hpr-knowledge-base/hpr_transcripts/hpr0950.txt

Episode: 950
Title: HPR0950: TGTM Newscast for 2012/03/21 
Source: https://hub.hackerpublicradio.org/ccdn.php?filename=/eps/hpr0950/hpr0950.mp3
Transcribed: 2025-10-08 05:27:20

---

Thank you.
You are listening to TalkEakTV News, number 64, record for March 21st, 2012.
You are listening to the Tech Only Hacker Public Radio Edition, to get the full podcast,
including political, commentary, and other controversial topics.
Please visit www.talkEakTV.us.
Here are the vials statistics for this program.
Your feedback matters to me.
Please send your comments to DG at deepgeek.us.
The webpage for this program is at www.talkEakTV.us.
You can subscribe to me on Identica as the username DeepGeek or you could follow me on Twitter.
My username there is DGTGM as a deepgeek talk geek to me.
And now the tech roundup from EFF.org dated March 13, 2012 by Hany Fakori, Supreme Court
decision on GPS surveillance spocking good court rulings.
The U.S. Supreme Court's recent ruling that warrantless installation of GPS devices violates
a Fourth Amendment.
United States versus Jones is already percolating through the court system, which is good news
for our privacy rights.
Today in a two sentence order, the Ohio Supreme Court vacated a lower court's opinion that
upheld the installation of a GPS device without a warrant and ordered the court to apply
Jones, EFF, and a number of civil liberties organizations filed an amicus brief in the
Ohio case last year urging just such a result.
The Jones decision has been lauded as a landmark ruling and the FBI's own lawyer commented
that Jones perceived as a sea change within the FBI.
And now its impact is starting to work its way through the judicial system as courts,
like the Ohio Supreme Court, are beginning to re-examine prior cases dealing with the
warrantless use of GPS devices.
After issuing its opinion in Jones, the Supreme Court in late February issued brief orders
reversing two other decisions from federal appellate courts that had previously upheld
the warrantless use of GPS tracking devices by law enforcement.
One of those decisions was in the United States versus Pineda Moreno, where the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals found law enforcement's installation of a GPS device on a suspects
Jeep while it was parked both on public streets and in his driveway did not violate the
Fourth Amendment.
After the entire Ninth Circuit Court refused to reconsider the case, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski
lamented, 1984 may have come a bit later than predicted, but it's here at last.
In the other case, to be reviewed in light of Jones, the United States versus Quervis
Perez, law enforcement installed a GPS device on a suspects Jeep and tracked him through
New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri, and Illinois.
The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals found the surveillance reasonable under the Fourth
Amendment, but Judge Diane Wood dissented, writing, the technological devices available
for such monitoring have rapidly attended a degree of accuracy that would have been unimaginable
to an earlier generation.
They make the system that George Orwell depicted in his famous novel, 1984, seemed clumsy.
The facts of these three cases fit squarely with the holding in Jones, and it's likely
that on taking a second look, all three courts will find the installation of a GPS device
without a warrant, unconstitutional, but as we've noted before, Jones is about more than
just the physical installation of GPS devices, particularly because physical installation
is no longer necessary for many forms of surveillance.
Jones is an important piece in future fights over location privacy and cell tracking,
and ensuring that the government is unable to track out every move.
So as the courts begin to reassess prior cases and the future implications of their decisions,
PFF is going to be working hard to stop the march towards the world reminiscent of 1984.
From torrentfreak.com, day at March 15, 2012 by Enigmex, ISPs to begin punishing BitTorn
pirates this summer.
After years of painful negotiations, last June it was revealed that the RIA, MPAA, and
some of the United States' largest internet service providers had finally come to an agreement
on action against unauthorized online sharing of copyright works.
The deal involves content owners, such as recording labels and movie studios, monitoring
peer-to-peer networks, including BitTorrent, for copyright infringements, and reporting
instances to internet service providers.
The ISPs have agreed to take steps to educate allegedly infringing customers through an
escalating system of notices, warnings, and other measures.
While it was big news at the time and a very hot issue since mid-2011, very little
has been reported on the progress of the deal.
The initial announcement said that ISPs would start implementing the alert system by the
end of last year.
But this obviously didn't happen.
However, according to the Center for Copyright Information, the organization responsible
for administering the scheme, all parties are on target to initiate the programs by July
the 12th this year.
The members of the coalition are making significant progress at developing a cooperative system
to educate consumers and deter copyright theft, a spokesman told Torrent Freak.
CCI is working to implement what is an unprecedented effort and is proceeding on pace with the
MOU.
We will have announcements in the near future that will include naming of the anti-piracy
monitoring partner and details on how CCI and the technology partner will work together.
According to CNET, this positive outlook was confirmed by RIA CEO Carrie Sherman.
