Apple seeking end to music copy restrictions in iTunes talks

Apple seeking end to music copy restrictions in iTunes talks (SiliconValley.com)

The end of DRM restricted files on iTunes would be a huge leap forward in the world of online music distribution. iTunes music is currently selling very well and making a huge amount of revenue for the company. Cutting down the amount of copy restrictions would only help Apple by allowing users more freedom with the files that they have paid for. Some people might say this would cut down the number of iPods being sold but I have always felt that iTunes is doing well because so many people love the iPod and not the other way around. I see the increase in sales coming from the fact that many more technically advanced users find it easier to download illegally then to use iTunes. If you go to the right places you can find a larger selection of music, at higher quality, all for free, and very often released before street date. If you increase the quality of iTunes downloads and get rid of the DRM that hurts the ability for users to copy their files, you make illegally downloading that much less enticing. Free is always going to be hard to beat, but if you make legally downloading better, more people will be willing to pay the 1.29 to get a song and not worry about legal recourse from the RIAA.

The biggest opponents to the DRM-free songs on iTunes are the record companies. These companies seem to be just delaying the inevitable fall of DRM. They are showing their reluctance to accept new technologies and the eventual rise of DRM-free music. The record labels are just showing their continued inability to change with the times and keep up with music. The labels will complain that they will lose money from this deal but I feel it is an evitable change and like NoFX said about the so called Big Five record labels in their song Dinosaurs will Die "The time has come for evolution, fuck collusion, kill the five".

Supreme Court loosens patent 'obviousness' test

Supreme Court loosens patent 'obviousness' test (CNet)

This ruling seems to be a fairly good and well thought out. I am not completely read up on every detail of the issue but it seems to make it easier to get rid of patents that are so common sense that they just slow down progress. If it is costing people money to use technologies that are so simple and obvious it is bad for technology to have them be patent protected. I was surprised at all of the negative feedback that resulted from this ruling, from many different people. Patent lawyers claimed it would hurt anyone trying to get a patent by making it slower and more expensive. While corporations seem to be just as adamant that this new ruling will only hurt them, especially corporations that are very reliant on their patents. Since I never trust what corporations or lawyers say, I am going to take a wild guess and say this is probably a good move by the Supreme Court. I hope it does what the surpreme court says it will do and helps the growth of technology. The idea itself seems good, changing the definition of common sense to make it more like the actually definition of common sense.

We mustn't cave in to copyright bullying

We mustn't cave in to copyright bullying (Toronto Star)

Canada and the United States have very different economies that are based on very different things. One of of the biggest differences is the United States' large amount of cultural exports compared to Canada. This means that these cultural exports are covered by strong copyright laws in the United States. The US cannot enforce its law in other countries though. There has been a major lobbying push to force other countries to support US copyright laws. The United States holds a lot of power in world trade agreements so they set up systems that force other countries to make concessions in copyright laws in order to gain other things from US policy. Canada doesn't need a trade agreement because of the NAFTA agreement signed in the early 90s. Canada can also throw around more weight then some other smaller countries can, with a pretty well functioning economy.

Since I don't agree with the bullying that the US copyright holders of the United States have engaged in, I am glad to see someone stand up to them. I hope more countries refuse to support the flawed copyright system that is currently in place.

Supreme Court asks administration to review patent royalty case

Supreme Court asks administration to review patent royalty case (SiliconValley.com)

This case is a difficult one to fully grasp because of the difficulties in understanding the patent system that is in place currently. Technology changes faster then the laws set up to control them, and patent law is just as slow as any other law. In this specific case the patent allowed Intel to use an LG patent in a certain way. Intel then sold their patent to another group and this other group used it in a way that Intel could not legally do, and apparently neither could they. Intel is essentially in the clear in this situation because they told the Taiwanese corporations that they couldn't use this product with anything except for Intel products. The Taiwanese companies sold these products to American computer manufacturers. This case seems like it is just Dell, HP, and Gateway trying to get products from LG and Intel at a cheaper price then it would cost them to buy directly from LG and Intel. Legally it seems as if LG has a clear case on their hands. I am not sure if I agree with the law though. If these Taiwanese companies can sell a product for less then the first party manufacturers can, why shouldn't they try to undercut them if they are selling the same product. The market should decide who they want to buy from, if LG and Intel didn't want this group to sell their product, they shouldn't have sold them the patent. Now you could also say that LG and Intel researched their product and need to charge more, but they also didn't need to buy the patent. I see LG winning this case but it clearly shows the problems in patent law.

