A List Apart Privacy from Companies6/5/2000; 7:18:26 AM April 28, 2000: "The electronic privacy invasion points to the failure of site designers to provide compelling content, clear navigation, and a user experience memorable enough to entice repeat visits. Click-thru is more important than Content. We have opted to become Electronic Rapists."This may overstate the case a bit (not all cookies are privacy invasions!), but I think that it's more accurate then most would admit.We tend to forget what is being done to us, because it happens so slowly and each step seems so small. The proverbial frog jumps right out of boiling water but will let you slowly raise the water temperature around it until it dies. We need to look around every once in a while and notice the bubbles in the water forming around us.(That's one of the reasons I'm so against web site annotation. It's just one of the ways the heat gets turned up on web sites.)
The Real Power of Wireless
Privacy from Companies
6/5/2000; 7:18:24 AM April 26, 2000: Why don't more people think like this? "As you think about moving your company into the wireless marketing realm, think about this: If you can target others [with constant unasked-for wireless advertising], you'll probably be a target yourself. What kind of future do you want?" The ugly world that so many marketing corporations are rushing to create will be inhabited by the members of that corporation too. Why are they working so hard to make their own world a living hell?
Anonymity Threatened in Europe Surveillance and Privacy from Government6/5/2000; 7:18:22 AM April 26, 2000: "The European Parliament is weighing a proposal that would limit the use of anonymous email, saying such a requirement would enhance police surveillance of criminals."''A Dutch member of parliament, Oussama Cherribi, was quoted in January as saying that anonymous Web surfing 'should be a criminal offense, and unlimited anonymity should become a penal offense.'''
'Bizkit Bonds With Napster
Music & MP3
6/5/2000; 7:18:20 AM April 25, 2000: 'Bizkit Bonds With Napster: "Hard rock band Limp Bizkit has teamed up with controversial Internet company Napster Inc. to launch a free U.S. concert tour, and the group's singer Monday criticized fellow artists who have accused Napster of promoting music piracy."
India Eyes Cyberlaws Country Watch: India6/5/2000; 7:18:18 AM April 25, 2000: "With estimates that nearly 2 million Indian citizens will be online by 2001, the world's second-most populous country is looking at ways to regulate cyberspace." OK, so let's take a look at what Wired said about these laws:"It also deems electronic documents as legally binding and acceptable in place of paper. Checks and bills, powers of attorney, trusts, wills, and contracts of sale of immovable property, however, will not be accepted in a digital format." Interesting but I don't believe the dangers of this have been fully explored in the real world; if this takes effect India will be a testing grounds to see if it works."Computer crimes recognized under the proposed law would affect hackers, and those who are not authorized to enter a system to download data, introduce viruses, damage data or the system, block access to authorized users, or even assist another person in contravening the law." If I host a web site in America that contains information about a security vulnerability (like BugTraq) and somebody in India uses that, will I find myself on the wrong side of Indian law? And the answer is..."If passed, the law would apply to anyone in or outside of India who tampers with a computer located in India." probably yes!, I would find myself a criminal in India. Again, without details this is tough to be sure about, but I am disturbed by the trend towards the attempted extending of jurisdiction like this. Almost anything you say that's even somewhat opinionated is a violation of a law somewhere in the world... even 'civilized' countries like Britain, let alone China or Iraq.I don't like it but odds are we're looking at another international treaty to specify what's illegal and not illegal on the Internet under International law and historically speaking, that often means we lose freedoms in America to satisfy the rest of the world. Let's call it the "International Internet Freedom Restriction Organization" treaty of 2004. You heard it here first."Contrary to other Indian laws, such as the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1973, additional powers have been given to the police to tackle cybercrime. Any senior police officer can enter and search any public place on suspicion without a warrant." I don't know enough about Indian law to know how strange this is by Indian standards."Senior Indian government officials, however, point to some shocking cases, arguing that there's a need to regulate the cyberjungle. They cite cases where a popular Hindi film actress was depicted nude on the Internet using altered graphics." Ummm... at least in this country when officials cite reasons to regulate the internet, they make reference to billions of dollars of commerce at stake and how We Must Save The Children, which as much as I don't like the Children Excuse I like it better then We Must Save The Celebrities.Over all, not an example I'm willing to follow, but I will be interested in their experiences with allowing digital signitures to be binding.
