Toysrus.com stops using Coremetrics
Privacy from Companies
8/15/2000; 9:46:42 AM '"For a short period of time, we had a trial arrangement with a service called Coremetrics to assist us in evaluating information about how visitors use our site," Toysrus.com's policy read. "This trial arrangement is no longer in effect."'

I think I understand thier point of view (if they are telling the truth)... "It was only a trial, why should we notify customers of something temporary that we may not even go with?" The answer is, of course, that a site like Toysrus.com can collect more data in an hour then I could collect from this site in a year; what looks like a trial arrangement can still collect a lot of data very quickly, without customer's knowlege. It's a perspective thing.

Writers sue Web publishers, demanding back royalties General IP Issues8/15/2000; 9:39:26 AM 'Database operators frequently pay publishers for access to articles and books and charge customers to download them from thousands of publications, but they typically pay the writers nothing. That violates U.S. copyright law, according to the San Francisco suit, because the authors contend that they never signed their rights away and still own their work.'...'The difference between Napster and the database defendants involves more pronounced financial considerations. “Napster isn’t earning any money for what they’re doing,” Mr. Fergus says. “These people are selling” the files they have amassed.'On a very related topic, consider the Slashdot story "95 (thousand) Thesis For Sale".'Have you completed a Masters or PhD thesis in the last eight or so years? If so, it is probably for sale at http://www.contentville.com, a for-profit company which I understand I partially owned by NBC and Time. Mine is there and I never gave them permission to sell it. As far as I know, I am the sole owner of the copyright on my thesis. Even my ex-supervisor had to ask permission (he did) before he could make it available on a web site (for free, by the way).'Good stuff there too, but I would definately recommend reading the high-scored comments; not everything is as it appears.

Digital Angel (or Digital Devil, if you prefer) Privacy from Companies8/14/2000; 12:31:31 PM Privacy Digest today did a great job on collecting links about the Digital Angel, which is a small device that can be implanted in a human body to confirm who and where you are, which a collection of obvious and not-so-obvious implications in privacy and religion.Start with the large words "Big potential for misuse!!", which is an understatement.Eventually, this should be a permenent link.Thanks for the good legwork!

Legal Tips For Your 'Sucks' Site
Free Speech
8/14/2000; 8:51:40 AM 'Wired News interviewed a number of legal experts who offered general legal tips for would-be sucks site operators:'

Also a couple of good tips for weblogs, such as proving that what I do here is fair use, which is nice to see.

EPA's Web Environment Unsafe Misc.8/14/2000; 8:48:48 AM 'How can the Environmental Protection Agency take care of the planet when it can't even protect its own computer network? That's the question raised by a General Accounting Office report released Friday that concluded that the EPA's information security measures are "ineffective" and "riddled with security weaknesses."' ...'In a statement, the EPA said that it takes information security seriously, and that it has already instituted policies to bolster its network.'heh heh... ph3ar th3 p0l|c|3s.(translation: Beareucratic policies aren't much good for defending systems. I can see the "policy" now... "It is EPA policy that EPA computer systems shall not be vulnerable to crackers." Yeah, that'll fix everything!)

How to Halt Nazi Sales in France? Country Watch: France8/14/2000; 8:36:59 AM 'A Paris judge ordered independent experts to investigate how to bar French Web surfers from tapping into online sales of Nazi memorabilia on websites accessed using the giant Internet portal Yahoo.'I find myself wishing I could get at the original court documents... and read them well enough to understand the intentions of the judge. There's a couple of interesting things in the article, though:'The judge rejected one of Yahoo's main contentions, which was that the English-language Yahoo.com site was outside the competence of the French court.'Keep in mind there is a French Yahoo, which, in compliance with French law, does not sell Nazi stuff of any kind. That link performs a search on yahoo.fr for "Nazi"... as of this writing, the only thing there is a DVD movie that happens to have "Nazi" in the description of the movie.This is an explicit case of a French judge imposing French law on an American company.'Independent Internet security experts also say it is next to impossible to screen web users on the basis of nationality in a failsafe way because PC dialing numbers used to identify the surfer can be disguised or even misread.'The judge is trying to constrain his order to only affect those in France, but he is finding that it takes more then passing a law and ordering enforcement to bring things about. The problem here is really one of percentages... Yahoo could easily block most people from France from seeing Nazi auctions. However, what's the acceptable percentage, as this deals with a group of people who are perfectly willing to do what it takes to actively circumvent the restrictions? 100% blocking may not be possible... will Yahoo be held responsible for this 'failure' of the Internet?BTW, Yahoo, take a look at the Olympics streaming solution... if you partner with French ISPs to identify their users, then you may be able to offload the responsibility onto the French ISPs....

Yahoo! reprieve over Nazi auctions
Country Watch: France
8/11/2000; 12:32:50 PM 'A French judge has ordered more technical advice before deciding whether to force internet portal Yahoo! to block French users from the sites that violate national laws against promoting racial hatred. Judge Jean-Jacques Gomez also refused to fine the firm which he had ordered on 22 May to make it "impossible" for French users to access the sites.'

TheStandard.com: Federal Judge Overturns Net Porn Law Free Speech8/11/2000; 9:34:03 AM 'A federal judge has ruled that a Virginia law aimed at blocking children's online access to adult material violates First Amendment free-speech protections and the constitutional interstate commerce clause. The opinion by U.S. District Judge James H. Michael Jr. marks the latest in a string of defeats for activists trying to apply historical standards for adult material to the Internet.'Key reasons:'"The 1999 Act provides no way for Internet speakers to prevent their communications from reaching minors without also denying adults access to the material," Michael wrote. "The Act is also overbroad because it infringes on the rights of adults in communities outside of Virginia."'

Preventing an e-book Napster
General IP Issues
8/10/2000; 9:54:10 AM 'If there’s one thing the book publishers want to avoid as they move into the digital realm, it’s a repeat of the Napster controversy that has plagued their e-music counterparts.'

Hey, they can learn!

Chinese govt. seeks control of Web Country Watch: China8/9/2000; 7:07:07 PM 'Chinese leaders are keen to promote the Web's economic benefits and use it, as they do the entirely state-run traditional media, to rally public opinion. But they are nervous that the Web gives Chinese access to uncensored news and information, and are trying to block its use in spreading opposition to communist rule.'It's worth watching the Chinese... I expect them to pioneer techniques of controlling the usage of the Internet, as Communism can't tolerate truth, or for that matter, lies other then its own.'Many state media are already online, but sites that provide access to less heavily controlled or uncensored information are among China's most popular.'