During the Association of American Publishers Annual Meeting yesterday, Sherman reported
the announcement that most of the major ISPs involved in the so-called graduate response
such as Comcast, Cable Vision, Verizon, and Time Warner Cable.
It is said that the process hadn't been easy, with each ISP having to establish their
own database to keep track of repeat infringers, the very people whose habits the studios hoped
to change, so come July what changes should customers of the major ISPs expect.
Those not engaging in file sharing on P2P network will probably notice very little, cyberlocking
sharing is not covered, apart from ultimately having to help finance the scheme through
their ISP bills.
For those who choose to download and share popular music from EMI, Sony Universal, and Warner,
or do likewise with movies owned by Disney, Sony, Paramount, 20th Century Fox, Universal,
and Warner, things will change.
Under a White House and lawmaker support, Memorandum of Understanding, published last July,
ISPs will send advisories to alleged copyright infringing customers.
The first so-called initial education steps will advise customers that copyright infringement
is illegal and a breach of the ISPs terms of service, that legal alternatives are available
and that continuing to infringe may have consequences, including accounts suspension or termination.
The acknowledgment step reached when an internet subscriber is accused of additional infringements
by rights holders, will see ISPs send copyright alerts requiring acknowledgment of receipt
from the account holders along with a pledge to end infringing activity from the account.
Should several attempts at educating a subscriber fail, ISPs will be able to send a mitigation
measure copyright alert, which again requires customer acknowledgment.
It will advise that the customer has received prior warnings, and as per the ISPs terms
of service, a mitigation measure will now be applied to the account.
Management measures can include throttling of upload or download speeds, a temporary
reduction in service quality to one step above dial-up, redirection to a landing page
so that the customer can be further educated or even account suspension.
No ISP has yet agreed to the latter and no ISP is allowed to disable VoIP, email security
or TV services.
From Tornfreak.com, day at March 14, 2012, by Ernesto, Domain Registrar confirms new
Pirate Bay investigation.
Last week, the news leaked that Swedish prosecutors have stored a new criminal investigation into
the Pirate Bay.
The assumed goal of the new effort is to shut the site down, something the authorities
failed to accomplish during the first investigation will in half a decade ago.
Initially, the only source of the new investigation was the Pirate Bay team itself.
Today, the plans are confirmed by Swedish hosting company Benero, where two of the Pirate
Bay's.se domain names are registered.
We can confirm that an investigation is underway against the Pirate Bay, we received a letter
with questions Benero's marketing manager, Eric Onberg, said.
In addition, the hosting company also made it clear that they won't be complying with
the requests unless a proper warrant is served according to Onberg this hasn't happened
thus far.
We will not share any information about our customers until there is a court order,
or when a prosecutor can refer to an applicable law.
In this case, we have answered the questions with information that's already available
through who is services.
The who is data for the Pirate Bay's new.se domain lists the name of Frederick Niche,
one of the defendants in the original trial who was sentenced to ten months in prison.
The exact goals of the new investigation are unclear.
The prosecution, led by piracy investigative Friedrich Englod, confirmed that they
are interested in torrent sites, but refused to comment further.
It is expected that the Swedish authorities want to finish what they failed to do in 2006,
shut down the Pirate Bay website for good.
However, concerning the current state of the site, that's pretty much an impossible task.
In recent years, the Pirate Bay has implemented a variety of changes to guarantee that can
remain online, whatever happens.
It added several backup domains, placed service all over the world while maneuvering resource
intensive components such as the tracker and torrent files.
The determination to keep the site online was once again confirmed by the Pirate Bay team
last week who noted, we're staying put where we are, we're going nowhere, but we have
a message to Hollywood, the investigators, and the prosecutors, L-O-L.
This American Life Retracts Empire episode about Apple factories after Mike Daisy admits
to fabricating parts of the story.
This is pretty big.
Last month we wrote about this American Life episode that focused on the Foxconn factories
where Apple products were made based on a one-man show by Mike Daisy.
I wrote about a few key points in the episode, including some of the more interesting claims
from those who were used to fact-check the story.
Apparently, that fact-check did not go nearly far enough.
Marketplace reporter Rob Schmitz, who was quite familiar with the factories in China, found
large plots of the story questionable and did some follow-up reporting, finding Daisy's
translator, and discovering that things Daisy said turned out not to be true.
He then conferred Daisy with Ira Glass from T-A-L, and got Daisy to admit that he fabricated
parts of the story, though he still appears to be indeniable about how bad this looks.
Quote, I stand by my work, my shows of theatrical peace, whose goal is to create a human connection
between our gorgeous devices and the brutal circumstances from which they emerge.
It uses a combination of fact, memoir, and dramatic license to tell its story, and I believe
it does so with integrity.
