Episode: 1145 Title: HPR1145: TGTM Newscast for 12/20/2012 Source: https://hub.hackerpublicradio.org/ccdn.php?filename=/eps/hpr1145/hpr1145.mp3 Transcribed: 2025-10-17 19:45:14 --- Hey everybody, this is Poki from Hacker Polic Radio. We're putting on another party like the New Year's Eve party we had last year. If you have a computer and you can get mumble working on it, we want you to join us on New Year's Eve. When is the party going to be? It's going to be all day. It's a 24 hour party, so you have plenty of time to call in and participate. If you're a podcaster, if you're a podcast listener, come and join us because this is our thing. This is our party we're getting together and we're doing it live. We're going to stream it live. And we're going to re-broadcast the recording later. The information is all available at hackerpublicradio.org. Please come along and join us on New Year's Eve. You're listening to 12 Geeks Me News, number 85 recorded for Thursday, December 20, 2012. You're listening to the Tech Only Hacker Public Radio Edition to get the full podcast, including political, commentary, and other controversial topics. Please visit www.torkgeeksme.us. Here are the vials to six 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.torkgeeksme.us. You can subscribe to me on Identica as the user name DeepGeek or you could follow me on Twitter. My username there is DGTGM as in DeepGeek TorkGeek to me. This is Pokey, reading for TechGeek to me news. And now for the tech news roundup from techdirt.com by Mike Maznik, dated December 14, 2012. ITU boss in denial claims success, misrepresents final treaty as US, UK, Canada, and many more refused to sign. From the, this is not consensus department. The ITU's world conference on international telecommunications, WCIT, is now over, and it played out almost exactly as many had predicted. After going back on explicit promises that the treaty would A, not be about the internet and B, would only be completed by consensus rather than by majority vote, the US lived up to its promise not to support such a treaty by officially stating that it would not sign. A number of other countries quickly followed suit including the UK, Canada, Denmark, Australia, Norway, Costa Rica, Serbia, Greece, Finland, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Sweden, New Zealand, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, and Qatar. Though some apparently said that they could not sign because they first had to consult with their own governments. So it's possible that some of these may change their mind, but many viewed such statements as a more diplomatic way of refusing to sign. The US on the other hand was explicit in refusing to sign, quote, it's with a heavy heart and a sense of missed opportunities that the US must communicate that it's not able to sign the agreement in the current form. End quote said US ambassador to WCIT Terry Kramer, quote, the internet has given the world unimaginable economic and social benefit during these past 24 years, all without UN regulation. We candidly cannot support an ITU treaty that is inconsistent with the multi-stakeholder model of internet governance. End quote Kramer had it. The US delegation also laid out the specific reasons why it refused to sign, and they're the same issues we've been talking about all along. One, the attempts to expand the definition of the types of entities covered by the treaty from the big telcos to just about everyone running network. Two, the explicit inclusion of internet and internet governance in the treaty. Three, the claim of a mandate over cybersecurity and four, the official regulation of Spain. The last one hasn't received as much attention, but the US found the rules put forth for dealing with Spain going way too far and putting in place rules that would violate the First Amendment. Of course, with so many countries bailing out, the ITU's promise that this would all be about consensus look positively laughable in retrospect. But perhaps even more laughable is the response from the ITU boss, Hamadun Torre, whose claims read like those of a bureaucrat in complete denial. First, he claimed complete surprise that the US and other countries walked away. Quote, I couldn't imagine they wouldn't sign it. I especially was surprised by the reasons that were put in place. I had made it clear from the opening that internet and content were not a part of the discussion. I invited ICANN to show that we want to build bridges. The telcom society and internet society need to work together. I made an appeal to please help us build bridges. The fighting will not help the consumer that we are trying to reach here. End quote. He kept going on and on insisting that the internet and internet governance were not part of the agreement, even though they are. Of course, he then effectively admits that part of the goal is to be the key player in the internet. Quote, I have been saying in the run up to this conference that this conference is not about governing the internet. I repeat that the conference did not include provisions on the internet in the treaty text. Annex to the treaty is a non-binding resolution which aims at fostering the development and growth of the internet. A task that ITU has contributed significantly to since the beginning of the internet era, and a task that is central to the ITU's mandate to connect the world, a world that today still has two-thirds