Blacknell.net

Politics, open government, and safe streets. And the constant incursion of cycling.

Category: Distribution Page 13 of 15

Heading out to see a movie? Skip Ballston’s Regal Cinema

By

On August 2, 2007

In Distribution, Law, Policy

This is ridiculous:

ARLINGTON, Va. – A 19-year-old woman is facing up to a year in jail and a fine up to $2,500 when she goes to trial this month on charges of illegally recording part of a motion picture.

Jhannet Sejas readily admits she used her digital camera last month in an Arlington theater to film about 20 seconds of the climax of the hit movie “Transformers.” She said she wanted to show the clip to her little brother and had no intention of selling it.

But minutes after filming the clip, police showed up in the theater, shining a flashlight in her face. Sejas and her boyfriend were ordered out, and the camera was confiscated.

Just an overzealous usher and bored police, right? Well:

Arlington County police spokesman John Lisle said the theater wanted to prosecute the case, which is a first for the police department.

“They were the victim in this case, and they felt strongly enough about it,” Lisle said.

That’s right. A crappy 20 second video clip victimizes Regal Entertainment Group (Second quarter 2007 gross revenues of $684 million). Another blow to the beleaguered forces of overbroad copyright claims. How will they ever survive?

This is the closest theater to me, and while it’s not my favorite in the area, I’ve often used it out of convenience. In fact, I’d made plans to see a movie there tonight. Forget it. For tonight and every other night. I’d urge you to do the same.* Better environments and movies can be found at Landmark’s E Street Cinema, Arlington Cinema and Draft House, or even the AMC Theatre in Courthouse.

Update: check out the WaPo story for additional details and some choice quotes. From the general counsel of the theater owners’ association: “We cannot educate theater managers to be judges and juries in what is acceptable[.]” Well, there you go.

*And let them know why.  You can contact Regal Entertainment Group corporate offices at:

7132 Regal Lane, Knoxville, Tennessee, 37918.
Corporate phone: 1-865-922-1123
Fax: 1-865-922-3188
Customer relations number: 1-877-TELLREGAL or 1-877-835-5734.

An EFF Victory: Broadcast Treaty in Tatters

By

On June 23, 2007

In Distribution, Society

On the right, under “Act”, you’ll see a link to the Electronic Frontier Foundation.  Why?  They’re working their asses off protecting freedoms and ideas you didn’t even know were important.  For example, they just achieved a significant measure of victory in getting rid of the ridiculous Broadcast Treaty.  What’s that? As Cory Doctorow puts it:

The broadcast treaty creates a copyright-like “broadcast right,” for the entities that make works available. So while copyright goes to the people who create things, broadcast rights go to people who have no creative contribution at all. Here’s how it would work: say you recorded some TV to use in your classroom. Copyright lets you do this — copyright is limited by fair use. But the broadcast right would stop you — you’d need to navigate a different and disjointed set of exceptions to broadcast rights, or the broadcaster could sue you.

That’s right.  No show-and-discuss newscasts in the classroom.  No playing of CC-licensed symphonies taped from the radio.  And what did the EFF and its allies do?

When we started going to the World Intellectual Property Organization, we had no idea how we would manage it. There is no constitution to appeal to there. They control the venue and call the shots. But we went in and blogged the negotiations (the first ever look inside the sausage factory of a UN treaty negotiation), bringing unparalleled transparency to the negotiations. We rallied dozens of other organizations to come to Geneva. We argued. We posted guards over our position papers when someone started to throw them in the bathrooms and hide them behind the plants (first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you — then you win!). We slashdotted them. We wrote them letters. We went all over the world and talked to librarians, activists, and hackers. We proposed a better treaty that would limit copyright around the world and give rights to archivists, educators and disabled people to use and preserve creative works.

We kicked ass.

And we won. (For now.)

Generations ahead are better off for this.  They’re fighting the good fight.  Even if next to no one understands that.

Bush and Cheney Set Standard for Acceptable Language

By

On June 5, 2007

In Distribution, Law, Policy

Okay, the title of this post isn’t really accurate at all. But lord, is this funny. In rejecting the FCC’s new enthusiasm for fining TV stations for broadcasting even a brief and unplanned use of an expletive, the Court of Appeals:

Adopt[ed] an argument made by lawyers for NBC, [and] cited examples in which Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney had used the same language that would be penalized under the policy. Mr. Bush was caught on videotape last July using a common vulgarity that the commission finds objectionable in a conversation with Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain. Three years ago, Mr. Cheney was widely reported to have muttered an angry obscene version of “get lost” to Senator Patrick Leahy on the floor of the United States Senate.

