FYI -------- Original Message -------- Subject: EFFector 18.36: Big Win in Broadcast Flag Battle Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:44:38 -0700 (PDT) From: EFFector List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: EFFector List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Organization: EFF To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
EFFector Vol. 18, No. 36 October 21, 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 In the 352nd Issue of EFFector: * Big Win in Broadcast Flag Battle * Secret Code in Color Printers Lets Government Track You * European Report Threatens Consumers' Rights * Judge Says No to Cell-Phone Tracking Without Probable Cause * A New Gaming Feature: Spyware * Barney's Temper Tantrum * First Annual P2P Litigation Summit, November 3, 2005 * CopyNight Reminder: Cocktails & Copyright, October 25 * Staff Calendar: 10.26.05 - Lee Tien speaks at University of North Texas and Fred von Lohmann speaks at NYC Copyright Society and the New York City Bar Association; 10.27.05 - Jason Schultz speaks at Duke University Law School, Lee Tien speaks at Michigan Library Association; 10.30.05 - Fred von Lohmann speaks at Eastern District of California Judicial Conference * miniLinks (8): J'Accuse, Yahoos * Administrivia For more information on EFF activities & alerts: <http://www.eff.org/> Make a donation and become an EFF member today! <http://secure.eff.org/support> Tell a friend about EFF: <http://action.eff.org/site/Ecard?ecard_id=1061> : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : * Big Win in Broadcast Flag Battle The story so far: the MPAA's multi-million dollar travelling salesmen had descended on Washington, pitching and wheedling to get the Broadcast Flag language into law, giving Hollywood control of your digital TV and a veto on future TV innovation. In the House, the MPAA convinced 20 representatives to support the Flag in the House Commerce Committee. But that's not a majority, and support was wobbly. Following your letters and phone calls to members of the committee, opposition has firmed up--and apparently, after reading a long explanatory letter from an expert voter, at least one representative regrets signing the MPAA's letter. In the Senate, Hollywood followed a less direct plan: hitch a ride on the fast-track budget reconciliation bill, as amended by MPAA-friendly Senate Commerce committee members. That Flag amendment was due to happen this past Thursday, October 20, 2005. Thanks to the hard work of you and our friends in Washington, the committee members grew concerned over the MPAA's plan to attach their non-budgetary amendment to the reconciliation bill and the amendment was withdrawn. After failing in the market, the courts, and last June's appropriations bill, it's yet another defeat for the Flag- wavers. But the MPAA's lobbyists are nothing if not tenacious--so what's their "Plan D"? One potential ploy would be to introduce a separate digital television bill containing the Flag. That could happen as early as next week, and senior committee members have indicated their preference for this approach. What we're hearing, however, is that the MPAA--still fearful of fair use amendments and compromise--wants to try to sneak the Flag language into the reconciliation bill, but this time, on the floor. We'll see what happens. But whether it re-emerges in a bill in a committee or an amendment on the floor, we'll keep you up-to-date and let you know what you can do. Our three-minute guide to the Broadcast Flag: <http://www.eff.org/broadcastflag/three_minute_guide.php> Tell your member of Congress about the Flag now: <http://action.eff.org/site/Advocacy?id=129> : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : * Secret Code in Color Printers Lets Government Track You Tiny Dots Show Where and When You Made Your Print San Francisco - A research team led by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) recently broke the code behind tiny tracking dots that some color laser printers secretly hide in every document. The U.S. Secret Service admitted that the tracking information is part of a deal struck with selected color laser printer manufacturers, ostensibly to identify counterfeiters. However, the nature of the private information encoded in each document was not previously known. "We've found that the dots from at least one line of printers encode the date and time your document was printed, as well as the serial number of the printer," said EFF Staff Technologist Seth David Schoen. You can see the dots on color prints from machines made by Xerox, Canon, and other manufacturers. (for a list of the printers we investigated so far, see: http://www.eff.org/Privacy/printers/list.php ). The dots are yellow, less than one millimeter in diameter, and are typically repeated over each page of a document. In order to see the pattern, you need a blue light, a magnifying glass, or a microscope (for instructions on how to see the dots, see: http://www.eff.org/Privacy/printers/docucolor/ ). EFF and its partners began the project to break the printer code with the Xerox DocuColor line. Researchers Schoen, EFF intern Robert Lee, and volunteers Patrick Murphy and Joel Alwen compared dots from test pages sent in by EFF supporters, noting similarities and differences in their arrangement, and then found a simple way to read the pattern. "So far, we've only broken the code for Xerox DocuColor printers," said Schoen. "But we believe that other models from other manufacturers include the same personally identifiable information in their tracking