From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Dec 20 11:23:37 1999 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from jamie.essential.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAFD321B0D for ; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:23:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (IDENT:jl@jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by jamie.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA21292 for ; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:35:44 -0500 Sender: jl@jamie.essential.org Message-ID: <385E5AE0.37F0071C@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 11:35:44 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] West Competitor Wins Fees in Suit Over Copyright This is a nice victory for Alan Sugarman, the owner of Hyperlaw, the small NY CD publisher that won a huge case against West Publishing, regarding ownership of legal opinions. Jamie http://www.lawnewsnetwork.com/stories/A11907-1999Dec17.html West Competitor Wins Fees in Suit Over Copyright Mark Hamblett New York Law Journal December 20, 1999 Saying West Publishing Co.'s conduct in defending itself on a copyright case brought by competitor Hyperlaw Inc. was "frivolous," a Southern District judge has ordered the legal publisher to pay its competitor $813,724 in attorneys' fees. Judge John S. Martin Jr., sharply criticized West for "asserting a copyright in a work consisting predominantly of the work of government agencies": the federal courts. He said in Hyperlaw Inc. v. West Publishing Co., 94 Civ. 589, that Hyperlaw earned the fees because their lawsuit "vindicated the public interest in the wide dissemination of federal judicial opinions." [snip] The controversy effectively ended in November 1998, when the Second Circuit, by a 2-1 vote margin, upheld a verdict in Hyperlaw's favor. After the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case, the only issue that remained was Hyperlaw's request for attorneys' fees. West argued it was inappropriate to award fees, in part, because Judge Robert W. Sweet's dissent on the Second Circuit's opinion showed there was a non-frivolous basis for their claims. Judge Martin disagreed. "The court would be sympathetic to West's argument had West forthrightly recognized that there was an open question concerning its right to assert copyright protection in court opinions and cooperated with Hyperlaw's efforts to obtain judicial resolution of that question," he said. "The record in this case demonstrates, however, that West used every effort to avoid an adjudication of its rights and to make it difficult for Hyperlaw to determine what portions of the reported opinions were in the public domain and could be freely copied." GOVERNMENT WORK Judge Martin noted that §403 of the Copyright Act prohibits the assertion of copyright in a work consisting predominantly of federal government works unless the copyright notice identifies the portions that are not subject to copyright. "West's conduct in this regard was the exact type of conduct which Section 403 was designed to prohibit," he said. "West's copyright notices failed to delineate that portion of the work as to which copyright protection was claimed and thereby discouraged dissemination of the work." This behavior, he said, was "exacerbated by the fact that every time Hyperlaw attempted to engage in a dialogue with West to determine which elements in a judicial opinion West considered protectable, West rejected the effort and responded with platitudes that gave Hyperlaw no guidance as to where West claimed its copyright protection began or ended." And when Hyperlaw and Matthew Bender were forced to sue to discover which parts of the judicial opinions were in the public domain, he said, "West again strove mightily to prevent a judicial resolution of the question by arguing that the controversy was not justiciable." "Thus, while the specific arguments that West ultimately advanced may not have been asserted in bad faith, i.e., were not known to be frivolous, its conduct of the litigation was." COUNSEL'S TIME Judge Martin also turned aside West's argument that it should not be forced to pay the attorneys' fees to Hyperlaw's general counsel, Alan Sugarman. Saying Mr. Sugarman did "a significant amount" of work on the litigation, Judge Martin said "there is no reason to punish Hyperlaw for choosing to have its general counsel do some of the work on this case." "Mr. Sugarman's time was an asset the company could have used in other ways had he not been involved in this litigation," he said. "Mr. Sugarman maintained an active legal practice during the course of this litigation and charged his other clients $250 per hour. They apparently found this a reasonable rate for an attorney of his skill and experience, and so do I." Mr. Sugarman, Paul J. Ruskin and Carl Hartmann represented Hyperlaw. James F. Rittinger, of Satterlee Stephens Burke & Burke, represented West, which is headquartered in Eagan, Minn., and is now part of The Thompson Corporation. -- James Love / Director, Consumer Project on Technology http://www.cptech.org / love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 202.387.8030 / fax 202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Dec 20 13:44:11 1999 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A65721B97; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:44:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA18927; Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:44:13 -0500 Sender: jl@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <385E7BD3.93CEE37B@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 13:56:19 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ecommerce , Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] White Memorandum on Electronic Government THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary ________________________________________________________________________ For Immediate Release December 17, 1999 December 17, 1999 MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES SUBJECT: Electronic Government My Administration has put a wealth of information online. However, when it comes to most Federal services, it can still take a paper form and weeks of processing for something as simple as a change of address. While Government agencies have created "one-stop-shopping" access to information on their agency web sites, these efforts have not uniformally been as helpful as they could be to the average citizen, who first has to know which agency provides the service he or she needs. There has not been sufficient effort to provide Government information by category of information and service -- rather than by agency -- in a way that meets people's needs. Moreover, as public awareness and Internet usage increase, the demand for online Government interaction and simplified, standardized ways to access Government information and services becomes increasingly important. At the same time, the public must have confidence that their online communications with the Government are secure and their privacy protected. Therefore, to help our citizens gain one-stop access to existing Government information and services, and to provide better, more efficient, Government services and increased Government accountability to its citizens, I hereby direct the officials in this memorandum, in conjunction with the private sector as appropriate, to take the following actions: 1. The Administrator of General Services, in coordination with the National Partnership for Reinventing Government, the Chief Information Officers' Council, the Government Information Technology Services Board, and other appropriate agencies shall promote access to Government information organized not by agency, but by the type of service or information that people may be seeking; the data should be identified and organized in a way that makes it easier for the public to find the information it seeks. 2. The heads of executive departments and agencies (agencies) shall, to the maximum extent possible, make available online, by December 2000, the forms needed for the top 500 Government services used by the public. Under the Government Paperwork Elimination Act, where appropriate, by October 2003, transactions with the Federal Government should be available online for online processing of services. To achieve this goal, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall oversee agency development of responsible strategies to make transactions available online. 3. The heads of agencies shall promote the use of electronic commerce, where appropriate, for faster, cheaper ordering on Federal procurements that will result in savings to the taxpayer. 4. The heads of agencies shall continue to build good privacy practices into their web sites by posting privacy policies as directed by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and by adopting and implementing information policies to protect children's information on web sites that are directed at children. 5. The head of each agency shall permit greater access to its officials by creating a public electronic mail address through which citizens can contact the agency with questions, comments, or concerns. The heads of each agency shall also provide disability access on Federal web sites. 6. The Director of the National Science Foundation, working with appropriate Federal agencies, shall conduct a 1-year study examining the feasibility of online voting. 7. The Secretaries of Health and Human Services, Education, Veterans Affairs, and Agriculture, the Commissioner of Social Security, and the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, working closely with other Federal agencies that provide benefit assistance to citizens, shall make a broad range of benefits and services available though private and secure electronic use of the Internet. 8. The Administrator of General Services, in coordination with the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Commerce, the Government Information Technology Services Board, the National Partnership for Reinventing Government, and other appropriate agencies and organizations, shall assist agencies in the development of private, secure, and effective communication across agencies and with the public, through the use of public key technology. In light of this goal, agencies are encouraged to issue, in coordination with the General Services Administration, a Government-wide minimum of 100,000 digital signature certificates by December 2000. 9. The heads of agencies shall develop a strategy for upgrading their respective agency's capacity for using the Internet to become more open, efficient, and responsive, and to more effectively carry out the agency's mission. At a minimum, this strategy should involve: (a) expanded training of Federal employees, including employees with policy and senior management responsibility; (b) identification and adoption of "best practices" implemented by leading public and private sector organizations; (c) recognition for Federal employees who suggest new and innovative agency applications of the Internet; (d) partnerships with the research community for experimentation with advanced applications; and (e) mechanisms for collecting input from the agency's stakeholders regarding agency use of the Internet. 10. Items 1-8 of this memorandum and my July 1, 1997, and November 30, 1998, memoranda shall be conducted subject to the availability of appropriations and consistent with agencies' priorities and my budget, and to the extent permitted by law. 11. The Vice President shall continue his leadership in coordinating the United States Government's electronic commerce strategy. Further, I direct that the heads of executive departments and agencies report to the Vice President and to me on their progress in meeting the terms of this memorandum, through the Electronic Commerce Working Group in its annual report. WILLIAM J. CLINTON # # # -- James Love / Director, Consumer Project on Technology http://www.cptech.org / love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 202.387.8030 / fax 202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Dec 21 12:01:58 1999 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64C3221B83 for ; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 12:01:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA32280 for ; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 12:02:00 -0500 Sender: jl@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <385FC043.48EE2D2C@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 13:00:35 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] GOP gets .gov I guess the Republican Party has merged with the federal government. It now has http://www.gop.gov Jamie -- James Love / Director, Consumer Project on Technology http://www.cptech.org / love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 202.387.8030 / fax 202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Dec 21 18:37:59 1999 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 456CB21D67 for ; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:37:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA05796 for ; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:38:04 -0500 Sender: jl@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38601D17.539C4BA0@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 19:36:39 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Ralph Nader on Consumer Harm in Microsoft Case This is part of a talk that Ralph Nader gave to a recent Open Source event in NYC. Jamie Love (http://www.cptech.org/ms/harm.html) Consumer Harm in the Microsoft Case by Ralph Nader Address to The Bazaar - An Open Source Software Event New York, New York December 15, 1999 Every time the Microsoft antitrust case moves forward, one observes a new wave of "where is the harm?" opinion articles in daily newspapers, presenting Microsoft's anticompetitive practices as harmful to competitors but not consumers. Judge Jackson's 206 page findings of fact addressed the issue of consumer harm in ways that resonated with many computer experts. While Judge Jackson mentioned that Microsoft had considerable leeway in terms of pricing Microsoft Windows, citing an internal Microsoft memorandum comparing the benefits of a $49 or $89 price for an upgrade price for Windows 98, the findings of fact devoted considerable attention to the non-price issues, such as those relating to innovation, choice and software quality, that are key to the Microsoft case. However, Judge Jackson's findings of fact are limited by the scope of the government lawsuit against Microsoft, both in terms of the types of anticompetitive conduct and the harm to consumers, and therefore understates the harm of Microsoft's monopoly to consumers. The US Department of Justice and State Attorney Generals have decided to prosecute a relatively narrow case against Microsoft, largely ignoring a plethora of issues relating to Microsoft's huge power in the desktop applications area, including the components of Microsoft Office, or the impact of its anticompetitive enterprise licensing strategies. We often hear from consumers who say they are harmed by Microsoft's monopoly abuses. Here are some of the complaints. Because this is a meeting about Linux, a free operating system, I will begin with the pricing issues. Pricing Issues Windows is too expensive. The price for Microsoft Windows depends upon how you buy it. A license for Windows is often bundled with a new PC. That doesn't mean it is free -- only that the OEM has paid for the license. When people talk about software prices, they sometimes forget that typically new technologies begin with high prices. Television sets, compact disk recorders and personal computers are only a few examples of this. Automobiles were very expensive when they were first introduced, costing around $10,000, or nearly $200,000 in today's dollars. More efficient mass production was followed by much lower prices. The Ford Model T, which was produced from 1908 to 1927, at one point sold for less than $260. As prices for personal computers, scanners, printers and other computing devices have fallen, Microsoft has been able to charge high prices for many of its products. For example, the OEM prices for Windows licenses have increased, making this license an ever larger share of the cost of a new computer. Microsoft charges consumers a list price of $109 for an upgrade of Windows 98, which is discounted by retailers to $89 -- but to get this price you must already own Windows 95, so it is like a maintenance fee. The list price for a new version of Windows 98 is $209. Yahoo.com sells Windows 98 at a discount for $181.92, nearly half the price of buying a new low end PC, and more than three times the $49.99 price for the well reviewed BeOS. BeOS is a technologically superior operating system that suffers from a paucity of third party applications, illustrating the significance of the consumer lock-in with Windows. In addition, Microsoft is steadily tightening the conditions on licenses. Many OEM licenses for Windows are tied to a single machine, and cannot be sold or transferred to another machine, even by the original owner. Business users are facing restrictions on the use of concurrent licenses, requiring them to purchase more copies than before. And for most models of PCs that consumers buy, the OEM has to purchase the license, even if the end user doesn't want the software. The "required to buy" Windows problem is a particular galling issue for Linux users who are often actively trying to avoid using Microsoft products. After our own efforts in 1998 to push the major OEMs to give consumers the chance to buy PCs without a Windows license, we have seem some modest improvement, as Dell and other PC manufacturers offer a limited number of PC models with Linux pre- installed. But it is still the case that nearly all of the PC models sold by major OEMs, including Dell, require purchase of a Windows license. A consumer who has been using computers since 1995 may have already purchased a half dozen or more Windows licenses. You might have begun with Windows 95a, but bought Windows 95b so you could better use the large hard drives. And then purchased one or more upgrade computers, with new Windows licenses. Then one has to consider the number of computers that need licenses. Often a person may have separate PCs for work and home, plus a laptop for travel. So it isn't simply the price of Windows, it's the number of licenses for Windows that you end up buying, and how often you have to pay upgrade fees. Microsoft forces upgrades of the operating system by introducing, even between official revisions, significant changes in the OS, including the important support for third party device drivers. Indeed, Windows 98 is already on its "second edition." To get what are essentially bug fixes, Microsoft charges Windows 98 users $19.95, plus shipping and handling, for the second edition of the same product. (Creating yet another opportunity to charge consumers more money so its products will function properly). Any given version of Windows becomes obsolete within a few years, because it will no longer support the latest innovations in hardware. This is intentional, because Microsoft's biggest "competitor" in the OS market is its installed base of users who have already purchased Windows. Microsoft forces consumers to buy what is essentially the same product again and again. In 1997, analysts said that Microsoft had a ninety-five percent share of global revenues for sales of office suites. Microsoft Office has become the global standard for word processing, spreadsheets and other desktop productivity applications. The pricing for MS Office is high. Microsoft's Office 2000 "standard" edition lists for $499, with a "street" price of $399. Even an upgrade to Office 2000 Standard has a list price of $249, and a discounted price of $195 - and this assumes you have already purchased the Microsoft Office before. The "premium" version of MS Office is now priced at $799, or $449 for an upgrade version. These prices are much higher than the prices for Corel's Office 200 suite, which features WordPerfect. For example, the list price for an upgrade of Corel's Standard Office 2000 suite lists for $99, about 40 percent of the Microsoft list price. (And discounts for about $79, about 40 percent of the Microsoft discounted price). Microsoft can command hefty prices for its Office Suite because consumers are often forced to upgrade - simply to read documents they receive from others. Microsoft is constantly changing document formats so that owners of older versions of Microsoft Office cannot read the newer documents. Again, Microsoft's main competitor is its own base of installed users. And, here too Microsoft is a tough adversary, using interoperability and compatibility as weapons, to force upgrades and generate more earnings for Microsoft. Millions of computer users who have perfectly functional copies of Microsoft Office 95 found it impossible to read documents prepared in Office 97, and one anticipates a new round of compatibility issues with Office 2000. Microsoft knows that most consumers have little use for the endless expansion of word processor features, particularly as the world has come to rely upon the much simpler formats for information used in electronic mail. Moreover, the newer versions nearly always contain new bugs, and necessitate more learning, and spark new predatory attacks on non-Microsoft products. Plus, as MS Office and Windows become ever larger, they require huge increases in computing resources. For consumers this often means a costly and time consuming hardware upgrade -- an event highly correlated with losses of user data. But for Microsoft, a hardware upgrade is usually just another source of revenue -- as nearly every new PC ships with a new license for Windows and other Microsoft software. One feature of Microsoft's pricing is the huge difference between its list prices and the prices paid by large buyers, including OEMs, big corporations, governments or universities. Microsoft knows that these large buyers need licenses to Microsoft products, and that they don't want to pay the high list prices. All of these large buyers get Microsoft products at significant discounts. However, for many big users, Microsoft insists on "enterprise" type licenses, which effectively force big organizations to buy licenses for many products for all employees (or students). When Microsoft gives an organization a blanket license for Windows and Office, they make it next to impossible for rivals to compete, since the organization has already paid Microsoft a license fee for all the computer users. Microsoft's pricing strategies are designed to give organizations no realistic options, if they want to avoid sky high list prices for Microsoft Office and Windows. This is also an issue for the OEMs, since the price of software is a significant component of cost in the highly competitive PC market. Microsoft can use the threat of higher prices for OEM licenses -- for Windows or Office -- to discipline OEMs, and reduce opportunities for Microsoft competitors. Non-Pricing Issues While the pricing issues are an important measure of the cost of the Microsoft monopoly, we hear more often from consumers about non- price issues, including many of the non-price issues raised by Judge Jackson. The most common complaint is that Microsoft crashes. "At least once a day," according to many Microsoft Windows users. We also hear countless complaints that Microsoft attacks non-Microsoft products, so they don't work. For example, when Microsoft released its Windows Media player, as a competitor against the RealAudio player, consumers wrote to say it disabled dozens of third party multimedia software programs. Little wonder that people call Microsoft's Internet Explorer, the "Internet Exploder," because it attacks and disables an unpredictable number of non-Microsoft applications. The documents in the Microsoft trial shed new light on the seemingly endless compatibility and interoperability problems with Windows and Microsoft Office. When Microsoft executives proposed making "running any other browser . . . a jolting experience," they were simply adding yet another example of the "DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run," corporate legacy. Microsoft could never have succeeded as a software company if its intentions to sabotage third party products were known earlier, before consumers and third party developers invested billions of dollars and countless hours around the Windows platform. Even before you consider issues surrounding deliberate hostility to users, you have the typical problem of a monopoly that can get away with poor products. Because it is so costly and difficult to migrate to a new platform, Microsoft can succeed even when its core products suffer hugely from poor stability, limited interoperabilty, and endless security problems. The fact that millions of users tolerate daily crashes of Windows says volumes about the costs of migration away from Windows. But, as Judge Jackson points out, and as most computer experts know, not all of the quality problems are innocent. In its internal emails and by countless examples, Microsoft has demonstrated that it believes it benefits when consumers cannot make competitor's products work correctly. Microsoft has a range of methods to undermine its competitor's products. When it does not use deliberate sabotage, it can withhold important technical information or refuse to license technology to its competitors, such as when it refused to permit Netscape to distribute a utility to log-on to Internet Service Providers, or when it withholds or unexpectedly changes applications programming interfaces and data file formats. Microsoft can also destroy the quality of rival software by using predatory business practices, such as the enterprise licensing of Windows and MS Office, exclusionary OEM and ISP licensing, or bundling of products with "must have" Windows and Office products. When Netscape cannot effectively distribute its browser through ISP or OEM channels, and when Microsoft's Internet Explorer product is bundled in with Windows and MS Office, Netscape can no longer justify continued R&D in the product. This harms consumers who prefer Netscape. When Microsoft bundles Outlook Express, its personal information manager and email client, into Windows, millions of users who relied upon rival products, like ECCO Pro, were stranded when their products were abandoned by publishers who could not compete with a bundled product having a zero marginal cost to consumers. And there are countless other examples of this in the software market. Despite the colossal sums of money being invested in ecommerce ventures, there is very little investment for desktop productivity software. And while the stock market seems crazy about some Linux stocks, and with all due respect to this gathering, and in light on the fact that we are using Linux extensively in our offices, Linux is still primarily a server technology, without significant penetration in the PC "client" space. For this to change, there will have to be considerable improvements in Linux documentation and in Linux desktop applications. For most PC users, there is a steadily shrinking number of choices for a growing number of important applications. Microsoft is squeezing the life out of markets for word processors, spreadsheets, desktop database software, presentation graphics, personal information managers, email clients and Internet browsers -- the applications that most computer users need. Some observers, such as Robert J. Samuelson, seem to think that Microsoft has provided a public service. By eliminating competitors, Microsoft gives everyone a common standard, and making life simpler has benefits, Samuelson says. I think most people here see the poverty of this analysis. There are, of course, alternative methods of setting standards than relying upon a private monopoly. The Internet is a powerful and relevant example of how a non-monopolistic standard can facilitate enormous innovation. And, as pointed out in Judge Jackson's findings of fact, Microsoft has sought to crush third party technologies, such as Java, that create cross platform standards that Microsoft does not control. The free software movement actively embraces a more open approach to software development. A distribution of Linux isn't the creation of a single firm. It is a collection of hundreds of programs developed by different individuals and groups, that work together. The disclosure of the source code is designed to make it easier to design software programs that work together, to solve user problems. There is competition among distributions of Linux, and users can choose alternative graphical user interfaces, programming tools, utilities and applications. As described in the so called Halloween memorandums, Microsoft's response to the popularity of Linux is to seek ways to cripple interoperability, by deploying proprietary and patented software interfaces. And so far, Microsoft has resisted efforts by OEMs to ship computers ready to dual boot Windows and Linux or Windows and BeOS. There are, of course, huge costs associated with forcing everyone into a software monoculture. Some of the issues concern security. Microsoft's security breach of the week wouldn't be such a huge problem if its software wasn't so ubiquitous. But this is only one of many issues. There are also large costs associated with the disappearance of the products that Microsoft crushes. In the beginning, Microsoft had a tiny presence in desktop applications, and businesses and individuals invested money and time around non-Microsoft products. The forced migration to Microsoft's Johnny-come-lately imitations is costly. Consumers value choice, about a wide range of software characteristics. WordPerfect and Microsoft Word have different approaches to document management. Netscape Navigator, Microsoft Explorer and Opera appeal to differ users. Every software product has its own fans and its own critics. Robert Samuelson seems to think of this as an inefficiency, but the contrary is true. A "one size fits all" world harms consumers, and lowers productivity. Competition among software products leads to innovation and improvements in software quality. This competition moves the industry to solve the problems consumers face, and leads to more productive and reliable products. Indeed, perhaps the most important consideration is that Microsoft is not a leader in product development -- it is an imitator, and this is the most significant harm to consumers -- the stifling of innovations that we never see. As pointed out by Judge Jackson, even Intel, the other half of Wintel, was forced by Microsoft to stop development of a promising new multimedia technology. We recognize that in software markets, there may be cases where the market coalesces around a single product with a large market share. But it is one thing for that decision to be made on the basis of competition for consumer satisfaction, based upon product quality and price, and something else when consumers are forced to pick Microsoft, by an endless array of underhanded, coercive and non- meritorious tactics. Consumers are harmed when there is no real choice, except to succumb to the Microsoft Borg. Thank you. For more information, see http://www.cptech.org/ms Contact Ralph Nader at ralph@essential.org -- James Love / Director, Consumer Project on Technology http://www.cptech.org / love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 202.387.8030 / fax 202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Dec 21 22:32:13 1999 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD29221C59 for ; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 22:32:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by milan.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA03541 for ; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 22:32:20 -0500 Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 22:32:20 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Hector Santos on Microsoft's "version spoofing" and Win2000 Interesting note from Hector Santos, concerning "version spoofing" of their product with Windows 2000. Jamie ----------- From hector.santos@santronics.com Tue Dec 21 22:27:38 1999 Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 19:53:51 -0500 From: hector.santos@santronics.com To: love@cptech.org Subject: [IPN] Ralph Nader: Consumer Harm in the Microsoft Case *cc: LOVE@CPTECH.ORG Hello Mr. Nadar, I don't know if anyone has been paying attention to Microsoft's Windows 2000 efforts but no doubt, this one is directed at the LINUS "server" market. Microsoft has already said they will not renew the "CISCO" Terminal Server licenses. Microsoft has broken even more "client/server" software by changing the behavior of RPC based communications systems. So while everyone is complaining about the current "monopoly" with Windows 95/98/NT, they are quietly making sure Windows 2000 will finish the task of a "complete take over of the "internet world" with even more changes to "Win32 API Standards". I have been reconsidering the "contract" I signed with Microsoft when they contacted us to ask permission to "Version Spoof" our software so that it will install on Windows 2000. We agreed thinking it would be no harm. However, after our programmers were able to get a copy of Windows 2000 and test out our current products, we found out it will not work. So even if Microsoft "Version Spoofing" of our product succeeds in the installation process, our product will not operate in normal fashion. It seems Microsoft was more concern, in the words of Microsoft exec "having less installation support issues with customers", so they can move the support issue to the vendor of the product at the operational level. This strategy has already worked as customers who have the public gamma version of Windows 2000 have told us our product will install but will not work thereafter. The issue is they have CALLED US for support - not Microsoft. Mr. Nadar, what Microsoft is deathly afraid of, which hasn't happen yet, is a NATION-WIDE Class Action Lawsuit on Software Quality (Bugs). Approach this just as you did with the defective "Pinto", and you will change Microsoft (and society) forever. They seems to be a growing mentality in the computer industry that "some bugs are ok", that it is "natural" to have software bugs. This direction or mentality must be stopped before it is too late. Sincerely, Hector Santos, President Santronics Software, Inc. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Dec 21 22:49:52 1999 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5E6D21B3A; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 22:49:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-6.essential.org [216.0.125.6]) by milan.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA03750; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 22:49:57 -0500 Sender: jamie@milan.essential.org Message-ID: <386049D2.EEBBBD3D@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 22:47:30 -0500 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.07 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.36 i586) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ecommerce , Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Cc: creuss@bluewin.ch Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Microsoft: defrag utility and Scientology firm This is from a pointer provided by Christoph Reuss . Apparently Microsoft is in a controversy in Germany over potential security risks from a defrag utility created by a firm with close Scientology links. Jamie ---------------------------------- http://www.heise.de/ct/english/99/25/058/ Windows 2000 in Danger of beeing Banned Scientology participation Critizised by Church Representatives An integrated component of Windows 2000 is made by a Scientology company. The connection between the psycho sect and the software giant is annoying representatives of the major churches in Germany. Microsoft risks a boycott of its flagship product by churches and government agencies. Windows 2000, the successor of Windows NT shipping in February, contains a defragmentation program called Diskeeper. The manufacturer is the company Executive Software Inc. (http://www.execsoft.com/) of the professed scientologist Craig Jensen. Founded in 1981 the enterprise offers defragmentation and data storage tools to "enhance the speed and performance of Microsoft Windows NT". Executive chief Jensen himself shares his biography on his homepage. According to that he has been a member of the organization calling itself church since 1974 and supposedly transformed his company from a "one-man show to a flourishing multi-million Dollar corporation" with the help of the scripts of Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard. Jensen also climbed the corporate ladder at Scientology: He is an operating Thetan at level VIII (OT VIII), the highest level scientologists can achieve currently. In 1992 the Californian company opened an office in Hamburg. Staff was hired according to the following criteria: "Fully trained scientologists, computer skills desirable but not a prerequisite". By integrating the Executive product into Windows 2000 Microsoft created a situation that at least a few large potential customers see as a serious problem. A employee of the German catholic church who did not want his name mentioned told c't that the origin of the software is "highly disturbing". It is "a genius move" of the Scientology organization if soon such a program that has direct and active access to all data is working principally on every company desk and in government and church institutions as an integrated part of a widely used operating system. Espionage suspected The underlying reason for these kinds of worries is the philosophy of the Scientology umbrella organization WISE, Executive being a member of the latter. WISE stands for World Institute of Scientology Enterprises and forms the "most important money-generating apparatus of the psycho sect" according to the German news magazine Focus. Up to 15 percent of the revenues are paid to Scientology. The participating companies are "exclusively managed with LRH technology" describes WISE itself; LRH are the initials of Hubbard. [snip] -- James Love Consumer Project on Technology http://www.cptech.org love@cptech.org 202.387.8030; fax 202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Dec 22 23:36:27 1999 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D51121B20 for ; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 23:36:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by milan.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA29592 for ; Wed, 22 Dec 1999 23:36:34 -0500 Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 23:36:34 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] My apologies for list problems As people probably know, a few days ago we switched to a new mailing program for random-bits. Tonite for some reason there was a flood of older messages set to the list. I'm not sure why, and we are trying to figure out what has happened. I think I have stopped the flood, and will do everything I can to try to stop this from happening again. Jamie ------------------------------- James Love Center for Study of Responsive Law | Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 | http://www.cptech.org Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 | love@cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Dec 27 17:45:11 1999 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CE3421C34; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 17:45:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by milan.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA10216; Mon, 27 Dec 1999 17:45:17 -0500 Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1999 17:45:17 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: ecommerce@venice.essential.org, random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Slashdot on Google Patent This is a discussion on slashdot.org about the google searching patent. Jamie http://slashdot.org/articles/99/12/26/2121203.shtml ------------------------------- James Love Center for Study of Responsive Law | Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 | http://www.cptech.org Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 | love@cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Dec 28 13:58:00 1999 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F86121B0C; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 13:58:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by milan.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA23042; Tue, 28 Dec 1999 13:58:03 -0500 Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 13:58:03 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org, ecommerce@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] IP: Web Tracking and Data Matching Hit the Campaign Trail (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 17:56:46 -0500 From: Dave Farber To: ip-sub-1@majordomo.pobox.com Subject: IP: Web Tracking and Data Matching Hit the Campaign Trail Date: Thu, 23 Dec 99 20:40 PST From: lauren@vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein; PRIVACY Forum Moderator) Subject: Web Tracking and Data Matching Hit the Campaign Trail Greetings. In yet another example of the "if it's legal, someone will do it" school of data matching and web tracking, it has been revealed that the two leading Republican presidential candidates, Sen. John McCain and Texas Gov. George W. Bush, have contracted with Aristotle Publishing (http://www.aristotle.org) to target web users by matching web browsing habits and web site signup data with actual voter registration records. Apparently these are the only two presidential candidates currently making use of this service, as announced by an Aristotle spokesman. Aristotle, which describes itself as a "thriving, growing, profitable firm," provides "tools" to political campaigns to "influence public opinion" and "win votes." Their web site apparently can only be viewed if you have javascript enabled--without it you could simply see a blank page. You may have already been justifiably concerned about DoubleClick, Inc.'s tracking of your behavior over the web, but Aristotle takes consolidation of personal data to a whole new level, by actually combining the information that has been provided by web users (e.g. for various "freebie" web giveaways), with specific and detailed political data such as voter location and party affiliation information, obtained from voter registration roles. Maybe you wondered why you seemed to be getting something for nothing at those web sites, and what would really happen to that information you provided to them? Well, now you know. Welcome to the big time. Once you've been targeted by this system, you'll be presented with the designated candidates' political banner ads on at least 1500 web sites, including some major portal and news sites. Some of these ads, once clicked, entice the user to enter various additional personal information (some of which Aristotle says they don't record). Of course, to the average web user, there's no clue that they've been the subject of this sort of intensive data matching and rifling through their voter registrations. Most users would probably just assume that the ads popped up at random. Random? Surely you jest! And golly gee whiz Mr. Wizard, you guessed it, this *is* all entirely legal. Proponents claim that there've been no significant complaints about the privacy aspects of the operation (perhaps that will change?), and they also suggest that they're no more privacy-invasive than direct mail (wow, now there's a "high" ethical bar to be shooting for if ever I've seen one...) And in fact, Aristotle is obviously proud of the service, since they've posted at least one outside press account on their own web site. (Will this issue of the PRIVACY Forum Digest show up on there? They hereby have my permission...) Keep in mind that this is just the barest shadow of the sorts of "services" likely to evolve in the near future, given the "wild west" attitude which still prevails regarding personal information. It was bad enough when this *only* involved search engines and ads for offshore gambling or mailorder sales pitches. But the introduction of the political element directly into the mix should give everyone cause for some serious concern. I dare say that this calls into sharp focus the abysmal lack of regulations to control the handling and abuse of personal information, regardless of its various sources. The power of web data collection, tracking, ad presentation, and similar technologies, combined with other traditionally public record data sources (and voter registration roles are just the tip of the iceberg) creates a scenario that might cause Darth Vader to be jealous. But of course, it's also possible to hold opposing points of view. Maybe none of this actually matters? Perhaps some persons reading this might feel that there really are no significant privacy problems with these sorts of data collection and matching activities. Perhaps you're not all that concerned about who gets your data or how it's used? Regardless of where you stand on this issue, I'd be interested in hearing your views (please remember to send submissions for possible inclusion in the Digest to privacy@vortex.com). It does seem bizarre, however, that it appears to be impossible to register to vote in this country without subjecting yourself to these sorts of information manipulations, with apparently no real opt-out available. Given these developments, perhaps it's no wonder that whenever I see the glowing descriptions of plans for voting over the Internet (already a reality for one state's primary and high on the wish list for many states) I get a cold chill down the back of my spine... Until next time, all the best for the holidays! --Lauren-- lauren@vortex.com Lauren Weinstein Moderator, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com Co-Founder, PFIR: People for Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy ****************** A Happy Holiday and a safe New Year from Dave and GG Farber ****************** From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Dec 30 20:51:14 1999 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED8BE21B08 for ; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 20:51:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by milan.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA21220 for ; Thu, 30 Dec 1999 20:51:31 -0500 Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 20:51:31 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Brett Glass on NIST Y2K issue Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 20:39:00 -0500 From: Dave Farber To: ip-sub-1@majordomo.pobox.com Subject: IP: Two possibly unaddressed Y2K problems > >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 16:52:36 -0700 >To: Dave Farber > >Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 16:52:36 -0700 >To: Dave Farber >From: Brett Glass >Subject: Two possibly unaddressed Y2K problems > >While performing a Y2K check of a client's computers, I discovered a small >program, written in BASIC, which suggests an entire class of potential Y2K >glitches which has not been publicized and may plague us on or after >January 1, 2000. > >In the client's back office was an older PC attached to a modem. Each time >the computer was booted, it ran a simple program which instructed the >internal modem to make a brief telephone call to a telephone number >somewhere in Colorado. Upon connecting, the computer received the date and >time, set its clock accordingly, and then hung up. > >Inspection of the program revealed that it received and used only two >digits for the year. > >What number was the computer calling? After a bit of snooping on the >Internet, I discovered that the number was that of the Automated Computer >Time Service (ACTS), provided by NIST (the National Institute of Science >and Technology, previously known as the National Bureau of Standards). The >time message received by the program, derived from an atomic clock, looks >like this: > >JJJJJ YRMODA HH:MM:SS TT L DUT1 msADV UTC(NIST) OTM > >Where > >JJJJJ is the Modified Julian Date (MJD); >YRMODA is the date (two digits each for year, month, and day); and >HH:MM:SS is the time in hours, minutes, and seconds. >(The remaining fields are documented online at >http://www.bldrdoc.gov/timefreq/service/acts.htm.) > >What is interesting is that the BASIC program provided by the NIST itself >(the same agency, ironically, which distributes the Malcolm Baldridge >quality awards and offers Y2K help to small businesses) ignored the Julian >date and used only the two-digit year to set the computer's clock. This >software was posted on the Internet by the NIST until approximately last >October. > >While ACTS can be used in a Y2K-compliant manner, the way to do this is >somewhat arcane (few programmers understand the concept of a Julian date, >and conversion is tedious). Perhaps this is why the NIST's own software -- >which was doubtless used verbatim or as the basis for other programs -- >cut corners, as most programmers were likely to do, and used only the two >digit "YR" code for the year. > >According to the NIST's ACTS Web page >(http://www.bldrdoc.gov/timefreq/service/acts.htm), more than 10,000 >computers call the NIST's number each day. How many are running that old >BASIC program, or similar ones published on computer bulletin boards, in >magazines, or on the Internet, which have the same flaw? > >But wait.... It gets worse. Apparently, the time code transmitted by ACTS >is similar to that used by the NIST's radio stations --WWV, WWVH, and WWVB >-- to transmit time and date information the entire world. WWV's binary >coded decimal format, described on the Web at >http://www.boulder.nist.gov/timefreq/pubs/sp432/s_appb.htm, also uses only >two digits for the year. Worse still, the Julian date is not present, so >there is no way, using this code, to distinguish between the years 1900 >and 2000. > >Alas, some digital logic circuits which interpret the codes from WWV, >WWVH, and WWVB are literally hard-wired to the existing format. (According >to some quick research I've done on the Net, these range from an old >Heathkit called "The Most Accurate Clock" to laboratory instruments to >traffic signal controllers.) So, the NIST does not have the option of >changing the format to include a 4-digit year for fear of breaking this >equipment. Unfortunately, it is unclear whether owners of this equipment >are aware of the potential problems in these embedded systems -- some of >which, again, use hardwired digital logic rather than microprocessors. >Will traffic signals in Los Angeles and Orange County, which are said to >use WWV as a time standard >(http://www.odetics-its.com/showcase/TASK2-2/la.html), fail? Or will they >become confused about the day of the week and snarl traffic by using >"weekend" timings on a weekday, or vice versa? What other municipal, >scientific, or military embedded systems will go awry because they rely on >the NIST's 2-digit time codes? > >Ironically, while the NIST Web site contains an article >(http://www.nist.gov/y2k/embeddedarticle.htm) warning users to evaluate >embedded systems for Y2K compliance, I have been unable to find any >article in which the NIST mentions the format of its own time signals as a >potential source of Y2K problems. Today, when I used the "Advanced Search" >facility on the NIST's Web site to search for the call sign "WWV" together >with the term "Y2K" or "2000," it failed to turn up any hits whatsoever. >The NIST's Y2K compliance page, at http://www.nist.gov/y2k/nistcomp.htm, >lists both ACTS and the agency's "time synchronization" services as Y2K >compliant. > >Conclusions are left as an exercise for the reader. > >--Brett Glass > From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Dec 31 16:45:07 1999 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69BE421C33; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 16:45:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-2.essential.org [216.0.125.2]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA30255; Fri, 31 Dec 1999 16:45:06 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <386D3223.A15080C4@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 17:45:55 -0500 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Link Controversy Page People who are interested in linking disputes, will find this page useful. Jamie -------------------- The Link Controversy Page is intended to provide an overview of the legal problems of using hyperlinks, inline images and frames in the WWW. http://www.jura.uni-tuebingen.de/~s-bes1/lcp.html -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jan 10 11:52:21 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FC8221B05; Mon, 10 Jan 2000 11:52:21 -0500 (EST) Sender: jamie@venice.essential.org Message-ID: <387A0E0F.B7C6E88E@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 11:51:27 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Quick notes why the AOL acquisition of Time-Warner should be stopped: Quick notes why the AOL acquisition of Time-Warner should be stopped: 1. AOL is the single most important force today in advocatingfor open access to the cable broad band platform. If this merger is approved, AOL s interests will be fundamentally changed. 2. AOL is a direct competitor to Time-Warner as an Internetcontent provider on broad band services. 3. One relevant market for AOL and Time-Warner as contentproviders is for providing navigation and interface services to Internet users - such as menus for electronic commerce. 4. If AOL can buy Time-Warner, will a Microsoft/AT&T merger befar behind? 5. AT&T and Time-Warner are both trying to set up broad bandinternet services that can discriminate among content providers, and effectively degrade services offered by competitors. People who know about this include: Andy Schwartzman, Media Access Project Jeff Chester, Media Access Project Gene Kimmelman, Consumers Union Mark Cooper, CFA -- James Love http://www.cptech.org mailto:love@cptech.org voice 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jan 10 14:35:24 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E53421AFF; Mon, 10 Jan 2000 14:35:24 -0500 (EST) Sender: jamie@venice.essential.org Message-ID: <387A3447.862E4A2D@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 14:34:31 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Meeks, Brock" Cc: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Subject: Re: [Random-bits] Quick notes why the AOL acquisition of Time-Warner should be stopped: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit "Meeks, Brock" wrote: > > But Steve Case, just now on the conference call, said that he knew the cable > open access issue would be a potential hurdle, so "we took it off the table > right away" but saying that the new company would be in FAVOR of open access > cable and provide for customer choice for ISPs. > When AOL purchaed Netscape, the company said it would continue to support the Mozilla project. We asked AOL to make specific legally binding commitments to this effect, and AOL refused. Since then, there have been some notabnle departures from the Mozilla project staff. Here is a link to Steve Case's letter to Jamie Zawinski when the Netscape merger was announced. http://www.mozilla.org/stevecase.html "Hopefully by now the AOL positon on mozilla.org is clear to all, but I did want to let you know personally that we're very supportive of mozilla.org;" When the merger was pending, Jamie Zawinski was quite hopeful. But later he resigned. http://www.jwz.org/gruntle/nomo.html In general, we expect AOL to flip an issues when it suits AOL -- just as it did when it dropped Netscape as its browser in return for Microsoft giving AOL a good position for its ICON on Windows. Jamie Quick notes why the AOL acquisition of Time-Warner should be stopped: 1. AOL is the single most important force today in advocating for open access to the cable broad band platform. If this merger is approved, AOL s interests will be fundamentally changed. 2. AOL is a direct competitor to Time-Warner as an Internet content provider on broad band services. 3. One relevant market for AOL and Time-Warner as contentproviders is for providing navigation and interface services to Internet users - such as menus for electronic commerce. 4. If AOL can buy Time-Warner, will a Microsoft/AT&T merger be far behind? 5. AT&T and Time-Warner are both trying to set up broad bandinternet services that can discriminate among content providers, and effectively degrade services offered by competitors. -- James Love http://www.cptech.org mailto:love@cptech.org voice 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jan 10 15:47:43 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6368021AFF for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2000 15:47:43 -0500 (EST) Sender: jamie@venice.essential.org Message-ID: <387A453B.2FF8E7A5@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 15:46:51 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] America Online and OpenTV This is AOL's earlier announcement that it was developing a DBS type serivce. Jamie ------------------------------------- 10/25/99 8:42 AM America Online and OpenTV Announce Plans to Develop Applications for OpenTV Platform Agreement Part of 'AOL Anywhere' Strategy America Online and OpenTV Announce Plans to Develop Applications for OpenTV Platform Agreement Part of 'AOL Anywhere' Strategy Dulles, VA and Mountain View, CA -- October XX, 1999 - America Online, Inc., the world's leading interactive services company, and OpenTV, the worldwide leader in interactive television software, today announced an agreement to collaborate on the development of AOL applications to be delivered over OpenTV interactive television software. AOL has also made an investment in OpenTV. Under the terms of the agreement, AOL and OpenTV will work to bring some of AOL's most popular communications features to the OpenTV platform., including e-mail and instant messaging. "Our AOL Anywhere strategy is based on bringing our most popular services and features to different devices and platforms," said Barry Schuler, President of AOL Interactive Services. "We're pleased to work with OpenTV to explore bringing some of our communications features to their platform, enabling interactive services over digital broadcast video systems." "With almost 99 percent of American households having one or more televisions, it makes the most sense to deliver the promise of convergence through the television," said Jan Steenkamp, OpenTV CEO. "What convergence means to most consumers is interactive information combined with everything they like about their favorite TV programming, and we think the agreement between AOL and OpenTV will enable us to deliver key AOL communications applications along with your favorite TV programs." About America Online Founded in 1985, America Online, Inc., based in Dulles, Virginia, is the world's leader in interactive services, Web brands, Internet technologies, and e-commerce services. America Online, Inc. operates: two worldwide Internet services, America Online, with more than 18 million members, and CompuServe, with over 2 million members; several leading Internet brands including ICQ and Digital City, Inc.; the Netscape Netcenter and AOL.COM portals; and the Netscape Navigator and Communicator browsers. Through its strategic alliance with Sun Microsystems, the Company develops and offers easy-to-deploy, end-to-end e-commerce and enterprise solutions for companies operating in the Net Economy About OpenTV OpenTV is the worldwide leader in interactive television software for the digital set-top box providing a complete end-to-end solution for the development and delivery of interactive services via digital satellite, cable and terrestrial broadcast. OpenTV set-top box software has been shipped with or installed in more than 3.5 million digital set-top boxes worldwide. To date, OpenTV software solutions have been deployed by 13 television networks worldwide, including British Sky Broadcasting (BSkyB) in the United Kingdom and TPS in France. EchoStar's DISH Networkä is scheduled to launch interactive services utilizing OpenTV software in the U.S. later this year. Worldwide headquarters for OpenTV is located in Mountain View, California, with European operations in Paris, France, and offices in Seoul, South Korea and Beijing, China. Information on OpenTV is available at www.opentv.com. # # # OpenTV is a registered trademark of OpenTV, Inc. All rights reserved. Java and all Java-based trademarks and logos are trademarks or registered trademarks of Sun Microsystems, Inc. in the U.S. and other countries. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. 10/25/99 8:42 AM -- James Love http://www.cptech.org mailto:love@cptech.org voice 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jan 10 17:03:45 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7F6021AFF for ; Mon, 10 Jan 2000 17:03:44 -0500 (EST) Sender: jamie@venice.essential.org Message-ID: <387A570D.E16F6A95@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 17:02:53 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Institute for Public Accuracy on the AOL merger Institute for Public Accuracy 915 National Press Building, Washington, D.C. 20045 (202) 347-0020 * http://www.accuracy.org * ipa@accuracy.org ___________________________________________________ Monday, January 10, 2000 AOL-Time Warner Merger In the largest corporate merger in history, America Online and Time Warner announced a $350 billion deal today. The following analysts are available for interviews: ROBERT McCHESNEY, (608) 238-0763, rwmcches@uiuc.edu Professor at the Institute of Communications Research at the University of Illinois and author of "Rich Media, Poor Democracy: Communication Politics in Dubious Times," McChesney, who participated in a CNN discussion on the future of media with Time Warner head Gerald Levin a week ago, said today: "This deal culminates five years of frantic deal-making that have seen our media culture come to be dominated by less than 10 transnational media firms operating in largely non-competitive markets.... It hammers the last nail in the coffin of those utopians who regarded the Internet as providing the mechanism to radically change our media culture for the better. The Internet was established by massive public subsidies and now, without a shred of public debate, the system has become the plaything of a handful of billionaire investors who use their power to commercially carpet bomb every possible moment of our lives." JILL NELSON, (212) 662-0884, JillieJams@aol.com Author of "Volunteer Slavery: My Authentic Negro Experience" and a columnist for MSNBC, Nelson said: "This may be good for business, but it's bad for people and the free flow of information. In our lust for profits, we have forgotten democratic principles. This can only increase the public's deep skepticism of the quality of the news." BEN H. BAGDIKIAN, (510) 848-2226, benmar@uclink4.berkeley.edu Author of "The Media Monopoly" and professor emeritus and former dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at the University of California at Berkeley, Bagdikian said: "This acquisition is standard in the strategy of media corporations that no significant media company in the country will remain independent." JEFF CHESTER, (202) 331-7833, jeff@cme.org, http://www.cme.org Executive director of the Center for Media Education, Chester said: "[AOL head] Steve Case is the Benedict Arnold of the digital age. Now that he has bought himself a piece of broadband cable access, he is no longer advocating for public policy to ensure open access to the Internet." FRANK BEACHAM, (212) 873-9349, frank@beacham.com, http://www.beacham.com A writer specializing in technology criticism, Beacham said: "AOL has focused on making the Internet into a shopping mall. It also has a miserable track record of keeping people's information private. In the hands of Time Warner, that could be more dangerous. This merger demonstrates the failure of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 to provide competition.... AOL was concerned that it didn't have access to broadband cable lines; now they have bought that access." For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy: Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020 or (202) 332-5055; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Jan 11 21:47:12 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF42121B02 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2000 21:47:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-9.essential.org [216.0.125.9]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA12564 for ; Tue, 11 Jan 2000 21:47:11 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <387BF2D0.3A6DD8F7@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2000 22:19:44 -0500 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Howard Rheingold: the stupider web and AOL, etc Here are a few comments from Howard Rheingold and me on the AOL merger -- jamie http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/01/11/aol_reaction/index.html Howard Rheingold, Net pioneer and author of "Virtual Community" The more the Net becomes like TV, the stupider we are going to become; the more TV becomes like the Net, the more intelligent we'll become. It's the mass media-fication/dumbing down of the Net; the bigger these enterprises get and the broader their reach, the less intelligent their content. The Net used to be a grand alternative to television, and it still is. But with the expectations of the mass market, the big center of the curve, clearly AOL's ambition is to be more and more like television. Jamie Love, director of the Consumer Project on Technology The current system -- you get a pipe from your ISP and you do what you want with content -- is that going to be history? The architecture that's being proposed by the big cable operators would allow them to discriminate in terms of performance ... They could design highly discriminatory platforms, so that [your content] will play differently if you have a business relationship with the owner of the last mile. Whether or not the operators go the common courier route or the common cable route -- "We own the pipe and decide what goes on it" -- is a big deal. AOL has been a big advocate of open access -- we need to have companies like AOL beating up on the regulators at state and federal level to change things. This merger is partly evidence that AOL thinks it's losing the battle to protect the competitors. AOL was the biggest proponent of making it a level playing field. They say they still are, but it depends how much you trust Steve Case. We don't; historically he does what benefits him at the time. -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Jan 12 09:31:40 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FE3721AFF; Wed, 12 Jan 2000 09:31:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA17940; Wed, 12 Jan 2000 09:31:39 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <387C902A.DB83813C@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000 09:31:06 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Alex Kuczynski: On CBS News, Some of What You See Isn't There ----Original Message----- From: "the terminal of Geoff Goodfellow" To: "Dave E-mail Pamphleteer Farber" Subject: more "new media": ...What You See Isn't There Date: Wednesday, January 12, 2000 3:33 AM http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/financial/cbs-digital.html On CBS News, Some of What You See Isn't There By ALEX KUCZYNSKI The New York Times If you were watching the "CBS Evening News" broadcast live from Times Square on New Year's Eve, you might have seen a billboard advertising CBS News out in the square behind Dan Rather. You might have looked at the well-placed billboard and wondered just exactly how it was that CBS was able to place its ad so fortuitously. The truth is, it didn't. The billboard and the advertisement for CBS did not exist. The image was digitally imported onto the live CBS broadcast and used to obliterate real objects, the NBC jumbotron underneath the New Year's ball and a Budweiser ad. Inserting digital images has become increasingly common in sports and entertainment programming -- usually to insert advertising and corporate logos and first-down markers in football -- but has generally been considered out of line on news shows, a type of programming in which the assumption of reality is considered sacrosanct and not informing viewers is considered a breach of journalistic guidelines. -- James Love http://www.cptech.org mailto:love@cptech.org voice 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jan 13 15:26:07 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D00BF21AFF; Thu, 13 Jan 2000 15:26:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA13393; Thu, 13 Jan 2000 15:26:06 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <387E34CA.588F5AC6@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 15:25:46 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] FTC action on eBay Interesting article about recent FTC action on eBay and its efforts to enforce the eBay user agreement, to stop a firm from spaming its users. ACLU and CDT criticized the FTC actions. http://www.lawnewsnetwork.com/practice/techlaw/news/A13317-2000Jan12.html FTC's eBay Move Gets Mixed Reactions By Lisa I. Fried New York Law Journal January 13, 2000 The Federal Trade Commission's move last week to help the Internet auction site eBay enforce its user agreement and privacy policy is generating mixed reactions from Internet lawyers and consumer rights advocates. -- James Love http://www.cptech.org mailto:love@cptech.org voice 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jan 13 17:19:17 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4163321B06 for ; Thu, 13 Jan 2000 17:19:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA15703 for ; Thu, 13 Jan 2000 17:19:17 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <387E4F51.7A438F47@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 17:18:57 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] comment on Bill Gates as ex CEO The following is a quick comment on today's announcement... --------------- "The biggest issue facing Microsoft today is whether or not to accept an AT&T type settlement that involves breaking the company up -- or to continue the present litigation. "Many people think that the barrier to a break up is more personal than financial. One interpretation of today's announcement is that Bill Gates is further disengaging from the business, making it easier to consider a break up of the company. But that may be reading too much into today's news. Jamie -- James Love http://www.cptech.org mailto:love@cptech.org voice 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jan 13 18:11:24 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B066221C13; Thu, 13 Jan 2000 18:11:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA16824; Thu, 13 Jan 2000 18:11:22 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <387E5B87.21852A4B@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 18:11:03 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ecommerce , Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , IP-Health list , pharm-policy , upd-discuss Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] National Academies: IPRs, who far should they be extended? This is part of a pretty important National Academies program on intellectual property. Jamie --------------------------- Board on Science, Technology and Economic Policy The National Academies Intellectual Property Rights: How Far Should They Be Extended? Wednesday, February 2 & Thursday, February 3, 2000 Lecture Room National Academy of Sciences 2100 C Street, NW Washington, DC This conference will bring together Federal judges, executive branch officials, practitioners, corporate executives, legal scholars, and economists to discuss the effects on innovation and economic performance of extending intellectual property rights. Confirmed speakers include Hon. Randall Rader, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Hon. Todd Dickinson, Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks Hon. Fern Smith, Federal Judicial Center and U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California Hon. Roderick McKelvie, U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware Richard Levin, President, Yale University Mark Myers, Senior Vice President, Xerox F.M. Scherer, Harvard Kennedy School of Government John Barton, Stanford University Law School Robert Merges, Boalt Hall Law School, University of California at Berkeley Sessions will examine recent IP developments and strategies in key sectors. Panel discussions will consider several cross-cutting issues: Wednesday, February 2 · IPRs in semiconductors · Technology development, competition and antitrust policy · IPRs in software and business methods · Patent standards, quality and scope · IP protection and knowledge transfers Thursday, February 3 · IPRs in biotechnology: pharmaceutical and agricultural applications · IP right to tools and results of fundamental research · Patent administration and litigation · Summary A current agenda may be found attached or on the STEP Board's website (www.nationalacademies.org/ipr). Registration is complimentary by (1) return email, (2) fax to 202-334-1505, or (3) completing the form on the website. For more information call Craig Schultz at 202-334-2200 or email to . We encourage you to refer this announcement to others who may be interested in joining us. (See attached file: 01-11agenda.doc) -- James Love http://www.cptech.org mailto:love@cptech.org voice 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jan 13 19:10:09 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65C1B21B0C for ; Thu, 13 Jan 2000 19:10:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA17817 for ; Thu, 13 Jan 2000 19:10:09 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <387E694D.5BB7A976@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 19:09:49 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN Travel reimbursements I have been asking ICANN for details of travel reimbursements given to its board members. I asked for reimbursements broken down by TRIP, and for each trip, by expense categories. I was sent this today. I don't consider this response to be complete or as detailed as I had asked. For example, an "other meeting" might be a cab ride down town and a lunch, or a trip to another country, so the totals for Esther, H. Kraaijenbrink, G. Capdeboscq and Mr. Roberts are not informative at all. One issue I was looking at was the level of style that ICANN board members were expecting to be reimbursed for, given the fact that the money comes, indirectly, from domain holders like me. I can see from G. Conrade and Linda Wilson's reimbursements that quite a bit of money is involved (particularly when compared to E. Triana), but I was given enough of a breakdown to even see how that was spent. I'll be writing the board to renew my request for more detailed reports, and I will also ask that they be made available more than one a year. I will also be asking Congress what it thinks of this limited disclosoure. Jamie ICANN Travel reimbursements Name Reimbursement Description Amount G. Capdeboscq $ 2,891 Berlin & 3 other meetings G. Conrades $ 12,043 Singapore & Berlin G. Crew $ 5,007 Four Board meetings E. Dyson $ 42,664 Four Board & 19 other meetings H. Kraaijenbrink $ 28,172 Four Board & 5 other meetings M. Roberts $ 54,671 Four Board & 36 other meetings E. Triana $ 1,674 Two Board meetings L. Wilson $ 5,378 Berlin ------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 15:12:01 -0800 To: James Love From: Mike Roberts Subject: Re: ICANN Payments to Directors Report CC: edyson@edventure.com Jamie - Here is a copy of the Payments to Directors report that will be posted on our web site later today. The Board discussed the report yesterday and believes that the level of detail is consistent with the related Bylaws provision. - Mike ------------ Report of Expense Reimbursement and Other Payments to ICANN Directors - Fiscal Period ending 6/30/99 This report is provided annually in accordance with Article XI, section 3 of the ICANN Bylaws, which provides, in part, that "The Board shall publish, at least annually.... a description of any payments made by the Corporation to Directors (including reimbursements of expenses)." The report covers payments for the eight month startup period of the corporation, during which four face to face Board meetings were held, in New York City (10/25/98), Cambridge, Massachusetts (11/14/98), Singapore (3/4/99), and Berlin (5/27/99). Not all Directors submitted travel and meeting expense reports for every meeting, and Directors Fitzsimmons and Murai received no reimbursements. A number of Directors also volunteered time to represent ICANN at other meetings, for which their travel and meeting expenses were reimbursed. Director Dyson was the elected Interim Chairman of the Board and Director Roberts was the elected Interim President and CEO during this period and in their respective capacities attended a substantially greater number of meetings. Director Roberts is compensated as President/CEO through a professional services contract with ICANN. Payments under this agreement totaled $144,000 for the eight months. No other Director received any payment except for the reimbursed expenses listed below. Name Reimbursement Description Amount G. Capdeboscq $ 2,891 Berlin & 3 other meetings G. Conrades $ 12,043 Singapore & Berlin G. Crew $ 5,007 Four Board meetings E. Dyson $ 42,664 Four Board & 19 other meetings H. Kraaijenbrink $ 28,172 Four Board & 5 other meetings M. Roberts $ 54,671 Four Board & 36 other meetings E. Triana $ 1,674 Two Board meetings L. Wilson $ 5,378 Berlin -- -- -- James Love http://www.cptech.org mailto:love@cptech.org voice 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jan 14 11:33:50 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D156121B12 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2000 11:33:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA27683 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2000 11:33:50 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <387F4FE3.A7E5D063@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 11:33:39 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Canadian government asked to review AOL/Time Warner deal Fri, 14 Jan 2000 11:27:30 -0500 From: Pippa Lawson Here's a copy of our letter referred to in the news release that I just sent out on the ecommerce listserv: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- January 13, 2000 Honourable John Manley Minister of Industry 235 Queen Street 11th floor, East Tower Ottawa, ON K1A 0H5 Dear Minister Manley: Re: AOL Time Warner Merger The AOL acquisition of Time Warner presents serious implications for Canadian consumers of broadcasting and new media services, as well as potential problems of access for Canadian content providers. These problems are not confined to Canada. Significant and reputable consumer groups in the United States, including the Consumers Federation of America, Consumers Union, the Consumers Project on Technology and the Media Access Project, have called for the AOL acquisition of Time Warner to be stopped. We believe that the analysis of the American consumer groups is compelling, and that a thorough review of the competitive and other implications of this deal is called for. As you are aware, the issue of the importance of carriage/content separation is not a new one for the federal government and your department. In 1995, the Information Highway Advisory Council report entitled "The Challenge of the Information Highway" had this to say on the issue: "The Broadcasting Act calls for programming that is varied and comprehensive, expressing a range of differing views on matters of public concern; indeed, the promotion of diversity has been a tradition in Canadian broadcasting policy and regulation. As companies merge to face global competition, maximize competitive advantage, and benefit from vertical integration, maintaining diversity will require structural measures that discourage preferential treatment based on ownership interests." Recommendation 7.7 of the aforesaid report provided as follows: "The principle of carriage/content separation should be maintained at a minimum through the requirement of structural separation between programming and distribution undertakings and with other reasonable safeguards." The legitimacy of these concerns was acknowledged by the federal government in its later report "Building the Information Society: Moving Canada Into the 21st Century". That report noted the dangers to Canadian content for new media services: "More important within the emerging information industry itself, there are signs of growing vertical integration between providers of broadcasting carriage and content services. This trend could ultimately leave providers of Canadian content vulnerable to discrimination. The present policy and regulatory framework may have to take this new reality into account." PIAC is of the opinion that the AOL Time Warner merger may have serious and sustaining implications for access and distribution of new Canadian media services. It not only blurs the line between the desirable carriage/content separation, it potentially lessens competition. In the words of our American counterparts the deal: "...raises the threat of discrimination among content providers effectively degrading the services offered by competitors." We believe that the implications for Canada and Canadian consumers are such that the government should make a formal request pursuant to Article V of the 1995 "Agreement between the government of the United States of America and the government of Canada Regarding the Application of Their Competition and Deceptive Marketing Practices Laws" The Agreement provides that: "If a party believes that anti-competitive activities carried out in the territory of another party adversely affect its important interest, the first party may request that the other parties competition authorities initiate appropriate enforcement activities..." We believe that AOL's acquisition should be afforded a rigorous review by American competition authorities. It is also our preliminary view that the merger in its current form should be stopped. We welcome the opportunity to discuss these concerns with your office and your officials. We would be pleased to provide any further information that may be of assistance to the government in making this request. Thank you. Yours truly, Michael Janigan Executive Director/ General Counsel cc: Konrad von Finckenstein, Commissioner of Competition ------------------------ Philippa Lawson Counsel Public Interest Advocacy Centre 1204 - 1 Nicholas St. Ottawa, Ontario K1N 7B7 tel: (613) 562-4002 ext.24 fax: (613) 562-0007 e-mail: pippa@web.net PIAC webpage: http://www.piac.ca -- James Love http://www.cptech.org mailto:love@cptech.org voice 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jan 14 15:28:19 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A00CD21B17 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2000 15:28:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA32556 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2000 15:28:19 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <387F86DA.5BB8DA75@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 15:28:10 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Aaron Pressman: Price of cable television rises at twice rate of inflation Subject: reuters on fcc cable report Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 15:00:56 -0500 From: Aaron Pressman Price of cable television rises at twice rate of inflation WASHINGTON, Jan 14 (Reuters) - The price of cable television service rose 3.8 percent last year, almost double the inflation rate but much less than rate hikes in prior years, the Federal Communications Commission said Friday. In its annual assessment of the subscription television market, the FCC said the rate rise between June, 1998 and June, 1999 came as cable operators increased spending 13.2 percent to upgrade their systems and programming costs jumped 16.3 percent. In March last year, the FCC's authority to regulate cable prices expired but the industry also faced increased competition from Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) services such as Hughes Electronics Corp.'s DirecTV and EchoStar Communications Corp. According to the FCC, 10.1 million households subscribed to DBS in June, 1999, up from 7.2 million a year earlier. Cable subscribers grew to 66.7 million from 65.4 million over the same period. FCC Chairman William Kennard said satellite carriers would pose an even stronger competitive challenge in the future because of a law passed late last year allowing the companies to carry local TV stations. "The satellite industry currently offers the most meaningful competition to cable," Kennard said, adding that the FCC would move "aggressively" to implement the new local channel law. Overall cable industry revenue is expected to hit $35.3 billion for all of 1999, up 8 percent from $32.7 billion in 1998, the FCC said. Cable companies collected an average of $529, or $44 per month, from each subscriber during 1999, up from $499, or $41.62 per month, in 1998. ((Aaron Pressman, Washington newsroom, 202-898-8312)) Friday, 14 January 2000 14:59:15 RTRS [nN1456676] ----------------------------------------------------------------- Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Reuters Ltd. -- James Love http://www.cptech.org mailto:love@cptech.org voice 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jan 14 17:12:33 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5624521B06 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2000 17:12:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA01870 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2000 17:12:33 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <387F9F48.769E5536@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 17:12:24 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Paul Allen's Vulcon Ventures and cable access issues This is an interesting note from John Schwartz, regarding Paul Allen's various investments in cable, as it relates to the issue of control of content in cable based internet services. Jamie --------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Smoking Gun? Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 08:46:51 -0700 From: John Schwartz To: Multiple recipients of list Here's some info I ran across recently that I think is germane to the cable modem open access debate. High Speed Access Corp. provides turnkey high speed internet service to mid-sized and small cable systems. Paul Allen's Vulcon Ventures recently invested in HSA. At roughly the same time, HSA contracted with two Allen-owned cable companies, Charter and Marcus, to service a number of their systems. In the master Network Services Agreement between Charter, Marcus, and HSA, violation of a separate "content agreement" is listed as a cause for termination. Here, from an HSA SEC filing, is a desciption of the content agreement. "Under our programming content agreement with Vulcan Ventures, Vulcan has the right to require us to carry, on an exclusive basis in all cable systems we serve, content it designates. Vulcan content may include start-up and related web pages, electronic programming guides, other multimedia information and telephony services. We will not share in any revenues Vulcan may earn through the content or telephony services it provides. We must provide all equipment necessary for the delivery of Vulcan content, although Vulcan will reimburse us for any costs we incur in excess of $3,000 per cable headend. Vulcan cannot charge us for any Vulcan content through November 25, 2008; after that date we will be obligated to pay Vulcan for this content at the lowest fee charged to any Internet service provider who subscribes to Vulcan content. Vulcan has the right to prohibit us from providing content or telephony services that compete with Vulcan content and can require us to remove our competing content. Moreover, many industry analysts believe that Internet access will become increasingly reliant upon revenues from content due to competitive pressures to provide low cost or even free Internet access. If Vulcan were to require us to remove our content or substitute its telephony services for any we might provide, we could lose a source of additional revenues and might not recover all related costs of providing our content or telephony services. Vulcan's ability to prohibit us from providing content and telephony services means that Vulcan's interests are not necessarily aligned with those of our other stockholders" There are quite a number of HSA SEC filings. The document from which the above quotation is taken can be found online at http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1075244/0000950123-99-002278.txt The Network Services Agreement between the Allen cable operators and HSA can be found at: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1075244/0001035704-99-000273.txt J. ___________________________________________________________________________ John B. Schwartz P.O. Box 6060 Telephone 303-442-2707 Boulder, CO 80306 FAX 303-442-6472 schwartz@usa.net ___________________________________________________________________________ From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jan 14 17:22:08 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6304021B06 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2000 17:22:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA01996 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2000 17:22:08 -0500 Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 17:22:08 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Ryan Tate: Ballmer Sticks it to Uncle Sam http://www.upside.com/Executive_Briefing/ Ballmer Sticks It To Uncle Sam By Ryan Tate January 14, 2000 Get-Rich Tip: When you're in a hole, stop digging. Even as the government was sharpening its carving knives and drooling over the image of fresh-fried Microsoft (MSFT) drumsticks in a bucket, newly appointed Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer -- never modest when it comes to describing how important a united Microsoft is to This Great Land Of Ours™ -- still couldn't get out of Uncle Sam's face. And it wasn't just that he called the government's widely reported breakup plans "reckless beyond belief" at a Thursday afternoon press conference. No, the real spittle-on-the-umpire's-cheek was Ballmer's enthusiastic description of the ominously Borg-sounding "next generation Windows services," which are really just Microsoft's effort to create more Web-based applications like Hotmail. Or are they? In a conference call with reporters Thursday, Ballmer said the services technology "will be integrated into Windows the client and into Windows the server... we see it being infused in and seamlessly integrated with Windows." Wow. Never mind that "Windows the client" and Windows the server" used to be four separate products -- Windows 95 and Internet Explorer, Windows NT and Internet Information Server -- before Microsoft got stir-happy and started puttin' da lime in da coconut. No, what's truly striking is that Microsoft is talking about extending this sort of integration to Web apps. Imagine a Hotmail that only really works for Windows 2000 users, or a Web calendar "free" to Windows CE users but useless to Palm Piloteers, or an Expedia with popup discount notices for Windows notebook owners but not Apple iBook owners. Considering that the mere act of rolling the browser into the OS prompted a federal antitrust suit that still threatens to split up the company, it takes some cojones to then take on hundreds of Web-app-based startups whose CEOs are likely dialing their lobbyists with maniacal fervor as we speak, plotting the release of Antitrust Suit 2001. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jan 14 19:00:17 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A42C21B06 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2000 19:00:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA03326 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2000 19:00:17 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <387FB889.E4AA0014@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 19:00:09 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] AOL/DirectTV and FTC Joint Venture Guidelines AOL/Time Warner, AT&T and Direct TV There have been several stories mentioning AT&T acquistion of Media One giving AT&T an ownerhsip interest in many Time Warner properties. This from a June 21, 1999 on AOL's agreement to invest $1.5 billion with GM for a deal with Hughes and DirectTV -- a direct competitor with Time Warner and AT&T cable properties. It is becoming difficult to figure out which company's are really independent these days. Which is one reason that the FTC's decision to extend the period for comments on the joint venture guidelines is a good thing. Here is the URL for the FTC's proposed "ANTITRUST GUIDELINES FOR COLLABORATIONS AMONG COMPETITORS," http://www.ftc.gov/os/1999/9910/jointventureguidelines.htm Here is the URL for the AOL/DirectTV deal: http://www.direcpc.com/consumer/scoop/pr11.html AMERICA ONLINE AND HUGHES ELECTRONICS FORM STRATEGIC ALLIANCE TO MARKET UNPARALLELED DIGITAL ENTERTAINMENT AND INTERNET SERVICES Will Accelerate Growth of DIRECTV, AOL TV and Launch AOL-Plus High-Speed Internet Service via DirecPC Nationwide Satellite System AOL to Make $1.5 Billion Strategic Investment in Hughes DULLES, Virg., and EL SEGUNDO, Calif., June 21, 1999 -- America Online, Inc. (NYSE:AOL), the world's leading interactive services company, and Hughes Electronics Corporation (NYSE:GMH), the world's leading provider of digital television entertainment and satellite-based data services, today announced a strategic alliance to develop and market uniquely integrated digital entertainment and Internet services nationwide. The Companies said that this alliance will accelerate subscriber growth and revenue-per-subscriber for Hughes' DIRECTV® television entertainment service and DirecPC® satellite-based broadband Internet delivery system, as well as extend the reach of America Online's developing AOL TV interactive television and high-speed AOL-Plus services. America Online and Hughes also plan to jointly develop new content and interactive services for the U.S. market and elsewhere in the world. This new alliance builds on the Companies' earlier agreement to develop a "combination" set-top receiver to make DIRECTV/AOL TV available to consumers next year. The Companies will launch an extensive cross-marketing initiative to package and extend the reach of both AOL TV and DIRECTV. Hughes and America Online will market the DIRECTV/AOL TV package to America Online's more than 16 million AOL and CompuServe members in the United States, as well as to millions more consumers of its Internet brands. Hughes also will market AOL TV to its more than 7 million current DIRECTV subscribers, and to millions of potential new subscribers through its extensive network of retail outlets. The Companies will also make the AOL-Plus broadband service available nationwide via the DirecPC satellite Internet network by early 2000. This initiative builds on America Online's recently announced partnerships with Bell Atlantic and SBC Communications to deliver DSL broadband connectivity to AOL members. The DirecPC network provides broadband download speeds up to 14 times faster than the standard 28.8 kilobits-per-second analog modem. AOL-Plus members will be able to transmit information back over standard telephone lines at speeds as fast as 56.6 kbps. Hughes Network Systems, a unit of Hughes, provides the DirecPC system and service, and will design and initially manufacture the combination DIRECTV/AOL TV set-top receiver. The alliance will also enhance the development of Hughes' next-generation satellite system for two-way, broadband connectivity, known as Spaceway?, scheduled to launch in 2002. Hughes previously announced a $1.4 billion investment to design, manufacture and launch the North American system and accompanying ground infrastructure. Under the agreement, America Online will make a $1.5 billion strategic investment in a General Motors equity security, which carries a 6-1/4% coupon rate, that is automatically convertible into GM Class H common stock (GMH) at a 24 percent premium in three years. GM will immediately invest the $1.5 billion in a security of Hughes under similar terms where it will be employed to implement the strategic alliance between AOL and Hughes. AOL said the investment would be non-dilutive to its earnings. [snip] -- James Love http://www.cptech.org mailto:love@cptech.org voice 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Jan 18 12:08:12 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C37B21B4F; Tue, 18 Jan 2000 12:08:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA17188; Tue, 18 Jan 2000 12:08:12 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38849E1C.8A54BAC2@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2000 12:08:44 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Media Concentration issue: David Cassel on AOL censoring email critical of AOL *** Democracies Online Newswire - http://www.e-democracy.org/do *** ------- Forwarded message follows ------- Date sent: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 13:39:00 -0800 (PST) From: David Cassel To: AOL Watch Subject: AOL Watch: Is AOL Blocking Your Mail? I s A O L B l o c k i n g Y o u r M a i l ? ~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~ On September 6, the AOL Watch newsletter was sent to its 50,000 readers. But subscribers on AOL didn't receive it. Canvassing nearly two dozen of the list's AOL subscribers, all reported the same thing: the newsletter didn't reach their AOL mailboxes. Had AOL's "spam" filters made a mistake? Or was the newsletter being deleted because it had included the phone number for cancelling AOL accounts? AOL's postmaster didn't respond to requests for comment. But AOL's privacy policy specifies AOL can read your e-mail "to protect the company's rights and property." Have they already invoked that clause? In July of 1997 Simutronics announced that AOL "without our knowledge, has been deleting all e-mail from Simutronics addresses to AOL addresses." A gaming newsletter also reported e-mail from gaming company Sierra wasn't reaching AOL addresses, and both incidents were cited in a lawsuit filed by a third company. http://www.aolsucks.org/list/0066.html http://www.aolsucks.org/list/0080.html Ziff-Davis News uncovered another incident, in which AOL, equating an internet web site's "Thank you" notes to customers with unsolicited commercial e-mail, began deliberately blocking the e-mail. (http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/zdnn_smgraph_display/0,4436,2139310,00.html) And one former AOL content partner told AOL Watch their goodbye to staffmembers suspiciously failed to arrive. In fact, AOL's Terms of Service also states they may block access to web sites that are "injurious to AOL" -- and they may have already begun. The author of a book about on-line dating -- titled "You've Got Male" -- filed a lawsuit in November alleging AOL prevented their users from accessing her site! Reuters reported that AOL had earlier demanded she stop selling the book and to never re-print it. "My attorney told me, 'You may as well change the name of the book," the author commented, "because you can't fight a big company like that'." http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-122453.html?tag=st.cn.1. http://www.youve-got-male.com/rocky_mountian_news_story.htm AOL has the power to control whether publishers can reach their audience. The "disappearance" of the last edition of this newsletter ( http://www.aolsucks.org/list/0102.html ) meant that many AOL Watch readers didn't received a post for nearly ten months. (Ironically, that edition had been titled "Breaking AOL's Grip".) AOL subscribers concerned at the thought of a corporation rifling through your mailbox, picking and choosing what e-mail you'll receive and which web pages you'll access, should also consider: when it comes to simply delivering mail reliably, AOL has a bad record. At various times AOL has sporadically refused to deliver mail from several other internet services, including the Microsoft Network, FlexNet, Fuse.net, En.com, Cybercom.net, and Gorilla.net. http://www.aolwatch.org/flexnet.htm http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,16907,00.html http://www.aolsucks.org/list/0011.html http://www.aolsucks.org/list/0009.html http://www.aolsucks.org/list/0081.html http://www.aolsucks.org/list/0080.html One December, AOL even stopped displaying thousands of web pages for over ten days. ( http://www.aolsucks.org/list/0031.html ) But AOL has affected the flow of online communication in other ways, too. On December 24 the Washington Post reported that internet service providers have been "bombarded with calls" from subscribers, most complaining that after installing AOL's 5.0 software, "non-AOL Internet software is disabled." Beta-testers warned AOL about the problem, the Post and other news outlets have noted -- but the warnings were apparently ignored. http://www.internetnews.com/isp-news/print/0,1089,8_216641,00.html Anger over the glitch proves noticeable numbers of AOL users now choose non-AOL services for their net access. Though AOL appears to have disregarded them, the users show that thousands of internet services exist for dissatisfied AOL subscribers, and that AOL doesn't have a monopoly on delivering service to homes like the cable television companies that deliver cable programming. But has AOL discovered a way to change that? A proposed merger with Time-Warner grants AOL access to that company's cable system -- and some observers fear other net services won't get the same access. Then only AOL would be able to offer high-speed net access through the cable! In his most-recent Community Update, Steve Case gloated that the deal gives AOL "an unprecedented ability to drive commerce" -- but besides exclusive rights to lucrative advertising and sales money, AOL could also determine what news and information is available. One columnist suggested that the real appeal of the merger "hinges on the ability to control both customers' ability to access the Internet and what they see, hear and read when they're online." http://www.alternet.org/PublicArchive/Hazen011400.html A variation on picking-and-choosing what subscribers receive will then become a reality! Senator Patrick Leahy warned that "we will have to look closely at whether it makes public policy sense to consolidate control of content, cable and Internet service distribution channels." ( http://www.senate.gov/~leahy/releases/0001/0110_4144.html ) Even before AOL's proposed merger, Forbes magazine had suggested AOL as "potential defendants" in a Department of Justice monopoly break-up. ( http://www.forbes.com/forbes/99/1129/6413054a.htm ) Now Senator Leahy wants Americans to think about the future. "At some point, all of this concentration and convergence has implications for consumers, because it will minimize competition and choice, giving us fewer voices and fewer pipelines in the marketplace." Ultimately the Senator cautions about the need to "make sure that all that information does not become funneled and controlled by just two or three sources." Resistance to the merger is already building. ( http://www.nypost.com/business/22004.htm ) Ralph Nader's Consumer Project on Technology warns that "AT&T and Time-Warner are both trying to set up broad band internet services that can discriminate among content providers, and effectively degrade services offered by competitors" ( http://www.cptech.org/ecom/aol-tw.html ) The European Union also announced that they'll investigate the implications of the proposed deal, and Canada's Ministry of Industry is already being urged to move against it. http://www.newsunlimited.co.uk/business/story/0,3604,121604,00.html http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,33668,00.html Concerned netizens have a way to voice their concerns. "People should contact the agencies that will review the merger," the Consumer Project on Technology's Jamie Love told AOL Watch. "That will include the Federal Communications Commission, as well as the Department of Justice or the Federal Trade Commission." There's also the ultimate protest: cancelling your service! One celebrity is already seeking suggestions for ways to replace his AOL account -- Michael Moore, director of "Roger and Me." He explained his feelings on his personal web page. "If just a few people end up owning all the ways for us to communicate with each other, and they decide what will be communicated and what won't, then we are all in deep trouble." ( http://www.michaelmoore.com/01122000.html ) Moore notes that "The incredible beauty of this Internet is that you and I can bypass all of them and talk to each other directly. They hate that!" Fear of the new world order showed in dark humor circulating the internet. http://graphics.nytimes.com/00/01/11/oped/011100opart.GIF http://www.globeandmail.ca/series/cartoon/0112.html One AOL Watch reader joked there might be consequences for cable viewers. "Attempting to switch channels will result in the message 'A request to the host has taken longer than expected. If the problem persists...' " And at least one Time-Warner employee with an AOL account suggested to AOL Watch that the deal has a bright side. "Perhaps now I'll be able to stay connected for more than three minutes without being cut off." Even the technology editor for Salon -- an AOL content partner -- saw the merger as a call to arms. "AOL-Time Warner's interests are now aligned opposite those of a freewheeling, independent Internet," their Managing Editor wrote. "So let's give 'em hell -- while we still can." (http://www.salon.com/tech/col/rose/2000/01/14/aol_deal/index.html?CP=SAL&DN=) In fact, those who value the freedom of their speech over the interests of corporations are already on the move. Unidentified web users have already claimed the domains anti-aol.org and aoltimewarnersucks.com , and they've even installed a pornography page at aolwebmaster.com. (It's slogan is "So sleazy, no wonder I'm number one.") "Web Vengeance" software took it further, using a parody doppelganger -- "America Offline" -- to illustrate a program letting users shoot bullet-holes into any web page. http://www.segasoft.com/webvengeance/index.html AOL's unspoken desire to control all media may have met its match in Georgia resident Christopher Alan. He claimed the domain stephencase.com -- then composed a rockabilly song about it and put it up at the URL. "When you bought Time-Warner we were all impressed. How come you didn't buy your web address?" The bluesy guitar tune http://www.stephencase.com, http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/62/christopher_alan_cook.html served as an important reminder -- that the internet houses millions of individuals, each with their own uses for technology. Alan's taunting song reaffirms the hope that ultimately consumers will do what *they* want... oblivious to what Steve Case wants. "You may be a big-shot down at AOL, but I'm the one that got your URL!" THE LAST LAUGH AOL is even having trouble providing users with access to their own software. An exit screen ad in September barked "We've got a new and improved browser!" -- then told users to "Download now at Keyword: " The ad's failure to provide an actual keyword made downloading impossible -- and users who guessed keyword "browsers" were told that that keyword didn't exist. AOL's software then suggested users try keyword "brewers." David Cassel More Information - http://www.fair.org/media-beat/000113.html http://www.newsunlimited.co.uk/leaders/story/0,3604,121553,00.html http://slashdot.org/features/00/01/10/1418231.shtml http://www.mercurycenter.com/svtech/news/indepth/docs/dg113099.htm http://yahoo.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-1429691.html http://www.internetworldnews.com/idx_article.asp?inc=010100/1.01Decon&issue=1.01 ~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~ Please forward with subscription information. To subscribe to this list, type your correct e-mail address in the form at the bottom of the page at http://www.aolsucks.org -- or send e-mail to MAJORDOMO@AOLWATCH.ORG containing the phrase SUBSCRIBE AOLWATCH To unsubscribe from the list, send a message to MAJORDOMO@AOLWATCH.ORG containing the phrase UNSUBSCRIBE AOLWATCH. ~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~ From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Jan 19 15:09:35 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93E6F21B8F for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2000 15:09:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA09410 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2000 15:09:35 -0500 Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2000 15:09:35 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Aaron Pressman - Kennard praises TW merger It would appears as though FCC Chairman Kennard is sticking with his see no evil, speak no evil policy regarding cable company control over the broadband cable internet platform. Jamie From aaron.pressman@reuters.com Wed Jan 19 15:06:10 2000 Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2000 15:03:25 -0500 From: Aaron Pressman Subject: reuters on kennard and aol-twx U.S. FCC head encouraged by AOl-Time Warner deal WASHINGTON, Jan 19 (Reuters) - America Online's proposed merger with Time Warner Inc. was another "encouraging" sign that the marketplace can resolve concerns about the openness of cable high-speed Internet systems, the top U.S. communications regulator said on Wednesday. As he has done many times in the past two years, Federal Communications Commission Chairman William Kennard said he had no interest in having the FCC require that cable companies give Internet service providers access to their high-speed systems. "I think it's encouraging," Kennard said at a new briefing, when asked about the AOL-Time Warner deal. "I've been saying since the very beginning of this debate that the marketplace should work this out...the signs are encouraging." No. 1 Internet service provider AOL had previously lobbied the FCC and Congress for regulations requiring that cable companies share their high-speed lines with competitors. At the press conference announcing the Time Warner merger, AOL Chairman Steve Case committed to voluntarily opening Time Warner's lines but said he no longer thought new government rules were required. Kennard declined to comment on his agency's expected review of the deal, saying that the companies had not yet filed for approval. Kennard said he would carefully review AOL's written commitments to open access that would likely accompany such a filing. "Some of the statements we've been seeing around this AOL-Time Warner transaction are encouraging," Kennard said. "Now the devil is in the details and we'll have to look and see what is really being committed to but, yes, I'm optimistic and still encouraged." ------------------------------- | James Love, Consumer Project on Technology | P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org | Washington, DC 20036 | love@cptech.org | Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Jan 19 23:29:44 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2272321AFF for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2000 23:29:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-5.essential.org [216.0.125.5]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA17774 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2000 23:29:42 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <388696DD.DFA98F90@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 00:02:21 -0500 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Richard Poynder: Method Madness -- ecommerce patents http://www.ipmag.com/monthly/99-nov/poynder.html Method Madness: The battle over e-commerce patents heats up Richard Poynder Nov 1999 ipmag.com -- It should, therefore, come as no surprise that a development as radical as the Internet should spark its own patenting wrangle. In particular, a cluster of patents issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office covering e-commerce methods and techniques has set off a storm of criticism. The main complaint is that many of these new patents are far too broad in scope. Massachusetts-based Open Market, for instance, has been granted several patents that, some claim, could potentially allow it to demand royalties from almost any company engaged in e-commerce. These include a patent on a secure, real-time payment method using debit and credit cards, one covering electronic shopping carts, and another on a technique for analysing how users browse Web content. To date, Open Market has not taken legal action against supposed infringers. In contrast, Sightsound.com -- which claims to have been granted a patent that covers the sale of any digital audio or video recording over the Internet -- is currently suing N2K, a company that retails music on the Web. The Mt. Lebanon, Pa., company has also written to a number of other prominent music sites demanding royalties on every sale that involves downloading music to a customer. . . . A 1998 Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling, endorsing the principle that business methods can be patented, has prompted an onslaught of filings for -- and PTO approvals of -- business method patents. Critics fear that the door has now been opened to allow anyone to take a familiar business method from the physical world, add the word "network," and then patent its use on the Web. Frequently cited in this regard is Priceline.com, which, among other things, claims to have patent rights on Internet-based "reverse auctions" -- where buyers propose a price for a product or service, and sellers bid to supply it. Likewise, Netcentives has been granted a patent covering the use of a promotional programme in which consumers earn points for making online purchases. "A lot of commentators are worried that patents will be issued on business methods that have been used for years," says Dickinson. "But that is not going to happen because if they have been used for years, and publicly, then a patent cannot be issued, as the method is not novel." The question of what is novel, however, makes for contentious discussions. When Oakland, Calif.-based Cybergold was issued a patent on pay-per-view advertising (where users are rewarded for looking at Internet-based advertisements), many questioned its novelty. But Cybergold's CEO, Nat Goldhaber, dismisses the criticism. "When I explained what we were doing to one of the leading men in American advertising, he told me our business model was so innovative that he would have to go back and re-learn the business." Until recently it was assumed that the controversy was not relevant to Europe. Historically, software (which e-commerce patents by definition are) has not been patentable in Europe; nor is it generally accepted that business methods can be patented. But apart from the inherent problems of trying to enforce a geographically defined legal system on a global network, current harmonisation initiatives are eroding national differences. Thus, in response to the European Commission Green Paper on patenting, the European Patent Office has recently proposed that 52 of the European Patent Convention should be replaced with wording agreed upon during the Uruguay Round of the GATT Accord. "If this were to happen, not only would it open the door to the patenting of software in Europe, but to business methods as well," argues Bob Hart, chairman of the Computer Technology Committee of the U.K. Chartered Institute of Patent Agents. "Which would make it highly likely that many of these e-commerce patents would be granted in Europe, too." Certainly a patents search reveals that applications for most of the controversial e-commerce patents have been filed at the World Intellectual Property Organization. Many of the inventors of those applications indicate an intent to file in most European countries as well. . . . James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jan 20 08:12:40 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C32021AFF for ; Thu, 20 Jan 2000 08:12:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA21120 for ; Thu, 20 Jan 2000 08:12:40 -0500 Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 08:12:40 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Philip Sishkin: EU considers business practices patents Europe's Confusing Laws Push Net Firms to Seek Patents in U.S. By PHILIP SHISHKIN Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL [snip] Not only is Europe a smaller Internet market than America, but also European patent laws are perceived to be less welcoming to software and Internet products than those in the U.S., says Adam Hodgkin, one of Xrefer's founders. Consider this clause from the European Patent Convention: "Programs for computers are excluded from protection under European patent law." Officials from the Munich-based European Patent Office hurry to explain that this clause is largely an obsolete legal quirk and that in reality software patents can be obtained in Western Europe, provided they meet certain technical requirements. But some patent experts say that this turn of phrase can confuse small-time programmers and Internet entrepreneurs. 'Lack of Transparency' "There is certainly a lack of transparency," says Gert Kolle, EPO's director of international legal affairs. "There are some unjustified fears and concerns. We see the point and we are doing our best to change it." The EPO is working on an amendment, which will replace the misleading language with something similar to this phrase: "European patents shall be granted for any inventions in all fields of technology," according to an EPO document. [snip] Europe's patent practices came under fire earlier this week when the EU's research commissioner, Philippe Busquin, said too many European companies are going to the U.S. to obtain their patents. The European Patent Convention was drafted in 1973, and the EPO was created shortly afterward. The EPO examines patent claims for the 15 member-states of the EU plus Switzerland, Monaco, Lichtenstein and Cyprus, and decides whether a patent should be granted. Provisions Not Up-to-Date A national authority then issues the actual patent. However, some of the patent office's provisions drafted in the '70s turn out to be ill-suited for the technology-heavy '90s, and patent office's experts seem to acknowledge some of the lapses. Just last month, the European Patent Court modified an old regulation that excluded genetically modified plants from patent protection. Ruling on an appeal filed by Swiss biotechnology concern Novartis AG, the court decided that when the old rules were drawn up "it was inconceivable that [plant] varieties could be obtained with the help of techniques including microbiological steps." While some environmentalists decried the ruling, a Novartis spokesman praised it saying "it allows companies to protect biotech inventions just like you would protect any other kind of invention." [snip] Protecting Business Methods Europe has shunned another software-related U.S. patent trend: In 1996, a U.S. court ruled that patents can be granted to protect business methods. The most vivid example of that decision is a face-off between online booksellers Amazon.com Inc. and barnesandnoble.com Inc. Last month, Amazon obtained a preliminary injunction barring its competitor from using Amazon's patented one-click shopping feature. This couldn't happen in Europe. "The EPO has no intention of either revising the convention or changing its practice" of not patenting business methods, one of the agency's documents reads. The U.S. and Europe have long held different philosophies about granting patents. The U.S. in general has fewer patent restrictions. Europe, on the other hand, has adopted a pickier approach to granting patents. [snip] Write to Philip Shishkin at philip.shishkin@wsj.com From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jan 21 04:21:20 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4203121C2E; Fri, 21 Jan 2000 04:21:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-7.essential.org [216.0.125.7]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA06537; Fri, 21 Jan 2000 04:21:18 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38882CBD.FDB89B77@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 04:54:05 -0500 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Clinton asked to put government contracts on Internet This is a letter send by Ralph Nader and James Love to President Clinton asking that he put US government contracts on the Internet. The request says this will make the government more accountable to citizens. There is also reference to an effort by Mike Palmedo and Shawn McCarthy to obtain copies of contracts directly from contracts and agencies. We intend also to raise this issue at the February 10-12 issue of the Trans Atlantic Consumer Dialogue (http://www.tacd.org), and with all US governors. Jamie URL for letter: http://www.cptech.org/ecom/contracts-jan6.html URL for Palmedo McCarthy notes http://www.cptech.org/ecom/may1999.txt Ralph Nader P.O. Box 19312, Washington, DC 20036 James Love Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 http://www.cptech.org January 6, 2000 President William Clinton The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Washington, D.C. 20500 Dear Mr. President, We are writing to ask that you issue an Executive Order setting procedures for every agency of the federal government to place its contracts on the Internet. We believe this initiative will help fundamentally change the accountability of government agencies to the public, and greatly reduce the number of poorly conceived contractual agreements now issued by federal agencies. We are in an era when private firms spend public funds for a wide range of activities, and there are daily transfers of public property to the private sector for a variety of purposes and rationales. The development of the Internet has created a new opportunity to empower scholars and the interested public to review and evaluate this growing and profoundly important aspect of government and budget allocations. In referring to contracts, we are speaking broadly about a wide range of written agreements, including such items as leases for mineral rights from public lands, research grants, industry government cooperative agreements, joint ventures with industry for the development of energy efficient cars, contracts for prison services, contracts with the independent counsel, consulting contracts, agreements to dispose of nuclear wastes, concession agreements for national parks, contracts for logging on public lands, licenses to government owned patents on biotechnology inventions such as the so called terminator seed patent, licenses to use public spectrum for broadcasting and telecommunications services, agreements with firms that do security clearances for federal agencies, debt collection contracts with private collection agencies, bank bailouts, loans and loan guarantee agreements, and countless other agreements. At present there are wide disparities among federal agencies with respect to access to government contracts. To its credit, the US Department of Commerce has placed existing and proposed contracts with the Internet Corporation for Names and Numbers (ICANN) on the Internet for public inspection and comment. However, most agencies make it difficult or impossible to obtain copies of government contracts. There is no public depository library that catalogs these documents for historical purposes. For example, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) enters into hundreds of agreements giving private firms and Universities exclusive rights to use patent and other rights from billions of dollars in federal research. The NIH refuses to disclose these contracts except under freedom of information Act (FOIA) requests, and even then only after long delays and typically with extensive redactions, including, for example, NIH's suppression of the amount of money or royalty rates private firms agree to pay in return for commercial rights worth millions or even billions of dollars. Mike Palmedo and Shawn McCarthy recently investigated the availability of government contracts to the public. They attempted to obtain 81 federal contracts that were listed in the Washington Post on May 10, 17 or 24, 1999, by contacting both the businesses and the government agencies that signed the contracts. We are attaching their notes. In no cases were they able to obtain copies of contracts from the businesses, and none of the federal agencies voluntarily provided copies of the contracts. The only mechanism available to Palmedo and McCarthy would have been to file requests under FOIA, a process that would be very time consuming, particularly when compared to making contracts directly available on the Internet, and in too many cases unsuccessful. In a period when your Administration is highlighting the brave new information age and the Internet and is focusing on ways that e-commerce can make transactions faster and more efficient, it is long overdue for you to harness this technology to make government accountability work in Internet time. After we receive your reply, we would like to meet with officials from your Administration to discuss this proposal further. Sincerely, Ralph Nader James Love cc: Palmedo and McCarthy notes on access to government contracts. -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jan 21 16:31:14 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F002A21B1E for ; Fri, 21 Jan 2000 16:31:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA16334 for ; Fri, 21 Jan 2000 16:31:13 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <3888CFC3.E55BFB3B@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 16:29:39 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Mickey Davis and Transmeta My friend Mickey Davis has a patent that Transmeta may infringe. It involves using slower CPU speeds to save battery life. Here is his email: "Davis, Mickey" -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jan 21 16:54:29 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CAB021B1E for ; Fri, 21 Jan 2000 16:54:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA16763 for ; Fri, 21 Jan 2000 16:54:29 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <3888D537.3BA2CFC5@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 16:52:55 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Rosch/Davis Microprocessor patent United States Patent 5,222,239 June 22, 1993 Process and apparatus for reducing power usage microprocessor devices operating from stored energy sources Abstract A process and apparatus for preparing said process for reducing the power consumption of microprocessor-based devices by reducing the frequency of the oscillator governing the logical operation of the microprocessor during periods of use in which system performance is not critical. In one embodiment of apparatus the microprocessor is controlled by a monitor circuit operable with the microprocessor and operated by the variable frequency oscillator. In another embodiment a hardware monitor circuit is utilized and which tracks microprocessor instructions to determine periods of use when performance is not critical. The shift in oscillator speed is mediated by a flip-flop latch circuit connected between one or more clock oscillators and the oscillator input of the controlled microprocessor. Inventors: Rosch; Winn L. (Shaker Heights, OH) Assignee: Prof. Michael H. Davis (Cleveland Heights, OH) Appl. No.: 954706 Filed: September 30, 1992 Claims 1. A process for automatically reducing the power usage of a microprocessor comprising the steps of: (a) continuously generating monitor interrupt signals for monitoring the operations of the microprocessor at predetermined intervals of time; (b) searching within an instruction stream of the microprocessor for a plurality of instructions executed by the microprocessor upon the occurrence each of of said monitor interrupt signals by means of a monitoring circuit; (c) comparing said plurality of searched instructions with a predefined list of instructions stored in memory to determine when at least one of said searched instructions constitutes a predefined instruction; and (d) supplying at least a first operation frequency to said microprocessor upon the occurrence of said predefined instruction, and a reduced second operation frequency to said microprocessor upon the non-occurrence of said predefined instruction, wherein the power usage of said microprocessor is reduced according to the occurrence or non-occurrence of said predefined instruction by reduction of the operation frequency supplied to said microprocessor. 2. A process as in claim 1, wherein said step of searching comprises evaluation of a predetermined number of instructions in an instruction stream both forwardly and backwardly from a starting address in said instruction stream. 3. A process as in claim 1, wherein said step of comparing comprises the determination of whether at least one of said searched instructions is a critical instruction which would require critical performance of said microprocessor. 4. A process as in claim 3, wherein said predefined list of instructions comprises critical instructions wherein said at least one searched instruction is critical if it matches one of said list of instructions. 5. A process as in claim 4, wherein said list of critical instructions constitute instructions utilized in operation of said microprocessor for which performance is critical. 6. A process as in claim 3, wherein said critical instruction constitutes an interrupt other than said monitor interrupt indicating that critical usage of said microprocessor is necessary. 7. A process as in claim 1, wherein said step of comparing comprises the determination of whether said at least one of said searched instructions is a non-critical instruction which would not require critical performance of said microprocessor. 8. A process as in claim 1, wherein said step of comparing comprises incrementing an inactivity counter upon no pre-defined instruction occurring in said plurality of searched instructions, and upon the occurrence of a predetermined value for said inactivity counter said second operation frequency will be supplied to said microprocessor. 9. A process as in claim 1, wherein said step of supplying said first or second operation frequencies includes the determination of whether operation of the microprocessor is presently at said first or second operation frequencies which is the operation frequency to be supplied wherein an inactivity counter will be reset, or whether said microprocessor is operating at said first or second operation frequencies with the other of said operation frequencies to be supplied to then supply said other operation frequency to said microprocessor and then reset said inactivity counter. 10. A process as in claim 1, wherein said step of searching comprises evaluation of a predetermined number of instructions in an instruction stream, and said step of making a determination comprises determining whether said searched instructions constitute a predefined sequence of instructions. 11. A process to reduce the power usage of a microprocessor utilizing a stored energy power source comprising the steps of: continuously generating monitor interrupt signals from a system in which a microprocessor operates to initiate monitoring operations at predetermined intervals of time, said monitoring operation being performed by means of a circuit for monitoring operation of said microprocessor, and comprising the searching of a plurality of instructions executed by said microprocessor upon the occurrence of each of said monitor interrupt signals in at least one direction in an instruction stream from a predetermined starting address in said instruction stream, determining whether any of the instructions searched constitutes a pre-defined instruction, supplying at least a first oscillation frequency to said microprocessor upon the occurrence of said pre-defined instruction, and supplying at least one second oscillation frequency to said microprocessor upon no pre-defined instruction occurring in said plurality of instructions wherein said at least one second oscillation frequency is lower than said first oscillation frequency such that the power usage of said microprocessor will be reduced by supplying said second oscillation frequency depending upon the non-occurrence of said pre-defined instruction. 12. An apparatus for reducing the power usage of a microprocessor utilizing a stored energy power source comprising, as microprocessor having means for continuously generating monitor interrupt signals at predetermined intervals of time; a monitoring circuit means for monitoring instructions executed by said microprocessor upon the occurrence of each of said monitor interrupt signals, and including means to compare said plurality of instructions which are monitored by said monitoring circuit means to instructions stored in memory, a latch circuit means having an input thereof coupled to the output of said monitoring circuit means, at least the source of an oscillating frequency for generating at least two discrete frequencies, coupled to said input of said latch circuit, wherein the output of said latch circuit couples a selected one of said at least two frequencies to said microprocessor upon the occurrence of at least one of said monitored instructions with at least one instruction in said stored instructions to enable the reduction of power usage dependent upon said selected one of said frequencies utilized in said microprocessor operation. 13. An apparatus as in claim 12, wherein said monitoring circuit means comprises a portion of said microprocessor wherein said monitoring of instructions executed by said microprocessor is accomplished by control program information supplied to said monitoring circuit means. 14. An apparatus as in claim 13, wherein said program information is stored in memory associated with said microprocessor. 15. An apparatus as in claim 13, wherein said program information is stored in an external memory coupled with said monitoring circuit means for access thereto. 16. An apparatus as in claim 12, wherein said monitoring circuit means comprises a separate circuit associated with said microprocessor being provided with program information to enable monitoring of said instructions executed by said microprocessor. 17. An apparatus as in claim 12, wherein said monitoring circuit means is an external circuit coupled with said microprocessor and having program stored in memory means associated therewith for monitoring said instructions executed by said microprocessor. 18. An apparatus as in claim 12, wherein said monitoring circuit means is coupled to an address bus of said microprocessor and monitors the instructions executed by said microprocessor on said address bus. 19. An apparatus as in claim 12, wherein said means to compare said instructions executed by said microprocessor includes a list of instructions stored in memory to which said monitored instructions are compared to determine which of said at least two frequencies will be coupled to said microprocessor for operation thereof. -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jan 21 17:21:30 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from lariat.lariat.org (lariat.lariat.org [206.100.185.2]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4223221B1E for ; Fri, 21 Jan 2000 17:21:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from workhorse (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.lariat.org [206.100.185.2]) by lariat.lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA24662; Fri, 21 Jan 2000 15:21:21 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <4.2.2.20000121151626.01a63b60@localhost> X-Sender: brett@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 15:21:18 -0700 To: James Love , Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: [Random-bits] Mickey Davis and Transmeta In-Reply-To: <3888CFC3.E55BFB3B@cptech.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Only if the power management code is interrupt-driven and uses a very unusual search mechanism. Very few power management schemes will infringe this rather narrow patent. --Brett Glass At 02:29 PM 1/21/2000 , James Love wrote: >My friend Mickey Davis has a patent that Transmeta may infringe. It >involves using slower CPU speeds to save battery life. > >Here is his email: > >"Davis, Mickey" > >-- >James Love, Consumer Project on Technology >P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org >Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org >Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 > > > >_______________________________________________ >Random-bits mailing list >Random-bits@lists.essential.org >http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/random-bits From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Jan 22 20:37:47 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7044C21B05 for ; Sat, 22 Jan 2000 20:37:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA29796 for ; Sat, 22 Jan 2000 20:37:47 -0500 Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2000 20:37:47 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Always on ISPs and Hacking This is a note from Ed Chaban, regarding the security problems faced by people who have always on cable internet connections. Jamie -------------------- From echaban@home.com Sat Jan 22 20:34:38 2000 Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2000 13:26:12 -0800 From: Ed Chaban To: love@cptech.org Subject: Internet Service Providers and Hacking James, I've been meaning to write to you on this issue for a while now. I'm one of the growing number of people with a "always-on" internet connection to my home. In my case I use cable modem service from @Home. I'm growing increasingly concerned about security issues surrounding having my personal computer attached to the internet all day long. I've installed some quasi "firewall" software on my machine and have noticed that I'm attacked an average of twice a day by hackers. Given the growing popularity of high speed internet service where home users are assigned permanet IP addresses, (this includes Cable Modem and DSL connections) I'm very disturbed by the fact that most of the companies providing the service do not provide even the most rudementary security protections found on most corporate networks. Most home users are unaware that their personal data on their home computers can be severely compromised when using DSL or Cable modem connections. As a computer professional of nearly 20 years, I'm aware of the risks and have protected myself from these hackers. Many consumers are now engaging in E-commerce, Electronic Banking and are using Financial Software such as Quicken or Microsoft Money. If they are not adequately protected from hackers who are routinely scanning the band of IP addresses set aside for Cable and DSL, they could be the victims of many financial frauds from the theft of their data. I was wondering if your organization has been addressing this issue? It seems to me that internet service providers could do a better job protecting their customers. Right now, it seems like chaos. Sincerely, Ed Chaban From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Jan 22 22:05:12 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38D7021B05 for ; Sat, 22 Jan 2000 22:05:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA30478 for ; Sat, 22 Jan 2000 22:05:12 -0500 Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2000 22:05:12 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Ted Bridis and Terry Jones on always on and hacking These are notes from Ted Bridis and Terry Jones on the always on issue. Jamie ------------------------ From tbridis@ap.org Sat Jan 22 22:03:45 2000 Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2000 21:26:43 -0500 From: Ted Bridis To: James Love Subject: Re: [Random-bits] Always on ISPs and Hacking Jamie, I've written about this problem before for the AP's national wire, and I will again. I've had a cable modem from @home in northern Virginia for about 5 months now, and I also highly recommend some type of firewall solution. I run a $29 software utility on the NT 4 Server that runs my in-home network. (One of the most interesting benefits is that it tells me -- since it monitors all inbound *and* outbound traffic -- when any of my software is surreptitiously "calling home" to the company's corporate servers, which happens suprisingly often, even with supposedly non-network-aware products, such as a graphics package). But I think it may be stretching things when Ed writes, "have noticed that I'm attacked an average of twice a day by hackers." He probably means his machine is randomly scanned for possible vulnerabilities that might be exposed, which is different, I think, than a deliberate "attack by hackers" that targets a specific IP (like a denial-of-service attack). While there isn't really any reason for a person to scan your computer's ports, I suspect Ed may be taking it a little personally (and, besides, there are benign reasons why you might be receiving what appear to be suspicious inbound packets. Anybody with a copy of PC Anywhere on your subnet, for example, will send out a signal to see if anyone else is running PC Anywhere). It's also incorrect to say that @home doesn't do anything to protect its customers. My understanding is that they do filter the SMB port, which means the problem of your neighbor's computer showing up in your Windows 9x "Network Neighborhood" doesn't happen (ie, you also can't map your neighbor's drives as though he were on your LAN). If you buy a house and decide not to lock your doors -- or decide against learning how to operate your home alarm system -- is it really the builder's fault when you're burglarized? I think user's should shoulder a little more personal responsibility to learn about the ramifications of some of their decisions (ie, enabling file & print sharing with one of these "always on" connections, or binding TCP/IP also to the NIC that runs your internal network traffic). Rgds, Ted Bridis, AP Washington <--------------------------------------------------------------> From terry@jones.tc Sat Jan 22 22:03:48 2000 Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 03:52:17 +0100 (CET) From: terry jones Reply-To: tc.jones@jones.tc To: James Love Subject: [Random-bits] Always on ISPs and Hacking The mail about always-on connections is a bit of a red herring. The always-on part really has nothing to do with the problem, it just makes those machines into more stable targets. The problem, which will receive more attention now that detection software is slowly making its way into the world of the PC, is that detection software hasn't formerly been widely available or recognized as being important. It's trivial for a cracker to scan for the IP addresses in use by an ISP. A machine at the other end of the line can be attacked regardless of whether it's always on or on for 5 minutes. That issue is almost orthogonal to the possibility of attack. It just makes the window of possibility longer for _that_ machine. Normal people generally don't realize that when they turn on their modem and make a PPP connection that they are really on the internet. On the other hand, people who've been using the internet for many years and administrating machines that are connected to it have long taken measures to watch for and correct problems. There is an enormous disparity: both types of machine are equally connected yet one type of user is (rightly) paranoid and acreful, while the other is totally oblivious. This disparity will be reduced, but only slowly and (necessarily) painfully... Regards, Terry. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Jan 23 08:20:46 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 575B721B05 for ; Sun, 23 Jan 2000 08:20:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA00516 for ; Sun, 23 Jan 2000 08:20:46 -0500 Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 08:20:46 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Ed Chaban's comments on cable security issue Here are two more comments from Ed Chaban, responding to comments on his first note regarding security and always on cable modem connections. The first is a reponse to Ted Bridis' note, and the second is a comment to Brian McWilliams, giving additional details on the nature of the security issues. Jamie From echaban@home.com Sun Jan 23 08:15:10 2000 Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 00:37:43 -0800 From: Ed Chaban To: James Love Subject: Re: [Random-bits] Always on ISPs and Hacking (fwd) Jamie, I'll have to disagree with Ted on a couple of points. First, as seemingly harmless as scans for vulnerabilities may appear to be, they constitute a hazard for many users. The "PC Anywhere" product Ted mentions has evil counterparts in the hacker's world known as "trojan horses" which can be unwittingly released on a system and will allow a hacker to have his way your data. Every time someone opens an E-mail with a Macro or some cute animated greeting card, they could infect their system with a trojan and be a target for such a scan. Second, Ted is obviously a sophisticated internet user with some background in the technology. Can we expect my mother-in-law to configure her own firewall? Hardly! Finally, while @Home provides the protection Ted mentioned, it is measly in comparison to the kind of protection provided at almost every corporate location in the world. His NT server with firewall is providing protection for all the PCs he has in his home. I don't think it unreasonable that a service provider do the same for it's customers. Cable Modem and DSL internet connectivity is being marketed to the home user. I plug my television set into a cable connection with no knowledge of the underlying technology and have no fear of security breaches. The same should go for my PC. -Ed Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2000 23:44:45 -0800 From: Ed Chaban To: Brian McWilliams Subject: Re: [Random-bits] Always on ISPs and Hacking Brian, In general, the attacks take the form of searches for openings in the "ports" of the internet protocol stack. A machine on the internet may be accessed through various services that listen to a specific set of ports. Some of these are well known to hackers. The range from login services to web services as well as services created by "trojan horse" programs. A Trojan Horse is a form of virus that listens on a specific IP port and waits for commands from the hacker to do any number of functions on the system. (The most notorious trojan horse for Windows systems is "Back Oriface") Trojans are easily introduced into a system via E-mail attachments that are executables or macros. Those "cute" animated greeting cards people send one another are famous for spreading such things. Virus protection software is of some use to fight these, but new viruses and trojans are always being developed. Virus detection software companies are always responding to the latest ones that come along. The problem is that by the time they respond with a tool to detect and eliminate the trojan, the damage may already be done. I do have file and print sharing turned off, but if there is a trojan horse program on my machine, a hacker could access any file he desires. I suggest the cable internet and DSL providers protect their customers as any desktop PC in Corporate America would be protected: with a Firewall. A Firewall, among other things, keeps outside systems from initiating a connection with a machine on the other side. All but a few ports could be blocked. I'd also suggest providers cooperate in tracking down offenders. The software I'm running on my PC tells me the IP address and a number of other pieces of information which can help identify the hacker. Currently, all complaints I make to my provider involve hackers on the same service as I. This is a very tiny percentage of the attacks I see. My provider will not help me report hackers to other providers. I must do so myself. A clearing house for exchanging information on hacking would make reporting a hacker and having them repremanded or even shut down even easier. I'd imagine that the FBI would love such a facility. That's about it. Does this make any sense? -Ed From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jan 24 12:33:57 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 523C121B02 for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2000 12:33:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA16981 for ; Mon, 24 Jan 2000 12:33:57 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <388C8CC5.1112A904@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 12:32:53 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] Lineo (was Caldera) and Windows CE-compatible product -- made in Seattle? ---------------- Subject: Lineo Ships Embedix Linux/Opens Development Office in Seattle Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 9:03:00 From: Lyle Ball Organization: Lineo, Inc To: love@cptech.org Jamie, Today, Lineo shipped our first packaged distribution of Lineo Embedix Linux 1.0 for x86 and PowerPC. Embedix Linux allows OEM developers to test and implement embedded Linux on their specific hardware solutions. We also announced plans to open a new development center in Seattle, Wash. This engineering center will be primarily responsible for developing another product we announced today, Lineo Embedix? PDA, a Windows CE®-compatible embedded Linux software solution. Embedix PDA will provide a Windows CE-compatible layer on top of Lineo Embedix Linux, allowing Windows CE applications to be easily ported to Lineo Embedix Linux. The complete releases are included in the text below. If you would like to talk to someone regarding these announcements, please contact me on my mobile, (801)-319-2173. If you would like to be removed from or have someone else added to this Lineo News e-mail distribution list, please notify me directly. Best Regards, Jennifer Finlinson Public Relations Manager Lineo, Inc. Tel: 801-426-5001 Mobile: 801-319-2173 Jennifer@lineo.com News Release #1 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE LINEO SHIPS EMBEDIX LINUX 1.0 LINDON, Utah - Jan 24, 1999 - Lineo?, Inc., the leading developer of embedded Linux® system software?, today began shipping Embedix? Linux 1.0, Lineo's embedded Linux distribution. Embedix Linux is engineered and re-configured specifically for embedded systems use. Embedix Linux allows OEM developers to test and implement embedded Linux on their specific hardware solutions. "The shipment of Embedix Linux signals the first major release of a Linux distribution targeted solely at embedded OEMs," said Bryan Sparks, CEO of Lineo, Inc. "OEMs are migrating to embedded Linux to take advantage of the advanced Internet protocols and lower cost of ownership inherent in Linux." This version of Embedix Linux, targeted at x86 and PowerPC? devices, includes more than 25 powerful Linux service components such as a very small Web server and support for network protocols, Web services and serial networking. Embedix Linux uses a minimum of 8MB RAM and 3MB of ROM or Flash memory. Embedix Linux is based on the Linux 2.2 kernel. E-mail-based technical support is available at embedix-support@lineo.com. Embedix Linux is the first release in Lineo's series of embedded Linux-based products which will soon be available, including Embedix SDK and Embedix Browser. Embedix SDK Embedix SDK 1.0, (software development kit) is scheduled for release in Q2. This product will include the features of Embedix Linux with lower minimum hardware requirements. It will also include additional embedded-specifi c Linux components, development tools and third-party applications - like VioSoft Arriba! for Embedix, an integrated development environment (IDE) suitable for developing embedded Linux kernel modules and user-space programs. Embedix SDK will also include Embedix Target Wizard, a graphical selection and configuration tool that allows OEMs to select from available embedded Linux components, identify interdependencies, and automate the configuration of embedded Linux for target OEM devices. -more- Embedix Target Wizard also allows OEM developers to store specific configurati ons of embedded solutions, facilitating identical reproduction and replication of the software for the embedded device. Embedix Browser Embedix Browser 1.0, also scheduled for release in Q2, is a compact, Linux-base d embedded Web browser that gives OEM developers an embedded Linux GUI and complete set of browser components for devices that interact with networks and the Internet. Pricing and Availability Embedix Linux is available immediately as a free, not-for-resale download from www.lineo.com. Embedix Linux 1.0 is also available in CD-ROM form for $29.99 from Lineo's Web store. Contact Lineo's embedded OEM sales team for royalty-based pricing for implementing Embedix Linux on embedded devices. Pricing for Embedix Linux, Embedix SDK, and Embedix Browser follows traditional OEM pricing models and scales according to volume, components licensed, custom development needs, support requirements and other factors. Please contact a Lineo OEM sales associate for a customized quote via e-mail at oemsales@lineo.com. Additional information on each of these products and other embedded Linux initiatives by Lineo can be accessed at www.lineo.com. About Lineo, Inc. Lineo?, Inc., the leading developer of embedded Linux® system software?, develops, markets and sells embedded Linux system software and applications that provide OEMs and consumers with simple, low-cost software for interacting with the Internet via embedded devices. Lineo owns the Embedix? product family including Embedix Linux, Embedix SDK and Embedix Browser. Lineo also owns DR DOS®, a component-based embedded OS, and other technologies designed to improve connectivity while reducing system requirements and per-unit costs. Visit Lineo, Inc. at www.lineo.com. For more information, contact Lineo, Inc. via e-mail: info@lineo.com or telephone: (801) 426-5001. # # # Lineo and Embedix are trademarks of Lineo, Inc. Linux is a registered trademark owned by Linus Torvalds. All other products, services, companies and publications are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. Press Only Contact: Jennifer Finlinson Public Relations Manager jennifer@lineo.com Tel: 801-426-5001 News Release #2 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE LINEO ANNOUNCES WINDOWS CE®-COMPATIBLE LINUX SOLUTION Lineo Establishes Development Center in Seattle LINDON, UTAH-Jan 24, 2000-Lineo?, Inc., the leading developer of embedded Linux® system software?, today announced Lineo Embedix? PDA, a Windows CE®-compatible embedded Linux software solution. Embedix PDA will provide a Windows CE-compatible layer on top of Lineo Embedix Linux, allowing Windows CE applications to be easily ported to Lineo Embedix Linux, a stable, compact and low-cost OS. Additionally, Lineo also announced a new development center in Seattle, Wash. Product Development of Embedix PDA will take place at this new site, scheduled to open March 2000. "Although Microsoft has not captured a majority position in the embedded market, it has encouraged a large number of companies to develop applications for the Windows CE platform," said Bryan Sparks, CEO of Lineo, Inc. "We believe that OEMs of Windows CE solutions will be enticed to migrate to Lineo Embedix Linux which we believe to be a more stable, lower cost embedded OS base for PDAs and other devices running Windows CE applications." "In talking to various customers about this strategy, we have been encouraged by the high level of interest in a product providing this functionality," Sparks added. Embedix PDA is a new addition to the Lineo Embedix product family. Lineo is dedicated to providing all the necessary layers of Linux to make adopting embedded Linux a viable option for developers. "We are very involved in the technology of Linux. Lineo is developing all the necessary tools and value-added layers needed to make embedded Linux attractive to device manufacturers," Sparks said. Embedix PDA is scheduled for release during Q1 2001. About Lineo, Inc. Lineo?, Inc. develops, markets and sells embedded Linux system software and applications that provide OEMs and consumers with simple, low-cost software for interacting with the Internet via embedded devices. Lineo owns the Embedix? product family including Embedix Linux, Embedix SDK and Embedix Browser. Lineo also owns DR DOS®, a component-based embedded OS, and other technologies designed to improve connectivity while reducing system requirements and per-unit costs. Visit Lineo, Inc. at www.lineo.com. For more information, contact Lineo, Inc. via e-mail: info@lineo.com or telephone: (801) 426-5001. ### Lineo and Embedix are trademarks of Lineo, Inc. and DR DOS is a register trademark of Lineo, Inc. Linux is a registered trademark owned by Linus Torvalds. All other products, services, companies and publications are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. Press Only, Contact: Jennifer Finlinson Public Relations Manager jennifer@lineo.com Tel: 801-426-5001 -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Jan 25 15:35:18 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C81C021AFF for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2000 15:35:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA09126 for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2000 15:35:18 -0500 Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 15:35:18 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Falwell Sues White House, FBI (fwd) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2000 11:38:41 -0800 From: James S. Tyre To: FOI-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU Subject: Falwell Sues White House, FBI I have no knowledge of whether there is any substance to this, but if there is, it may interest listmembers. http://www.callaw.com/stories/edt0125z.html LYNCHBURG, Va. -- The Rev. Jerry Falwell has sued the White House and the FBI for denying a request for information about him that he contends is kept in a ``secret'' Justice Department database about religious and anti-abortion leaders. The lawsuit, filed last week in U.S. District Court, contends the database is used to keep information intended for use in smear tactics. Falwell sought the information last summer under the Freedom of Information Act after being told of the alleged database by Judicial Watch, a conservative Washington group that said it learned of the material through an anonymous source. Falwell contends that keeping information about him in the database is a violation of the Privacy Act, which makes it illegal for the government to keep a file on a person without a lawful reason. .... -------------------------------------------------------------------- James S. Tyre mailto:j.s.tyre@cyberpass.net Bigelow, Moore & Tyre, LLP 626-792-6806/626-792-1402(fax) 540 South Marengo Avenue Pasadena, California 91101 Co-founder, The Censorware Project http://censorware.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Jan 26 03:05:04 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B733C21AFF; Wed, 26 Jan 2000 03:05:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-7.essential.org [216.0.125.7]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA18436; Wed, 26 Jan 2000 03:04:32 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <388EB226.226975BE@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 03:36:54 -0500 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Will Rodger: Activists charge DoubleClick double cross http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/cth211.htm Activists charge DoubleClick double cross Web users have lost privacy with the drop of a cookie, they say By Will Rodger, USATODAY.com Say goodbye to anonymity on the Web. -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Jan 26 16:06:33 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9982A21AFF for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2000 16:06:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA28661 for ; Wed, 26 Jan 2000 16:06:33 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <388F61B0.4541C7BC@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 16:05:52 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Brian McWilliams: Excite@Home to Offer Personal Firewalls http://www.internetnews.com/isp-news/article/0,1087,8_295621,00.html ISP News Excite@Home to Offer Personal Firewalls January 26, 2000 By Brian McWilliams InternetNews.com Correspondent ISP News Archives Responding to rising security concerns, Excite@Home will announce an agreement next week to provide personal firewall software to subscribers of its cable modem access service. @Home (ATHM) officials declined to provide specifics on the announcement. But Jay Rolls, vice president of network engineering, said the gesture was aimed at giving users peace of mind. [snip] -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jan 27 08:14:14 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7184321AFF; Thu, 27 Jan 2000 08:14:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA06202; Thu, 27 Jan 2000 08:14:14 -0500 Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 08:14:14 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Cc: am-info@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] David Wilson: PFF says break MS up http://www.mercurycenter.com/svtech/news/indepth/docs/ms012700.htm Conservative think tank urges Microsoft breakup BY DAVID L. WILSON Mercury News Washington Bureau WASHINGTON -- A Washington think tank best known for its conservative views has taken a look at Microsoft Corp.'s antitrust case and will today recommend in a report that the company be broken up. The presiding judge in the Microsoft trial found in November that the company held monopoly power in the market for personal computer operating systems and had used that power to stifle competition and harm consumers. If Microsoft is found next to have violated law, it will face court-mandated remedies later this year -- possibly a breakup plan. The Progress & Freedom Foundation, staffed largely by former members of the Reagan and Bush administrations, says the least disruptive way for the government to handle the problem of Microsoft's monopoly is to separate it into several companies allowed to sell Microsoft's proprietary Windows operating system, thereby creating competition in the market. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jan 28 00:59:58 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FF2921B30; Fri, 28 Jan 2000 00:59:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA22488; Fri, 28 Jan 2000 00:59:58 -0500 Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 00:59:58 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org, Ecommerce@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Jerry Gleeson: Kodak web trademark dispute This is a dispute over whether or not a Kodak investor and critic can use the name of Kodak in an Internet domain, with names such as: http://www.kodakinvestor.com, as well as: WWW.KODAKDEALER.COM WWW.KODAKSHAREHOLDER.COM WWW.KODAKEMPLOYEE.COM WWW.KODAKANALYST.COM WWW.KODAKDEALERS.COM WWW.KODAKSHAREHOLDERS.COM WWW.KODAKEMPLOYEES.COM WWW.KODAKANALYSTS.COM WWW.KODAKSTOCK.COM WWW.KODAKSTOCKHOLDER.COM --------------------------- GANNETT NEWS SERVICE, January 19, 2000 January 19, 2000, Wednesday, FINAL EDITION HEADLINE: Kodak sues Web site for infringement BYLINE: JERRY GLEESON; Westchester Journal News DATELINE: NEW CITY, N.Y. BODY: NEW CITY, N.Y.--Bruce Sirovich owns a photo lab and is fighting the sort of adversary that most people in his business would not want to antagonize: Eastman Kodak. The $ 20 billion corporation has hauled him into federal court, complaining that his use of the word "Kodak" in a series of Internet Web site addresses is infringing on its trademark. A jury trial could begin as early as March in U.S. District Court in Manhattan. Kodak is seeking unspecified damages and wants to put an end to Sirovich's use of the Web site addresses. He appears unrepentant. He accuses Kodak of trying to silence his withering criticism of the management and of certain company products he regards as inferior, an accusation the company denies. "I tilt at windmills," said Sirovich, 56. "I really believe what I'm doing is right." Issues of free speech and trademark infringement go back more than a century, but experts in the field say the evolving arena of the Internet makes it difficult to predict how this particular battle will turn out. Sirovich's interest in photography goes back to his boyhood days, working in the darkroom in the basement of his parents' home in Maryland. It led to his study of physics and ultimately to a doctorate in that subject; his thesis was on the arcane subject of particle diffusion in frozen neon gas. He founded Technilab Inc. in New City in 1983 at a time when one-hour photo processing was becoming popular. Ask him how business is and like many merchants he talks about the difficulty in finding staff (his grown daughter helps out behind the counter) and about nearby competition. Ask him about Kodak, and he peppers his conversation with obscenities. Sirovich alleges that Kodak chemicals have damaged his lab equipment and says the company's new film products are inferior to their predecessors. He said after hearing that Kodak chairman George Fisher sometimes answered his own telephone directly, he tried to call him at the company's headquarters in Rochester to share his views. He was transferred to a subordinate instead. Kodak spokesman Charles Smith said Kodak has procedures for replacing defective merchandise, but he was unfamiliar with the details of Sirovich's complaint. The company's newer films, he said, are superior to their predecessors. Sirovich, who said he grew up with Kodak products, said he now recommends other manufacturers to his customers. He owns stock in Kodak, he added, because he hopes that some day "somebody good" will take over management of the business. Last year Sirovich began posting his views -- lengthy pages of single-spaced type, with liberal use of boldface and capital letters -- on Internet Web sites that his teen-aged son helped design. The sites, nearly a dozen in all, had addresses Sirovich had registered that all featured the word "Kodak" in them (including www.kodakdealer.com and http://www.kodakinvestor.com/). Kodak filed its lawsuit against him in October. Company spokesman Paul Allen said Kodak has defended its 112-year-old trademark name in court before but this is the first time in the United States that the company is challenging its use in an Internet address. "If you fail to do so, you could lose your trademark," said Allen, who declined to discuss the lawsuit in detail. Sirovich "certainly has his right to free speech, but infringing our trademark is not something we can accept." Sirovich said he sees the issue in more personal terms. "I regard George Fisher as my employee," he said. "George Fisher regards me as something he wants to scrape off the bottom of his shoe. They're trying to shut me up." Sirovich's attorney, Jerold C. Rotbard, said there are some legal precedents that support his client. In 1998, a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit brought by Bally Total Fitness against a man who had set up a Web site that criticized the health club chain (the Web address included "Bally"). Judge Dean D. Pregerson held that the use of the trademark in the context of consumer commentary amounted to speech that is entitled to First Amendment protection. "The explosion of the Internet is not without its growing pains," Pregerson wrote. "It is an efficient means for business to disseminate information, but it also affords critics of those businesses an equally efficient means of disseminating critical commentary." A less favorable federal ruling, however, may play a larger role in Sirovich's case. Planned Parenthood Federation of America sued the operator of a Catholic radio program broadcast in Syracuse. In 1997, Planned Parenthood successfully obtained a court order barring the operator from using a Web address (http://www.plannedparenthood.com/) that contained anti-abortion messages. In her decision, U.S. District Judge Kimba Wood held in part that the operator was making commercial use of Planned Parenthood's trademark, since the Web site was promoting an anti-abortion book. Rotbard said that Wood is the same judge who is overseeing Kodak's current lawsuit. He said there is no commercial use of the Kodak name, that Sirovich is just expressing opinions. His Web sites are clearly labeled at the top of their pages as the property of Technilab and not affiliated with Kodak, Rotbard said. They even offer a "hot link" to Kodak's own commercial site for browsers seeking the company. "Do you see how many Star Trek Web sites there are? Thousands," he said. "What Bruce is doing is similar to that." The issue of commercial use will be an important one in the case, according to John Berryhill of Dann, Dorfman, Herrell and Skillman, a Philadelphia law firm specializing in trademark and copyright cases. "If you're making a lawful, non-commercial use, that will be counted in your favor in the mix," he said. "Intent is everything, and objective manifestation of intent is everything." From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jan 28 12:26:55 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4592B21B05; Fri, 28 Jan 2000 12:26:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA28662; Fri, 28 Jan 2000 12:26:55 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <3891D14A.FBF37AF1@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 12:26:34 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ecommerce , Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Gregory Aharonian: Worst business method claim of 2000 ------- Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 11:43:12 -0500 (EST) From: Gregory Aharonian To: patent-news@world.std.com Subject: PATNEWS: Worst business method claim of 2000 !20000128 Worst business method claim of 2000 We haven't even left January, and I already I have a good candidate for the worst business method claim of 2000, bad enough I will probably use it in my talk next week. Here it is (citing only one non-patent prior art item, an SEC regulation): 6014643 Interactive securities trading system Filed: Aug. 26, 1996 What is claimed is: 1. A method for trading securities between individuals, comprising: entering an offer of a first individual to trade a security on a first data processing system; transmitting the offer to additional data processing systems, including a second data processing system, over a public communication network; entering a reply of a second individual on the second data processing system, wherein the reply is in response to the offer; executing a trade of the security based on information contained in the offer for consideration specified in the reply to the offer, whereby the security is traded efficiently between the first individual and the second individual; transmitting to the second data processing system additional offers to trade in the security formed by additional individuals; ranking the offer formed by the first individual and the additional offers formed by the additional individuals according first to a price value, then secondly, according to a quantity value; and displaying the offer formed by the first individual and the additional offers by the additional individuals according to the ranking step on a graphical user interface on the second data processing system. That's right, a securities trading system where incoming bids are ranked by price and volume. Assuming that is not utterly unnovel, it has to be utterly obvious, in light of what has gone on in a certain city in this country from the last thirty years. Where are the citations from all of the financial journals that have reported on trading systems technologies from the last thirty years? Where are the citations from all of the product literature from companies that have been selling trading system technology? A suggestion to PTO management. Across the river from PTO facilities is a big pretty building called the Amtrak train station. If you go there, and get on one of the big shiny trains and head north, three hours later you will arrive in a city, which if you walk about 40 blocks south come to a magical, mystical place called, ..................... WALL STREET. It is pathetically searched business method patents like this that are troublingly Wall Street and the Fortune 500. Activities they have been doing for decades being allowed as patents. And it is going to get worse because despite PTO management announcements of new initiatives to solve this problem, they will achieve little because a) they refuse to examine why prior initiatives have failed, b) they refuse to implement any serious quality control before and after the introduction of new initiatives, and c) and they don't understand the logistics of supplying large numbers of examiners for large numbers of patent applications with even small amounts of non-patent prior art. In short, they ignore standard business practices for achieving process improvement, because to use such practices could lead to improvements that jeopardize the quantity-versus-quality goals that please their "customers". Greg Aharonian Internet Patent News Service -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jan 28 16:02:41 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1834721B0E for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2000 16:02:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA00027 for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2000 16:02:40 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <389203DD.4A73BA37@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 16:02:21 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Steven Vonder Haar: AOL Still Not Taking Messages? David Cassel send me this: http://www.zdnet.com/intweek/stories/news/0,4164,2429074,00.html Steven Vonder Haar, AOL Still Not Taking Messages? January 28, 2000 "The implication is that AOL - in the case of instant messaging - is a benevolent monopolist: It only blocks companies it perceives to be a strategic threat, said Bill Kirkner, chief technical officer at Prodigy. He did not expect AOL's inaction in the case of NovaWiz to signal a new era of open instant messaging standards. "I don't see the evil empire changing policy on this anytime soon," Kirkner said. -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jan 28 16:51:50 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6091921B05 for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2000 16:51:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA01002 for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2000 16:51:50 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38920F63.D6F9CC69@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 16:51:31 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] Ted Bridis's earlier story on AOL software sabotaging rival ISPs. Apparently Prodigy's Kirkner was also quoted by Ted Bridis last week in his story about AOL software sabotaging rival ISPs. Date: Fri Jan 21 08:01:17 2000 WASHINGTON TODAY: Critics say new AOL software interferes with rivals By TED BRIDIS= Associated Press Writer= ¶ WASHINGTON (AP) _ The latest software from America Online Inc., the world's largest Internet provider, can prevent customers from using rival online services or corporate connections, enraging smaller competitors and even some of AOL's own subscribers. ¶ Critics contend that version 5.0 of America Online's Internet software _ which a national technology magazine this week suggested was "the upgrade of death" _ sometimes cripples existing Internet accounts with rival companies and prevents current AOL users from signing for service with competitors. ¶ "You're faced with a company that knew its software would blow up the ability of its competitors," charged Bill Kirkner, chief technology officer for Prodigy Communications Corp., an AOL competitor that has roughly 2.2 million subscribers. "We can get our customers through it if they call, but the solutions are sometimes a bit nasty to go through." These include deleting and reinstalling software, and sometimes tinkering with arcane technical settings. ¶ America Online, with 20 million subscribers, said complaints about interference by its latest software are overblown and the result of customers not understanding that if they click yes during installation to allow AOL to become their default Internet browser, AOL largely takes over all the online functions on the computer. ¶ "If a member picks yes, we make their lives simple," said Jeff Kimball, AOL's executive director for its client software. That means AOL seizes responsibility to display all Web pages, send all e-mail and exclusively perform other tasks online. ¶ But rivals and some AOL customers complain that the selection, made with a single click of a mouse with no added explanation, also can suddenly interfere with connections to rival Internet services or business accounts. ¶ "It wipes out their previous settings, and the customer becomes an AOL customer," said Kirsten Witt, a spokeswoman for Mindspring Enterprises Inc., with 1.3 million subscribers. "In effect it allows the customer only to access AOL." ¶ Peg Graham of New York installed AOL's latest software on her laptop weeks after its initial release in October with disastrous results: Her computer crashed. In vain, her laptop manufacturer urged her to reinstall her entire Windows operating system _ she did three times _ before she finally paid a local repair shop $145 to fix it. ¶ Afterward, she returned to an earlier version of AOL's software she considers less risky. She suspects the new program suffered conflicts with the laptop's network hardware she used to connect at her university. ¶ "There's no person to hold accountable," fumed Graham, who's now shopping for a new Internet service. "They just say, yes, we know there might be problems. It's almost like brushing you off." ¶ The complexity of modern software can lend itself to problems that are hard to diagnose and make it even harder to lay blame. Rival Internet providers won't say exactly how many customers have reported problems, and no one admits even to calling AOL formally to complain about its software's alleged behavior. ¶ AOL spokeswoman Anne Bentley reported "very minimal calls about this," and many AOL customers said they installed the latest software without hassle. ¶ But AOL's own message boards, with thousands of complaints since Christmas, suggest these problems are more than fantasy concocted by disgruntled rivals. And this week, Windows Magazine's Web site asked, "AOL 5.0: The Upgrade of Death?" ¶ The magazine's technical testing showed AOL's software installed redundant files that threatened a computer's stability. The software crashed the first time it ran. "AOL can reduce a perfectly good computer system to a paperweight," the magazine concluded. ¶ Software problems like these also can take on enormous implications when a company becomes as dominant as AOL, which last week announced its $145 billion mega-merger with Time Warner Inc. That's a deal that will allow AOL to distribute this new software with Time Warner products, including its magazines, which draw 120 million readers. So far, about 8 million of AOL's 20 million customers have installed the new software. [snip] -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jan 28 22:30:04 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24E9B21B05 for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2000 22:30:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA04610 for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2000 22:30:03 -0500 Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 22:30:03 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Exchange with Dr. Novotny on WHO AIDS resolution The following is part of an exchange between myself and Dr. Thomas Novotny of DHHS, on the US government's role in modifying a WHO resolution on HIV/AIDS this week in Geneva. CPT was critical of the US government's efforts to remove the section of the resolution that addressed intellectual property rights. Here is the url for a communication by Dr. Novotny, a DHHS official who was head of the US delegation at the Geneva meeting of the WHO Executive Board, and my response. Jamie Dr. Novonty's comment was here: http://lists.essential.org/pipermail/pharm-policy/2000q1/000079.html My response is here: http://lists.essential.org/pipermail/pharm-policy/2000q1/000082.html From James Love To: ip-health , TNovotny@osophs.dhhs.gov Date: Thu, 27, Jan 2000 I appreciate Dr. Thomas Novotny's willingness to provide information about the US government's positions at the WHO Executive Board (EB) meetings in Geneva this week, and welcome a continued dialogue on these matters, so that US policy is truly transparent. One can draw different conclusions as to how and why US policy evolved as it did over the past week in Geneva and at USTR, and I will not address these issues in detail in this note. I remain somewhat puzzled over the US government (USG) policy with respect to the WHO and trade policy, including trade policy as it relates to intellectual property rights on pharmaceuticals. I would appreciate a clarification from Dr. Novotny on a few points. And since Dr. Novotny is concerned about the US government position being misrepresented, I would encourage him to respond directly, once again. Several persons in Geneva have reported that Dr. Novotny expressed opposition to the WHO playing a role in policy making on intellectual property right (IPR) issues, and Dr. Novotny acknowledges that the USG did ask that the EB remove the following language from the original EB AIDS resolution: The Executive Board . . . REQUESTS the Director-General: 7) on their request, to advise governments on their options under the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) to increase their capacity to negotiate for more affordable HIV/AIDS-related drugs; According to Dr. Novotny, "we [the USG] opposed this because it went beyond what was agreed to in the Revised Drug Strategy." I would point out that "going beyond" the RDS isn't bad, from our point of view, and in any case, it is a stretch to say this is "going beyond." It looks to me like an effort to implement the RDS, and to give some plain language support for WHO doing something useful on IPR issues. In any event, the language Dr. Novotny did not like was later replaced, by the EB, which this language: To cooperate with governments at their request and other international organizations regarding possible options under relevant international agreements, including trade agreements to improve access to HIV/AIDS-related drugs; Dr. Novotny says: "We believe this covers WHO responsibilities and opportunities to work with WTO and WIPO on trade agreements to improve access to drugs (just as USDHHS now cooperates with USTR to insure the flexibility of US Trade Policy in health crises)." Which is true, but it is certainly less specific with regarding the IPR than was the language it replaced. I had predicted earlier and Dr. Novotny points out now, language was added to make reference to the RDS. However, again the words intellectual property rights don't appear in the AIDS resolution. The new "sanitized" version of the AIDS resolution doesn't mention patents or intellectual property rights anywhere anymore, as if this isn't a matter of controversy the should be addressed by the WHO. Dr. Novotny's interventions as to how WIPO and the WTO should be the lead players on this issue, and his efforts to remove reference to intellectual property rights from the document, have given us a new more industry friendly resolution. Dr. Novotny also takes credit for inserting more of the familiar "industry partnership" language into the resolution, specifically on the issue of pricing problems. So, while Vice President Gore on the campaign trail is concerned about price gouging by the drug companies, WHO is to told to "reinforce, promote, and explore partnerships" with the drug companies, to make drugs more affordable. Addressing a red herring, Dr. Novotny says "what it [the AIDS resolution] does not do, and we feel strongly that it must not do, is refer solely to price as the answer to accessibility." To drive the point home and make it personal, Dr. Novotny says: "Again, we worked hard not to let only the price issue drive accessibility concerns. To limit accessibility concerns only to price would be terribly mistaken. Your position on this is far too narrow. Price reduction is only one tool to improve access. Drugs could be free and still not be effective without effective health care systems. In fact, they would rapidly become ineffective." Now I don't recall ever saying that accessibility concerns are limited to issues of price, and I don't know any serious people who would say this. Perhaps Dr. Novotny will issue a similar statement lambasting those who advocate investments infrastructuring saying: "Again, we worked hard not to let only the infrastructure issue drive accessibility concerns. To limit accessibility concerns only to infrastructure would be terribly mistaken. Your position on this is far too narrow. Infrastructure investment is only one tool to improve access. The infrastructure could be world class, and if drugs were unaffordable, people would still die." Of course, it would be a taboo for a public health official to issue such a statement, because it would undermine funding for health care infrastructure, which we all agree is important. And more importantly, it should be obvious to most people that both issues (and many others) are important. Of course, intellectual property issues are more controversial than spending on public health professionals. This is because the drug companies care about this issue a lot. Dr. Novotny then says: Finally, you must now realize the dialogue that continues between DHHS and USTR is already showing results. Today, USTR released a paper in which they stated, "If the Thai government determines that issuing a compulsory license is required to address its health care crisis, the United States will raise no objection, provided the compulsory license is issued in a manner fully consistent with the WTO Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Rigths (TRIPS)." Now, with all due respect to Dr. Novotny, I find it amazing that he would pick this example, because as far as I know (and I know a lot on this one), DHHS had nothing to do with the USTR/Thailand letter. The NGO lobbying on this issue could not have been more intense, and no one was talking with (or about) DHHS at all. I wouldn't mind Dr. Novotny claiming credit for future Act UP!, MSF, CPT campaign efforts, if he plays a role of some type, and we look forward to the day when he does. Here are questions for Dr. Novotny: 1. Will the US government support or oppose WHO playing an active and indeed a pro-active role providing poor countries with information on IPR disputes as they related to trade policy and public health? 2. Would you oppose or not oppose the publication of a paper by the WHO that would call for "fast track" compulsory licensing of essential medicines in poor countries? 3. Will DHHS intervene with USTR on the dispute over the Dominican Republic's proposed patent law, which includes fast track compulsory licensing? 4. Will you support or oppose our request that the USTR provide a communication to the WTO on the issue of patent exceptions (under Article 30) for production for export? (Needed for poor countries to benefit from compulsory licensing.) PUBLIC CONSULTATION I would also like to comment on consultation with the public. When Dr. Novotny met with about a dozen HIV/AIDS, public health and consumer groups on January 12, to discuss trade policy as it relates to IPR and pharmacueticals, he never mentioned that the USG had a problem with the December 22, 1999 draft of the WHO AIDS resolution. None of the many groups that I work with was given a heads up that the US would ask that the language on intellectual property rights be removed. I think it should be clear that it is possible to consult with interested parties in advance, and it should be obvious who the interested parties are. As Dr. Novotny notes, the USG solicited input from pharmaceutical companies. My advice is pick upon the phone and raise these issues before, to see how it is going to be received by consumer interests and public health groups (including ones not funded by drug companies). Final comments We are facing a big crisis in access to medicines, and the issues will become even more explosive with the next generation of medicines, which should include products that will be better for use in developing countries. (For example, from a compliance point of view, or products that actually cure conditions). We want our government, the USG, to be strong for the poor. We want the USG to say things in international forums that make us proud. For decades, the USG has been strong for the rich and powerful. In the WHO, the USG has a well deserved reputation for being very strong for the drug companies. We want to see a change. The drug companies have plenty of power already. They don't need our government to act as their guardian angel or global apologist. There are many good points you can make for the drug companies. You can repeat the IFPMA talking points endlessly, including the ones that even we would agree with. You can talk about the virtues of protecting intellectual property, the need to develop new medicines, and you can explain how it isn't all their fault. And even after you remove all the exaggeration and eliminate patently false claims, they will still have some good points. We recognize this as well as anyone. And by repeating these points endlessly, you will make them even stronger. But there are another set of talking points that are not on the IFPMA web page. The IFPMA doesn't point out that compulsory licensing is part of the TRIPS, or that it permits governments rather than companies to determine how much money the poor should pay for patents. The IFPMA has its favorite parts of the TRIPS, but it leaves out the parts that give rights to the poor. The IFPMA doesn't provide accurate information about the costs of drug development or the role of taxpayer supported research in the development of essential medicines. The IFPMA doesn't discuss the high pricing of government funded pharmacuetical inventions. The IFPMA doesn't talk about the pricing of fluconazole, and how this medication can help AIDS patients right now, for a tiny fraction of the Pfizer price. The IFPMA doesn't talk about how the industry uses the legal system to block the introduction of generic drugs, or how costly and difficult it is for poor countries to litigate against the best law firms in world. The IFPMA doesn't talk about how it can get patents in developing countries that would not pass the examination process in the USA. The IFPMA doesn't talk about the importance of domestic industries in providing generic competition. The IFPMA doesn't talk about abuses of the US orphan drug marketing exclusivity, the abuses of health registration data exclusivity, or the countless other regulatory barriers they lobby for. There are lots of things the IFPMA doesn't talk about. So by using your position to advance the IFPMA agenda, you leave out other agendas, and other talking points. The world for the poor is the same world for the rich, but it is perceived differently. Try to see things from the point of view of the poor. Make the poor more powerful. This is what we are asking. Jamie Love -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Jan 29 15:15:23 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DD5B21B05 for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2000 15:15:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA10938; Sat, 29 Jan 2000 15:15:21 -0500 Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2000 15:15:21 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: tacd-ecommerce , random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Steve Metalitz's meeting with ICANN Executives Steve Metalitz is a lobbyist for intellectual property owners. This is a report that he wrote about his January 27, 2000 meeting with ICANN executives. I believe he wrote this for the "Intellectual Property Constituency," or IPC, that representss "Trademark, Intellectual Property and Anti-Counterfeiting Interests" and ICANN. (I can't keep up with all this, but there is some background on the IPC here: http://www.icann.org/minutes/exhibita.htm#4) Interestingly, Metalitz write: ICANN is initiating a 'comprehensive compliance review program' to make sure that accredited registrars . . . are fulfilling th obligations they assumed in their accreditation agreements. The goal is to mak such compliance policing a "core competence" of ICANN. . . . I intervened in strong support of the need for ICANN to ensure that accredited registrars are in compliance with their obligations, particularly regarding WHOIS. The WHOIS issuse is the first step in IP owners using ICANN to impose polices that make it easier to identify alleged violations of intellectual property. Here is his report, which mostly deals with ICANN voting issues. Jamie >From: Steve Metalitz >To: Mike Kirk , Rodrigo Albagli , > Marylee Jenkins , > Hayden Gregory > , > Lee Schroeder , > Jonathan Hudis , Joan McGivern >, > Sam Mosenkis , > Andrew Collins > , > "Alberto Berton Moreno, Jr." , > Felipe Claro , jms@olivares.com.mx, > Nisha Tyree > , nicholas.wood@netsearchers.net, > Ian Jay Kaufman > , > Stuart Rosen , Mike Remington > , > Bob Kruger , Don Medley , > Antonio Mille , M C Ralph , > Wenquan Yang , > Cristina Guerra > , > eric.fingerhut@shawpittman.com, Steven Wadyka , > Mikki Barry , > Dan Steinberg , > Morris John > , > Philip Sheppard , > David Tatham , Roland Louski , > Angela Mills , > Emma Ascroft > , > Jonathan Cohen > , > Victoria Carrington > , > John Orange , > "Dipl.-Ing. Helmut Sonn" , > Angela Babineck > , > Isabelle Roudard , > "Dr. Nils Bortloff" , > Steve Metalitz > , > Kevin Thompson , > Michael Heltzer , > Susan Anthony > , > Caroline Chicoine , > Michael Erdle , Luise Czernenko Reid , > Lindsay Casey , Tod Cohen , > Ted Shapiro > , > Elissa Hecker , > Herbert Schwartz , > John Delehanty , eprager@darbylaw.com, > Jose de Pierola , > Sarah Deutsch , > Jonathan Whitehead > , > Mike Flynn , Dan Duncan > , > Keith Kupferschmid , admin@tmpdf.org.uk, > Julio Enrique Zaldivar , > June Besek , lcristal@fishneave.com, > stafford_guest@yahoo.com, Howard Hill , > matthooker@hotmail.com, parksy@oomph.net, > Helene Ramonatxo > , attyross@aol.com, > Martin Schwimmer > , > Russ Smith , Jason Vogel > , > Vincenzo Pedrazzini , > Guillermo Carey >Subject: RE: Report on meeting with ICANN Executives 1/27/00 >Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2000 14:04:18 -0500 > > >TO: IPC Participants >FM: Steve Metalitz, Executive Vice President >RE: Report on meeting with ICANN executives, 1/27/00 > >DT: 1/29/00 > > Last Thursday, January 27, I attended an informal meeting in >Washington with Mike Roberts, interim CEO of ICANN; Louis Touton, General >Counsel of ICANN; and Andrew McLaughlin, CFO of ICANN. This is a brief >report to Mike Kirk, who was unable to attend, and to the other participants >in the IPC. > > The ICANN executives identified four main issues "on the docket" for >the Cairo meetings in March: (1) at-large ICANN membership and the >elections for at-large members of the ICANN Board; (2) new gTLD's and the >associated issue of protection for famous marks; (3) coordination with >ccTLD's and regional Internet address registries; and (4) budget. Most of >the discussion focused on the first issue. > >As you may know, ICANN is currently proceeding to sign up individual >members, who will choose an At-Large Council, which will select nine new >Board members by September 30, 2000. The membership sign-up process is >currently in "alpha testing" and could go "live" as soon as February 11. >ICANN has also received a grant from the Markle Foundation to enable several >public interest groups to evaluate this process and make recommendations for >improvements in it. Representatives of several of the groups participating >in the Markle-funded review also attended last Thursday's meeting. > >There is clearly a lot of unhappiness about the procedures now underway and >about the tight deadline for electing new Board members (which derives from >the agreement under which the U.S. government is devolving its Internet >management functions to ICANN). Among other things, it will be almost >impossible for the Markle-funded review to have any impact on the process, >given the deadlines involved. There are also concerns about whether the >at-large election process could easily be "captured" by a single company or >country that would encourage its employees (or citizens) to sign up in >massive numbers in order to influence the election. Obviously, the >seriousness of these questions also depends to a great extent on how broad >or narrow ICANN's mandate is perceived to be. > >As a result of Thursday's meeting, there is likely to be an effort to >persuade the ICANN Board to slow down the at-large membership and election >process. I got the impression that if ICANN asks for more time, the U.S. >government will probably agree to relax the deadlines (Becky Burr of the >U.S. Department of Commerce attended most of the meeting). Such a move >would also require amendments to the ICANN by-laws. The ICANN Board meets >by conference call February 10, and then again at Cairo a month later, and >could take action on this issue. > >[[Stepping aside from my report on the meeting, I think it would be in the >best interests of IPC members to become better informed on this issue. I >suggest that a brief time be set aside at our Washington meeting for >discussion of this question. I will be glad to work with Mike Kirk and >other interested parties to arrange presentations by some knowledgeable >people. I am not suggesting that IPC necessarily take any formal position on >at-large elections or membership, but this process, which will culminate in >the election of half of the ICANN Board, clearly will have an impact on our >interests in ICANN.]] > >Virtually nothing was said on Thursday about item (2), except that there >would be a "study session" in Cairo to let the Board learn more about the >issues and contending viewpoints concerning new gTLDs and famous marks. >Similarly, I learned little about item (3), other than that there are >"ongoing discussions" with the ccTLDs which were described as "fairly >productive." On item (4), it was indicated that ICANN will seek a USD 4 >million budget for its fiscal year, and is expecting to double its staff to >14 people over the next several months. Over one-third of this budget is >expected to come from ccTLDs, which so far have not agreed to any formula >for allocation of this sum. > >One other issue of concern to the IPC was discussed. ICANN is initiating a >"comprehensive compliance review program" to make sure that accredited >registrars (now 98, of which 24 are fully operational) are fulfilling the >obligations they assumed in their accreditation agreements. The goal is to >make such compliance policing a "core competence" of ICANN. It is not clear >what this program entails in to the short term, other than that one of the >new ICANN hires (probably an attorney) will have this as his/her main >function. I intervened in strong support of the need for ICANN to ensure >that accredited registrars are in compliance with their obligations, >particularly regarding WHOIS. > >Please let me know if you have questions about this report. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Jan 29 14:51:14 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 732FB21B05 for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2000 14:51:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-10.essential.org [216.0.125.10]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA10711; Sat, 29 Jan 2000 14:51:12 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38934C66.B47EA59F@cptech.org> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2000 15:24:06 -0500 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Dan Morgan: Think Tanks: Corporations' Quiet Weapon Nice piece of reporting on corporate use of DC "think tanks" to lobby, focusing on Citizens for Sound Economy (CSE). Includes a brief mention about Microsoft, plus lots of others. Jamie http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46598-2000Jan28.html Think Tanks: Corporations' Quiet Weapon By Dan Morgan Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, January 29, 2000; Page A1 Derailing a multibillion-dollar federal plan to restore the Florida Everglades is just the kind of cause that suits Citizens for a Sound Economy, a conservative think tank that fights for smaller government. But soon after the group took on the Everglades project in 1998, the Washington-based nonprofit got an incentive that went beyond the purely philosophical. It received $700,000 in contributions from Florida's three biggest sugar enterprises, which stand to lose thousands of acres of cane-growing land to reclamation if the Army Corps of Engineers plan goes into effect. The sugar contributions were never disclosed publicly but were outlined in internal CSE documents that detail how various corporate interests donated millions to the group to bankroll its efforts on issues of direct interest to them, from global warming to Florida tort reform.

Along with those earmarked contributions, from companies such as Exxon Corp. and Hertz Corp., the organization received more than $1 million from Philip Morris Cos. at a time when CSE was opposing cigarette taxes. Phone company US West Inc. gave $1 million as CSE pushed deregulation that would let US West offer long-distance service. The documents, obtained by The Washington Post, provide a rare look at think tanks' often hidden role as a weapon in the modern corporate political arsenal. The groups provide analyses, TV advertising, polling and academic studies that add an air of authority to corporate arguments--in many cases while maintaining the corporate donors' anonymity.

"Corporations have discovered that funding of research, publications, media campaigns and other forms of advocacy on policy issues can serve as an adjunct to traditional corporate lobbying and political contributions," said James Allen Smith, author of a book about think tanks. Others use harsher terms. "It's part of a rent-a-mouthpiece phenomenon," said Gary Ruskin of the Congressional Accountability Project. "There are mercenary groups that function as surrogates when industry feels it's not advantageous for it to speak directly." [snip] Several months after Microsoft Corp. committed $380,000 to CSE's tax-exempt foundation last May, CSE officials lobbied in Congress to limit the Justice Department's budget for antitrust enforcement. CSE officials say their opposition to Justice's antitrust suit against Microsoft long predated the company's contribution. [snip] -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Jan 29 22:12:06 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E1C821B05 for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2000 22:12:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA14506 for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2000 22:12:05 -0500 Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2000 22:12:05 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] MS's ads touting Office 2k anti-piracy features From kaner@kaner.com Sat Jan 29 22:10:31 2000 Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2000 12:46:48 -0800 From: Cem Kaner To: James Love Subject: microsoft [snip] I'm at the Boise Airport. There's a big poster/billboard from Microsoft that says: OFFICE 2000 is here So are three new anti-piracy features. www.microsoft.com/pacwest Be sure it's legal. I am in and out of the Boise Airport frequently. This is the only Microsoft billboard that I have noticed. This billboard has been here for several months. I can't imagine more stunning evidence of a monopoly position. If Microsoft had to worry about competition, they wouldn't dare post -- as their primary or maybe only publicity piece -- something that seems to reflect strong mistrust of their customer base. And with advertising like this, no one would buy it if there was an alternative. -- Cem Kaner ======================== _______________________________________________________________________ Cem Kaner, J.D., Ph.D. P.O. Box 1200, Santa Clara, CA 95052 http://www.kaner.com http://www.badsoftware.com Author (with Falk & Nguyen) of TESTING COMPUTER SOFTWARE (2nd Ed, VNR) Author (with David Pels) of BAD SOFTWARE (Wiley, 1998) This e-mail communication should not be interpreted as legal advice or a legal opinion. The transmission of this e-mail communication does not create an attorney-client relationship between me and you. Do not act or rely upon law-related information in this communication without seeking the advice of an attorney. Finally, nothing in this message should be interpreted as a "digital signature" or "electronic signature" that can create binding commercial transactions. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jan 31 09:21:36 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFE6021B02 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 09:21:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA30044 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 09:21:35 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38959A79.D8F1B098@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 09:21:45 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Number of fast residential internet Connections The following is a response to the question "Does anyone know the number of fast residential internet Connections?" Jamie --------------------------- Subject: numbers Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 06:33:07 -0600 From: Michael Gawdun To: In last week's InfoWorld column, Bob Metcalfe has provided the following information from an International Data Corp survey: In 1999 there were: 102 million homes in the US 36 million of US households were online 1.34 million were on cable modems 330,000 were using DSL 4.5 million of 7.67 million companies were online - 150,000 were on cable modems - 150,000 were on DSL By 2003, IDC predicts there will be 65 million households online 9 million cable modem users 9 million DSL users ______________________________________________ Michael Gawdun USAA - Applied Research, D-1-W 9800 Fredericksburg Road San Antonio TX 78288 210 456 2158 603 806 5510 fax Hours: Mon-Thurs (6 a.m. - 4 p.m. Central Time) From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jan 31 10:16:13 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5298D21B02 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 10:16:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA30903; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 10:16:13 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <3895A746.3DA3BA49@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 10:16:22 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] UK dispute over cybersquatting http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/scotland/newsid_619000/619312.stm Wednesday, 26 January, 2000, 13:53 GMT Firm accused of net name piracy A company has been accused of piracy after bulk buying the internet names of thousands of British villages. Webhound Ltd spent Ł75,000 in purchasing the valuable 'co.uk' versions of 15,000 village names. The company paid Ł5 for each name from the UK licensing authority Nominet and has now offered to sell them back to village groups at a minimum cost of Ł500 each with an expected profit of Ł7.5m. [snip] -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jan 31 10:25:21 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FB3921B02; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 10:25:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA31067; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 10:25:21 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <3895A96B.EA75FA9B@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 10:25:31 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , Multiple recipients of list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Nader and Love in Dallas Morning News: Should Microsoft be broken up? Yes http://dallasnews.com/sun_reader/23186_YES.html Should Microsoft be broken up? Yes Microsoft tried to stifle competition 01/28/2000 By Ralph Nader and Jamie Love / Special Contributors to The Dallas Morning News There are a lot of good reasons for the government to break Microsoft up into separate companies. [snip] -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jan 31 11:14:02 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22BC721B02 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 11:14:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA32036 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 11:14:02 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <3895B4D4.BA0873C3@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 11:14:12 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] URLs for Random-bits Archives From time to time I get a request for articles from the archives of random-bits. This is the URL for archives beginning 1999, Q4: http://lists.essential.org/pipermail/random-bits/ This is the ULR for archives of older postings: http://lists.essential.org/random-bits/ -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jan 31 11:19:02 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E19BE21B1A for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 11:19:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA32192 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 11:19:01 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <3895B600.679741AB@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 11:19:12 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Cameron Crouch on Yankee Broadband projections Thanks to Andy Schwartzman for this pointer: http://www.pcworld.com/pcwtoday/article/0,1510,15035,00.html Broadband Is Coming at High Speed The Yankee Group reports that the battle between cable and DSL will make for high-speed growth in broadband. by Cameron Crouch, PC World January 28, 2000, 4:13 p.m. PT You and your neighbors could have high-speed Internet access sooner than you might think. The U.S. market for residential high-speed Internet services will grow to 3.3 million subscribers this year, and reach 16.6 million subscribers in 2004, according to a report released today by the Yankee Group. The study, "Cable Modems and DSL: High-Speed Growth for High-Speed Access," cites cable industry consolidation and competition from local phone companies as driving the expected growth in broadband. The installed base of residential high-speed Internet access for 1999 was 1.4 million, with nearly 80 percent of those homes using cable modems, the study found. By the end of this year, 41 percent of U.S. households will have access to cable modem service but only 24 percent will have access to digital subscriber line. Consolidation among cable operators will eliminate some of the cost barriers for small operators to upgrade to two-way cable modem-capable infrastructures, causing cable modem deployment to grow, suggests Bruce Leichtman, director of Yankee Group's Media & Entertainment Strategies practice, in a release announcing the report. But as local telephone carriers make competing DSL service widely available at better prices, the report predicts that cable's share of the residential broadband market will shrink to 42 percent by the end of 2004. [snip] -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jan 31 11:28:21 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 647AA21B02 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 11:28:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA32429 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 11:28:21 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <3895B82F.8FBBB393@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 11:28:31 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] James Grimaldi in WP: Top Lawyers to AID Microsoft Congratulations to James Grimaldi for his new job at the Washington Post. Jamie http://washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/business/feed/a52590-2000jan31.htm Top Lawyers to Aid Microsoft By James V. Grimaldi, Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, January 31, 2000; Page A04 Two former attorneys general and two former White House lawyers are part of a high-powered team recruited by a group with close ties to Microsoft Corp. to take the software giant's side in its antitrust battle with the federal government. The Association for Competitive Technology, a trade group backed by Microsoft, has hired the Washington law firm Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering and recruited prominent lawyers to join in a friend-of-the-court brief arguing that Microsoft did not break federal antitrust laws, said Jonathan Zuck, the group's president. [snip] "We take the facts as the judge found them and on that basis will show that Microsoft hasn't violated the antitrust laws and has in fact engaged in the kind of vigorous and aggressive competition that the antitrust laws encourage," Wilmer, Cutler attorney Michael Burack said. The brief will be signed by Lloyd Cutler and C. Boyden Gray, partners of the firm and both former White House counsels. Cutler served Presidents Clinton and Jimmy Carter. Gray worked in the Bush administration. Also to sign briefs are Louis Cohen, a deputy solicitor general for President Ronald Reagan; Griffin Bell, U.S. attorney general under Carter; Nicholas Katzenbach, U.S. attorney general under President Lyndon Johnson and the International Business Machines Corp. attorney who fought the federal government's unsuccessful antitrust lawsuit; and Howard Trienens, an AT&T Corp. attorney during the breakup of the Bell System in an antitrust suit settlement with the Justice Department. [snip] Katzenbach worked with David Boies when he was one of the lead outside attorneys for IBM. Boies, now working on the Microsoft case, was hired to lead the effort by the Justice Department and 19 states against Microsoft. Cutler also had worked with Boies when he helped encourage the government to dismiss the IBM lawsuit. [snip} While Zuck says the Association of Competitive Technology represents 9,000 independent software vendors, he acknowledges that Microsoft is "a standout" among its contributors. He would not disclose the percentage of the group's budget that is covered by Microsoft's contributions. Zuck said, however, that the legal fees for the brief were paid primarily by Corporate Software Technology, a computer reseller in Norwood, Mass., and Clarity Consulting, an information-technology consulting firm in Chicago. Gray also has close ties to Microsoft. As chairman of Citizens for a Sound Economy, a conservative think tank, Gray was a frequent visitor to the trial to argue Microsoft's case to reporters. The Washington Post reported on Saturday that several months after Microsoft committed $380,000 to the group's tax-exempt foundation, officials lobbied to limit the Justice Department's budget. The group said its support of Microsoft long predated the software company's contribution. -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jan 31 15:52:20 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7B5B21B02 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 15:52:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA06102 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 15:52:20 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <3895F611.FC678F29@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 15:52:33 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] FTC Advisory Committee on Online Access and Security This is an FTC advisory committee on "Fair Information Practices." It is typically (for the Clinton Administration) weighed to business interests. Jamie http://www.ftc.gov/acoas/acoasmemberlist.htm Advisory Committee on Online Access and Security Membership List Mr. James C. Allen, Vice President of Development and Operations, eCustomers.com Stewart A. Baker, Esq., Steptoe & Johnson LLP Mr. Richard Bates, Vice President of Government Relations, The Walt Disney Company Ms. Paula J. Bruening, Director of Compliance and Policy, TRUSTe Mr. Steven C. Casey, Director of Government Affairs, RSA Security, Inc. Fred H. Cate, Esq., Professor of Law, Indiana University School of Law - Bloomington Mr. Jerry Cerasale, Senior Vice President for Government Affairs, Direct Marketing Association, Inc. Steven J. Cole, Esq., Senior Vice President and General Counsel, Council of Better Business Bureaus, Inc. Dr. Lorrie Faith Cranor, Senior Technical Staff Member, AT&T Labs-Research Dr. Mary J. Culnan, Professor, McDonough School of Business, Georgetown University Mr. E. David Ellington, Co-Founder, Chairman, President and CEO, NetNoir, Inc. Ms. Tatiana Gau, Vice President of Integrity Assurance, America Online, Inc. Alexander Gavis, Esq., Assistant General Counsel, Fidelity Investments Mr. Rob Goldman, Executive Vice President of Customer Experience, Dash.com, Inc. Mr. Robert T. Henderson, Vice President, Warehouse Outsourcing Solutions, NCR Corporation David Hoffman, Esq., Intel Corporation Dr. Lance J. Hoffman, Professor of Computer Science, School of Engineering and Applied Science, George Washington University Mr. Josh Isay, Director of Public Policy and Government Affairs, DoubleClick, Inc. Mr. Daniel Jaye, Chief Technology Officer, Engage Technologies, Inc. Dr. Eric J. Johnson, Professor of Business, Columbia University Dr. John Kamp, Senior Vice President, American Association of Advertising Agencies Mr. Rick Lane, Director of Congressional and Public Affairs, U.S. Chamber of Commerce James W. Maxson, Esq., Delta Air Lines, Inc. Mr. Michael R. McFarren, Chief Executive Officer, Bellerophon, Ltd. Mr. Gregory Miller, Chief Internet Strategist, MedicaLogic, Inc. Deirdre Mulligan, Esq., Staff Counsel, Center for Democracy and Technology Deborah Pierce, Esq., Staff Attorney, Electronic Frontier Foundation Ronald Plesser, Esq., Piper, Marbury, Rudnick & Wolfe LLP Dr. Lawrence A. Ponemon, Partner, Global Leader for Compliance Risk Management, PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP Mr. Richard Purcell, Director, Corporate Privacy Group, Microsoft Corporation Mr. Arthur B. Sackler, Vice President for Law and Public Policy, Time Warner, Inc. Dr. Daniel Schutzer, VP and Director of External Standards and Advanced Technology, e-Citi, Citigroup Mr. Andrew Shen, Policy Analyst, Electronic Privacy Information Center Dr. Jonathan M. Smith, Professor, Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania Mr. Richard Smith, Internet Security Consultant Ms. Jane Swift, Lieutenant Governor of Massachusetts, The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Frank C. Torres III, Esq., Legislative Counsel, Consumers Union Mr. Thomas Wadlow, Vice President of Security Research and Development, Pilot Network Services, Inc. Mr. Ted Wham, Director, Membership, Excite@Home Network Ms. Rebecca Whitener, Principal, Global Services Security and Consulting Group, IBM Corporation From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jan 31 16:18:21 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE9FD21B99 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 16:18:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA06776 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 16:18:20 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <3895FC29.84075803@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 16:18:33 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Ralph Nader: Digital signature legislation must protect consumers http://www.computerworld.com/home/print.nsf/all/000117E08E Digital signature legislation must protect consumers By Ralph Nader 01/17/2000 A window salesman talks an elderly woman into buying 10 windows for $10,000. She signs several papers, including one whereby she consents to receive the contract and all notices relating to the sale over the Internet at an e-mail address established for her by the salesman. She doesn't own or know how to use a computer. The window salesman doesn't provide any paper copies of the documents. A savvy young man decides to buy a car but finds he must first sign a consent form similar to the one presented to the elderly woman. He objects, but the salesman says if the young man doesn't agree to receive everything electronically, the car's price will rise by $1,000. A professor shops the Web for a PC and enters into a contract to buy one. He agrees to receive the contract and other legal documents electronically. His copy of the contract is sent in WordPerfect 6.0 format; to open and print it, he must save it as a Microsoft Word file. The computer arrives but isn't the one he ordered or the one referred to in his contract. He contacts the computer dealer and is told that he received what the dealer's version of the contract indicates. The professor's attorney tells him he is stuck: He doesn't have a copy of the contract that he can use in court, and terms in the contract that he was sent don't match the terms on the Web page. All of the situations depicted in these scenarios are currently illegal but would be made legal under HR 1714 -- the Third Millennium Digital Commerce Act -- which overwhelmingly passed the House of Representatives in November, despite the threat of a presidential veto. The bill, under the guise of facilitating e-commerce, would eviscerate numerous state and federal consumer protection laws. If the act is made law, states would be prohibited from passing e-commerce laws to protect their own citizens. A much more judicious bill on the same subject passed the Senate soon after. However, the Senate version -- S 761 -- allows consenting parties to enter into contracts using electronic records and electronic signatures. States are permitted to protect their consumers as they deem fit. The Federal Trade Commission and consumer groups have objected to the overreaching provisions of the House bill. The consumer groups have proposed the following basic standards for a federal law that governs e-commerce: 1.Electronic disclosures should be permitted only when the transaction is initiated and consummated electronically. 2.When electronic signatures are required, the technologies used must be reasonable, reflect an actual intent to sign a document (not merely opening a package of shrink-wrapped software) and be attached only to documents that are unalterable after the signature is attached. 3.The consumer should be given the opportunity to accept or refuse disclosures electronically without surcharges. 4.The consumer must be able to obtain paper copies at a reasonable cost and in a timely manner. 5.The disclosures must actually be delivered to the consumer's e-mail address with a reply requested or must be retained on the seller's Web site for the duration of the contract. 6.When disclosures are provided to consumers through a seller's or creditor's Web site, they must be retained for the duration of the contract. 7.The electronic record must be accessible and retainable by the consumer. It must also be provided in a format that prevents alteration after it's sent, so it can be used to prove the terms of the record in a court of law. 8.The consumer's failure to respond to the consent request should trigger paper disclosures, before the failure to respond triggers default. Let Congress know that digital signature legislation must take into account the practical issues that are important for consumer protection. -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jan 31 17:06:23 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9556521B9F for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 17:06:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA07834 for ; Mon, 31 Jan 2000 17:06:23 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <3896076C.9B6A2A17@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 17:06:36 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Dave Banisar on FTC privacy committee Subject: IP: re FTC Committee Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 16:59:59 -0500 From: Dave Farber To: ip-sub-1@majordomo.pobox.com > >Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 10:46:26 -0500 >To: farber@cis.upenn.edu >From: David Banisar > >Hi Dave, > >My first impression looking at the list is that (with a very few >exceptions) it looks more like a "most wanted list" of privacy invaders. > >Upon further impression, I think that it will be very useful as a >preliminary list of nominees for the annual Privacy Intl Big Brother >Awards (@CFP2000). And who says the FTC doesn't do anything useful for >privacy....Thanks guys! > >Dave -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Feb 1 11:14:18 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 754B821B06 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2000 11:14:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA20991; Tue, 1 Feb 2000 11:14:18 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <3897066F.2026D33E@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 11:14:39 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Andy Oram's Coping with Database Protection Laws I feel bad because I was supposed to give Andy some comments on this, and never did. But here is a URL to his article. Jamie http://www.oreilly.com/people/staff/andyo/professional/collection_law.html The Sap and the Syrup of the Information Age: Coping with Database Protection Laws The following article was first published, in a shortened version, in the February 2000 issue of the journal Copyright World. -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Feb 1 13:17:13 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EB2521B06 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2000 13:17:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA23813 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2000 13:17:13 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <3897233F.B06998BC@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 13:17:35 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Michael Hirsh: Has the White House Really Changed Its Tune on AIDS Drugs? --------------- http://newsweek.com/nw-srv/printed/us/na/a10740-2000feb1.htm Has the White House Really Changed Its Tune on AIDS Drugs?, Washington says it has shifted its policy on patents. But not everyone has gotten the message., By Michael Hirsh, With Gregory L. Vistica, Feb 01 2000 Newsweek.com: Newsweek US Edition: Nation: Has the White House Really Changed Its Tune on AIDS Drugs? It was with great fanfare that Bill Clinton announced a dramatic shift in America's policy on AIDS drugs at the World Trade Organization meeting in Seattle. The president, in one of several moves intended to appease raucous protesters, declared on Dec. 1 that Washington would no longer stand in the way of cheaper medicines for AIDS victims. Until then, the Clinton administration had mostly taken the side of major pharmaceutical manufacturers, which in order to preserve profits and royalties have sought to ban cheap knockoff drugs. But in Seattle, Clinton said that drug-patent rights were secondary, and "people in the poorest countries won't have to go without medicine they so desperately need." On Jan. 10, more than a month after Clinton's announcement, Vice President Al Gore reaffirmed the policy shift during a historic appearance before the U.N. Security Council, which convened to address AIDS in Africa. All well and good. So why in late January was the administration still pursuing its hardline policy of protecting corporate patents in Thailand, one of the worst-hit AIDS countries? A few days after Gore's U.N. appearance, on Jan. 14, an official with the U.S. Trade Representative's office warned the Thais that they could face trade sanctions if they issued a "compulsory license" to manufacture ddI, a drug like AZT that helps to fend off full-blown AIDS. Such a license would compel the U.S. pharmaceutical company that makes the drug, Bristol-Myers Squibb, to allow Thai or other overseas manufacturers to produce it themselves more cheaply. A key reason for Clinton's Seattle announcement was to facilitate that process. Again on Jan. 19, the U.S. embassy in Bangkok presented the Thais with a position paper that still emphasized U.S. disapproval of compulsory licensing. Such actions were typical before the administration's policy shift. AIDS activists complained that the administration applied the same unfeeling standard to defending U.S. intellectual property rights whether the issue was cassette tapes or life-and-death drugs. Yet in Thailand the U.S. actions were "particularly irritating," says James Love, head of the Consumer Project on Technology, a Ralph Nader-affiliated legal advocacy group. It wasn't just the obvious hypocrisy of announcing a policy shift in public and then ignoring it in practice, he says. Worse, ddI had actually been invented on a grant from the U.S. government, which itself held the patent. Bristol-Myers Squibb was trying to patent a formulation process for the drug in Thailand when it hadn't even been able to do so in the United States, Love says. (The company was not immediately available for comment.) It was only after the intervention of Leon Fuerth, Gore's national security advisor, that the Thai issue was resolved late last week, Newsweek has learned. Following a complaint from Love, Fuerth asked the U.S. Trade Representative's office to clearly state the new policy to the Thai government, according to an administration official familiar with the matter. The USTR's assistant trade representative for the issue, Joseph Papovich, finally responded with a letter on Jan. 27, which the U.S. ambassador to Thailand hand-delivered to the Thai Health minister. A copy was also faxed to the Commerce minister. "The United States will raise no objection," the letter said, if the Thai government decides that it needs to issue a compulsory license. Thai officials, who previously had said they would refrain from issuing a license because of U.S. pressure, are now reassessing what to do. Love says similar changes of approach have not yet been seen in other countries such as the Philippines and Dominican Republic. The U.S. trade representative's office did not respond to repeated requests for comment. [snip] With Gregory L. Vistica -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Feb 1 13:34:01 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D7F421B06 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2000 13:34:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA24177 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2000 13:34:01 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <3897272F.C327E7CB@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 13:34:23 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Declan on FTC Advisory Panel Jamie, you might be interested in my piece on the FTC advisory panel. --Declan http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,33586,00.html 3:00 a.m. 22.Jan.2000 PST Being appointed to a federal advisory committee is a lot like becoming a mother-in-law: You get to tell everyone why they're wrong, but nobody has to listen. Still, resume-obsessed Washingtonians vie for such opportunities, and a few dozen of them learned Friday they would be on a Federal Trade Commission privacy and security advisory panel. (The self-congratulatory press releases quickly followed.) The interesting thing, though, was how the FTC decided on the members. Over 180 people applied, and about 40 were picked. You'd think that of that pool of eager applicants, the FTC would have an exquisite selection of potential choices. Nope. The commission decided to pass over veteran privacy advocates and technical experts -- like SystemExperts CTO Dan Geer, a security guru and Usenix officer since 1985 -- to choose someone who hadn't even applied for the gig. They picked E. David Ellington, chairman and CEO of NetNoir, an online services company that targets African-Americans. It probably didn't hurt that Ellington gave US$2,500 to Democratic candidates -- including $1,000 to Al Gore -- during the last two years, according to Federal Election Commission records. An FTC staff member wouldn't say why Ellington was chosen except to say the commission wanted to "make its best efforts" to make sure the group was representative. "The commission retained discretion in the absence of a nomination to appoint advisory committee members to ensure balance," said Jessica Rich, who pointed us to a Federal Register notice in December that said precisely that. Perhaps the FTC hoped serving on the advisory panel, which first meets on 4 February, would prove educational? NetNoir asks visitors for their home addresses, birthdates, and telephone numbers, but does not have a posted privacy policy saying what it will do -- or won't do -- with that info. That runs afoul of the Better Business Bureau's principles for ethical conduct for Web businesses, not to mention the FTC's own guidelines. The only other person on the panel who didn't apply was Robert Henderson of NCR Corporation. The FTC said he replaced Peter Reid, also of NCR, who did apply. -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Feb 1 13:43:00 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AA3A21C30 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2000 13:43:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA24384 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2000 13:43:00 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <3897294A.2F5E33F8@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 13:43:22 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Howie Mirkin on ISPs, Hacking and firewalls Howie lives in Thailand, and sent this last week, regarding the always on / Hacking issue. Jamie ---------- Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 11:02:09 +0700 To: random-bits@venice.essential.org From: Howie Mirkin Subject: Re: Random-bits digest, Vol 1 #18 - Always On, hacking, forewalls, etc I'm not going to try and pretend to be all knowledgeable in these matters, but my prior navy communications background does make me a bit paranoid about having some kind of protection against hackers. While I agree with the gentleman who said that most "hacking" seems to be merely people playing around with scanners. However, there are hackers out there who are malicious, so if we leave ourselves unprotected we are at risk. Realizing that "better safe than sorry" has some budget constraints, I would recommend that anyone in doubt get the program Black ice defender for their PC or home network. http://www.networkice.com This is not a fire-wall because, as I understand fire-walls, they are used to filter out unwanted information. Black ice defender (and there are similar programs out there) is a blocker, which prevents unauthorized intrusions (some intrusions are necessary as I found out the hard way when I blocked out every intrusion Black ice defender recorded and then denied myself access to the Internet). Black ice Defender costs about US$40.00. I get about 6-8 ATTEMPTED intrusions every time I am on line, which is about 4-6 hours per day. Since I do research work it can be very distracting and time consuming to have to stop work, do an ISP lookup and then report the intruder to their serving ISP. I believe a good test is to go to the Gibson Research web site (http://www.grc.com) , download the small test program and get one's ports probed. I did this before and after I loaded Black ice and there was a vast difference in the results. However, Black Ice does have some inconvenience in the ability to extract reporting information, but to solve this I would recommend Clear Ice (http://www.clariondeveloper.com/ which expedites the reporting procedure. The latest download version 2.0 costs $20.00. As for always on, I would always be on line if I could get a flat rate, but I live in Thailand (and appreciate the views on compulsory licensing, by the way), and instead of about $9.95 per month, it costs more like $0.85-$1.35 per hour, quite steep, although the rates should be improving in the next few months. In my view everyone should have the capability to block out potentially harmful intrusions, as well as being able to filter out unwanted information. But I think that this may be difficult for computer suppliers to do so at this time because keeping up with all the technology changes is virtually impossible. Why? because the possibility of legal action is always present, say, if someone steals credit card information from a computer and runs up high bills, can one blame the computer seller? In the USA it would probably end up that way as we have too many Clintonesque lawyers. I think it will be very likely in the future that even when a computer sales shop sells anti-virus software with their product they will become liable for virus damage if they do not train the user in updating the software. Then we can sue the software makers and the computer companies and really have a good time making the lawyers richer. I believe that it is the individual who must take some actions on their own part to protect themselves, and not depend on others to protect them from everything. In a country where one can sue and win because they got burned by ironing their clothes while they were wearing them (recent report from CNN) , people want someone else to protect them from everything. So be thankful that you can be online all the time for $9.95/month to $19.95 a month and take some time to learn a bit about how to protect yourself. Howie Mirkin Bangkok -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Feb 1 16:47:53 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59C6D21AFF for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2000 16:47:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA29271 for ; Tue, 1 Feb 2000 16:47:53 -0500 Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 16:47:53 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] DOC asks Public Comments on E-Commerce Policies We will use this public comment period to request changes in patent laws to exclude patents on busines methods, expansion of WTO rules on copyright exemptions (TRIPS, Article 13) for fair use and interoperability, public procurement of software that supports open web standards, stricter privacy regulation, and a "bright line" limiting ICANN jurisdiction. Jamie ------------------------- Contact: Morrie Goodman 202/482-4883 Chuck Melley 202/219-4287 For IMMEDIATE RELEASE Tuesday, February 1, 2000 COMMERCE SECRETARY DALEY CALLS FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS ON WAYS TO FACILITATE THE GROWTH OF ELECTRONIC COMMERCE Washington, DC - U.S. Secretary of Commerce William M. Daley announced today that the Administration is seeking public comments and suggestions concerning policies, laws or regulations that might create barriers to electronic commerce. "Our aim is to establish a legal framework that facilitates electronic commerce around the globe, to protect consumers and their privacy, and to enable everyone in our country to fully participate in this remarkable economic transformation," Daley said. "Some laws and regulations designed for the 'physical world' may not always work in cyberspace. We need to ensure that governments do everything possible to foster this revolution in opportunity, convenience, and choice, while providing on-line equivalents to important consumer protections we now have in the paper-based world." Vice President Gore announced this initiative in November 1999 through a Presidential Directive to Federal Agencies. A Department of Commerce led sub-group will undertake this initiative on behalf of the U.S. Working Group on Electronic Commerce. The sub-group will recommend revisions that facilitate electronic commerce while ensuring that online commerce is as safe for consumers and the public as commerce in the offline world. Many of the laws now on the books pre-date the recent explosion in online commerce. For example, some licensing requirements or specific technical standards may unintentionally prevent some transactions from occurring online. On the other hand, the sub-group may find that the current rules in some areas continue to make sense. In addition to soliciting public comments, the Administration will invite representatives from Federal agencies, and state and local governments to identify barriers to e-commerce, propose solutions and identify opportunities for collaboration. Among other objectives, the sub-group seeks to identify on a priority basis which federal laws or regulations are inhibiting electronic commerce by small businesses and to suggest how they might be modified. A detailed request for public comments was published in today's Federal Register. Comments, which can be submitted via the web at http://www.ecommerce.gov/ebarriers/respond, are due by March 17, 2000. -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | mailto:love@cptech.org Voice 1.202.387.8030 | fax 1.202.387.8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Feb 7 13:23:54 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 808DD21AFF; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 13:23:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA27673; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 13:23:54 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <389F0E10.CC152040@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2000 13:25:20 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] British Telecom wants ICANN to regulate sex-themed web sites Subject: FC: British Telecom wants ICANN to regulate sex-themed web sites Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2000 12:55:40 -0500 From: Declan McCullagh To: politech@vorlon.mit.edu CC: john.c.lewis@bt.com Some of the corporations hoping to influence ICANN want the group to segregate web sites with erotic or sexual-themed material. In a post sent apparently accidentally to a public mailing list, we see that the British Telecom delegate to an ICANN working group says such sites must not be able to register in, say, a new top level domain (.ent?) created for "entertainment" purposes. "This is becoming a more significant issue for us as the introduction of digital tv and its potential for distribution on the Net raises the public awareness of this issue," wrote BT's John Lewis. It might sound like a good idea at first, but there are lots of problems with it. For instance, who decides what sites have an unacceptable percentage of sex-themed content? ICANN? British Telecom? Network Solutions? Morality in Media? The police? It's not an obscure issue. Web sites that most of us might think to be perfectly legitimate contain sex-themed content. Editors of news organizations like Salon and CNET testified in the Child Online Protection Act lawsuit that they could be vulnerable to prosecution because their content might upset America's self-appointed purity protectors. (The judge agreed, and blocked prosecutors from enforcing the law.) Original post from British Telecom's John Lewis: http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-full/Arc00/msg00090.html Mirrored copy here in case it disappears from the archive: http://www.well.com/user/declan/docs/msg00090.html Background on ICANN DNSO working group: http://www.bcdnso.org/WGrapporteurs.htm Article on Salon and CNET testimony in COPA lawsuit: http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,17465,00.html -Declan -------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology To subscribe: send a message to majordomo@vorlon.mit.edu with this text: subscribe politech More information is at http://www.well.com/~declan/politech/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Feb 7 14:43:34 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1764521AFF for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 14:43:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA29679 for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 14:43:34 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <389F20BC.1F49E9C@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2000 14:45:00 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Yahoo's dispute over fantasy football patent I missed this earlier December 29, 1999 story about the Fantasy Football patent. Jamie http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-1509490.html Fantasysports files suit against Yahoo, others By Patricia Jacobus Staff Writer, CNET News.com December 29, 1999, 4:50 p.m. PT An online sports start-up has set out to tackle Internet titans Yahoo, CBS SportsLine, ESPN and lesser-known Sandbox Entertainment in a patent infringement suit relating to popular online fantasy sports leagues. <------------background info from patent---------------------> USP 4,918,603 Computerized statistical football game Abstract A method and apparatus for playing football. The football game is played on a computer system and is based upon actual football performances by a database of football players. The computer football game is played by a league of individuals, each of whom can individually, or in groups, own a franchise. Franchises select their players from an initial draft. The starting players are then selected by individual franchise owners. Wins and losses for the computer football games occur by calculating a total of each individual player's points who make up a team. The calculation of points is done automatically either manually or using actual weekly performance by individual NFL players as the basis for determining points. Claims: 1. A computer for playing football based upon actual football games, comprising: means for setting up individual football franchises; means for drafting actual football players into said franchises; means for selecting starting player rosters from said actual football players; means for trading said actual football players; means for scoring performances of said actual football players based upon actual game scores such that franchises automatically calculate a composite win or loss score from a total of said individual actual football players' scores; said players' scores are for quarterbacks, running backs and pass receivers in a first group and kickers in a second group; and wherein said players in said first and second groups receive bonus points. 2. The apparatus according to claim 1, wherein said bonus points for said first and seconds groups are based upon complex or difficult plays. 3. The apparatus according to claim 2, wherein said complex and difficult plays include extra points for a quarterback who receives or runs for said touchdown, extra points for said running back for throwing or receiving a touchdown pass, and extra points for said pass receive for passing the ball or running for a touchdown. <------------info from web page---------------> http://www.fantasysports.com/fspihist.html In April 1990, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued a patent (No. 4,918,603) covering the FFL game and its software process to the game's co-inventors, Patrick J. Hughes, Michael B. Hughes and David C. Yager, which expires in August 2008. In late 1990, Fantasy Sports Properties, Inc. was incorporated in the Commonwealth of Virginia and shortly thereafter obtained the exclusive licensing rights to the existing intellectual property from the co-inventors in return for royalties to be paid to the co-inventors based on net sales of the software products ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Feb 7 16:52:46 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FB1021AFF; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 16:52:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA00244; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 16:52:45 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <389F3F04.FA7075C4@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2000 16:54:12 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce , wcorbitt@ustr.gov Cc: "Wilder, Richard" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] White House Position on Internet patents I just ran across the White House paper on global electronic commerce. It says that the US is pushing internationally for treaties that will stop countries from issuing complusory licenses on ecommerce patents, except as a remedy to an antitrust case. Plus, it says the US will ask for a special committee to be formed on these issues by the US, EU and Japan patent examiners, and separately, that WIPO have a working group on this. I think this has already happened. I'm meeting with USTR tomorrow, and will ask about this. Jamie http://www.ecommerce.gov/framewrk.htm A Framework for Global Electronic Commerce THE WHITE HOUSE July 1, 1997 <---------------------Section on Patents--------------------> Patents Development of the GII will both depend upon and stimulate innovation in many fields of technology, including computer software, computer hardware, and telecommunications. An effectively functioning patent system that encourages and protects patentable innovations in these fields is important for the overall success of commerce over the Internet. Consistent with this objective, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) will (1) significantly enhance its collaboration with the private sector to assemble a larger, more complete collection of prior art (both patent and non-patent publications), and provide its patent examiners better access to prior art in GII-related technologies; (2) train its patent examiners in GII-related technologies to raise and maintain their level of technical expertise; and (3) support legislative proposals for early publication of pending patent applications, particularly in areas involving fast moving technology. To create a reliable environment for electronic commerce, patent agreements should: prohibit member countries from authorizing parties to exploit patented inventions related to the GII without the patent owner's authority (i.e., disapproval of compulsory licensing of GII-related technology except to remedy a practice determined after judicial or administrative process to be anti-competitive); require member countries to provide adequate and effective protection for patentable subject matter important to the development and success of the GII; and establish international standards for determining the validity of a patent claim. The United States will pursue these objectives internationally. Officials of the European, Japanese, and United States Patent Offices meet, for example, each year to foster cooperation on patent-related issues. The United States will recommend at the next meeting that a special committee be established within the next year to make recommendations on GII-related patent issues . In a separate venue, one hundred countries and international intergovernmental organizations participate as members of WIPO's permanent committee on industrial property information (PCIPI). The United States will attempt to establish a working group of this organization to address GII-related patent issues. -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Feb 7 17:50:41 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 575C921AFF for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 17:50:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA01503 for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2000 17:50:41 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <389F4C99.814034A7@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2000 17:52:09 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Notes from Robert Merges talk on ecommerce patents Here are notes from a 1999 presentation by Robert Merges, author of "As Many as Six Impossible Patents Before Breakfast: Property Rights for Business Concepts," 14 Berkeley Tech. L.J. ___ (1999). http://e-conomy.berkeley.edu/pubs/summary/0399ecom.html The Legal and Policy Framework for Global Electronic Commerce March 5-6, 1999 Conference Summary and Report Prepared for the UC E-conomy[tm] Project by John W. Cioffi* conference organized by The Berkeley Center for Law and Technology and The Berkeley Technology Law Journal, Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California, Berkeley** Professor Robert Merges (U.C. Berkeley, Boalt Hall School of Law) The growth of electronic commerce brings with it the relentless disintermediation of commerce through the usurpation of the roles played by middlemen.21 The new "middleman" in the digital economy is the patentee, the holder of intellectual property rights in key technologies. The questions that arise from this new context is whether these patentee-middlemen have any economic value and whether stronger patent rights adds value by inspiring more innovation. The available evidence suggests that current intellectual property rights have not resulted in a shortage of innovation. The number of products, services, and business models is exploding. Technology continues to develop rapidly. Thus, there is little empirical support for strengthening patent rights. Yet, this appears to be the trend in the U.S., both in the legislatures and in the courts. As patent rights were expanded to cover software, the distinction between products and businesses began to disintegrate in areas where the business models and practices are driven by technology. This has set off a steady expansion of patent rights until at least one Court of Appeals has granted patent protection to a business model. This is a dramatic experiment in economic incentives without explicit legislative authorization and in conflict with the traditional reluctance to grant monopolies in easily replicable ideas. The results may be harmful to the development of a vibrant marketplace. Business entities have an incentive to foreclose competition in both technology and business strategy through acquisition and enforcement of patent rights. Electronic commerce may suffer from reduced competitive pressures to improve products and services as broader swaths of the digital economy are brought within the insulated monopoly created by patent rights. Once expanded, property rights cannot be contracted easily. The recognition of patent rights creates entrenched, vested interests and investment backed expectations that raise takings objections to the ex post limitation of the property interest embodied in the patent. In place of the dynamic and fluid innovation characteristic of digital technologies and markets, expanded intellectual property could slow development by freezing technologies and business practices behind the edifice of property rights. Merges quips: "All property is theft until I have something to steal; business patentees now have property." Even business model patents have their proper place in a world in which the distinction between technology and business practices is blurred. Merges sees the solution to overly expansive patents as better oversight and control over the patent granting process. He believes the real problem is not the expansion of patent rights per se, but the granting of patents that are invalid under existing law. The incentives driving the U.S. patent office favor granting patents and allow public input through litigation only after the grant is made. This dynamic favors patentees by shifting the legal burden against challengers and giving the patentees an economically advantageous position to defend. The excessive granting of patents also encourages inadvisable expansions of patent law to justify the granting of "bad patents." The solution to this problem requires disclosure of patent applications and the ability of private parties to bring pre-patent challenges. In this framework, opposing private parties with the best information bring their knowledge of a subject to the patent process. This knowledge eliminates the advantage of the patent applicant over the civil servants in the patent office. The incentive structure thus favors blocking invalid patents before they go into effect. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Feb 8 10:29:45 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ED0621AFF for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 10:29:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA13568 for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 10:29:45 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38A036C8.80FDA533@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 10:31:20 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Paul Garrin: domain "sniping" Subject: domain "sniping" Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 04:47:46 -0500 From: Paul Garrin To: random-bits-admin@venice.essential.org Hello Jamie, What do you know about "domain sniping"? This is when speculators or "domain predators" snatch a domain name if it expired, before the holder has a chance to renew, and when an unscrupulous domain registrar grabs a domain name before it can be registered, by monitoring their whois query logs, and getting a jump on the person who searched for the domain name before they can complete their application. It's forbidden in the ICANN agreement, but difficult to enforce or prove. Domain name "sniping" is a serious policy problem in the existing system. Name.Space has a 60-90 day hold period at the expiration of a domain that allows ample time for "right of first refusal" if a person does not renew the domain at or before the moment of expiration. The present system encourages it. I know of at least one individual who has been the victim of domain name sniping, and have experienced this first hand, as a registrar, when someone beats one of my clients to a registration of a clever name. Domain "sniping" upon renewal can be easily solved by requiring a 60-90 day hold period to allow right of first refusal by the original registrant, and to allow time to notify the holder of abandonment, or to update their contact information. Domain sniping by unscrpulous registrars is a more complex issue. regards, Paul -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Feb 8 16:33:31 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1B3A21AFF; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 16:33:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA22539; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 16:33:30 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38A08C0D.360B8DA3@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 16:35:09 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Milton Mueller on ICANN domain name policy More on the ICANN domain issue. Jamie ---------------- Subject: FC: Yes, British Telecom *does* want to segregate Web sites Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 15:56:03 -0500 From: Declan McCullagh To: politech@vorlon.mit.edu CC: john.c.lewis@bt.com ********** Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 12:53:20 -0500 From: Milton Mueller To: declan@well.com Subject: Re: FC: British Telecom says idea "distorted," wants other suggestions Declan: Your take on Lewis's policy perspective was exactly correct. I have been interacting with Lewis and another BT representative on ICANN's Working Group C on new TLDs for several months. The BT representatives have consistently advocated a highly regulated DNS name space. For example, instead of allowing new businesses and organizations to propose their own new TLD names, BT wants ICANN to establish a central, fixed classification scheme for new TLDs. Each TLD would have a very specific "charter" as to who could and could not register within it. As Lewis put it, "the TLD structure should embody a framework which precludes replication of domain types, interest groups or business areas, to avoid confusing Internet customers." This has profound implications for the regulation of the Net as a whole. Your discussion of how pornography might be classified did the community a service by highlighting one of the dangers of such an apporach. But it is only one aspect of what could turn out to be a way to exert sweeping forms of leverage over Internet content. Imagine how robust the publication market would be if some international authority decided that there should be a "framework which precludes replication of [magazine content] types, interest groups, or business areas, to avoid confusing [magazine] customers." Imagine the regulation that would be imposed as a relatively unaccountable international regulatory agency (ICANN) decided which form of publication content belongs in which category. Those of you who have not been struggling in the trenches of ICANN's working groups for the past 8 months probably cannot believe how rigid and regulatory are the attitudes of the business and political interests who have gravitated to ICANN's DNSO. Declan McCullagh wrote: > Is BT justifiably annoyed or simply backpedaling from a proposal > accidentally sent to a public list? You decide: > http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga-full/Arc00/msg00090.html > -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Feb 8 17:23:10 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4442621AFF for ; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 17:23:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA23894; Tue, 8 Feb 2000 17:23:10 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38A097B0.79FC8316@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 17:24:48 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Will Rodger reviews Simson Garfinkel's Database Nation http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/review/crg884.htm 02/08/00- Updated 05:13 PM ET \ 'Database Nation:' Big Browser's watching By Will Rodger, USATODAY.com Sun Microsystems CEO Scott McNealy once said: "There is no privacy, get over it." Well, Simson Garfinkel still hasn't gotten over it. And neither will you, if you read Database Nation. [snip] ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Feb 9 09:27:04 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAAFD21AFF for ; Wed, 9 Feb 2000 09:27:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA16784 for ; Wed, 9 Feb 2000 09:27:04 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38A179A2.522BAED4@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2000 09:28:50 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] RTMark release on autodesk and dispute over the3DStudio.com Subject: Autodesk cowed by threat of attack by RTMark Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2000 06:12:12 -0500 (EST) From: Certain elements To: Certain elements February 9, 2000 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE THE LEGACY OF ETOYS: AUTODESK Trying to take over website, company buckles at threat of attack Contacts: mailto:autodeskinfo@rtmark.com Matthew Anderson: mailto:webmaster@the3dstudio.com Autodesk, Inc.: mailto:martin.konopken@autodesk.com, mailto:rootcsh2@autodesk.com More information: http://rtmark.com/autodesk.html, http://rtmark.com/netabuse.html, etoy/eToys update: http://rtmark.com/etoynsi.html (more contacts and links listed at end) When thousands of activists forced Internet toy giant eToys to withdraw its lawsuit against art site etoy.com last month, one of their bigger goals was to create a chill on all of e-commerce, so that companies using the Internet would think twice before trying to steal precious bits of online public space. This goal seems to be a few steps closer to being fulfilled. Last week a user of http://The3DStudio.com told RTMark that Autodesk, a company that makes a product coincidentally called 3D Studio, was attempting to shut down the forum, which is used by hundreds of 3D artists to freely trade graphics. According to The3DStudio.com webmaster Matthew Anderson, he and the artists who use the site had written hundreds of e-mails to Autodesk explaining the purpose of the forum and begging them to leave it alone, but Autodesk had never replied to anyone. Friday night, RTMark informed the parties concerned that it would help sponsor an eToys-style attack against Autodesk. Within hours, Autodesk announced that it would relent from its suit, and on Monday morning Martin M. Konopken, Senior Corporate Counsel for Autodesk, officially informed Anderson and RTMark that all threats against The3DStudio.com were being withdrawn; a link to The3DStudio.com was even placed on the Autodesk website. (See http://rtmark.com/autodesk.html for full correspondence.) "Now if they jump like that BEFORE being threatened, we'll have achieved something nice," said RTMark spokesperson Ernest Lucha. But Lucha said that goal is still far away. "So many companies are still behaving like thugs on the Web. The HMO Health Net is trying to destroy http://www.HealthNet.org, founded in 1993 by a Nobel-winning cardiologist to connect doctors in the developing world; Leonardo Finance is suing the thirty-year-old art magazine, Leonardo, for its name; even the Vatican has gotten into the act, by stealing Vaticano.org from an artists' group with the complicity of Network Solutions [the company that controls Internet domain names]. We know of dozens of such cases. Each of these aggressors must be informed that they're vulnerable to attack just like eToys, and could easily lose it all in a matter of weeks." (E-mail addresses and information links can be found at the end of this release.) "We must ensure that eToys fulfills its role as the Brent Spar of e-commerce," said Reinhold Grether, an Internet researcher and a mastermind of the anti-eToys campaigns. "Just as the Brent Spar fiasco forced the petroleum industry to listen to environmentalists, so e-commerce companies must continue to be reminded that the Internet doesn't belong to them, and that they can't do whatever they want with it." But even if RTMark and other activists are successful in intimidating companies into behaving well on the Internet, there are bigger goals that must also be kept in mind, said lawyer and RTMark member Rita Mae Rakoczi. "Companies' fear of Web activists doesn't help the thousands of victims of toxic waste dumps who are sued into silence, nor the scientists who are intimidated into practicing shoddy science for the sake of corporate profit, nor the millions of citizens--demeaningly called 'consumers'--who reap the poisonous fruits of bad science and other corporate lies." Rakoczi sees the solution to widespread corporate criminality in legal reform. "It's not a matter of creating new laws; there are swarms of old laws that need rescinding--starting with a flawed 1886 Supreme Court decision granting corporations, those entities whose only possible aim is profit, the rights of people. Then there are all the laws and decisions built onto that, like the 'money = speech' decision that declares spending, and hence political lobbying by huge corporations, a form of protected free speech." "Corporations use their legal standing in predictable ways," said Rakoczi, "but not a one has ever received a lethal injection. Only wide-ranging, visionary legal reform can address the enormous problems of corporate crime. Protecting the Internet, important as it is, is only a stepping stone to that goal." RTMark aims to publicize the widespread corporate abuse of democratic institutions like courts and elections. To this end it solicits and distributes funding for "sabotage projects," groups of which are called "mutual funds" in order to call attention to one way in which large numbers of people come to identify corporate needs as their own. Additional links: HealthNet.com information: http://www.healthnet.org/notice.html contact: (818)676-6775, mailto:webteam@healthnet.com Leonardo Finance information: http://rtmark.com/leonardo.html contacts: mailto:yves.delacour@leonardofinance.fr, mailto:fmonnot@leonardofinance.fr, mailto:valerie.virlouvet@leonardofinance.fr The Holy See information: http://rtmark.com/vaticano.html contact: +39-06-698.92.434/443/442, mailto:accreditamenti@pressva.va Skippy Peanut Butter information: http://www.skippy-scam.org/ contact: 201-894-4000, mailto:webmaster@bestfoods.com eToys: http://rtmark.com/etoy.html Network Solutions contacts: mailto:chrisc@netsol.com, mailto:smcclorey@netsol.com Shell Oil: http://rtmark.com/shell/ Other cases: http://rtmark.com/netabuse.html Corporate history: http://www.poclad.org/ # 30 # ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Feb 9 11:02:17 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AC4C21B07 for ; Wed, 9 Feb 2000 11:02:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA18887 for ; Wed, 9 Feb 2000 11:02:17 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38A18FF4.CAD08B79@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2000 11:04:04 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] healthnet.org domain dispute These are URLs to stories about the dispute between Satellite, the owner of e-drug and other internet resources used by public health professionals, and an HMO that is trying to take away the healthnet.org domain. http://www.healthnet.org/notice.html http://www.healthnet.org/press_release.html http://www.salon.com/tech/log/1999/11/22/healthnet/index.html http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/319/7225/1592/f http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-1452800.html http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/ctg817.htm http://www.american-reporter.com/1251/15.html ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Feb 13 09:26:42 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65A5821AFF for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2000 09:26:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA22494; Sun, 13 Feb 2000 09:26:37 -0500 Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2000 09:26:37 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Cc: ecommerc@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Subject: [Random-bits] D.I.R.T. Data Interception by Remote Transmission. I'm not sure what to make of this, but it is scary. Jamie =20 ------ From=20inkling@foxinternet.net Sun Feb 13 09:18:37 2000 Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 11:38:24 -0800 From: Mike W. Perry To: James Love Subject: Big Brother goes commercial James, Not warning people about this dirty little bit of software seems a far worse crime than violating the "copyright" they claim for their bit of unsolicited spam. This could be bogus, but their web site looks all too legit. Do with it what you want. --Mike BEGIN FORWARDED TEXT ---------- From: CDSsales Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 12:28:08 -0500 To: (Recipient list suppressed) Subject: NEWS UPDATE: D.I.R.T. v.2.1 now in beta Codex Data Systems, Inc. is currently beta testing the latest version of its flagship software application, D.I.R.T.- Data Interception by Remote Transmission. D.I.R.T. is designed to allow remote monitoring of a target PC. Base functionality includes surreptitious keystroke logging capabilities and stealth transmission of captured data to a pre-determined stealth Internet address monitored and decoded by the D.I.R.T. Command Center Software. Physical access to the target computer is not necessary. The "target" need not execute an ".exe" file like unsophisticated hacking programs. New Features Add Versatility, Reliability D.I.R.T. version 2.1 has added or updated features from 2.0 that give D.I.R.T.^=D9 additional versatility and performance reliability. New featur= es include the ability to use multiple sources within the target computer to transmit data. D.I.R.T. no long relies solely on TCP-IP connections for transmittal. D.I.R.T. is now able to transmit their proprietary protocols such as those now used by AOL and Compuserve, network connections, and is now Windows NT compatible. Embed D.I.R.T.on CD-ROMS In addition, the remote screen capture feature has been upgraded, and the Command Center is able to remotely override an existing D.I.R.T. bug, as well as set a time limit on the bug's activity. D.I.R.T. can now be programmed remotely delete files on the target computer, and the user can now embed the D.I.R.T. payload in the autorun feature of a CD-ROM. Release date for D.I.R.T. is scheduled for Friday, February 25, 2000. Any questions or comments may be addressed to "sales@codexdatasystems.com". Sincerely, Codex Data Systems, Inc. 167 Route 304 Bardonia, New York 10954 Tel: 914-627-0011 Fax: 914-627-0211 Company E-mail: sales@codexdatasystems.com Web: ************************************************************************ This communication is copyrighted and is protected by U.S. and International copyright law. The information transmitted in this e-mail message may not be reproduced, reposted or forwarded to anyone other then the intended recipient without expressed written permission of the sender. Violation of U.S. copyright law is a criminal and civil offense... ************************************************************************ From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Feb 14 13:23:38 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90C5E21B0A for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 13:23:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA09344 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 13:23:38 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38A848CB.3451D2BC@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 13:26:19 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] TACD statement on ICANN The following is the text of one of the resolutions approved by the Trans Atlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD) at its meeting that meeting concluded on February 12, 2000. There may be a final stylistic change by the TACD secretariat before the resolutions from the Feb 10-12 meeting are published on the TACD web page (http://www.tacd.org). This one of several TACD resolutions on ecommerce that were approved by the group. The others covered topics such as the US/EU safe harbor negotiations, jurisdiction, alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, spam, linking of web pages and the privacy implications of the Time Warner/AOL and similar mergers. (None of which are available from the TACD web page yet). TACD represents more than 60 consumer groups in the EU and the US, including all of the largest and best known consumer organizations. It is funded by the EU and US governments to provide a consumer perspective in the negotiations on the Trans Atlantic Economic Partnership (TEP), a very important trade negotiation between the US and the EU. Jamie Love <--------begin TACD recommendations----------------> Pharmaceuticals - access to medicines in developing countries TACD statement on ICANN The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is a non-profit organization incorporated in the State of California that is seeking broad control over resources and functions that are essential for the operation of the Internet. According to ICANN, this includes "responsibility for the IP address space allocation, protocol parameter assignment, domain name system management, and root server system management." Groups with various agendas are seeking ways to block access to websites that engage in a variety of activities, or to impose new Internet surveillance systems that can be used to impose liability on certain actions. There is now growing attention to the role of the DNS system and Internet protocol development as a system of control over Internet usage. For example, by controlling the allocation and mapping of domain names and IP numbers, it is possible to render a web page invisible and unfindable to most Internet addresses. There are also proposals for various Internet protocols that would enable new mechanisms for surveillance of Internet transmissions. Because of their strategic importance, there are profound concerns over the future control over the resources to control DNS management. A number of groups with diverse interests and views are seeking mechanisms to limit the use of DNS management to narrow technical issues necessary for the operation of the Internet, and to prevent the system of DNS management from being used as an enforcement mechanism for government or private policy making. It is the view of TACD that ICANN's mission should be limited so that it does not become a general purpose Internet governance organization. The records of ICANN should be open to the public, including financial records, and all ICANN contracts, and ICANN should be accountable to the public. The public should be given an annual opportunity to review and comment on the ICANN budget. The Budget of ICANN should be subject to review by the countries that provide the ICANN charter. Fees associated with domain registration should only be spent on activities essential to the management of the DNS system. TACD asks the US and the EU to report on the legal mechanics that will limit ICANN's power to address broad Internet content issues, and insure public accountability. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Feb 14 13:37:31 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3183D21B0A for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 13:37:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA09703 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 13:37:31 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38A84C0C.892FF140@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 13:40:12 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] The D.I.R.T. product is real, but not full featured, say hackers I am informed by Ted Bridis that the D.I.R.T. software is a real product, but considered inferior to BackOrifice 2000, by hackers, because of a lack of "features," and because it can be detected. I'm thinking that the security issues for PCs is bigger than I had imagined. (Speaking as someone who's desktop Linux box was hacked a few weeks ago). Jamie ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Feb 14 16:49:49 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E2CF21B28 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 16:49:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA14314 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 16:49:49 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38A8791F.77B5D63E@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 16:52:31 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Bill Clinton on putting government contracts on the Internet The following is a letter that we have received from President Clinton, responding to our letter of January 6, 2000, asking for an executive order setting out proceedures to put government contracts on the Internet. We were pleased to receive a response directly from the President, and to see that OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) will be reviewing this issue. I have asked OMB for a meeting with OIRA Administrator John Spotila to discuss this further. THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON February 8, 2000 Mr.Ralph Nader Mr. James Love Post Office Box 19312 Washington, D.C. 20036 Dear Ralph and James: Thank you for your letter requesting that I issue an executive order setting procedures for placing government contracts on the Internet. I understand the concerns that prompted you to write, and I've forwarded your correspondence to my staff in OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs for review. As you may know, I issued an executive memorandum in December that calls on federal agencies to use technology to ensure that governmental services and information are easily accessible to the public. The Information Age offers us exciting possibilities for the 21st century, and my Administration has worked hard to take advantage of this remarkable opportunity. We will continue to encourage the use of technology to improve government services and accountability. I appreciate knowing your thoughts on these important matters, and I send my best wishes. Sincerely, (signed) Bill Clinton <--------------background information-----------> Our January 6, 2000 letter to President Clinton: http://www.cptech.org/ecom/contracts-jan6.html Palmedo and McCarthy's survey of May 1999 contacts http://www.cptech.org/ecom/may1999.txt URL for President Clinton's response http://www.cptech.org/ecom/clintonletter.html ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Feb 14 22:57:27 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6BA921B0A for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 22:57:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-6.essential.org [216.0.125.6]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA20718 for ; Mon, 14 Feb 2000 22:57:25 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38A10576.3382DC39@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2000 01:13:10 -0500 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgements I am not an expert on international law, and indeed, I am not a lawyer, so I hope I am getting this right. The Hague Conference on Private International Law has issued a preliminary draft for a "Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters." This contains controversial elements regarding electronic commerce. There will be a meeting of ecommerce experts in Ottawa on February 27 thorugh March 1 to discuss the ecommerce issues. Consumer groups will be meeting with US officials about this meeting next week, on February 22. Here are some ULRs for information regarding the proposed convention: http://www.hcch.net/e/events/press01e.html http://cuiwww.unige.ch/~billard/ipilec/ http://www.state.gov/www/global/legal_affairs/whats_new.html http://www.state.gov/www/global/legal_affairs/991030_forjudg.html One contact person in the government is Michael Donohue at the FTC. His email address is mdonohue@ftc.gov. From the first press release, here is item 5: 5.For business-to-consumer transactions, further assessment is required in the light of all the interests involved. Particularly, during the second plenary, Professor Catherine Kessedjian proposed to avoid the traditional dichotomy between the "country of origin" (i.e. that of the seller or provider) and the "country of reception" (i.e. that of the consumer). She proposed to start with a process of site-certification along the lines of the work done within the icc and other private organisations. This certification process should include minimum substantive rules of protection for the consumer including warranties, and a fair and easy dispute resolution mechanism which could possibly be free of charge to the consumer. When a site has obtained the certification label, it could provide for the application of the law of the country of origin and for the courts of that country for the residual cases which could not be solved by the dispute resolution mechanism part of the certification. If a site has not been certified, then the law and the courts of the consumer's location would be competent. This is a controversial proposal. I'll provide additional details later. Jamie -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Feb 15 12:50:35 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1E5C21AFF for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2000 12:50:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA30885 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2000 12:50:34 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38A9917C.FB596391@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 12:48:44 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] CHEW: UK based effort to overcome restrictive use of copyright in academic writing This is a note about an effort established by the Copyright in Higher Education Workgroup (CHEW), to analyse and overcome financial and pedagogical barriers to UK university teaching and learning created by the restrictive use of copyright in academic writing. Their "first campaign" is the UK Higher Education Copying Accord. Jamie Subject: Copyrights Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 17:17:11 +0000 (GMT Standard Time) From: Alan Story To: love@cptech.org James: I thought that you might be interested in the following...and might want to "pass it on." Cheers Alan Story Intellectual Property Kent Law School Canterbury UK ANNOUNCEMENT - APOLOGIES FOR CROSS POSTINGS As many of you are aware, there are a growing number of problems in the access to and use of teaching materials in higher education (and further education) in the United Kingdom. In particular, restrictive conceptions of copyright and the privileging of the interests of publishers have led to the replacement of traditional copyright notions of "fair dealing" with expensive and cumbersome user-pay turnstiles. To bring these issues to the attention of all members of the academic community and to work for reform of the current regime, a new group, the Copyright in Higher Education Workgroup (CHEW) has recently been formed. Our first project has been to establish a website that focuses on a range of copyright issues in education. This site includes the results of a recent survey about the effects of the Higher Education Copying Accord (HECA) on teaching and learning in UK universities and puts forward various analyses of HECA. CHEW's first campaign is directed at the reform /repeal of HECA when it expires in January 2001. The website's URL is: http://www.law.warwick.ac.uk/ncle/Copyright/ We are also interested in recognising the "good practice" efforts of some academic journals that allow non-profit educational photocopying under an "open licence" system. The website gives examples of such journals and welcomes your own suggested additions. The site was created with the assistance of the United Kingdom Centre for Legal Education (UKCLE) at the University of Warwick with whom CHEW is affiliated. To encourage discussion and debate over copyright issues in education, CHEW has also established a Mailbase discussion list entitled "Copyrights." The list and archives of past messages are accessible from the above website. You can also send a message to the list by e-mailing: copyrights@mailbase.ac.uk The website of "Copyrights " is: http://www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/copyrights/ Although the initial members of CHEW are UK legal academics, the group wants to address copyright issues in other disciplines and work with those individuals and groups interested in reform. Our main focus at present is on the problems that have been created for the provision of course (study) packs and the operation of Library short loan (reserve) collections. We are also interested in hearing from academic colleagues in other countries who may face their own copyright-related issues. Those individuals and groups who maintain copyright-related websites are welcome to add a link between their own site and CHEW's site. We would like to be informed if you insert such a link?and we will reciprocate. CHEW itself can be contacted by e-mail at: s.l.fury@warwick.ac.uk specifying CHEW in the subject line. We welcome your comments and criticisms. And we also welcome new members. Alan Story Kent Law School Canterbury Kent For the Copyright in Higher Education Workgroup (CHEW) ---------------------- Alan Story Kent Law School Eliot College University of Kent Canterbury Kent UK CT2 7NS a.c.story@ukc.ac.uk Ph. 01227 823316 Fax 01227 827831 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Feb 15 14:19:38 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70D1021AFF for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2000 14:19:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA00554 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2000 14:19:38 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38A9A65C.7110E6EF@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 14:17:48 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Dan Gillmore: Tech hypocrisy running rampant Echoing our feelings exactly, is Dan Gillmor's recent column http://www.sjmercury.com/svtech/columns/gillmor/docs/dg021500.htm Posted at 8:45 p.m. PST Monday, February 14, 2000 Tech hypocrisy running rampant America Online and DoubleClick are Exhibits A, B in mockery of integrity BY DAN GILLMOR Mercury News Technology Columnist IF hypocrisy were an Academy Award category, the technology industry would vie with politics for the Oscar. [snip] ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Feb 15 14:31:33 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01A2621AFF for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2000 14:31:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA00894 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2000 14:31:32 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38A9A927.35BEA686@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 14:29:43 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] More from the world of corporate big brother. Subject: Re: Big Brother goes commercial Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 11:07:37 -0800 From: "Mike W. Perry" To: James Love How did I get on this spam list? More from the world of corporate big brother. --Mike The Digital Detective Workshop Digital evidence acquisition tools and techniques are demonstrated in this "hands-on"computer investigations training seminar. Who's using your company's computers? Are they: * Working, or playing games and surfing the Internet? * Accessing your confidential files? * Leaking proprietary data by E-Mail? * Downloading illegal files or images? * Storing personal info on company PCs? * Committing fraud against the company? * Juggling the company payroll records? * Using E-Mail for "Flames" or sexual harassment? Are you prepared for these scenarios: * An employee left and changed critical computer passwords? What do you do? * An employee is using company computers for illegal purposes. What do you do? * A female employee receives sexually harassing e-mail anonymously. What do you do? * You seize a computer and need to develop evidence of wrongdoing. What do you do? * You're company is based in Texas and you need to supervise employee computer use in twenty-two cities around the world. What do you do? Who should attend this workshop? * Government and Law enforcement personnel charged with the investigation of computer crime * Corporate security personnel charged with computer security and incident response * Private Investigators hired to assist in computer related investigations. What we'll cover: Types of Computer Crime Cyber Law Basics How to Bypass Passwords Cracking Encrypted Files Tracing the Source of E-Mail How to Track a Suspect Online How to Monitor Online Activity How to Identify Software Pirates How to Track & Recover Stolen Laptops & PCs How to Match a File on a Diskette to a PC How to Recover Deleted Data Data Hiding Techniques Text Search Techniques Finding Disguised or Hidden Images How to Find Unique Identifiers in Documents How to Remotely Monitor a Target PC How to Create Trackable Electronic Files Types of Investigative Software Actual "Hands-On" Demonstrations of the latest High-Tech Evidence Gathering Software We'll do a demonstration of a counter-attack from a honeypot that should raise a few eyebrows... this just might take the fun out of hacking. We'll also do a demonstration on how to track electronic files that are lifted from your machine by intruders/industrial spies... and they are not ..exe files ;-) Don't miss the Digital Detective Workshop! * Each Participant will receive a CD-ROM with demonstration & evaluation copies of investigative, forensic & security software plus all PowerPoint presentations used during the seminar (over 400 MB). * Each Participant will receive a Certificate of Attendance * Each Participant receives a FREE copy of PC PhoneHome Theft Protection & Recovery Software for Laptops & PCs which includes one year of free recovery service Seminar Date: Friday, February 18th, 2000 Hours: 0800 hrs to 1730 hrs. Location: Codex Data Systems Regional Training Center 167 Route 304 Bardonia, New York 10954 Exit 8W off the Palisades Parkway (just 18 Miles Northwest of New York City) Seminar Fee: $495.00 per participant Visa - Mastercard - American Express Accepted US Government Impact Cards Accepted Complimentary continental breakfast, luncheon & afternoon refreshments are included. Please forward/fax agency/business letterhead with attendee's name(s) to reserve your seat. Register now . . . seating is VERY limited. For further information, contact: Codex Data Systems, Inc. 167 Route 304 Bardonia, New York 10954 USA Tel: 914-627-0011 Fax: 914-627-0211 E-Mail: sales@codexdatasystems.com Or visit our website at: From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Feb 17 20:48:14 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A59A21AFF for ; Thu, 17 Feb 2000 20:48:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA23271; Thu, 17 Feb 2000 20:48:09 -0500 Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2000 20:48:09 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: AT-MEMBERS@ABANET.ORG, random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Subject: [Random-bits] Robert Reich on AOL/Time Warner merger http://www.americanprospect.com/archives/V11-7/reich.html The American Prospect - Online V O L U M E 1 1 I S S U E 7 F e b r u a r y =A0 1 4 2 0 0 0 AOL-Time Warner's Kingly Prerogative Robert B. Reich Any time now, government economists will decide whether America Online's (AOL's) $165-billion proposed take-over of Time Warner is likely to be good or bad for consumers. If good, the government will sign off. If bad, there'll be negotiations with AOL and Time Warner until an agreement can be reached on what the new company would have to do to answer economic objections. The inquiry will be quiet and businesslike, occurring in colorless offices and occasionally in meeting rooms filled not only with economists but also with government lawyers and the counsel and investment bankers representing AOL and Time Warner. I'll save all those economists and lawyers and bankers a lot of time and trouble, and answer their questions right here: [snip] So the take-over should fly through. But if government officials were paying proper attention, they wouldn't let this one slide by. The antitrust movement of the last decades of the nineteenth century wasn't animated by concerns about consumer welfare. Reformers worried that concentrations of economic power would undermine democracy. Republican Senator John Sherman of Ohio, chief sponsor of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, said the power of the trusts amounted to "a kingly prerogative, inconsistent with our form of government." Here's a checklist of questions government officials should ask about the proposed take-over, and the answers: [snip] From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Feb 18 09:03:35 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C073521B0C; Fri, 18 Feb 2000 09:03:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA29618; Fri, 18 Feb 2000 09:03:34 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38AD50E6.26493373@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2000 09:02:14 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Carl Kaplan: Texas Lawsuit Says Web Cookies Allow Illegal Stalking Yet another example of why government officials need to be thinking more seriously about how the Internet will lead to new political changes to address the law of cyberspace. State based cookies laws seem like a crazy way to do things, but what is the best alternative? Jamie http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/02/cyber/cyberlaw/18law.html Feb 18, 2000 By CARL S. KAPLAN Lawsuit Says Web Cookies Allow Illegal Stalking Under the law of Texas, a person who follows another person around repeatedly in a way that is calculated to cause the victim to fear for his safety or the safety of his family or property is guilty of the crime of stalking. Obviously, the law would apply to a crazed fan who shows up with a baseball at at a movie starlet's home every Saturday night. But in the Internet age, can the Texas law be applied to a Web site owner that is accused of electronically monitoring the browsing habits of its customers? [snip] ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Feb 19 00:10:14 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from cptech.org (slip129-37-49-243.ca.us.prserv.net [129.37.49.243]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E20EE21B06 for ; Sat, 19 Feb 2000 00:10:09 -0500 (EST) Sender: jamie@venice.essential.org Message-ID: <38AE258A.122EF43B@cptech.org> Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 00:09:30 -0500 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Colorado Spam law A Colorado legislative committee approves anti-spam bill, that would require ADV label on unsolicited spam, and make no distinction between commercial and non-commerical spam. Jamie http://news.excite.com/news/ap/000218/09/internet-spam Updated 9:46 AM ET February 18, 2000 DENVER (AP) - Internet spammers would have to slap a crystal-clear "advertisement" label on all electronic junk mail and provide an easy way for consumers to scratch their names from mailing lists under a bill passed Thursday by a state House committee. Before approving the bill by a 10-2 vote, the House Business Affairs and Labor Committee toughened the rules further by adding politicians and nonprofit groups to the mailers who must use the dreaded "ADV:" label. The tag must appear at the beginning of any junk mail's subject memo, which appears in consumers' lists of new e-mail and guides them on what they wish to read. [snip] Any individual computer user receiving mail that violates the law could sue the sender for $10 for each message. But the bill also allows that customer's Internet service provider to collect hundreds or thousands of bad messages sent through its main computers and sue the mailer for $10 on each one, providing the incentive of millions of dollars in potential damages. -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Feb 19 00:11:03 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from cptech.org (slip129-37-49-243.ca.us.prserv.net [129.37.49.243]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5489521B06 for ; Sat, 19 Feb 2000 00:11:02 -0500 (EST) Sender: jamie@venice.essential.org Message-ID: <38AE25BF.6DCDF97B@cptech.org> Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 00:10:23 -0500 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] TACD E-Commerce recommendations on the web The TACD E-Commerce recommendations from the Feb 10-12 meeting are on the web here: http://www.tacd.org/ecommercef.html -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Feb 19 11:43:48 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C304621B02 for ; Sat, 19 Feb 2000 11:43:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA15716 for ; Sat, 19 Feb 2000 11:43:48 -0500 Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 11:43:48 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Text of Colorado spam bill This is what I got off the Colorado House web page. It does not appear to be the current version, because it exempts non-profits and political organizations, and I believe those exemptions have been eliminated. However, the restrictions on SPAM appear to limited to unsolicited commercial announcements, which are defined as: "UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL MESSAGE" MEANS AN ELECTRONIC MAIL MESSAGE SENT WITHOUT THE RECIPIENT'S EXPRESSED PERMISSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROMOTING REAL PROPERTY, GOODS, OR SERVICES FOR SALE OR LEASE; So it would seem to this layman that the law would not address messages that were not commerical in content, regardless of who sends them. Jamie Second Regular Session Sixty-second General Assembly LLS NO. 00-0570.01 Bart Miller HOUSE BILL 00-1309 STATE OF COLORADO BY REPRESENTATIVES Mitchell, May, Hagedorn, Kester, Takis, Tupa, Young, and Zimmerman; also SENATORS Teck, Chlouber, Dennis, and Weddig. A BILL FOR AN ACT 101 CONCERNING ENACTMENT OF THE "COLORADO JUNK EMAIL LAW", AND, 102 IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, RESTRICTING UNSOLICITED 103 COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL MESSAGES. Bill Summary (Note: This summary applies to this bill as introduced and does not necessarily reflect any amendments that may be subsequently adopted.) Enacts the "Colorado Junk Email Law". Defines the terms "current or prior business relationship", "electronic mail", "electronic mail service provider", "person", and "unsolicited commercial electronic mail message" for purposes of this act. Sets forth certain activities, with respect to the transmission of certain unsolicited commercial electronic mail messages, that will be violations of this law. Creates a private civil right of action in the case of violations of this law. Allows the prevailing party to recover actual damages, attorney fees, and costs. Also entitles the prevailing party to collect a civil penalty of $10 for each unsolicited commercial electronic mail message transmitted in violation of this law. Upon request, authorizes courts to conduct proceedings under this law in such a way as to protect the trade secrets of any party and to protect the security of any computer system or computer software. Authorizes county courts and small claims courts to enter injunctive relief in cases filed under this law. Provides civil immunity for electronic mail service providers that adopt measures to prevent the transmission of unsolicited commercial electronic mail messages in violation of this law and provides that no electronic mail service provider shall be liable for the mere transmission of bulk, unsolicited commercial electronic mail messages over the provider's computer network. Capital letters indicate new material to be added to existing statute. Dashes through the words indicate deletions from existing statute. 