michael Ayers, Toshiba Jason Schultz, EFF Read the rest

Digital TV liberation front/Chilling Effects talk at USC

Next Tuesday night, October 3, I'm hosting a free talk by Wendy Seltzer, the lawyer who founded EFF's Digital TV liberation front -- teaching people how to build the TV sets that the Broadcast Flag would ban -- and the Chilling Effects project -- which documents and analyzes the nastygrams used to censor Internet speech.

Wendy's coming to my USC speaker-series on Oct 3, the International Day Against DRM to tell us about the ways that copyright law have become a tool for censorship, perverting the original intention of copyright, to enable creativity. If you're looking to understand how free speech become suppressed speech, you need to come to this talk.

Wendy presently teaches at Brooklyn Law, and is one of a small but growing number of lawyers who can write code as well as hacking law. She is a Harvard Berkman Fellow, and a smart lawyer, a fine writer, and a great speaker.

As you've heard from the previous speaker podcasts (Jason Schultz, EFF, Michael Ayers, Toshiba, Bruce Sterling, Bruce Schneier) these are great, interdisciplinary talks, attracting engineers, lawyers, film studies people, hackers, artists and musicians, people in industry, students, and hobbyists. I hope you'll make it next Tuesday!

Where: University of Southern California, Annenberg School, Room 240, Los Angeles

When: Tuesday, October 3, 7PM - the International Day Against DRM

Link Read the rest

Audio, slides from Jason Schultz's USC talk on Internet Freedom

USC's Annenberg Center for Public Diplomacy is hosting audio from last week's speech by Jason Schultz, the EFF lawyer who runs the patent-busting project. Jason gave a great talk on Internet Freedom (his slides are online, too) -- the ways in which we've benefitted from an open Internet, and the ways that openness is threatened on all fronts, by legislators, greed, and censors. Regular Boing Boing readers will recognize Jason's name from the frequent contributions he makes here on matters of law -- his talk was tremendous.

You can subscribe to a podcast of all the USC Public Diplomacy talks that I'm hosting here -- upcoming speakers include Toshiba's Michael Ayers, EFF's Fred von Lohmann and Seth Schoen, Wendy Seltzer of ChillingEffects, Revver's Steven Starr, Xbox hacker Bunnie Huang, Bruce Sterling, Bruce Schneier, Jamie Love from the Consumer Project on Technology, and the grand finale, a triple-header from EFF founders John Gilmore, John Perry Barlow, and Mitch Kapor!

Link Read the rest

EFF's Jason Schultz speaks at USC next Tuesday

I'm running a public speaker series on copyright, culture and technology in conjunction with my Fulbright Chair at USC's Annenberg Center on Public Diplomacy, and next Tuesday we'll have our first speaker: Jason Schultz. Regular Boing Boing readers will recognize Jason as a frequent commentator on legal issues. He's also the lead on EFF's patent-busting project, as well as a feminist activist and all-round mensch.

Where: USC Annenberg Center, room 207, 3502 Watt Way, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0281 When: Tuesday, September 5, 7PM-9PM

The event is free and open to the public. Hope to see you there!


Read the rest

More on YouTube's controversial new terms and conditions: UPDATED

Update: YouTube's response is here (scroll down to the end of the post).

Earlier today on BoingBoing, I pointed to discussions around the blogosphere about YouTube's newly updated Terms & Conditions. As Eliot Van Buskirk wrote on the Wired News music blog "Listening Post," the new policy appears to give YouTube more rights over user-uploaded content than before. Link to post, with some insightful comments, both pro and con, from readers.

I asked Jason Schultz of the EFF what he thought of the news, and he tells BB:

Your commenters are pretty much correct. YouTube wants to CYA itself in case it flows into new formats with old videos, e.g., cell phone downloads. They don't want to have to go back and relicense all the content in new mediums. And its also true that simply yanking the video will cut off all their rights, which is a powerful weapon to keep them in check.

When the Billy Bragg folks complained about MySpace, it was basically over the same issue, so now that MySpace has responded with some clarity, it might behoove YouTube to do the same.

One thing they could say is that any reproductions, distributions, derivatives, etc. that they make of your work would not be sold separately as a distinct product. This would keep them from burning CDs or DVDs and the like.

Reader comments... Read the rest

Photo pool: laptop stickers

Link (Thanks, Jason Schultz) Read the rest

Civil rights of transgender Army vet confirmed by court

A federal judge ruled last week that an employment discrimination suit against the Library of Congress, brought by the ACLU on behalf of a transgender veteran, may go forward. Plaintiff Diane Schroer is a male-to-female transsexual and a 25-year veteran of the U.S. Army. Snip from ACLU notice:

Finding that sex may not be "a cut-and-dried matter of chromosomes," the court ruled that federal protections against sex discrimination may also protect transgender people who are discriminated against based on their gender identity. In rejecting the government's argument that discrimination against transgender people is not sex discrimination, the court noted "the factual complexities that underlie human sexual identity. These complexities stem from real variations in how the different components of biological sexuality -- chromosomal, gonadal, hormonal, and neurological -- interact with each other, and in turn, with social, psychological, and legal conceptions of gender."

Link to more on the ACLU's website, and here's a copy of the court's decision (PDF). (Thanks, Jason Schultz!) Read the rest

Court orders Google to provide teabagging, pearlnecklaces to DoJ

Jason Schultz says,

Here's a PDF copy of the actual order in the Department of Justice subpoena to Google for porn search results and queries (Gonzales v. Google). It's not every day that you see the phrases "teabagging" and "pearlnecklace" footnoted in a legal opinion -- see page 8, footnote 3. Also page 13, footnote 6 is highly amusing. Anyway, the bottom line is that Google has to turn over 50,000 random URLs from its index but no query strings, so most of the privacy concerns are now moot.

Link to PDF (Thanks, Jason Schultz!), and here's a related NYT report on the ruling by Katie Hafner. Attorney Daniel Solove has an analysis post on his blog, here.

Previously on BoingBoing:DoJ search requests: Google said no; Yahoo, AOL, MSN yes. Read the rest

New bill: Cyber Safety For Kids Act of 2006

Senators Mark Pryor (D-AR), and Max Baucus, (D-MT) have proposed a bill that would require all commercial websites with material "harmful to minors" (in other words, sexually explicit content) to move to a .xxx domain within 6 months of this bill becoming law -- or face civil penalties. Under the terms of the proposed law, the US Commerce Department secretary would be required to develop a domain name for adult sites (presumably .xxx) with ICANN. Snip from one news report:

Adult industry representatives say the bill if enacted would have a chilling effect on free speech. "This is constitutionally protected speech -- we're not talking about illegal content," said Tom Hymes, a spokesman for the Free Speech Coalition, the trade association representing the adult entertainment industry.

The proposal is an ineffective approach to the problem since many of the adult Web sites are based outside the country and the civil penalties would not apply to them, he said. Hymes said the companies would find ways to circumvent the new designation, including moving their operations offshore. Instead, he proposed setting up a .kids domain name for children-friendly content.

The industry would incur costs from new registration fees and losses from existing marketing campaigns on .com and .biz domains, Hymes said, but he did not think it would get that far. "The likelihood is that this legislation would be challenged as being unconstitutional were it to go through," Hymes said.

Jason Schultz adds, "Talk about a misguided attempt at Internet zoning... also has severe implications for filtering as I'd imagine every .xxx Read the rest

NJ Assemblyman introduces bill to force online identification

Jason Schultz says,

Peter J. Biondi, NJ Assemblyman for District 16, has introduced A1327, a bill to force every ISP and website with comments/forums to demand user identification from every single poster (called an "information content provider" in the bill). While ostensibly an effort to stop defamation on the net, the identification requirements apply to all posters, not just those who defame others.

Link Read the rest

Xeni on ABC World News Tonight: billionth iTunes download

I'll be a guest on ABC World News Tonight Thursday evening for a segment on the significance of a milestone for Apple's iTunes Music Store: the one billionth song was purchased and downloaded today. Will the success of iTMS and Apple's iPod foster a more competitive digital music marketplace, with more choice for music fans? Or should consumers brace themselves for a future in which music and movies are locked up in proprietary, non-interoperable systems that limit our freedom to enjoy tunes we've legally obtained? Link to ABC World News homepage, here's a related news synopsis on the ABC.com site. Here's a press release from Apple about the billionth download (a Coldplay song, btw). Image: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images.