Certainly, the comprehensive investigations undertaken by the New York Times and a number
of labor rights groups to document conditions in the electronics manufacturing would seem
to bear this out.
What I do is not journalism.
The tools of the theater are not the same as the tools of journalism.
For this reason, I regret that I allowed this American life to air an excerpt from my
monologue.
This American life is essentially a journalistic, not a theatrical enterprise, and as such
it operates under a different set of rules and expectations.
But this is my only regret.
I am proud that my work seems to have sparked a growing storm of attention and concern over
the often-appalling conditions under which many of the high-tech prox we love so much are
assembled in China.
End of quote.
The problem, of course, is that it now appears that many of the things he was claiming weren't
actually true of the plants he wrote about.
There was one story that recounted events that did happen, but added a different plant
1,000 miles away, and which Daisy did not witness at all.
In the meantime, this American life has retracted the entire show, and apparently plans to
air a new show today that details what happened, and has a detailed apology from Ira Glass,
who just recently on the show was telling listeners to go see Daisy's full one-man show.
It is true that Daisy is a storyteller, not a reporter, and that's fine.
In the right context, but once it got to the point that journalistic outfits were reporting
on his story, or even letting him repeat it on the air, he had every responsibility to
be clear about the parts that were simply fabricated.
Editorial comment.
I love to end the tech segment on an upbeat story.
End editorial comment.
From torrentfreak.com by Enigmaxted March 18, 2012.
Mega upload seizure order Nolan Void says high court.
Just when it seemed that the handling of the Mega upload case couldn't get any more
controversial, a development from New Zealand has taken things to the next level.
Following the raids on Kim.com's mansion in January, police seized millions of dollars
worth of property belonging to the Mega upload founder, but thanks to a police blunder,
he could now see all those assets returned.
On Friday, Justice Judith Potter in the high court declared the order to use to seize.com's
property, Nolan Void, after it was discovered that the police had acted under a court order
that should have never been granted.
The air dates back to January when the police applied for the order granting them permission
to seize.com's property, rather than applying for an interim restraining order, the police
commissioner applied for a foreign restraining order instead.
In which did not give that kind of chance to amount to defense.
According to New Zealand Herald, on January 30, prosecution lawyer Ann Tui wrote to the court
explaining that the wrong order had been applied for and detailed five errors with the application.
Justice Potter said that police commissioner Peter Marshall tried to correct the error
by applying for the correct order after the raids were completed and retrospectively adding
these items already seized.
Although the correct order was eventually granted, albeit on a temporary basis, Potter said
she will soon rule on whether the procedural error will result in .com having his property
returned.
The crown is arguing that since the new order was granted, the earlier error no longer
matters, but .com's legal team framed it rather differently by describing the seizure
of assets as unlawful.
Whether the assets are returned will rest on .com's legal team showing a lack of good faith
in connection with the blunder, a hearing to decide if the assets will be returned will
take place next week.
Other headlines in the news to read this story for our link in the other headlines section
of the show notes, Yahoo's Su's Facebook over 10 disputed patents in the US.
News from NBSTimes.com, TechDirt.com, audio of Moment of Clarity No. 124, and allgov.com
used under arranged permissions.
News from EFF.org and torrentfreak.com used under permission of the Creative Commons by
Attribution License.
News from peoplesworld.org and PLRI.org used under permission of the Creative Commons by
Attribution Non-Commercial No Drivers License.
News sources retained their respective copyrights.
Thank you for listening to this episode of Talk Geek to Me.
Here are the vials statistics for this program.
Your feedback matters to me.
Please send your comments to DG at deepgeek.us.
The web page for this program is at www.talkgeektoMe.us.
You can subscribe to me on Identica as the username DeepGeek or you could follow me on Twitter.
My username there is DG-T-G-T-M as in DeepGeek Talk Geek to me.
This episode of Talk Geek to Me is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution Share
like 3.0 on Port License.
This license allows commercial reuse of the work as well as allowing you to modify the
work as long as you share a like the same rights you have received under this license.
Thank you for listening to this episode of Talk Geek to Me.
You have been listening to Hacker Public Radio or Hacker Public Radio does not.
We are a community podcast network that releases shows every weekday Monday through Friday.
Today's show, like all our shows, was contributed by a HBR listener by yourself.
If you ever consider recording a podcast, then visit our website to find out how easy
it really is.
Hacker Public Radio was founded by the Digital.Pound and the Emponomic and Computer Club.
HBR is funded by the Binary Revolution at binref.com.
All binref projects are crowd-responsive by Lina Pages.
From shared hosting to custom private clouds, go to LinaPages.com for all your hosting needs.
Unless otherwise stasis, today's show is released under a Creative Commons Attribution Share