Archive Search




This page is powered by Blog Studio.
and s-integrator

Saturday, April 26, 2003

Judge: File-swapping tools are legal | CNET News.com as long as the company does not handle the real-time communications in any way.
Napster's service opened itself to liability for its users' actions by actively playing a role in connecting people who were downloading and uploading songs--a little like a physical swap meet provides the facilities for people exchanging illegal material, the judge said. By contrast, Grokster and Streamcast distributed software to people and had no control over what their users did afterwards, Wilson said.

When users search for and initiate transfers of files using the Grokster client, they do so without any information being transmitted to or through any computers owned or controlled by Grokster," Wilson wrote. "Neither Grokster nor StreamCast provides the site and facilities" for direct infringement. "If either defendant closed their doors and deactivated all computers within their control, users of their products could continue sharing files with little or no interruption."

It didn't matter that the companies were aware generally of copyright infringement happening using their software, Wilson added--they would have to know of specific instances of infringement and be able to do something about it, to be liable for those users' actions.

That stands in stark contrast to an earlier ruling against file-swapping company Aimster, in which the judge explicitly said the file-trading company did not need to know about individual acts of copyright infringement as they were happening to be held liable for the illegal activity.


"This is far from over," said Fred von Lohmann, an Electronic Frontier Foundation attorney who has represented Streamcast in the case. "This is not the end, but it sends a very strong message to the technology community that the court understands the risk to innovation."

wo 8:53 AM - [Link] - Comments ()

Friday, April 25, 2003

Yet another massive and complete US intelligence failure...

Bush: Iraq May Have Destroyed Weapons (washingtonpost.com) - April 25, 2003

Bush's remarks today were more pessimistic. He noted that Iraqis with knowledge of the programs "have come forward recently, some voluntarily, others not," to "let us know what the facts were on the ground." While expressing no certainty about Iraq's weapons, Bush said that "one thing is for certain: Saddam Hussein no longer threatens America with weapons of mass destruction."

In an interview today with NBC's Tom Brokaw, Bush acknowledged "there's going to be skepticism until people find out there was, in fact, a weapons of mass destruction program," but he repeated his belief that Hussein "destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some." Bush said there are "literally hundreds" of suspect sites and only 90 have been examined so far.

Launching the war, Bush said that "the people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder." In the months before the war, the administration said that Iraq had not accounted for 25,000 liters of anthrax; 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin; 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent; and 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents.

The Bush administration has kept repeating that cooperation from Iraq defectors brings the best Iraq weapons intelligence. Then why do they only reference the portion of Hussein Kamel's (highest-ranking Iraqi to defect in 1995) testimony that says how many weapons of mass destruction there was, and not the portion where Hussein Kamel says they were all destroyed?

Altercation - A LOT TO HIDE = April 24, 2003

Followup Needed After Newsweek Story on Iraqi Weapons

The original interview with Hussein Kamel

Exclusive: The Defector?s Secrets

wo 11:10 AM - [Link] - Comments ()

Thursday, April 24, 2003

Ramifications of a unilateral, unjustified, illegal and immoral war...

CNN.com - N. Korea: War at 'any moment' - Apr. 24, 2003

wo 8:17 AM - [Link] - Comments ()

Thursday, April 17, 2003

UN Resolutions Primary Goal for Iraq
- Iraq must disarmed itself of weapons of mass destruction

US Reasons for Iraq War
- Iraq has not disarmed itself of weapons of mass destruction
- Iraq has huge stores of weapons of mass destruction
- Iraq has violated many UN resolutions of many years
- Iraq is therefore a potential future danger to US national security

US Goals of Iraq War
- Disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction (none found yet)
- Regime Change (done)

Requirements to end UN Sanctions against Iraq
- Disarm Iraq of Weapons of Mass Destruction confirmed by UN Inspectors

Bush wants Iraq sanctions lifted before disarming Iraq - Thu April 17, 2003
The European Union on Thursday cautiously welcomed President Bush's call for economic sanctions against Iraq to be lifted, but said the decision rested with the United Nations.

Bush urged the United Nations on Wednesday to lift the 13-year-old sanctions, which would allow Iraq to sell oil to help pay for postwar reconstruction following the overthrow of President Saddam Hussein.


U.N. resolutions say an end to sanctions hinge on the world body certifying that Iraq is free of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons, the main reason Washington gave for the war.

'Inspectors must return' - Blix - Thu April 17, 2003
Chief United Nations arms inspector, Hans Blix, has called for experts to return to Iraq to check whether Baghdad had a programme to develop weapons of mass destruction.

wo 9:25 AM - [Link] - Comments ()

Tuesday, April 15, 2003

The city bleeds as the chief spends

Bush calls for $550 billion in tax cuts as the current NYC mayor paints bleak picture in 'doomsday' budget.

wo 9:40 PM - [Link] - Comments ()

charging the canvas