1 Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Colorado: 2 SECTION 1. Title 6, Colorado Revised Statutes, is amended BY 3 THE ADDITION OF A NEW ARTICLE to read: 4 ARTICLE 2.5 5 Colorado Junk Email Law 6 6-2.5-101. Short title. THIS ARTICLE SHALL BE KNOWN AND MAY 7 BE CITED AS THE "COLORADO JUNK EMAIL LAW". 8 6-2.5-102. Definitions. AS USED IN THIS ARTICLE, UNLESS THE 9 CONTEXT OTHERWISE REQUIRES: 10 (1) "CURRENT OR PRIOR BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP" MEANS: 11 (a) THE RECIPIENT HAS INDICATED A WILLINGNESS TO RECEIVE 12 COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL MESSAGES FROM THAT SENDER; OR 13 (b) THE RECIPIENT HAS PURCHASED OR LEASED REAL PROPERTY, 14 GOODS, OR SERVICES FROM THE SENDER OF THE UNSOLICITED 15 COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL MESSAGE, THE MESSAGE FROM THE 16 SENDER DIRECTLY CONCERNS THE PURCHASE OR LEASE, AND THE MESSAGE 17 IS SENT WITHIN THE WARRANTY PERIOD OR WITHIN THIRTEEN MONTHS 18 AFTER THE DATE OF PURCHASE OR LEASE, WHICHEVER PERIOD IS A 19 GREATER LENGTH OF TIME; OR 20 (c) THE RECIPIENT HAS AN ONGOING CONTRACT WITH THE SENDER 21 OF THE UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL MESSAGE, AND THE 22 MESSAGE FROM THE SENDER DIRECTLY CONCERNS THE ONGOING 23 CONTRACT. 24 (2) "ELECTRONIC MAIL" MEANS AN ELECTRONIC MESSAGE THAT IS 1 TRANSMITTED BETWEEN TWO OR MORE COMPUTERS OR ELECTRONIC 2 TERMINALS. "ELECTRONIC MAIL" INCLUDES ELECTRONIC MESSAGES THAT 3 ARE TRANSMITTED WITHIN OR BETWEEN COMPUTER NETWORKS. 4 (3) "ELECTRONIC MAIL SERVICE PROVIDER" MEANS ANY PERSON 5 THAT IS AN INTERMEDIARY IN SENDING OR RECEIVING ELECTRONIC MAIL 6 AND PROVIDES TO END USERS OF ELECTRONIC MAIL SERVICES THE ABILITY 7 TO SEND OR RECEIVE ELECTRONIC MAIL. 8 (4) "PERSON" SHALL HAVE THE SAME MEANING AS SET FORTH IN 9 SECTION 2-4-401 (8), C.R.S. 10 (5) "UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL MESSAGE" 11 MEANS AN ELECTRONIC MAIL MESSAGE SENT WITHOUT THE RECIPIENT'S 12 EXPRESSED PERMISSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROMOTING REAL PROPERTY, 13 GOODS, OR SERVICES FOR SALE OR LEASE; 14 6-2.5-103. Restrictions on certain commercial electronic mail 15 - violations of article. (1) IT SHALL BE A VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE FOR 16 ANY PERSON THAT SENDS AN UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL 17 MESSAGE TO FAIL TO DISCLOSE THE ACTUAL POINT-OF-ORIGIN ELECTRONIC 18 MAIL ADDRESS OF THE UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL 19 MESSAGE. 20 (2) IT SHALL BE A VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE FOR ANY PERSON 21 THAT SENDS AN UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL MESSAGE TO 22 FALSIFY ELECTRONIC MAIL TRANSMISSION INFORMATION OR OTHER 23 ROUTING INFORMATION FOR THE UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC 24 MAIL MESSAGE. 25 (3) IT SHALL BE A VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE FOR ANY PERSON 26 THAT SENDS AN UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL MESSAGE TO -3- 1 USE A THIRD PARTY'S INTERNET ADDRESS OR DOMAIN NAME WITHOUT THE 2 THIRD PARTY'S CONSENT FOR THE PURPOSES OF TRANSMITTING 3 ELECTRONIC MAIL. 4 (4) IT SHALL BE A VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE FOR ANY PERSON 5 THAT SENDS A COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL MESSAGE TO FAIL TO USE 6 THE EXACT CHARACTERS "ADV:" (THE CAPITAL LETTERS "A", "D", AND 7 "V", IN THAT ORDER, FOLLOWED IMMEDIATELY BY A COLON) AS THE FIRST 8 FOUR CHARACTERS IN THE SUBJECT LINE OF AN UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL 9 ELECTRONIC MAIL MESSAGE UNLESS THE SENDER: 10 (a) IS A TAX EXEMPT NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION; OR 11 (b) IS A POLITICAL OR POLLING ORGANIZATION; OR 12 (c) IS AN ORGANIZATION USING ELECTRONIC MAIL TO 13 COMMUNICATE EXCLUSIVELY WITH ITS MEMBERS; OR 14 (d) IS AN ORGANIZATION USING ELECTRONIC MAIL TO 15 COMMUNICATE EXCLUSIVELY WITH ITS EMPLOYEES OR CONTRACTORS, OR 16 BOTH; OR 17 (e) HAS A CURRENT OR PRIOR BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE 18 RECIPIENT, AS DEFINED IN SECTION 6-2.5-102 (1). 19 (5) IT SHALL BE A VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE FOR ANY PERSON 20 THAT SENDS AN UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL MESSAGE TO 21 FAIL TO PROVIDE A MECHANISM ALLOWING RECIPIENTS TO EASILY REMOVE 22 THEMSELVES FROM THE SENDER'S ELECTRONIC MAIL ADDRESS LISTS SO 23 THAT THEY ARE NOT INCLUDED IN FUTURE MAILINGS. IT SHALL ALSO BE A 24 VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE TO SEND UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL 25 ELECTRONIC MAIL MESSAGES TO ANY PERSON THAT HAS REQUESTED UNDER 26 THIS SUBSECTION (5) TO BE REMOVED FROM THE SENDER'S ELECTRONIC -4- 1 MAIL LISTS OR TO PROVIDE THE ELECTRONIC MAIL ADDRESS OF ANY SUCH 2 PERSON TO ANY THIRD PARTY, WHETHER OR NOT SUCH THIRD PARTY IS 3 PART OF THE SENDER'S BUSINESS ORGANIZATION. 4 6-2.5-104. Enforcement - civil right of action for damages - 5 civil penalty. (1) IN THE CASE OF ANY VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE, ANY 6 PERSON, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY ELECTRONIC MAIL SERVICE 7 PROVIDER, MAY FILE A CIVIL ACTION IN A COURT OF COMPETENT 8 JURISDICTION AND MAY, UPON PROOF OF ANY SUCH VIOLATION, RECOVER 9 SUCH SUMS AS ALLOWED UNDER THIS SECTION. 0 (2) (a) IN ANY SUCH ACTION, THE PREVAILING PARTY SHALL BE 1 ENTITLED TO ACTUAL DAMAGES. UPON A SHOWING THAT THE SENDER OF 2 AN UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL MESSAGE VIOLATED ANY 3 PROVISION OF THIS ARTICLE, WHETHER OR NOT THE VIOLATION RESULTED 4 IN A FINANCIAL LOSS OR INJURY, THE PREVAILING PARTY MAY RECOVER 5 ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS. 6 (b) IN ANY SUCH ACTION, THE PREVAILING PARTY IS ALSO ENTITLED 7 TO RECOVER AS PART OF THE JUDGMENT A CIVIL PENALTY IN THE AMOUNT 8 OF TEN DOLLARS FOR EACH UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL 9 MESSAGE TRANSMITTED IN VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE. 0 (3) THE REMEDIES, DUTIES, PROHIBITIONS, AND PENALTIES OF THIS 1 SECTION ARE NOT EXCLUSIVE AND ARE IN ADDITION TO ALL OTHER CAUSES 2 OF ACTION, REMEDIES, AND PENALTIES PROVIDED BY LAW. 3 (4) AT THE REQUEST OF ANY PARTY TO AN ACTION BROUGHT 4 PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION, THE COURT MAY, IN ITS DISCRETION, 5 CONDUCT ALL LEGAL PROCEEDINGS IN SUCH A WAY AS TO PROTECT THE 6 SECRECY AND SECURITY OF ANY COMPUTER, COMPUTER NETWORK, -5- 1 COMPUTER DATA, OR COMPUTER SOFTWARE INVOLVED IN ORDER TO 2 PREVENT POSSIBLE RECURRENCE OF THE SAME OR SIMILAR CONDUCT BY 3 ANOTHER PERSON AND TO PROTECT THE TRADE SECRETS OF ANY PARTY. 4 (5) ELECTRONIC MAIL SERVICE PROVIDERS THAT ADOPT AND 5 IMPLEMENT TERMS, CONDITIONS, AND TECHNICAL MEASURES TO PREVENT 6 THE TRANSMISSION OF UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL 7 MESSAGES IN VIOLATION OF THIS ARTICLE SHALL BE IMMUNE FROM CIVIL 8 LIABILITY FOR ANY SUCH ACTIONS, AND NO PROVISION OF THIS ARTICLE 9 SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO CREATE ANY LIABILITY FOR SUCH ACTIONS. 10 (6) NO ELECTRONIC MAIL SERVICE PROVIDER SHALL BE LIABLE FOR 11 THE MERE TRANSMISSION OF UNSOLICITED COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL 12 MESSAGES OVER THE PROVIDER'S COMPUTER NETWORK. 13 SECTION 2. 13-6-105 (1) (f), Colorado Revised Statutes, is 14 amended to read: 15 13-6-105. Specific limits on civil jurisdiction. (1) The county 16 court shall have no civil jurisdiction except that specifically conferred 17 upon it by law. In particular, it shall have no jurisdiction over the 18 following matters: 19 (f) Original proceedings for the issuance of injunctions, except as 20 provided in section 13-6-104 (5), except as required to enforce restrictive 21 covenants on residential property AND TO ENFORCE THE PROVISIONS OF 22 ARTICLE 2.5 OF TITLE 6, C.R.S., and except as otherwise specifically 23 authorized in this article or, if there is no authorization, by rule of the 24 Colorado supreme court. 25 SECTION 3. 13-6-403 (2) (h), Colorado Revised Statutes, is 26 amended to read: -6- 1 13-6-403. Jurisdiction of small claims court - limitations. 2 (2) The small claims court shall have no jurisdiction except that 3 specifically conferred upon it by law. In particular, it shall have no 4 jurisdiction over the following matters: 5 (h) Actions involving injunctive relief, except as required to 6 enforce restrictive covenants on residential property AND TO ENFORCE THE 7 PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 2.5 OF TITLE 6, C.R.S.; 8 SECTION 4. Effective date - applicability. (1) This act shall 9 take effect at 12:01 a.m. on the day following the expiration of the 10 ninety-day period after final adjournment of the general assembly that is 11 allowed for submitting a referendum petition pursuant to article V, 12 section 1 (3) of the state constitution; except that, if a referendum petition 13 is filed against this act or an item, section, or part of this act within such 14 period, then the act, item, section, or part, if approved by the people, shall 15 take effect on the date of the official declaration of the vote thereon by 16 proclamation of the governor. 17 (2) The provisions of this act shall apply to acts occurring on or 18 after the applicable effective date of this act. -7- -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Feb 19 11:51:57 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E09921B02 for ; Sat, 19 Feb 2000 11:51:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA15791 for ; Sat, 19 Feb 2000 11:51:56 -0500 Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 11:51:56 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Clark Evans on Colorado Spam Law From cce@clarkevans.com Sat Feb 19 11:50:58 2000 Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 11:22:30 -0500 (EST) From: Clark C. Evans To: James Love Subject: Re: [Random-bits] Colorado Spam law Yes. This was unfortunate. There is a way to mark messages without messing around with the title -- you add a header saying that it's an advertisement. Actually, there already is a header for this, it's called the bulk header, which is the internet equivalent of 3rd class mail. If all of the legislators would require this header to be inserted for advertisments (obviously bulk), then everthing would be just great. As it stands, about 1/10 of my junk mail comes from those who mark it bulk. If every state passes a similar law, for instance, if Michigan passes a law requiring the title to start with "BULK:" then there will be no way for the advertiser to not violate one or more laws; which could make the laws unenforceable. This isn't a "state" issue, in fact, it isn't a "national" issue; it's an international issue -- a small conference should make a recommendation and then each nation should implement the recommendtation. Funny thing is, there already is a recommentation (one of the ITEF RFC's describes the bulk header in detail). Besides... the bulk header is perfect -- it is a clear technical difference so it would be easy to distinguish in court. Best, Clark James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | love@cptech.org Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Feb 19 11:57:13 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E26CF21B02 for ; Sat, 19 Feb 2000 11:57:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA15858 for ; Sat, 19 Feb 2000 11:57:12 -0500 Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 11:57:12 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] TACD statement on Junk E-Mail The Colordo bill seems to be consistent with the TACD statement regarding unsolicited commercial email, although there may be some discussion regarding the TACD comment regarding distinctions between commercial and non-commercial speech, and more generally, the issue of the need to coordinate these policies globally, an issue raised by Clark Evans in his missive. Here is the TACD statement: Unsolicited Commercial Email (Passed on Feb 12, 2000) The use of unsolicited commercial email is a growing burden for persons who use email. Consumers need better mechanisms to control and manage unwanted commercial solicitations. This is an international problem. Governments need to work together to develop common approaches to address consumer concerns about unsolicited commercial email. One approach would be to require labelling of unsolicited commercial solicitations by electronic mail, so that consumers or Internet service providers can better manage such information. Such approaches should recognize the distinction between commercial and non-commercial speech. TACD asks the US and the EU to report on efforts to coordinate the development of international mechanisms to address the problem of unsolicited commercial email. Jamie -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org _______________________________________________ Ecommerce mailing list Ecommerce@lists.essential.org http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/ecommerce James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | love@cptech.org Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Feb 19 19:00:18 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from cptech.org (ppp-7.essential.org [216.0.125.7]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7881621B02 for ; Sat, 19 Feb 2000 19:00:17 -0500 (EST) Sender: jamie@venice.essential.org Message-ID: <38AF2E6F.12193409@cptech.org> Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2000 18:59:43 -0500 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Matt Drudge: TW "making a better world' with AOL/Swimsuit deal AOL/TW synergy story by Matt Drudge. jl http://www.drudgereport.com/matt.htm XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU FEB 17 2000 12:51:07 ET XXXXX Matt Drudge 'MAKING A BETTER WORLD'; SWIMSUIT EDITION FIRST STEP IN AOL/TIME WARNER GLOBAL SOCIAL AGENDA The deal still may be months away from being realized, but the fruits of the proposed merger between America Online and TIME WARNER are already being tasted. Under a mutual agreement, AOL will have exclusive rights starting Monday to give its 21 million members a sneak peek at the cover of this year's Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue! [snip] "We have an unbelievable opportunity to really make a difference, not just in terms of the services people use, but also in terms of the kind of impact we can have on society," AOL head Steve Case declared after he announced his marriage to TIME WARNER. "This notion of a global interconnection can actually be used for a very good social purpose," agreed TW's Gerry Levin. "This merger is not just about big business. This is not just about money. This is about making a better world for people because we now have the technology and the instruments to do that." [snip] From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Feb 20 13:35:26 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89DB421B02 for ; Sun, 20 Feb 2000 13:35:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA28445 for ; Sun, 20 Feb 2000 13:35:26 -0500 Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2000 13:35:26 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Seth Shulman: Software Patents Tangle the Web http://www.techreview.com/articles/ma00/shulman.htm March/April 2000 Software Patents Tangle the Web A profusion of new software patents on Internet business methods puts our notions of intellectual property to the biggest test yet. By Seth Shulman From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Feb 22 13:20:00 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FDDB21B0A for ; Tue, 22 Feb 2000 13:20:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA01549; Tue, 22 Feb 2000 13:20:00 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38B2D32D.A2AC98D6@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 13:19:25 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Cc: "Farber, David" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Linda McQuaig on who wants regulation of Internet This is Linda McQuaig's comment on the response to iCraveTV. Jamie Subject: Linda McQuaig on Net Regulation Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 12:09:09 -0500 From: Pippa Lawson They crave de-regulation...don't they? > Despite the widespread belief that it's virtually > impossible to regulate the Internet, the iCraveTV > drama shows us that if you're big enough and > powerful enough, you can do just about anything > By: Linda McQuaig > Before we get to the short-lived drama of iCraveTV, let's > consider another recent Internet story - the America Online > takeover of Time Warner a few weeks ago. > There's been much said about how this takeover would > concentrate power within the vast information and entertainment > industry. But there's been little talk about doing anything to > regulate this crucial, multi-billion dollar industry. > If anything, there's been talk of further deregulation. In > Canada, our regulatory body, the CRTC, had already decided last > year not to regulate the Internet. So of course, there would be > nothing the CRTC would do to enforce Canadian content rules on > the programming that would now soon be coming through the > Internet as a result of this takeover. > In many ways, iCraveTV's action was right in sync with the > mood of the times, simply exploiting the endless new > possibilities of the Internet > Indeed, a CRTC official suggested that the takeover might make > it necessary for us to actually deregulate the related field of > television. His point was that since there's no way to enforce > Canadian-content rules on the Internet, why should Canadian TV > broadcasters be forced to submit to them either? > It all seemed like just one more example of how powerless > governments are these days, in the face of globalization and the > on-line revolution. No point it trying to fight it; the computer > has changed the world, and anyone trying to resist is simply a > Luddite. > Except, it turns out, if it's big business doing the > resisting. Take the case of iCraveTV. In many ways, iCraveTV's > action was right in sync with the mood of the times, simply > exploiting the endless new possibilities of the Internet. > But in doing so, it stepped on the toes of the powerful > companies in the U.S. entertainment business. > They (media giants) certainly don't buy that nonsense about > how it's impossible to regulate the Internet. When their > interests are at stake, they find a way to regulate the > Internet. > And when it comes to defending their own interests, these > giants don't fool around. They certainly don't buy that nonsense > about how it's impossible to regulate the Internet. When their > interests are at stake, they find a way to regulate the > Internet. > So, for instance, the big entertainment companies simply sent > a high-powered team of lawyers to court and brought a whammy of > legal actions that quickly drove iCraveTV off the air and > threatened it with multi-million dollar lawsuits. It was even > reported that William Craig, president of the upstart company, > would be arrested if he dared to enter the U.S. > It wasn't enough just to shut down Craig's pirate operation, > they wanted to beat him up enough to scare anyone else with a > similar idea. > One thing that becomes clear from all this is that, lo and > behold, it is possible to regulate the Internet after all - if > you're rich and powerful enough. > Indeed, powerful companies have shown similar clout in their > ability to impose regulations on what's known as intellectual > property. > It would be hard to imagine anything much more difficult to > regulate than intellectual property - that is, the copyright > ownership of ideas, inventions and artistic works. But these > ownership rights are terribly important to powerful corporate > interests, ranging from pharmaceutical giants to Hollywood film > companies. So these corporate interests have used their clout to > get the U.S. government to put in place and enforce a worldwide > system to protect their copyrights. > Such a show of government potency is strangely lacking however > when it comes to regulating things the financial elite doesn't > want regulated - like international capital flows. > When it comes to regulating international capital flows - a > move that could be enormously beneficial to the world economy - > governments suddenly go limp. > For instance, a proposed tax on international capital flows, > known as the Tobin tax, is simply dismissed as unfeasible. How > could governments possibly regulate capital flows in these days > of world-wide computer networks? > Well, you can bet they'd find a way - if powerful financial > interests wanted them to. Just ask iCraveTV. > Linda McQuaig is an economic journalist and author of many > books, including Why Shoot the Hippo and The Wealthy Banker's > Wife. She currently writes a biweekly column for the National > Post. This commentary used by permission of Linda McQuaig and > CBC radio. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Feb 22 17:16:53 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E61D221AFF for ; Tue, 22 Feb 2000 17:16:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA07846 for ; Tue, 22 Feb 2000 17:16:52 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38B30AB2.E42F2EBF@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2000 17:16:18 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] Microsoft off the hook with Bush victory? Subject: Antitrust Enforcement in a Bush Administration Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 16:18:20 -0500 From: "McDavid, Janet L." To: AT-MEMBERS@MAIL.ABANET.ORG What does the group think about these comments by one of the Republican presidential candidates? Jan McDavid Bush pledges to scale back antitrust enforcement By Richard Wolffe in Columbia, South Carolina - 17 Feb 2000 05:24GMT George W. Bush, the Republican presidential frontrunner, indicated he would scale back antitrust enforcement if he won the White House, presaging a return to the minimalist intervention of the Reagan era. In his first public comments on antitrust policy, the Texas governor said he would restrict antitrust action to clear cases of price-fixing in markets - a standard many high-profile cases in recent years would not meet. His comments suggest the landmark Microsoft antitrust case, which returns to court next week for final legal arguments, would not have begun under a Bush administration. In an interview with the Financial Times, he said: "My own personal view, just in general, is the application of antitrust laws needs to be applied where there are clear cases of price-fixing." Mr Bush is battling to steady his campaign since his stunning 19-point defeat in New Hampshire by Senator John McCain. He holds a narrow lead in South Carolina before the crucial primary election contest on Saturday amid signs that his high-spending strategy is causing concern among fund-raisers. He has spent $53m of his $73m warchest. Asked if there was a role for aggressive antitrust enforcement in cases other than price-fixing, Mr Bush said: "Well no . . . everything evolves into price-fixing over time." "Price-fixing up and price-fixing down - price-fixing down to eliminate competition, price-fixing up to accumulate profit." Price-fixing cases have proved difficult to establish in court although the Justice department was successful in cracking global cartels in vitamins and graphite electrodes last year. Cases that would probably fail to reach Mr Bush's standards include lawsuits against Microsoft, Intel, Mastercard, Visa and American Airlines. While Microsoft is accused of seeking to carve up markets with its internet rival, Netscape Communications, no price-fixing or market division was agreed between the two companies. However Mr Bush said antitrust investigations might be warranted in agricultural markets such as hog farming. Reflecting his experience of campaigning in rural areas of Texas and Iowa, he said meatpackers might be exercising too much power through corporate-owned hog farms. Microsoft has contributed $300,000 (Ł186,335) to the Republican National Committee compared with $100,000 to the Democrat National Committee. American Airlines has contributed $232,000 to the RNC compared with $120,000 to the DNC. FT exclusive: Interview with George W. Bush ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Feb 23 14:09:40 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4AB721B09 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 14:09:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA28677 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 2000 14:09:40 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38B4305C.FA5BD18C@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 14:09:16 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Cem Kaner: UCITA: a bad law that protects bad software I assume that everyone who evers UCITA knows about Cem Kaner and his excellent work on this topic. Below is a URL to an article by him. CPT has asked Vergil Bushnell to collect various click on/shrink wrapped contracts and identify troublesome clauses that will be effected by UCTIA, and we will publish that next week. Jamie http://www.badsoftware.com/networld.htm Op-Ed in Network World Delta: Legal issues Head: UCITA: a bad law that protects bad software Byline: Cem Kaner and David L. Pels ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Feb 24 13:35:13 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C06421BC2 for ; Thu, 24 Feb 2000 13:35:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA21843 for ; Thu, 24 Feb 2000 13:35:13 -0500 Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2000 13:35:13 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] CPT Senate Statement on Africa AIDS crisis This is the CPT statement submitted for today's Senate hearing on the Africa AIDS crisis. Jamie http://www.cptech.org/ip/health/aids/frist-feb24-2000.html Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 200036 202.387.8030; fax 202.234.5176 http://www.cptech.org February 24, 2000 Senate Committee on Foreign Relations Subcommittee on African Affairs Washington, DC Dear Senators Frist and Feingold, Please include this statement as part of the record of the hearing on AIDS and Africa. Our comments will focus on the following topics: - What is US trade policy as it relates to access to medicines? - What are the concerns of public health groups with regard to US trade policy? I. US Trade policy and access to medicines. For decades, the US government has advanced the interests of large pharmaceutical companies in its trade policy. The pharmaceutical sector is considered a major export industry, and US government trade policy has been focused almost entirely upon the commercial interests of companies like Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer and other members of trade associations like the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association (PhRMA) and the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Associations (IFPMA). Among the features of US policy, as expressed in countless bilateral negotiations and multilateral fora, are the following: 1. The US government has pushed to end the exemptions for medicines in national patent laws. 2. The US government has pushed for a minimum term of 20 years in patent laws. 3. The US government has put pressure on governments to create patent extensions for pharmaceuticals. 4. The US has pushed for a broader scope of patenting, on issues such as patenting of doses and treatment regimes for medicines, formulations of medicines, patents on second uses of medicines, and patents on biotechnology. 5. The US government has been an aggressive opponent of the use of compulsory licensing of patents on medicines by developing countries. 6. The US government has objected when other countries have proposed US "Bolar" style patent exceptions for testing of bioequivalence of generic products. 7. The US government has opposed efforts by developing countries to require the use of the generic name of a product on pharmaceutical packaging, claiming this violates company trademark rights. 8. The US government has opposed the efforts by developing countries to require generic prescribing, or generic substitution laws, as a violation of company trademark rights. 9. The US government has opposed efforts by many countries to impose price controls on pharmaceuticals. 10. The US government has objected to efforts by many countries to use US style "managed care" formularies to obtain better prices on drugs. 11. The US government is seeking extensive non-patent regulatory barriers to entry for generic drugs, such as regulatory exclusive marketing rights for products not protected by patent. 12. The US government is asking countries to provide 10 years of commercial exclusivity for data used in regulatory reviews of the safety and efficacy of pharmaceuticals as a barrier to entry for generic versions -- even though the US laws only provide five years of data exclusivity. 13. US trade officials oppose laws that would permit parallel imports of pharmaceutical drugs, thereby denying countries the ability to get the best world price on branded pharmaceutical products. 14. The US government has rejected proposals by public health groups to permit the World Health Organization to use US government rights in taxpayer funded health care patents, to expand access to medicines in developing countries. 15. The US government has opposed proposals that the World Health Organization advise developing countries on intellectual property policies, as they relate to access to HIV/AIDS drugs. I could add to the list or simply refer persons to the National Trade Estimates (NTE) reports of the United States Trade Representative (USTR), other US government trade publications and CPT's extensive reports on trade disputes involving pharmaceutical drugs. These can all be found on the web here: http://www.cptech.org/ip/health. While US trade officials sometimes claim they are merely protecting the legitimate interests of investors in intellectual property, the US positions are often perceived outside the US as extreme, hypocritical, unfair or protectionist, and increasingly are criticized by the public health community for the negative impact on access to medicines. II. Public Health concerns regarding US trade policy. The rising concern over the global AIDS crisis has highlighted the need to change US trade policy. With more than 22 million persons currently infected with HIV/AIDS in Africa, and millions more in developing countries outside of Africa, it is clear that the costs of treatment would be astronomical, if there ever was a serious effort to do so. A typical HIV/AIDS cocktail in the US costs more than $10,000 per year, for the drugs alone. At just $10,000 per year, it would cost more than $222 billion per year to provide drugs to the current population of African persons living with HIV/AIDS, and for significant portions of the population, this would not be effective without other investments in health care infrastructure. But even if one has far more modest treatment goals -- the prices of drugs are important -- as illustrated, for example, by the lack of access to fluconazole, an important, high priced, but cheap to produce, antifungal medicine. This committee will hear from many informed persons who can describe the nature of the HIV/AIDS crisis in Africa and other developing countries. We will simply note the obvious, which is that this is an overwhelming tragedy that challenges all of humanity to fashion a response equal to the human suffering. Certainly the Subcommittee will hear how complex are the problems in dealing with HIV/AIDS in Africa. There are many aspects of the problem -- poor medical infrastructure, limited budgets, lack of education, ineffective prevention efforts, discrimination and bias, employment practices, the need to change sexual behavior, the failure of African countries to allocate greater funding to health care, the crushing burden of debt on African countries, the paucity of foreign aid, the high prices of drugs, the rules for the protection of intellectual property and bilateral trade pressures to protect the pharmaceutical industry. There are many issues that must be addressed to save lives and limit suffering in Africa. There are no silver bullets, no single solutions -- simply a large list of things that must be done. There should be no controversy that this list will include changes in US trade policy, and addressing intellectual property rules. And, while compulsory licensing and other measures will change private R&D incentives, it is worth noting that Africa only accounts for about 1.3 percent of the worldwide pharmaceutical market, and that much R&D on HIV/AIDS related medicines is funded by the US government. Defenders of current US trade policy sometimes say that the price of drugs isn't the "the issue," pointing the many other problems. But as is often said, when someone says it isn't about the money, it is often about the money, and only a fool would suggest the price of drugs is not important to people in Africa who are infected with HIV/AIDS. Responding to increasing international and domestic criticism of US trade policies on pharmaceutical drugs, President Clinton announced on December 1, 1999, that he was removing South Africa from the USTR Watch list on intellectual property, and that US trade policy would be changed to facilitate access to medicines. That review is just beginning, and has produced very few results so far. The WTO TRIPS agreement as a norm for Africa The World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade Related Aspects on Intellectual Property, known as the TRIPS agreement, is the most important international agreement on intellectual property rights. The TRIPS accord is extensive and comprehensive, covering patents, trademarks, copyright, trade secrets, undisclosed health registration data and other items. Under the TRIPS, all WTO member countries will have to extend 20 years of patent protection to pharmaceuticals. The TRIPS accord places restrictions on government use or compulsory licensing of patents, and provides countless other protections for the owners of intellectual property. However, the US government does not accept the WTO rules as appropriate for African countries. It seeks much higher levels of protection --- so called "TRIPS plus" levels of protection. US policy on this is itself a seeming violation of the WTO rules. Article 1 of the TRIPS says: Members . . . shall not be obliged to, implement in their law more extensive protection than is required by this Agreement. . . . Members shall be free to determine the appropriate method of implementing the provisions of this Agreement within their own legal system and practice. The public health community is split on the degree to which the WTO TRIPS agreement should be modified to address public health concerns. There is, for example, much controversy over whether or not poor countries should be required to have 20 year patents on pharmaceutical drugs. However, there is much less disagreement on the issue of TRIPS plus obligations. Given the huge suffering in Africa today, a policy of requiring TRIPS plus -- more than the WTO rules for medicines -- is morally repugnant. A February 10-12, 2000 meeting of the Trans Atlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD) produced a set of recommendations on health care and intellectual property that provide a useful overview of public health community views on these disputes. I have attached the TACD resolutions to this letter. We ask the members of this Subcommittee to formally ask the US government to provide a written response to the TACD recommendations. From these recommendations, I would highlight several issues that are a priority to public health groups. 1. The US and EU governments should not require TRIPS plus levels of intellectual property protection on medicines. This is an issue addressed in the Senate version of the African Trade Bill. 2. The US government should support the call to create a working group on access to medicines within the WTO. This would provide an important and needed forum to discuss a number of important trade related aspects of the access to medicines problem. 3. The US government should permit the World Health Organization, UNAIDS or other international bodies to use US government funded patents in developing countries. It is shocking and ethically indefensible to withhold use of US government funded medical inventions in developing countries. 4. The US government should provide the WTO with a communication supporting an interpretation of Article 30 of the TRIPS that would permit patent exceptions for production of medicines for export. I will elaborate briefly on item 4, concerning patent exceptions and exports of medicines. Under the WTO rules, governments can issue a compulsory license to a patent, but in most cases, the use must be limited to domestic consumption. The practical effect of this is that only a handful of developing countries will have a large enough domestic industry to manufacture their own products. Moreover, it is inefficient if not absurd to think of more than 100 different manufacturing facilities for each essential medicine that might be a subject of compulsory licensing. If one was serious about providing treatments for HIV/AIDS medicines in developing countries, one would focus attention on those issues that would lead to the cheapest and highest quality production of medicines. This would involve: a. Fast-track compulsory licensing (as has been proposed in South Africa and the Dominican Republic). b. Coordinated global procurement, to take advantage of economies of scale, joint bargaining power and the best international production facilities, and c. An agreement by the WTO that patent exceptions for production of medicine for export would be a reasonable use of TRIPS Article 30. Finally, thanks to Senators Frist and Feingold for addressing this important issue. Sincerely, James Love Director Consumer Project on Technology 202.387.8030, fax 202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | love@cptech.org Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Feb 26 10:41:27 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A59C21B09 for ; Sat, 26 Feb 2000 10:41:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA31067 for ; Sat, 26 Feb 2000 10:41:27 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38B7F42D.174C4EEB@cptech.org> Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 10:41:33 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN and top level domains This is something I am working on with regarding to ICANN and top level domains. Jamie ----------------------------------- Subject: [Upd-discuss] .upd or .gnu top level domains Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 10:35:23 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org To: upd-board@venice.essential.org, upd-discuss Soon ICANN will be issuing new top level domains (tld). So far most of the action has been for various commerical domains, such as .web, .inc, .flowers, or whatever. We are proposing a .customers tld, that would be used for consumers or organize (such as for .aetnaushc.customers, dell.customers, etc as one type of non-commerical domain. We are proposing .sucks as a second one, that would be non-profit, but require a fee (like $10) that would fund a foundation to protect free speech on the Internet. We are working with unions to propose .union, to help "the workers of the world organize." (i.e., nike.union, boeing.union, microsoft.union, etc). Maybe it would be cool for propose .upd or .gnu. The domain could be managed by any number of firms on contract, but the policy could be things like, only use open publishing standards, or contributions for registration to support groups that protect the public domain in intellectual property. Jamie ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Feb 27 08:48:35 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F2F321B02 for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2000 08:48:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-3.essential.org [216.0.125.3]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA10467 for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2000 08:48:34 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38B92B3F.8011FF0B@cptech.org> Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 08:48:47 -0500 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] AP: Amazon patents affiliate programs technology http://technews.netscape.com/news/0-1007-200-1558650.html?tag=st.ne.1002.thed.1007-200-1558650 Amazon patents affiliate programs technology By The Associated Press Special to CNET News.com February 25, 2000, 5:00 p.m. PT SEATTLE--In a move that could shake up e-commerce, Internet retailer Amazon.com has patented a technology that lets other Web sites send it customers in exchange for a commission. These "affiliate programs" are commonly used by many sites, including Amazon competitors, to enhance sales. Amazon's possession of a patent on the technology could allow the company to prohibit others from using it, or Amazon could charge them a fee if they want to use it. "If they choose to enforce this, it may radically impact aspects of emerging technology for Web shopping," Rob Labatt, an analyst at the research firm Gartner Group, said Friday. "The $64,000 question is whether they'll enforce it." Amazon wouldn't say today what plans it has for the new patent. [snip] -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Feb 27 08:57:47 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1049421B02 for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2000 08:57:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA10535 for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2000 08:57:46 -0500 Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 08:57:46 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Dan Gilmor and Dave Winer on ecommerce patents From farber@cis.upenn.edu Sun Feb 27 08:56:35 2000 Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 08:06:04 -0500 From: Dave Farber To: ip-sub-1@majordomo.pobox.com Subject: IP: Two on Lets fix the Patent System From: "Gillmor, Dan" To: "'farber@cis.upenn.edu'" See my latest posting on eJournal -- email from a software exec who says affiliate programs long predate Amazon's entry. http://weblog.mercurycenter.com/ejournal From: "Dave Winer" To: Dave, I wrote an essay this morning about this. http://scriptingnews.userland.com/stories/storyReader$374 Dave From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Feb 27 10:37:44 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A54B21B02 for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2000 10:37:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA11333; Sun, 27 Feb 2000 10:37:44 -0500 Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 10:37:44 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Cc: Gregory Aharonian Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Selected E-Commerce and Marketing Patents Here are selected marketing patents recently granted by the US PTO, including several by Citibank, and patents by AOL, Amazon.com, IBM, NCR and others. Jamie United States Patent 5,966,695 Melchione , et al. October 12, 1999 Sales and marketing support system using a graphical query prospect database Abstract An electronic sales and service support system and method for identifying sales targets using a centralized database to improve marketing success. The system includes a central database that receives comprehensive information from a variety of internal and external feeds, and standardizes and households the information in a three-level hierarchy (households, customers, and accounts) for use by a financial institution. The comprehensive information stored on the central database is accessed through micromarketing workstations to generate lists of sales leads for marketing campaigns. A database engine is provided for generating logical access paths for accessing data on the central database to increase speed and efficiency of the central database. The system distributes sales leads electronically to branch networks, where the sales leads are used to target customers for marketing campaigns. The central database is accessed by workstations of a central customer information system for profiling customers, enhancing customer relationships with the financial institution, and electronically tracking sales performance during marketing campaigns. Inventors: Melchione; Anthony R. (Bridgewater, NJ); Martinez; Rafael (Fairfield, CT); Seifert; Eric (East Northport, NY); Hirsch; Martin (Teaneck, NJ) Assignee: Citibank, N.A. (New York, NY) Appl. No.: 544102 Filed: October 17, 1995 <------------------------------------------------> United States Patent 5,974,396 Anderson , et al. October 26, 1999 Method and system for gathering and analyzing consumer purchasing information based on product and consumer clustering relationships Abstract A method and system for gathering and analyzing customer and purchasing information permits a retailer or retail chain to process transactional information involving large numbers of consumers and consumer products. Product information is gathered that uniquely identifies a specific product by type and manufacturer and grouped into generic product clusters. Consumers are similarly grouped into consumer clusters based on common consumer demographics and other characteristics. Consumer retail transactions are analyzed in terms of product and/or consumer clusters to determine relationships between the consumers and the products. Product, consumer, and transactional data are maintained in a relational database. Targeting of specific consumers with marketing and other promotional literature is based on consumer buying habits, needs, demographics, etc. A retailer queries the database using selected criteria, accumulates data from the database in response to that query, and makes prudent business and marketing decisions based on that response. Queried information from the database may be communicated to a printing subsystem for printing promotional literature directed to particular customers based on cluster information stored in the database. Inventors: Anderson; Michael W. (West Seneca, NY); Hargreaves; David (North Tonawanda, NY); Hoellig; Susan M. (Boston, NY); Johnson; Drew S. (Wexford, PA); Mischel; Blaine D. (Buffalo, NY) Assignee: Moore Business Forms, Inc. (Grand Island, NY) Filed: July 19, 1996 <-----------------------------------------------------> United States Patent 6,009,407 Garg December 28, 1999 Integrated marketing and operations decisions-making under multi-brand competition Abstract A computer-implemented method for merging product marketing control and product inventory control, generates a segment-level consumer choice model for a plurality of competing brands, and aggregates that to a market-level consumer choice model, then generates a brand-level demand probability distribution function based on the choice models. A cost-minimized base stock level and a demand forecast for each of the plurality of brands is generated based on the market level model consumer choice model and on pricing, promotion, and other marketing data for each of the brands. An inventory control receives inventory subtraction data and inventory addition data and, using the cost-minimized base stock levels, generates orders to replenish the inventory. Inventors: Garg; Amit (White Plains, NY) Assignee: International Business Machines Corporation (Armonk, CA) Appl. No.: 032527 Filed: February 27, 1998 <--------------------------------------------------------------> United States Patent 6,026,382 Kalthoff February 15, 2000 Computer-implemented system for relationship management for financial institutions Abstract An apparatus, method, and article of manufacture for implementing a financial system. The financial system comprises a computer for storing a database describing operations of a financial institution. The database comprises: (1) party data that identifies any individual or external organization, (2) product data that identifies any marketable product or service offered by the financial institution, (3) account data that identifies an ongoing arrangement between the financial institution and the party data, (4) internal organization data that identifies a unit of the financial institution, (5) contact/transaction event data that identifies any occurrence of an event that involves the account data or party data, (6) location data that identifies an address for the party data, (7) campaign data that identifies a marketing strategy or promotional event for the financial institution, and (8) channel data that identifies any vehicle by which any individual or external organization interacts with the financial institution. A database management system, performed by the computer, accesses the database stored in the computer via relationships between the party data, product data, account data, internal organization data, contact/transaction event data, location data, campaign data, and channel data. Inventors: Kalthoff; Nancy Yvonne (Rancho Palos Verdes, CA) Assignee: NCR Corporation (Dayton, OH) Filed: October 8, 1997 <---------------------------------------------------------> United States Patent 6,009,415 Shurling , et al. December 28, 1999 Data processing technique for scoring bank customer relationships and awarding incentive rewards Abstract A Relationship scoring and Incentive Reward awarding process determines a Relationship score for the Relationships between a Bank and each of its customers. Such Relationships may include deposit accounts, loan accounts, and customer referrals. Customer data describing the Relationship between the Bank and its customers is furnished by the customers and extracted from a Bank customer information file. Incentive Rewards, such as reduced loan rates or increased deposit account interest, are awarded to customers based on the Relationship scores. Management reports summarize the Relationships between the Bank and its customers and provide marketing information. Inventors: Shurling; Larry W. (Barnesville, GA); Nimis; Gregory R. (St. Paul, MN); Reagle; Granville S. (Littleton, CO); Motschenbacher; Darlene M. (Burnsville, MN); Hansen; Wayne P. (Shakopee, MN) Assignee: The Harrison Company, LLC (Denver, CO) Appl. No.: 808324 Filed: December 16, 1991 <------------------------------------------> United States Patent 6,014,638 Burge , et al. January 11, 2000 System for customizing computer displays in accordance with user preferences Abstract A system for customizing content and presentation of content for computer users is disclosed. The system monitors and records a user's navigational choices to determine the user's needs and preferences for subsequent computer displays. Displays are customized in accordance with the user's needs and preferences. In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, an electronic marketing and shopping system accessible via the WWW is described. The shopping environment--including the opportunities presented to the shopper (content) and the appearance of the displays (presentation of content)--is customized according to the shopper's preferences. The functions of data collection and display customization are performed automatically by the electronic shopping system. To customize the environment, various attributes of Web pages or other displays provided by participating merchants are modified as they are accessed by shoppers using the system. Inventors: Burge; Gary L. (Powell, OH); Luddy; William A. (Columbus, OH) Assignee: America Online, Inc. (Dulles, VA) Appl. No.: 654529 Filed: May 29, 1996 <----------------------------------------------------> United States Patent 6,029,141 Bezos , et al. February 22, 2000 Internet-based customer referral system Abstract Disclosed is an Internet-based referral system that enables individuals and other business entities ("associates") to market products, in return for a commission, that are sold from a merchant's Web site. The system includes automated registration software that runs on the merchant's Web site to allow entities to register as associates. Following registration, the associate sets up a Web site (or other information dissemination system) to distribute hypertextual catalog documents that includes marketing information (product reviews, recommendations, etc.) about selected products of the merchant. In association with each such product, the catalog document includes a hypertextual "referral link" that allows a user ("customer") to link to the merchant's site and purchase the product. When a customer selects a referral link, the customer's computer transmits unique IDs of the selected product and of the associate to the merchant's site, allowing the merchant to identify the product and the referring associate. If the customer subsequently purchases the product from the merchant's site, a commission is automatically credited to an account of the referring associate. The merchant site also implements an electronic shopping cart that allows the customer to select products from multiple different Web sites, and then perform a single "check out" from the merchant's site. Inventors: Bezos; Jeffrey P. (Seattle, WA); Kaphan; Sheldon J. (Seattle, WA); Ratajak; Ellen L. (Seattle, WA); Schonhoff; Thomas K. (Seattle, WA) Assignee: Amazon.com, Inc. (Seattle, WA) Appl. No.: 883770 Filed: June 27, 1997 <-------------------------------------------> United States Patent 6,029,153 Bauchner , et al. February 22, 2000 Method and system for analyzing and handling the customer files of a financial institution Abstract A system and method for identifying and communicating the availability of additional products to at least one customer of a financial institution is disclosed. A processor analyses data about the customer and identifies characteristics indicative of financial products compatible with the customer's financial needs. The customer's files are appropriately electronically tagged and representatives of the financial institution are alerted of the marketing opportunity and, in turn, communicate the availability of the product to said customer. The representative may be a teller, branch manager, telemarketer or direct mail supervisor. Reporting of tagging is also provided. Inventors: Bauchner; Renee (New York, NY); Weinberger; Henry (New York, NY); Wright; Wilbur E. (Elmsford, NY); Newman; Al (Huntington, NY) Assignee: Citibank, N.A. (New York, NY) Appl. No.: 927683 Filed: September 11, 1997 <-------------------------------------------------------> United States Patent 5,907,830 Engel , et al. May 25, 1999 Electronic coupon distribution Abstract An electronic coupon distribution system providing on-line coupon information for a potential consumer using a personal computer connected to a host computer. A potential consumer using a personal computer and a modem connects to a host computer via the Internet or directly. The potential consumer may specify product preferences or search and view coupons of interest to the consumer. The consumer may then download from the host computer coupon information that may be printed on the potential consumer's printer connected to his personal computer. Information identifying the downloaded coupon is coded or encrypted onto the printed coupon to prevent unauthorized reproduction. The coupon distribution system may be used to obtain additional information about the potential consumer for future marketing purposes. The present invention greatly facilitates and makes economical distribution of coupons or certificates. Inventors: Engel; Peter (144 N. Robertson Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90048-3102); Engel; Andrew (2392 Camino Capitan #4D, Santa Fe, NM 87505) Appl. No.: 600751 Filed: February 13, 1996 <-------------------------------------------> United States Patent 5,961,151 Tung , et al. October 5, 1999 Pharmaceutical marketing device and method of use Abstract Sampling device for marketing a drug by a pharmaceutical company includes multiple segments. One segment includes the drug to be sampled and another segment includes preprinted indicia on one side providing prescribing information for a prescriber of the drug and an adhesive layer on the other side for attachment to a patient's medical chart maintained by the prescriber of the drug. A method of sampling a drug employing the above described sampling device also forms a part of this invention. Inventors: Tung; James C. (Blue Bell, PA); Werther; Norman (Fort Washington, PA) Assignee: Global Healthcomm, Inc. (Abington, PA) Appl. No.: 082569 Filed: May 21, 1998 <-------------------------------> United States Patent 5,930,764 Melchione , et al. July 27, 1999 Sales and marketing support system using a customer information database Abstract A sales process support system and method for identifying sales targets using a centralized database to improve marketing success. The system includes a central database that receives comprehensive information from a variety of internal and external feeds, and standardizes and households the information in a three-level hierarchy (households, customers, and accounts) for use by a financial institution. The comprehensive information stored on the central database is accessed through micromarketing workstations to generate lists of sales leads for marketing campaigns. A database engine is provided for generating logical access paths for accessing data on the central database to increase speed and efficiency of the central database. The system distributes sales leads electronically to branch networks, where the sales leads are used to target customers for marketing campaigns. The central database is accessed by workstations of a central customer information system for profiling customers, enhancing customer relationships with the financial institution, and electronically tracking sales and service performance during marketing campaigns. The system can also include a system for opening an account in a single session that is in communication with the central database, micromarketing centers, central customer information systems and branch systems of the present invention so that data can pass between these systems where legal and appropriate. Inventors: Melchione; Anthony R. (Bridgewater, NJ); Martinez; Rafael (Fairfield, CT); Seifert; Eric (East Northport, NY); Hirsch; Martin (Teaneck, NJ) Assignee: Citibank, N.A. (New York, NY) Appl. No.: 702039 Filed: August 23, 1996 <------------------------> United States Patent 5,950,171 Madell September 7, 1999 System for determining hypothetical book value Abstract A system for producing sets of competitive depreciation rates (CDRs) for a high-cost plant based on the hypothetical book value of the plant, such that the application of any set would result in the plant generating electricity competitively. A CDR set consists of one or more higher-than-standard depreciation rates first applied sometime prior to the start of competition, and one or more lower-than-standard depreciation rates first applied sometime after the start of the plant's competitive operation and continued for the rest of its life. The system also calculates the potential stranded assets (PSAs) and the time-at-risk (TAR) associated with the power plant prior to its reaching competitive operation. The system is designed to analyze the competitiveness of an individual high-cost power plant, hereafter known as the first plant, over its full lifetime under given assumptions and conditions about the introduction of competitive marketing of electricity. ventors: Madell; John T. (4351 Grand, Western Springs, IL 60558) Appl. No.: 920075 Filed: August 26, 1997 <-------------------------------------------------------> United States Patent 5,873,068 Beaumont , et al. February 16, 1999 Display based marketing message control system and method Abstract A marketing system for use in a public switched telephone system having stored program controlled switches connected to customer premise equipment having an Analog Display Service Interface, comprises a storage device for storing predetermined information respecting each of customer premise equipment, a device for assembling and managing messages including creating a message to be delivered to one or more of the customer premise equipment, linking each message with one or more of the customer premise equipment, scheduling the delivery of the messages at a predetermined time, and measuring the response of each customer premise equipment to messages delivered thereto. Inventors: Beaumont; Robert M. (Saint John, CA); Doiron; Danny J. (Westfield, CA); Keevill; Christopher G. (Quispamsis, CA); Pomeroy; Trenton A. (Quispamsis, CA); Pond; Gerald L. (East Riverside, CA); Thorburn; Mark L. (Quispamsis, CA); Drummond; Douglas B. (Quispamsis, CA); Bouchard; J. Marc (Saint John, CA) Assignee: New North Media Inc. (CA) Appl. No.: 556981 Filed: December 13, 1995 -------------------------------------------- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | love@cptech.org Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Feb 27 12:22:43 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4B7921B02 for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2000 12:22:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA12719 for ; Sun, 27 Feb 2000 12:22:43 -0500 Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 12:22:43 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN Launches Membership Web Site for Individual Internet Users ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 17:34:14 -0800 From: icann To: icann-announce@icann.org Subject: ICANN Launches Membership Web Site for Individual Internet Users ICANN Launches Membership Web Site for Individual Internet Users Marina del Rey, CA, USA, (25 February 2000) The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) announces the launch of its At Large Membership web site. After considerable public input, the ICANN Board has developed this program as a new way for Internet users from all over the globe to participate directly in the ICANN process and help ensure the smooth coordination of the Internet's technical infrastructure. Individuals can begin registering today to become ICANN members at http://www.icann.org. . The At Large Membership of ICANN will give individual members of Internet communities worldwide a voice in the selection of Directors to the ICANN Board. By becoming an ICANN member, individuals will have an opportunity to become part of the ICANN "bottom-up" approach to making policy concerning Internet Names and Addresses. ICANN members will be able to receive regular news, updates and announcements about ICANN activities and policy initiatives. The basic requirements for applying to become an ICANN At Large member are: * The completion of an online membership application, * A working Internet email address; and * A single physical residence verified by a postal mail address. Thanks to a grant from the Markle Foundation, the initial launch of ICANN's At Large Membership program has been funded without the need for membership dues. The ICANN Board will consider and adopt further policy about composition and structure of the At Large Membership, and to establish rules for the nomination and election of candidates for the At Large Council, at the Board's next meeting, to be held March 9-10. It is hoped that the target goal of 5000 members can be reached in the next few weeks in order to move forward with the At Large Elections later this year. ABOUT ICANN The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is a non-profit, international corporation formed in September 1998 to oversee a select set of Internet technical management functions currently managed by the U.S. Government, or by its contractors and volunteers. Specifically, ICANN is assuming responsibility for coordinating the management of the domain name system (DNS), the allocation of IP address space, the assignment of protocol parameters, and the management of the root server system. CONTACT Pam Brewster 415-902-1158 - mobile 415-923-1660 x119 - voice pbrewster@alexanderogilvy.com From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Feb 28 09:45:28 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B984121B02 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 09:45:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA28751 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 09:45:28 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38BA8994.DCD0A4B8@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 09:43:32 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Mickey Davis on patent for voting by email The Union for the Public Domain has recently voted to oppose business practices, and will be doing some things on this later. As part of the vote on this, John Lederer proposed that UPD patent "voting on decisions by email," to which Mickey Davis, co-author of a textbook on intellectual property, provided this suggestion: Jamie ---------------- Re: [Upd-board] From John Lederer Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 09:22:49 -0500 From: "Michael H. Davis" Reply-To: upd-board@venice.essential.org To: upd-board@venice.essential.org CC: upd-board@venice.essential.org References: 1 I think John's suggestion is an excellent one. If someone could devise a program that would assign a value to each positive vote--perhaps one, perhaps not--and tabulate the votes in a serial manner, while at the same time treating the no votes similarly, tabulated and stored in a different file, for instance--why then, a sum and difference calculation could be made, a comparison to .50 performed, and the result, which might be characterized as the "winner" would be posted. It seems to me that should be patentable. If we need more obscurity to produce the required novelty and nonobviousness, some or all of those calculations could be multiplied and divided by the same numbers, respectively, until a satisfactory level of complexity and obscurity were reached. I just doubt that voting is going to be all that important in this millennium. It seems to me that a lot of what goes on here, which might be more and more useful, is just thinking, but it seems that would probably not qualify as patentable because thinking is obviously not a business method. Too bad. Mickey James Love wrote: > > Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2000 19:16:51 -0600 > From: John Lederer > To: upd-board@lists.essential.org > Cc: upd-board@venice.essential.org > Subject: Re: [Upd-board] Proposal for UPD > > Sounds reasonable to me. > > Perhaps we should apply for a patent on voting on decisions by email? > > Incidentally have any of you been tracking the Jurisline case? > > Regards, > John Lederer > > James Love wrote: > > > I propose that: > > > > 1 UPD oppose patents on business practices. > > > > 2. Write the US Congress and the EU, expressing opposition to business > > practices patents. > > > > 3. Place a page on the UPD web page giving links to business practice > > patents information, and a "what you can do" to oppose business > > practices patents, including proposed form letter to members of the > > House and Senate Commerce and Judiciary committees. > > > > 4. Ask Vergil to do all the work. > > > > This is a formal UPD proposal. Please vote. > > > > Jamie > > > > James Love, Consumer Project on Technology > > P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org > > Washington, DC 20036 | love@cptech.org > > Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Upd-board mailing list > > Upd-board@lists.essential.org > > http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/upd-board > > James Love, Consumer Project on Technology > P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org > Washington, DC 20036 | love@cptech.org > Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 > > _______________________________________________ > Upd-board mailing list > Upd-board@lists.essential.org > http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/upd-board -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Feb 28 11:52:06 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B6AD21B02 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 11:52:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA31812 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 11:52:05 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38BAA742.920DDD45@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 11:50:10 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Subject: Re: [Random-bits] Mickey Davis on patent for voting by email References: <38BA8994.DCD0A4B8@cptech.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit James Love wrote: > > The Union for the Public Domain has recently voted to oppose > business practices, and will be doing some things on this later. I was asked if this was a typo, and yes, it should have read: oppose business practices patents, jl ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Feb 28 15:43:18 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 079A721B02 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 15:43:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA05631 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 15:43:17 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38BADD74.9B159B16@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 15:41:24 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Charles Babcock: Kerberos Made To Heel To Windows 2000 Thanks to MS for this pointer. Jamie http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/zd/20000228/tc/20000228205.html Monday February 28 02:00 PM EST Kerberos Made To Heel To Windows 2000 By Charles Babcock, Inter@ctive Week In a move that company detractors said is another sign of its infamous "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" strategy, Microsoft has used an open Internet security standard in its Windows 2000 operating system and made modifications without openly documenting its changes. Microsoft has incorporated open standard Kerberos security, which keeps user passwords from being sent over a network where they can be sniffed and stolen, into Windows 2000, making its marquee operating system (OS) more competitive with Unix. But in doing so, it has made changes to Kerberos - producing "Microsoft Kerberos, which is proprietary," said Ted Ts'o, who helped lead the development team on the network authentication protocol with others at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (web.mit.edu/kerberos/www) in the early 1990s. ... ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Feb 28 15:46:01 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31FAB21B02 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 15:46:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA05731 for ; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 15:46:01 -0500 Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 15:46:01 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] New EU "Trust Mark" announced by UK Govt. Thanks to DB for pointing this out. Jamie FEB 28, 2000, M2 Communications - A new EU 'Trust Mark' to help identify reliable Internet sites and encourage e-commerce across Europe is recommended in a new Government report on Internet use, published by Culture Secretary Chris Smith today. The proposal comes from the latest Creative Industries Task Force report Creative Industries Internet Inquiry : Snapshot of a rolling wave. The aim of the proposal is to boost consumer trust and confidence in e-commerce across national boundaries and help create new opportunities both for UK creative industries and consumers. The 'Trust EU' hallmark would indicate that the company carrying it: -- followed EU consumer protection legislation; -- respected consumer privacy; -- had effective security practices; -- had clear policies on contracts and dispute resolution. Mr Smith said: [snip] From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Feb 29 09:46:28 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1FA921B02 for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 09:46:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA20525 for ; Tue, 29 Feb 2000 09:46:27 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38BBDB5A.EB37694@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 09:44:42 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Hague Convention on Jurisdiction http://www.cptech.org/ecom/hague-march-2000.html Meeting in Ottawa on the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgements in Civil and Commercial Matters. Summary: The following are CPT's comments for a March 1, 2000 meeting in Ottawa on the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgements in Civil and Commercial Matters. CPT is concerned about proposals that would eliminate the right of consumers to bring legal actions in their own countries, weaken consumer rights in intellectual property, and authorize private trade associations to write their own privacy and consumer protection rules that would preempt national laws. Background: These extraordinary discussions concern a proposed Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, that would include provisions regarding business-to-consumer transactions in cyberspace. The Hague Convention was first proposed in 1992, long before anyone was considering the impact of the Internet. Formal negotiations began in 1996. The Convention was supposed to be finished this year, but has been slowed by controversy, particularly over the ecommerce provisions. There are meetings this week in Ottawa on electronic commerce and a proposed meeting in July in Geneva with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). CPT, Consumers Union, and the National Consumers League were briefed on the treaty last week. We were told it was the first briefing for consumer groups. There have been extensive business sector involvement in the treaty negotiation process. For example, in meetings this week in Ottawa the US delegation includes Cindy Rose, an employee of Disney. In the negotiations, the US government is opposing language (Article 7) that would guarantee a consumer the right to bring a private legal action in her country of residence. Key persons working on the Hague Convention are also proposing a system whereby an ecommerce firm could seek a private sector "certification" that it provided good consumer protection or privacy practices. Such a certification would mean that a business would not be required to abide by country of destination laws. The certification proposal provides a context for the current Federal Trade Commission/Department of Commerce efforts to push for "alternative dispute resolutions (ADR) systems. Jamie Love, Director, Consumer Project on Technology love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org <-----------------------CPT Statement---------------> To: secretariat@hcch.net Attention: Professor Catherine Kessedjian cc: Jeffrey Kovar, US Department of State Mark Bohannon, Department of Commerce Commissioner Mozelle Thompson, Federal Trade Commission Michael Donohue, Federal Trade Commission Views of the Consumer Project on Technology James Love March 1, 2000 Meeting in Ottawa on the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgements in Civil and Commercial Matters The Consumer Project on Technology (CPT) is a non profit organization created by US consumer advocate Ralph Nader. The work of CPT is on the web at http://www.cptech.org. CPT is concerned about several issues in the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgement in Civil and Commercial Matters. In particular, we are interested in the provisions in the Convention that address business-to-consumer transactions, including transactions in electronic commerce. In the October 1999 draft of the Convention, there are strong protections for consumers with respect to the issue of jurisdiction. In Article 7, consumers cannot alienate, at the time of the transaction, their right to sue in their home courts. Only after a dispute takes place could consumers be asked to make a "choice of court" that would exclude the right to sue in the home country jurisdiction. We believe this is the correct approach. Choice would be permitted if the consumer had a real opportunity to decide which court to use, and the choice would make the consumer better off. It is our view that consumers will be harmed if they are faced with contracts of adhesion that undermine consumer rights on issues of jurisdiction of law. This is an issue in the United States now, where contracts that address jurisdiction are common. For example, Microsoft routinely presents consumers with "take it or leave it" contracts that establish King County, Washington as the venue of jurisdiction. Corel, a Canadian software firm, requires consumers to "agree to irrevocably submit to the jurisdiction of the Courts of the Province of Ontario." The October 1999 draft, particularly Article 7(3), would protect the consumer interest, by declaring these contract provisions to be invalid in international business to consumer transactions. Unfortunately, the US government has voted against the October 1999 draft of Article 7, on the grounds that US businesses oppose rules that guarantee consumers legal rights in the country where they live. We are also concerned with reports that large ecommerce firms are lobbying the European Union for changes in the EU position on the same issue. Moreover, other proposals would create new systems of private law making, and eliminate existing legal rights. In the press release from the September 1999 Geneva Roundtable on electronic commerce and private international law, Professor Catherine Kessedjian, the Deputy Secretary General of the Hague Conference on Private International Law, made a proposal that sellers could go through a certification process concerning: "minimum substantive rules of protection for the consumer including warranties, and a fair and easy dispute resolution mechanism which could possibly be free of charge to the consumer." Professsor Kessedjian further proposed that: "When a site has obtained the certification label, it could provide for the application of the law of the country of origin and for the courts of that country for the residual cases which could not be solved by the dispute resolution mechanism part of the certification." Professor Kessedjian says this will "avoid the traditional dichotomy between the "country of origin" and the "country of destination," and she suggests the certification process be "along the lines of the work done within the icc and other private organizations." We are concerned and indeed alarmed that the Hague Convention is considering an agreement that would permit private organizations to exempt sellers from laws where the consumer resides. We recognize that this is not part of the current draft of the Convention, and we strongly oppose its inclusion. We are further troubled by item 9 of the press release from the September 9, 1999 Geneva Roundtable, which included this proposal regarding privacy laws: 9.In the matter of data protection, the Round Table recognized that data collection, personal data included, and processing thereof are inherent to electronic commerce. The dichotomy between systems which do not accept general standards and those which require a rigid a priori framework for the collection and transfer of data should be avoided. Furthermore, it is necessary to carry out a study on the most relevant system of applicable law which would also allow a greater role to self-regulation and model contracts such as those proposed by the icc and in line with the principles recommended by the Council of Europe. Again, the suggestion that the "relevant system of applicable law" should provide a "greater role to 'self-regulation'" seems at odds with the experience in the United States. Self regulation of consumer privacy has been a colossal failure, as measured by the astronomical increases in the unwanted collection and marketing of personal information. Taken together, the opposition by the US and others to the October 1999 draft Article 7 language, and the proposals to create "self regulation" mechanisms that would exempt sellers from national laws in the country where the consumers reside, raise the possibility that the Hague Convention will be used to privatize parts of our legal system and shift control of public policy from democratically elected governments to powerful industry trade groups. It is also relevant that these proposals are being taken at a time when large ecommerce firms are asking US State governments to enact a controversial "Uniform Computer and Information Transactions Act," known as UCITA, that will greatly expand the domain of contracts of adhesion in the United States. Under a system of Hague Convention exceptions from national jurisdiction and UCITA-style contracts of adhesion, one can imagine a future where consumer rights will be extremely limited and sellers of ecommerce services will write their own private laws. It is of course difficult to address global jurisdictional issues in cyberspace, and there are good reasons to seek more uniform rules for electronic ecommerce. However, we are also mindful of the benefits of democratic governance, and national laws to protect consumers from abusive practices by businesses. Greater efficiencies in global ecommerce business are not a rationale for stripping consumers of their rights, including the right to elect the governments that determine the rules of commerce. Discussions with TACD After several years of meeting with various business lobbyists, the negotiators for the Hague Convention would benefit from a broader engagement with consumer interests. The Hague Convention should schedule a meeting with the Trans Atlantic Consumer Dialogue and other consumer interests to address issues concerning the appropriate forums for setting norms for consumer and privacy protection. The TACD has adopted statements on electronic commerce for unfair contracts, intellectual property rights, the appropriate framework for alternative dispute resolution systems, jurisdiction of law and other topics. These are found on the TACD web page at: http://www.tacd.org. TACD is also working on a statement regarding self regulation and consumer protection, and the development of international institutions that address global consumer protection issues. While this Hague convention is focusing on issues relating to private judgements, it would be useful to consider a joint workshop on jurisdiction issues, where there would be discussion of the special issues of cross national jurisdiction for laws dealing with unsolicited commercial mail, consumer privacy, the marketing of securities on the Internet, and the difficulties of regulating Internet marketing practices for a wide range of goods regulated in non-internet media. It would also be useful to compare the approaches in the consumer protection and privacy area to the approaches in the area of Intellectual property, and to explain why self regulation should be accepted in areas of consumer protection and privacy, but rejected in matters concerning intellectual property rights. We suggest the Hague Convention approach the TACD about joint sponsorship of a meeting on this topic. Background Information: http://www.hcch.net/e/events/press01e.html http://cuiwww.unige.ch/~billard/ipilec/ http://www.hcch.net/e/members/members.html http://www.state.gov/www/global/legal_affairs/whats_new.html http://www.state.gov/www/global/legal_affairs/991030_forjudg.html ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Mar 1 11:48:14 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 863DD21B18 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2000 11:48:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA16200; Wed, 1 Mar 2000 11:48:13 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38BD496F.E779CE78@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 11:46:39 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Cc: "Ress, Manon Anne" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Weird and Wacky patents Thanks to Manon Ress for this pointer: Patently Absurd! Weird and Wacky patents http://www.patent.freeserve.co.uk/internat.html http://www.patent.freeserve.co.uk/ ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Mar 1 19:49:58 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51CCB21B22 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2000 19:49:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA28239 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2000 19:49:58 -0500 Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 19:49:58 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN asked to create .union, .sucks and other TLDs http://www.cptech.org/ecom/icann/tlds-march1-2000.html John Richard Essential Information P.O. Box 19405 Washington, DC 20036 http://www.essential.org James Love Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 Washington, DC 20036 http://www.essential.org March 1, 2000 Esther Dyson Chair Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 Marina del Rey, CA 90292 USA Dear Esther: This letter is to propose that Essential Information be permitted to establish a registry for new top level domains (TLDs). It is our intention to create several TLDs that would facilitate free speech and criticism, and enable consumers, workers and others to organize. Each of these TLDs will be operated under its own management charter. The particular TLDs that we propose include: .union .customers .complaints .sucks .ecology .isnotgreen .isnotfair .shareholder .taxpayer .unite Our plans for each domain are as follows: .union The .union TLD will be a "union label" for cyberspace. EI is working with the international labor union community to develop a management system for .union. Use of the domain would be restricted to bona fide labor unions. Examples of use of this TLD would include: nike.union exxon.union microsoft.union as well as other uses, such as dcprinters.union, for links to union printers in Washington, DC. EI will be holding meetings with members of the labor community to discuss the policies for the management of this domain. It is our goal to use the .union domain to strengthen union organizing efforts, and to make it easier for workers at a firm to communicate with unions that represent workers at the firm, or who are seeking to organize workers at the firm, and for unions in different countries to coordinate efforts with each other. .customers EI will create a self governance management organization for .customers. This domain will be used to create democratically managed membership organizations of the customers of particular companies. The customer organizations would be able to address any number of consumer problems. For example, ford.customers might organize to address safety, service or warranty issues on Ford automobiles. Safeway.customers might organize in favor of labeling of genetically modified foods. Bellatlantic.customers might address Bell Altantic service and pricing issues in regulatory proceedings. Bankofamerica.customers could address ATM charges and other bank fees. The .customers domain will be a cyberspace version of the "Citizens Utilities Boards" that were set up in several US states in the 1970s, funded by voluntary contributions from customers of public utilities. .complaints EI is studying different models for the use of .complaints, to give consumers specific information about mechanisms to address product or company specific complaints, and to permit customers to share information about company practices with each other. .sucks This TLD will be used to facilitate criticism of a firm or organization, such as aol.sucks, wipo.sucks, or even greenpeace.sucks. We would not permit the organization that owned an associated domain to also own .sucks, so it would expand the name space in an important way. The domain would also be available for other uses, such as work.sucks, life.sucks or television.sucks. Our plan is to create an independent non-profit free speech foundation that will be funded by fees from the .sucks registration. The Dot Sucks Foundation (http://dot.sucks) will fund Internet related free speech fights. We recognize the .sucks TLD will be offensive to some persons, but we do not think that this should exclude .sucks from being approved by ICANN. We believe the .sucks domain will be popular in the marketplace, and also generate important funding for the free speech rights of individuals and small organizations. .ecology .isnotgreen These two TLDs will be managed by environmental groups, to create forums to discuss and criticize the environmental policies of businesses, governments and other organizations. .isnotfair This TLD would be used by civil rights groups to discuss issues of discrimination or workers rights. We will be holding discussions with a variety of civil rights organizations to determine the management structure for the TLD. It is our intention to create a space where the public can quickly review a company's record on employment practices. For example, Texaco.isnotfair or coke.isnotfair might have links to information about discrimination suits involving these companies, or to organizations working on various discrimination or fairness issues. .shareholder This TLD will be used by church groups who organize shareholder suits on issues of conscience. .taxpayers The .taxpayer TLD would be given to democratically elected taxpayer organizations that would monitor budgets and management practices of governments. Examples of this TLD would include Arlington.VA.Taxpayers, Anchorage.AK.Taxpayers, London.UK.Taxpayers, Sidney.AU.Taxpayers. .unite EI is evaluating different models for the use of .unite. These are serious proposals to use the power of a TLD to enable citizens to improve civil society. We believe the creation of domains like .union, .customers, .isnotgreen, and .isnotfair will create powerful mechanisms to share information and organize. We would like to meet with the ICANN staff to discuss these proposals further. Sincerely, John Richard James Love Director Director Essential Information Consumer Project on Technology -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Mar 2 09:50:55 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0A8921B45 for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2000 09:50:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA05854 for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2000 09:50:54 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38BE7F7A.89CB1C3F@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 09:49:30 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] New TLDs stories, and clarification of CPT views Here are two articles on the CPT/Essential Information proposals for new top level domains. I would like also to clarify a few items. 1. CPT supports the creation of many new TLDs, including commercial and noncommercial TLDs. 2. Each of the particular TLDs that we have proposed would be charted domains, to be used in particular ways. Unlike .com, .org or .net, there would be some rules on use. Examples of this now are .gov, .mil, and .edu, each of which serves a different purpose. I think .gov has made democracy work better, by making government more accessible. But we also support the creation of lots more domains like .com or .org that are not restricted. For example, we support creation of .inc, .web, etc, by others, as well as domains like .flowers. Lets lots of flowers bloom. 3. The rules for each of our proposals would be different. .union would be controlled by the labor movement and .ecology by environmental groups, for example. However, for .sucks, the only restriction is that it not be controlled by the associated domain holder. So, for example, anyone but Exxon (who owns exxon.com) could own Exxon Sucks. I have CPTECH.org, but could not own cptech.sucks. 4. In the case of .sucks, there would be a fee to support the dot sucks foundation, that would fund free speech. The other TLDs would have their own systems, decided by the goverance systems they put in place. 5. I have had two exchanges of email from Esther Dyson about this. There are of course hundreds of persons with information and opinions on this. Some that might be contacted would be: Milton Mueller" , who has been helping me on this. Harold Feld who is quite supportive "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" , who thinks .sucks is a bad idea, but knows a lot about trademarks, and Mikki Barry , who is supportive. There are also about 30 others I can think of that have interesting things to say. And, there are people who have been trying to set up new TLDS for some time, like Richard Sexton and Chris Ambler. Here are a few stories, by Rob Lemos and Brock Meeks. http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/zd/20000301/tc/20000301297.html Wednesday March 01 09:30 PM EST Can free speech, the Internet co-exist? By Robert Lemos, ZDNet News http://www.msnbc.com/news/376819.asp Domains would push social agendas Nader-backed consumer group proposes `.sucks,' `.unions' By Brock N. Meeks MSNBC March 1 - A Ralph Nader-backed consumer group is proposing ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Mar 2 14:17:42 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C154221B07 for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2000 14:17:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA13546 for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2000 14:17:42 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38BEBE04.E91DA32@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2000 14:16:20 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Declan: A Ralph Nader Plan That 'Sucks' This is Declan's article. One clarification. CPT is a big supporter of new TLDs, even if we get zip. We support commerical TLDs and non-commerical TLDs. We encourage others to make similiar proposals. We have't asserted any "ownership" on this. Indeed, we are hoping to mobilize others to think of even better proposals, even though we like the ones we have. Jamie http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,34691,00.html A Ralph Nader Plan That 'Sucks' by Declan McCullagh 9:50 a.m. 2.Mar.20 -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Mar 21 09:19:47 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0A3121B14 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2000 09:19:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA32039 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2000 09:19:46 -0500 Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 09:19:46 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] linking and copyright ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 08:02:12 -0700 From: T. R. Halvorson Reply-To: cni-copyright@cni.org To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: linking and copyright Recently published on LLRX.com How to Start an Urban Legend: the Reporting of Intellectual Reserve, Inc. v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry, Inc., http://www.llrx.com/features/urban.htm Summary from LLRX.com front page: "T.R. Halvorson delves into the facts of this provocative case concerning Web site copyright infringement, as well as the manner in which mainstream and electronic press reaction to the story contributed to major distortions of the issues involved." T. R. -- T. R. Halvorson mailto:pastel@lyrea.com Pastel Programming Co. http://www.netins.net/showcase/trhalvorson/ Author of: Law of the Super Searchers: the Online Secrets of Top Legal Researchers edited by Reva Basch, Information Today, Inc. http://www.netins.net/showcase/trhalvorson/pubs/index.html _______________________________________________________________________ From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Mar 21 15:27:01 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7195821B14 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2000 15:27:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA09912 for ; Tue, 21 Mar 2000 15:27:01 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38D7DB8E.EC525105@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 15:29:02 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] NC-TLDS - list on new Internet Top Level Domains (TLDs) Note: announcement for new list: nc-tlds - list on new Internet Top Level Domains (TLDs) http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/nc-tlds At its July meeting in Japan, ICANN will likely take steps to create new Internet Top Level Domains (TLDs). Examples of existing TLDs .com, .org, .net, .edu, .gov, .mil, .int, .fr, .uk or .br. There are many issues that ICANN will address in determining which new TLDs to create and how they will be managed. Some have proposed the creation of new TLDs that will advance a variety of civil society objectives. These include special "chartered" TLDs, that would be managed by various NGO interests. These new TLDs would use the Internet's domain name space to make it easier for civil society to organize, to make companies accountable to various worker, consumer and citizen interests, and to promote free speech. Examples would include: .union, for labor unions .customers, to organize consumer interests of companies .ecology, to provide information on a company's environmental record .isnotfair, to provide information on a company's civil rights record, .sucks, to provide a forum for criticism, but also to raise money to fund free speech battles. .ngo, to use a percent of the proceeds from the use of the TLD for non-profit organizations to fund NGO participation in global internet forums. These and other proposals were designed to stimulate debate on possible models for TLD polices, and to encourage various non-commerical consistutencies to come up with their own proposals. At this point, there really are no hard and fast rules or even models, and ICANN and those who want to manage a registry for new TLDs will be proposing their own rules. Some in the registry business want everything managed on a commercial commodity model, without the headache and restrictions of limiting the use of domains. From this perspective, they would sell .union to anyone who wanted it, including a company, or someone who wanted to buy bustyour.union, or whatever. There are lots of philosophical issues, as well as practical issues in how TLDs could be managed. nc-tlds is a new open and unmoderated discussion list to consider these and other issues. Subscription info is here: http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/nc-tlds ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Mar 23 11:53:01 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B11E21B07 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2000 11:53:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA24544 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2000 11:53:00 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38DA4C79.347E1884@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 11:55:21 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Mattel trademark king - Supeans on Declan As apparently the current trademark king in the USA, Mattel might be a good candidate for a boycott, if it continues it current campaign of subpoenas against journalists. Jamie http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/speeches/00-18.htm PTO 1999 Trademark Statistics Announced Washington, DC, March 21 - Mattel, Inc. filed 5,501 trademark applications and received 3,445 trademark registrations, which were the highest number of trademarks filed and issued to a single entity in FY 1999. PRESS RELEASE http://cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/03/21/cyberpatrol.decoder/ Cyber Patrol decoding brawl gets ugly and international March 21, 2000 By Richard Stenger CNN Interactive Writer FRAMINGHAM, Massachusetts (CNN) -- A legal dispute between a U.S. toymaker that produces a popular Internet pornography filter and two programmers that decoded the software could heat up into a messy international brawl. A subsidiary of Mattel Inc. won a court order Friday requiring Eddy Jansson of Sweden and Matthew Skala of Canada to stop distributing a method to bypass its Cyber Patrol filtering software. Now the company is going after mirror sites that posted the "cphack" decoding program, and anyone who downloaded it. [...] Targeting mirror sites, downloaders Microsystems' lawyers are also now looking for anyone who downloaded cphack, according to Declan McCullagh, a journalist and computer expert who received an electronic subpoena from a lawyer representing Cyber Patrol. "Mattel attorneys are bulk-mailing anyone who even linked to the cphack code and telling them the order applies to them too. They're also sending out subpoenas, frantically trying to find out who downloaded copies," he said in an email on Sunday. McCullagh said he never mirrored the cphack utility, but did post the addresses of mirror sites to Politechbot, his Web site about politics and technology that includes a moderated mailing list. "Naturally I have no intention of revealing the identities of politech readers to Mattel or anyone else. Nor is a subpoena sent via email usually viewed as proper service, at least where I come from," he wrote. Sydney Rubin, a Cyber Patrol spokesperson, downplayed Mccullagh's charge. "The court gave us the ability to [locate those who downloaded the program] but I don't think we will. We will do only what is absolutely necessary to take this [utility] down," she said. But Schwartz, in an email to McCullagh, writes: "I have included a subpoena to you that requires you to disclose the log of persons who downloaded either 'CP4break.zip' and/or "cphack.exe'." [...] -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Mar 23 17:32:25 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD3C521B05 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2000 17:32:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA00456 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2000 17:32:25 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38DA9C09.7D07FD7F@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 17:34:49 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] STEP RFP for Intellectual Property Rights Project Subject: Intellectual Property Rights Project - Request for Proposals Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 16:52:44 -0500 From: "Craig Schultz" The attachment to this message describes the next step in the STEP Board's work on intellectual property policy. Focusing on issues raised at our February 2-3 conference, "Intellectual Property Rights: How Far Should They Be Extended?", we are seeking help in analyzing and documenting the benefits and costs of several features of the system as well as in understanding its operation in software and biotechnology. Please refer this announcement of our intention to support selected research projects to anyone you think may be interested in participating. (See attached file: IPR.RFP.doc) March 23, 2000 ' The National Academies Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy Request for Proposals for Research on Intellectual Property in the Knowledge-Based Economy Purpose The Science, Technology, and Economic Policy (STEP) Board is undertaking a study of intellectual property policy to address the following questions: What are the consequences of the series of legislative actions, judicial decisions, institutional changes, and international agreements that have marked IP policy over the past 20 years? What benefits have been derived? What problems may be emerging? Are there respects in which the extension of IPRs should proceed further to encourage technical advance, investment, and innovation or, in view of claims that in some circumstances IPRs may be inhibiting competition and discouraging research and its communication and use, are there respects in which the extension of IPRs has proceeded too far? The project is chaired by Richard Levin, President, Yale University, and Mark Myers, Senior Vice President (ret.), Xerox Corporation. Additional information about the Board ?s membership and this project is available on its home page, www4.nas.edu/pd/step.nsf. The STEP Board has held workshops in Berkeley and New Haven and a two-day conference in Washington to refine these issues and hear the range of opinions about them. The sustained growth and technological dynamism of the economy suggest that IP protection has been beneficial. At the same time, there is growing concern about the operation of IP in some industries. There is, however, little systematic information on how IPRs are being acquired and exercised in most sectors, and especially in emerging technologies such us the Internet and human genomics. Little research has been done on the operation of the patent system or on costs and benefits associated with patent litigation or patent-related transactions (e.g., licensing and cross-licensing). To inform its deliberations over the next 12-15 months, the Board wishes to commission analysis and research on the issues described below. These topics primarily concern the patent system. Other topics relating to copyright and trade secret protection may be the subject of future RFPs, depending on resources. Scale of Research and Mechanism of Support To be useful to the Board in this time frame, projects should be policy-oriented and should be completed in 10-12 months. The Board will consider proposals for analytical papers with budgets in the range of $5,000-7,000 and proposals for empirical research and data analysis in the range of $15,000-30,000. The resources available to the Board obviously fall short of being able to finance large-scale empirical data collection but may enable ongoing research to address additional questions, conduct of a pilot survey, employment of a research assistant, or interview-based studies. The support will normally be provided through a contract or consulting agreement with an investigator per the standard procedures of the Academies. Procedure and Schedule The Board requests submission to the email address below, preferably in Word format, of 2-5 page statements of interest by May 1, 2000. These statements should include a description of the proposed analysis or research, a description of the proposed methodology, and a brief statement of qualifications and related work. A statement need not address all of the questions listed under the general topic heading. The statements will be reviewed by a group of STEP members and advisers. Authors of proposals of interest will be contacted by May 15, 2000 for further discussion. Final selection will be made by June 1, 2000. The investigators will meet with the committee in October or November 2000 to discuss their progress. Where appropriate, small informal groups may be formed to advise on the execution of the research. A new Academy website will be available to solicit input and comments. One or more public meetings will be held in Spring 2001 to discuss the research findings with other investigators, practitioners, and policymakers. Finally, the Academy may publish the results as part of the project. Topic 1: Patent Administration and Litigation The Board is interested in several generic issues while recognizing that circumstances are likely to vary considerably from one class of technology to another and that problems in one arena may not be characteristic of all. The Board seeks proposals addressing one or more of the following dimensions of the patent system: (a) Administration: A commonly expressed concern is that that Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) lacks sufficient resources to conduct rigorous, thorough review of patent applications, especially in rapidly changing technologies. What are the facts regarding the relationship of human (encompassing numbers, qualifications, turnover, etc.), financial (fees available to the PTO), and information resources (prior art data bases) to the volume of applications, prior art search methods, adaptation to new technologies? What is the incentive structure or bureaucratic culture in the PTO and how does it affect performance? (b) Patent Quality: Another concern is that there may have been a lowering of standards, especially non-obviousness and utility, in reviewing and issuing patents, with the result that many more patents of ?low quality? and broad scope are being issued. Are there ways to measure empirically changes in the application of these standards over time? Is the number of claims associated with a patent an empirical measure of breadth of scope in this sense? How are these related to observable characteristics of PTO administration and/or court decisions? How are these measures related if at all to the way economists measure patent importance or value ? i.e., by the frequency of citations in subsequent patents? Has there been a demonstrable change over time across technologies or in particular sectors? What are the economic implications of more patents of poor quality and broad scope? (c) International Comparison: A related claim is that the German or another European patent system produces superior results ? fewer, higher quality patents less subject to litigation, etc. How can systems be compared and the effects of particular system differences be isolated? For example, would a comparison of the life histories of a sample of identical patents in the U.S. and another country such as Germany illuminate the effects of differences in examination processes, reexamination, opposition and interference proceedings, publication of applications, litigation processes, etc.? (d) Litigation Costs: Some observers claim that the costs associated with litigating patents, including responses to threats of litigation that may never occur, are escalating and excessive. What is the best measure of the rate of litigation ? e.g., the rate for all issued patents or the rate for all commercialized patents or some other measure? How does the incidence and cost of patent litigation compare with other areas of commercial law (e.g., tort liability)? To what extent does essentially defensive patenting contribute to these costs? What are the opportunity as distinct from out-of-pocket costs ?e.g., the technical and managerial resources devoted to assessing patent validity and to negotiation? Finally, how do characteristics of patent administration (e.g., thoroughness of review, availability and frequency of reexamination, etc.) affect transaction costs? (e) Markets in Intellectual Property: It has been suggested that there has been a dramatic growth in patent-related transactions (e.g., licensing, cross-licensing, equity sales, etc.). We would like to document this trend and develop an understanding of its possible benefits and costs. How do the trends in these transactions and their benefits and costs vary across key technology areas?for example, in complex electronic versus more discrete chemical product technologies? Topic 2: Software-enabled business method patents and biotechnology patents The Board is also interested in the functioning of IP in particular technologies and industries and the similarities and differences among them. According to many participants in the recent series of STEP meetings, the most problematic arenas are software, especially software-enabled business methods, and biotechnology, especially involving genetic sequences. The fact that extensive patenting of these technologies is quite recent precludes definitive conclusions. Moreover, there are striking differences in product cycles, industry structure and other economic characteristics. It is not expected that research proposals will address both sectors. Nevertheless, the Board seeks information that will enable it to assess and compare trends for each of these two technology areas in (a) Patenting and licensing: Who is patenting what? What are the common licensing patterns in each industry? (b) Patents and investment: What are early stage (e.g., VC and angel) investors? perceptions of the value of formal intellectual property in these technologies? How have these attitudes changed over time? What do IPO filings reveal about public investors? view of the role of IP? Do investors perceive differences in the quality of patents? Do they take care to evaluate the validity of patents? (c) Patent litigation: What are the litigation trends in these areas? (d) Disclosure: How does the disclosure function of patents operate in software and biotechnology? Are issued patents (or, prospectively, patent applications available after 18 months) a source of useful technical information? The controversies surrounding software and biotechnology patents also pose sharply different issues of concern to the Board. Although these are of recent origin, there may be instructive parallels in the evolution of other technologies. The Board encourages exploration of analogous historical cases. The examples of business method and genomic patents are not meant to restrict attention to those categories, but proposal statements should specify the scope of the subjects of the proposed work. n Software-enabled business methods. Here the concern is that patents on elements of widespread software-based business practices and Internet services will enable hold-ups of routine operations, blocking of new entrants, and economic concentration with a consequent slowdown in innovation. The patenting issues relate to whether there are adequate searches of prior art and adherence to the non-obviousness and novelty standards. There are also post-issuance questions about whether reasonable licensing arrangements are being or can be worked out. Business methods software represents a technology in transition ? either from the public domain to the patent domain or from copyright to patent protection ? raising two questions: Are the alleged problems transitory rather than fundamental? Are they likely to arise in other technological areas that may become subject to patenting? n Biotechnology. Here there is controversy over whether genetic sequences should have patent protection and, if so, whether application of the standards of utility and non-obviousness and the written description requirement is sufficiently stringent. The latter issue has led to new guidelines for patent application review. One question, therefore, is how the new guidelines would have affected patents that have already been issued. A second question is whether existing gene patents have been put into practice, e.g. for the development commercial products anticipated by the utilities described in the applications or whether the patents on upstream research materials have reduced the incentives for downstream research and commercialization. Are suitable licensing arrangements being worked out to facilitate further research and commercialization or are the initial patents raising transaction costs to the point of impeding them? A related question is the effect of sequence patents on academic research and its communication. Are they, for example, creating obstacles to the exchange of research tools and delays in the publication of results? The role of universities in biotechnology patenting under the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 is an important factor in considering the effects both on research and on commercial development. Other Topics The Board will consider proposals on other topics broadly relating to the economic impacts of the patent system, both positive and negative. These might include: 1) The effects on research and on IP-intensive industries of the Supreme Court?s decisions that Congress lacks the power to compel the States (and State agencies) to observe federal intellectual property law. 2) The political economy of the patent system ? what forces and interests have shaped the current patent system and what are the levers for change? 3) The theoretical underpinnings of the patent system in light of changes in its scope and operation. 4) Characteristics of individual inventors and the role of features of the patent system in stimulating or impeding entrepreneurship and industry entry. For Further Information: Dr. Stephen A. Merrill Executive Director Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W., FO-2014 Washington, DC 20418 Tel. 202-334-2200 Fax. 202-334-1505 Email. Smerrill@nas.edu To Submit Proposal Statements: STEP@nas.edu From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Mar 24 11:50:48 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1260921B05 for ; Fri, 24 Mar 2000 11:50:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA15240 for ; Fri, 24 Mar 2000 11:50:48 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38DB9D7F.F17AFC84@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 11:53:19 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Linux Users to Protest New Copyright Law in Washington, D.C. Linux Users to Protest New Copyright Law in Washington, D.C. WASHINGTON, D.C., March 21, 2000 -- Members of the Linux user groups in the Washington, D.C. area have announced a protest against provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). It will be held on the west side of the U.S. Capitol Building on Tuesday, March 28th, from 9-12 AM. The DMCA was enacted in 1998, and its most objectionable provisions took effect as Section 1201 of U.S. Code Title 17. The DMCA grants copyright holders sweeping legal protection for technological access control measures, regardless of whether those access control measures are reasonable, fair, or justified by legitimate copyright enforcement concerns. In effect, it lets copyright holders write their own arbitrary copyright laws which are nominally enforced by these access control measures (such as weak encryption). The DMCA then outlaws circumventing these access controls for virtually any reason, even by legitimate paying customers engaged in "fair use" activities. A portion of the DMCA is not yet in effect and is in a comment period. But other provisions which prohibit the distribution of circumvention technologies are already in effect and are being used by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) to threaten parties who are attempting to develop Digital Versatile Disk (DVD) player software for the Linux operating system -- a case in which no actual copyright infringement has even been alleged. As it now stands, the DMCA could permit a few large organizations who hold copyrights and also control distribution technologies (such as the MPAA does with DVD video) to gain an unassailable stranglehold over their respective markets -- to the detriment of both independent content producers and consumers. In order to make the law balanced, the provisions which grant protection to technological access controls need to be revised to be strictly confined to protection against copyright infringement. Even then, no special legal protection should be granted to access controls which stifle free market competition, preclude technological innovation, curtail "fair use" by legitimate consumers, or raise barriers to independent distribution of artistic works. For more information, please see: http://www.tuxers.net/dmca/ DCLUG Home Page (Bethesda, MD): http://dclug.tux.org/ NovaLUG Home Page (Chantilly, VA): http://novalug.tux.org/ Email Contact for Volunteers: dmca-protest@tuxers.net Email Press Contact: dmca-press@tuxers.net Fax Press Contact: (202) 234-5176 Attn: Vergil From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Mar 24 14:34:55 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFE6821B05 for ; Fri, 24 Mar 2000 14:34:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA19302 for ; Fri, 24 Mar 2000 14:34:54 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38DBC3F7.FD873AD4@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 14:37:27 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] NBC's trademark dispute with 2600 Apparently NBC believes fucknbc.com is a violation of the NBC trademark. http://www.2600.com/news/2000/0323.html Jamie ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Mar 26 11:38:13 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6EEF21AFF for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2000 11:38:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA12003 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2000 11:38:13 -0500 Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 11:38:13 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Yahoo denial of ads for union organizers ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 09:43:04 -0500 From: Manon Ress To: nctlds list Subject: [Nc-tlds] SEIU Local 1877: Yahoo! Censors Workers' Voices, Abruptly Ends Virtual Some of the reasons to create a .union domain is to avoid the kind of problems describe in the following press release Manon http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/000222/ca_seiu_ya_1.html Tuesday February 22, 9:42 am Eastern Time Company Press Release SOURCE: SEIU Local 1877 SEIU Local 1877: Yahoo! Censors Workers' Voices, Abruptly Ends Virtual Leafleting Campaign LA Airport Security Workers Rally at Yahoo! Headquarters to Protest Cancellation of Internet Ad Campaign SAN JOSE, Calif., Feb. 22 /PRNewswire/ -- Yahoo!, one of the leading Web portals, has cancelled an advertising campaign which sought to bring a message, via the Internet, from passenger service workers attempting to form a union at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). With the help of the Respect at LAX campaign, passenger service workers at the airport employed by Argenbright Security, an AHL Services, Inc. company (Nasdaq: AHLS - news), were using virtual leaflets (banner advertisements) strategically placed on Yahoo! to publicize their labor dispute and a connecting Web site, www.un-fulfilled.com. The Campaign began distribution of the virtual leaflets in mid-January, but by early February, they were informed that the advertisements were being dropped because they ran counter to Yahoo's policy in this area. However, Yahoo! reviewed the banner ad content prior to commencement of the campaign. The virtual leaflets were presented to Web users who sought information on AHL Services, or their e-commerce subsidiary, Gage Marketing, via the Yahoo! Web site. If users clicked through on the leaflets, they were then connected to the un-fulfilled.com Web site. The cancellation came just days after Administrative Law Judge James L. Rose ruled that Argenbright was guilty of committing dozens of violations of federal labor laws against these employees. The violations include 40 suspensions and final warnings stemming from a legal, protected strike by the employees in April, 1999. They also include the disciplining of another union activist and threats, both written and verbal, against the Argenbright employees. The Campaign decided to use this inventive approach since Argenbright Security had sufficiently silenced their employees, using both legal and non- legal measures to keep them from forming a union. According to SEIU Local 1877 President, Mike Garcia, ``AHL has used illegal threats and intimidation to silence these workers and Yahoo!'s decision to pull the ad is an attempt to silence them once again. AHL customers who use Yahoo! have the right to know that AHL is a law-breaker,'' he said. ``While Yahoo! claims to support Internet free-speech, their decision to cancel the ad demonstrates their willingness to use censorship to prevent the public from learning that AHL has been convicted of breaking federal labor laws.'' Yahoo!'s decision to censor the ads runs contrary to positions that Yahoo! executives have taken in the past on free-speech issues. According to Chief Yahoo! Jerry Yang, ``We (Yahoo!) try to be very inclusive of everybody's comments and everybody's opinions even if those opinions are not very favorable.'' (The Daily Yomiuri, March 12, 1996) Moreover, the company's general counsel, John Place, recently said in an interview, ``To me, the most exciting thing about the Internet is a democratization ... everyone has a voice. It's the ultimate function of a participatory democracy.'' (The National Law Journal, December 20, 1999) Unfortunately the company's actions speak louder than their words. Mary Anne Hohenstein, organizing director of SEIU Local 1877 was quite disheartened by Yahoo's decision. ``We believed this was an outlet where we could freely spread the worker's message,'' she said. ``Argenbright has willfully violated the law in order to prevent its employees from exercising their rights to organize a union. The workers should have the right to share this message with the public and Argenbright's customers. Yahoo was wrong in unilaterally ending our contract to do so.'' Respect at LAX is one of the largest joint organizing campaigns in country, bringing together two of the fastest growing unions, the Service Employees International Union and the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees International Union to organize low-wage workers at Los Angeles International Airport. SOURCE: SEIU Local 1877 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Mar 26 21:39:21 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25DFF21AFF for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2000 21:39:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA27981 for ; Sun, 26 Mar 2000 21:39:21 -0500 Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 21:39:21 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Trademark dispute on Consumer Toilet Report This is a dispute between Terry Love, who is a plumber and my brother, and Consumer Reports, over his "Terry Love's Consumer Toilet Report." (http://www.terrylove.com/crtoilet.htm). Consumer Reports thought his web page on low-flow toilets voilated their trademark rights. The dispute appears to have been resolved. Jamie ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 17:42:15 -0800 From: Terry Love To: James Love Cc: KathrynKl@AOL.COM, Eric Menge I had received a request from Wendy Wintman of Consumer Reports, to not use the words consumer and report in a "confusing" way. below are the emails back and forth between her and I. A little background first. In the Winter of 1998, I had posted on the Internet, a page from the AOL version of the CU 1995 toilet report. This html page was text only with no links or pictures, just as it appeared on AOL. A single typewritten page. During my Winter vacation, I had decided to write a better toilet report than the old CU 1995 toilet report. It seemed out of date and listed toilets that I considered poor working in addition to their highly rated ones. It was at this time also, that the Nice& Easy plumbing bulletin that I had been posting to, and was referred to as an resident expert, had sold advertising to someone that had references to me and my site removed. Within a week of meeting with the purchaser of that advertising in Hawaii, Consumer Reports asked me to remove their report from the Internet. Timing was good, as I felt I was ready to move on this anyway. Their report was deleted. I promptly got my own plumbing bulletin board up and running. I also polled the four hundred plumbers on the plumbers.org discussion list about their opinions about toilets. From this input, I purchased toilets, and tried them out. Within a short amount of time, I had assembled quite a bit of new information, of which a few surprises showed up. The page currently is updated monthly. No advertising has been taken on this web site. That could change. It would have to be in a way that does not interfere with the integrity of the writing. I have considered taking non-plumbing advertising. I know that the report on toilets is quite a thorn in CU's side. I think it gets read much more than their May 98 report. 6,985 page views this month so far on the front page. 159,719 hit requests for the pictures and back pages on this report this month. http://www.terrylove.com/crtoilet.htm Terry Love <--------------------------------------------------> From CU, Wendy Wintman Dated 3/8/2000 I continue to notice that on your web site you are refer to the Consumer Report on Low-Flow Toilets and in a confusing and unapproved way in that consumers confuse with us, Consumer Reports magazine. This use unfortunately misuses the registered trademark, "Consumer Reports". We are sure the misuse was unintentional, however, such an oversight can serve to weaken the identity and value of our publication, CONSUMER REPORTS, and the service we offer consumers. Your commercial use of our name and Ratings was done without our knowledge or consent. It is in violation of Consumers Union's long-standing policies. Misuse of our materials results in significant harm caused to both Consumers Union and the consuming public. Those who violate these policies damage Consumers Union's most precious asset-its reputation for independence and integrity. Our name is tarnished by misuse. It dilutes the meaning of our trademark, "Consumer Reports" and creates public distrust of our findings and the perception that in someway Consumers Union is somehow affiliated with the very same commercial interests whose products are being evaluated. Overwhelmingly, once they learn of Consumers Union's rights, product manufacturers, sellers, and advertisers throughout the United States agree to refrain from any further use of our name, Ratings, and materials. Please, let me explain why Consumers Union regards such a situation with the utmost gravity. Since its founding in 1936, Consumers Union has built its hard-earned and well-deserved reputation for objectivity, accuracy, and lack of bias upon its independence from commercial interest. Consumers Union does not accept outside advertising for any of its publications nor do we accept commercial contributions. Permission is never given to anyone to use our name or Ratings for advertising or commercial purposes. These policies are stated in every issue of CONSUMER REPORTS, as follows: We accept no advertising and buy all the products we test on the open market. We are not beholden to any commercial interest. Our income is derived from the sale of CONSUMER REPORTS and our other publications, and from nonrestrictive, noncommercial contributions, grants, and fees. Our Ratings and reports are intended solely for the use of our readers. Neither the Ratings nor the reports may be used in advertising or for any other commercial purpose. Consumers Union will take all steps open to it to prevent commercial use of its materials, its name, or the name of CONSUMER REPORTS. Now that you are aware of Consumers Union's policies, its rights, and the important rationale supporting them, I trust that you will agree to discontinue your current use of our name and will respect our rights in the future. You should confirm your agreement to remove this from your web site and refrain from using this or any other reference to CONSUMER REPORTS whether in print or electronically. Please eMail your confirmation to me at the address below within the next seven days so that we may consider this matter resolved. Thank you for your courtesy and cooperation. I would be pleased to answer any questions. Sincerely, Wendy Wintman Copyright Manager Legal Department Consumers Union of U.S., Inc. 101 Truman Avenue Yonkers, NY 10703-1057 PH: 914-378-2448 FX: 914-378-2946 E-Mail: wintwe@consumer.org Our POLICY is below: CONSUMERS UNION OF U.S., INC. NO-COMMERCIAL USE POLICY STATEMENT Consumers Union's no-commercial use policy is stated in the front of every issue of CONSUMER REPORTS, CONSUMER REPORTS ON HEALTH, CONSUMER REPORTS TRAVEL LETTER, ZILLIONS, our CD-ROMs, interactive telephone services, on-line services, the Internet, and every book published by Consumer Reports Special Publications. The policy is as follows: Our Ratings and Reports are intended solely for the use of our readers. Neither the Ratings nor the Reports may be used in advertising or for any other commercial purpose. This policy is interpreted to preclude the use of any of Consumers Union's material or title of publication by professionals and/or commercial organizations who would have a direct or indirect benefit from making use of our material, both in print and electronically, including use on the Internet. More specifically, Consumers Union does not permit the use of its material by a manufacturer of a product or a provider of a service, or a professional in the related field discussed in the work. Our material cannot be used by a manufacturer, service provider, or professional internally with employees (for informational purposes), sales force (for training, informational, or sales purposes), dealers, distributors, retailers, or agents. It may not be used externally with existing or potential customers and clients. Mention of our material may not be included in a press release, an annual report, nor a radio or television commercial (whether initiated by the manufacturer, service provider, or by anyone else acting on their behalf). NO MATERIAL MAY EVER BE USED FOR ANY ADVERTISING OR PROMOTIONAL PURPOSES Consumers Union will not sell you additional copies of the entire magazine or book containing the article of interest, nor will we sell you reprints of the specific article. We will also deny permission for you to reproduce the article, in whole or in part, or quote from the article or book. If you believe that your intended use of our material is not commercial in nature, please resubmit your order with payment and a brief explanation of the purpose of your order directly to CU/Reprints, 101 Truman Ave., Yonkers, NY 10703-1057. For permissions requests, please resubmit your request with an explanation by mail or fax it to W. J. Wintman at 914-378-2946. In some cases, your use of our material may violate our legal rights. All of CU's products are fully protected under the United States Copyright Laws, 17 U.S.C. ?? 1 et seq., and unauthorized copying of, or quoting from our materials is strictly prohibited. CONSUMER REPORTS, CONSUMER REPORTS ON HEALTH, CONSUMER REPORTS TRAVEL LETTER, and ZILLIONS, are federally registered trademarks. Advertising that deceptively or falsely misrepresents our findings, or which creates confusion, infringes on our rights under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C., ??1 et seq. Such advertising may also contravene our rights under state laws prohibiting false advertising and other unfair trade practices. Under ?397 of the New York State General Business Law, the use of the names or identities of nonprofit organizations for advertising or trade purposes is strictly prohibited without obtaining prior written consent. Indeed, CU is a nonprofit organization. If Consumers Union learns that this policy has been violated, it will forward the information to its attorney, who will take all steps open to Consumers Union to prevent the misuse of any of its materials. We hope you can understand why Consumers Union has adopted this policy. Please feel free to share this with your colleagues, clients, and others as appropriate. NOCOM.POL0300 <-----------------------------------------------------> My response to the CU email Wendy, I went through my site and updated links. Things should be better now. Terry Terry Love's consumer toilet reports A report on low flow toilets I list 22 toilets on my report. (02/00) I list 16 toilets that are not listed on "Consumers Report". We list six toilets in common. Consumers Report (05/98)listed 13 toilets total, of which two of them, I listed as bad buys at the lower part of the article, but not in the ratings . Consumers Digest (04/00) on remodel listed a total of nine toilets, five toilets in common with Consumers Report and five in common with Terry Love Consumers Report (05/98) copied the idea for the title of their toilet report from one of my web pages CR Search for a better toilet. TL Search for a better plumber. Terry Love's toilet report is based on plumber input. Plumbers choose toilets for different reasons. We don't like hearing customer complaints on products that we sell. Rather than fixing poor working toilets, we would prefer they buy good ones. For that to happen, the public needs more information. My web site is meant for plumbers and homeowners. Currently we supply information to 1,169 people a day, 4,590 pages, 15,184 files hits. The toilet report gets updated monthly, with input from water districts, plumbers and homeowners. I am in a position to hear all the new and upcoming product information first. If you question people about plumbing on the Internet, they will remember TerryLove.Com TerryLove.Com is a brand name on the Internet. I accept no advertising. I do use the information that plumbers and homeowners give me. I do sell plumbing products. Terry Love <--------------------------------------------------> March 13, 2000 Dear Terry: THANK YOU. We sincerely appreciate it. Sincerely, Wendy Wintman Copyright Manager Legal Department Consumers Union of U.S., Inc. 101 Truman Avenue Yonkers, NY 10703-1057 PH: 914-378-2448 FX: 914-378-2946 E-Mail: wintwe@consumer.org File #NC1869 Terry Love Love Plumbing & Remodel 18628 NE 25th St. Redmond WA 98052 (425) 649-5683 Puget Sound Business Listings _______________________________________________ Ecommerce mailing list Ecommerce@lists.essential.org http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/ecommerce From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Mar 27 02:02:39 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D972021AFF; Mon, 27 Mar 2000 02:02:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA31290; Mon, 27 Mar 2000 02:02:38 -0500 Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 02:02:38 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Cc: upd-discuss@venice.essential.org, Ecommerce@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Dicussion list on UCITA This is a new mailing list set up by Vergil Bushnell, for discussion of UCITA, the controversial Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act. Jamie Ucita mailing list Ucita@lists.essential.org Subscriptions: http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/ucita --------------- CPT has more on UCITA, including a nice survey of shrinkwrap and clickon licenses, at: http://www.cptech.org/ecom/ucita/ ============================================= James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | love@cptech.org Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 ============================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Mar 27 18:29:26 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A374421AFF; Mon, 27 Mar 2000 18:29:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA15995; Mon, 27 Mar 2000 18:29:26 -0500 Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 18:29:20 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org, Ecommerce@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Subject: [Random-bits] AOL TW Merger out for public comment ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 18:10:39 -0500 From: CyberTelecom Reply-To: Telecom Regulation & the Internet To: CYBERTELECOM-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM Subject: AOL TW Merger out for public comment ** www.cybertelecom.org ** http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/Public_Notices/2000/da000689.doc CABLE SERVICES BUREAU ACTION March 27, 2000 AMERICA ONLINE, INC. AND TIME WARNER INC. SEEK FCC CONSENT FOR A PROPOSED TRANSFER OF CONTROL CS DOCKET NO. 00-30 Petitions/Comments due: April 26, 2000 Oppositions/Responses due: May 11, 2000 On February 11, 2000, America Online, Inc. (AOL) and Time Warner In= c. (Time Warner) filed joint applications under Sections 214 and 310(d) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. =A7=A7 214, 310(d), requesting Commission approval of the transfer of control to AOL Time Warner of licenses and authorizations controlled by AOL and by Time Warner or its affiliates or subsidiaries. On March 21, 2000, the parties supplied the Commission with a supplemental public interest statement. This transfer of control would take place as the result of the proposed merger of AOL and Time Warner, following which both AOL and Time Warner would become wholly owned subsidiaries of a newly formed holding company, AOL Time Warner. The ultimate ownership and control of those entities holding licenses and authorizations would be transferred from AOL and Time Warner to AOL Time Warner. AOL and Time Warner submit that the public interest will benefit fr= om the proposed transaction which will combine the strengths of the two companies to build an integrated media and communications company capable of enhancing consumers' access to the broadest selection of high-quality content and interactive services. Interested parties may file comments or petitions to deny the applications no later than April 26, 2000. Oppositions or responses to these comments and petitions may be filed no later than May 11, 2000. For administrative convenience, the various applications listed bel= ow have been consolidated into one general docket. The Cable Services Bureau will have primary responsibility for reviewing the applications. All filings regarding any aspect of the proposed merger should reference the Cable Services docket assigned to this proceeding, CS Docket No. 00-30. EX PARTE STATUS OF THIS PROCEEDING Because this proceeding involves broad public policy issues, the Ca= ble Services Bureau will treat the proceeding as "permit but disclose" for purposes of the Commission's ex parte rules. See generally 47 C.F.R. =A7= =A7 1.1200-1.1216. Should circumstances warrant, the Bureau may designate this proceeding and all interrelated proceedings as restricted. As a "permit but disclose" proceeding, ex parte presentations will be governed by the procedures set forth in Section 1.1206 of the Commission's rules applicable to non-restricted proceedings. Parties making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memora= nda summarizing the presentation must contain a summary of the substance of the presentation and not merely a listing of the subjects discussed. More than a one or two sentence description of the views and arguments presented is generally required. See 47 C.F.R. =A7 1.1206(b)(2), as revised. Other rules pertaining to oral and written presentations are set forth in Section 1.1206 (b) as well. Interested parties are to file with the Commission Secretary, Magalie Roman Salas, 445 12th Street, S.W., TW B204, Washington, D.C. 20554, and serve James Bird, Office of General Counsel, 445 12th Street, S.W., 8-C818, Washington, D.C. 20554, To-Quyen Truong, Associate Chief, Cable Services Bureau, 445 12th Street, S.W., 3-C488, Washington, D.C. 20554, Royce Dickens, Cable Services Bureau, 445 12th Street, S.W., 3-A729, Washington, D.C. 20554, Linda Senecal, Cable Services Bureau, 445 12th Street, S.W., 3-A734, Washington, D.C. 20554, and International Transcription Service, Inc., 1231 20th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036, with copies of any written ex parte presentations in these proceedings filed in the manner specified above. TRANSFER OF CONTROL APPLICATIONS The applications for transfer of control of Time Warner's and AOL's authorizations and licenses to AOL Time Warner include numerous Commission authorizations and licenses. Attached is a list of the authorizations and licenses involved in this transaction. They are separated by type of authorization and license, and, within each category, by the subsidiary or affiliate that holds the authorization or license. Each subsidiary or affiliate may hold multiple authorizations or licenses of a particular type. Interested parties should refer to the transfer of control applications for a listing of the authorizations or licenses. Parties should be aware that additional applications may have to be filed to identify any additional authorizations in the services noted. AOL and Time Warner have requested that grant of the applications listed herein include the authority for AOL Time Warner to acquire control of: (1) any authorization issued to AOL or Time Warner or subsidiaries and affiliates during the Commission's consideration of the transfer of control applications and the period required for consummation of the transaction following Commission approval; (2) construction permits held by licensees involved in this transfer of control that mature into licenses after closing and that may have been omitted from the transfer of control applications; and (3) applications that will have been filed by such licensees and that are pending at the time of consummation of the proposed transfer of control. GENERAL INFORMATION The applications for transfer of control of the licenses/authorizat= ions referenced herein have, upon initial review, been accepted for filing. The Commission reserves the right to return any applications if, upon further examination, they are determined to be defective and not in conformance with the Commission's rules and policies. Final action will not be taken on the applications earlier than 31 = days following the date of this Notice. Interested parties may file pleadings as indicated above regarding the applications. An original and 4 copies of all pleadings, in accordance with Section 1.51(c) of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R. =A71.51(c), must be filed with the Commission's Secretary, Magalie Roman Salas, 445 12th Street, S.W., TW B204, Washington, D.C. 20554. One copy of each pleading also must be filed with other offices, as follows: (1) International Transcription Service, Inc., the Commission's duplicating contractor, at its office at 1231 20th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036, telephone (202) 857-3800; (2) James Bird, Office of General Counsel, 445 12th Street, S.W., 8-C818, Washington, D.C. 20554; (3) To-Quyen Truong, Associate Chief, Cable Services Bureau, 445 12th Street, S.W., 3-C488, Washington, D.C. 20554; (4) Royce Dickens, Cable Services Bureau, 445 12th Street, S.W., 3-A729, Washington, D.C. 20554; (5) Matthew Vitale, International Bureau, 445 12th Street, S.W., 6-A821, Washington, D.C. 20554; (6) Marilyn Simon, International Bureau, 445 12th Street, S.W., 6A-633, Washington, D.C. 20554; (7) Monica Desai, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, 445 12th Street, S.W., 4-A232, Washington, D.C. 20554; and (8) Laura Gallo, Mass Media Bureau, 445 12th Street, S.W., 2-A640, Washington, D.C. In addition, twelve copies of each pleading must be filed with Linda Senecal, Cable Services Bureau, 445 12th Street, S.W., 3-A734, Washington, D.C. 20554. In addition to filing paper comments, parties may also file comment= s using the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 Fed. Reg. 24,121 (1998). Comments filed through the ECFS can be sent as an electronic file via the Internet to . Generally, only one copy of an electronic submission must be filed. In completing the transmittal screen, commenters should include their full name, Postal Service mailing address, and the applicable docket or rulemaking number. Parties may also submit an electronic comment by Internet e-mail. To get filing instructions for e-mail comments, commenters should send an e-mail to ecfs@fcc.gov, and should include the following words in the body of the message, "get form ." A sample form and directions will be sent in reply. Copies of the applications and any subsequently filed documents in = this matter may be obtained from International Transcription Service, Inc., 1231 20th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036, telephone (202) 857-3800, and will also be available through the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System. Copies of the applications and documents are also available for public inspection and copying during normal reference room hours at the Commission's Reference Center, 445 12th Street, S.W., CYA-257, Washington, D.C. 20554. The Cable Services Bureau's home page will contain electronic versions of selected key documents, including Applicants' public interest statement, public notices, and procedural orders. For further information, contact Linda Senecal (202) 418-7044, or Richard Kalb (202) 418-1055 of the Cable Services Bureau. Press inquiries should be directed to Michelle Russo (202) 418-2358 of the Cable Services Bureau. TTY: (202) 418-7172 or (888) 835-5322. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Mar 28 09:24:33 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED22A21AFF for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2000 09:24:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA28221 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2000 09:24:32 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38E0C162.70F2BD27@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 09:27:46 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN's famous names proposal This is what I have posted on ICANN's Working Group B list (the group working on trademark issues). Jamie ----------------------- Subject: famous names Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 09:17:02 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org To: Working Group B I would like to see if I understand the positions of the people concerned with "famous" type trademarks. Is the proposal to: a. Have WIPO create a list, of indeterminate size, of "famous" marks. b. Give trademark owners the first right to buy (or block) the use of the famous name is all new TLDs (or all new non-commercial TLDs)? Here are a few comments: 1. Last year the USPTO apparently issued 87,774 trademark registrations, including 3,445 for Mattel, a single company. Just how big of a list are we talking about? 2. Is the proposal to cover any use of the name, or some uses. For example, would aolsucks.networks or betterthanaol.networks, be covered because aol "owns" aol, or would only aol.networks be covered? 3. Would Ford Motor Company, which is famous, have the rights to ford.modeling? Would McDonalds, have the rights to mcdonalds.books, mcdonalds.vacations, mcdonalds,travel, mcdonalds.lawyers, etc? 4. Is there any legal basis for this, in any country, let alone in every country? Jamie http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/speeches/00-18.htm PTO 1999 Trademark Statistics Announced In fiscal year 1999, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) issued 87,774 trademark registrations. U.S. domestic entities received 87% of all U.S. trademark registrations issued in fiscal year 1999 (FY 1999). Thirteen percent of FY 1999 U.S. trademark registrations were issued to entities of other countries. Of these non-domestic entities, Canada (2,052), Germany (1,393) and Japan (1,034) received the highest number of trademark registrations. "Trademarks are the fingerprints of commerce. In this era of innovative commercial creativity, registered trademarks will become one of the most important assets of companies and individuals who want to compete in the global marketplace," observed Anne Chasser, Assistant Commissioner for Trademarks. Of U.S. domestic registrants, Mattel, Inc. filed 5,501 trademark applications and received 3,445 trademark registrations, which were the highest number of trademarks filed and issued to a single entity in FY 1999. Of those applications, Mattel, Inc. filed 476 of them using the online trademark filing system, e-TEAS, available at the PTO web site (http://www.uspto.gov), making Mattel, Inc. also the top filer of electronic applications. With Mattel, Inc. leading the list, the top ten recipients of trademark registrations in FY 1999 were: Mattel, Inc. 3,445 Avon Products, Inc. 1,180 Johnson & Johnson 1,486 General Mills, Inc. 1,298 Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company 1,270 Ralston Purina Company 1,218 American Greetings Corporation 1,196 American Home Products Corporation 1,108 E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Company 1,084 Clairol Incorporated 1,072 # # # -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Mar 28 17:57:33 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DF4221B1C for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2000 17:57:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA09833 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2000 17:57:32 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38E139A1.72F1C6C1@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 18:00:49 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] John C. Dvorak: More Domain Names Now! Apparently completely ignorant of the current proposals to expand the TLD space, John Dvorak has called for more TLDs, including "gasp," TLDs with more than 3 letter. Meanwhile, a number of unions will be meeting to discuss the .union issue this friday, and the FDIC has proposed the creation of .usbanks for FDIC insured banks. More Domain Names Now! John C. Dvorak http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2476614,00.html ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Mar 28 18:17:13 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DDF221B06 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2000 18:17:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA10267 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2000 18:17:13 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38E13E3E.FE9EDE0A@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 18:20:30 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] How will a change in TLD policy change the value of .com strategies One thing that isn't being picked up in the press is how the entire e-commerce landscape will change if (actually when) ICANN opens the doors for thousands of new TLDs. 1. Many firms now invest to brand companies that are a generics with .com, like drugstore.com, .flowers or register.com (name of a company that registers domains). The dot com part becomes part of the name. 2. If ICANN permits thousands of new TLDs, which is what I predict, there will a flood of new differentiated domains, like .drugstore, .flowers, .usedcars, etc. This will both expand the space for new internet names and make names more meaningful, and reduce the value of the dot com label. 3. Firms that want to build a brand in the domain space will have to look at names like ebay or AOL, which like texaco or exxon, are not regular words. Generic names like united or delta, won't get trademark protection across lots of different tlds. The creation of new TLDs won't happen right away, but within 2 years, the domain space will be fundamentally changed, IMO. Jamie -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Mar 28 19:04:43 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A27B321B06 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2000 19:04:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA11430 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2000 19:04:43 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38E14961.E3FC5882@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 19:08:01 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN WGB and WBC discussions on TLDs ICANN discussions on the TLD policy are largely found in the archives of two lists, Working Group B, which is looking at trademark issues, and Working Group C, which I guess is looking at the practical steps. Believe it or not, this is the "bottom up internet self governance consensus" system at work. It's not pretty. Jamie WG-B, not a bad idea to began toward the of the page, unless you have lots of time. http://www.dnso.org/wgroups/wg-b/Archives/maillist.html Often tough going WG-C http://www.dnso.org/wgroups/wg-c/Arc01/maillist.html -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Mar 29 13:47:35 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84C9A21B0C for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2000 13:47:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA30591 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2000 13:47:35 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38E25095.AE986274@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 13:51:01 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Today's House Judiciary Committee meeting Today I testified in the House Judiciary Committee on antitrust issues in the oil and gas industry. My testimony focused on the issue of collaborations between competitors, and the FTC joint venture guidelines. We said these were important issues for other industries, including the pharmaceutical, telecommunications and software industries, where firms are competitors in some markets, and partners or collaborators in other markets. We have asked for changes in the Horizontal Merger guidelines to reflect the importance of collaborative agreements on measures of market concentration, and to routinely require public disclosure of such agreements on the Internet, as part of the Hart Scott Rodino process. http://www.cptech.org/at/oil/mar29-2000-opec.html Jamie -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Mar 29 19:49:09 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B4A221B4A; Wed, 29 Mar 2000 19:49:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA07742; Wed, 29 Mar 2000 19:49:09 -0500 Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 19:49:09 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Ecommerce@venice.essential.org, random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] TRADE ASSOCIATION COMMITTEE PROGRAMS Interesting program. Jamie ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 18:27:17 -0500 From: "Armstrong, Stephen" To: AT-MEMBERS@MAIL.ABANET.ORG Subject: TRADE ASSOCIATION COMMITTEE PROGRAMS At the ABA Antitrust Section Spring Meeting the Trade Associations Committee is sponsoring two excellent programs: Can Industry Self-Regulation by Trade Associations Really Be Lawful? a General Sessions program on April 6 at 1:30 p.m. Keeping Antitrust Simple: "Momma's Rules" for Attending Trade Association Meetings a Committee Program on April 7 at 8:15 a.m. The Self-Regulation program has a superb group of presenters who will address a provocative issue that challenges the core of trade association activities. The FTC's recent efforts to encourage industry self-regulation in a variety of consumer protection areas presents an intriguing contrast with its challenge to a professional association's efforts to prevent harmful false advertising in FTC v. California Dental Ass'n. This program presents an important topic of broad public interest with a significant panel. We hope you will attend the program and ask that you invite anyone you know who might be interested in these issues. Our committee program is a joint presentation with the Corporate Counseling Committee, which has a deep interested in providing guidance on appropriate conduct for attending trade association meetings, and participating in their activities. David Bagwell, who has authored "Your Momma's Rules for Corporate Guidelines for Attending Trade Associations Meetings and Standards Setting Activities", a very practical presentation in a context that our clients, who attend these meetings, can appreciate, will lead a discussion on counseling clients about the risks in association activities. If you or your clients have an interest in these issues, we hope to see you there. Stephen W. Armstrong, Chair Mary L. Azcuenaga, Vice Chair Roscoe B. Starek, III, Vice Chair PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS: ____________________________________________________________________________ _ CAN INDUSTRY SELF-REGULATION BY TRADE ASSOCIATIONS REALLY BE LAWFUL? CHAIRMAN PITOFSKY'S CHALLENGE APRIL 6, 2000 Moderator: Roscoe B. Starek, III, Vice Chair, Trade Associations Committee Senior Vice President, Direct Marketing Association The program will explore ideas introduced by FTC Chairman Pitofsky in his February 1998 speech on self-regulation, that associations should engage in active cooperative self-regulation and that the antitrust risks have been overstated by some antitrust advisors. Speakers The Consumer Protection Values Jodie Bernstein Director, Bureau of Consumer Protection Federal Trade Commission The Antitrust Rationale: FTC Perspective Richard G. Parker (Chairman Pitofsky's view) Director, Bureau of Competition Federal Trade Commission The Legal Challenges: Consumer Protection and Antitrust Issues Robert B. Barnett Williams & Connolly Washington, D.C. The Realities: How Can Industries Effectively Exercise Co-operative Self-Restraint Lynne J. Omlie Secretary & General Counsel Distilled Spirits Council of the US Inc.(DISCUS) ____________________________________________________________________________ _ KEEPING ANTITRUST SIMPLE: "MOMMA'S RULES" FOR ATTENDING ASSOCIATION MEETINGS APRIL 7, 2000 Moderator: David A. Bagwell, Esquire Author: Your Momma's Rules For Trade Association Meetings Antitrust Section Committee Vice Chair Mr. Bagwell will lead a discussion with counsel from corporations and industry associations, and the audience, to examine the challenging and subtle issues inherent in formal and informal cooperative "associations" among competitors, and practical responses to the concerns of clients and their counsel. Speakers: Paul Saltzman Bond Marketing Association Dennis White General Motors Legal Department From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Mar 29 20:03:53 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2F9E21B83 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2000 20:03:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA08050 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2000 20:03:53 -0500 Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 20:03:53 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Business Methods Patent Initiative: An Action Plan ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 20:01:46 -0500 (EST) From: Vergil Bushnell To: upd-discuss@venice.essential.org Subject: [Upd-discuss] PTO's newly announced "Action Plan" Here is the URL for the freshly minted "Business Methods Patent Initiative: An Action Plan" http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/actionplan.html Sincerely, Vergil Vergil Bushnell Consumer Project on Technology (CPT) www: www.cptech.org email: vbushnell@cptech.org phone: 202.387.8030 address: PO Box 19405, Washington DC 20036 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Mar 29 22:18:45 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 666A321B3D for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2000 22:18:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-7.essential.org [216.0.125.7]) by milan.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA00687 for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2000 22:18:39 -0500 Message-ID: <38E2C849.27C1502B@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 22:21:45 -0500 From: James Love Reply-To: love@cptech.org Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Judge OKs deep hyperlinking The AP report on today's decision on deep hyperlinking. Jamie Judge OKs deep hyperlinking http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/cth632.htm James Love Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 love@cptech.org | http://www.cptech.org voice 202.387.8030, fax 202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Mar 30 11:06:20 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B6E921B08 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2000 11:06:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA19803 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2000 11:06:20 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38E37C53.A73113B0@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 11:09:55 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Proposal to ICANN's Working Group C for new TLDs This is a proposal that I made today on ICANN's Working Group C. It does not reflect our views on the way ICANN should proceed, but is offered as a compromise proposal. Jamie Jamie ------- Subject: Proposal for new TLDs Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 10:47:51 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org To: wgc Although I was pleased to support the paper that ICANN would create 6 to 10 testbed TLDs, I think WG-C will have some problems narrowing it down so much. It might well be easier to do this with a larger number. Name.space provides a nifty voting system for new TLD names, which is on the Internet here: http://vote.global-namespace.net/ As a member of Working Group C, I propose that we take the top 200 names off of this list, and try to put them into catagories as to which ones would be: 1. the most generic .com type top level TLDs, like .web, .mall, .zone, .firm, .asia, etc. 2. The more differentialed TLDs that would most clearly be for open registration, such as .arts, .music, .news, or .consulting, and 3. The types of TLDs that would be might be appropriate for a more restricted charter, or that should be removed from the list for any other reason, such as pending litigation or concerns over trademarks in the TLD. For the names in 1 and 2, that would clearly be open and unrestricted, we ask ICANN to begin a competitive process to run the registries all the names in 1 and 2, under a shared and competitive registrar system. For the names in (2), which are differentiated, we just go forward, because the trademark concerns will be adequately protected by the current ADR. For the names in (1), we ask WIPO to create a list of no more than 3,000 famous names, and give the owners of these famous names a one time first right of refusal for 30 days to acquire the basic registration in (1), like cocacola.inc, if they want to own it. This is the so called "sunrise" proposal some are advocating. It isn't something that I would support on principle, but it could be part of a compromise, depending upon the rest of the "deal." This would all be part of a testbed, and would not bind ICANN or anyone else for future TLD proposals. For example, there would be no agreement that all future TLDs would be on the shared registry model, or that there would be any sunrise requirements on famous names. ICANN would also openly solicit proposals for restricted use TLDs, including both commerical non-commerical chartered TLDs. For the testbed, ICANN should seek to include a significant number of restricted non-commerical TLDs. I recognize this is quite a bit different than the 6 to 10 proposal, and I won't be shocked if people reject this proposal out of hand. But it is offered as a serious proposal to move things along.* I think once you open the door somewhat, it will radically change the public demand for new TLD space, so this should just be a beginning. Here are the top 200 names from the name.space poll, in the order of votes they received (as of this morning). * typo fixed. http://vote.global-namespace.net/ WEB. SPACE. SHOP. ART. SEX. ZONE. INFO. FIRM. MUSIC. DESIGN. MEDIA. TRAVEL. ONLINE. ARTS. INC. MAIL. X. HOME. 2000. FAMILY. BANK. USA. LTD. WORLD. NEWS. MAG. FUCK. DIRECT. CORP. FREE. SERVICE. LOVE. SALE. GAMES. CASINO. AUCTION. FUN. MALL. CAM. LAW. STUDIOS. ASIA. MARKET. CAFE. MAD. HACKER. CITY. NETWORK. CONSULTING. EUROPE. COMPUTER. SPORTS. CLUB. JAM. GAME. CAT. ZERO. 4U. SOFTWARE. RADIO. CHANNEL. WINE. BOOKS. TRADE. TIME. COMMERCE. FAX. GRAPHICS. HOLE. LAB. FILM. HOST. INSURANCE. SITE. 4ALL. SHOW. NOW. POWER. SCHOOL. BUSINESS. GROUP. IRC. ONE. TECH. CARS. MAGAZINE. GIRL. SOLUTIONS. PUB. PRODUCTIONS. MOON. SYSTEMS. SHOES. ADS. SOFT. WATCH. AGENCY. BOX. MED. ETC. HELP. HOTEL. COOL. 3D. NYC. GUIDE. CARD. PHOTO. VIDEO. INDEX. AUDIO. RED. COMPUTERS. MARS. TOYS. AIR. ZINE. WAR. SOUND. BAR. UNDERGROUND. THEATER. GIRLS. SECURITY. PLANET. PICTURES. HACK. HELL. PRESS. WORLDWIDE. ENTERPRISES. PAGE. HOUSE. MOVIE. MAN. CENTER. DIGITAL. DOG. GATE. GALLERY. SCIFI. REALITY. DATA. ACCESS. CYBER. MATRIX. GLOBAL. MONEY. MODELS. LINK. CHAT. STAR. CAPITAL. RECORDS. PRO. CENTRAL. UNIX. ACADEMY. PLACE. TOLERANCE. CHAOS. BOOK. ARTISTS. STREET. BEER. THEATRE. CULTURE. UNLIMITED. ANARCHY. STUDENT. WEATHER. MEN. BOYS. JEWELRY. FUND. AIRLINES. THINK. WAY. IMAGE. NOISE. LOGIC. EXPRESS. PEOPLE. GER. VISION. LABS. DANMARK. FILMS. ROCK. WORKS. ARCH. FLUX. MAP. FILTER. HISTORY. SKI. NETWORKS. WALES. COFFEE. -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Mar 30 22:25:51 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 694D221B05 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2000 22:25:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-2.essential.org [216.0.125.2]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA02458 for ; Thu, 30 Mar 2000 22:25:50 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38E38DD1.EE61921C@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 12:24:33 -0500 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] $38 million for cool domain name According to this story in MSNBC, Tim Lee was offered $38 million to buy cool.com, a domain he registered for free five years ago. MSNBC says this tops the $7.5 million paid for business.com. The purchases illustrate the huge value of a generic name of the .com top level domain. http://www.msnbc.com/news/387441.asp A man, a domain and a plan Martin Wolk -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Mar 31 01:32:20 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37C5A21BB7; Fri, 31 Mar 2000 01:32:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA04813; Fri, 31 Mar 2000 01:32:20 -0500 Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 01:32:20 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: antitrust@venice.essential.org, random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN's proposed restrictions on use of famous names This is a missive I sent this evening to the ABA antitrust list. Jamie ------------------ Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 14:13:15 -0500 From: James Love To: ABA Antrtrust List Subject: ICANN's proposed restrictions on use of famous names This is a question about antitrust actions involving private sector "self governance" organizations. ICANN is the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. It is a California Non-Profit organization, and is operating under a memorandum of understanding with the US Department of Commerce that might be terminated as early as this year (or might not, of course, if DOC decides to extend it). ICANN now controls the main root server for the Internet DNS system, the thing that permits people to use names like www.usdoj.gov or www.ftc.gov instead of numbers like 149.101.10.32 or 164.62.7.15. The names are organized in a series of domains. The top level domain (TLD) is the last name in the string, such as .com, .org, .gov or .uk. The next one is the second level domain, or SLD, and so on. NTIA is the third level domain in ntia.doc.gov. Right now there are 244 2 digit country code top level domains (ccTLDs) like .uk, .fr and .jp, and seven so called "generic" top level domains (gTLDs), out of the country code space, of which only three are widely available, .com, .net and .org. All three of the generally available gTLDs are manged by NSI, a firm that was recently sold for about $22 billion. While several country TLDs have tried to compete against NSI for registering domains, for the most part the action is in .com, a single TLD. IMO, this is because ccTLDs like .to, .de, .au etc are not particularly well known, intuitive or appealing. The 2 letter limit for ccTLDs is a also severe constraint. (There are a few exceptions, of course, like the .fm ccTLD which is marketed to fm radio stations, for example). For the public, the .com space is very overcrowded. People are paying huge sums to buy the rapidly dimminishing remaing regular names on the .com space, and people apparently pay millions for generic names. MSNBC reported today that someone paid $38 million for cool.com. I don't know if this is a bona fide offer or not, but there are surly lots of high priced sales, and many businesses, NGOs and individuals cannot buy the names they want from .com, .net or .org. Technically, the TLD space could be huge, perhaps as large as a million TLDs with today's technology, and who knows how large later. While anyone can set up a computer to run a TLD registry, very few people will be able to find it, unless ICANN includes the TLD in the main root. Several years ago, the pre-ICANN authority proposed to create 150 new TLDs, run by 50 new NSI competitors. The main thing that stopped this was the (big) trademark lobby. There are also non-trivial but resolvable issues concerning the policies associated with new TLDs. Now ICANN is considering once again to expand the root, first with a 6 to 10 TLD testbest, and once that is done, perhaps a much larger expansion. We have called for the addition of thousand of new TLDs. There is much demand for new TLDs. Within the proposed new TLD space would be lots of types of new TLDs. Some would be .com clones, like .inc, .biz, .web, .zone, .store. .firm, .mall, etc. Others would be particular to types of activity, such as .software, .consultant, .sex, .usedcars, .flowers or .drugstore. And this is just scratching the surface. There would also be a variety of noncommercial TLDs, such as .union, .sucks, or .isnotfair, and lots of different management styles, some unrestricted and some restricted. For example, .union might be controlled by labor unions, or .usbank might be restricted to FDIC insured bands (an actual proposal by an FDIC official). All of this is being held up by a handful of big corporate trademark lawyers, who have generally opposed adding new commerical TLDs. These by and large are firms that already have staked out or taken various domains like att.com, mattel.com, pepsi.com, etc, and they don't want to have to fight to protect their trademark name in thousands of new TLDs. These trademark groups are saying they will block any new TLDs unless their demands are met. One current one is to create an open ended list of "famous" names that would be reserved on new TLDs. There are various issues in these negotations, including such items as how many uses of a "string" (use of a name) would be reserved. For example, would cokevpepsi.comparison be blocked? Would boeing.union be reserved for boeing? Would Exxon.sucks be reserved for Exxon? (There may be some openess to consider non-commercial exceptions). There is no legal basis for this type of reservation of famous trademarks in the US or in nearly any country, and many of the proposed reservations don't make any sense. For example, why would ford motor company be able to reserve ford.flowers, ford.plumbing or even ford.foundation (not to mention ford.modeling)? Why would one not have lotus.cars, lotus.flowers and lotus.software, one ICANN participant asked? The trademark lobby is seeking to "own" a string across all TLD space on the Internet, and of course, you can't blame them for trying. But they are seeking this not in a national legislature or through a treaty, but through ICANN's control of the Internet's root. The failure to expand the root is now beginning to have serious anticompetive consequences, because new entrants are disadvantaged, by not having very much space to find domains. This is an artificial regulatory scaricity, but largely by a private sector self regulation body. Would there be antitrust grounds to challenge a decision by ICANN to place restrictions of the use of famous names? Jamie -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Mar 31 12:26:05 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFFAC21B15 for ; Fri, 31 Mar 2000 12:26:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA12639 for ; Fri, 31 Mar 2000 12:26:04 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38E4E08F.BAC00095@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 12:29:51 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Vergil Bushnell, our UCITA person Vergil Bushnell (202.387.8030, vbushnell@cptech.org) is who we have assigned to work on UCITA. He has a web page on various click on contracts, and is working on a 10 page letter to Maryland on its UCTIA propose, getting into the nitty gritty of the proposal, so he is a decent source on this topic. Jamie ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Apr 1 12:21:06 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12F5921B02; Sat, 1 Apr 2000 12:21:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA30925; Sat, 1 Apr 2000 12:21:05 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38E630EF.E778356F@cptech.org> Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 12:25:03 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , Non-commercial TLDs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] US DOC: government control of root is material to antitrust analysis I sent Beck Burr from the US Department of Commerce, a copy of a letter I sent to the ABA listserve on the potential antitrust issues in ICANN imposing restrictions on the use of famous names. (This leter can be read here: http://lists.essential.org/pipermail/random-bits/2000-March/000128.html). Becky was kind enough to respond, twice, on this issue, and indicated I may share these letters on listserves. Jamie <---------- 1st letter from Becky Burr----------------> Subject: Re: ICANN's proposed restrictions on use of famous names Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 09:54:22 -0500 From: "Becky Burr" To: , CC: Jamie, Thanks for sending this along, and I'm sure we'll have an opportunity to discuss some of the issues in here later this afternoon. I would, however, characterize some issues in a different way, and that different characterization might have some implications for an antitrust analysis. 1. ICANN does not control the Internet's authoritative root. Network Solutions operates the A root, at the direction of the Department of Commerce. Every change to the authoritative root file must be approved by the USG. Any antitrust analysis would likely consider this material. 2. It is certainly true that there is currently no effective competition for .com in the TLD space at the time. Most commenters on the Green Paper argued that there would never be real competition at the gTLD level, due to lock-in and switching costs. The USG thought that they might be wrong, and that at the very least we ought to provide an opportunity to study this by adding, in a careful and controlled way, some new gTLD space. 3. While the ccTLDs are not real competitors at the moment, there are some interesting changes taking place in these spaces. The rate of growth in .uk and .de over the last year, for example, has exceeded the growth rate in .com. I think that with some work .us could be very, very interesting real estate. 4. It certainly appears to be true that there is some significant speculation going on in the market for generic second level domains like cool.com or business.com. It also is clear that we have not h >>> James Love 03/31/00 09:32AM >>> This is a missive I sent yesterday to the ABA antitrust list. Jamie >>> James Love 03/31/00 09:32AM >>> This is a missive I sent yesterday to the ABA antitrust list. Jamie <------------my follow-up----------------------------> Subject: Re: ICANN's proposed restrictions on use of famous names Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 10:28:04 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org To: Becky Burr CC: lessig@pobox.com, mpalage@infonetworks.com References: 1 Becky, thanks for the note. My copy appears to be missing the end of your comment. Do you mind if I share this or a redacted version on the list? Also, are you saying that is is DOC's decision to expand the root, rather than ICANN's? As a member of ICANN's working groups B and C, this is a bit of a surprise. Also, it is great that there will be changes in .us, but I would not hold out the .us as a substitute for significant changes in the gTLD space. I think the Internet is basically a global deal, and there are some natural reasons why many would be seeking to build a brand or identity in a space that was not identified with geography. Certainly many in the union community think that a global .union TLD will possibly change the nature of the union movement itself, not only provide their own readily available name to use. Of course, .us could also be used better than it is now. Jamie <-----------2nd letter from Becky Burr-----------------------------> -- Subject: Re: ICANN's proposed restrictions on use of famous names Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 12:12:20 -0500 From: "Becky Burr" To: CC: , Jamie, somehow, mysteriously, the email disappeared off my screen, and apparently I inadvertently hit the send key before i finished the email. I'll finish it later today, and you can post it then. I understand, and agree, that .us won't be a substitute for a generic. On the question of USG authority over expansion of the root, the answer is in two parts. First, our position on expansion of the root is clearly laid out in the White Paper - we think that new gTLDs should be added, but in a careful and controlled way and that ICANN and not the USG should decide what new gTLDs should be added and how they should be added (within the parameters of careful and controlled so as to preserve the stability of the Internet). But of course, NSI can't change the Authoritative Root file without our approval. Under what circumstances would we not approve ICANN recommendations? In extremely limited circumstances like, for instance, where the recommended addition/change would violate US law. If, for example, the ICANN process identified consensus for addition of a .union gTLD, I can't think of any reason that we would object to that on its face (which is to say, if the rules for registering in a .union violated US competition law or intellectual property law, we might object to those rules). I trust that to the extent the above is quoted, it will be used in context and in appropriate completeness. I'll finish the other part of my email, or just discuss it with you this afternoon. Becky From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Apr 1 13:58:49 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC33521B02 for ; Sat, 1 Apr 2000 13:58:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA32271 for ; Sat, 1 Apr 2000 13:58:49 -0500 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38E647D7.FF62FBFA@cptech.org> Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2000 14:02:47 -0500 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Friday's dot union briefing On Friday, March 31, I attended a briefing on the issue of the .union internet top level domain (TLD). The meeting was organized by Manon Ress . There were 17 participants, including the union members and the speakers. I was one of the speakers, as were Becky Burr and Mark Bohannon from the US Department of Commerce and Michael Palage, who is Chair of ICANN's working group B on trademark issues. The AFC-CIO and a number of unions attended. The meeting was organized for informational purposes, and it was probably the first meeting of its type as it relates to the creation of new TLDS for labor unions. In the beginning, it was made clear by the union representatives that they were gathering information, to see if the union community had interests that should be represented in the ICANN process, and if unions would become involved in efforts to create a .union TLD. I started off by providing backgrond on the DNS system and some of the policy issues that ICANN was addressing in the discussions over new TLDs. I talked about our earlier proposal to create several new TLDs, incuding .union, for a variety of civil society purposes. I indicated that we had raised these issues in the ICANN process to insure that decisions on issues such as the use of famous names would not forclose the use of a company or product name in connection with various domains that were related to organizing workers, consumers and for criticisms. (i.e., boeing.union, nike.union, texaco.isnotfair, aol.sucks, etc). I said that while we had raised the issue of the .union domain, in order to address various ICANN policy discussions, we thought the unions themselves should control .union (a view not shared by everyone in the ICANN processs). I said there were currently 244 country code TLDS, and 7 TLDs outside of the country codes, including 4 that were restricted (.int, .gov, .edu and .mil) and 3 that were unrestricted (.com, .net and .org), and that from a technical point of view, the system could accomodate hundreds of thousands if not millions more TLDs. The issues regarding expansion of the TLD space were political, not technical. I provided some examples of different ways the .union domain might be used. The first would be to provide a way to indicate if a domain was controlled by a bona fide union, just like .gov or .edu does for the government or real higher degree granting educational institutions. It could also be used to provide a predictable location for information about union information for a particular firm. For example, at gm.union or microsoft.union, workers could find links to unions that were organizing workers at that company. In the common situation where there were more than one union, the TLD could provide for gateways to each union's information (such as is done for http://www.scrabble.com now, to accomodate different owners of the scrabble trademark in the US and and Canada (Hasbro) and elsewhere (Mattel), an example that Michael Palage had provided. Unions could also create sites like hotels.union, printers.union, airlines.union or supermarket.union, to provide their members and the public with links to unionized businesses, or information about unions issues or campaigns in these areas. These were only a few of the possible uses of a TLD. I said that ICANN would be deciding, relatively soon, the rules for new TLDs, and that there were important issues, such as the ability to restrict the registration, or the use of company name (worldcom.union). Becky Burr and Mark Bohannon from DOC then make presentations. Becky expanded the background of the Green Paper and White Paper, the ICANN process, how .edu and .us worked, and other items. Mark Bohannon then went on an extended discussion of why unions might not need .union. Mark said they could do everything they needed by using the .org domain. They didn't need boeing.union, he said, if they could get boeingunion.org (assuming Boeing or someonelse didn't buy it first). The AFLCIO already had aflcio.org, so they could be found on the Internet, without a .union TLD. IMO, the suggestion that unions could be happy sharing .org with everyone, saving themselves the trouble of getting .union, was not particularly well recieved, although there were differences of views among the participants. The union members wanted to know if it would be possible for a non-union group to get the .union TLD. Becky told the meeting that if the AFLCIO wanted to block someone from getting .union, they could. Mark and Becky also said that if the unions wanted .union, they could probably do it, but that they would have to provide a consensus proposal (consensus among stakeholders, in this case the labor movement), it would have to address the international aspect of ICANN, and it would have to follow the rules laid down by ICANN and DOC on issues such as intellectual property and disclosure of the names of domain owners. Some union members wanted to know about alternative root systems and to talk about the issues of ICANN's power and control over the Internet. Becky and Mark said that they did not want to stop people from experimenting with these alternatives at this time, but that they were not practical. Michael Palage provide an explanation of the ICANN working group B process and the trademark issues. Michael make distinctions between the trademark issues for a domain like .biz and domains like .union, in terms of the appropriate use of a trademarked name in connection with a TLD. Michael also provided a very good explanation of the value of a TLD to the union community, the "union label" was the phrase Michael and several others used in the meeting. He gave pretty straight answers to questions about the ICANN process, and responded to a number of interesting technical questions raised by the union members. He said the key to success in the ICANN process was to minimize enemies, and he did not appear to have made any enemies at the this meeting. Given the fact that this was an informational meeting, I don't think it is appropriate for me to report on the details of the discussions among the union members, and in any event, the speakers were asked to leave at one point so the unions could talk about this in private. However, I can report that there were a range of opinions expressed during and before the meeting. There were some differences among the union members in terms of their backgrounds, but they were very well prepared, and knew quite a bit about the topic. The opinions seemed to range everywhere from "this isn't very important and would be a distraction" to "this could fundamentally change the labor movement." Some union members are clearly thinking that the .union TLD could be used very effectively in organizing efforts, particularly if new digital signature initiatives permit online organizing and even voting. Also, some members think it has the potential to enhance cooperation among unions, including among unions in different countries, in dealing with a single company. Others are uncomfortable with the larger ambitions. Jamie Love ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Apr 3 18:07:49 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99B4C21AFF for ; Mon, 3 Apr 2000 18:07:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (phelsuma.essential.org [216.0.124.26]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA13340 for ; Mon, 3 Apr 2000 18:07:49 -0400 Message-ID: <38E91512.49011CDE@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 18:02:59 -0400 From: Vergil Bushnell Organization: Consumer Project on Technology X-Sender: "Vergil Bushnell" <@smtp.essential.org> (Unverified) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-gatewaynet (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Comment of Consumer Advocate Ralph Nader on Microsoft Decision Comment of Consumer Advocate Ralph Nader on Microsoft Decision Microsoft has illegally crushed innovative competitors and harmed consumers. The company has shown its contempt for any court-imposed changes in its conduct. The court must break up this monopoly corporation. For Further comment call: Ralph Nader 202-387-8030 For more information on Mr. Nader's position on Microsoft's anti-competitive practices see: http://www.cptech.org/ms/ From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Apr 3 18:30:22 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A00521AFF for ; Mon, 3 Apr 2000 18:30:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (phelsuma.essential.org [216.0.124.26]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA13857; Mon, 3 Apr 2000 18:30:22 -0400 Message-ID: <38E91A5B.35F9459D@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 18:25:31 -0400 From: Vergil Bushnell Organization: Consumer Project on Technology X-Sender: "Vergil Bushnell" <@smtp.essential.org> (Unverified) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-gatewaynet (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: random-bits@venice.essential.org, love@cptech.