Jakob Nielsen's Spotlighted Links Internet/Weblog Culture6/5/2000; 7:18:15 AM April 25, 2000: April 25, 2000: "The true danger comes from allowing access services and browser software to be integrated with content services. Thought police. The one way to ensure the continued growth of the Web, freedom of speech, and democracy is to keep bit transport and Web navigation as two separate layers that are not allowed to give preferential treatment to any content services." Emphasis mine.We need to stop relegating this point to parenthetical comments and bring it out into the public and legal discourse. If we lose this battle, we will lose the entire war.
Maryland may be first to enact UCITA
UCITA
6/5/2000; 7:17:21 AM April 21, 2000: "Although Maryland is the second state to approve UCITA, it may be the first state to legally enact the measure, according to a spokeswoman at the governor's office. The act, if signed Tuesday, will take effect latter this year."
Press & Weblogs... Personal Notes6/5/2000; 7:17:19 AM April 19, 2000: I was thinking about the essay... suppose Dave Winer declared Scripting News to be a member of the press. It's not unreasonable. Would Conxion's attempt to censor him attracted more attention from the more mainstream press?More on that thought-train... USIS -- Issues of Democracy, February 1997 -- Goodale on First Amendment and Press Freedom: "As Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart explained in a 1974 speech, the 'primary purpose' of the First Amendment was 'to create a fourth institution outside the government as an additional check on the three official branches' (the executive branch, the legislature and the judiciary)." Hey, think about this for a second. Is iRights a member of the press, even a little? If that makes sense, then look! I'm part of the fourth branch of the government!The Internet brings government By The People, For The People to the masses again... one way of looking at it is the scaling of the fourth branch of the government to handle the 250 million+ people who now live in this country.This brings a new twist to weblogs that cover politics or political issues... I am fulfilling a civic duty to participate in the Republic with iRights! (Now if THAT doesn't add some legitimacy to the weblog movement, nothing will.)
Gnutella Links General IP Issues6/5/2000; 7:17:16 AM April 19, 2000: Jacob Levy needs a weblog... here's a smattering of Napster & Gnutella links he posted in a DG message.I actually can't understand the Upside article in those links; the article uses Napster to mean both the software and the company and doesn't clarify the two very well. For instance, the big paragraph I don't understand:
Yet, because "online services" and "network access" are such broad terms, and because Napster functions both as a peer-to-peer client and as a server, it could very well meet the definition of a "service provider."Napster-the-company is not a peer-to-peer client, but they may be a server of search results. Napster-the-software may be both server and client, but software can't be a "service provider", which has to be a person or corporation (as "service provider" here is a role a human or company plays, not just "a thing which provides service"). My attempts to tease out what that paragraph means have been futile.Like I said yesterday, enough with the companies with products with the same name!
Web Links Can Be Considered Illegal, Osaka Court Judgment Sa Country Watch: Japan6/5/2000; 7:17:14 AM April 19, 2000:
A landmark verdict handed down on March 30 by the Osaka District Court states that, under certain sets of conditions, links used to connect one Web page to another could be considered an infringement of the law.The court's ruling means that if somebody creates a Web page that includes a link to another page, and if that other page is in violation of the law, then the person who creates the link can be charged with aiding and abetting the crime. This is regardless of whether or not they are aware of the illegality of the page they linked to.Emphasis mine.I doubt I need to share my opinion on this ruling. BTW, the logic given above, assuming it is an accurate representation of the court's reasoning, does beyond a shadow of a doubt imply that link-liability is infinitely contagious. Which is to say, if by following a link on your page, you can get to an illegal page, you can be charged with having an illegal link.A page with a link to an illegal page itself become illegal. Thus, it will be illegal to link to a page that links to a page that becomes illegal. Thus it is illegal to LTAP that LTAP that LTAP that is illegal. And so on and so forth.And that is not a silly exaggeration; any solid limit set by the law will be instantly abused. If you say "A person is liable for a depth of three", then someone hosting the illegal page (probably not in Japan) puts up an illegal page, and creates a gateway series of pages that eventually will link to the illegal content.Certainly a judge will inject a certain amount of rationality into any real ruling, that is their purpose. Each judge will be different and you will never be certain whether you could be shut down.BTW Japan, kiss this site goodbye.