Taking a Harder Line on Piracy

Taking a Harder Line on Piracy (Washington Post)

I've always felt there are two different types of piracy in the world. There is the newer high tech more individual version of piracy. This is done by college and high school kids and some tech savvy individuals who want to put the time and effort into downloading movies and music illegally. Then there is the mass produced kind that results from groups manufacturing large quantities of music, movies, and software to sell on streets. The street vending pirates are very often looked as dirty thieves and scam artists by the first group of pirates. The first group simply wants to obtain their products for free, while the second wants to get it for free and then turn a profit on it. I believe the stance against individuals downloading personal copies of things is far to harsh, while those against sellers are far to lenient.

This leads me to support this move by the government (something I do don't often). Not only does it push for tougher penalties and more enforcement of the distribution of illegally pirated materials but also pushes for stopping the reasons for piracy. China slows the distribution of imports through their import system and these leads many to buy their goods pirated, since it is the only way they can get them. Cutting down the reasons for piracy will cut much piracy. Obviously free always wins, but many people are willing to pay a small fee for ease of use and reliability. I also support the moves to impose tariffs against China if they do not follow some basic rules of trade. If they are willing to hurt US imports they need to suffer the consequences.

U.S. Internet fraud at all-time high 'Nigerian' scam and other crimes cost $198.4 million

U.S. Internet fraud at all-time high 'Nigerian' scam and other crimes cost $198.4 million (SF Chronicle)

Internet fraud has always been a problem on the internet since the rise of the internet. Everyone is constantly warned to avoid opening emails from people they don't know, and to verify the authenticity of any emails they think might be real. There has been a lot of work done to stop spam lately, but still some makes it through. I find it strange that so much money is actually made out of these scams. Anyone who has an email address has received hundreds and more likely thousands of unsolicited emails trying to scam you. I just don't understand how so many people could possibly mistake some of the jumbled misspelled garbage that comes through the email as legitimate offers.
I think the only way to slow the growth of online scam is to simply create a huge marketing campaign to stop it. It seems people only listen if they are told repeatedly. I know my parents are always assuming every email they receive is going to be a virus. They have heard so many news reports and seen so many television ads related to computer viruses, they that it what they are always worried about. Unfortunately sometimes you need to scare people into what is right for them, and this is one of those cases. If everyone assumes all their emails are fraud and then decide which ones might be real, they will most likely reduce they amount of people falling for these scams.

Neiman Marcus Files Suit Over Misspelled Web Domain Names

Neiman Marcus Files Suit Over Misspelled Web Domain Names (AP via FOXNews.com)

There are a couple issues brought up in this article concerning the domain name registration system. One is the domain grace period that was set up for legitimate reason. This legitimate system is now being used by people to find out which domain names will earn them the most money. There is no real reason for this grace period. Sure people might accidentally type the wrong name when trying to register a domain, but the amount of misuse of this system doesn't warrant the extra caution. People just need to make sure they type correctly. Registering a domain name is not an ultra fast process, a quick double check of what they typed will eliminate most of these problems. Instead these people are 'tasting' domain names for typo domain names to earn a quick buck. This is not a serious business but instead just fishing for a name that people accidentally type a lot and trying to get advertising revenue from these sites. I think that these sites should be forced to shut down immediately, if they are not offering any of their own services and just hoping to make profit off of typos. They using up resources for no real reason and possibly even committing fraud on the consumer who accidentally thinks he is going to a different website.