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Comments of Consumer Advocate Ralph Nader on Microsoft Decision Comments of Consumer Advocate Ralph Nader on Microsoft Decision April 3, 2000 Microsoft has illegally crushed innovative competitors and harmed consumers. As the court found, it has done "violence to the competitive process" through a set of wide-ranging illegal tactics. Its predatory and exclusionary practices have saddled consumers with inferior technologies and blocked innovations which would have otherwise occurred. Microsoft doesn't respect the antitrust laws, and it has amply demonstrated that it can't be trusted. The company has shown its contempt for any court-imposed changes in its conduct. If the government ends the antitrust case by seeking changes in its conduct, but not in its structure, Microsoft can be expected to creatively evade the thrust of such agreements. The court must break up this monopoly corporation. Creating separate companies for the Microsoft operating system (Windows) and applications (Microsoft Office) would be a first step, and the court should also require Microsoft to divest itself of its browser -- the software product that led to the antitrust case. Other remedies the court should also pursue include: * Prevent Microsoft from penalizing OEMs (original equipment manufacturers) that carry non-Microsoft software. * Microsoft should be required to disclose Windows source code to competitors. It should be required to meet specific timetables for disclosure and be subjected to constant government monitoring. * Microsoft or the company which gains control of Microsoft Office should be required to make its applications compatible with at least two non-Microsoft platforms. For Further comment call: Ralph Nader 202-387-8030 For more information on Mr. Nader's position on Microsoft's anti-competitive practices see: http://www.cptech.org/ms/ From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Apr 6 09:11:44 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EA7F21B0D for ; Thu, 6 Apr 2000 09:11:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA15744 for ; Thu, 6 Apr 2000 09:11:44 -0400 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38EC8E31.BA96E903@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 09:16:33 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Jail terms for copyright violations ----------------- Subject: IP: SENTENCING PANEL INCREASES FEDERAL PENALTIES FOR CRIMES Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 08:58:13 -0400 From: David Farber To: ip-sub-1@majordomo.pobox.com The federal government's Sentencing Commission recently voted to stiffen punishment for various copyright and identity theft violations. Counterfeiting and piracy on the Internet can result in a 10-month to 16-month prison sentence, regardless of whether the violator is attempting to turn a profit. The punishment for stealing electronic property, such as songs and writing samples, is calculated by multiplying the value of the item stolen by the number of people who download it. The greater the value, the longer the prison sentence, although the maximum penalty for a first-time offender is three years. Identity theft violations also carry a 10-month to 16-month sentence for first-time offenders, but the punishment will increase if a bogus identification is used to get other phony identification; those who have more than five fake IDs also face stiffer penalties. Increased penalties for copyright violations will begin on May 1, and those for identity theft will be effective on Nov. 1. (Washington Times, 5 April 2000) From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Apr 7 14:38:43 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E135E21B09 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2000 14:38:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA17380 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2000 14:38:43 -0400 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38EE2C61.3EBBACD9@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2000 14:43:45 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Jamie Boyle's Missing the Point on Microsoft Jamie Boyle's Missing the point on Microsoft http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/04/07/greenspan/index.html A bit off the beaten track. He begins with a quote from Dorthy Parker: "If you want to know what God thinks of money, just look at the people he gave it to.") ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Apr 7 14:46:38 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6E8721B09 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2000 14:46:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA17647 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2000 14:46:38 -0400 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38EE2E3C.6D0E36FF@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2000 14:51:40 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] the .humanrights TLD This is a letter from the Debs-Jones-Douglass Institute about an effort to create .humanrights. The letter is from Manon Ress, who is also working with unions on the .union proposal. Jamie (disclosure, Manon and I are married). Subject: Comments on new TLDs and .humanrights Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2000 14:33:02 -0400 From: Manon Anne Ress To: Mike Palage , Jonathan Weinberg Dear Mr. Palage and Professor Weinberg, Would you please distribute this letter on the lists for Working Groups B and C? Thank you. Manon Ress <--letter to ICANN working groups on new TLDs--> Dear members of ICANN's working groups B and C, We are writing to address issues concerning (1) the creation of restricted use TLDs and (2) the use of company, product, government or organization names in connection with TLDs. First, the procedures adopted by ICANN for new TLDS should permit the creation of both unrestricted and restricted TLDs, to address different needs. A TLD for human rights organizations, such as .humanrights, should be controlled by the human rights community, and not be created as an unrestricted TLD. Second, the ICANN rules regarding the use of names of companies, products, governments or non-government organizations should not prevent the registration of domains such as nike.humanrights, by human rights organizations, for use in organizing communities or providing information about human rights records. We are working on the creation of a coalition to apply to ICANN to be the registry for .humanrights. The coalition will include representatives from national and international human rights organizations, and will provide a gateway or portal to information about human rights for specific companies, products, governments or non-government organizations. Persons who are interested in this initiative may contact Manon Ress at 1.202.234.0040, mress@essential.org. Sincerely, Manon Ress Debs-Jones-Douglass Institute _______________________________________________ Non-Commercial Top Level Domains mailing list nc-tlds@lists.essential.org http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/nc-tlds From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Apr 7 21:59:37 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8086B21B09; Fri, 7 Apr 2000 21:59:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-6.essential.org [216.0.125.6]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA25193; Fri, 7 Apr 2000 21:59:36 -0400 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38EE96FB.8C8C0C96@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2000 22:18:35 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Carl Kaplan on Deep Linking http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/yr/mo/cyber/cyberlaw/07law.html April 7 , 2000 By CARL S. KAPLAN Legality of 'Deep Linking' Remains Deeply Complicated -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Apr 12 13:37:17 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73DC721B1B for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2000 13:37:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA15886 for ; Wed, 12 Apr 2000 09:23:01 -0400 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38F47A16.9CE1DFBC@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 09:28:54 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Zaret and Meeks: Kozmo's digital dividing lines Nice take on the digital divide issue by MSNBC's Zaret and Meeks. Jamie http://www.msnbc.com/news/373212.asp Kozmo's digital dividing lines MSNBC.com probe reveals Net firm doesn't deliver to many black areas Elliot Zaret and Brock N. Meeks WASHINGTON, April 11 - Kozmo.com promises to deliver books, music, video rentals and sundries "from the Internet to your door in under an hour." But an MSNBC.com investigation has revealed that in the cities it serves, the company does not offer delivery to many neighborhoods with high concentrations of black residents. The company says it only looks at Internet usage when deciding which areas to serve and says race is not a factor. But some lawyers and advocacy groups say the investigation may have exposed the first case of cyber-redlining. [snip] ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Apr 13 11:00:51 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33AE921B14 for ; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 11:00:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA12535 for ; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 11:00:51 -0400 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38F5E28F.C47FBB17@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 11:06:55 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN discussions on new non-commercial TLDs This is a note from the nc-TLDS discussion list, on the creation of new non-commerical top level domains. Jamie --------------------------------------- Subject: [Nc-tlds] ICANN discussions on non-commercial TLDs Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 10:46:15 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org To: Non-commercial TLDs ICANN's policies on new top level domains are supposed to come from a "bottom up" self governance model. Here is some explanation of that, plus a note on the discussions in ICANN's Non Commercial Domain Name Holders Constituency (NCDNHC), that I find quite distressing. 1. ICANN has a "names council" made up of 7 different constituency groups. These are: gTLD registries (right now with NSI as only member) ccTLDs registries (the 2 digit country code registries, some non-profit, some businesses) registrars (the businesses that register domains) Commerical and Business entitites ISPs and connectivity providers (businesses that provide ISP type services) Trademark, intellectual property and anti-counterfeiting interests (speaks for itself) Non-commerical domain name holders constituency (NCDNHC) So it should be obvious that the names council is stacked in terms of commerical interests. 2. Within the NCDNHC, there are apparently about 100 member organizations, and lots of membership applications that have not been acted on. There are three persons elected from the NCDNHC to ICANN's Names Council. The person with the most votes was YJ Park, who is a member of this discussion list. There is also Kathy Kleiman from the US, who is a lawyer with a big firm, who is the rep from the Association for Computer Machinary (ACM), and Zakaria Amar from Africa. YJ Park was the biggest vote getter, with 34 votes, followed by Zakaria Amar, who had 30. Kathy Kleiman (20), the only US person, barely edged Vany Martinez (17) and Dany Vandromme (18). There is no one from Europe or Latin America. Among the NC members, YJ Park is by far the most assertive on the NCDNHC list. Lots of people on the NCDNHC list have nothing to do with civil society NGOs. Not only are there lots of individuals who have not been approved as members, but you have industry people with "boat club" memberships, tons of Internet Society Chapters filled with various industry types, people working for various government agencies, and lots of commerical groups or country code registries. 3. Several persons on the NCDNHC list are attacking the notion on new TLDs for non-commerical purposes. Park is quite aggressively pushing for a position that there will be only 1 in the testbed, .ngo, and she is opposed to ones that would address specific agendas, like .union, .humanrights, etc. 4. There is a very big attack on new TLDs that use english names. .union is being attacked because there are lots of different spelling of union or somewhat different meanings in different countries. One person suggested there should be 250 different language versions of union in the root, or none at all. (This from the person who runs the .nu ccTLD registry). None of these attacks so far have offered concrete alternatives for a single name that would be better. The putative issue is "we don't like english taking over the world." Some have suggested this is simply a tactic to block new TLDs. 5. People who work for or have other ties to the ccTLDs are also explicitly trying to block new TLD on the grounds that it will undermine registrations in the ccTLD space. The .ch China registry is very blunt about this, and I'll post that message to this list, to illustrate the flavor of this discussion. 6. Others seem to be advocating blocking expansion of the root because they think Asia and other regions of the world need to "catch up" with the US, before new space is opened up, so the US doesn't dominate it. The language issue becomes one way to blocking things. Some are insisting that we don't do anything until we have non ascii type TLDs in play. Or, suggestions are made for impossible demands that every new TLD work perfectly in every language in culture. There is also appears to be a tendency to have ICANN's NCDNHC's micromanage certain details of a new TLD proposal, the language issue being one aspect, but there are also people who want to impose their personal views "how the Internet should work" to everyone, or to block things that they don't understand or personally benefit from. 7. Conflicts of interest seem to be widespread, but not transparent. This is a pretty critical description of the discussions on NCDNHC list, and I could have made it more upbeat and positive, and indeed, I hope things will improve. However, it is important to note that there are many forces in this group that are opposed to moving forward, and want to block all sorts of things for all sorts of reasons. At some point there may be new consensus calls on the NCDNHC list. It would be good if real civil society NGOs could actually join the NCDNHC, and participate in the votes. This isn't a trivial part of the ICANN structure. It would also be good if people from real NGOs would speak up on the list from time to time. Jamie Subject: Opinion from China regarding new gTLD. Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 10:33:05 +0800 From: "YJ Park" To: ============================================ FYI, Opinion from CHINA which has totally different voice regarding new gTLDs and to avoid some misunderstanding about my position, I also attached my response to China message. ============================================ Dear APTLD Non-commercial members: ICANN is planning to expand gTLDs. I don't think this is a good idea for most of the countries and ecomomies. The existing gTLDs such as .COM NET and so on are historically formed. Initially, these gTLDs were set for being used in US. During the early time of the Internet, when people outside the USA want to use Internet, they have to be registered in these gTLDs. Now things are changed, every countries or ecomomies have their own ccTLD. If .COM is too crowded, people can register their Domain Name under their ccTLDs. Setting up NEW gTLDs will be a bad practice: 1, If a company XXX is registered under .FIRM because there is no space for it to register under .COM, when users need to connect to their WEB page, they normally try WWW.XXX.COM first, then WWW.XXX.FIRM. This is not efficient. 2, The NEW gTLDs will be surely tightly controlled by the ICANN, because they controls the ROOT. 3, The NEW gTLDs will attract more and more companies from their country (or ecomomy) ccTLD. Taking China as an example, China will pay more money to the registries (I don't think that ICANN will give the registries of the NEW gTLDs to China). And when resolving the Domain Names, it will need more international traffic. The expensive international link (payed also for example by China) will be wasted. 4, For being easily found by users, the companies already registered in COM will surely want to register in the NEW gTLDs. This kind of duplication will make the NEW gTLDs a nonsense. 5, For the developing countries (economies), many of their conpanies have not been connected to the Internet yet, when they need a name in the future, they have to buy their name from developed countries. This is unfair. In my opinion, we do not need gTLDs except .INT. Let companies to register their name under their ccTLDs. This will make things more simple and more fair. Presently, most of the disputes are caused by gTLD. The ccTLDs are very well managed by different countries (economies). Hualin Qian from CNNIC ============================================================ Dear Hualin Qian and all, This is my 2 cents thought on this position. > Now things are changed, every countries or ecomomies have their own > ccTLD. If .COM is too crowded, people can register their Domain Name > under their ccTLDs. > > Setting up NEW gTLDs will be a bad practice: > > 1, If a company XXX is registered under .FIRM because there is no space > for it to register under .COM, when users need to connect to their WEB page, > they normally try WWW.XXX.COM first, then WWW.XXX.FIRM. This is not > efficient. This is based on the reality right now. However, if we imagine 5 years later, people are all aware of .shop, .firm as well as .com. So, this issue will not be that much problematic. The beauty of new gTLD is you can have more choice. > 2, The NEW gTLDs will be surely tightly controlled by the ICANN, because they > controls the ROOT. Yes, so far. > 3, The NEW gTLDs will attract more and more companies from their country > (or ecomomy) ccTLD. Taking China as an example, China will pay more money > to the registries (I don't think that ICANN will give the registries of the NEW > gTLDs to China). WHY NOT? If you are interested in this and ready to carry out this, no reason or right for ICANN to reject China nor any other Asia registry. If they intentionally or politically don't choose us, we, Asia, will not be as quiet as we had been in the name of APTLD(APDN).:-) > And when resolving the Domain Names, it will need more > international traffic. The expensive international link (payed also for example by > China) will be wasted. Most people in China including myself, we are dreaming of "ONE BILLION" power can show your power on the Internet. And then you would realize how desperately you would need such kind of new space not only ccTLD but also gTLD. What we have to understand is all the decision should be made upon Internet users rather than any entity or country. That's why we APTLD has been soliciting your participation in this Internet Governance to have more distribiuted way of decision making process instead of US-driven process. In conclusion, if people want to have this, I don't think there would be no compulsive way of preventing this. People out there who embarked on the NET earlier than us, they have been thirsty for new spaces, which I think we have to understand. > 4, For being easily found by users, the companies already registered in COM > will surely want to register in the NEW gTLDs. This kind of duplication will make > the NEW gTLDs a nonsense. This is strongly related with Famous marks issue which is being discussed. However, the situation is likely that new gTLD is coming soon. Then, what should we do? We have to prepare not to lose more. > 5, For the developing countries (economies), many of their conpanies have not > been connected to the Internet yet, when they need a name in the future, they have > to buy their name from developed countries. This is unfair. TRUE. So, if we admit we cannot block the forthcoming deluge with our fingers, we have to take actions to decrease this kind of damage. > In my opinion, we do not need gTLDs except .INT. Let companies to register > their name under their ccTLDs. This will make things more simple and more fair. > Presently, most of the disputes are caused by gTLD. The ccTLDs are very well > managed by different countries (economies). It is already out of our hands, man.:-( Regards, YJ From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Apr 13 12:05:26 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 140D521B14; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 12:05:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA14393; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 12:05:26 -0400 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38F5F1B2.57703FCE@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 12:11:30 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] CPT comments on Barriers to Ecommerce April 13, 2000 To: ebarriers@ita.doc.gov From: James Love, Consumer Project on Technology, http://www.cptech.org, love@cptech.org Re: CPT comments on Barriers to Ecommerce Subgroup on Legal Barriers to Electronic Commerce U.S. Department of Commerce 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Room 2815, Washington D.C. 20230. I 1. The US PTO should not issue business practice patents. Business practices should not be the subject of government monopolies. There is no way the staff of the US Patent and Trademark Office should be asked to judge prior art, novelty and utility of business practices, and no way that business models should be protected by legal monopolies. If the USA grants these monopolies, but they are not recognized in other countries, US businesses will be prevented to doing things that will be legal outside of the US. Put this in an Internet context, and you have a recipe for all sorts of problems. 2. The Internet's top level domain space should be greatly expanded, and there should be a diversity of management models for TLDs. Right now we have 244 ccTLDs like .fr, .uk, .ch, .tv, .md, etc, and 7 so called "generic" top level domains (gTLDs). Of the gTLDs, 3 are unrestricted, and 4 are restricted. The .us ccTLD is almost unusable. If I wanted to create an organization on .us, it would have to be something like cpt.washington.dc.us, and the name of the organization would be on the 4th level domain. The existing .com, .net and .org space is now very extensively mined, and lots of groups cannot find a name that makes sense and is short and easy to type. This could easily be fixed with the approval of new TLDs. Technically, there could be hundreds of thousands of TLDs, rather than 251. The problems are all political, and not technical. ICANN is the group that is supposed to deal with new TLDs. It is riddled with conflicts of interest, and many groups are trying to block any new TLDs, to protect the existing registry cartel. See for examples the comments of the .ch (China) ccTLD at the end of the note at this URL: http://lists.essential.org/pipermail/random-bits/2000-April/000139.html If we could expand the TLD space, businesses and organizations could better protect their legitimate trademark interests. Lotus.flowers, lotus.software and lotus.cars would easily co-exist and not confuse consumers. Consumers, workers and citizens could create TLDs like .union, .humanrights, .customers, .ecology, etc to provide information about company practices or citizen or worker rights. TLDs like .organic could be created for organic food products. Lots of creative things could be done. Everything is being blocked by narrow anticompetitive concerns that control the ICANN process. 3. The failure of the US government to protect privacy undermines trust. Only someone who is incredibly inept at research would come to the conclusion that government regulation is not needed to protect privacy. There is no empirical evidence that (a) consumers don't want government regulation to protect privacy and (b) that self regulation will make a dent in the problem. It is time for government officials to start earning their salaries and deal with the difficult but necessary task for regulating business practices that undermine privacy. 4. The failure to address jurisdictional fora for regulating ecommerce denies consumer protection. Right now there are hundreds if not hundreds of thousands of rules to protect consumers in a wide range of non--cyberspace transactions. For example, we regulate lending practices, marketing securities to investors, the regulation of pharmaceutical marketing practices, privacy and all kinds of other things. One can quibble about particular regulations, but unless you think that all consumer protection rules are unnecessary, at some point you have to figure out how to resolve cross country disputes over rules, norms and enforcement. The US government has not provided leadership on these issues. This should change. The US government should support the creation of something like a World Consumer Protection Organization (WCPO), modeled after WIPO perhaps, that would at least provide a fora for discussion these issues. Here is one such proposal: http://www.cptech.org/ecom/cpt-wcpo.html Sincerely, James Love -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Apr 17 11:18:02 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A98D21B02 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 2000 11:18:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA19270 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 2000 11:18:02 -0400 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38FB2CC1.2FBED85C@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 11:24:49 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Brenda Sandburg: Expanding the Internet's Domain http://www.lawnewsnetwork.com/practice/techlaw/news/A21286-2000Apr14.html Expanding the Internet's Domain Some companies want to restrict new addresses to protect their trademarks but others say that may violate antitrust laws By Brenda Sandburg The Recorder/Cal Law April 17, 2000 -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Apr 17 16:21:26 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72BD321B02 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 2000 16:21:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA27347 for ; Mon, 17 Apr 2000 16:21:26 -0400 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38FB73DF.9729870B@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 16:28:15 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Sexton, Berryhill et all on ICANN and trademarks This is an online petition to ICANN regarding the issue of trademark's and domain names. http://sunrise.open-rsc.org/ In the sign-on letter to ICANN, be http://sunrise.open-rsc.org/see_it/ This is from the letter: MichaelKirkIsaPedophile.com is libelous, and has legal consequences as a string of text. HaveSexWithMeForMoney.com is a criminal solicitation. TheHolocaustIsaJewishLie.com is likewise a criminal utterance, but in Germany, not the U.S. MuhammadTheProphetAtePork.com is blasphemous and likely a capital offense in several countries. Yet, despite these and other categories of legally significant alphanumeric character sequences, some even criminal in nature, nobody is proposing a prior restraint on them. Trademark infringement is only a subset of a much larger category of legally-proscribable uses of alphanumeric characters. Why, among all forms of legally significant text strings, are trademarks singled out for a heretofore unknown pre-emptive right? Because ICANN, a technical body, has an "Intellectual Property Constituency" with non-technical concerns. ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Apr 18 16:47:47 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 110DF21B02 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2000 16:47:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA22046 for ; Tue, 18 Apr 2000 16:47:46 -0400 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38FCCB97.3BDA9BFE@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 16:54:47 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Gregory Aharonian: (Walker Asset's) trivial/obnoxious business method patents Subject: PATNEWS: (Walker Asset's) trivial/obnoxious business method patents Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 02:39:55 -0400 (EDT) From: Gregory Aharonian Reply-To: patent-news@europe.std.com To: patent-news@world.std.com !20000417 (Walker Asset's) trivial/obnoxious business method patents There are many fears of future patent litigation as everyone and their grandmothers file business method patents, for which the PTO (despite its current shut-up-the-public PR campaign) will all too happily allow the majority of them to turn into issuance/maintenance fee generators. While such fears in moderation are very justified, there is another danger, more psychological than financial. That is, mental nausea due to the trivial and obnoxious obviousness of many of these patents (I have a bet going with a friend that the Green Stamps people have a patent pending for electronic green stamps, a perfect test case for whether or not automating the Old Economy to exploit in the New Economy is patentable). Case in point is Walker Asset Management (Walker Digital/Priceline) who with their billions of dollars and teams of PhD scientists redefining, reengineering, revolutioning and recapitulating the ENTIRE business world in electronic form that their president can rightly be called the Thomas Edison of the ecommerce world as he leads his people to ecommerce solutions for poverty, global medical care, reversing environmental destruction, all protected by patents that are legal and intellectual writings ranking up their with the Magna Carta ...... ahhhhhh stop me before I choke on my own contempt. Here are abridged titles to some recent patents awarded to Walker Asset, supposedly new ways of allowing people to do socially beneficial commercial activities such as ......... gamble, phone chat and use their credit cards: 6049778 Administering a reward program 6024640 Offline remote lottery system 6018718 Processing customized reward offers 6014439 Entertaining callers in a queue 6012983 Automated play gaming device 6010404 Using a player input code to affect a gambling outcome 6006205 Credit card billing method and system 6001016 Remote gaming device 5999596 Controlling authorization of credit card transactions 5978467 Enabling interaction between callers with calls in a queue 5970478 Customizing credit accounts 5967896 Controlling a gaming device having a plurality of balances Is this the type of business method innovation we want to incent with the constitutionally inspired patent system? Is this type of thinking supposed to stand on the shoulders of hundreds, if not thousands, of years of methods of doing business, to be rewarded by the stock market with billion dollar capitalizations? I am not sure. Are they great marketers? Yes. Innovators? Can't tell with this list of patents. And that's assuming any of this stuff is novel and unobvious. For example, take their latest patent, awarded last week: 6,049,778 Method and apparatus for administering a reward program Inventors: Jay Walker, Andrew Van Luchene, James Jorasch, Dean Alderucci Filed: October 31, 1997 Claim 1: 1. A computer-based method for administering a reward program based on a series of registrations, each registration corresponding to a purchaser, comprising: calculating a measurement of product success; determining if the measurement is within a predetermined range; selecting from the series of registrations a set of registrations which are early-adopter registrations, the set of registrations thereby defining a set of early-adopter purchasers; and providing a reward to each early-adopter purchaser if the measurement is within the predetermined range. In short, if sales of a product are good enough, reward early purchasers. Brilliant. Bravo. Noble Prize in Economics. Rewrite the undergraduate marketing textbooks. Unheard of in the world of sales and marketing, in either manual or electronic form. Yale University should have these guys running their business school. And pigs fly (which they probably do at the PTO, where even reality isn't obvious). One more case of a patent application that wasn't taken too seriously by all involved. With nothing better to do with my life, I spent ten minutes doing a quickee search (ten minutes more than the PTO spent searching on this patent apparently), and came up with the following prior art item: Sign early, save $ on cruises. Advertising Age v64, n1 (Jan 4, 1993):3,33 (by Nancy Magiera) Abstract: The cruise line industry wants to change the way people book trips by offering discounts to consumers who sign up early. Norwegian Cruise Line and Carnival Cruise Lines, 2 of the largest players, began offering new advance purchase discounts on January 1, 1993. Both Norwegian's yearlong "Dream Fares" promotion and Carnival's 18-month "Fun Ship Super Savers" program are based on occupancy rates. For example, a 7-day cruise might be discounted by up to $1,000 for the first 20% of tickets sold. As more berths are filled, the discount is reduced. Jennifer De La Cruz, public relations manager for Carnival, said that the objective was to move customers away from waiting until the last minute to obtain a good deal. Now how obvious is the Walker Asset patent filed five years later (which is little more than a post-conditional variation of the cruise line's offering)? We have: measurement <==> occupancy rate, early adopters <==> first %20, providing a reward <==> upto $1000 discount, predetermined range <==> as more berths are filled, computer-based <==> cruise line reservation computers, purchaser <==> vacationer. Dependent claims just as obvious: 5. The method of claim 4, wherein the ordinal position of each registration indicates the order in which corresponding registration information was received. i.e., a dictionary entry for the word "ordinal" turned into a claim (what page of Landis is that?), with more such gems in the 82 claims issued in total, such as 21. The method of claim 1, wherein the step of providing rewards comprises printing a mailing address. Wow - I always wanted to win a mailing address. But how would they know which customer I was? 22. The method of claim 1, wherein each registration includes a registration identifier for uniquely identifying the registration. to distinguish their invention from all of those companies that use the same identifier to identify different customers (which makes sense only if all of your customers are the sons of George Foreman). There seems to be one distinction trying to be made in the specification, for example, from the background summary: It would be advantageous to provide a method and apparatus that facilitates the introduction and sale of new products. Such a method and apparatus would ideally overcome the drawbacks of known systems for promoting the sale of new products. Drop the word "new" from this paragraph gives you the cruise line promotion. Adding it back in doesn't seem to innovative. ==== How much more such prior art is to be found in the marketing and sales world if a serious search is actually done? Where is the innovation? (A legitimate question for a patent where the length of the text of the specification is just a measly twice the length of the text of the claims). One would have to prepare a sample of the universe of similar promotional schemes from the 1980s and 1990s to seriously determine how unobvious this patent really is. Walker Asset didn't provide such a sample to the PTO, and the PTO hasn't, doesn't and won't be able to do so itself. As far back as their Priceline patent (a patent for reverse auctions that didn't use the already known phrase/process "reverse auction" in the specification), their searches have reflected a less than serious interest in a quality patent examination process. So between the PTO's inability and apathy towards business method patent examination, and extremely rich applicants with attitudes not much better, I am afraid that the future will see thousands of business method patents for the non-novel, the marginally unobvious, the variations of a theme that are cute in music but sad in the world of inventing. And for those of you going to a certain seminar on ecommerce patents next week in New York, one of the speakers will be a Walker Asset lawyer, a second speaker from a company that came close to being sanctioned by the PTO for violating Rule 56 (and should have been), and a third speaker from a company that doesn't warn its clients that no matter how good the tools are, poor quality patents usually lead to GIGO (garbage in garbage out) when you analyze them. Greg Aharonian Internet Patent News Service -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Apr 18 18:04:27 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02B5121B02; Tue, 18 Apr 2000 18:04:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA24058; Tue, 18 Apr 2000 18:04:26 -0400 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38FCDD8F.C8083A6D@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 18:11:27 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Stefan Friedman: no 3-letter .com names left As ICANN considers whether or not to recognize new top level domains, the NY Post reports that there are no longer any 3 letter names left in .com. http://www.nypost.com/business/28458.htm ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Apr 19 16:12:05 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D3DD21B05 for ; Wed, 19 Apr 2000 16:12:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA14371 for ; Wed, 19 Apr 2000 16:12:05 -0400 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <38FE14C3.8CC974EA@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 16:19:15 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN and Anonymous registration of Internet domains For some reason, I don't think I posted this to random-bits before. Here are two things concerning ICANN's role in eliminating anonymous registration of Internet domains. The first are the FTC comments from October 29, 1999, to ICANN, regarding the NSI registry contract. It says: http://www.ftc.gov/os/1999/9910/icann.htm II. The Need for Registrars to Obtain Accurate and Reliable Contact Information from Domain Name Registrants For law enforcers working to prevent Internet fraud, the problem of false domain name registration information has become an impediment to effectively identifying law violators. When accurate, the registration information publicly available on the Whois database provides an important tool for tracking down the operators of Web sites violating the law. Commission investigations are increasingly being hampered, however, by registration information that is not only false, but sometimes clearly false on its face.(8) A. Noteworthy Measures in the Accreditation Agreement With encouragement from stakeholders in the intellectual property arena,(9) ICANN has attempted to improve the quality of information in the Whois database. As law enforcers, we support the use of the proposed Registrar Accreditation Agreement (Accreditation Agreement) to elicit a more active role for registrars in ensuring that the Whois database contains accurate contact information.(10) Several measures contained in the Accreditation Agreement are particularly noteworthy. One essential provision, paragraph II(J)(7), requires a registrar to collect contact information in a number of categories from an applicant for a domain name, and specifies that the applicant's willful failure to provide accurate information may result in the termination of the registration. From a law enforcement perspective, the most critical information gathered is the name and physical address of the domain name holder, which is necessary to identify an alleged wrongdoer and facilitate service of process.(11) [snip........lots of relevant stuff] We also welcome the measure in the Accreditation Agreement aimed at ensuring that a registrar take reasonable steps to investigate complaints that the contact information for a registrant is inaccurate..... [snip] "In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with [a registrant], it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy." These provisions recognize the need for registrars to play a more active role in ensuring accurate contact information. B. Suggested Improvements to the Accreditation Agreement Although the measures highlighted above will help, they may not go far enough. The Accreditation Agreement would be strengthened if it required that registrars, if they are unable to obtain accurate information after having conducted an investigation and after having given the registrant a reasonable opportunity to cure inaccuracies, suspend registration for commercial sites until accurate contact information is obtained. [snip, much relevant stuff omitted] This next are a few sections from the ICANN registrar agreement with NSI: http://www.icann.org/nsi/icann-raa-04nov99.htm F. Public Access to Data on SLD Registrations. During the term of this Agreement: 1. At its expense, Registrar shall provide an interactive web page and a port 43 Whois service providing free public query-based access to up-to-date (i.e. updated at least daily) data concerning all active SLD registrations sponsored by Registrar in the registry for the .com, .net, and .org TLDs. The data accessible shall consist of elements that are designated from time to time according to an ICANN-adopted policy. Until ICANN otherwise specifies by means of an ICANN-adopted policy, this data shall consist of the following elements as contained in Registrar's database: [snip] g. The name and postal address of the SLD holder; h. The name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number, and (where available) fax number of the technical contact for the SLD; and i. The name, postal address, e-mail address, voice telephone number, and (where available) fax number of the administrative contact for the SLD. [snip] 8. Registrar shall abide by any ICANN-adopted policies requiring reasonable and commercially practicable (a) verification, at the time of registration, of contact information associated with an SLD registration sponsored by Registrar or (b) periodic re-verification of such information. Registrar shall, upon notification by any person of an inaccuracy in the contact information associated with an SLD registration sponsored by Registrar, take reasonable steps to investigate that claimed inaccuracy. In the event Registrar learns of inaccurate contact information associated with an SLD registration it sponsors, it shall take reasonable steps to correct that inaccuracy. [snip] -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri May 12 18:30:13 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 720DA2A060 for ; Fri, 12 May 2000 18:30:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA31436 for ; Fri, 12 May 2000 18:30:13 -0400 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <391C784B.CE5BA975@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 17:31:55 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Brian Livingston: Web registrars may take back your domain name Brian Livingston for news.com: Web registrars may take back your domain name May 12, 2000 Network Solutions, the oldest and largest registrar of Web domain names, changed its contract in recent months to allow it to take names back--and a recent court decision supports that policy. In a decision that went largely unnoticed in the press, the Virginia Supreme Court ruled 7-2 last month that a domain name "is the product of a contract for services," and not a type of property that a Web site owns. The majority opinion reversed a March 1999 circuit court ruling. The Supreme Court said the lower court erred when it concluded that "Internet domain names are a new form of intellectual property." ............... ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue May 16 15:36:18 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 262D12A3D8 for ; Tue, 16 May 2000 15:36:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA19913 for ; Tue, 16 May 2000 15:36:17 -0400 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <3921A30A.7E81235B@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 15:35:38 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] ALI meeting on Hague Convention Apparently this afternoon the American Law Institute will have a Washington, DC discussion about the Hague Convention on Foreign Judgements, a topic that has never been discussed in any US news article that I have read. As indicated in an earlier note (http://www.cptech.org/ecom/hague-march-2000.html), the proposed treaty would create mechanism to govern the recognition and collection of foreign judgments, including, for example, foreign judgments against US citizens for libel, slander, copyright infringement, fraud, and just about anything else that could be the subject to private litigation. The potential impact and exposure for internet related activities is enormous, and essentially unknown and yet to be discussed by anyone but a handful of experts. Jamie ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri May 26 13:04:42 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 638712A066 for ; Fri, 26 May 2000 13:04:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA05233 for ; Fri, 26 May 2000 13:04:42 -0400 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <392EAEEC.8F801E7@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 13:05:48 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] 3rd E-commerce Roundtable -- The 3rd E-commerce Roundtable will take place on June 13, from 12-2 PM. A tentative agenda includes: David Beier, US government e-commerce czar. Overview of Administration policies on consumer protection. (Invited) C.L. Hoewing, Bell Atlantic. Verizonreallysucks.com domain name dispute. (Invited) Jeff Kovar, Department of State. Update on the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction of Private Law Maneesha Mithal, Federal Trade Commission. July 20-22 APEC E-commerce Steering Group Meeting and Consumer Protection Workshop, Bangkok, Thailand. Regina Vargo, Department of Commerce. E-commerce negotiations for the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). DIRECTIONS The Roundtable will be located at U.S. PIRG's office (Phone 202-546-9707) on the 2nd floor, 218 D St, SE, Washington, DC. (right next to a health club on a little park.) U.S. PIRG's office is 2 blocks from the Capital South metro stop. The metro is on First street, turn right off escalator and go down the hill half a block and turn left on D--up the hill one and one-half blocks. The Roundtable will be a brown-bag meeting. You can buy food at Subway near the corner of First and D or, for more variety, find your way UP the hill from the Metro one block to Independence and right one block to the Pennsylvania Ave business block (it ain't DuPont, but we have Burrito Bros, delis, greasy spoons, French cafe takeout, bagel bakery, Chinese, etc.) next to the Madison Bldg of Library of Congress, before coming down to D St on the park. CONTACT INFORMATION If you would like more information about the E-commerce Roundtable, please contact Vergil Bushnell at Email: vbushnell@cptech.org phone: 202.387.8030 ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed May 31 15:41:02 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 583532A05E for ; Wed, 31 May 2000 15:41:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA22132 for ; Wed, 31 May 2000 15:41:02 -0400 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <39356B26.BEF3FE6F@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 15:42:30 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Banning Negative Reviews Subject: [Ucita] Banning Negative Reviews Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 14:57:45 -0400 From: Vergil Bushnell Organization: Consumer Project on Technology To: ucita@venice.essential.org Todays's Slashdot (www.slashdot.org) contains a discussion (http://slashdot.org/articles/00/05/31/1748223.shtml)centering around a software gaming company's (Apogee) alleged prohibitions on negative reviews, comments, etc. The "Apogee Software LTD. Intellectual Property Rights -- Terms of Use" agreement may be found at www.3drealms.com/policy/index.html Here is a portion of the agreement concerning the use of Apogee's Trademarks: "Trademark Use 1.You may use the Marks on a web site, on bulletin boards, in chat rooms to discuss or promote Apogee's games and/or products. 2.You may use the Marks as metatags or as key terms in a search engine. 3.You may not use the Marks in banner advertisements or other internet advertising mediums. 4.You are not allowed to vary the spelling, add or delete hyphens (even for normal hyphenation at the end of a line of text), make one word two, or use a possessive or plural form of the Marks. 5.You may not use the Marks in a derogatory or defamatory manner, or in any negative context. Such use will terminate your license to use the Marks. 6.You may not use the Marks as part of any third party products, services or trade name, without Apogee's express written permission. 7.You may not use the Marks in a manner that is likely to cause confusion with, dilute or damage the reputation or image of Apogee or any of its products. 8.The Marks, or any portion thereof, may not be used by you or any third party as a domain name or as part of or incorporated in to a domain name. If you learn of such unauthorized use, please inform us. However ..." Sincerely, Vergil Bushnell Consumer Project on Technology email: vbushnell@cptech.org phone: 202.387.8030 -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed May 31 17:47:01 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 046DF2A05E; Wed, 31 May 2000 17:47:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA24753; Wed, 31 May 2000 17:47:00 -0400 Message-ID: <393588AD.5FD1BDF9@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 17:48:29 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Three international labor organizaitons propose .union Today the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (http://www.icftu.org), the OECD Trade Union Advisory Committee (http://www.TUAC.org) and the Union Network Internetional (union-network.org) distributed a proposal for a .union top level domain. Jamie ------------------------- Subject: [Nc-tlds] Some thoughts on a chartered GTLD for trade unions Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 19:13:42 +0200 From: "Pruett, Duncan" To: "'ncdnhc-discuss@lyris.isoc.org'" , "'nc-tlds@lists.essential.org'" Greetings. A number of international trade union organisations have been following the deliberations of the NCDNHC with interest. As some of you may know, early consultations have begun within the trade union movement about the possibility of an application being made to ICANN to run a chartered GTLD for trade unions. As we continue to assess the issue, we would like to share with you a preliminary discussion paper recently prepared by the ICFTU on behalf of 3 international trade union organisations (ICFTU, UNI, and TUAC*). Any comments from members of the NCDNHC would be welcome. Please feel free to forward them to us at this address: duncan.pruett@icftu.org (ICFTU Brussels) (with copies to schneider@tuac.org (TUAC, Paris) and neil.anderson@union-network.org (UNI, Geneva)) ...and we will integrate them in ongoing internal discussions on the matter. Duncan Pruett Information / IT Coordinator International Confederation of Free Trade Unions Tel: +32 (2) 224 0219 GSM: +32 (477) 861 903 ___________________________ DOT UNION - AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE: Having only recently become aware of the ongoing discussions, regarding the creation of a new non-commercial top-level Internet domain, along the lines of ".union", the Trade Union Advisory Committee (TUAC - http://www.tuac.org), Union Network International (UNI - http://www.union-network.org), and the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU - http://www.icftu.org) would like to offer a few shared perspectives on the discussion. This is based on verbal and written reports on the March 31 briefing to US-based trade unions, organised by Manon Ress in Washington DC, as well as supplementary information picked up from the "nc-tlds" and "NCDNHC" mailing lists, and other related sources. We would also like to thank Manon Ress for making the effort to involve those of us based in Europe who have not, till now, been very involved in these internationally-relevant discussions. This note is not intended to constitute a position paper, but rather a contribution to the ongoing discussion, and a registration of interest in the discussion on the part of the international trade union organisations. _______________ 1. Consensus proposal According to Jamie Love's written report, persons from the US Dept of Commerce (DoC) present at the March 31 meeting indicated that "if the unions wanted .union, they could probably do it, but ... would have to provide a consensus proposal (consensus among stakeholders, in this case the labor movement)". We think that it would be quite possible for the union movement to come up with such a proposal, and we would be quite prepared to participate in its preparation. 2. Validity of this initiative Although we are persuaded of some of the potential merits of the idea, (such as its possible role in the expansion of Internet-based organising), we feel that the introduction of such a top-level domain would provide plenty of opportunities for misuse, were it not properly managed. The most predictable misuse of such a system would be likely to come from "company unions" or other organisations which are not seen by the labour movement as bona fide trade unions. We therefore feel this initiative would only be worth pursuing if the labour movement were able to exclude certain applicants from using the ".union" domain. In other words, only a "chartered" domain would be feasible. 3. International aspect The DoC participants in the Washington DC meeting also said that for such a proposal on ".union" to succeed, it "would have to address the international aspect of ICANN". Given not only the global nature of trade unionism, but also the existence of well-developed international democratic trade union structures, a formula could and should be backed by the international trade union bodies. TUAC, UNI and the ICFTU will, as a next step, inform other international trade union bodies about this discussion. 4. Registrant Approval Mechanism Given the close partnership that exists between the international trade union organisations, it is quite feasible that some kind of registrant approval mechanism could be evolved and managed at the international level. It should be noted that all of the trade union organisations we know to have participated in the DC meeting are represented in one or more of the international trade union bodies being referred to here (ie. ICFTU, UNI and TUAC). Of course, we would need to consider the cost implications of an undertaking to manage registration for a top level domain. We would also need to consider whether certain elements of the process could be outsourced. 5. Language question One of the issues dominating the debate seems to be the concern that ".union" is not universally understood to mean "trade union". In the international trade union bodies, we have over 50 years of experience in dealing with these issues (albeit that for most of this period we have mainly been dealing with paper and not internet domains). The ICFTU, which represents over 200 national trade union centres from around the world (including the AFL-CIO) has 4 official languages. English, French, Spanish and German are accepted and used by its affiliates as a "lowest common denominator". If the international union movement can agree internally on the language issue, there should be no need for outsiders in the "nc-tlds" discussion, or in the ICANN working groups, to lose time telling us what is and what is not acceptable. Based on the above, one possible solution may be to establish 3 or 4 synonyms which all point to the same "root". In other words, we are wondering whether it is technically feasible to have a limited number of top level domains (TLD) all be interchangeable. For example: .union (english) .syndicat (french) .sindicato (spanish) .gewerkschaft (german) This proposed solution might even serve as a model for some other proposed top level domains (eg. ".ngo/.ong/.ong/.nro" or ".ltd/.sa/.sa/.gmbh"). We don't think this approach would face that much opposition from those currently using the commercially available TLDs - for instance, these three addresses all point to pretty much the same IP address/name server: www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.org www.yahoo.net Is there really any difference between this practice and the solution proposed above? ___________ * ICFTU has 216 affiliated organisations in 145 countries and territories, and represents 123 million workers, 39 million of whom are women; TUAC has 55 affiliated organisations in the 29 OECD member countries, and represents 70 million workers; UNI has 900 affiliated organisations in 140 countries and represents 15.5 million workers From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jun 1 15:41:59 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 352362A3A4 for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 15:41:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA07325 for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2000 15:41:59 -0400 Message-ID: <3936BCE9.8989B2C6@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 15:43:37 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Australian E-Commerce Code This is a missive from Louise Sylvan, CEO of the Australian Consumers Association, regarding the Australian Electronic Commerce code. The document can be found on the web here: http://www.treasury.gov.au/publications/ConsumerAffairs/ElectronicCommerceAndConsumerProtection/BuildingConsumerSovereigntyInElectronicCommerce/index.asp. Sincerely, Vergil Bushnell Consumer Project on Technology Subject: Australian E-Commerce Code Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 10:37:27 +1000 From: "Louise Sylvan" Apologies for Cross-Postings I'm attaching the Australian Electronic Commerce - Best Practice Model for Business. The Code was created by the Government's Expert Group in E-Commerce of which I'm a member. It's being launched by the Minister today (May 18th) at the Australian Consumers' Association. This code has a lot of good stuff in it - in particular the Government has taken the position of opt-in spam (see 23)! Other good things are: clause 44.6 - that "Businesses should not try to contract out of their responsibiity for losses arising from the misuse or failure of authentication mechanisms."; clause 49.7 - that independent methods of dispute resolution should be "without prejudice to judicial redress."; cluse 53 - code administrations mechanisms... "should include an independent chair and equal numbers of industry and consumer/community representatives"; and quite a lot of other parts of the code which require good disclosure, business identification, processes for concluding the contract and so on. Things that we didn't or couldn't win were: applicable law (clauses 50 and 51), but at least it doesn't say "country of origin" explicitly; and privacy (clause 39) - although the statements are strong, the proposed Australian privacy law which is in our Parliament at the moment is quite weak. This is a self-regulatory code which also has inherent limitations. But a lot of self-regulation is closely monitored by the Government here - in fact, some of it comes close to co-regulation. Judging by the way some industry groups are reacting to the opt-in spam position, it's obviously being taken very seriously. The document is attached. Louise Sylvan, CEO Australian Consumers Association -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Jun 7 17:47:06 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0D582A063 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 17:47:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (phelsuma.essential.org [216.0.124.26]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA23911 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 17:47:06 -0400 Message-ID: <393EC065.36CCB1B0@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 17:36:37 -0400 From: Vergil Bushnell Organization: Consumer Project on Technology X-Sender: "Vergil Bushnell" <@smtp.essential.org> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-gatewaynet (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Nader Statement on MS Decision NADER APPLAUDS MICROSOFT RULING For immediate release For more information, contact: June 7, 2000 Robert Weissman, 202-387-8030 Ralph Nader today issued the following statement: Today a Reagan-appointed judge has taken the minimal necessary steps to constrain Microsoft's predatory activity. Judge Penfield Jackson's order to split Microsoft into two companies should benefit consumers by promoting competition and speeding innovation, and will lead to the development of a more robust computer industry. The order, following two years of litigation, careful deliberation and extremely detailed and well-argued findings of fact and law, should begin to level the playing field in the software industry. The inevitable appeal should be quickly rejected. Today, Judge Penfield Jackson hit a triple. Had he broken Microsoft into three companies, separating the operating system, the applications and the browser businesses, we would be able to cheer a home run. But a triple isn't bad. ### From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Jun 7 19:40:11 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80C9C2A36D for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 19:40:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (phelsuma.essential.org [216.0.124.26]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA25550 for ; Wed, 7 Jun 2000 19:40:11 -0400 Message-ID: <393EDAE6.E8C72B52@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 19:29:42 -0400 From: Vergil Bushnell Organization: Consumer Project on Technology X-Sender: "Vergil Bushnell" <@smtp.essential.org> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-gatewaynet (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] NADER APPLAUDS MICROSOFT RULING This is a better formatted version. Also, this statement is available online at http://www.cptech.org/ms/naderjun72000.html ___________________________________________________ NADER APPLAUDS MICROSOFT RULING For immediate release For more information, contact: June 7, 2000 Robert Weissman, 202-387-8030 Ralph Nader today issued the following statement: Today a Reagan-appointed judge has taken the minimal necessary steps to constrain Microsoft's predatory activity. Judge Penfield Jackson's order to split Microsoft into two companies should benefit consumers by promoting competition and speeding innovation, and will lead to the development of a more robust computer industry. The order, following two years of litigation, careful deliberation and extremely detailed and well-argued findings of fact and law, should begin to level the playing field in the software industry. The inevitable appeal should be quickly rejected. Today, Judge Penfield Jackson hit a triple. Had he broken Microsoft into three companies, separating the operating system, the applications and the browser businesses, we would be able to cheer a home run. But a triple isn't bad. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jun 12 13:04:03 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B0192A05E for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 13:04:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA24631 for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 13:04:03 -0400 Message-ID: <394518D9.F653E6B@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 13:07:37 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Tuesday, June 13 E-commerce Roundtable Meeting Tomorrow What?: 3rd E-commerce Roundtable Meeting Where?: US PIRG office, 2nd floor, 218 D St. SE, Washington DC (202-546-9707) When?: Tuesday, June 13, 12-2 PM This Roundtable will be chaired by Ed Mierzwinski of US PIRG. AGENDA: Speaker/ Topic 1. Regina Vargo, Department of Commerce: E-commerce negotiations for the proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) 2. Jeff Kovar, Department of State: Update on the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction of Private Law 3. Jonathan Menes, Department of Commerce: Briefing on the July 20-22 APEC E-commerce Steering Group Meeting and Consumer Protection Workshop, Bangkok, Thailand. 4. Margo Saunders, National Consumer Law Center: Briefing on the newly passed Esign bill 5. Sarah Deutsch, Bell Atlantic: Verizonreallysucks.com domain name dispute 6. Possibly, Jerry Mander and Sarah Anderson from the International Forum on Globalization will be available to discuss their new Project on Ecommerce 7. ICANN and creation of .xxx or .sex top level domains DIRECTIONS: The Roundtable will be located at U.S. PIRG's office (Phone 202-546-9707) on the 2nd floor, 218 D St, SE, Washington, DC. (right next to a health club on a little park.) U.S. PIRG's office is 2 blocks from the Capital South metro stop. The metro is on First street, turn right off escalator and go down the hill half a block and turn left on D--up the hill one and one-half blocks. CONTACT INFORMATION: For more information about the E-commerce Roundtable, please contact Vergil Bushnell at phone: 202-387-8030 email: vbushnell@cptech.org -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jun 12 13:37:25 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76C1E2A05E for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 13:37:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA25362 for ; Mon, 12 Jun 2000 13:37:25 -0400 Message-ID: <394520AC.C0BA3274@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 13:41:00 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Republican party formally announces use of .gov site to promote political party. Republican party formally announces use of .gov site to promote party. Jamie Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 12:50:08 -0400 From: "Smith, James M." To: GOP Conference Press Office Greetings. Per your request, we are notifying you that GOP.gov, the official source for customized news from House Republicans, launched last week. This will be the only notice you receive from us about GOP.gov's launch. You can, though, sign up to receive e-mail updates from any of the participating members and committees by visiting the site and selecting "Customize" on the top navigation bar. On the site you can find thousands of articles from members of Congress representing all parts of the country - and members add dozens of new articles every week. Not only can you find the latest news, you can also find out what events members will attend today and coming up. We believe there is no other web site that offers this sort of comprehensive and official look at what representatives in Congress are doing. Check it out at http://www.GOP.gov. Indeed, Yahoo! picked GOP.gov as one of its sites of the day today. (Check it out at http://dir.yahoo.com/new/). James M. Smith, press secretary Republican Conference U.S. House of Representatives 1010 Longworth House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 (202) 225-5107; fax: (202) 225-0809 ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Jun 14 13:51:45 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F17082A30E for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2000 13:51:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA29591 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2000 13:51:44 -0400 Message-ID: <3947C71C.2216D1@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 13:55:40 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN on Introduction of New Top-Level Domains http://www.icann.org/yokohama/new-tld-topic.htm ICANN Yokohama Meeting Topic: Introduction of New Top-Level Domains Posted: 13 June 2000 Deadline for Public Comments: 10 July 2000 -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jun 15 10:32:39 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AE9C2A30E for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 10:32:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA10227 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 10:32:39 -0400 Message-ID: <3948E9FC.37AA3B64@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 10:36:44 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] AOL/TW merger Subject: RE: EU Review of AOL merger, advice Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 09:20:44 +0200 From: Ursula Pachl for your information, news on the Warner/EMI deal. decision on Warner/AOL should follow on Monday; (EU) EU/COMPETITION: Detailed inquiry on Time Warner/EMI merger Brussels, 14/06/2000 (Agence Europe) - The European Commission has opened a detailed inquiry into the merger between Time Warner and EMI in the musical sector. The Commission points out the inquiry will focus on three areas: 1) recorded music: the merger will lead to an oligopoly of four firms - Time Warner/EMI, Universal Music Group (Seagram, Canada), Bertelsmann Music Group and Sony Music - that will control around 80% of the EEA market; 2) music publishing: "Time Warner/EMI will control by far the largest number of copyrights in the world and would be considerably larger than the next largest competitor"; 3) digital delivery of music via the Internet, where Time Warner/EMI could hold a dominant position. This gives particular cause for concern if one takes into account the AOL/Time Warner merger, which is the subject of a separate inquiry, specifies the Commission. - ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jun 15 11:18:25 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A35B2A30E for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 11:18:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA11051 for ; Thu, 15 Jun 2000 11:18:25 -0400 Message-ID: <3948F4B6.E51AFF41@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 11:22:30 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Senate Commerce Internet Tax Markup Score: Retailers 2, McCain 0 http://www.tax.org/text/TaxWire/taxwire.htm#TTN Senate Commerce Internet Tax Markup Score: Retailers 2, McCain 0 (Last Updated: June 14, 2000 -- 7:07 p.m.) A predicted June 15 Senate Commerce Committee markup of an Internet tax moratorium extension will not happen, a committee source has told Tax Analysts. According to committee spokesperson Pia Pialorsi, discussions are "ongoing" between Commerce Committee Chair John McCain, R-Ariz., and other committee members, but Internet tax issues are not on the committee's June 15 agenda. "He's still committed to a moratorium and he's trying to get the strongest bill possible," Pialorsi said of McCain. McCain had been pushing for a five-year extension (as introduced in his bill, S. 2255) of the current Internet Tax Freedom Act moratorium, which expires on October 21, 2001. However, an intense lobbying effort by the traditional Main Street retailers of the e-Fairness Coalition and National Retail Federation stymied his first effort to mark up such a bill in April, and appears to have scored another victory with the apparent abandonment of the June 15 markup -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jun 16 11:13:53 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1041F2A30E for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 11:13:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA29992 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 11:13:52 -0400 Message-ID: <394A4531.2BA2DD0A@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 11:18:09 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Petition against software patents in Europe Su bject: PATNEWS: Petition against software patents in Europe Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 02:03:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Gregory Aharonian To: patent-news@world.std.com !20000616 Petition against software patents in Europe -- Petition against software patents in Europe Greg Aharonian Internet Patent News Service ==================== -- PETITION AGAINST SOFTWARE PATENTS IN EUROPE No e-Patents: A Petition to Save Software Innovation in Europe EuroLinux Alliance petition.eurolinux.org For Immediate Release Berlin, Bruxelles, Copenhagen, Frankfurt, Paris, Maastricht, Metz, Munich and Nurenberg, 15/6/2000 - The Eurolinux Alliance of European software companies and Open Source associations launches a pan-European petition to keep Europe free from software patents. This petition is receiving growing support from commercial software publishers in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Spain and Sweden. Together with this petition, the EuroLinux Alliance publishes "The EuroLinux File on Software Patents" [http://petition.eurolinux.org/reference/] a document which lets everyone understand in less than 15 minutes the dangers posed by software patents. This document, based on thorough economical and legal analysis, exhibits clear evidences of the negative impact of software patents on innovation and competition. It shows that the European Commission has mainly taken into account the point of view of patent attorneys, dominant players in the electronic industry and recent rulings of the United States Patent Office, leaving away the point of view of innovative European software publishers. Also, the decision making process at the European Commission does not seem to implement provisions of the Rome Treaty calling for a high level of competition, consumer protection, public safety, industrial growth and cultural diversity in Europe. Frank Hoen, President of NetPresenter, a Dutch company which invented Internet push technology, warns: "financial analysts should be aware that the software patent system, as it has evolved in the US, does generate many costly legal disputes but does not succeed in protecting real software inventors or investors. It is a system which allows companies with a strong legal team, and often no merit, to rip-off or block innovative companies. As it has been highlighted by MIT and Harvard economists, a system based on copyright, or copyright-like sui generis Law, protects investment in software technologies much better than the current US patent system." "Thank God that Patent Law wasn't around when the French language was born", says Jacques Le Marois, President of MandrakeSoft, who adds "Software Patents are a major concern, not only for the Linux & Open Source Software industry, but for the whole information technology industry. Software publishers and innovative internet businesses in the US constantly face the risk of a patent war, just because obvious techniques such as publishing a database on the Web were granted a patent. This system generates more losses than revenue for the IT industry." Roland Dyroff, CEO of SuSE AG, adds: "In the field of software, unlike other industries, introducing patents can lead to counter-productive effects on innovation. Writing software is very similar to writing a book. It is not too difficult to come up with great ideas. But the challenge is to provide a clean and reliable implementation of those ideas, which is precisely what copyright protects. Granting patents for software is the same as granting patents for generic ideas of books. If a patent had been granted for writing a novel describing the actual life of a historic personality through a fiction, and if authors were required to pay licenses to write such novels, few authors would keep on writing historical novels. Same does apply to the software publishing industry. Therefore I believe Copyright Law has proven to be the most adequate intellectual property framework in order to protect software publishers while at the same time promoting diversity and innovation". "Internet technology has been built on patent-free software. E-commerce is based on this patent-free technology and it is generating one of the fastest economic growth in history." says Ralf Schwebel, CEO of Intradat, a leading E-Commerce software publisher in Germany, "introducing internet patents in this complex system may just trigger a recession cycle instead of boosting economic growth. I am quite surprised that European Authorities never considered this possibility, especially given the patent-free nature of Internet technology." Agrees Jean-Pierre Laisni, CEO of Linbox SA : "if everyone who writes a simple web application is a potential patent infringer, who is going to take the risk of becoming a criminal for combining a database server, a web server and a scripting language? With the tremendous legal risk generated by software patents, no one is free any longer to use his or her brains to develop and market innovative services over the Internet. And this may actually slow down the economy." This campaign comes as a response of IT associations and software companies to recent ideological speeches from the Directorate for the Internal Market at the European Commission, which indicate that the European Commission will likely issue a directive to extend the scope of European patents to software and intellectual methods, completely ignoring the concerns raised by leading software companies, refusing to study the general economic effects of software patenting, and even rejecting without explanation arguments raised by other General Directorates of the European Commission. Previous campaigns on this subject had quickly reached more than 10,000 signatures from software developers. This petition is just the beginning of a new campaign based on (hopefully not yet patented) advanced e-techniques to let volunteers participate in the lobbying effort. It will be formally filed within three months at the European Parliament. References The EuroLinux Petition for a Software Patent Free Europe - http://petition.eurolinux.org The EuroLinux File on Software Patents - http://petition.eurolinux.org/reference Intellectual Property Law in a Global Economy, the hidden patent agenda of the European Commission - http://www.eurolinux.org/news/agenda/ Companies quoted in this PR NetPresenter - www.netpresenter.com MandrakeSoft - www.mandrakesoft.com SuSE - www.suse.de Intradat - www.vshop.de Linbox - www.linbox.com About EuroLinux - www.eurolinux.org The EuroLinux Alliance for a Free Information Infrastructure is an open coalition of commercial companies and non-profit associations united to promote and protect a vigourous European Software Culture based on Open Standards, Open Competition, Linux and Open Source Software. Companies members or supporters of EuroLinux develop or sell software under free, semi-free and non-free licenses for operating systems such as Linux, MacOS or Windows. The EuroLinux Alliance has co-organised in 1999, together with the French Embassy in Japan, the first Europe-Japan conference on Linux and Free Software. The EuroLinux Alliance is at the initiative of the www.freepatents.org web site to promote and protect innovation and competition in the European IT industry. Press Contacts France & Europe: Jean-Paul Smets-Solanes jp@smets.com +33-662 05 76 14 Germany & Europe: Harmut Pilch phm@ffii.org +49-89 127 89 608 Denmark and Northern Europe: denmark@eurolinux.org Belgium: belgium@eurolinux.org Permanent URLs for this PR http://petition.eurolinux.org/pr/pr1.en.html http://petition.eurolinux.org/pr/pr1.en.pdf Legalese NetPresenter is a registered trademark of NetPresenter B.V. Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds. VShop is a registered trademark of intraDAT GmbH. Linux-Mandrake is a trademark of MandrakeSoft SA. SuSE is a registered trademark of SuSE Linux AG. Linbox is a registered trademark of Linbox Inc. Windows is a registered trademark of Microsoft Inc. MacOS is registered trademark of Apple Inc. All other trademarks/copyrights are owned by their respective companies. ==================== ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jun 16 12:20:49 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8251C2A331 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 12:20:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA31143 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 12:20:49 -0400 Message-ID: <394A54E2.ED4C215C@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 12:25:06 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Declan on PI's investigation of Zuck operation Declan, who has shown almost no interest in Microsoft's various front groups and lobbying efforts, has a nice article today on the investigation of Jonathan Zuck's ACT, by MS's competitors. Jamie http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,37022,00.html -- Espionage: Cash for Trash by Declan McCullagh 6:00 p.m. Jun. 15, 2000 PDT WASHINGTON -- When Jonathan Zuck joined a trade association to fight the antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft, he never thought he'd be battling corporate espionage instead. A private investigator appears to have spent thousands of dollars attempting to obtain documents that could be damaging to Microsoft and its free-market allies including Zuck, who became president of the Association for Competitive Technology (ACT) two years ago. ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jun 16 13:21:04 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BFD72A30E for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 13:21:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA32084 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2000 13:21:04 -0400 Message-ID: <394A6301.E3D94728@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 13:25:21 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Ted Bridis on PI investigation of ACT http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB961105810825579561.htm Police Probe Attempt to Buy Garbage Linked to Microsoft By TED BRIDIS Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL WASHINGTON -- On the evening of June 1, Jose Lopez and Erminia Morales of P&R Enterprises were going about their normal office-cleaning duties when, they say, a woman approached them and offered in Spanish to pay between $50 and $60 to each of them for the trash of the Association for Competitive Technology here. The trade group is heavily funded by Microsoft Corp. and has been relentlessly pro-Microsoft in its work. The cleaners said the woman identified herself as Blanca Lopez and asked them to bring the bags of trash to Upstream Technologies, on the same floor of the building. The cleaners declined. Less than one week later -- exactly one day before U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson ordered the breakup of the software giant -- the value of Microsoft-related trash rose dramatically. Lou DeLeon, the general manager for the cleaning service, said Ms. Lopez returned the evening of June 6 and repeated her request for the trash. This time she offered $500 each to the two cleaners and $200 more to their supervisor. When they again declined, Ms. Lopez handed over a copy of her business card and asked that Mr. DeLeon call her, saying she was "investigating a criminal case and wanted the trash from these suites," according to the cleaning crew. Mr. DeLeon got the business card but never called her. The cash-for-trash offers came just days before a mysterious break-in at Microsoft's offices here in Dupont Circle. So far, no one has been charged with anything. Microsoft officials say it doesn't look like any valuables were stolen in the weekend break-in. And police say the bizarre trash-buying attempt -- which may have been totally unrelated to the break-in -- probably wasn't even against the law. When contacted by The Wall Street Journal, Blanca Lopez said, "I know nothing of this," and referred questions to Martin Lobel, a Washington antitrust attorney. Mr. Lobel said Monday that he was paid "a nice retainer" by an executive at Upstream Technologies, whose name he declined to reveal, to investigate the trash-buying incident. But he said Blanca Lopez was not his client. The next day, Blanca Lopez hired attorney Pamela Bethel, a former assistant U.S. prosecutor, and stopped talking to Mr. Lobel, he said. Ms. Bethel declined to comment. Upstream Technologies is itself shrouded in mystery, with no evidence that it exists as a corporation. Its three-month lease next to the Association for Competitive Technology was arranged to begin May 1 by a Robert Walters, according to a copy of the credit application he made for the property. An Upstream lawyer identified Mr. Walters as a former investigative reporter. A New York Times article in August 1998 identified a Robert Walters as a former newspaper reporter who had links to Investigative Group International Inc., a high-powered research firm led by Terry Lenzner that has been employed by lawyers for President Clinton. Larry Potts, former deputy director at the Federal Bureau of Investigation, is IGI's chief operating officer. Sitting on a special board of advisers created by IGI is George Vradenburg, senior vice president for global and strategic policy at America Online Inc., a fierce Microsoft rival. An AOL spokesman, Andrew Weinstein, said Mr. Vradenburg agreed to sit on the board at the request of Mr. Lenzner, a personal friend. But Mr. Vradenburg hasn't attended any board meetings and isn't involved with the work of the company, Mr. Weinstein said. In a statement, Edward Federico, corporate vice president and director of operations for IGI in Washington, said, "It is IGI's longstanding policy not to respond to media inquiries relating to client, personnel or other business issues. However, at the specific request of Mr. George Vradenburg of America Online, a member of IGI's advisory board, I can confirm that neither AOL nor Mr. Vradenburg is a client of IGI." In correspondence with the building's management, Mr. Walters named three others from Upstream authorized to use the office, including one person identified as Grant Stockdale. Mr. Stockdale was listed as the IGI spokesman on a May 1 news release. But a woman answering the telephone at the number provided for Mr. Stockdale on the release said that no one with that name worked at IGI. Mr. Walters didn't return repeated messages left at his home and office and with business colleagues. By Friday, a woman answering the office telephone number that had been accepting messages for Mr. Walters said she did not know anyone by that name. Aside from the hiring of Mr. Lobel and the opening of the office, there is no evidence that Upstream Technologies exists as a corporation. On a credit application for the office suite, Mr. Walters said the company was involved in "technology development," and listed an address on Main Street in Laurel, Md. That address is of a telephone answering service, where the owner and employees say they have never heard of Upstream. Maryland state records show no firm incorporated there. Mr. Walters wrote that Upstream wanted to rent the office for "selected company employees" to make telephone calls and catch up on work while they were downtown. Telephone logs for the Upstream office for the entire month of May show only five outgoing phone calls, none lasting longer than 48 seconds and almost all of them made late in the evening. Three were made to the home of Mr. Walters in Washington or to his wife at work. The other two were to voice-messaging systems. The new Upstream lawyer, Mr. Lobel, says he doesn't know any details about the company either. "They tend to be very low-profile," Mr. Lobel said. He complained that "so far nobody has returned my calls." The head of the pro-Microsoft trade association, Jonathan Zuck, and some Microsoft insiders believe industry rivals may be behind the break-in and the two attempts to buy the unshredded trash at Mr. Zuck's offices. They note the plethora of leaks of confidential Microsoft e-mails to the press during the antitrust investigation to bolster their case. Police are continuing to investigate the break-in at Microsoft's offices here. The cleaning crew who turned down $1,200 for the trash at Mr. Zuck's building, meanwhile, were rewarded this week by their boss. "We appreciate the honesty of our employees," Mr. DeLeon said. He gave them checks for modest amounts -- far less than $500 each, he admitted -- and a pizza party. Write to Ted Bridis at ted.bridis@wsj.com -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jun 19 10:37:52 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 923A12A060 for ; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 10:37:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA30412 for ; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 10:37:52 -0400 Message-ID: <394E3160.D739223B@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 10:42:40 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Ted Bridis: Even more on the trash-gate story.... Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 10:30:30 -0400 http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB961371069137283125.htm Microsoft-Tied Groups Report 'Weird' Incidents By TED BRIDIS Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL WASHINGTON -- Following efforts by a shadowy company to buy the office trash of a pro-Microsoft Corp. trade group, a number of organizations allied with the software giant said they too have been the victims of suspicious incidents they believe are related to their work with Microsoft. In two of the cases in the past year, both involving groups funded by Microsoft, confidential documents and even laptop computers have disappeared from the groups' offices. The pilfered information eventually appeared in the media, usually with embarrassing results for Microsoft. The reports are the latest twists in a strange tale surrounding the Microsoft antitrust case. Last week, The Wall Street Journal reported that a woman with ties to Upstream Technologies, a largely unknown Maryland company set up by Investigative Group International, tried to buy bags of Microsoft-related trash for $1,200. (Police Probe Attempt to Buy Garbage Linked to Microsoft, June 16) The offer was made two weeks ago to the cleaning crew of the Association for Competitive Technology, of which Microsoft is a member. The cleaners turned down the money and reported the incident. A few days later, police said someone tried to break into Microsoft's downtown offices here. According to police, someone damaged the door trying to get in. Microsoft officials said nothing appears to be missing. Items were stolen from other companies with offices in the same building. In yet another case, the National Taxpayers Union, also allied with Microsoft, reported that a succession of visitors have appeared at its Arlington, Va., offices pretending to be people they weren't. NTU president John Berthoud said he is convinced that unidentified opponents of Microsoft "have been conducting some type of corporate espionage against us." Earlier this year, Mr. Berthoud's group argued that because of the Microsoft antitrust case, public pensions funds that invested in the software maker's stock had lost $38.6 billion, thanks to the steep drop in the price of company shares. Shortly afterward, the Journal ran a story disclosing Microsoft contributions of more than $201,000 to the taxpayers union, information the taxpayers union said was available only in confidential company papers. (Microsoft Steps Up Lobbying, Donations to Fight Government's Antitrust Case, May 16) "We take it that there has been no suggestion of any improper activity by the Journal, or any knowledge by the Journal of any such activity by any of its sources, and we know of none," spokesman Richard Tofel said. There is no evidence linking the cash-for-trash attempt to the pilfered-documents cases, or tying any of the episodes together. Police don't know who is responsible, although police records indicate that four people linked to the trash-buying efforts worked for Investigative Group International, an opposition research firm. Microsoft allies say the episodes suggest a conspiracy. "There are well-funded interests in this city that have been casting unsubstantiated aspersions for some time, and now they are desperate to find evidence to back up their hysterical claims," said the ACT's head, Jonathan Zuck. The latest cases all involve organizations funded by Microsoft that have lent support during the antitrust case through advertising, letters to newspapers and visits to lawmakers. Two of the groups, Citizens for a Sound Economy and the Independent Institute, said separately that confidential financial documents related to Microsoft contributions were stolen along with laptops, later turning up in the news. Citizens for a Sound Economy, a free-market activist group based here, said thieves stole three laptops from its downtown offices between November 1999 and January, including one from a staff member. Information about the group's financial backing from Microsoft, contained on one of the laptops, appeared subsequently in the Washington Post. "I don't think anyone can draw a bright, clear line between one item and the next, but the timing of it makes everybody start to feel a little more suspicious," said Erick Gustafson, CSE's director of technology and communications policy. The Washington Post said Sunday that a source provided the document about CSE and that there was no indication it had been stolen. If source material had been obtained illegally, said Jill Dutt, the Post's assistant managing editor for financial news, the newspaper would have contacted its lawyers. A thief stole two laptops last June from Independent Institute, said David Theroux, the president of the Oakland, Calif., think tank. A stranger visited the group's headquarters under the pretense of asking for directions, then returned moments later and took the machines, he said. One computer included financial records showing that Microsoft had paid for pro-Microsoft ads published by the institute and signed by 240 academic experts. In September, the New York Times ran a story disclosing the payment. Mr. Theroux said he called police after the theft but didn't raise his suspicions with the Times. "The best guess we had [about the source of the records] was this strange incident with the laptop," Mr. Theroux said. A New York Times spokesman Sunday said the newspaper at the time reported that the documents about the Independent Institute ads "were provided to The New York Times by a Microsoft adversary associated with the computer industry who refused to be further identified." An internal report from a fourth organization, the DCI Group, also subsequently appeared in the Times on June 11. A spokesman said the consulting firm doesn't discuss its work with clients. The stolen report detailed confidential efforts to lobby lawmakers and recruit sympathetic employees inside Microsoft's rivals. Write to Ted Bridis at ted.bridis@wsj.com -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jun 19 10:44:32 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D30F52A31D for ; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 10:44:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA30513 for ; Mon, 19 Jun 2000 10:44:32 -0400 Message-ID: <394E32F0.5E805068@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 10:49:20 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Subject: Re: [Random-bits] Ted Bridis: Even more on the trash-gate story.... References: <394E3160.D739223B@cptech.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I might add also that during this time, CPT had 2 computer's hacked (broken into), including my desktop, a laptop (mine) was stolen, plus a few other events which caused some concern. Jamie ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Jun 20 14:49:34 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C01012A060 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:49:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA23442 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:49:34 -0400 Message-ID: <394FBDEA.31CC554F@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:54:34 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] BT patent on hyperlinks -----Original Message----- From: stobrien@wajones.org [mailto:stobrien@wajones.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2000 2:06 PM To: riders@topica.com; BBranch@wajones.org Subject: [Riders] this ought to scare you BT OWNS KEY WEB PATENT It turns out that British Telecom has owned a U.S. patent covering hyperlinks for the last 14 years, but up until now has made no attempt to exploit the patent commercially. The patent, which expires in 2006, was buried among 15,000 other global patents owned by the telecom giant until it was rediscovered "a few years ago" during a routine review of the company's intellectual property. BT has now decided to commercialize the technology, which allows Web surfers to move between pages by clicking on pictures or text -- a move that could earn BT hundreds of millions of pounds. "We are not trying to stop anybody using the Internet. We simply want some reasonable royalties based on the revenues that other organizations are enjoying from making use of this intellectual property," BT said in a statement Monday. "We are not trying to take anything away from Tim Berners-Lee, but [BT] did invent a way of structuring information to make it easily accessible." The company added that it has spent the last two years researching its claim to the technology to make sure it holds up in court. "It is not something you want to shoot from the hip on," it said. (Financial Times 20 Jun 2000) http://www.ft.com -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Jun 20 14:53:39 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C06C62A060 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:53:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA23549 for ; Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:53:39 -0400 Message-ID: <394FBEDF.7B28FA44@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:58:39 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Aharonian on British Telecom patent Subject: PATNEWS: British Telecom asserting 1989 patent claiming HTML? Date:Tue, 20 Jun 2000 13:20:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Gregory Aharonian Reply-To: patent-news@europe.std.com !20000620 British Telecom asserting 1989 patent claiming HTML? Over three years ago, I sent out the following PATNEWS: DATE[19970114 TITLE[Fax patent lawsuit is another Freeny patent TEXT[ I just heard from one of my readers that the patent in question with regards to the lawsuit against the fax machine industry is patent 4,837,797, and surprise, surprise, it is another patent originally owned by Charles Freeny, the inventor of the patent behind the E-data lawsuits. Are these cases a portent of the future, where older technology chunk patents are used to go after entire market sectors? For example, given the broad way some of these companies are interpreting their claims (though in this regard, most are amateurs compared to IBM), if they were so inclined and managed to remember, British Telecom has a patent that with a few legal gymnastics could be read to cover all uses of Web pages. I am thinking of approaching BT to see if I can buy out rights to their patent :-) Thereafter I hinted about the patent in talks I gave, though given that there are British Telecom people getting PATNEWS, I always wondered why they never emailed me asking which patent I had in mind. I never really pursued the issue, or tried to exploit knowledge of the patent, partly because I didn't think they would sell me the patent and that I doubt anyone would want to pay the really big bucks to try to bust the patent, and partly because there are some biotech patents horrendous and obscene in their implication whose knowledge I intend to exploit for much bigger stakes (the biotech industry has multiple heads stuck in the sand). Well apparently the answer is that intellectual property matters at British Telecom are very very deliberate, because the newswires this week are all abuzz that British Telecom has decided to assert the patent. The patent, 4873662, "Information handling system and terminal apparatus therefor" (abstract and claim below), basically claims the method of sending out information in two blocks - the first block has the text of the current page, and the second block has display formatting information for the text in the first block plus links to other pages of text and formatting information. As I implied in 1997, with a little legal gymnastics, these claims can be interpreted to read on HTML coding and HTML links, the most fundamental aspects of the original Web. What compounds the potential threat of these claims is the priority dates. The patent issued in 1989, making it assertable for (Internet) years to come, though it has a priority date of July 1977, and cites a good amount of prior art for that date. In short, this patent will be real tricky to bust (i.e. anyone calling me to do a bust, have a lot of zeros at your disposable :-) The original assignee was the General Post Office, which was later split in two to the UK Post Office and British Telecommunications, and based on their original work with videotext such as the Prestel system. Here are some links and excerpts from current newwires articles: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/11450.html Dr Ken Gray, chairman of Scipher, told AFX: "On behalf of BT we are attempting to licence (hyperlink technology), and inviting licences to be taken out by ISPs in the States." A spokesman for BT said: "We patented the principle of the hyperlink in the mid-70s when people were still wearing kipper ties and flares." He said the company was only going to pursue ISPs and not individual users. (Note: Scipher was formerly the Thorm-EMI research lab. But what are kipper ties?) http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_798000/798475.stm Ben Goodger, a technology and intellectual property expert from law firm Willoughby and Partners, said BT would be unwise to try and enforce its claim. "The commercial damage and unpopularity which BT would bring on its head if it tried to enforce this patent would be incalculable," he said. Mr Goodger said in the 1980s Unisys tried to enforce its claim to a technology which was widely used to compress image files. He said Unisys was vilified for its action at the time especially when it started charging $5000 per licence. Now over 2000 companies have paid Unisys for a licence to use the compression system known as the LZW algorithm. http://www.ft.com/ (Financial Times 20 Jun 2000) NEWSCAN: The patent, which expires in 2006, was buried among 15,000 other global patents owned by the telecom giant until it was rediscovered "a few years ago" during a routine review of the company's intellectual property. The company added that it has spent the last two years researching its claim to the technology to make sure it holds up in court. "It is not something you want to shoot from the hip on," it said. (Note: they should have hired me in 1997 to help with their routine review :-) Nice to see they spent some time researching the validity of its patent - not enough patent assertors do so.) So this should be a very interesting to follow, with British Telecom in a position to reap hundreds of millions of dollars in licensing fees. Greg Aharonian Internet Patent News Service \ ==================== 4873662 Information handling system and terminal apparatus therefor Issued/Filed Dates: Oct. 10, 1989 / Aug. 15, 1980 (cont. from July 1977) Abstract: Informaton for display at a terminal apparatus of a computer is stored in blocks the first part of which contains the information which is actually displayed at the terminal and the second part of which contains information relating to the display and which may be used to influence the display at the time or in response to a keyboard entry signal. For example, the second part of the block could include information for providing the complete address of an another block which would be selected by the operation of a selected key of the keyboard. The second part of the block could alternatively influence the format and/or color of the display at the terminal. When a block is read from the store of the computer the second part is retained in another store which may be located in the terminal or in the computer itself or perhaps both. The invention is particularly useful in reducing the complexity of the operating protocol of the computer. What is claimed is: 1. A digital information storage, retrieval and display system comprising: a central computer means in which plural blocks of information are stored at respectively corresponding locations, each of which locations is designated by a predetermined address therein by means of which a block can be selected, each of said blocks comprising a first portion containing information for display and a second portion containing information not for display but including the complete address for each of plural other blocks of information; plural remote terminal means, each including (a) modem means for effecting input/output digital data communication with said central computer means via the telephone lines of a telephone network, (b) local memory for locally storing digital data representing at least the first portion of the selected block of information received via said modem means from the central computer, (c) display means for visually displaying such a locally stored first portion of a block of information and (d) key pad means connected to communicate data to at least said modem means for manual entry of keyed digital data; and further memory means being provided as a part of said central computer means for receiving and storing said second portion of the block of information selected by a particular terminal means in response to the selection of the block and when its respective first portion is transmitted to that terminal means for display, said central computer means utilizing keyed digital data from that particular terminal means of less extent than any one of said complete addresses for another block of information but nevertheless uniquely indicative of one of the complete addresses contained in said portion of the block of information which contains the first portion then being displayed by that particular terminal means for selectively accessing the part of said further memory means associated with that particular terminal means and for supplying the complete address of the next block of information which is to be retrieved for that particular terminal means and utilized for display purposes at that terminal means. -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jun 22 12:47:25 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D08FA2A05E; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 12:47:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA25749; Thu, 22 Jun 2000 12:47:25 -0400 Message-ID: <3952445E.E6199828@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 12:52:46 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Standard on Jeff Chester ===================================================================== THE INDUSTRY STANDARD'S I N T E R N E T A R C H I T E C T S P O T L I G H T Selected from The Network - The First-Ever Who's Who of the Internet Economy ===================================================================== | http://www.thestandard.com | Wednesday, June 21, 2000 PROFILE: * Jeffrey Chester: Guardian of the Last Mile Worried about broadband access? So is Jeffrey Chester, who's fighting to ensure that the Internet of tomorrow is as free and open as the Web of today. Jeffrey Chester: Guardian of the Last Mile By Jenn Shreve If you've followed the major events of the Internet over the past couple months, chances are you've come across Jeffrey Chester. In articles about broadband, AOL-Time Warner and media mergers in general, the press often calls upon Chester to present a sober voice of reason. It's not surprising; the executive director and cofounder of the Center for Media Education counts "schmoozing the press" as among his most important activities, alongside the more common activist tasks like lobbying and writing articles. As Web users seek increasingly faster ways of logging onto the Net, Chester has argued long and hard for open-access to cable lines. After all, the battle for the "last mile" is heating up. AT&T has spent over $100 billion buying up cable properties like MediaOne. The AOL-Time Warner merger, of course, provided the world's largest ISP with the world's best source of cable lines. "When each new technology in the last century was created - first with radio in the '20s, then television in the '50s, and cable in the '70s - people like myself called for policies to make sure it was going to be accessible," Chester says. Many of those efforts, he acknowledges, have failed. To read more about Jeffrey Chester, click here: http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/1,1151,16205,00.html?nl=ias --------------------------------------------------------------------- JEFFREY CHESTER IN BRIEF ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Executive director Center for Media Education 2120 L Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037 Phone: (202) 232-2234 Fax: (202) 232-2893 Email: jeff@cme.org http://www.cme.org Job History ~~~~~~~~~~~ Center for Media Education Executive director Teledemocracy Project Director National Campaign for Freedom of Expression Cofounder 1991 - 1992 Various Journalist and filmmaker 1981 - 1990 Psychiatric social worker 1979 - 1981 Education ~~~~~~~~~ San Francisco State University B.A. psychology 1975 University of California at Berkeley M.S. clinical social work 1979 /=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= advertisement =-=-=\ Check out the Standard's all new Job Shop! Come browse the hottest job opportunities in the Internet Economy. Our new posting service brings together the top employers and the top candidates in the Internet business space. Find your next gig right here or post a job in front of the best web minds in the world. Your next career move could be a mouse click away. Visit JOB SHOP today. http://www.thestandard.com/people/recruitment/?nrc=nhsr \=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=/ JEFFREY CHESTER QUOTED ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ You are introduced to someone at a cocktail party. Describe what you do in two or three sentences. I run an advocacy group working to promote the democratic potential of the Internet. I am currently running a campaign to ensure that the broadband Internet will be open, competitive and foster democratic applications - not just a shopping mall. What do you consider your greatest professional achievement? Working to mobilize groups to take up policy decisions about the future of the Internet. Some of my work led to the school and library community's initiaive to create the E-Rate, which helps to ensure that everyone can have some guaranteed access to the Internet. I also helped lobby in the country's only federal fund to support independent film and TV production, the ITVS. My work - my wife - tracking and analyzing new Internet e-commerce strategies led us to expose profiling and one-to-one marketing practices early on, which led to the first law regulating privacy on the Internet (the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act). Our work in this area "woke-up" the Federal Trade Commission to the problems emerging from many e-commerce business practices. Tell us the URL of one site (other than your own) that you think is essential for doing business on the Net, and why. Epic.org. The best site on privacy and related issues. It helps to warn people of the dangers of electronic eavesdropping and what you can do about it. They are a model advocacy group. If you weren't doing what you're doing now, what would you be doing? Writing more reflective pieces and spending time engaged in a more spiritual orientation. But always involved in the issue of renewal of self and community. Who's your hero? Ralph Nader and Carl Jung. READ MORE ABOUT JEFFREY CHESTER ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jun 23 12:51:31 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69DF72A05E for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 12:51:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA29133 for ; Fri, 23 Jun 2000 12:51:31 -0400 Message-ID: <395396DE.2E51EB81@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 12:57:02 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] vintagevolvos.com This is an interesting dispute involving Ford Motor Company, who has apparently sued 50 domain name holders that use the name ford or its various products, including, for example, vintagevolvos.com. Jamie http://ford.launchpad.com/fc/uploads/4/Complaint.htm Subject: Re: Pls help. Ford Motor V.S. over 50 domain name holders Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 17:42:40 -0400 From: Tom Organization: Alchemy, Inc. Shari, Thank you so much for your reply and interest in helping us. We need legal help. I just received an email today from another person who gave in and paid Ford the 43,000 that they demanded. He said that is was for his child's education. Nearly all of us are small web site owners. Details of the suit are not online. I will start gathering the information now and get it up over the weekend. I just created a web site, at http://ford.launchpad.com with a BBS message board and a "file cabinet" document manager program that we wrote. I also emailed all of the people I know who are being sued by Ford and asked them to start putting relevant info on this new web site. Thanks again, Tom Cooper Shari Steele wrote: > > Hi Tom. > My apologies for taking so long to get back to you. I'm overloaded with > email! This sounds like a terrible abuse of your First Amendment rights. > Is the complaint available online anywhere? Do you have an attorney? What > kind of assistance are you requesting? > > I'm cc'ing this note to Jamie Love of the Consumer Project on Technology > and Kathy Kleiman of the Association for Computing Machinery to see if > their groups would like to get involved. > Shari > > At 07:28 AM 06/18/2000 -0400, Tom wrote: > >Shari, > > > >Ford Motor Company is suing over 50 domain name holders with names that > >merely contain a Ford trademarked name. They filed suit in Detroit > >Federal Court. I am one of the defendants. I own the name > >vintagevolvos.com. It was intended to be a collectors's site. When I > >called Ford's attorneys to explain my case they said that I'd have to > >pay them $3,000 to be dropped from the suit. I explained that I have > >owned Volvos for over 18 years, that I own (lease) a year 2000 Volvo and > >what my intent was with the site. > > > >Ford said that even though I may be falling through the cracks with > >respect to intent, that I would still have to pay them $3,000. They > >argued that they must defend against trademark dillution. This case > >seems to strike at the heart of the Anti Cybersquatter Act. > > > >One other domain name holder in this suit is fordsucks.com. If anything > >strikes at the heart of free and protected speech, it is this. > > > >Please help and thank you for your time. > > > >Tom Cooper > > > >================== > >Tom Cooper > >President > >Alchemy, Inc. > >732.560.8802 > > > > > ~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~.~~ > Shari Steele > Executive Director 415 436 9333 (voice) > Electronic Frontier Foundation 415 436 9993 (fax) > 1550 Bryant Street, Suite 725 415 793 5569 (cell) > San Francisco, CA 94103 ssteele@eff.org (email) -- ================== Tom Cooper President Alchemy, Inc. 732.560.8802 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jun 26 14:45:04 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CC7C2A05E for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:45:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA07994 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:45:04 -0400 Message-ID: <3957A61C.BACE02F1@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 14:51:08 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Jeri Clausing: Afternic/ICANN law suit http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/06/biztech/articles/26doma.html June 26, 2000 Internet's Domain Administrator Is Sued New York Company Says It Was Blocked From Registry Business By JERI CLAUSING [snip] Jon Whelan, co-chief executive of Afternic, said the company first applied to become an official registrar last October. But he said Icann had refused to act on the application, citing the company's involvement in the resale of domain names. Mr. Whelan said Louis Touton, Icann's vice president, told him that Icann was concerned about the peddling of trademarked domain names in the secondary market and was holding the application while the board considered how to deal with those issues. ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jun 26 16:01:46 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A0922A05E for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 16:01:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA09587 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 16:01:46 -0400 Message-ID: <3957B816.A95B703C@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 16:07:50 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] "What the Market Will Bear": Cisco's Vision for Broadband Internet Since the disclosure that my boss has a lot invested in Cisco, I thought it might be a good idea of take a look at some of the broadband issues that concern Cisco. This is something that CME wrote concerning CISCO's "Quality of Service" technology for cable/Internet services. http://www.cme.org/access/broadband/market_will_bear.html CME's "What the Market Will Bear": Cisco's Vision for Broadband Internet ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jun 26 18:44:39 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D5C32A05E for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 18:44:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA12431 for ; Mon, 26 Jun 2000 18:44:39 -0400 Message-ID: <3957DCD2.B8A2783@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 18:44:34 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Afternic/ICANN dispute The Afternic/ICANN dispute seems like an interesting example of ICANN's growing role as a protector of trademark rights. In its June 20 advisory on the law suit, ICANN discusses the basis for refusing to permit Afternic to be an ICANN accredited registrar of domain names. Apparently ICANN is asking Afternic to refuse to auction off domains that other accredited registrars have already issued. Among other things, by rejecting the Afternic registrar application on the grounds that Afternic auctions off already issued domains with the names of celebrities, company names etc, ICANN raises questions about the other "policy relevant" reasons, particularly those relating to intellectual property, that ICANN could address in restricting a firm's business activities. Jamie http://www.icann.org/announcements/advisory-20jun00.htm 20 June 2000 Advisory Concerning Afternic Litigation In investigating Afternic's application for accreditation, ICANN discovered that Afternic's web site presented many offers to sell domain names based on other company's names, some with remarks reflecting the abusive nature of the offers. One company name, for example, was offered with the remark that it would be an "Excellent domain for a reseller, owner, or competitor of" the company (this example was offered at a starting bid of $125,000). Although ICANN alerted Afternic to the situation, Afternic denied any responsibility for these offers on its web site. Several months later, Afternic's site is still offering the example name mentioned above, though the starting bid has now been reduced to $50. Currently, Afternic's site is offering many other domains incorporating well-known business, celebrity, and government agency names, such as: mircosotf.com (with the remark "this is a common miss spelt version of one of the most active sites on the web"). TheOlympics2000.com (Section 220506 of title 36 of the United States Code prohibits use of the word "Olympic" to falsely suggest authorization by the International or United States Olympic Committees; Section 3002(a) of the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act prohibits bad-faith registration of domain names covered by Section 220506). FBICrimeLab.com MichaelJackson.ws iBMW.com (with the remark "sell it to BMW for use as their premiere webcar!") ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Jun 27 22:49:56 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F98C2A319 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 22:49:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA31614 for ; Tue, 27 Jun 2000 22:49:56 -0400 Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 22:49:56 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] WSJ on "Microsoftgate" http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB962146554881934536.htm June 28, 2000 Oracle Admits It Hired Agency To Investigate Allies of Microsoft By GLENN R. SIMPSON and TED BRIDIS Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL WASHINGTON -- Software maker Oracle Corp. acknowledged it hired a detective agency to investigate allies of Microsoft Corp. and disclose internal documents to the media about Microsoft's political activities. The detective firm, Investigative Group International Inc., used controversial tactics against technology trade associations and other groups allied with and supported by Microsoft -- in one case, offering to buy their office trash -- in an elaborate yearlong operation. Oracle confirmed its use of IGI in a statement late Tuesday, saying it was necessary to expose underhanded attempts by Microsoft to fight the Justice Department's landmark antitrust case against the software giant. "Left undisclosed, these Microsoft front groups could have improperly influenced the outcome of one of the most important antitrust cases in U.S. history," Oracle said in response to queries from The Wall Street Journal. The new disclosures suggest Oracle, which is on the brink of eclipsing Microsoft as the technology industry's hottest software maker, waged an elaborate clandestine battle against its rival even as Microsoft was under siege from the federal government in its landmark antitrust case. Oracle confirmed that it hired IGI to probe the Independent Institute of Oakland, Calif., and the National Taxpayers Union of Arlington, Va. "As a result, Oracle discovered that both the Independent Institute and the National Taxpayers Union were misrepresenting themselves as independent advocacy groups, when in fact their work was funded by Microsoft for the express purpose of influencing public opinion in favor of Microsoft during its antitrust trial," the company's statement said. Oracle also defended IGI's investigation of a third group, the Association for Competitive Technology, without explicitly taking credit for that probe. Jonathan Zuck, executive director of ACT, described IGI's attempts to purchase his group's trash for $1,200 as "a violation and personal attack," and demanded an apology from Oracle. "Given the climate of privacy concerns today, how could Oracle's Larry Ellison possibly think this is an acceptable business practice?" Mr. Zuck said. Mr. Ellison is Oracle's chief executive officer. The IGI investigator who led the company's Microsoft project, Robert M. Walters, 61 years old, resigned Friday after he was named in stories about the case. Oracle said it has no knowledge of any illegal activities by IGI, and the agency says it strictly abides by the law. Initial reports of a break-in and a theft possibly connected to the affair haven't been substantiated. "This is further evidence that our competitors have conducted an orchestrated PR and lobbying campaign to generate government intervention into a marketplace that is working for consumers," Microsoft spokesman Vivek Varma said. "This is a pretty sad commentary to resort to these sorts of actions. It's a bad day for the industry." In addition to IGI, Oracle also hired Chlopak, Leonard, Schechter & Associates, a Washington, D.C., public-relations agency, to distribute damaging information about Microsoft's allies to media outlets, according to people familiar with Chlopak's operations. In one instance, Chlopak was involved in distributing internal information from the firm of political consultant Ralph Reed about his lobbying for Microsoft. The revelation that Mr. Reed was working to curry favor for Microsoft with Republican presidential candidate George W. Bush, for whom he was a campaign adviser, was embarrassing to Mr. Bush and resulted in a public apology by Mr. Reed. The firm also played a role in distributing an internal strategy document from the DCI Group, another Microsoft consultant. IGI hasn't been linked to those incidents. Beau Phillips, a spokesman for Chlopak, had no immediate comment. Microsoft, despite its legal battles, remains the biggest commercial threat to Oracle, which makes powerful database software used by many of the world's largest corporations. Named after a Central Intelligence Agency project that was its first commercial contract, Oracle has seen its stock climb nearly 350% in the past 12 months; Oracle is now the No. 2 software maker, behind Microsoft. Oracle also was among companies that provided documents and guidance to the Justice Department during its antitrust investigation of Microsoft. Mr. Ellison, Oracle's flamboyant chief executive, is at least as well known for his business acumen as for his personal rivalry with Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates. This year, Mr. Ellison closed in on Mr. Gates to become the second-wealthiest American, worth roughly $47 billion to Mr. Gates's $60 billion. -- Don Clark in San Francisco contributed to this article. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Jun 28 14:24:47 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7243F2A05E for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 14:24:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA08941 for ; Wed, 28 Jun 2000 14:24:47 -0400 Message-ID: <395A42FE.A4B1C657@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 14:25:02 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Peter Hong: Consumer Advocate's Role in Ad Campaign Questioned Speaking of front groups. Jamie http://www.calendarlive.com/tvent/20000625/t000060519.html Monday, June 26, 2000 | Print this story Consumer Advocate's Role in Ad Campaign Questioned By PETER Y. HONG, Times Staff Writer Longtime consumer TV show host David Horowitz's voice boomed through commercials last week as his piercing gaze adorned full-page newspaper ads and direct mailings, all railing against a Los Angeles City Council proposal to force cable TV companies to open their high-speed Internet lines to competitors. Horowitz--known nationally for his attacks on would-be rip-offs and deceptive advertising--said he opposes the measure because it would cost the public millions of dollars and slow the development of Internet technology. The council postponed its scheduled Friday vote on the proposal, though that delay was due to a related federal court ruling Thursday. In the so-called "open access" debate, a multimillion-dollar nationwide lobbying battle pitting cable companies against Internet service providers, Horowitz is one of many hired guns. He is allied with AT&T--which owns cable systems across the country--and other cable companies. The firms are among those funding "Hands Off the Internet," the group for which Horowitz is a paid spokesman. But Horowitz said he joined the ad campaign because he supports the cause, not for the money. "My whole reason for going into this," Horowitz said, "was that I felt [the proposal] was anti-competitive and anti-consumer." It is the same thing that motivated his career as a crusading consumer reporter, Horowitz said. Before deciding to speak for the cable industry position, Horowitz considered working for the other side of the dispute, backed by Internet service and phone companies. Horowitz met several times with those he now opposes. Two sources familiar with the discussions said Horowitz was eager to work for the so-called "open access" side, led by America Online. The talks fell apart over pay, the sources said. Horowitz insisted that he met with both camps only to discuss the merits of each side's position, not money, and that he made the pro-consumer choice. Nonprofit consumer groups, however, have attacked Horowitz for his role in the campaign. "He's used his name and journalistic credentials to mislead the public," said Harvey Rosenfield, president of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, which has no position in the open access debate. [snip] Horowitz won't say how much he is being paid. "One thing I do not discuss is what I earn," he said, repeating that his fees simply pay for his labor and do not shape his views. Those familiar with Horowitz's meetings with the anti-cable side have a different view. "David was in active negotiations to sell his services" and met several times with anti-cable partisans in July and August of last year, the source said. Horowitz had asked for several hundred thousand dollars, the source said. Horowitz told the "open access" group that he would consider working for the pro-cable side, according to the source. "He was looking for the best rate," the source said. Another person familiar with the talks said Horowitz "told us he had already talked to AT&T, but he would prefer to be on our side of the issue." Horowitz has a different version of what was discussed at the meetings. He said he met with George Vradenburg, an AOL lawyer, and others he declined to name from the open access side. Horowitz said he told the group that he would hear their arguments but was not interested in discussing payment. Vradenburg and his associates were the ones who brought up money, Horowitz said. "They tried to woo me by offering me money," he said. Horowitz said he rebuffed the Vradenburg group after deciding that the cable industry was on the right side of the dispute. [snip] ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jun 29 09:49:22 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F15312A05E for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 09:49:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA20263; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 09:49:21 -0400 Message-ID: <395B53F9.767BA294@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 09:49:45 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Cc: Ellen Rony Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Ellen Rony: for the .SUCKs crowd Reposted with permission. Jamie Subject: [bwg+] for the .SUCKs crowd Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 17:55:05 -0700 From: Ellen Rony To: bwg-n-friends@jetty.net I've just created a new term to add to the Internet lexicon: RDND: Reverse Domain Name Denigration That's when a corporation registers a domain name that deprecates itself, to preempt others from claiming it. But lo-- could this be an example of RDND excess or merely corporate paranoia? CoreComm (CORECOMM-SUCKS2-DOM) CORECOMM-SUCKS.COM Corecomm (CORE-COM-INTERNETSUCK2-DOM) CORE-COM-INTERNETSUCKS.COM Corecomm (CORE-COM-INTERNETSUCK3-DOM) CORE-COM-INTERNETSUCKS.NET Corecomm (CORE-COM-INTERNETSUCK-DOM) CORE-COM-INTERNETSUCKS.ORG corecomm (CORE-COMM-SMARTPACK-S3-DOM) CORE-COMM-SMARTPACK-SUCKS.ORG corecomm (CORE-COMMSUCKS2-DOM) CORE-COMMSUCKS.COM corecomm (CORE-COMMSUCKS3-DOM) CORE-COMMSUCKS.ORG corecomm (CORE-COMM-SUCKS2-DOM) CORE-COMM-SUCKS.NET corecomm (INTERNET-BY-CORECOMMS-DOM) INTERNET-BY-CORECOMMSUCKS.ORG corecomm (COREINTERNETSUCKS-DOM) COREINTERNETSUCKS.ORG corecomm (CORECOMMDSLSUCKS2-DOM) CORECOMMDSLSUCKS.COM corecomm (INTERNETBYCORECOMMSUC2-DOM) INTERNETBYCORECOMMSUCKS.ORG corecomm (INTERNETBYCORECOMMSUC3-DOM) INTERNETBYCORECOMMSUCKS.COM corecomm (CORECOMM-INTERNETSUCK2-DOM) CORECOMM-INTERNETSUCKS.NET corecomm (CORECOMMDSLSUCKS-DOM) CORECOMMDSLSUCKS.NET corecomm (CORECOMM-DSLSUCKS2-DOM) CORECOMM-DSLSUCKS.ORG corecomm (CORE-COMMSUCKS-DOM) CORE-COMMSUCKS.NET corecomm (CORE-COMM-SUCKS-DOM) CORE-COMM-SUCKS.COM corecomm (CORE-COMM-INTERNETSUC-DOM) CORE-COMM-INTERNETSUCKS.COM corecomm (CORECOMMDSLSUCKS3-DOM) CORECOMMDSLSUCKS.ORG corecomm (CORE-COMM-ECHAT-SUCKS2-DOM) CORE-COMM-ECHAT-SUCKS.COM corecomm (CORE-COMM-SMARTPACK-S2-DOM) CORE-COMM-SMARTPACK-SUCKS.NET corecomm (CORE-COMM-ECHAT-SUCKS3-DOM) CORE-COMM-ECHAT-SUCKS.ORG corecomm (COREINTERNETSUCKS3-DOM) COREINTERNETSUCKS.NET corecomm (CORECOMM-SMARTPACKSUC-DOM) CORECOMM-SMARTPACKSUCKS.NET corecomm (INTERNETBYCORECOMMSUC-DOM) INTERNETBYCORECOMMSUCKS.NET corecomm (CORE-COMM-DSL-SUCKS3-DOM) CORE-COMM-DSL-SUCKS.NET corecomm (CORE-COMM-INTERNETSUC2-DOM) CORE-COMM-INTERNETSUCKS.NET corecomm (CORE-COMM-SMARTPACK-S-DOM) CORE-COMM-SMARTPACK-SUCKS.COM BTW, a CoreComm domain name was hijacked in January. -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- Ellen Rony // http://www.domainhandbook.com Co-author *=" ____ / erony@marin.k12.ca.us The Domain Name Handbook \ ) +1 415.435.5010 // \\ "Carpe canine" The more people I meet, the more I like my dog. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jun 29 11:45:54 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CF992A05E for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:45:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA22180 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:45:54 -0400 Message-ID: <395B6F4A.9742E70C@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:46:18 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Dave Farber's Internet telephony patent http://www.caritastech.com//uspatent.html Subject: IP: A patent of some interest [ I am one of the inventors djf] Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2000 11:49:59 -0400 From: Dave Farber To: ip-sub-1@majordomo.pobox.com http://www.caritastech.com// Abstact: In a telephone conferencing system, a digital communication network is used to establish and control the telephone connections between multiple conferees with the telephone network being the means of exchanging verbal information. Each conferee may have a computer connected to the digital network, and each has an independent telephone instrument connected to the public switched telephone network. An in-charge conferee utilizes his computer containing appropriate software to initiate the conference and to control the participation of the conferees. The in-charge conferee sends digital control signals to a switch interface controlling a telephone switch as a gateway to the telephone network. These control signals include the commands by which the conferee telephones are rung up, brought on line, or dropped from the conference. The switch provides telephone status information back over the digital network, and the in-charge conferee, as well as other conferees if provided with appropriate software, display this status information on their PC monitors. -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jun 29 12:50:32 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 448412A05E for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 12:50:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA23194 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 12:50:32 -0400 Message-ID: <395B7E70.8EDC4E75@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 12:50:56 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Microsoft/Oracle and monitoring Now that Microsoft has registered outrage over Oracle's efforts to uncover Microsoft's undercover support for various groups or individuals that were paid to oppose the antitrust case against Microsoft, it might be useful to ask Microsoft the following questions. 1. Has Microsoft ever hired a firm to investigate its competitors? (John Markoff has reported that Microsoft has hired IGI to investigate copyright violations). 2. Has Microsoft ever hired a firm to monitor its critics? For example, has Microsoft paid anyone to monitor what I do? Jamie ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jun 29 13:02:44 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from mail.msnbc.com (mail.msnbc.com [207.46.169.46]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 675F52A05E for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:02:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail.msnbc.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 10:03:10 -0700 Message-ID: <25982F19D886D11180460000F84001440600784D@msnbcsea01> From: "Meeks, Brock" To: 'James Love' , Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Subject: RE: [Random-bits] Microsoft/Oracle and monitoring Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 10:02:42 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" It is known (how well, I'm not sure) that Microsoft keeps a dossier on a large number of journalists via one of its outside PR firms. Each journalist is assigned a 'handler' which is a PR flak at the company. I learned of this several years ago when my handler called to "chat" with me. We had actually known each other in "another life" when he was working at a trade association and I at Communications Daily. He prefaced his conversation with: "Now, I know you hate PR flaks..." When I asked him how in the world he could make that statement or could possible know that I "hate" flaks (in truth, my position has always been I hate PR flaks that try and blow smoke up my ass) he said, "Well, I read it off a posting you made to a newsgroup that's included in your folder." Yes, my dossier, that apparently was complied by someone at the PR firm, which included trolling the Net and newsgroups for any sort of contribution I made. They were, in essense, profiling me. -----Original Message----- From: James Love [mailto:love@cptech.org] Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 12:51 PM To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Subject: [Random-bits] Microsoft/Oracle and monitoring Now that Microsoft has registered outrage over Oracle's efforts to uncover Microsoft's undercover support for various groups or individuals that were paid to oppose the antitrust case against Microsoft, it might be useful to ask Microsoft the following questions. 1. Has Microsoft ever hired a firm to investigate its competitors? (John Markoff has reported that Microsoft has hired IGI to investigate copyright violations). 2. Has Microsoft ever hired a firm to monitor its critics? For example, has Microsoft paid anyone to monitor what I do? Jamie ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= _______________________________________________ Random-bits mailing list Random-bits@lists.essential.org http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/random-bits From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jun 29 13:18:25 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 841CE2A38B for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:18:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA23644 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:18:25 -0400 Message-ID: <395B84FA.954F32DE@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:18:50 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Microsoft itself acknowledges searching trash of other company June 29, 2000 When Microsoft's Spin Got Too Good, Oracle Hired Private Investigators By TED BRIDIS, GLENN SIMPSON and MYLENE MANGALINDAN Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB962233963277025801.htm "... Microsoft itself acknowledges that it once pulled an important document from the trash of another company. The incident occurred in February 1993 during a police raid of Supercom Inc., a California company accused of reproducing Microsoft software. According to court documents, an investigator hired by Microsoft, Stephen H. Lawrence, accompanied police on the raid and rummaged through the company's trash. He found a two-page document crucial to the piracy allegations, along with 325 other pages that Microsoft later produced as part of the court case in a box labeled "documents found in trash." A Microsoft spokesman, Vivek Varma, argued Wednesday that circumstances of the 1993 police raid and Oracle's activities were different." ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jun 29 13:31:14 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B9222A386 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:31:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA23818 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:31:14 -0400 Message-ID: <395B87FB.9708002C@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:31:39 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] ewatch.com Edelman I-Wire is a reseller of this service: http://www.ewatch.com/ Today, more than 800 of the world's largest corporations trust eWatch to help them accurately track what is appearing in cyberspace. Safeguard stakeholder value, improve customer service, protect corporate reputation, monitor competition, identify trends, and pinpoint corporate activism... subscribe to eWatch today. ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jun 29 13:46:46 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B1192A05E for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:46:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA24019 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:46:46 -0400 Message-ID: <395B8B9F.7C63534E@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:47:11 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS References: <395B87FB.9708002C@cptech.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] More on ewatch.com and Edelman I just talked with one of Edelman and ewatch's competitors. I was told that one of the "value added" services that Edelman is said to offer concerns contracting a firm's critics, distracting them, wasting their day, etc. Jamie James Love wrote: > > Edelman I-Wire is a reseller of this service: > > http://www.ewatch.com/ > > > > Today, more than 800 of the world's > largest corporations trust eWatch to help > them accurately track what is appearing > in cyberspace. Safeguard stakeholder > value, improve customer service, protect > corporate reputation, monitor > competition, identify trends, and pinpoint > corporate activism... subscribe to > eWatch today. > > ======================================================= > James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org > Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org > P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 > Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 > ======================================================= > > _______________________________________________ > Random-bits mailing list > Random-bits@lists.essential.org > http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/random-bits -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jun 29 14:31:26 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 553DF2A05E for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 14:31:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA24701 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 14:31:26 -0400 Message-ID: <395B9617.E193057@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 14:31:51 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] eWatch cybersleuth eWatch offers a number of services that include surveillance of activism or criticism of a company. There are also fighting back services. According to eWatch: "On the Internet, there are many communication tools at our disposal. We can post back to the message boards where the original postings appeared to give our side of the story, provide clarification or debunk it. We can email directly those we think were affected by the incident." As indicated, Edelman is a reseller of eWatch services, through Edelman Interactive Solutions. This is from the Edelman web page: http://www.eisite.com/client/home.html "From not-for-profit organizations like Chicago's Shedd Aquarium to corporate powerhouses like Microsoft, Barnes & Noble and Unilever, Edelman Interactive Solutions has been fortunate to work with some of the best companies in the world." And this is from the eWatch page on its CyberSleuth page: http://www.ewatch.com/pop_sleuth.html eWatach CyberSleuth It is unfortunate that companies are being targeted by entities whose motives are fraudulent, deceptive or criminal. eWatch CyberSleuth will attempt to identify the entity or entities behind the screen name(s) which have targeted your organization. eWatch CyberSleuth includes a 30-day subscription to the eWatch All Coverage Bundle (except WebWatch) with the screen name(s) as the sole criteria. eWatch CyberSleuth requires 7 to 10 days to complete from the date of submission and costs $4,995 per screen name. 48-hour turn around is available for an additional $1,995 per screen name. Results will vary and cannot be guaranteed. Customers will receive a dossier detailing all information gathered about the subject during the inquiry. Click here to order. Counteracting Online Anti-Corporate Activism While the Internet is in fact a new medium, based on our five years of experience in helping companies monitor the Internet, most of the old rules with respect to how we respond and react still apply. The biggest differences are that our actions are more public, the audience is larger and we're running in real-time. There are six major motivations for online activism. The same response methodology cannot be used for all of them. It is critical to understand the motivation or motivations behind online attacks in order to employ the correct response mechanisms. The six motivations include: Legitimate complaint. Behavior influencing (Environmental group targeting an oil company, etc.) Stock manipulation. Revenge. Mis- or dis-information. Fraud and extortion. Troubleshooting dubious postings need to happen on four fronts (what we call these the four C's): Classification Containment Communication Counteraction Classification Before troubleshooting, decide if action is warranted. Let's face it, there is a lot of awful content on the Internet about even the best companies. To take action on every occurrence is impractical. What are the key triggers that your company will use to prioritize and classify online threats? In our experience, other companies have used these standards, among others, for online threat assessment: Threats against the safety of employees. Threats against property (physical and intellectual). Decreasing sales. Lowering stock price. Affecting litigation. Affecting negotiations (labor, acquisitions, etc.). Containment If the attack is prioritized for action, then containment is the next step. Containment is a two part endeavor focusing on (1.) Neutralizing the information appearing online, and; (2.) Identifying the perpetrators behind the postings, rogue website, hack, etc. Neutralizing information posted online, if appropriate, is the removal of the offending messages from where ever they appear in cyberspace. This may mean something as simple as removing a posting from a web message board on Yahoo! to the shuttering of a terrorist web site. The objective is to not only stop the spread of incorrect information, but ensure that what has already spread is also eliminated. Victims of verifiable libel and trademark infringement have a much easier time neutralizing Internet content in our experience. Non-libelous content but nonetheless incorrect or offensive content is less likely to be removed by 3rd party search engines, ISPs, etc. Identifying the perpetrators behind the action requires the kind of special expertise that we've assembled for out eWatch CyberSleuth product. Internet attackers attempt to cover their tracks by erasing identifying personal information from their postings, using anonymous remailers to strip off network information, posting under assumed names, etc. Identifying these perpetrators is done using a variety of methods such as following leads found in postings and web sites, working ISPs, involving law enforcement, conducting virtual stings, among other tactics. Communication Depending on the scope of the event, it may become necessary to communicate to our key audiences about an incident that is occurring online. Our key audiences may include our employees, vendors, customers, prospects, regulators, beat journalists, financial analysts and investors (retail and institutional). The purpose of communicating with our key audiences is to signal that we are on top of the situation and have, or are working, to resolve it. When our key audiences are communicating in real-time, so must we. In certain situations, the lack of a response will be viewed as incompetence or worse, that there is in fact something to hide. As in other media, perception is reality. On the Internet, there are many communication tools at our disposal. We can post back to the message boards where the original postings appeared to give our side of the story, provide clarification or debunk it. We can email directly those we think were affected by the incident. We can use our own web site -- or set up a temporary micro site -- to address the situation in detail. Micro sites are useful for communicating a lot of information to a lot of people in a short period of time...especially journalists. For situations that are or have the potential to affect a large number people, companies are also using traditional media tools such as news releases and media relations that can reach outside the online world more effectively. Regardless of the method used, the targeted company has to evaluate these tools with great caution. What may appear to a company as a serious incident may in fact not be to its key audiences. By communicating even to a small audience we run the risk of creating a larger problem where one did not exist before. And on the Internet, it is easy for our adversaries to take our response out of context. Furthermore, when communicating with our adversaries directly, everything we send them will more than likely appear online. Depending on the situation, curt letters from corporate lawyers merely serve to bolster their claims. Counteraction Based on the information that is learned about the perpetrator(s), and given the seriousness of the offense, the appropriate countermeasures are taken. These may include everything from simply exposing the individual online all the way to arrest. In some cases, the perpetrator is an employee of or contractor to the targeted company. In these cases, termination of employment is customary. Counteraction may also include closing loop-holes in computer networks or developing new security procedures to prevent a recurrence. For more information on eWatch CyberSleuth or to discuss a specific situation you may be facing, please email info@ewatch.com or call 1-888-857-6842. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jun 29 14:44:32 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from paranet1.paradesa.com (dsl-206.169.166.34.wenet.com [206.169.166.34]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3BA22A378 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 14:44:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from covad ([207.240.244.75]) by paranet1.paradesa.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5 release 215 ID# 0-52748U100L100S0V35) with SMTP id com; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:44:32 -0700 From: "Larry Magid" To: "Meeks, Brock" , "'James Love'" , "Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS" Subject: RE: [Random-bits] Microsoft/Oracle and monitoring Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 11:44:18 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <25982F19D886D11180460000F84001440600784D@msnbcsea01> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 I would be very surprised if Microsoft failed to monitor what you do. They probably subscribe to this list and clip everything you write about them. I know they keep track of what I write about them but that, per se, doesn't bother me. The question isn't whether they monitor what public figures say about them in public (they have a right to do that) but whether they do it by peering into what is presumably private information. If they want to read and make note of my columns about them in the LA Times, so be it. But I don't want them going through my garbage. Larry Magid Syndicated Columnist, Los Angeles Times CBS News Computer Consultant Host, Redband Broadcasting's Palo Alto Cafe -------------- visit my web sites: www.larrysworld.com www.safekids.com www.safeteens.com www.redband.com/cafe -----Original Message----- From: random-bits-admin@venice.essential.org [mailto:random-bits-admin@venice.essential.org]On Behalf Of Meeks, Brock Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 10:03 AM To: 'James Love'; Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Subject: RE: [Random-bits] Microsoft/Oracle and monitoring It is known (how well, I'm not sure) that Microsoft keeps a dossier on a large number of journalists via one of its outside PR firms. Each journalist is assigned a 'handler' which is a PR flak at the company. I learned of this several years ago when my handler called to "chat" with me. We had actually known each other in "another life" when he was working at a trade association and I at Communications Daily. He prefaced his conversation with: "Now, I know you hate PR flaks..." When I asked him how in the world he could make that statement or could possible know that I "hate" flaks (in truth, my position has always been I hate PR flaks that try and blow smoke up my ass) he said, "Well, I read it off a posting you made to a newsgroup that's included in your folder." Yes, my dossier, that apparently was complied by someone at the PR firm, which included trolling the Net and newsgroups for any sort of contribution I made. They were, in essense, profiling me. -----Original Message----- From: James Love [mailto:love@cptech.org] Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 12:51 PM To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Subject: [Random-bits] Microsoft/Oracle and monitoring Now that Microsoft has registered outrage over Oracle's efforts to uncover Microsoft's undercover support for various groups or individuals that were paid to oppose the antitrust case against Microsoft, it might be useful to ask Microsoft the following questions. 1. Has Microsoft ever hired a firm to investigate its competitors? (John Markoff has reported that Microsoft has hired IGI to investigate copyright violations). 2. Has Microsoft ever hired a firm to monitor its critics? For example, has Microsoft paid anyone to monitor what I do? Jamie ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= _______________________________________________ Random-bits mailing list Random-bits@lists.essential.org http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/random-bits _______________________________________________ Random-bits mailing list Random-bits@lists.essential.org http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/random-bits From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jun 30 14:21:59 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C89B2A05E for ; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 14:21:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA05988 for ; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 14:21:59 -0400 Message-ID: <395CE56B.3A285357@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 14:22:35 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Eveline Lubbers: ewatch, Shell & web intelligence From: "Eveline Lubbers" To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 20:10:33 +0200 Subject: Shell & web intelligence Two years ago I visited a conference in Brussels organized by a PR-firm on the dangers of on line activism. One of the speakers was Shell's Internet manager (now no longer there) Simon May. I wrote a report on this meeting and I interviewed this guy, who quite openly admitted Shell hires companies like E-watch to monitor its ''enemies'' on the web. Below you'll find the part of my article that deals with this web intelligence. As I am currently composing a book on Corporate Counterstrategies against Campaigners, please feel free to send me anything you know on this subject. (I'm not on the random bits list, but read about this thread through another list, nettime, I will check the next few days on this subject.) greetings from Amsterdam eveline lubbers The Brent Spar Syndrome Counterstrategies against online activism. the full story is at my website: http://.xs4all.nl/~evel/brenteng.htm --cut-- Taking care of Shell's presence on the web is only one of the Internet manager's tasks. He must also monitor and react to what is being written and said about Shell. "The on-line community should not be ignored" was part of his advice in Brussels. "Pressure groups were aware of the potential of the Internet far earlier than the corporate world. There are pressure groups that exist only on the Internet, they're difficult to monitor and to control, you can't easily enroll as member of these closed groups." Listening to the Internet community can be an effective barometer of public opinion about your company. The Shell Headquarters in London are making a thorough job of it. Specialized, external consultants have been hired who scout the web daily, inventorying all possible ways Shell is being mentioned on the net, and in which context. Things are not made easier by the fact that search engines will assign forty-eight different well-known uses of the word "shell"... Simon May gladly explains how the work is done. "We use a service which operates from the US, E:Watch, who scan the Web world-wide for references to certain key words and phrases we supply to them. In the UK we use a company called Infonic, who does the same thing from a European perspective. The results they come up with can be completely different, although they have been given the same search criteria, and the search has been done at the same period of time. This can be for a number of reasons, including the methods which they use to search, and the times of day they enter a site to index it." Shell also uses so-called intelligent agents. These are search programs that can be trained to improve their performance over time. Simon May: "This is particularly useful for us since our company name has so many different meanings. We can tell the "agent" which results are useful and which ones aren't, the next time the agent will go out and come back with only those documents which are relevant." This monitoring can not be for 100 percent truly effective, but has to be carried out nonetheless, according to Simon May. "You need to keep track of your audience all the time, since you may learn a lot from it." Visiting the Shell web-site, the first surprise is the measure of openness about issues previously wrapped in taboo. There are carefully written features on human rights, the environment, and even the devastation and exploitation of Ogoni-land in Nigeria. The somewhat defensive character of some stories gives an indication as to which issues are still sensitive. Speaking for instance of the massive oil spills in Ogoni-land, for which Shell is held responsible ("totally exaggerated and unproved accusations"), there is always the mention that 80 percent of those have been caused by sabotage by radical resistance groups (this percentage is contested by the groups concerned). At the site's discussion forums arranged by subject everybody is allowed a say about Shell's practices. It is ironic then to see Shell collaborators from Malaysia and Nigeria reacting with dismay about what they read in those forums about their employer. The question is of course whether this form of openness really yields results. The forums are not intended for people to question Shell; the email facility is provided for that. "The forums are intended for people to debate issues relevant to Shell among themselves, so to speak," says Simon May. The email service is actually being used quite intensively to put questions to Shell--these are the 1,100 emails coming in every month. What the nature is of these questions, and the answer to these, remains between Shell and the emailers. All in all, one might conclude that this amounts to a fake openness, for show purposes only. After all, in public true discussions are being eschewed. But Simon May would deny that the forums are merely window-dressing: "We do believe quite firmly that people have the right to debate these issues and we provide a place where they can do that in an environment which might just lead to their view being heard in an organization that can make a difference." Of course these forums function as barometer for what certain people think, May admits, although this is not their primary aim. --cut-- http://.xs4all.nl/~evel/brenteng.htm -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jun 30 14:12:52 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from smtp2.a2000.nl (duck.a2000.nl [62.108.1.88]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E626A2A061 for ; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 14:12:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from node119aa.a2000.nl ([24.132.25.170] helo=v5v9b3) by smtp2.a2000.nl with smtp (Exim 2.02 #4) id 1385HV-00028c-00 for random-bits@lists.essential.org; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 20:12:49 +0200 From: "Eveline Lubbers" To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 20:10:33 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Reply-To: evel@xs4all.nl Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01d) Message-Id: Subject: [Random-bits] Shell & web intelligence Two years ago I visited a conference in Brussels organized by a PR-firm on the dangers of on line activism. One of the speakers was Shell's Internet manager (now no longer there) Simon May. I wrote a report on this meeting and I interviewed this guy, who quite openly admitted Shell hires companies like E-watch to monitor its ''enemies'' on the web. Below you'll find the part of my article that deals with this web intelligence. As I am currently composing a book on Corporate Counterstrategies against Campaigners, please feel free to send me anything you know on this subject. (I'm not on the random bits list, but read about this thread through another list, nettime, I will check the next few days on this subject.) greetings from Amsterdam eveline lubbers The Brent Spar Syndrome Counterstrategies against online activism. the full story is at my website: http://.xs4all.nl/~evel/brenteng.htm --cut-- Taking care of Shell's presence on the web is only one of the Internet manager's tasks. He must also monitor and react to what is being written and said about Shell. "The on-line community should not be ignored" was part of his advice in Brussels. "Pressure groups were aware of the potential of the Internet far earlier than the corporate world. There are pressure groups that exist only on the Internet, they're difficult to monitor and to control, you can't easily enroll as member of these closed groups." Listening to the Internet community can be an effective barometer of public opinion about your company. The Shell Headquarters in London are making a thorough job of it. Specialized, external consultants have been hired who scout the web daily, inventorying all possible ways Shell is being mentioned on the net, and in which context. Things are not made easier by the fact that search engines will assign forty-eight different well-known uses of the word "shell"... Simon May gladly explains how the work is done. "We use a service which operates from the US, E:Watch, who scan the Web world-wide for references to certain key words and phrases we supply to them. In the UK we use a company called Infonic, who does the same thing from a European perspective. The results they come up with can be completely different, although they have been given the same search criteria, and the search has been done at the same period of time. This can be for a number of reasons, including the methods which they use to search, and the times of day they enter a site to index it." Shell also uses so-called intelligent agents. These are search programs that can be trained to improve their performance over time. Simon May: "This is particularly useful for us since our company name has so many different meanings. We can tell the "agent" which results are useful and which ones aren't, the next time the agent will go out and come back with only those documents which are relevant." This monitoring can not be for 100 percent truly effective, but has to be carried out nonetheless, according to Simon May. "You need to keep track of your audience all the time, since you may learn a lot from it." Visiting the Shell web-site, the first surprise is the measure of openness about issues previously wrapped in taboo. There are carefully written features on human rights, the environment, and even the devastation and exploitation of Ogoni-land in Nigeria. The somewhat defensive character of some stories gives an indication as to which issues are still sensitive. Speaking for instance of the massive oil spills in Ogoni-land, for which Shell is held responsible ("totally exaggerated and unproved accusations"), there is always the mention that 80 percent of those have been caused by sabotage by radical resistance groups (this percentage is contested by the groups concerned). At the site's discussion forums arranged by subject everybody is allowed a say about Shell's practices. It is ironic then to see Shell collaborators from Malaysia and Nigeria reacting with dismay about what they read in those forums about their employer. The question is of course whether this form of openness really yields results. The forums are not intended for people to question Shell; the email facility is provided for that. "The forums are intended for people to debate issues relevant to Shell among themselves, so to speak," says Simon May. The email service is actually being used quite intensively to put questions to Shell--these are the 1,100 emails coming in every month. What the nature is of these questions, and the answer to these, remains between Shell and the emailers. All in all, one might conclude that this amounts to a fake openness, for show purposes only. After all, in public true discussions are being eschewed. But Simon May would deny that the forums are merely window-dressing: "We do believe quite firmly that people have the right to debate these issues and we provide a place where they can do that in an environment which might just lead to their view being heard in an organization that can make a difference." Of course these forums function as barometer for what certain people think, May admits, although this is not their primary aim. --cut-- http://.xs4all.nl/~evel/brenteng.htm From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jun 30 18:09:49 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5C7C2A314; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 18:09:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA09379; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 18:09:48 -0400 Message-ID: <395D0C01.60F8E359@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 17:07:13 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , info-policy-notes Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] CPT Statement on E-Sign bill FMI: Jamie Love, love@cptech.org, 202.387.8030, hm 703.522.4380 Vergil Bushnell, vbushnell@cptech.org 202.387.8030 Today a consumer group criticized the new US law on electronic signatures. Jamie Love, Director of the Consumer Project on Technology, stated: "People should understand that this bill is about legal issues. It does not create any new technology. The bill was pushed to solve the problems of businesses, and not to protect consumers. The legislation will increase the risks of identity theft. According to the National Consumer Law Center, the bill places places new burdens on consumers to provide evidence in disputes over electronic transactions. "The E-sign Act increases the legal obligations on consumers who interact with busineses on the Internet and through other digital media. "The E-sign Act raises the legal status of agreements that are 'signed' using electronic technologies, including such authorizations as click-on buttons on web pages, as well as many other electronic authorizations, of varying degrees of security. On the one hand, it overrides other statutes and regulations, and declares as a general rule, that no contract or signature can be denied legal effect, solely on the grounds that it was in electronic form. On the other hand, it fails in important ways to guarantee that consumers will be protected from fraud or unfair business practices in a wide range of matters. "In general, electronic transactions may leave consumers more vulnerable to unauthorized use, compared to conventional transactions. Technology residing on a consumer's personal computer can hardly be expected to be shielded from malicious intrusions. Unlike a handwritten signature, if an electronic authorization is stolen or forged, the legitimate owner will be hard-pressed to prove that it was used fraudulently. The E-sign Act contains no provision to limit the liability of consumers victimized by fraudulent spending. "Congress rejected pleas from consumer groups that the e-sign bill include a provision to ensure that a contract cannot be altered once a consumer's digital signature is affixed. The Senate langauge on this was dropped from the bill that was signed by the President today. The risk is that consumers will be victimized by changes in contractual text, inadvertent or otherwise, eroding the consumer's ability to reproduce copies of digital contracts at a later date, or admit such documents as evidence. "The digital signature bill is likely to hurt consumers lacking access to the Internet, especially low-income consumers and minorities. The E-sign Act does allow the consumer the choice of receiving a contract in electronic or paper form. However, given the prevalence of adhesion contracts in business-to-consumer transactions, this 'choice' may very well be "take-it-or-leave it," or constrained by penalty fees for paper-based contracting, a practice not prohibited by the legislation. Other experts that have expressed opinions on the E-sign Act are: - Vergil Bushnell Consumer Project on Technology http://www.cptech.org/ecom 202.387.8030 vbushnell@cptech.org - Margot Saunders National Consumer Law Center 202-986-6060 -Frank Torres/ David Butler Consumers Union 202-462-6262 ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Jul 1 10:11:12 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 591EF2A061 for ; Sat, 1 Jul 2000 10:11:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA16122; Sat, 1 Jul 2000 10:11:12 -0400 Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2000 10:11:12 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Cc: robert.reese@mindspring.com Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Robert Reese on CPT Statement on E-Sign bill ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2000 04:04:38 -0400 From: Robert Reese Subject: Re: [IPN] CPT Statement on E-Sign bill [snip] Dear Jamie and group, This law deeply concerns many privacy advocates as well as civil libertarians. While we believe this took a step in the right direction by allowing digital signatures, there is a significant and disturbing difference between an Electronic signature and a Digital signature. A digital signature is provable: it provides nearly iron-clad proof that the signature belongs to the signer. It also undeniably proves that the document has not changed since the signing. On the other hand, an Electronic signature is simply an assertion to one's identity; it is not provable. If I were to email someone with some type of agreement contained within, the simple fact my name was on the email is enough proof for this law. That isn't good enough for me. Here's why: *It's A Security Issue* Sadly, it is extraordinarily easy to falsify email and even a web presence by either "spoofing" (faking) an IP address(1) or breaking into a poorly guarded ISP account. Take your own ISP account - it is probably protected only by a PASSWORD; not a passphrase, nor a PKI(2) system, nor a PASSPHRASE, nor any other secure protocol. Very few people have available a Virtual Private Network (a.k.a VPN) for secure communications to their ISP. taking your PASSWORD again, how many ISPs even allow a password longer than eight characters? There are only 95 available characters on the standard US keyboard. There are actually up to 255 theoretical characters without "unicode", but those special characters are inputted via special key combinations. Few people know of the existence of these characters, less know how to apply them, and almost no one uses them. As is often the case, let's say your PASSWORD is uses only the keyboard characters. Well, many systems cannot handle the asterisk (*) nor the question mark (?) as characters, leaving 93 characters left. Out of those, only 63 characters are most commonly used - the upper- and lower-case letters, the numbers, and the seldom used space bar. Very few many people use all eight available places in the PASSWORD, so let's say the average length is 7 characters. Assuming for simplicity that rare characters are used as often as common characters ('x' as often as 'e') AND you don't have to make sense, you get the following formula for the average number of passwords a hacker has to try before accessing an ISP account: (63^7)/2 or 196,949,032,000. Quite a big number you say? How many people do you know that have a PASSWORD such as this: "x5PqAE2"? Not very many. No, the actual number a hacker has to try is significantly lower because folks use their spouse's birthday or their child's name, etc. There are programs specifically designed to attack PASSWORDS such as these. In testing, I have used a dictionary attack on an 8-character password-protected zip file. My dictionary contained over 100,000 entries. The zip file was broken in less than 10 seconds! The PASSWORD was all lower case, and was a proper name. If the PASSWORD was like the example "x5PqAE2", the dictionary would have been cycled through, and then a "brute-force" attack would have to be used. Instead of mere seconds, it now could take hours or even days to break. The _only_ protection you have from someone accessing your internet account and your now legally-binding email account is a crummy little PASSWORD that probably can be broken in less time than it took for you to read this post. Remember, it's now your key to your identity, not just your internet password! Do you feel comfortable trusting your entire life to 8 little bytes? Digital signatures provide far more protection, as it is necessary to possess the private key AND the PassPHRASE. Yes, the passphrase can be as insecure as a password, but hopefully someone that is concerned with the importance of a digital signature will recognize the importance of the passphrase protecting it. Hopefully soon ISPs will now offer the ability to secure your acount via one or a combination of the following options. Bear in mind this is only a partial list of different methods and protocols - many more exist, and many more are being developed: PASSPHRASE: A good passphrase not only takes a large number of characters, but also replaces characters with less-used characters. Additional precautions may include misspellings, munging, character replacement with a phonetic or symbolic/iconically similar character or string of characters, random strings, and nonsensical combinations. An example may be: "#mArEE h@d & -L1ddL3 7@mB!* xJC24" You need to only remember that Mary Had A Little Lamb followed by xJC24, plus how you changed it. Thankfully, once you type the passphrase a few times it is surprisingly easy to remember the key sequence as you think of the phrase. Of course, a passphrase need not be a phrase at all. Any combination is fine, but the longer and chaotic the better. USER ENTROPY: Answer a few questions only the user would know. More advanced than a simple "City of Birth" or "Mother's Maiden Name". Can be compromised, but is pretty good for most applications. BIOMETRICS: Fingerprints, voice-print analysis, facial recognition, handwriting recognition (2) PKI aka PUBLIC KEY INFRASTRUCTURE : Pretty Good Privacy (PGP), RSA Security, Etc. Uses a private/public key scheme whereby the user presents a private key protected by a strong passphrase, or biometrics, or etc. to the host containing the user's public key. The user in turn verifies the host's private key with the host's public key which the user already has in his or her possession. KERBEROS: Been around for a long time, somewhat obscure, but is making a resurgence. When done properly it is highly reliable and secure. VPN aka VIRTUAL PRIVATE NETWORKS: Not so much as a protocol but a type of connection. The user and host authenticated each other and then the pathway is encrypted / secured for the duration of the connection. Someday all connections will be VPN or a variant thereof. Similar to SSL used of secure online purchases. SMART CARDS: Typically secured like PKIs, with strong passphrases, biometrics, etc., but not always and therein lies their danger. Personally, I feel there are too many problems with these. However, they are better than just a password. The two above best, in my opinion, are the passphrase and biometrics. These protect other methods and protocols such as the VPN or the smart card. They are required for the private key; otherwise it is worthless if a copy gets loose. Just like any other serious security project, the more layers on your system the better. A good scenario would be to use a passphrase to verify the smart card that opens the biometric database containing the pattern to unlock the PKI private key (in lieu of it's own passphrase) that verifies the VPN. In fact, with a properly configured secure communications system, it is far safer and more secure than physical mail. *A RECOMMENDATION* PGP is an excellent PKI program, and is freely available for non-commercial use. In addition to the well-known encryption properties, the true power of PGP is the DIGITAL SIGNATURE capability. To give folks an example of what a PGP Digital Signature looks like, I have signed this post using my private key. Anyone can obtain my public key off the public key server at http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371 or ldap://certserver.pgp.com. I could have used an x.509 certificate had I chosen; it is another method to provide digital signatures. Also, added benefits of the later and purchased versions of PGP are an included VPN plus something called PGPdisk, a utility that creates a secure "container" on your harddrive or removable media. The free versions can be found at http://web.mit.edu/network/pgp-form.html. PGPdisk is only available in the licensed versions. "Security is a process, not a product." - Bruce Schneier, Counterpane Internet Security (http://www.counterpane.com) Sincerely, Robert Reese~ Owner - RE6 Computer Services Cedartown GA My PGP Key ID# is 0x2F644E48 and the "Fingerprint" is ED06 4800 FAE3 1739 3D4D F5EA AA5D C3C5 2F64 4E48 NOTE (1): An IP (Internet Protocol) address is the unique address to which you are known to the internet world. Each address cannot be duplicated, and therefor serve to identify computers/devices connected to a network and the internet. A computer or device may have more than one IP address. Most dial-up accounts use a method where a customer is assigned a dynamic IP address that has a limited life for that particular user before expiring. This actually promotes security and privacy on the internet, but significantly prohibits many current and future applications. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 6.5.3 Comment: NO one has the right NOT to be offended! iQA/AwUBOV2ll6pdw8UvZE5IEQInKwCg+rDJW6Q+/3k9Y1v6UJROW6Px7XcAoI8m N1MW0NhTrJV3ftznSDyn1zKr =7lkl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jul 7 17:27:23 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD5002A374; Fri, 7 Jul 2000 17:27:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA30682; Fri, 7 Jul 2000 17:27:22 -0400 Message-ID: <39664B1D.766F9DEC@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 17:26:53 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] PATNEWS: A mostly purely mathematical patent claim Subject: PATNEWS: A mostly purely mathematical patent claim Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 15:39:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Gregory Aharonian Reply-To: patent-news@europe.std.com To: patent-news@world.std.com !20000707 A mostly purely mathematical patent claim A patent recently issued for a cryptography method which is a good example for arguing just how mathematical a claim can be. The general understanding is that mathematical formulas/scientific equations can't be patented, an objection used against software patents for many years by arguing that software is little more than mathematical equations implemented on a computer. As they say, you can't patent "E=mc^2". So consider then the following recently issued patent claim, which borders on pure mathematical number theory: 6081597 Public key cryptosystem method and apparatus We claim: 1. A method for encoding and decoding a digital message m, comprising the steps of: selecting ideals p and q of a ring R; generating elements f and g of the ring R, and generating element Fq which is an inverse of f (mod q), and generating element Fp which is an inverse of f (mod p); producing a public key that includes h, where h is congruent, mod q, to a product that can be derived using g and Fq ; producing a private key from which f and Fp can be derived; producing an encoded message e by encoding the message m using the public key and a random element .o slashed.; and producing a decoded message by decoding the encoded message e using the private key. This is not that much different from an existence theorem, especially if restated using more formal mathematics (though the claim seems to be poorly worded in saying at one point "... and generating element Fp which is an inverse of f (mod p);" and then for the same Fp saying "producing a private key from which f and Fp can be derived;" - which seems to imply that Fp is generated/derived in two different ways in the same claim. Also, I question having both an encoding operation and a decoding operation in the same patent claim, operations usually done by two different parties, neither of whom would infringe the entire claim. In a networked world, manipulating numbers becomes quite practical and quite lucrative. If one can simply claim number theory theorems and algorithms with so little specification of anything beyond the math equations, such as in this patent claim, it will surely blur the lines completely with regards to mathematical equations/scientific theories patentability. Greg Aharonian Internet Patent News Service -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Jul 9 09:02:53 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A66872A060; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 09:02:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA17378; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 09:02:53 -0400 Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 09:02:53 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Cc: nc-tlds@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] LPA opposition to .union TLD The Public Policy Association of Senior Human Resource Executives, a corporate group that fight labor union organization efforts, has filed a 6 page letter with ICANN, opposing the creation of a .union top level domain.. Jamie http://www.lpa.org http://www.lpa.org/lpapublic/downloads/00-173_LPA_ICANN_Comments.pdf ============================================= James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | love@cptech.org Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 ============================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Jul 9 14:21:43 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from prserv.net (out2.prserv.net [32.97.166.32]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0A5E2A060; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 14:21:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org ([32.101.208.217]) by prserv.net (out2) with SMTP id <20000709182056229009sodje>; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 18:20:57 +0000 Message-ID: <3968C8AE.8408BF42@cptech.org> Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 14:47:10 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: info-policy-notes , Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Dispute over .union Top Level Domain LPA (http://www.lpa.org) is a group of corporate managers that lobby the US Congress and the US government, on behalf of management, on issues such as labor union organizing or civil rights for workers. Among the projects of the LPA is NLRB Watch (http://www.nlrbwatch.com/), a web site and newsletter that alerts employers to activities of the US National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), and promotes various anti-union views. On July 8, 2000, the LPA wrote a six page letter to ICANN that provided a full scale attack on the proposal to create a .union top level internet domain, to be controlled by labor unions. For background on the .union proposal, see: http://www.cptech.org/ecom/icann/toplevel/ Many of the LPA's attacks on the .union proposal echo the similar naive critics of new proposals for civil society Top Level Domains. For example, much is made of potential disputes among competing unions to get a domain such as boeing.union, where multiple unions represent workers or are seeking to represent workers. Mentioned only in passing is the fact that in such cases the domain would be a gateway or portal to various unions with interests in providing information about union activate with of a particular firm or employer. While it is true that the management of something like a .union TLD will involve choices and decisions, the global labor union community is apparently willing to take this task on. A group of international labor organizations, lead to the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), has been holding discussions on this issue, and is expected to come forward with a formal ICANN proposal at some time. The ICANN board meets in Yokohama on July 14, 2000, and will discuss rules for TLDs like .union. Manon Ress of the Debs-Jones-Douglass Institute (http://www.djdinstitute.org) has proposed a resolution to the ICANN non-commercial constituency that reads: The .union TLD should be controlled and managed by labor unions. With the exception of limited technical issues that affect Internet navigation and stability, and the selection of a bona fide global labor union body that will control the registry, ICANN should not interfere with the management of the .union TLD. The July 8, 2000 letter from LPA opposing the .union TLD is evidence that corporate management now sees the .union TLD proposal as potentially a powerful labor union organizing tool, and a significant threat to corporate management interests. The LPA letter follows: Jamie love <-------------------- LPA Letter to ICANN -----------> July 8, 2000 Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 Marina Del Rey, CA 90292 Re: July 2000 ICANN Yokohama Meeting Topic: Introduction of New Top-Level Domains To Whom It May Concern: LPA is pleased to submit comments regarding the likely addition of new top level domain names by the Internet Corporation on Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). In particular, LPA registers its strong opposition to the adoption of a .union chartered top- level domain (TLD), which was mentioned as an example of a new domain name in ICANN's June 13, 2000 background document. The addition of a .union TLD would cause undue confusion among Internet users, particularly among employees who are not represented by a union. Moreover, a .union TLD would violate many of the principles announced by Working Group C in its supplemental white paper. At a minimum, LPA recommends that ICANN refrain from accepting a .union TLD in the initial round of expansion and instead draw on the lessons learned from the implementation of other chartered top level domains that are added before evaluating the viability of .union TLD. LPA is an association of the senior human resource executives of more than 200 leading corporations in the United States. LPA's purpose is to ensure that U.S. employment policy supports the competitive goals of its member companies and their employees. LPA member companies employ more than 12 million employees, or 12 percent of the private sector U.S. workforce. LPA members have a substantial interest in making sure that employees receive accurate information about whether they are represented by a union or not. The addition of a .union top-level domain could prematurely undermine employee confidence in the use of the Internet as a tool for communicating with employees. I. The Creation of a .union TLD Would Create Confusion and Administrative Problems LPA believes that a .union TLD would create more problems than benefits and should be dropped from consideration, particularly at this stage of domain name expansion. The creation of a .union TLD could confuse employees, especially those who are not familiar with union organizing procedures. The .union domain name would also likely require the chartering entity to put in place sophisticated application and management procedures to reduce the inevitable disputes that would arise among competing unions. Moreover, it is far from clear that a .union TLD would pass muster under the principles set forth by the Domain Name Supporting Organization's Working Group C. A. Background on the .union Proposal The background paper posted on ICANN's web site on June 13, 2000, used a .union top level domain name (TLD) as an example of a non- commercial chartered TLD that could be sponsored and managed by a group of interested labor unions.1 The .union TLD proposal was introduced by Jamie Love, the director of the Consumer Project on Technology and John Richard, director of Essential Information, both technology-related interest groups affiliated with Ralph Nader. On March 1, 2000, they sent a letter to Esther Dyson, the chair of ICANN, indicating their interest in establishing a .union TLD, described as: a "union label" for cyberspace. Use of the domain would be restricted to bona fide labor unions. Examples of the use of this TLD would include: nike.union, exxon.union, microsoft.union, as well as other uses . It is our goal to use the .union domain to strengthen union organizing efforts, and to make it easier for workers at a firm to communicate with unions that represent workers at the firm, or who are seeking to organize workers at the firm, and for unions in different countries to coordinate efforts with each other. Letter from James Love and John Richard to Esther Dyson, chair of ICANN, Mar. 1, 2000. Shortly after the letter was sent, a meeting was held reportedly involving Mr. Love, union leaders in the United States, the chair of ICANN's working group on trademark issues and senior representatives from the Department of Commerce to discuss the prospects of a .union TLD. During the meeting, some union representatives noted that having domains under a company name could enhance cooperation among unions in several countries in dealing with the same company. Nothing in the written account of the meeting mentioned the prospect of employee confusion.2 Subsequent to the meeting, a posting from Pruett Duncan of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions indicated that many of the international trade union organizations would be interested in participating in, and even managing, a .union TLD.3 This indicates that already there is competition for the management of a .union TLD between the AFL-CIO in the United States and a group of international trade union organizations. Competition for sponsorship of a .union TLD aside, LPA believes that a .union TLD would create excessive confusion among employees and would be counterproductive in enhancing the Internet in the initial round of domain name expansion. B. The .union Proposal Would Create Employee Confusion LPA's primary concern with a .union TLD is that a domain name such as nike.union would create substantial employee confusion and labor relations problems. These issues take a .union TLD proposal out of the "technical" realm occupied by ICANN and into the realm of labor relations policies governed by legislative and administrative bodies in the United States and other countries. A .union TLD is also likely to create several difficult domain name management issues that ICANN would have to resolve with the organization that is granted a .union TLD charter. ------------------------ 1 See ICANN Yokohama Meeting Topic: Introduction of New Top-Level Domains, II(C)(2-3) . 2 James Love, Friday's Dot Union Briefing, April 1, 2000, . 3 Duncan Pruett, Some Thoughts on a Chartered GTLD for Trade Unions, May 31, 2000, . --------------------------- 3 A company.union TLD could potentially confuse employees into thinking that they were already represented by a union that was formed by or recognized by the company. In the United States and other countries, it is illegal to have a union that is formed by the company (a company union).4 Generally, in the United States, an employer can only recognize a union after employees have voted for a union in a secret ballot election or after the company has obtained an objective measure that a majority of employees in the bargaining unit support the union. The union normally demonstrates a showing of interest by having employees sign union authorization cards that indicate that the employee wants to be represented by a labor union. Even though a company union is illegal in the United States, a nike.union domain name, for example, could create the impression that all or many Nike employees are already represented by a union initiated or run by the company (i.e., the Nike union). Alternatively, a nike.union domain name could lead employees to the conclusion that they already had an independent union, and could allow a union organizer to play upon this impression to convince employees to sign union authorization cards. There is substantial evidence in U.S. labor jurisprudence that individual union locals seeking to organize particular employers have misrepresented the significance of signing an authorization card in order to convince employees to sign the cards.5 If a .union TLD were created, at the very least, the entity holding the charter would have to set well-defined rules regarding the accuracy of the information available on chartered web addresses. Further confusion could arise for employees working at different companies that have the same name. As John Berryhill pointed out in a March 25, 2000 posting, "at delta.union will they be the faucet makers or the airline employees?"6 One can think of several other examples that could further lead to employee and union confusion. C. A .union TLD Would Require Constant Oversight by the Chartering Entity A chartered .union TLD would require significant monitoring and oversight by the holder of the charter, and it would require a sophisticated dispute resolution mechanism to resolve conflicts that develop among unions, regarding rights to domain names and misinformation posted on web sites. A .union TLD would be used primarily for adversarial and advocacy purposes, namely to convince employees to join one of a number of competing unions or to engender support among employees for a union. Thus, although a .union TLD may be non-commercial, it is not non-commercial in the same sense as a .museum TLD or a .edu TLD, which -------------------- 4 See 29 U.S.C. 158(a)(2). 5 Cases in which unions have used misrepresentations to convince employees to sign authorization cards include: Nissan Research & Dev. Inc., 296 N.L.R.B 598 (1989) Burlington Indus., Inc. v. NLRB, 680 F.2d 974 (4 th Cir. 1982); Medline Indus., Inc. v. NLRB, 593 F.2d 788 (7 th Cir. 1979); Fort Smith Outerwear, Inc. v. NLRB, 499 F.2d 233 (8 th Cir. 1974); Southern Cal. Associated Newspapers, Inc. v. NLRB, 415 F.2d 360 (9 th Cir. 1969); Schwarzenbach-Huber Co. v. NLRB, 408 F.3d 236 (2d Cir. 1969); J.M. Machinery Corp. v. NLRB, 70 L.R.R. M. 3355 (5 th Cir. 1969); Lenz Co. v. NLRB, 396 F.2d 905 (6 th Cir. 1968); Southland Paint Co. v. NLRB, 394 F.2d 717 (5 th Cir. 1968); Dan Howard Mfg. Co. v. NLRB, 390 F.2d 304 (7 th Cir. 1969); Swan Super Cleaners, Inc. v. NLRB, 384 F.2d 609 (6 th Cir. 1967); Dayco Corp. v. NLRB, 382 F.2d 577 (6 th Cir. 1967); Nichols-Dover, Inc. v. NLRB, 380 F.2d 438 (2d Cir. 1967); Eng'rs & Fabricators, Inc. v. NLRB, 376 F.2d 482 (5 th Cir. 1967); Freeport Marble & Tile Co. v. NLRB, 367 F.2d 371 (1 st Cir. 1966); Bauer Welding & Metal Fabricators, Inc. v. NLRB, 358 F.2d 766 (8 th Cir. 1966). 