Fucking brilliant.

Cryptome Shutting Down?

By

On April 29, 2007

In Distribution, Law, Policy, Society, Tech

Via Slashdot, I see that Verio recently sent Cryptome.org a notice informing the owner that Verio will no longer provide hosting services as of this Friday. What is Cryptome, and why should you care? Cryptome is perhaps the most impressive individual effort at plugging the “memory hole” that has ever existed.* In Cryptome’s own words:

Cryptome welcomes documents for publication that are prohibited by governments worldwide, in particular material on freedom of expression, privacy, cryptology, dual-use technologies, national security, intelligence, and secret governance — open, secret and classified documents — but not limited to those.

As you might imagine, this has annoyed not just the US government, but governments around the world. I’m near-fanatical when it comes to the idea that transparency is essential to good government, and I think James Young (who runs Cryptome) has done important work in advancing that idea. So getting this notice of shut down from Verio – with no explanation beyond a claim that Cryptome is violating its Acceptable Use Policy – is troubling. Verio, which has otherwise been an excellent host for Cryptome, appears to be unwilling to explain the reasons behind terminating this relationship. Mr. Young speculates:

It may be wondered if Verio was threatened by an undisclosable means, say by an National Security Letter or by a confidential legal document or by a novel attack not yet aired.

I should hope not. But that appears to be the most likely explanation.  I’d quite like to see more on what happened.

*I’m not absolutely certain, but I think Cryptome may be the first online effort I’ve ever donated to.

A Beautiful Thing

By

On April 15, 2007

In Distribution, Society

Whenever I return from travel to a city filled with billboards, I’m reminded how much I love the DC area’s near-complete absence of the horrible blight that is outdoor billboard advertising.   It seems that the residents of São Paulo felt the same way, and have banned all outdoor advertising from their city.  That is, not only are new billboards banned, but old ones must come down.  Here’s a flickr set showing some of the resulting bare infrastructure.  Background on the ban here.

(I wouldn’t personally support a US edition of the policy adopted by São Paulo – it reaches well beyond billboards and into protected speech, I think – but the results sure are a beautiful thing to contemplate.  Atlanta would do well to take a lesson.)

Earthlink Wifi: Is it a good deal for Arlington?

By

On April 10, 2007

In Distribution, Tech, Virginia

I’ve had a chance to read through the proposed Arlington County/Earthlink agreement (PDF), and am throwing my summary up here in the hope that it might be useful to other Arlington residents interested in the matter. If you’re not an Arlington resident, you may still be interested, as a lot of cities are considering similar agreements. My summary is not legal advice, a comprehensive analysis, or a substitute for reading the agreement yourself. So, with that said, here are the quick and dirty basics of the proposed agreement:

  • In return for getting access to County owned light poles in public rights-of-way (e.g., medians and sidewalks) for the next 20 years, Earthlink will build out a wireless network in Arlington County.
  • Earthlink will pay Arlington County $40,000 a year.
  • The service will be available to home and business users for a yet-to-be determined fee.
  • Earthlink will provide free access in certain county parks.
  • Earthlink will provide, free of charge, access accounts to certain county recreation centers, and as-yet-unidentified Arlington non-profits. It will also make accounts available to selected county employees at a very low ($10) rate.
  • Earthlink will “establish, construct, own, operate, upgrade, and maintain” the network – so it won’t be Arlington County you’re buying service from. For the most part, unless you’re in a park or community center, it doesn’t appear that you’ll have any indication that the county was involved with this.
  • There are no apparent coverage requirements/benchmarks. Wherever the service is available, however, Earthlink will make sure than anyone can access, free of charge, certain county websites (i.e., “Walled Garden Service”).
  • The network is scheduled to be operational 6 to 8 months after the effective date of the agreement.

All in all, pretty standard stuff. They’re doing the right thing on a number of points, while I’m not so thrilled with a few others.