Reader comment: Jason Schultz says,

Worth noting also that it's taken Apple about three years to sell a billion songs, which is a drop in the bucket compared to CD sales and especially compared to P2P traffic, even today. So while this is nice for Apple, it's still not showing signs of replacing the existing music distribution mechanisms.

Reader comment: Jonathan Tilney says,

Read this item and the comment by Jason that this was after three years. While it is correct, it should be remembered that it took iTunes 27 months to record its first 500 million sales and only 7 months to do the second 500 million. Its growth is looking like becoming exponential.

Reader comment: Chad Arsenault says,

It's also worth noting that iTunes is providing the consumer with much better service than CD distributors, by allowing a la carte delivery of the product. When we hear a song we like, we no longer drive to our local music stores and pay upwards of $12 to purchase a CD full of other songs we may or may not enjoy.

Read the rest

DHS agents visit student over Little Red Book - HOAX DEBATE

UPDATE: Report confirmed as hoax, Link to BB update.

Widespread debate today over whether the South Coast Today story "DHS visits student over Little Red Book" is a hoax, or contains unsubstantiated non-facts. But the reporter who filed it maintains otherwise; update and details at bottom of this post.

A Massachussetts paper is reporting that a college student was visited by Department of Homeland Security agents in October after requesting a copy of Quotations From Chairman Mao Tse-Tung -- better known as "The Little Red Book" -- from a university library:

Two history professors at UMass Dartmouth, Brian Glyn Williams and Robert Pontbriand, said the student told them he requested the book through the UMass Dartmouth library's interlibrary loan program.

The student, who was completing a research paper on Communism for Professor Pontbriand's class on fascism and totalitarianism, filled out a form for the request, leaving his name, address, phone number and Social Security number. He was later visited at his parents' home in New Bedford by two agents of the Department of Homeland Security, the professors said.

The professors said the student was told by the agents that the book is on a "watch list," and that his background, which included significant time abroad, triggered them to investigate the student further.

Link to news report.

Attention, comrades! Subversive cesspool Amazon.com sells copies of this watchlisted terrorist manual. Here's the link where you can buy a copy before you invite the DHS over for eggnog. (Thanks, Nat, and the approximately ten gajillion other fellow travelers who suggested this item. Read the rest

Photos: Internet Archive reception for Open Content Alliance

This Tuesday evening, Brewster Kahle blogged:

Tonight we launched our bookscanning initiative and presented a vision of an Open Library. At the event, Microsoft Network (MSN) joined the Open Content Alliance and committed to kick off their support by funding the digitization of 150,000 books in 2006! (...) Also, 14 libraries and library organizations joined in the last 3 weeks. Please see the Open Content Alliance site for more information. [C]heck out OpenLibrary.org for a cool bookviewer and the vision book-- it tells the story of what we envision.

Jake Appelbaum photographed the event -- humming servers, buzzing laptops, and lots of internetorati in the house: Link to photo set. Snapped attendees include Joi Ito, Donald Knuth, Jason Schultz and Cindy Cohn from the EFF, Brewster Kahle, and the NYT's John Markoff. Read the rest

Fox shuts down Buffy Hallowe'en musical despite Whedon's protests

Fox has shuit down a plan to perform a fan version of the Buffy musical episode, Once More with Feeling, even though creator Joss Whedon has asked them not to. Jason Schultz has written a great analysis of this here.

Is this the kind of copyright policy we want? Those are tougher questions. Just as artists are an engine for creativity in our culture, so are fans. An artist on their own can make a work of art, but only fans can make it mean something in our society. Fans take art and translate it into culture. They invest in it, obsess over it, share it, and spread it to others. They turn it from an isolated item into a means of communication. (For more on this, see danah's posts here and here where she breaks it down more eloquently).

But where is the recognition of this reality in copyright? Well, before the digital age, it was often in the idea that copyright was a public right and fandom was a private series of acts. Copyright would control public distribution of works and fans would collect them and share them and discuss them in private. More importantly, they would do so without making "copies" of them; instead, they would trade physical goods and have verbal conversations. Some would make costumes or their own art based on the subject matter, but those were generally kept private or only exhibited at limited forums like Comic Cons.


(Thanks, Ryan!) Read the rest

Previous PageNext page