DRM systems can include special formats for media files or proprietary media players.
For instance, people buying tracks from the iTunes store cannot move tracks on to non-Apple portable music devices. Others restrict the number of times a user can copy a file.
Yahoo does not agree.
Does not agree that iTunes cannot move tracks…? Seems like an awkwardly written story, but with dramatic effect. Also seems like a bad sign that the reporter doesn’t know it’s “Yahoo!” and not “Yahoo”.
On the official Yahoo music blog, director of product management Ian Rogers wrote: “As you know, we’ve been publicly trying to convince record labels that they should be selling MP3s for a while now.
“Our position is simple: DRM doesn’t add any value for the artist, label (who are selling DRM-free music every day – the Compact Disc), or consumer, the only people it adds value to are the technology companies who are interested in locking consumers to a particular technology platform.”
Dave Goldberg, the vice president and general manager of Yahoo Music urged record labels reconsider their stance on DRM technology earlier this year.
The EFF reports that a “Judge Denies Government’s Motion to Dismiss AT&T Case”:
AT&T Corp. (which was recently acquired by the new AT&T, Inc,. formerly known as SBC Communications) maintains domestic telecommunications facilities over which millions of Americans’ telephone and Internet communications pass every day. It also manages some of the largest databases in the world, containing records of most or all communications made through its myriad telecommunications services.
The lawsuit alleges that AT&T Corp. has opened its key telecommunications facilities and databases to direct access by the NSA and/or other government agencies, thereby disclosing to the government the contents of its customers’ communications as well as detailed communications records about millions of its customers, including the lawsuit’s class members.
The lawsuit also alleges that AT&T has given the government unfettered access to its over 300 terabyte “Daytona” database of caller information—one of the largest databases in the world. Moreover, by opening its network and databases to wholesale surveillance by the NSA, EFF alleges that AT&T has violated the privacy of its customers and the people they call and email, as well as broken longstanding communications privacy laws.
The lawsuit also alleges that AT&T continues to assist the government in its secret surveillance of millions of Americans. EFF, on behalf of a nationwide class of AT&T customers, is suing to stop this illegal conduct and hold AT&T responsible for its illegal collaboration in the government’s domestic spying program, which has violated the law and damaged the fundamental freedoms of the American public.
The Guardian has an interesting story about postcodes in the UK:
Nearly everyone has a postal address and most householders assume they “own” it. Unlike in France, say, no law stops us removing our number and calling our home what we like. But as usual with cases highlighted by Guardian Technology’s Free our Data campaign, the truth is not so simple.
During the past seven years, disagreement between different state bodies and state-owned companies over who owns intellectual property has blocked the creation of a definitive national list of addresses. As a result, says geographer and local councillor Robert Barr, emergency responses get sent to the wrong place, council tax goes uncollected and government plans are put in jeopardy.
And apparently the postal codes are, well, encoded:
the postcode file has big gaps. According to Barr, it holds only 60% of buildings in England – the Royal Mail is not interested in structures such as churches, which do not receive mail. Because of the purpose for which they were set up, postcodes may bear little relevance to reality – the initial component, the “post town”, relates to the nearest sorting office rather than the nearest town.
It’s about time someone came up with a name for phishing on voice technology…but seriously, here’s the downside to making international automated calling cheaper and easier:
Secure Computing has found a more sophisticated scam that avoids e-mail altogether. Instead the criminals behind this scam have programmed computers to dial a long list of phone numbers and play a recorded message to anyone that answers.
The recorded message warns that a person’s credit card has been used fraudulently and asks them to enter their card number. Significantly, those responding are also asked for the security number found on the rear of the card.
Not to be confused with vichyssoise, the plot of attacks on credit card numbers seems to be getting thicker by the minute.