Read More

Arlington’s Proposed Agreement with Earthlink

By

On April 10, 2007

In Distribution, Tech, Virginia

Last week, I mentioned that Arlington had tentatively selected Earthlink as its contractor to build out a county-wide WiFi network. I also noted that Arlington would be holding a public hearing on the proposed agreement today (7:30p, Room 311, 2100 Clarendon Blvd.). Having both professional familiarity with municipal network projects, and a personal interest as an Arlington resident, I asked the County, in writing, for a copy of the proposed agreement. And waited. And then waited some more.

Yesterday, I received a note from a consultant (that I presume has been hired by the county to run the RFP) that a copy of the agreement would be available on the county website this morning. And, well, here it is. I don’t know what time it was posted, but I can’t help but being a little annoyed that the document was only released the day of the public hearing ON the document. I wrote and asked the consultant whether, in light of that, they planned to hold any additional public hearings on the matter between now and when the county board will (presumably) adopt the agreement without much discussion at the next board meeting. Nope, says the consultant.

Not exactly the Arlington Way, is it?

(Please note that this post has nothing to do with the merits of the proposed agreement. I’ll share my thoughts on that once I read it . . .)

Update:  Analysis here.

Arlington: County-wide WiFi

By

On April 5, 2007

In Distribution, Tech, Virginia

It seems that Arlington County has provisionally tapped Earthlink to build, operate, and own a county-wide WiFi network. Arlington already provides free WiFi (near the Courthhouse complex, in the Quincy Park library, and probably most other libraries), but that still leaves most of this small county uncovered. Details are sketchy, but based upon other Earthink municipal network deal, it will probably look something like this:

The network, once fully installed, will cover 26 square miles and provide wireless broadband for residents and visitors, as well as connections for on-the-move county employees. Yet-to-be-determined nonprofit partners of the county would likely get free access, and free hotspot service will be provided in parks, libraries and community centers.

I’ve seen no coverage of this before today, so I’m reserving judgment until I get more details. I’m quite familiar with the pro and con arguments for municipal networks, and I hope this will turn out to be a good deal for Arlington residents. That’s not a safe assumption, though, so it’s worth some closer scrutiny. The deal is going to the County Board on April 28th for approval. I’ll see what I can find before then, and share it here.

Update: Arlington’s Cable Television and Information Technology Advisory Commission describes it thusly:

The terms of the agreement provide significant public benefit to the County to include free wireless access in designated community centers, county parks, recreation centers, and public school facilities.  Earthlink will offer competitive monthly and short-term subscription rates to residents, businesses, and visitors for the broadband wireless service.

Also, there will be a public hearing on the proposed agreement (of which I’ve yet to find a copy) on April 10, 2007, in room 311 of the Courthouse Plaza Government Center at 2100 Clarendon Blvd, beginning at 7:30 p.m.

“I want less but better.”

By

On March 20, 2007

In Distribution, Tech

Waldo points us to a MeFi comment that – I bet – really captures what those of us who’ve been kicking around the Internet for well over a decade are feeling:

It’s funny how [Bruce Sterling] points out the need to find out what is good. I used to use mefi for this because the consensus used to be trustworthy. Now I feel like I am walking to into the smoking area of a seventies high school where their english teacher has just taught them the phrase “nihilistic existentialist” is the technical term for high school cool and everything must suck. Everything good now suffers up to 50353 pricks trying to out cool each other. I’m one of the pricks but I don’t want to be anymore. I want to hang out with the neat people. Where the hell do I find them? I know they’re here and I love their contributions but I am just getting so tired of wading through the “Metafilter: some one liner here”. I don’t have the time anymore to wade through all the stuff.

[ . . . ]

I want less but better. Not less functionality and better design (sorry mr. jobs) . I want less information and better functionality. Or rather I want to have to wade through less information because of that better functionality.

Amen.

Working hard for your ISP, are you?

By

On March 16, 2007

In Distribution, Policy

Via Dave Farber’s IP list:

[T]he CEO of Compete Inc. revealed that ISPs happily sell clickstream data — and that it’s a big business. They don’t sell your name — just your clicks — but the clicks are tied to you as a specific user (User 1, User 2, etc.).

How much are your clicks worth? About 40 cents a month per user (per customer)… and the Compete CEO estimates that there are 10-12 big buyers of this data. In other words, your ISP is probably making about $5 a month ($60 a year) off your clickstreams.

This is news to me, and I like to think of myself as someone who pays attention to these things. More here.

Page 13 of 15

Previous

Next

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén