Colbert: Corporations ready to take over Patriot Act

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
The Word - Spyvate Sector
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor U.S. Speedskating

A morning e-mail from Facebook

“Facebook is sending you this notice of a proposed class action settlement that may affect your legal rights as a Facebook member who may have used the Beacon program. This summary notice is being sent to you by Court Order so that you may understand your rights and remedies before the Court considers final approval of the proposed settlement on February 26, 2010.

“This is not an advertisement or attorney solicitation.

“This is not a settlement in which class members file claims to receive compensation. Under the proposed settlement, Facebook will terminate the Beacon program. In addition, Facebook will provide $9.5 million to establish an independent non-profit foundation that will identify and fund projects and initiatives that promote the cause of online privacy, safety, and security.

“For full details on the settlement and further instructions on what to do to opt out of, object to, or otherwise comment upon the proposed settlement, please go to http://www.BeaconClassSettlement.com.

“Please do not reply to this email.”

Colbert on “criminal” Amtrak photography

Amtrak vs. Duane - 02/02/09 from swatspyder on Vimeo.

Strict constructionalism is "a strange notion"

Man arrested and locked up for five hours after taking photo of police van

I want a week where there aren't stories like this for me to post. Here's another photographer being arrested in the UK for just taking a photo.

When Andrew Carter saw a police van ignore no-entry signs to reverse up a one-way street to reach a chip shop, he was understandably moved to protest to the driver.

Particularly as he lives on the road and always goes out of his way to obey the signs.

But his complaint brought a volley of abuse from PC Aqil Farooq.

And when Mr Carter took a picture of the van then tried to photograph the officer, PC Farooq rushed out of the shop and knocked his camera to the ground.

Mr Carter was then arrested and bundled into the van over claims he had 'assaulted' an officer with his camera, resisted arrest and was drunk and disorderly.

He was held in a police cell for five hours before being released on bail at midnight.

Read the full story on MailOnline.

Maps and photographs now considered evidence of terrorism in the UK

Reposted from BoingBoing:

A Londoner was stopped by a London Transport Police officer under S.44 of the Terrorism Act 2000, and had the presence of mind to whip out his video camera and record the officers tearing through his stuff. They officers admitted that they had no suspicion of him, no reason to search him and told him he'd be arrested if he refused. They riffle through his books (looking for terrorist words?) and go through his things. Welcome to Britain, now spread 'em. Stopped under S.44 of the Terrorism Act 2000

The bit about photographs and maps is sated by one of the officers involved while he's looking through the bag.

Police: Photographing thugs 'is assault'

From the UK:

A householder who took photographs of hooded teenagers as evidence of their anti-social behaviour says he was told he was breaking the law after they called the police.

David Green, 64, and his neighbours had been plagued by the youths from a nearby comprehensive school for months, and was advised by their headmaster to identify them so action could be taken.

But when Mr Green left his £1million London flat to take photographs of the gang, who were aged around 17, he said one threatened to kill him while another called the police on his mobile.

And he claimed that a Police Community Support Officer sent to the scene promptly issued a warning that taking pictures of youths without permission was illegal, and could lead to a charge of assault.

Read the full story on Mail Online.

Take photos of your kids having fun, get called a pervert

When Gary Crutchley started taking pictures of his children playing on an inflatable slide he thought they would be happy reminders of a family day out.

But the innocent snaps of seven-year-old Cory, and Miles, five, led to him being called a ‘pervert’.

The woman running the slide at Wolverhampton Show asked him what he was doing and other families waiting in the queue demanded that he stop.

Luckily in this instance the police were sympathetic towards the photographer:

‘This parental paranoia is getting completely out of hand. I was so shocked. One of the police officers told me that it was just the way society-is these days. He agreed with me that it was madness.’

Read the full story at Mail Online.

Photographing the Police in Tennessee

A Johnson County sheriff’s deputy arrested Scott Conover for unlawful photography.

“He says you took a picture of me.  It’s illegal to take a picture of a law enforcement officer,” said Conover.

Conover took a picture of a sheriff’s deputy on the side of the road on a traffic stop.  Conover was stunned by the charge.

...

In an affidavit, the deputy said he saw something black with a red light which he thought was a threat.  Conover was also arrested for pointing a laser at a law enforcement officer.

The photo was taken with an iPhone which contains no laser. It doesn't even contain a flash like my Motorola Q.

Read the full story at TriCities.com.

Help Stop Big Media

[This is a slightly edited reprint of an e-mail I received and support.]

Add Your Voice - Sign the Petition Today!

When members of Congress return home this summer, they need to hear why stopping further media consolidation must be a top priority.

By acting now, you can ensure that there are thousands of petitions ready to be delivered when Rep. Jeff Fortenberry sets foot back in your district for the summer congressional recess.

Help Stop Big Media: Sign the Petition Now

In May, the Senate voted to stop Big Media by passing a "resolution of disapproval," which rejected the Federal Communications Commission's latest effort to consolidate local media.

We won in the Senate. We can win again in the House.

To do this, we need to get 100 co-sponsors in the next 100 days to support the House version of the bill (H.J. Res. 79). This summer, we'll be delivering hundreds of thousands of petitions at in-district meetings with key members of Congress. Make sure your voice is heard.

Help Us Get 100 Co-Sponsors in 100 Days.
Sign the Petition Today

Tens of thousands of people already have signed the petition, and 30 members of Congress have agreed to co-sponsor the bill. But we need to do more to swing a majority in the House.

And we don't have much time. We plan to deliver the signatures in August, when elected representatives leave D.C. for the summer.

Congress may be about to go on break, but we aren't going to rest.

Thanks for your help,

Josh Stearns
Campaign Coordinator
http://www.stopbigmedia.com/
http://www.freepress.net/
P.S. Help spread the word! Join the 100 Cosponsors in 100 Days event on Facebook and tell your friends to sign the petition.

---

Take action on this important campaign at:
http://free.convio.net/site/Advocacy?pagename=homepage&id=265

Tell your friends about this campaign at: http://free.convio.net/site/Ecard?ecard_id=1109

StopBigMedia.com is a project of Free Press and the Free Press Action Fund, on the Web at www.freepress.net.

It's not just the UK

Here's a story from Oklahoma:

"That black SUV passed me doing about 120," Owens said. "I stopped, pulled off on the median, had my camera and just walked around and shot a few pictures."

Much to Owens' surprise, when police saw him taking the pictures, they demanded he hand them over or go to jail. Owens said three troopers and an Oklahoma City police officer were present during the incident.

"I quickly opened the scooter seat, dropped my camera in and locked it, and said ‘No, I won't give it to you,' Owens said.

As professional photographer and a teacher at Casady School, Owens stood his ground, telling police they were violating his civil rights.

"I'm a prep school teacher, not a criminal," Owens said. "It was constant screaming a foot from my face, of how stupid I am."

After Owens refused to take the camera out of his scooter and delete the pictures, that's when he said one of the Troopers lost his restraint.

"He finally just snapped, and said ‘That's it, you're going to jail,' and knocked my helmet off my head and took me over to a tree and cuffed me," Owens said.

Read the full story and see video at NewsOn6.com.

Daniel Ellsberg on warrantless wiretapping bill

What Every American Needs to Know (and Do) About FISA Before
Tuesday, July 8th from Tim Ferriss on Vimeo. via BoingBoing.

More on UK photographer's rights

This group of photographers came prepared and pulled out a bull-horn when confronted by security guards.

The BBC picked up the story and has more details.

Snuggly is back!

Snuggly the Security Bear is back and this time he's here to explains Warrantless Wiretapping.

UK photographers are basically & officially screwed

'First of all, may I take this opportunity to state that the Government greatly values the importance of the freedom of the press, and as such there is no legal restriction on photography in public places,' [Home Secretary] Smith writes. 'Also, as you will be aware, there is no presumption of privacy for individuals in a public place.'

However, the Home Secretary adds that local restrictions might be enforced. 'Decisions may be made locally to restrict or monitor photography in reasonable circumstances. That is an operational decision for the officers involved based on the individual circumstances of each situation.

Read the full story in The British Journal of Photography.

Don't take pictures of busses in the UK...

...or you might be labeled a paedophile.

A bus-spotter says it is no longer safe to practise his hobby of 40 years after being branded a terrorist and a paedophile.

Rob McCaffery, 50, is proud of his 30,000 photos of trams and coaches but after being interrogated twice in 12 months he fears the time may have come to hang up his camera.

The credit controller, from Gloucester, says he now suffers "appalling" abuse from the authorities and public who doubt his motives.

The bus-spotter, officially known as an omnibologist, said: "Since the 9/11 attacks there has been a crackdown.

"The past two years have absolutely been the worst. I have had the most appalling abuse from the public, drivers and police over-exercising their authority.

Mr McCaffery, who is married, added: "We just want to enjoy our hobby without harassment.

"I can deal with the fact someone might think I'm a terrorist, but when they start saying you're a paedophile it really hurts."

Read the full story on Yahoo! UK & Ireland News.

EFF weighs in on "making available"

These two arguments are brilliant! First, Making Available == distribution:

It claims that the right "to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public" granted in the Copyright Act means that an actual distribution must be proven. This is a more demanding standard of evidence than simply showing a judge that copyrighted files exist in a user's shared file folder on a P2P network.

One of the key parts of this claim is that Congress showed in other laws that it could be quite clear about granting a "making available" right when it wished to do so. The fact that the Copyright Act doesn't include such language should be taken as an obvious sign that just attempting to distribute a work cannot be considered copyright infringement, said the EFF.

Second Media Sentry == the public:

"It is axiomatic that a copyright owner cannot infringe her own copyright," says the brief in its concluding section. "By the same token, an authorized agent acting on behalf of the copyright owner also cannot infringe any rights held by that owner. Accordingly, where the only evidence of infringing distribution consists of distributions to authorized agents of the copyright owner, that evidence cannot, by itself, establish that other, unauthorized distributions have taken place."

Read the full story on ars technica.

MPAA Says No Proof Needed in P2P Copyright Infringement Lawsuits

Never mind "innocent until proven guilty" when it comes to copyright infringement according to the MPAA.

"Mandating such proof could thus have the pernicious effect of depriving copyright owners of a practical remedy against massive copyright infringement in many instances," MPAA attorney Marie L. van Uitert wrote Friday to the federal judge overseeing the Jammie Thomas trial.

"It is often very difficult, and in some cases, impossible, to provide such direct proof when confronting modern forms of copyright infringement, whether over P2P networks or otherwise; understandably, copyright infringers typically do not keep records of infringement," van Uitert wrote on behalf of the movie studios, a position shared with the Recording Industry Association of America, which sued Thomas, the single mother of two.

Red the full story on Wired.com.

Profs tell Thomas judge making available isn't distribution

It can't be easy for a federal judge to admit that he was wrong when giving jury instructions in a high-profile case, but the judge in the Jammie Thomas file-swapping case has stepped up and cast serious doubt on his own actions. Following other court rulings around the country, Judge Michael Davis indicated that he may grant Thomas a new trial after telling the jury that simply "making available" a copyrighted song on P2P networks counted as infringement. Now, Davis has asked for public comment on "whether the Court committed a manifest error of law in instructing the jury." The first public response to that question offers a resounding "yes" in response.

Nine copyright professors have filed a "friend of the court" brief (found via Threat Level) that addresses Davis' question. While the "making available" issue can be tedious, technical, and contradictory (different court rulings have gone different ways), the brief actually does a fine job of making the debate accessible.

The main thrust of the argument is a simple one: a close look at the actual words of the relevant copyright statute show that rights holders have the exclusive prerogative to "distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public." The key question concerns whether just making available a file in a shared directory counts as a distribution to the public, and the professors argue that it clearly does not.

Read the full story on ars technica.

Author Sues Booksellers for Selling His Books

More proof that Copyright as it stands is totally bonkers. (Even if this case gets tossed out, which it should, the fact the someone thinks this is reasonable under the current law proves my point.)

But the Los Angeles-based Valerie F. Horn, Townsend's attorney, said that although the claim is rooted in an issue with Nazca (which is, for all intents and purposes, an individual named Herbert R. Moseley), the bookstores are legally entangled. According to Horn, Nazca, aka Moseley, copied Townsend's works without permission and then distributed the books to the booksellers. This, she said, results in "liability to all those within the chain of distribution." Horn also added that whether the booksellers named knowingly or unknowingly sold ripped-off books is irrelevant, as per the copyright statute.

Read the full story at Publishers Weekly.

Digital copyright: it's all wrong

Check this one out, the US proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement:

The ACTA draft is a scary document. If a treaty based on its provisions were adopted, it would enable any border guard, in any treaty country, to check any electronic device for any content that they suspect infringes copyright laws. They need no proof, only suspicion.

They would be able to seize any device - laptop, iPod, DVD recorder, mobile phone, etc - and confiscate it or destroy anything on it, merely on suspicion. On the spot, no lawyers, no right of appeal, no nothing.

Read the full story in The Sidney Morning Herald.

Your Papers Please: TSA outlaws ID-less flight

That is, unless you just say, you "forgot" your ID...

In a major change of policy, the Transportation Security Administration has announced that passengers refusing to show ID will no longer be able to fly. The policy change, announced on Thursday afternoon, will go into force on June 21, and will only impact passengers who refuse to produce ID. Passengers who lie and claim to have lost or forgotten their proof of identity will still be able to fly.

Yep, a terrorist would never lie and say "whoops I forgot my ID" now would they? The full story can be read on CNET News.com.

Photographing in Union Station (DC)

This one is hilarious.

The Fox channel in Washington D.C. became aware that photographers were being hassled by security in Union Station (the train station in Washington), so they dispatched a reporter and a crew to do a story on it. So they're interviewing the head spokesman for Amtrak, who is explaining that there aren't any laws or rules against photography inside the train station...when a security guard comes up and tells the TV crew they'll have to turn the cameras off.

A link to the video and a second video from of Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton regarding her opinion that these "rules" are getting out of hand are at The Online Photographer.

Cop takes out news cameraman

An Eyewitness News 4 photographer was cuffed and cited Thursday morning for disobeying a police officer. It was a situation where the photographer was trying to do his job. And now the Albuquerque Police Department is reviewing the tape to see if the officer crossed the line. Full story and video at KOB.com.

Religious test for office

According to Article VI of the US Constitution:

"...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

That is, except in Tennessee I guess:

Article IX: Disqualifications
§ 2. Atheists holding office
No person who denies the being of God, or a future state of rewards and punishments, shall hold any office in the civil department of this State.

Hmmm... Well, they don't allow "Ministers of the Gospel" to hold state-level legislative seats either but that is to ensure that they are "not to be diverted from the great duties of their functions" (Article IX,§1).

Now here's a lawsuit that should be waiting to happen.

You Can't Picture This

More sad news about public photography. This time again from the UK.

Jury clears Galveston news photographer of interfering with police during arrest

Finally, some good news, though it's sad that the trial even happed at all.

A jury cleared a former Galveston County Daily News photographer Wednesday of a charge that he interfered with police during 2007’s Mardi Gras.

The case raised questions about whether police destroyed evidence, and prompted debate about the rights of journalists and ordinary citizens to monitor the actions of law enforcement.

Read the full story at KHOU.com.

Understanding Anti-Piracy Enforcement

TorrentFreak has a great post explaining some of the most common misconceptions about anti-piracy enforcement today. They are:

1. There have been very few actual legal cases, as yet, that have involved torrents.
2. The majority of copyright cases are CIVIL, not criminal
3. What most people think of as being the law, often isn’t.
4. The RIAA and the MPAA never get involved in anti piracy evidence collection directly.
5. Most of the time, people are going from what someone they have met on a forum had read in an IRC channel.

Each of these are addresses in detail on TorrentFreak.

Tourist or Terrorist?

According to this article from The Memphis Flyer be weary of taking photos in Memphis. You just might be a terrorist.

A man walking through Tom Lee Park pauses to snap a photo of the iconic Hernando DeSoto Bridge. Another man shoots pictures of numerous downtown buildings.

Many would assume the men are tourists taking in the city's sights, but law enforcement officials say they could be terrorists staking out possible targets.

The scenarios were described at an anti-terrorism town hall meeting last week hosted by the Shelby County Sheriff's Office. The meeting, held at Cordova's First Assembly of God Church, was one of four public meetings that occurred in conjunction with Operation Sudden Impact, a new local anti-terrorism initiative.

"You may think a guy is just shooting pictures, but if you report it to us, we'll send it on to the FBI and they may have four or five other reports of the same thing," said Richard Pillsbury with the Tennessee Fusion Center, a collaboration between the Department of Safety and the Department of Homeland Security.

Shelby County sergeant Larry Allen warned attendees at the meeting to look for people who appear to be doing surveillance outside public buildings, such as shopping malls.

I'm glad I got my photos of Graceland a few years ago.

The War on Photography: NYC

I've  been reading more and more stories about police and government warring on photographers who are well within their rights to do what they're doing. As a photographer myself I'm starting to get a little nervous. Until now I've failed to post much about this issue but that stops here. I can't not share this video.

via Boing Boing

Thing #9: Searching for feeds

I'm trying to play along, honest, but really, do I need to go looking for feeds to add to my aggregator? That answer is simply no. Not because I feel that I have too many feeds, or even enough feeds, but instead it's because feeds find me not the other way around. Here's an example:

I was just catching up on some of my Library-related blog feeds when I saw a link to a new blog named Photography Friendly. Here's the first post:

Welcome to Photography Friendly

I have heard stories of photographers who have gone to a location, such as a park, to do personal photography. They would end up being told by an employee at that location that photography is not allowed or requires an application and a fee to take photos, even if they are just personal photos. I have also heard that some locations will consider you a professional photographer if you are using a tripod!