dots." You can decode your own Xerox DocuColor prints using EFF's automated program at: <http://www.eff.org/Privacy/printers/docucolor/index.php#program> Xerox previously admitted that it provided these tracking dots to the government, but indicated that only the Secret Service had the ability to read the code. The Secret Service maintains that it only uses the information for criminal counterfeit investigations. However, there are no laws to prevent the government from abusing this information. "Underground democracy movements that produce political or religious pamphlets and flyers, like the Russian samizdat of the 1980s, will always need the anonymity of simple paper documents, but this technology makes it easier for governments to find dissenters," said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Lee Tien. "Even worse, it shows how the government and private industry make backroom deals to weaken our privacy by compromising everyday equipment like printers. The logical next question is: what other deals have been or are being made to ensure that our technology rats on us?" EFF is still working on cracking the codes from other printers and we need the public's help. Find out how you can make your own test pages to be included in our research at http://www.eff.org/Privacy/printers/wp.php#testsheets . For this release: <http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2005_10.php#004063> : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : * European Report Threatens Consumers' Rights EFF Urges Fresh Inquiry Into Ramifications of DRM London - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has criticized a European Commission group for assuming that digital rights management (DRM) is the only way to foster development of the home audiovisual market. In comments filed last week, EFF European Affairs Coordinator Cory Doctorow took the Networked Audiovisual Systems and Home Platforms (NAVSHP) group to task for its report on developing a harmonized system of DRM requirements. Doctorow urged NAVSHP to explore approaches grounded in empirical research, not industry mythology. "DRM is already widely deployed without a hint of success, and the NAVSHP group has the opportunity to learn from its well-known failures," said Doctorow. "NAVSHP should take a new look into how DRM affects the public, artists, and industry." So far, DRM has failed to reduce unauthorized copying or enrich content authors and performers, and instead has curtailed competition and sacrificed user rights for the benefit of entertainment giants. A fresh inquiry could examine why otherwise law-abiding citizens have resorted to finding unrestricted material on peer-to-peer networks and look at technological systems that might encourage new artistic works and new business models. "The EU and the world are experiencing a revolution in creativity thanks to the Internet," said Doctorow. "An entire generation of remixers, talented amateurs, and Creative Commons enthusiasts have created works that do not require DRM to thrive. NAVSHP should produce recommendations for systems that embrace unrestricted distribution methods in support of these new Internet-native business models. These European creators deserve every bit as much attention from the EU as do American film studios and other incumbents." For the full critique submitted to NAVSHP: <http://www.eff.org/IP/DRM/NAVSHP/> For more on digital video standards in Europe: <http://www.eff.org/IP/DVB/> For this release: <http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2005_10.php#004064> : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : * Judge Says No to Cell-Phone Tracking Without Probable Cause Last month, we told you about the first published court decision considering when the government can track your cell phone's location. In that case, federal magistrate judge James Orenstein in New York denied the Justice Department's request to track someone's cell phone location without probable cause. EFF filed a brief in that case, urging the court to stand by its decision despite the government's request that it reconsider. It looks now like judicial skepticism of the DOJ's authority to track cell phones is catching. Last week, a second magistrate judge--this time in Texas--issued another decision similarly denying a Justice Department request to tap a cell phone's location. Using much of the same reasoning as in EFF's New York brief, the Texas Court found that it could only authorize the surveillance based on a search warrant supported by probable cause and dismissed the DOJ's argument that a combination of existing surveillance statutes authorizes cell-phone tracking under a lower legal standard. "Surely," the court found, "if these various statutory provisions were intended to give birth to a new breed of electronic surveillance, one would expect Congress to have openly acknowledged paternity somewhere along the way... While Congressional enactments are sometimes difficult to decipher, employing such a three-rail bank shot to create a new category of electronic surveillance is almost perverse." The weakness of the government's argument makes it all the more remarkable that, as the New York decision first hinted and this one confirms, the government has routinely succeeded in convincing magistrate judges to follow its "perverse" logic and allow cell phone tracking without probable cause. Indeed, seeking such court orders is the government's "standard practice," according to the Texas decision, and magistrate judges are faced with such cases "on a daily basis." The