of its population without internet access. End quote. So it's not about the internet, but the internet is central to the ITU's mandate. Of course, that claim is also a lie. The ITU's mandate does not cover the internet, but telecom infrastructure. One of the more nefarious moves by Torrey and the ITU and this whole process was to continually blur the lines between telecom, infrastructure, and the internet, as if they were the same. To read the rest of this story for yourself, please visit techdirt.com or see the link in the show notes. Our next story, also from Techdirt by Tim Cushing, dated December 13, 2012. Sony's new German e-book store features thousands of DRM-free books. From the, in other news, Sony sells e-readers department. DRM is becoming less and less prevalent these days, as more companies are realizing that the flashback from crippling the purchases of paying customers far outweighs any perceived prevention of infringement. It is not a wholesale conversion, but the new DRM-free converts are appearing more frequently, including some surprising holdouts. The digital reader brings us the news that Sony of all companies is opening its own e-book store in Germany, bringing with it a large selection of DRM-free books. Quote, the press release mentions that not all of the e-pub books sold by Sony come with the owner's Adobe D.E. DRM. Some of the books, numbering in the thousands, use digital watermarks instead. Apparently, several German publishers have decided to go with this low-hassel security, including Bastille, Lubé, Verlag, which publishes novels by Ken Follett, Andreas, Eschbach, and Dan Brown. It is not clear that any of these authors' novels are DRM-free. End quote. Rather than inject malignant coding that often fails to distinguish between paying customers and file sharers, these German publishers are opting for digital watermarking, which generally works as well as nastier forms of DRM, but without the negative side effects. Book's team is handling the watermarking for Sony, having proved its worth to publishers by providing this service to one of the biggest e-book store fronts of all time. Pottermore. So what convinced Sony to go DRM-free on thousands of titles? Perhaps it was observing Book's stream success in detecting piracy without having to resort to draconian measures. Quote, according to Hube Vanderpoll, the founder of Book's team's parent company Eye Contact, the official release of the Harry Potter e-books saw a decrease in piracy of the series. Once the titles were available legally and were easy to use, pirates saw little reason to post copies of the e-books online. End quote. As Hofolder points out, you can't make the same claim about DRM-loaded e-books. In nearly every case, the DRM is discarded easily by enterprising shareholders, or just as often by consumers who strip their purchases of this handicap in order to move them to other devices, or simply to make sure the publisher, bookstore, or DRM itself, doesn't suddenly decide to register their purchases unavailable or useless. Some customers may download the pirated version, even if they've purchased it, just to have an easily portable version, unhampered by DRM. Why punish your paying customers in order to temporarily annoy, slash, entertain, and fringes? The other key to book stream and Pottermore's success is the simplest one to solve. Make the books available for sale at reasonable prices and with as few limitations as possible. Do this, and your piracy problem will very possibly solve itself. Our next story from torrentfreak.com. By Ernesto, dated December 12th, 2012. Six strikes scheme may lead to lawsuits against pirates. Early next year, the controversial Six Strikes anti-piracy system will kick off in the US. While the initiative itself has a focus on education instead of punishing bit torrent pirates, ISPs are obliged to hand over IP addresses of repeat infringers to the MPAA and the RIAA. Commenting on this largely overlooked aspect, CCI director Jill Lesser confirmed to torrentfreak that lawsuits may indeed be initiated based on information collected under the program. Last year, the MPAA and RIAA teamed up with five major internet providers in the United States to launch the Center for Copyright Information, CCI. The parties agreed to operate a system, which will see subscribers warned when their connections are observed, engaging in copyright infringement. After several warnings, the ISPs will take a variety of mitigation measures against account holders. This continues up to six strikes. And after that, quote, nothing will happen and quote, according to the parties involved. While this is true in terms of mitigation measures applied by internet providers, the tracking of these subscribers doesn't stop. Even worse, in the memorandum of understanding signed by the participating parties we read the following, quote, the participating ISP will, however, continue to track and report the number of ISP notices the participating ISP receives for that subscriber's account. So that information is available to a content owner representative if it elects to initiate a copyright infringement action against that subscriber, end quote. While copyright infringement action could mean a lot of things, we previously pointed out that this also means lawsuits. As a part of the system, ISPs have to share the monthly reports with copyright holders, which would allow these groups to