Finding information on photography restrictions for various locations can be difficult, if not impossible. I am hoping that this site will become a location for photographers, whether they just take photos for special occasions, as a hobby, or professionally, to look up information on how photography friendly a location is - no restrictions, some restrictions, application and fee required, or no photography allowed at all!

Your participation will help make this site successful. It can just be sharing your experience at a site. Better yet, link to an official policy or extract the text from an email from that location that gives their policy. To do so, leave a comment. All comments go through moderation. Site your source and how you would like to be credited. The more detailed the information, the better.

Well, that sounds interesting so a few clicks later I'm that blog's first subscriber in Bloglines. I don't know how long I'll keep it but I'm interested in photography-related legal issues so I'm giving it a shot. If it becomes not worth my time I can always unsubscribe.

Odds & Ends

There's been a few news items of late that I've been thinking about yet somehow can't bring myself to write long posts about so I'll just throw out my general opinion on the issues here:

The SAFE Act
Many a library blog have been complaining about the implications of this potential new law when it comes to offering public and open WiFi in the library. While I'm not defending this bill in any way, shape, or form, I think certain bloggers are overreacting. Here's the relevant text:

"Anyone providing an “electronic communication service” or “remote computing service” to the public who learns about the transmission or storage of information about certain illegal activities or an illegal image must..." [emphasis added]

The key phrase here is "who learns about". In other words, providers of open WiFi are not required to troll for illegal activity, just report it if they find out about it. Which, in my opinion is something that we should be doing from a moral standpoint anyway. (You see child porn on a computer in the library, you say something.) If you're concerned about having to report, this is just another reason to not look over the shoulders of your patrons.

The Kindle
I've held one and I'm not impressed. I have a Sony Reader (and not even the latest version) and that impresses me. (I may have one or two of my facts wrong in this bit so please correct me if appropriate. The Kindle is $400. The Reader, $300 or less. The Kindle has a keyboard, the Reader doesn't. So what. I'd rather have that space taken up by the screen instead of having another device on which I have to type with my thumbs. I can easily get pretty much any document I want onto my Sony Reader through an iTunes-esque interface. For the Kindle I either need to buy it from Amazon or go through some undocumented hack-like steps to get my files into it. The Kindle is physically larger than the Reader and just feels more cumbersome. The Reader does audio, the Kindle doesn't. (Ok, not a big deal to me but it might be tom some people.) Those big honkin' buttons on the side of the Kindle are too easily accidentally pressed. The Kindle's WiFi? From what I hear every little thing you do is going to cost you. But you might be in the airport and finish off the last book and need to buy a new one you say. Sorry, but if you're on a trip and have read everything on a device that can hold hundreds of books, you've either had way too much free time to read (go out and get some exercise) on your trip or it's the result of poor planning on your part. Go buy a paperback for $7.99 at the gift shop. At least then you'll own something more than a license.

No, the Sony Reader isn't perfect but I don't believe the Kindle is the killer app of eBooks or even much of an improvement. It's tacking on a bunch of features to a good product that no one really needs. And no, I'm not going to get into the whole DRM discussion here as that applies to both platforms. (Well, no more than I did at the end of the previous paragraph.)

RIP Pandora

Pandora is dead due the the recently new (retroactive no less) Internet radio royalty rates. As Doc Searls put it:

"In a move that recalls the Vogons' decision to destroy Earth to clear the way for a highway bypass through space (a thankfully fictional premise of Douglas Adams' Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy), the judges comprising the Copyright Royalty Board have decided to destroy the Internet radio industry so the Recording Industry won't be inconvenienced by something it doesn't know, like or understand."

Viacom sues Google/YouTube for (insert Dr. Evil joke here)

Here's the basic story and the Google Copyright Blog has the full text of the complaint as a PDF.

"YouTube is a significant, for-profit organization that has built a lucrative business out of exploiting the devotion of fans to others' creative works in order to enrich itself and its corporate parent Google."

The feds want ISPs to keep data

The feds are at it again. Data retention seems to be their latest thing. This time they want image-sharing sites to keep data "in case police determine the content is illegal and choose to investigate." Normall this would be something I'd comment on just on principle. However, this quote just makes it way to funny:

"Only universities and libraries would be excluded, one participant said. 'There's a PR concern with including the libraries, so we're not going to include them,' the participant quoted the Justice Department as saying. 'We know we're going to get a pushback, so we're not going to do that.'"