DOJ has been getting away with this for years, apparently--but now, with two judges having publicly rejected the government's argument, hopefully even more courts will start viewing the DOJ's "standard practice" with suspicion and add more support to what should be an obvious proposition: the government can't track your cell phone's location without a search warrant. As Judge Smith, the magistrate in Texas, described at the end of his decision: "Judge Orenstein's opinion was the first word on this topic; this opinion will undoubtedly not be the last. It is written in the full expectation and hope that the government will seek appropriate review by higher courts so that authoritative guidance will be given the magistrate judges who are called upon to rule on these applications on a daily basis." We share Judge Smith's hope--and guarantee that when a higher court considers the issue of cell phone tracking, EFF will be there to defend your privacy rights. For the judge's decision: <http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/USA_v_PenRegister/Cell-Site-Opinion.pdf> : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : * A New Gaming Feature: Spyware Rejoice gaming fans, for the latest new "feature" of Blizzard Entertainment's smash hit multi-player online videogame World of Warcraft is here! No, it's not a new Sword of Destruction or Staff of Power--it's spyware! Yes, unbeknownst to many gamers, World of Warcraft now has an unwanted special feature--a hidden program called "Warden" that snoops gamers' computers, looking for any "unauthorized third-party program" that "enables or facilitates cheating of any type." According to Greg Hoglund, co-author of "Exploiting Software, How to Break Code," this hidden program opens every process on a gamer's computer, from email programs to privacy managers, and sniffs email addresses, website URLs open at the time of the scan, and the names of all running programs--whether or not those programs, emails, or websites could conceivably have anything to do with hacking. Blizzard calls this an "anti-cheating system." We call it a massive invasion of privacy. Blizzard has scrambled to come up with three responses to the widespread criticism: Response 1: Warden doesn't collect personal information, so what's the problem? Well, problem one is that gamers have no choice but to accept Blizzard's word on that. More importantly, if Hoglund is right, Blizzard has a pretty skewed idea of privacy--we can look at your personal info, but if we don't collect it there's no invasion? Hardly. We also wonder how Blizzard's executives would feel if we searched their homes, wallets, and bank accounts and read their letters and emails but didn't write down anything we found. Response 2: Everyone's doing it. Blizzard points out that many companies use hack-scanning programs. We all learned the problem with that reasoning from Mom ("If all of your friends jumped off a bridge..."). Response 3: Read the end-user license agreement (EULA). Blizzard advises gamers of its intent to invade in its terms of service. "People should read contracts," says Blizzard rep John Lagrave. True enough--people should read contracts. But here's the really depressing part of this story--companies like Blizzard know few people read the terms of service and end-user license agreements that pop up when they install new software or create new accounts, and fewer still have the time, patience, and knowledge to parse the legalese. Without some constraints on what a company can hide within these massive legal tomes, more and more companies will learn that they can invade our electronic privacy for any reason they wish--as long as they disclose it somewhere in the fine print. The cost of such a practice over time is not only access to our personal and private information but also control over our personal computers and devices. Then we really will be prisoners to the Wardens of the networked world. : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : * Barney's Temper Tantrum Barney the purple dinosaur is throwing another temper tantrum that his little fans would envy. And his fury is even less justified than that of a three-year-old who wants ice cream. Lawyers for the TV character have sent another cease and desist notice to the creator of a Barney parody site <http://dustyfeet.com/evil/enemy.html> . This is the same web page that the same lawyer threatened back in 2002. And, just like in 2002, this Barney parody is unequivocally protected under both the First Amendment and fair use law. The cease and desist notice threatens the web page creator with a claim of copyright infringement to his Internet service provider. But it's illegal to make that claim if you know that the charge is bogus. EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn, who represents the Barney parodist, points out that EFF and another client were paid $125,000 in damages in a similar case (see Diebold Coughs Up Cash in Copyright Case: <http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2004_10.php#002009> This is another example of corporations using intellectual property laws to silence legitimate online activity. The Internet offers incredible opportunity for people to express their views, parody politicians and TV characters, and criticize businesses. This is why EFF is fighting the harassment at every turn. If you want to learn more about the problem, check out <http://www.chillingeffects.org> . And if you receive a cease and desist letter from Barney's attorneys, please let us know here at EFF. : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : * First Annual P2P Litigation Summit, November 3 In September 2003, members of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) filed the first wave of lawsuits against individual peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharers. Two years and 14,000 lawsuits later, both P2P file-sharing and file-sharing litigation continue unabated, and members of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) are now suing individual Internet users, as well. It's time to step back and consider where this litigation has been, where it's going, and whether there is a better way forward. EFF is co-sponsoring the First Annual P2P Litigation Summit, to be held on Thursday, November 3, 2005, at Northwestern University School of Law in Chicago, Illinois. The day-long conference brings together public and private defense attorneys, clients, investigators, advocates, and academics to discuss the latest developments in peer-to-peer litigation. How do the RIAA and MPAA go about identifying plaintiffs? What are the most effective legal strategies and tactics? Is it better to settle immediately or fight it out in the courts? How is this impacting the individuals sued? What is the role of ISPs in this quagmire? Should Congress step in and, if so, what legislation is needed? Are there other ways to compensate authors for their works? For more information, and to register: <http://www.signmeup.com/51363> : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : * CopyNight Reminder: Cocktails & Copyright, October 25 It's that time again! Join your fellow copyfighters this upcoming Tuesday, October 25th, for drinks and discussion at CopyNight meet-ups all across North America. Details about topics and which cities are having meet-ups are available at the CopyNight website: http://copynight.org/ The San Francisco meet-up will take place from 7:00-9:00 p.m. at the 21st Amendment Brewery & Cafe, 563 2nd St (between Bryant and Brannan). Your host will be Danny O'Brien, EFF's activism coordinator. See you there! : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : * Staff Calendar For a complete listing of EFF speaking engagements (with locations and times), please visit the full calendar: <http://www.eff.org/calendar/> October 26 Lee Tien speaking at RFID Institute at University of North Texas, Denton TX http://www.niso.org/news/events_workshops/RFID-05-wkshp.html Fred von Lohmann speaking at the NYC Chapter of the Copyright Society of the USA and the New York City Bar Association <https://www.abcny.org/cle/show_course.php?cnameid=1098> October 27 Jason Schultz speaking at Duke University School of Law http://calendar.duke.edu/calendar.nsf/EventID/6H9HAE Lee Tien speaking at Michigan Library Association <http://www.mla.lib.mi.us/development/conference/2005/index.htm> October 30 Fred von Lohmann speaking at Eastern District of California 2005 Judicial Conference : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : * miniLinks miniLinks features noteworthy news items from around the Internet. ~ J'Accuse, Yahoos Chinese human rights activist Liu Xiaobo writes to Jerry Yang, asking him to stop collaborating with Chinese repression. <http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blogs/gelman/archives/003388.shtml> ~ DVD Jon Moves From Norway to USA Joins Bunnie Huang in the reverse engineering mines of San Diego. <http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,69257,00.html> ~ Identity Theft With Four Easy Keystrokes UK politician claims Brits will be able to view and edit their national ID card info online using a PIN number. <http://www.spy.org.uk/spyblog/archives/2005/10/commons_report.html> ~ US Navy Bans Webmail Not quite the port blockade they're known for. <http://stripes.com/article.asp?article=32347> ~ JibJab Parodies Themselves? Sadly, it appears not. "This Land" parodists send legal letters claiming infringement to someone using nine seconds of JibJab material. <http://www.boalt.org/biplog/archive/000633.html> ~ No One Suspects the National Clandestine Service! One more three-letter-acronym spook hut. <http://www.odni.gov/release_letter_101305.html> ~ Face-recognition for the Rest of Us A blog of a start-up that will scan and put your friends' names to your photographs. Feel free to chart the ramifications. <http://munjal.typepad.com/recognizing_deven/> ~ Surveillance by the Numbers Mother Jones tallies up the spying stats. <http://www.motherjones.com/news/exhibit/2005/11/the_watched.html> : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : * Administrivia EFF Privacy Policy: <http://www.eff.org/policy/> EFFector is published by: The Electronic Frontier Foundation 454 Shotwell Street San Francisco CA 94110-1914 USA +1 415 436 9333 (voice) +1 415 436 9993 (fax) http://www.eff.org/ Editor: Rebecca Jeschke, Media Coordinator [EMAIL PROTECTED] Membership & donation queries: [EMAIL PROTECTED] General EFF, legal, policy, or online resources queries: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reproduction of this publication in electronic media is encouraged. Signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of EFF. To reproduce signed articles individually, please contact the authors for their express permission. Press releases and EFF announcements & articles may be reproduced individually at will. Current and back issues of EFFector are available via the Web at: <http://www.eff.org/effector/> -- Paul G. Allen Owner, Sr. Engineer, BSIT/SE Random Logic Consulting Services www.randomlogic.com -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