uncover identities of those alleged Victorian pirates. This means that IP addresses will be shared without being redacted. The memorandum of understanding puts it as follows, quote, the content owner representatives, explicitly MPAA and RIAA, or any other member of the participating content owners group may use such reports or data as the basis for seeking a subscriber's identity through a subpoena or order or other lawful process. For the avoidance of doubt, the parties agree that the content owner representatives may share such reports with other members of the participating content owners group, end quote. This quote unquote side effect of the Six Strikes Plan has been largely ignored. So to get clarification on the purpose of the above paragraphs, Torrent Freak contacted CCI Executive Director Jill Lesser this week. Lesser confirmed over the phone that the data shared by ISPs would allow copyright holders to request the personal details of alleged infringers through subpoenas, but that this type of legal action is not part of the copyright alerts program. Lesser added, the copyright holders can and are already tracking bit Torrent users right now, suggesting that it's nothing new. While it's true that the MPAA and RIAA can use monitoring companies to track alleged infringers, from a legal perspective, they have a much stronger case when it's done as part of the copyright alert system. For example, getting the data from ISPs allows copyright holders to say with certainty that certain accounts were used for multiple infringements as ISPs will connect dynamic IP addresses to the correct account holders. Also, those who receive warnings under the copyright alert system will have to acknowledge that they understand the risks. This means that the rights holders could show the court that subscribers were warned multiple times, but chose not to take action. Lesser told Torrent Freak that she doesn't believe that the MPAA and RIAA are interested in going after persistent pirates. However, she admitted that she doesn't know why the language was included in the agreement as she wasn't yet around when the agreement was drafted. While we can't say with certainty that the information shared by the ISPs will lead to lawsuits from the RIAA or MPAA, it wouldn't be a surprise if this happens. Why else would they have negotiated this option to begin? We can think of no other reason why these groups would want to know the identities of repeat infringers. From the website perspective.mvderona.com by James Hamilton, dated December 11th, 2012. I'll add here that this story includes a disclaimer by Mr. Hamilton that the opinions expressed here are his own and do not necessarily represent those of his current or past employers. Micro-server market heats up Intel Adam S-1200, codenamed Centerton announcement. Since 2008, I've been excited by working on and writing about micro-servers. In these early days, some of the workloads I worked with were IO-bound and didn't really need or use high single thread performance, replacing the server class processors that supported these applications with high volume low cost client system CPUs, yielded both better price performance and better power performance. Fortunately, at that time, there were good client processors available with ECC enabled and most embedded system processors also supported ECC. I wrote up some of the advantages of these early micro-server deployments and showed performance results from a production deployment in an internet scale mail processing application in the story, cooperative, expandable, micro-slice servers, low cost, low power servers for internet scale services. Intel recognizes the value of low power low cost processors for less CPU demanding applications and announced this morning the newest members of the Adam family, the S-1200 series. These new processors support two cores and four threads and are available in variance of up to two gigahertz while staying under 8.5 watts. The lowest power members of the family come in at just over six watts. Intel has demonstrated the S-1200 reference board running spec web at 7.9 watts, including memory, SATA, networking, BMC and other onboard components. Unlike past Adam processors, the S-1200 series supports full ECC memory and all members of the family support hardware virtualization, 64 bit addressing and up to eight gig of memory. These are real server parts. For a more complete list of the Centerton S-1200 microservice features and more of James Hamilton's opinions on it, please visit the story on perspectives.mvderona.com, a link will be in the show notes. Our last story from torrentfreak.com by Ernesto, dated December 12th, 2012. Verizon determines to expose bit torrent copyright trolls. It's now apparent that Verizon is fed up with the avalanche of masked bit torrent lawsuits and is determined to put an end to copyright trolls extortion-like practices. The internet provider is asking a Texas court to grant discovery so it can expose how these companies operate. According to Verizon, copyright trolling practices don't belong in court, and the ISP equates the companies involved with, quote, school yard bullies who push and shove until firm opposition is met when they shrink away. End quote. Two weeks ago, a group of adult movie companies sued Verizon for failing to hand over the personal details of alleged bit torrent pirates. The internet provider had ignored court orders and Malibu media, Patrick Collins and third degree films asked the court to hold Verizon in contempt and compel the company to respond to the subpoenas. This week, Verizon responded to the claims with a frontal attack. Verizon is asking a Texas federal court to grant discovery so the ISP can expose how the quote unquote copyright trolls in question operate. Verizon's motion is short, but leaves very little to the imagination. In its filing, Verizon states that the copyright holders, quote, pursue a scheme which, if not illegal, is at a minimum of a type to which the courts should not lend their powers and support. End quote. The provider has therefore decided to turn the tables. Instead of exposing the identities of their customers, they want to be granted discovery themselves so that they can request sensitive information on the companies involved. An unusual request at this stage of a case, but needed because many of Verizon's customers are unable to defend themselves. Quote, the circumstances are also unusual because the persons subject to potential abuse by the plaintiffs' approach are unlikely to be able for financial reasons, personal reasons, or plaintiffs' tactical approach to those who do actively oppose them to effectively oppose the plaintiffs' oppressive and unfair methods, end quote, Verizon writes. By exposing the tactics of these copyright holders, Verizon hopes the court can make an informed decision as to whether the alleged bit torrent users should have their identities revealed. This expose includes uncovering the tangled web of individuals behind these lawsuits and the tactics copyright holders use to get defendants to hand over their money. Quote, Verizon intends, among other things, to seek discovery from the senior level managers of the plaintiffs and from the persons affiliated with the plaintiffs whose declarations have been used to support the plaintiffs' requests for discovery, end quote, Verizon writes. Quote, Verizon further intends to seek discovery into the business model of plaintiffs and whether the plaintiffs are good faith publishers of the material they purportedly seek to protect as opposed to whether the plaintiffs' business model is primarily profit from their aggressive and abusive copyright enforcement efforts, end quote, they added. The ISP concludes its request by equating the tactics of the copyright holders to school yard bullies who run away scared if their targets fight back, a seemingly fitting description as none of their cases have ever made it through a full trial. Quote, plaintiffs tactics appeared to be much like those of school yard bullies who push and shove until firm opposition is met when they shrink away. Plaintiffs and those like them have apparently avoided having to deal with these issues by not pursuing those who would raise these issues and quote, Verizon concludes. From the filings, it becomes clear that Verizon is determined to end the trolling tactics of the adult studios and they're not scared to invest money into the fight. Torrent Freak talked to attorney Graham Stifert, who has a lot of experience with these mass bit torrent lawsuits and he believes that this case could have a wide impact. Quote, if discovery is granted, these companies will be subject to the same scrutiny as a plaintiff in a trial and those depositions and answers could be used in cases nationwide and quote, Stifert told us. This means that if Verizon gets their way and they uncover an updirt, some of the most active copyright trolls may be put out of business. In any case, we can expect fireworks. Other interesting headlines in the news this week to read these stories, please follow the links in the show notes. Swedish Pirate Party defends role as Pirate Bay ISP. Pirate Bay founder released from solitary confinement. Production and editorial selection by DeepGeek, views of the story authors reflect their own opinions and not necessarily those of TGTM news or its readers. News from tecturt.com of anti-times.org, perspectives.mvderona.com, in these times.com and allgov.com are used under arranged permission. News from torrentfreak.com and dff.org are used under permission of the creative comments by attribution license. News from democracynow.org is used under permission of the creative comments by attribution, non-commercial, no derivatives license. News sources retain 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 dgatdeepgeek.us. The web page for this program is at www.talkgeektme.us. You can subscribe to me on Identica as the username DeepGeek or you could follow me on Twitter. My username there is dggtm as in DeepGeek Talk Geek to me. This episode of Talk Geek to Me is licensed under the creative comments 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 so 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 at Hacker Public Radio.org. We are a community podcast network that releases shows every weekday on day through Friday. Today's show, like all our shows, was contributed by an HPR 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 dog pound and near-phonomical and computer cloud. HPR is funded by the binary revolution at binref.com. All binref projects are crowd-responsive by linear pages. From shared hosting to custom private clouds, go to lunarpages.com for all your hosting needs. Unless otherwise stasis, today's show is released under a creative commons, attribution, share a like, videos or license.