6 John Berryhill's Response to James Love Regarding a .union Top- level Domain Name, Mar 25, 2000, . ----------------------------- 4 are primarily informational in nature. The ICANN background document erroneously grouped all three TLDs together. A .union TLD also could create significant conflict between and among unions, depending upon how the charter is managed. For example, assuming unions are the only entities eligible to register second level domain names under a .union TLD, ICANN would need to determine: - whether an individual union would have the right to register a company.union domain name or whether all unions interested in representing employees at the company would have a right to post information on the site; - if an individual union was allowed to register a company.union domain name, how the union would demonstrate that it had a legitimate interest in representing employees at the employer; if an individual union was allowed to register a .union domain name, the point in the organizing process at which the union would be allowed to register the name (before organizing began in earnest, after the union has begun organizing, after a showing of interest by employees); if an individual union was allowed to register a .union domain name, how the chartering entity would prevent "cybersquatting" among unions. If ICANN allowed the chartering entity to sell a company.union domain name to an individual union, other unions would be excluded from posting information on that web site. Significant disputes among unions competing to represent employees at the company would result. For example, what would happen if a competing union secured the rights to company.union, where company's employees were already represented by a different union? Would the chartering entity be required to grant a right of first refusal to the union that represented employees at the company? In addition, where multiple unions represent different groups of employees at a company, such an arrangement would exclude unions that have legitimate interests at the company. Matters would be complicated further under such an arrangement if employees voted to decertify a union as the exclusive bargaining representative of the employees at the company. After the decertification, would the chartering entity require the owner of the do main name to surrender the name? What if the employees decertified one union and elected to be represented by another? Would the decertified union be required to transfer ownership over the domain name to the newly certified union? These and other complex issues would be created if individual unions were allowed to own a company.union domain name. Based on the above concerns, it would appear that, in the interest of fairness, a .union TLD charter would have to allow all interested unions to post information on a company.union site to be equitable. Yet, this "gateway" approach presents its own problems. The chartering entity would still need to determine when a union would be allowed to post information on a company site. In larger companies that have many unions, this could become excessively complicated. It could be possible to have dozens of union locals posting information to a single company site, creating more confusion for employees and imposing significant administrative burdens for the chartering entity, which arguably would be required to monitor the postings. In addition, the chartering entity would presumably be required to establish dispute resolution procedures to resolve claims made by competing unions about inaccurate information 5 posted on the web site by their rivals. Such procedures could lead to a significant new bureaucracy to monitor and resolve claims as unions compete for new union members. D. The Proposal Would Violate the Principles for New TLDs Set Forth by Working Group C The Domain Name Supporting Organization's Working Group C on new TLDs approved five additional principles for assessing new general TLDs which are pertinent to the discussion of a .union TLD. These are meaning, enforcement, differentiation, diversity, and honesty. As analyzed below, whether a .union TLD would meet several of these principles is questionable at best and points to the conclusion that a .union TLD should be shelved. ** Meaning. According to the Working Group C summary, "an application for a TLD should explain the significance of the proposed TLD string, and how the applicant contemplates that the new TLD will be perceived by the relevant population of net users. The application may contemplate that the proposed TLD string will have its primary semantic meaning in a language other than English."7 As explained above, the relevant population of net users for a .union TLD would be employees, who could be confused by a company.union domain name. By having a company.union TLD, employees may be led erroneously to believe that they were already represented by a union that was recognized by a company. ** Enforcement. "An application for a TLD should explain the mechanism for charter enforcement where relevant and desired."8 Enforcement of the .union TLD charter has several aspects to it. Enforcement of a charter typically means that the charter is available only to those entities that are interested in the subject matter in question, in this case, labor unions. Enforcement also means, however, the need to ensure that all unions that wish to provide information under a .union domain name may do so. Because many unions can compete to represent the same employees at a company or can represent different employees at the same company, enforcement is likely to be a substantial undertaking that would require significant oversight by the chartering entity. ** Differentiation. "The selection of a TLD string should not confuse net users, and so TLDs should be clearly differentiated by the string and/or by the marketing and functionality associated with the string."9 As noted above, the use of a company.union TLD could confuse some employees into thinking that their employer had recognized a union when it had not or that the employer had recognized a union other than the one that represented its employees. ** Diversity. "New TLDs are important to meet the needs of an expanding Internet community. They should serve both commercial and non-commercial goals."10 Although a .union TLD would serve non-commercial goals, the ICANN background informa tion significantly misstated the effect of union websites by characterizing them as similar to .edu or .museum. Union web sites are information and advocacy tools in union-management relations that are inherently -------------- 7 Addendum to WG-C consensus report to the Names Council, Apr. 17, 2000, http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/20000417.NCwgc- addendum.html. 8 Id. 9 Id. 10 Id. -------- 6 adversarial. LPA believes that there is substantial opportunity for some unions to profit at the expense of others. LPA suggests that diversity and competition would be better protected by requiring unions to register through existing TLDs or new general and open TLDs. In addition, many unions are now providing benefits that involve commercial transactions. For example, many unions offer discounts on credit cards, computers and Internet access. These transactions would clearly take the web sites out of the non-commercial realm. ** Honesty. "A TLD should not unnecessarily increase opportunities for malicious or criminal elements who wish to defraud net users." Even if intended for bona fide information dissemination and sharing, a .union TLD creates increased opportunity for unions to convince nonunion employees that they are already represented by a union by virtue of the web site name. As stated above, some unions could use the existence of a company.union domain name to convince employees that the company supports a union and to convince employees to sign union authorization cards to demonstrate their support for the union. In sum, LPA believes that the principles suggested by Working Group C support the notion that a .union TLD could be counterproductive to the domain name system. III. More Time Is Needed to Consider New Chartered, Non- Commercial TLD Proposals LPA does not involve itself with the technical aspects of web management, but it does believe that ICANN should provide additional time for public comment on proposals for new chartered, noncommercial TLDs. Specifically, LPA believes that ICANN should provide a minimum 60-day period for evaluating proposed new chartered, non-commercial TLDs after the deadline for submission has passed, instead of the one-week period currently suggested. This puts all parties interested in new chartered, non-commercial TLDs on a level playing field, rather than disadvantaging those who are interested in proposals that were posted at the last minute. LPA also recommends that applicants be required to provide a detailed account of how the application process for new domain names would operate under chartered domains. Applicants should be required to demonstrate how they will resolve competing claims where more than one party is likely to want access under each domain name. IV. Conclusion LPA believes that the creation of .union TLD is unnecessary and will create more confusion and conflict than access to useful information. A .union TLD is likely to cause infighting among unions, require the chartering entity to keep a vigilant watch on how domain names are used, and require regular dispute resolution proceedings. Above all, the prospect for employee confusion merits that the proposal be dropped at this stage of Internet expansion. Finally, to ensure a full airing of the views of interested parties, LPA recommends that ICANN adopt a 60-day evaluation and comment period following the deadline for filing proposals. Sincerely yours, Daniel V. Yager Senior Vice President and General Counsel www.lpa.org 1015 FIFTEENTH STREET N SUITE 1200 WASHINGTON, DC 20005-2605 TEL 202.789.8670 FAX 202.789.0064 INFO@L A.ORG L A, INC. PRESS RELEASE From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Jul 11 12:39:41 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC4272A380; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 12:39:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA13981; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 12:39:41 -0400 Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 12:39:41 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org, nc-tlds@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Dot GNU ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 13:06:22 -0600 (MDT) From: Richard Stallman To: love@cptech.org Here is what I sent. To: tld-interest@icann.org Subject: Top-level domain proposal Reply-to: rms@gnu.org --text follows this line-- Dear ICANN This is an expression of interest in the creation of .gnu as a new Internet Top Level domain. The owner of the .gnu TLD registry would be the Free Software Foundation. The Free Software Foundation was created in 1985, and has been instrumental in the development of important pieces of the software now used to run the Internet--including much of the GNU/Linux operating system now used by many Internet servers. The GNU project web page, http://www.gnu.org, has additional information about GNU and the Free Software Foundation. There is currently a shortage of available name space, and the creation of a new .gnu TLD would expand the name space, particularly for individuals and software developers who cannot find the name they want from .com, .net or .org. Also, the creation of a .gnu TLD would permit Internet users to express their support for the GNU project, and to financially support the creation of free software. This would benefit the Internet community directly. I believe The ICANN staff is currently considering rules and policies for new TLDs. I suggest those rules should permit expansion of the current name space, and enable proposals, like the .gnu TLD, to support the public and defend the public's rights in cyberspace. Sincerely, Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Jul 11 15:48:08 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8FE82A05E; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 15:48:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (phelsuma.essential.org [216.0.124.26]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA17463; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 15:48:08 -0400 Message-ID: <396B76FF.29705102@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 15:35:27 -0400 From: Vergil Bushnell Organization: Consumer Project on Technology X-Sender: "Vergil Bushnell" <@smtp.essential.org> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-gatewaynet (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: nc-tlds@venice.essential.org, random-bits@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] CPT expression of interest in new Top-level-Domains June 10, 2000 To: tld-interest@icann.org from: James Love, Consumer Project on Technology John Richard, Essential Information Re: Expressions of interest from parties seeking to operate and/or sponsor any new TLD registry. I am writing to express the interest of Essential Information (EI) and the Consumer Project on Technology (CPT) in sponsoring new TLD registries. 1. CPT/EI's March 1, 2000 request. CPT and EI first wrote to ICANN to propose sponsorship of new TLDs on March 1, 2000. CPT and EI's March 1 letter proposed ten new TLDs, including: .union, .customers, .complaints, .sucks, .ecology, .isnotgreen, .isnotfair, .shareholder, .taxpayer and .unite A copy of the March 1, 2000 letter is attached, and is incorporated in this letter, with the following modifications. With respect to .union, it is our position that the .union TLD should be controlled and managed by labor unions. Therefore, we will not be proposing EI/CPT sponsorship of the .union TLD. Our March 1, 2000 letter sought to illustrate the types of uses for TLDs that would benefit the NGO community. Among the TLD proposals in our March 1, 2000 letter, CPT/EI are most likely to apply for the .sucks or .ecology TLDs in the proposed ICANN request for proposals beginning in August. With respect to the much discussed .sucks proposal, we should point out that many businesses are seeking to prevent the public from using similar names by preempting registration. For example, Bell Atlantic has recent registered verizonwirelesssucks.com, verizonwirelessblows.com and verizonwirelessbites.com. Verizon and other companies seek such registrations to prevent their critics from having a voice, not to use the domain names to publish information. The EI/CPT proposal of prohibiting the registration of verizon.com and verizon.sucks to the same organization would protect the public from such tactics, and expand the name space. CPT/EI's proposal to use the profits from the .sucks TLD to fund a foundation that supports free speech illustrates the types of benefits to the Internet community that are possible when allocating the rights to various TLDs to competing parties. 2. Additional TLD proposals. CPT/EI will also apply for the rights to use .watch and .critics. We believe that these TLDs will expand the name space, and create important domains for free speech and criticisms. Like similar TLDs, it is envisioned that a .watch or .critics TLD would be used in connection with names that may be protected by trademark. CPT/EI also is considering an application for .ngo, a TLD that would be reserved for use by civil society organizations. With respect to the .ngo proposal, CPT/EI may withdraw its request in the event that a suitable non-profit applicant is willing to sponsor .ngo. CPT/EI feels strongly that the .ngo TLD should not be sponsored by a profit making entity, and that the .ngo registry should restrict the use of .ngo to non-profit organizations. 3. Request for all words in English, French and Spanish dictionaries. Some have proposed that TLDs be awarded on the basis for first come first serve requests, without any clear limit on the number of TLDs one could sponsor. Therefore, we ask for the rights to use all of the words in Microsoft's English (US), French (France) and Spanish dictionaries in new TLDs. EI/CPT understands that ICANN may feel it is unreasonable to award all of the words in these dictionaries to one organization. Indeed, we think such a policy would be unreasonable, and urge ICANN to adopt rules against such a name space grab. James Love telephone: 202-387-8030 email: love@cptech.org web: www.cptech.org ----------------------------------------------------- March 1, 2000 letter to ICANN asking to create new Internet Top Level Domains John Richard Essential Information P.O. Box 19405. Washington, DC 20036 http://www.essential.org/ James Love Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 http://www.cptech.org/ March 1, 2000* Esther Dyson Chair Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 Marina del Rey, CA 90292 USA Dear Esther: This letter is to propose that Essential Information be permitted to establish a registry for new top level domains (TLDs). It is our intention to create several TLDs that would facilitate free speech and criticism, and enable consumers, workers and others to organize. Each of these TLDs will be operated under its own management charter. The particular TLDs that we propose include: .union .customers .complaints .sucks .ecology .isnotgreen .isnotfair .shareholder .taxpayer .unite Our plans for each domain are as follows: .union The .union TLD will be a "union label" for cyberspace. EI is working with the international labor union community to develop a management system for .union. Use of the domain would be restricted to bona fide labor unions. Examples of use of this TLD would include: nike.union exxon.union microsoft.union as well as other uses, such as dcprinters.union, for links to union printers in Washington, DC. EI will be holding meetings with members of the labor community to discuss the policies for the management of this domain. It is our goal to use the .union domain to strengthen union organizing efforts, and to make it easier for workers at a firm to communicate with unions that represent workers at the firm, or who are seeking to organize workers at the firm, and for unions in different countries to coordinate efforts with each other. .customers EI will create a self governance management organization for .customers. This domain will be used to create democratically managed membership organizations of the customers of particular companies. The customer organizations would be able to address any number of consumer problems. For example, ford.customers might organize to address safety, service or warranty issues on Ford automobiles. Safeway.customers might organize in favor of labeling of genetically modified foods. Bellatlantic.customers might address Bell Altantic service and pricing issues in regulatory proceedings. Bankofamerica.customers could address ATM charges and other bank fees. The .customers domain will be a cyberspace version of the "Citizens Utilities Boards" that were set up in several US states in the 1970s, funded by voluntary contributions from customers of public utilities. .complaints EI is studying different models for the use of .complaints, to give consumers specific information about mechanisms to address product or company specific complaints, and to permit customers to share information about company practices with each other. .sucks This TLD will be used to facilitate criticism of a firm or organization, such as aol.sucks, wipo.sucks, or even greenpeace.sucks. We would not permit the organization that owned an associated domain to also own .sucks, so it would expand the name space in an important way. The domain would also be available for other uses, such as work.sucks, life.sucks or television.sucks. Our plan is to create an independent non-profit free speech foundation that will be funded by fees from the .sucks registration. The Dot Sucks Foundation (http://dot.sucks) will fund Internet related free speech fights. We recognize the .sucks TLD will be offensive to some persons, but we do not think that this should exclude .sucks from being approved by ICANN. We believe the .sucks domain will be popular in the marketplace, and also generate important funding for the free speech rights of individuals and small organizations. .ecology .isnotgreen These two TLDs will be managed by environmental groups, to create forums to discuss and criticize the environmental policies of businesses, governments and other organizations. .isnotfair This TLD would be used by civil rights groups to discuss issues of discrimination or workers rights. We will be holding discussions with a variety of civil rights organizations to determine the management structure for the TLD. It is our intention to create a space where the public can quickly review a company's record on employment practices. For example, Texaco.isnotfair or coke.isnotfair might have links to information about discrimination suits involving these companies, or to organizations working on various discrimination or fairness issues. .shareholders This TLD will be used by church groups who organize shareholder suits on issues of conscience. .taxpayers The .taxpayers TLD would be given to democratically elected taxpayer organizations that would monitor budgets and management practices of governments. Examples of this TLD would include Arlington.VA.Taxpayers, Anchorage.AK.Taxpayers, London.UK.Taxpayers, Sydney.AU.Taxpayers. .unite EI is evaluating different models for the use of .unite. These are serious proposals to use the power of a TLD to enable citizens to improve civil society. We believe the creation of domains like .union, .customers, .isnotgreen, and .isnotfair will create powerful mechanisms to share information and organize. We would like to meet with the ICANN staff to discuss these proposals further. Sincerely, John Richard Director Essential Information James Love Director Consumer Project on Technology * corrected for typos From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Jul 11 16:03:10 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB0422A05E; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 16:03:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (phelsuma.essential.org [216.0.124.26]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA17748; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 16:02:41 -0400 Message-ID: <396B7A6A.7A32D5DA@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 15:50:02 -0400 From: Vergil Bushnell Organization: Consumer Project on Technology X-Sender: "Vergil Bushnell" <@smtp.essential.org> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-gatewaynet (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: roundtable@cni.org, ecommerce@venice.essential.org, random-bits@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] July 20 E-commerce Roundtable Update The next E-commerce Roundtable will be held on Thursday, July 20 from 12-2 pm in Washington, DC. This meeting of the Roundtable will be hosted by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC). Directions and additional information will be emailed within several days and posted on the Roundtable homepage (www.cptech.org/ecom/Roundtable). Here is the tentative agenda for the July E-commerce Roundtable: Confirmed presenters: -Robin Miller, Slashdot: Why government offices should shift to Linux. -Margot Saunders, National Consumer Law Center: E-sign Act - Linda Golodner, National Consumers League: ISO "Consumer protection in the global marketplace" workshop. -Vergil Bushnell, Consumer Project on Technology: July 27 FCC Protest. Additionally, several representatives of the federal government have been invited to brief the Roundtable. Contact Information: For more information about the July 20 Roundtable meeting, please contact Vergil Bushnell at email: vbushnell@cptech.org phone: 202-387-8030 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jul 13 23:14:38 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFDE02A05E; Thu, 13 Jul 2000 23:14:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA23232; Thu, 13 Jul 2000 23:14:38 -0400 Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 23:14:38 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: info-policy-notes@venice.essential.org, random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Subject: [Random-bits] Labor Unions propose .union TLD The following message is from a group of 13 trade unions and labor union organizations that are proposing .union as a new Internet top level domain. Jamie Love ------- Subject: Expression of interest in proposing a top-level domain for trade unions Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 17:27:25 +0200 From: "Pruett, Duncan" To: "'tld-interest@icann.org'" CC: "'roberts@icann.org'" , "'ncdnhc-discuss@lyris.isoc.org'" , "'nc-tlds@lists.essential.org'" Expression of interest in proposing a top-level domain for trade unions It should be noted that the policies mentioned in this paper are likely to be features of an eventual proposal for a trade union TLD. This paper is meant only as a guideline, however, and it is quite possible that some or all policies mentioned could be altered considerably, following a full discussion among the sponsoring group on the content of a proposal. 1. Self identification The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions is submitting this expression of interest, on behalf of a group of international trade union organisations and their national affiliated organisations. The group of international organisations, referred to hereafter as "the sponsoring group", comprises: =B7 Education International (www.ei-ie.org) =B7 International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (www.icftu.org) =B7 International Federation of Building and Wood Workers (www.ifbww.org) =B7 International Federation of Chemical, Energy, Mine and General Workers'Union (www.icem.org) =B7 International Federation of Journalists (www.ifj.org) =B7 International Metalworkers' Federation (www.imfmetal.org) =B7 International Textile, Garment and Leather Workers' Federation (www.itglwf.org) =B7 International Transport Workers' Federation (www.itf.org.uk) =B7 International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Association (www.iuf.org) =B7 Public Services International (www.world-psi.org) =B7 Trade Union Advisory Committee to the OECD (www.tuac.org) =B7 Union Network International (www.union-network.org) =B7 Universal Alliance of Diamond Workers =20 =20 ICFTU has 216 affiliated organisations in 145 countries and territories, and represents 123 million workers, 39 million of whom are women. The ICFTU membership includes, for example, the AFL-CIO (USA), CLC (Canada), DGB (Germany), TUC (UK), FNV (Holland), COSATU (South Africa), LO and TCO (Sweden), CUT (Brazil), KCTU and FKTU (South Korea), ACTU (Australia). In addition to the sponsoring group listed above, all of these national trade union centres are closely associated with this expression of interest. 2. Brief Description of the structure and purpose of the proposed TLD The Top-Level Domain (TLD) would be chartered (or restrictive). The preferred string for the domain would almost certainly be ".union", although some discussion is taking place as to whether it would be necessary, at some stage, to set up a number of "alias" TLDs to make the TLD more accessible to other language groups (such as ".syndicat" or ".sindicato"). The TLD would be open to registrations from representatives of trade unions which are independent of outside control and have a democratic structure. The purpose of the TLD would be five-fold: a) to provide a strong and clear identity for workers' organisations on the Internet; b) to facilitate the efforts of employees to find and contact trade unions in their country, sector, or enterprise; c) to help internet users identify bona fide trade union organisations, as distinct from bogus unions such as government-sponsored labour fronts, and company-controlled unions; d) to form part of the ongoing international effort to bridge the "digital divide", by building meaning and utility into the Internet for workers, regardless of country, or economic status. e) to facilitate employee and public access to a wide variety of union-sponsored services, including apprenticeship and training programmes, health and pension benefits, family and community services, etc. Registrants: It should be noted that the registrant database would most likely be managed by the sponsoring group. The arrangement would probably involve the creation of a review body comprising the group's 13 organisations. The body would be empowered to accept or reject an application to become a registrant. A review procedure would be set up, to appeal decisions when and where necessary. Registrant organisations would be reviewed according to two leading criteria: a) is the organisation internally democratic? b) Is the organisation free from control by government, political parties, employers or other interests? These are the necessary conditions for the existence of representative workers' organisations capable of engaging in collective bargaining, within the definitions and jurisprudence established by the United Nations' International Labour Organisation. We intend to explore further refinements to ensure practicality and application. Additional criteria may also be identified and considered as well. It should be noted that non-profit organisations, such as apprenticeship and training organisations, affiliated to approved unions, would also qualify as registrants. Through the worldwide networks of the ICFTU, and its review body, a system would be devised to screen potential registrants. Applicants not affiliated directly or indirectly to one of the organisations in the sponsoring group would not be excluded from consideration if their organisation is known to be free and democratic. Registrations of second-level domain names: A contractor would most likely be responsible for "registry operation". Its responsibility would include the technical management and registration of second-level domain names as well as the billing of approved registrants for those registrations. We understand, however, from our contacts with ICANN, that this contractor would need to be identified as an integral part of any proposal made, in order to facilitate the rapid introduction of a "test-bed TLD". It should be noted that a contractor has not yet been identified, and that we feel that our choice of contractor, whose role would be technical, should be evaluated separately from our proposal on the policy for a trade union TLD. A decision coming from ICANN (or from whatever process ICANN sets up to evaluate proposals), rejecting a contractor mentioned in a proposal from us, should not prejudice any future proposals for a trade union TLD, and indeed, should not prevent a decision being taken, in principle, to support a trade union TLD, subject to the identification of a suitable contractor. In cases where it is alleged that the names or acronyms of existing trade union organisations have been registered in bad faith, we expect that we will find the machinery of the Uniform Domain-Name Dispute-Resolution Policy (UDRP) adequate to handle disputes. The sponsoring group would most likely also reserve the right to identify and resolve possible conflicts prior to completion of domain registrations, in order to prevent disputes arising at a later stage. We are seriously thinking about a range of options for segmenting the TLD space, which would be addressed, should a proposal be forthcoming. For example, we would consider devising a system for allocating second and third level names for the purpose of avoiding confusion about which unions are involved in a particular second-level domain, and for directing employees to the union branch or local they may be particularly interested in. Examples: iam.boeing.union, seui.boeing.union, iamlocalxxx.union, seiulocalyyy.union Segmentation by function is another option we might explore. For example, training.carpenters.union might direct people to carpentry apprenticeships and training links. Expected size of domain: It is hard to estimate the number of potential registrations likely to take place in a trade union TLD. The ICFTU's database, for example, contains approximately 2000 trade union organisations. This purpose of this database, however, is primarily to maintain information on international and national trade union organisations, and not union locals or branches, many of which already have their own web site. We expect the overall number of union organisations in the world to be considerably higher - for example, there are about 5,000 registered unions in India and Bangladesh alone. A recent estimate put the figure at 100,000 trade union organisations world-wide. We would also expect that many union organisations would wish to register several domains in a trade union TLD. For example, the Communications Workers of America already has at least one thousand second- or third-level domain names. We would also expect that, at least in the early days, trade union organisations from the wealthier industrialised countries would make up a large proportion of the registrations, since the majority of workers with access to the Internet is currently based in these parts of the world. We foresee a strategy to bridge the "digital divide" and promote greater use of the web by unions from developing countries, by making the cost of domain registrations considerably lower for registrants from poorer nations. Expected use of TLD: Organisation names: Most union organisations are either registered in ccTLDs (country-level TLDs such as ".uk" or ".za") or in the undifferentiated ".org" domain. Although unions would be free to stick with their existing domain registrations, some union organisations might choose to switch their registrations to a trade union TLD. Others might choose to keep an existing registration, while adding a second. Examples: cosatu.union, afl-cio.union, cwa.union, icftu.union Geographic or trade descriptions: Reflecting the way unions have traditionally been structured, it is likely that some registrations might come in the form of descriptions of trades or places: Examples: bricklayers.union, telecoms.union, seattle.union, ontario.union, merseyside.union, southafricanminers.union, american-painters.union We would also support the use of a service, product or company name in connection with a trade union TLD. Unions sponsored services: Union-sponsored services to their members such as training, education and apprenticeship, family and community services, communication, etc. Example: bricklayers-training.union 3. Indication of the likelihood of submitting a formal application for the proposed TLD In order to make a decision which is fully backed by the unions we represent around the world, and in order to fulfil our constitutional obligations, we are bound to consult widely (The ICFTU constitution can be found at this URL: http://www.icftu.org/displaydocument.asp?Index=3D990916420). Among the international trade union bodies, and the affiliates of those bodies, we are currently holding an internal discussion on whether or not we proceed in making a proposal to ICANN. There are many issues which need to be examined before we proceed, and we may very well decide either not to proceed, or to defer an application for a TLD to a later date (that is, we may decide that it is too early for us to decide to apply to be one of the first "test bed" TLDs). =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D James Love, Consumer Project on Technology =20 P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org=20 Washington, DC 20036 | love@cptech.org =20 Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 =20 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jul 14 02:45:40 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58DB72A05E for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 02:45:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA24420 for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 02:45:40 -0400 Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 02:45:40 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] NCC Resolution on new TLDs This is one of five resolutions passed by ICANN's DNSO Non-Commercial constituency. Jamie --- Noncommercial Constituency Resolution in Response to ICANN Staff Notice of June 13, 2000, regarding "Introduction of New Top-Level Domains" Introduction: On June 13, 2000, the ICANN staff issued a notice asking for input on the Introduction of New Top-Level Domains. This resolution is a response by the Noncommercial Constituency to certain high level concerns raised by the notice and its proposed policies for new gTLDs. I. Procedural Objections To meet its goal of introducing new gTLDs as quickly as possible, it is time for the ICANN staff to propose specific rules, in a notice of proposed rulemaking, and allow the noncommercial community and all other ICANN communities to comment upon it. The NCC requests that such specific rules be issued subject to a reasonable public notice to allow review and input about concrete and specific rules. II. The Need for New gTLDs to be Opened by ICANN is Real and Substantial The limited number of general Top Level Domains creates an artificial scarcity of domain names for noncommercial, commercial and individual use and limits and threatens the robustness and activity of the Internet. Domain names are conduits for posting and finding noncommercial and commercial speech. The current gTLD structure imposes an artificial scarcity at the expense of noncommercial speech. There is inadequate space in the current TLD structure to put the domain names of individuals, families, clans, political organizations, religious groups, labor groups, libraries, consumer groups, environmental groups, free speech and open communication groups, professional associations and philanthropic institutions. The need by these organizations and individuals is real and substantial; the speech that these organization and individuals provide to their communities and to the Internet is tremendously valuable. It is up to ICANN to act now. III. New gTLDs Must Be Adopted Without Excessive Intellectual Property Regimes - Either Public or Private A. ICANN Should Not Regulate Intellectual Property Rights; It has neither the mandate nor the expertise to do so. ICANN should not introduce restrictions on the registration of new TLDs based on their connection with famous marks because ICANN does not have the Authority to regulate property rights. The NCC submits that policy-making over intellectual property is inappropriate for ICANN. ICANN was required by the U.S. Govt. White Paper to ask WIPO to convene an international process to develop a set of recommendations for trademark/domain name dispute resolutions. However, ICANN is an institution for technical coordination of the Internet, not property rights policy-making. ICANN has already created Uniform Dispute Resolution Process (UDRP) to resolve trademark disputes, and it should not expand its role in restricting the use of trademarks in domain names. Additional regulation of property rights, such as famous mark restrictions or other forms of trademark protection in domain names - either in an express ICANN rule or in any private registry rules approved by ICANN -- risks dragging ICANN into public policy-making in an area where it has neither competence nor a mandate. Institutions with relevant authority already exist for such matters. The NCC notes the DNSO Working Group B Report (17 April 2000), which reports the consensus view that: "There does not appear to be the need for the creation of a universally famous marks list at this point in time." B. The NCC Supports Use of Corporate and Product Names in Connection with Expressions of Concern and Criticism. The NCC adds that it supports the use of a company, product or service name in connection with a TLD or its domain names that is designed to facilitate organization of consumers or workers for comment, concern and criticism. We call on the appropriate institutions - legal authorities with jurisdiction over trademark disputes -- to permit this use of names. We call on ICANN not to create policies that would limit the use of company, product or service names by domain name holders seeking to use them in for legitimate and protected expressions of concern and criticism. There should be an adequate number of TLDs and diversity of registries to satisfy the needs of the Internet community by region, language, culture, and point of view. IV. ICANN Should Make Clear Its Intention To Continue the Development of New gTLDs in the Near Future. The Current Debate over new gTLDs is one based largely in developed countries. However, with the rapid development of other regions, the need for new gTLDs and their domain names is growing in developing countries in a similar manner to that of developed countries, with a slight time delay. Rather than indicating its willingness to pursue the corporate agenda of extremely slow growth of gTLDs, the NCC resolves that ICANN should adopt a schedule of rapid and substantial expansion of new gTLDs today to meet the existing need. The NCC further resolves that ICANN should also formally commit itself to the sustained and substantial expansion of new gTLDs in the future so that the developing countries will be able to fulfill their needs for new gTLDs as these needs arise. There should be a recognition that as new multilingual character sets become available for the DNS, there should be adequate resources for TLDs to satisfy the needs of the new domain space. The NCC recommends that ICANN adopts the DNSO Working Group C recommendation that new gTLDs be followed by an evaluation period. This evaluation period should include a study of the impact of new gTLDs on developing countries, to ensure that the benefits of new gTLDs are not gained by the developed countries alone. V. Need for Noncommercial and Civil Society gTLDs Must Be A Paramount Concern In This First Round of Openings ICANN should consult with the NCC as a part of the efforts to create new gTLDs. The NCC submits that granting noncommercial gTLDs today will begin to address the critical need for new gTLDs discussed in Section II above, and complement existing domains that are increasingly oriented towards business. Existing gTLDs are predominantly utilized by commercial entities (most notably ".com" but increasingly ".org" and ".net.") Noncommercial gTLDs would serve the "third sector" of private, non-commercial institutions. A "noncommercial or civil society gTLD" model should include generic gTLDs and/or chartered gTLDs to cover a range of activities and interests within the noncommercial arena. The specific character strings of the TLDs that the NCC hereby proposes are not addressed here. These proposals should come from the communities themselves, working with registries who will submit proposals to ICANN. Further, just as in other avenues of communication, the NCC resolves that noncommercial and civil society groups must be free to continue using domains in other TLDs as appropriate, as they do now. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jul 14 02:47:47 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DC9B2A05E; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 02:47:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA24437; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 02:47:47 -0400 Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 02:47:47 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: nc-tlds@venice.essential.org, random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] NCC Resolution on Trademarks This is one five resolutions passed by ICANN's DNSO Non-Commercial constituency. Jamie Trademarks Non-Commercial Constituency Resolution Yokohama - July 13, 2000 1. The purpose of trademark protection, with its traditional limitations and exceptions, is to serve the public interest. For example, to eliminate confusion about the identity of the manufacture of a product, or the name of an organization. For example, names like Sony, Xmission, Greenpeace, or the AFL-CIO are protected so that consumers or the public will connect the use of the name with the correct organization. ICANN should not be a global policy making body on global trademark rights. 2. There are many different approaches to trademark protection in national laws, and many areas of controversy. 3. Not all uses of a trademark should be restricted by trademark protection. For example, the use of a trademark and the term sucks, such as verizonreallysucks.com, or volvoenthusiasts.org, should not be a prohibited use, because they would not be confused with the seller to the branded product or service. ICANNwatch.org is another example of a use that should be protected, because people understand that icannwatch.org is different from icann.org. Nor should it be prohibited for labor unions to create domains such as boeing.union, for purposes of providing information about unions that represent workers at boeing. The purpose of a trademark is not to give the owner the trademark complete control over the use of the trademark, but to avoid confusion over the identity of persons, groups, firms or organizations. 4. The NCC is particularly concerned that rights of free speech, criticism and parody be protected in trademark policy, and that trademarks not be used for anticompetitive reasons. 5. ICANN should not adopt policies to restrict the creation of new top level domains as a mechanism to protect trademarks. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jul 14 02:49:49 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 855002A3A9; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 02:49:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA24445; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 02:49:49 -0400 Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 02:49:49 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: nc-tlds@venice.essential.org, random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] NCC - Resolution on non-commerical TLDs This is one of five resolutions passed by ICANN's DNSO Non-Commercial constituency. Jamie Non-commercial TLDs Non-Commercial Constituency Resolution Yokohama - July 13, 2000 The NCC resolves that chartered non-commercial TLDs be controlled and managed by stakeholders with a bona fide connection to the specific charter. For example, should the .union, .consumer, or .museum TLD be adopted, we support that the .union TLD be controlled and managed by labor unions, .consumer by global consumer organizations, or .museum by bona fide museum organizations. With the exception of limited technical issues that affect Internet navigation and stability, and the selection of a bona fide global body that will control the registry, ICANN should not interfere with the management of non-commercial, chartered TLDs. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jul 14 03:18:39 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B1162A05E; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 03:18:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA24575; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 03:18:39 -0400 Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 03:18:39 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org, Ecommerce@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Stepanek on eWatch http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/july2000/nf00707g.htm PIVACY MATTERS BY MARCIA STEPANEK July 7, 2000 Now, Companies Can Track Down Their Cyber-Critics A new service allows corporate spinmeisters to retaliate against outspoken citizens with "reeducation" efforts -- or worse [snip] From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jul 14 03:47:18 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89C7B2A05E for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 03:47:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA24677; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 03:47:18 -0400 Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 03:47:18 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org, roundtable Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Brett Glass question to me on Conflict of Interest Brett Glass has asked if I have a conflict of interest in Linux, because I have a "close relative" of is the CEO of a Linux company. Well, I do have a cousin, Ransom Love, who is the CEO of Caldera Systems. And, my mother owns 400 shares of Caldera Systems, valued yesterday at $3,650. She also owns stock in Microsoft and several other companies, through mutal funds, and most of my immediate family lives in the Seattle area, where the Microsoft monopoly has been a boon to the local economy. Jamie ------ Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 21:24:29 -0600 To: Vergil Bushnell , roundtable@cni.org, ecommerce@venice.essential.org, random-bits@venice.essential.org From: Brett Glass Subject: Re: [Random-bits] July 20 E-commerce Roundtable Update [snip] It is interesting that your organization continues to push Linux rather than alternative operating platforms which are not part of Mr. Richard Stallman's effort to destroy legitimate business via predatory tactics. Government offices should most certainly NOT embrace software which is licensed under a regime whose purpose is to destroy American businesses. Is it true that Mr. James Love, of your organization, has a close relative who is the CEO of a Linux company and therefore has a conflict of interest in this area? --Brett Glass From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jul 14 05:07:14 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E7DF2A05E for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 05:07:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id FAA25026 for ; Fri, 14 Jul 2000 05:07:14 -0400 Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 05:07:14 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] .geo, an interesting TLD proposal http://www.icann.org/yokohama/eoi4.htm ICANN Yokohama Meeting Topic: Introduction of New Top-Level Domains Expression of Interest #4 Posted: 9 July 2000 Letter Proposal for .geo, a New Global Top Level Domain Dr. Yvan G. Leclerc, SRI International 6/19/2000 In response to ICANN's call for statements of interest in proposing new top level domains (TLDs), SRI International is pleased to propose the formation of a new TLD called ".geo". The primary purpose of .geo is to allow Internet users to find data by the geographic location that the data refer to. Data that refer to a geographic location or area is called georeferenced data. Examples include a 3D model of the Golden Gate Bridge, vacation photos of Yosemite taken with GPS-enabled cameras, the menu for Les Halles in Montreal, a historical document or web site on the Vatican, a weather map of the United States, traditional GIS data, or dynamic data such as the location of a cell phone or airplane. Our proposed TLD, infrastructure, and charter will allow anybody in the world to publish, search for, and access georeferenced metadata for free and in a manner that adheres to established international standards. (Metadata contains elements such as the author, date, data type, geographic location, and URLs pointing to the data itself.) This free and open infrastructure for georeferenced metadata will enable radically new services that are not possible on the Web today by allowing users to transparently browse geospatial data by location. This capability will enable a powerful new paradigm for navigating, accessing, and visualizing georeferenced Web data. Unlike other TLDs, the domains under .geo will not be arbitrary strings, but instead will represent geographic areas with a naming convention that clients will determine by downloading a simple XML schema from the top level .geo domain. Consequently, .geo domains will not be subject to the problems of trademark violations and the like. Indeed, the importance of users knowing domain names and URLs is drastically diminished with this architecture. We believe that .geo warrants the creation of a new TLD because it offers a fundamentally new kind of service on the Internet, one with broad-sweeping implications and influences, one which would encompass a potentially vast distribution of data, and one which encourages a global network of users and providers of those data, much like the Web provides for non-georeferenced data today. We believe that the potential impact and openness of the proposed infrastructure deserves, and indeed requires, the recognition of a charted TLD by ICANN in order to safeguard its free and open access by contract with ICANN. Motivation The National Academy of Sciences estimates that 70% of web-accessible data are georeferenced. Yet, it is currently impossible for a user to find all web-accessible georeferenced data for a given area (or even a significant fraction of the data). That's because the location that the data refers to is typically not a searchable part of the data. Instead, it is either implicit or part of associated metadata. Thus, today's search engine technology is not applicable. A number of companies and organizations have created private or governmental databases that hold a small fraction of all georeferenced data. Companies like Mapquest maintain private map databases with associated street addresses and pointers to businesses like restaurants and shops. Organizations like the Federal Geographic Data Committee maintain government-owned imagery and coordinate data databases that can either be accessed directly or via a Clearinghouse that let's a user find georeferenced data across many databases through a keyword-based search engine. The FGDC Clearinghouse is an example of a database that uses metadata containing the geographic location and URLs of the data. None of these organizations is either capable of, or willing to, create a database that would allow anybody in the world to publish and search georeferenced metadata for free. Indeed, this task is so large that no single, regional, organization could do it alone. What is needed is a coordinated global infrastructure with participating organizations from around the world, as we propose below. The proposed .geo chartered TLD will greatly enhance the probability that such an infrastructure can be built and sustained globally. It would also enable existing search engine and mapping companies to search for georeferenced metadata with minor modifications to their software architectures. New markets for viewing and analysis of this data would emerge and add value to existing commercial web capabilities. Technical Approach We propose to build and maintain an open standards-based infrastructure on .geo that will enable anybody to publish and search for all metadata referring to a given area for free. The infrastructure is based on a hierarchy of servers whose domain names represent geographic areas, nominally of the form minutes.degrees.tendegrees.geo. The exact form of the naming convention will be available as a simple downloadable XML schema from the top level .geo domain. No other names are anticipated beyond a few administrative domains. For example, consider a server with DNS name 10e20n.geo. Since it is a server at the second level of the hierarchy (tendegrees.geo), it is responsible for a 10 degree x 10 degree "cell" of the world. The service area of the cell spans from longitude 10 degrees East and latitude 20 degrees North to longitude 20 degrees East and latitude 30 degrees North. Similarly, server 1e5n.10e20n.geo is responsible for a 1 degree x 1 degree area. Metadata is placed at the appropriate level and position in the hierarchy as a function of the geographic footprint and location of the corresponding data. See http://www.dgeo.org/ for a prototype DNS hierarchy and server that we have built as part of our DARPA-sponsored Digital Earth project. This hierarchy and related software will serve as the basis for our proposed .geo infrastructure. This naming convention and metadata placement strategy allows clients to determine which host(s) to query for metadata referring to a given area, thereby distributing the load over many servers with no single point of failure or congestion. This is a significant advantage over current approaches (such as the FGDC Clearinghouse) in which all client queries pass through a single host. An open source API for publishing, querying, and accessing the metadata will be made freely available. The use of DNS also allows metadata to be transparently moved to new hosts and subdomains as needed. For example, initially all metadata may be physically hosted on a single computer, with all .geo domain names aliased to that machine. But over time, as areas fill with metadata (such as large urban areas), their corresponding subdomain and metadata can be transparently transferred to new computers. These computers may be maintained by other organizations who may, when necessary, transfer data to new computers (and new organizations) deeper in the hierarchy. This distribution and query method drastically reduces the storage and bandwidth requirements of any given server, making it possible for thousands of high-speed visualization systems to be simultaneously searching for and retrieving metadata and data. The .geo hierarchy and distributed infrastructure enables a radically new approach to finding, visualizing, and interacting with data on the web. Instead of searching for data in Web sites or entering keywords into a search engine and looking through the hundreds of resulting links, a user can specify a profile and then simply navigate in 2D or 3D and have the visible data presented within the spatial context of a realistic model of the earth (which will itself be represented in the .geo hierarchy). Spatial data freely available today can, and has been, used to provide a very adequate baseline to build a world model to enable this new browsing paradigm. Of course, a standard textual search engine augmented with a location criterion is still possible. Many other uses for this free and open worldwide index of georeferenced data can be imagined. For example, a complete index of the geographic location of IP-addressed devices, or static and mobile phones, becomes not only possible but quickly accessible. Business Model The .geo hierarchy, were it to be expanded to the smallest cells, would require tens of millions of servers and terrabytes of storage. It would also require appropriate supervision to ensure that the free basic services (publishing, searching, and disseminating of any metadata) are being offered compliant with the appropriate standards and performed adequately. Such an enterprise cannot be sustained without significant financial resources, which are clearly not available from the free basic services. We propose that such resources be obtained through optional, non-free services to data providers. Such optional services would include caching and/or hosting data, and providing various security mechanisms for restricting access to the metadata and/or the cached or hosted data. These optional services would be provided by the franchise owners of the particular domains, who would pass on a fraction of the data-provider fees to the parent domains (ultimately .geo) whose responsibility is to maintain the integrity of the hierarchy beneath them. Domain ownership would be allocated on a franchise basis to qualified commercial or government organizations. Charter The charter of the founding organization for .geo, which we have tentatively called the GeoNIC, would be to define and enforce standards and practices for hosts operating within the .geo hierarchy, including: registering domains (cells) in the hierarchy to qualified commercial or government organizations; enforcing the requirement that cell owners provide free access to the basic services (publishing, querying, and accessing metadata) for all users and data providers; enforcing adherence by cell owners to appropriate international standards (e.g. ISO TC 211) for metadata, data, and access to services; participating in the international bodies that define such standards; providing a framework for testing conformance and ensuring that performance targets are being met; and generally ensuring the integrity of the hierarchy. SRI International as Founding Organization SRI International is a non-profit research institute that is uniquely suited to be the founding organization for the proposed top level .geo domain. Its 2,500 researchers, scientists, technologists and business consultants recently celebrated 50 years of scientific discovery, new technology applications and innovative management approaches that have benefited businesses, governments and organizations worldwide. Its original charter -- to "promote and foster the application of science in the development of commerce, trade and industry [for the] prosperity of mankind" -- remains its mission. As important as its charter and wide-ranging research, engineering, and business experience, SRI has deep roots in the Internet: Arpanet SRI was one of the first two nodes of the Arpanet. NIC SRI served as the Network Information Center (NIC) for over two decades. Furthermore, our team has wide-ranging experience in the creation and use of standards for georeferenced data: Digital Earth SRI's Digital Earth project is currently being funded by DARPA to create a testbed hierarchy that will serve as the basis for the worldwide .geo hierarchy. TerraVision TerraVision is our freely available, multi-platform, network-based terrain browser. It is currently being re-engineered to use the .geo hierarchy. GeoVRML SRI was the founder of, and is the primary contributor to, the GeoVRML Working Group of the Web3D Consortium. GeoVRML is an extension of the ISO standard Virtual Reality Modeling Language (VRML97) that enables the creation of georeferenced 3D models. GeoVRML 1.0 has recently been accepted as a recommended practice by the Web3D Consortium and is being considered for adoption as an ISO standard. Participation in Standards Organizations SRI is an active member of the OpenGIS Consortium and the US Federal Government Digital Earth Working Group, and is formally collaborating with the Alexandria Digital Library Project. When the size of the .geo hierarchy grows beyond certain limits, SRI will transfer management of this hierarchy to a dedicated subsidiary. However, this would only be done with ICANN's approval and guarantees on adherence to the founding principles of open standards and free access defined in the charter. Proposal Team Our team consists of technical and management staff of SRI International, whose headquarters are located at 333 Ravenswood Avenue, Menlo Park, CA 94025. David Scott is located at the Washington, DC, office, located at 1611 North Kent Street, Arlington, VA 22209-2111. The point of contact for technical issues regarding this proposal is Yvan Leclerc. The point of contact for business issues is Michael Summers. Please do not hesitate to contact either of us (or any other member of the team if we are not available) if you have any questions about this proposal. The team currently consists of the following individuals. Dr. Yvan G. Leclerc Sr. Computer Scientist, Artificial Intelligence Center Principle Investigator, Digital Earth Project TerraVision Designer leclerc@ai.sri.com http://www.ai.sri.com/~leclerc Tel: (650) 859-6153 Fax: (650) 859-3735 Mr. Michael Summers Vice-President, Business Development, Software michael.summers@sri.com Tel: (650) 859-5555 Fax: (650) 859-6171 Dr. Martin Reddy Computer Scientist, Artificial Intelligence Center Investigator for SRI'S Digital Earth Project Co-chair of the GeoVRML Working Group TerraVision Software Engineer 3D Visualization Expert reddy@ai.sri.com http://www.ai.sri.com/~reddy Tel: (650) 859-6468 Fax: (650) 859-3735 Dr. Lee Iverson Computer Scientist, Artificial Intelligence Center Investigator for SRI'S Digital Earth Project Co-chair of the GeoVRML Working Group TerraVision Software Engineer Open Source/Standards Expert iverson@ai.sri.com http://www.ai.sri.com/~iverson Tel: (650) 859-3307 Fax: (650) 859-3735 Dr. Michael Eriksen Computer Scientist, Artificial Intelligence Center Investigator for SRI'S Digital Earth Project Digital Earth Infrastructure Software Engineer eriksen@ai.sri.com http://www.ai.sri.com/~eriksen Tel: (650) 859-3389 Fax: (650) 859-3735 Mr. David J. Scott Program Manager GIS Expert david.scott@sri.com Tel: (703) 247-8527 Fax: (703) 247-8537 Comments concerning the layout, construction and functionality of this site should be sent to webmaster@icann.org. ============================================= James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | love@cptech.org Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 ============================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Jul 15 21:37:45 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AE2E2A05E; Sat, 15 Jul 2000 21:37:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA09927; Sat, 15 Jul 2000 21:37:45 -0400 Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 21:37:45 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org, nc-tlds@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN votes to create new TLDs ICANN just voted to create new TLDs. There was surprising support within the board for diversity of models for the test TLDs, for non-commerical TLDs, for different business models, different regions, and even for relatively high numbers compared to expectations by some. Several said it should be 6 to 10, the WG -C recommendation. Others, such as Vint, were very negative on the numbers, suggesting 1 or maybe 2 or 3. The actual numbers for the test TLDs will be determined later, after a review of the applications. It should be noted that Mike Roberts, the ICANN CEO, was very conservative, and is in general quite hostile to civil society type concerns. Esther was very good on the diversity issue, she really pushed this right off the bat, effectively, and Ken Fockler was very good too. Pindar pushed a bit, and even Jon Cohen was pretty positive. Hans Kraaijenbrink was also good on the issues of numbers and diversity. Fitzsimmons and Conrades were negative on the numbers, asking for very slow role out. Linda Wilson jumped into the go slow camp. One big problem was the $50k non-refundable application fee, the high end of the staff recommendation. This makes it very costly to apply, particularly given the small chance that a particular application will be approved. Jamie ============================================= James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | love@cptech.org Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 ============================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Jul 15 23:07:28 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FD952A30E for ; Sat, 15 Jul 2000 23:07:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA11686 for ; Sat, 15 Jul 2000 23:07:28 -0400 Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 23:07:28 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] TLD fees One of the issues in the TLD debate concerns the non-refundable fees for a new TLD application. Before the meeting, an ICANN staff paper said the fees would be $7,500 to $50,000, assuming 7 to 20 applications would be submitted. During the public comment period, People said the fees would be a problem for the non-commercial proposals. However, the staff proposal, which was approved by the Board today, choose a flat non-refundable $50,000 fee, the high end. I have asked Mike Roberts, the ICANN CEO, and some ICANN board members, to raise the issue of whether or not this fee would "disappear" if an application is rejected in the first round, or if the application would have to pay again to be considered in the second round or third round. Mike said he had an open mind, as did one board member, but the issue has not been addressed by the board. We will press ICANN to at least make the fee a credit to another application, and also ask the board to create tiered fees for different types of TLDs, and even fee waivers. In the first round, there is really very little information regarding what would succeed, in terms of an application, and indeed, the board has indicated that the numbers will be limited, even if there are a large number of "qualifed" and quality applications. The board also did not make any distinctions between fees for a commercial TLD, that would be worth millions if approved, and a non-commercial TLD that would be run as a public service. Many see this as running the risk that there will be big barriers to some of the types of applications that would meet various civil society goals. Jamie ============================================= James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | love@cptech.org Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 ============================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Jul 15 23:15:26 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86EBC2A05E for ; Sat, 15 Jul 2000 23:15:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA11734 for ; Sat, 15 Jul 2000 23:15:26 -0400 Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 23:15:26 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Subject: Re: [Random-bits] TLD fees In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sat, 15 Jul 2000, James Love wrote: > I have asked Mike Roberts, the ICANN CEO, and some ICANN board members, > to raise the issue of whether or not this fee would "disappear" if an > application is rejected in the first round, or if the application > would have to pay again to be considered in the second round or third > round. Whoops, I didn't say this very well. What I meant is, will the fee only apply to the first round, or be credited to a future round? Jamie ============================================= James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | love@cptech.org Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 ============================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Jul 16 01:09:11 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC5862A05E for ; Sun, 16 Jul 2000 01:09:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA12217 for ; Sun, 16 Jul 2000 01:09:11 -0400 Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 01:09:11 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Brock on $50k TLD fee Subject: RE: [Random-bits] TLD fees Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 21:39:41 -0700 From: "Meeks, Brock" To: "'James Love'" , random-bits@venice.essential.org This 50k non-refundable fee is fucking extortion. All this talk about making this process inclusive and open and then ICANN sets the bar to simply toss your hat in the ring at $50k? It's a fucking TLD Poll Tax folks... they should be ashamed. <------end Brock's missive-------> Brock, It is my impression from talking with ICANN board members, that the $50k non-refundable application fee for the TLD testbed is designed to generate a "resource infusion" (in the words of one board member) for ICANN. Then, if you "win," and have permission to create a TLD, you pay fee to ICANN for being a registry, plus fees for paticipation in various DNSO activities. The ICANN board is explicit that test bed applications will rejected, even if they are qualified on technical grounds, because the test bed will be delibertly smaller than demand. The early applications will likely generate a lot of money for ICANN. 20 applications would generate 20 percent of ICANN's budget. Jamie ============================================= James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | love@cptech.org Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 ============================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Jul 16 01:24:41 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DF2D2A05E for ; Sun, 16 Jul 2000 01:24:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA12287; Sun, 16 Jul 2000 01:24:39 -0400 Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 01:24:39 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: "Meeks, Brock" Cc: random-bits@venice.essential.org Subject: RE: [Random-bits] Brock on $50k TLD fee In-Reply-To: <25982F19D886D11180460000F840014406007927@msnbcsea01> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sat, 15 Jul 2000, Meeks, Brock wrote: > Yes, I understand this. I also know that a registry isn't rocket science. > Having to put up this kind of money "just to play the game" is like making > people pay to enter a horse in the Kentucky Derby and then if they have to > scratch the horse, saying that they still have to pay the entry fee even > though did run the race. > > Having the "winners" pay up seems feasible as there will be financial gain > to running the registry if the TLD catches on (and it's not a given that it > will). Making people kick in $50k upfront is just wrong. Brock, Hey, I agree with you. I don't see how ICANN can solicit a very wide range of proposals for a test bed if they charge $50k, and say in advance that most will be rejected, and they don't even have a known (real) criteria for approval. The fee will limit the types of proposals, at a time when they should be seeking more diversity and creativity. When approved and up and running, these new TLDs will generate additional "resources" (ICANN isn't using the "tax" word much) for ICANN. Jamie > > -----Original Message----- > From: James Love [mailto:love@cptech.org] > Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2000 1:09 AM > To: random-bits@venice.essential.org > Subject: [Random-bits] Brock on $50k TLD fee > > > Subject: RE: [Random-bits] TLD fees > Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 21:39:41 -0700 > From: "Meeks, Brock" > To: "'James Love'" , > random-bits@venice.essential.org > > This 50k non-refundable fee is fucking extortion. All this talk about > making this process inclusive and open and then ICANN sets the bar to > simply toss your hat in the ring at $50k? > > It's a fucking TLD Poll Tax folks... they should be ashamed. > > <------end Brock's missive-------> > > Brock, > > It is my impression from talking with ICANN board members, that the > $50k non-refundable application fee for the TLD testbed is designed to > generate a "resource infusion" (in the words of one board member) for > ICANN. Then, if you "win," and have permission to create a TLD, you pay > fee to ICANN for being a registry, plus fees for paticipation in various > DNSO activities. > > The ICANN board is explicit that test bed applications will rejected, > even if they are qualified on technical grounds, because the test bed > will be delibertly smaller than demand. The early applications will > likely generate a lot of money for ICANN. 20 applications would > generate 20 percent of ICANN's budget. > > Jamie > > ============================================= > James Love, Consumer Project on Technology > P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org > Washington, DC 20036 | love@cptech.org > Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 > ============================================= > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Random-bits mailing list > Random-bits@lists.essential.org > http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/random-bits > ============================================= James Love, Consumer Project on Technology P.O. Box 19367 | http://www.cptech.org Washington, DC 20036 | love@cptech.org Voice 202/387-8030 | Fax 202/234-5176 ============================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Jul 16 01:27:13 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 288812A05E; Sun, 16 Jul 2000 01:27:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA12293; Sun, 16 Jul 2000 01:27:13 -0400 Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 01:27:13 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Cc: nc-tlds@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Richard Sexton on ICANN decision on TLDs ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 01:23:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Richard J. Sexton To: love@cptech.org Subject: Some questions I just sent this to every icann board member individually. In case you hadn't heard, they just voted to approve tld apps that cost $50K USD each, due oct 1, non refundable, no criteria, and they don't know hw many they'll approve as a "proof of concept", but it's between 2 and 8. I doubt doing this will have any effect whatsoever, but I felt bettrr for having done it. Hi; I watched with interest the board meeting about new tlds. Here is my response, and if you have time to answer that would be great. 1) What do you mean "proof of concept" ? What is so unknown about adding a TLD that we arbitrarily call a "gTLD" as opposed to a TLD we arbitrarily call a "ccTLD" ? Especially in the light of things like .nu, .tv, and so on. There was no proof of concept or application fee at all for cctlds - no gatekeeper, no checks to see how robust or fiscally responsible the idea, no proposal, yet despite all this, not ONE cctld has failed. What are you guys so scared of? 2) All the world is not .com It's a common fallacy that any new tls is competion for .com, almost as common is "dns is not a directory service". No, it isn't, it's a distributed database that can be used for many things. One thing it could be used for *is* a directory service. For example, for 3 years I've run the .NIC zone, which is nothing more than a way to find how to register a tld in any given zone. If you point your DNS nameserver at 199.166.24.1 then you can type in http://.nic into the location line of Netscape and find the registration authority for . There is no "cost to registr" into the .NIC zone, and the work to keep it up to date is roughly an hour a month. Talk of "data escrow", "internet stability", "IP issues" and "TLD application fees" for something like this is absurd. Not all TLDS are cut in the same cloth as .com; get out of that mindset! 3) We're paying you to catch up ? You have no idea what you want in a TLD application, you have no experience in this area and the only thing you're sure of is it'll cost $50K USD. Back 5 years ago Jon Postel suggested $100K. Everybody freaked out and tumbped their nose. In his second draft he suggested $10K and 2%. People had the same reaction. There are people who have been coordinating root zones for years and I suggest if staff thinks it will cost $50K to scrutinize a tld applicaiton then you should get new staff! This number seems to me to have been dragged out of thin air to make up for ICANN's lack of funding. How many businesses could get away with saying "send us your applicaton, and $50K non-refundable and your proposal. We don't know what we want, you have a slim chance of being accepted, we've never done this before, everybody before you got in free but we'll "take money from anybody" to quote Ken Stubbs. Nobody wants new tlds more than I do, but I'd be willing to wait a bit longer till you guys got more of a handle on this. -- rich@rd.sexton http://ph-1.613.473.1719 It's about travel on expense accounts to places with good beer. - BKR From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Jul 18 16:56:34 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B61252A05E; Tue, 18 Jul 2000 16:56:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (phelsuma.essential.org [216.0.124.26]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA16762; Tue, 18 Jul 2000 16:56:03 -0400 Message-ID: <3974C157.E4857F3A@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 16:43:03 -0400 From: Vergil Bushnell Organization: Consumer Project on Technology X-Sender: "Vergil Bushnell" <@smtp.essential.org> (Unverified) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-gatewaynet (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: roundtable@cni.org, ecommerce@venice.essential.org, random-bits@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] July 20 E-commerce Roundtable Update E-commerce Roundtable Update WHEN: Thursday, July 20 from 12-2 pm. WHERE: This month's Roundtable will be hosted by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC). This Roundtable will be a brown-bag meeting. DIRECTIONS: EPIC's office is located at 1718 Connecticut Avenue, NW, close to the Dupont Circle metro stop. From the North exit of the Dupont Circle metro, continue up Connecticut Avenue (away from Dupont Circle), past the Odeon cinema. EPIC's office is right next to Burrito Brothers at 1718 Connecticut Ave, 2nd floor (suite 200). EPIC can be reached at 202-483-1140. AGENDA: -Robin Miller, Slashdot: Why government offices should shift to Linux. -Margot Saunders, National Consumer Law Center: E-sign Act -Linda Golodner, National Consumers League: ISO "Consumer protection in the global marketplace" workshop. -Vergil Bushnell, Consumer Project on Technology: July 27 FCC/ Open Access Protest. CONTACT INFORMATION: For more information about the July 20 E-commerce Roundtable, please contact Vergil Bushnell. email: vbushnell@cptech.org phone: 202-387-8030 Additionally, the E-commerce Roundtable homepage can be found at www.cptech.org/ecom/Roundtable From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Jul 19 15:00:52 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5B3D2A05E for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2000 15:00:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA31015 for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2000 15:00:52 -0400 Message-ID: <3975FB46.3F30E3DD@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 15:02:30 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] RMS/Brett Glass history Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 13:08:19 -0600 (MDT) From: Richard Stallman To: James Love , random-bits@venice.essential.org, nc-tlds@venice.essential.org, tld-interest@icann.org Subject: Brett Glass Reply-To: rms@gnu.org You need to be aware of the history between Brett Glass and me. He got angry, a couple of years ago, that the GNU GPL (the license I wrote for use in the GNU system) does not give him permission to use my code in his proprietary software. He believes I have no moral right to refuse him such use of my code, and that by doing so, I am unfairly sabotaging his business. He does not however apply the same principle to himself and conclude that he is morally obliged to share his program's code with me. Ever since then, he has displayed a pattern of attacking me in any and every forum, much as he has done here. His attacks often exaggerate and often misrepresent my views. If you'd like to know where I actually stand, I refer you to the articles in http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/. ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jul 21 14:35:23 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D4EE2A05E; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 14:35:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA28878; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 14:35:23 -0400 Message-ID: <39789860.A1ABCB9@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 14:37:20 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] US PTO roundtable on businss methods - panel members Yesterday the US Patent and Trademark Office told me that my nomination to participate as a panel member at the July 27 US PTO roundtable on business methods patents was rejected. Here is a list of the people that the USPTO has approved to participate on the roundtable discussion. While it is true that there are a few business methods patent critics included, such as Tim O'Reilly, plus some thoughtful academics such as Thomas and Lerner or professional organizations such as IEEE, there are zero persons from consumer organizations included. In contrast, the various industry groups were permitted to speak for themselves, or send their agents, including several, such as Kupfeschmid (representing SIIA) or Kushan (clients include Merk, PhRMA and others), who are ex PTO employees. One wonders what broad spectrum of opinion the US PTO is listening too if it feels comfortable in completely excluding consumer organizations from participation. Jamie PANEL NAME AFFILIATION Armitage, Robert Eli Lilly Banner, Pamela I. Banner & Witcoff, LTD Goldberg, Eric M. American Insurance Association Keyack, Albert DirectWeb, Inc. Kuester, Jeffrey R. Thomas, Kayden, Horstemeyer & Risley, LLP Kupferschmid, Keith Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA) Kursman, Scott Securities Industry Association (SIA) Kushan, Jeffrey P. Powell, Goldstein, Frazier & Murphy, LLP Laurie, Ron Skadden, Arps Lerner, Joshua Harvard Business School Linck, Nancy Guilford Pharmaceuticals Menell, Peter University of California School of Law Nydegger, Rick Wortman, Nydegger & Seeley/AIPLA O'Reilly, Tim O'Reilly Publishing Reidinger, Jerry A. Perkins Coie Romain, Patrick Merrill Lynch Sander, Scott T. Sightsound.com Tenney, Glenn IEEE Thomas, Jay George Washington University Law School Wallach, Steven I. Pennie & Edmonds, LLP ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jul 21 14:54:38 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD7252A05E; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 14:54:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA29286; Fri, 21 Jul 2000 14:54:38 -0400 Message-ID: <39789CE5.3D61BDE8@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 14:56:37 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] USPTO white paper on business methods http://www.uspto.gov/web/menu/busmethp/index.html New US PTO White Paper on Automated Finanical or Management Data Processing Methods (Business Methods). -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Jul 22 11:00:23 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C31D02A05E for ; Sat, 22 Jul 2000 11:00:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA03466 for ; Sat, 22 Jul 2000 11:00:23 -0400 Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 11:00:23 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Henry Jenkins on Digital Land Grab Thank to David Akin for the pointer: From MIT's Technology Review: Digital Land Grab Media corporations are stealing our cultural heritage. Can we take it back? By Henry Jenkins http://www.techreview.com/articles/ma00/viewpoint.htm "Preparing for this new era, media companies are expanding their legal control over intellectual property as far and as wide as possible, strip-mining our culture in the process. They have made inventive uses of trademark law to secure exclusive rights to everything from Spock's pointy ears to Superman's cape, pushed policies that erode the remaining protections for fair use, and lobbied for an expansion of the duration of their copyright protection and thus prevented works from falling into the public domain until they've been drained of value. In the end, we all suffer a diminished right to quote and critique core cultural materials. Imagine what our holiday season would look like if Clement Moore had trademarked Santa Claus! From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Jul 23 10:19:48 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53F842A05E for ; Sun, 23 Jul 2000 10:19:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA10833 for ; Sun, 23 Jul 2000 10:19:48 -0400 Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 10:19:48 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Sarah Ryle on MS/UK complaint re Inland Revenue software http://www.observer.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,346184,00.html Microsoft's Revenue deal nets complaint Sarah Ryle Sunday July 23, 2000 An exclusive deal between Microsoft and the Inland Revenue has provoked a complaint to the Office of Fair Trading about alleged anti-competitive behaviour. The complaint, supported by Basda, the computer software industry's professional body, says the Revenue is acting unfairly by promoting a Microsoft program and supplying it free to people wanting to file tax returns online. Questions are being asked about the role of Phil Stradling, a Microsoft staff member seconded to the Revenue. He supervised the 12 months of work which created the system. Basda's chief executive, Dennis Keeling, said it was Stradling who invited him to recruit from among his 350 company members for an official working party which originally consisted of just Microsoft and Which? Soft ware magazine. Keeling's 20 recruits were initially suspicious that they would devote time to the project to Microsoft's benefit, with no gains for themselves. One of those companies, Forbes Computer Systems, devised the format now used by the Revenue to facilitate the Microsoft software. Managing director David Forbes is furious that his tax returns package is among those which have effectively been elbowed out of the market by the deal with Microsoft. 'The fact that the person in charge of the process is on the Microsoft staff does not look good,' he said. 'They have taken the market leader and given it preferential treatment. It has all been an absolute waste of time. We were given repeated guarantees that this would not happen. We were told it would be a level playing field.' [snip] -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jul 24 11:36:01 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2415A2A05E for ; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 11:35:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA21755 for ; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 11:35:57 -0400 Message-ID: <397C62F2.604838B3@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 11:38:26 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Aharonian on USPTO patent 5,947,957 on web access for manufacturing execution systemr Subject: PATNEWS: 2700 shakeup; totally pathetically crappy business method patent Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 10:34:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Gregory Aharonian !20000724 2700 shakeup; totally pathetically crappy business method patent [snip] ==================== A business method patent issued in December 1998 that is so atrocious, pathetic, crappy (feel free to insert your own insults here) that it raises questions on just what should be the main focus of discussion at Thursday's business method Roundtable. The patent first: Trivial concepts: - automated manufacturing system with data I/O lines - http server Apply the Landis transformation: - Patent 5,947,957 Web access for a manufacturing execution system Base Ten Systems - Filed June 1997 What is claimed: A method for remotely accessing batch status information from a manufacturing execution system, comprising the steps of: providing a web page server connected to a manufacturing execution system network and to a digital network; accesing the web page server over the digital network using a web browser program and downloading a batch status review query program as a web applet from the web page server; and running the web applet within the web browser program to access data from the manufacturing execution system network via the web page server to obtain batch status information. What a complete joke - connecting an HTTP server to some factory machines. The first clause is trivial, the second clause obvious from the nature of Web page serving (by definition, web page servers are connected to digital networks and accessed using a web browser, so these words in clauses 1 and 2 are redundant), and the third clause, well heck, Carnegie Mellon as early as the 1980s had a manufacturing machine (where you put in pieces of metal and out came other pieces of metal with a liquid inside) from which you could obtain status information from over the Internet - okay it was the infamous Carnegie Mellon Coke machine - but still clause three's use of applets in 1997 was trivial in light of early 1990s use of scripts inside multimedia Internet browsers. Not only does the business method patent suffer from the usual problem of not citing ample amounts of relevant non-patent prior art, but even worse, this patent was a First Office Action issuance where no patent examination really goes on (the applicant gets the original claims submitted). The patent application was filed July 1997, scanned into the computers in Sept. 1997, dispatched from pre-exam in Nov. 1997, docketed Feb. 1998 (all paper shuffling activities), and then magic - in July 1998 a notice of allowance was issued. The examiner apparently didn't think such a broad trivial patent warranted any examination. So why bother bringing in industry experts in business methods to lecture examiners, and why bother building collections of business method prior art for examiners to use (and all of the other wonderfully misguided suggestions that people will offer at the Roundtable), if the examiners aren't even going to examine the patents because they are under too much pressure to meet their quotas? Now you might argue that this is an isolated case (a First Office Action citing no non-patent prior art for a software patent), but a) it probably isn't, and b) who the heck knows, inside or outside the PTO, because of the unprofessional lack of quality statistics on patent examination operations, inside or outside the PTO. Roundtable speaker who don't talk about this issue of more indepth statistical quality control aren't really being serious about dealing with these issues (again Mr. Armitage, now of Eli Lilly, being the perfect person to do so, given Eli Lilly's widescale use of statistical process control for all of its manufacturing operations, which without we would all be shorting Eli Lilly stock bigtime). Additionally, what is a business method patent to have a roundtable on such a specific topic? The patent above is for monitoring the status of a manufacturing environment, which certainly is a method of doing business well establised in industry. I argue that business methods does not mean just forms of electronic commerce where money is exchanged somewhere, but rather any operation or procedure that a business engages in, such as this monitoring of a manufacturing system. But isn't this just a software patent at its heart, as are the majority of all business method patents? Yes, but we cannot concede this at the roundtable because we then have to ask the PTO and the patent bar why since Compton's has no progress been made handling software patents (which the transfer of Mr. Goldberg is essentially conceding), in light of the hearings on software patents in 1994 and 1999 and the hearing on obviousness (I think in 1995), all equivalents if not more so of the roundtable? And to some extent, isn't one of the big problems with business method patents a problem of software patents more broadly, and all technology areas of patenting in general - the pressure on examiners to turn out patents to meet the patenting quantity demands of the PTO's corporate "customers"? I mean, how much contempt did Ten Base Systems have for the patent system to submit such a broadly trivial patent as the above, and not only not seek out any non-patent prior art which they had to know had to be out there, but also not protest getting a First Office Action issuance? Don't tell me many corporations aren't out there stocking up as many patents, good or bad, as possible. Get the patent first, then ask questions. No progress can be made on improving the quality of business method, software and/or Internet patents until we first start out with statistical analysis of the workflow operations of patent examiners. But for forty years, the PTO and patent bar have at best shown absolutely no interest in doing so. What are they afraid that will be found out by such a study? That the most honest move of PTO facilities shouldn't be from Crystal City to Alexandria but to Potemkin? I hope such questions will be raised and answered Thursday, and if not, those of you really interested in such matters like myself and attending will ask the panelists and PTO officials. Greg Aharonian Internet Patent News Service -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jul 24 13:38:21 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E19C82A05E; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 13:38:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA24033; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 13:38:20 -0400 Message-ID: <397C7FA2.D0A28A9D@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 13:40:50 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] Is internet prescribing safe? Yes, according to this study Subject: [e-drug] Is internet prescribing safe? Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 06:55:07 -0400 (EDT) From: "Wilbert Bannenberg" To: e-drug@usa.healthnet.org E-DRUG: Is internet prescribing safe? ------------------------------------------------------ [A not-yet-peer reviewed study in the electronic Lancet website concludes that Internet prescribing for sildenafil is safe. Maybe this is worth a discussion? Copied from the Lancet website as fair use; see http://www.thelancet.com/eprint/30/index.html for the full article. Wilbert Bannenberg, co-moderator E-drug] Internet-based prescription of sildenafil: a 2104-patient series Miles J Jones Consultative & Diagnostic Pathology, Inc, 1704 SE 11th Street, Lee's Summit, MO 64081, USA (M J Jones MD) Correspondence to: Dr Miles J Jones (FinalDoc@mindspring.com) Lancet Eprint 2000; 00ART/5398: UR Context: The Internet is becoming increasingly important as a way for patients to acquire medical information and as a means for patient-physician communication. Questions about appropriate use of this new technology have been brought to the fore by the many patients using the Internet to seek sildenafil prescriptions. Objective: To present the first description of a physician designed and directed Internet-based prescribing system of sildenafil, together with data covering more than 2100 patient encounters. Design: Retrospective analysis of a large case series, with informal comparison to patients seen in a conventional inner city hospital clinic practice setting. Setting: A medical practice that prescribes sildenafil based on medical and sexual histories obtained through a physician designed and directed World Wide Web site. For comparison, we utilized patients from clinics at a Midwestern inner city medical center. Patients: All 2104 Internet patients seeking sildenafil prescriptions between June 14, 1998, and March 1, 1999, and all 36 medical center patients obtaining sildenafil prescriptions during the same period. Main outcome measures: Completeness of medical record; patient safety as noted by the follow up responses of all patients requesting refills, any comments received by the internet site (webmaster), and patient or physician comments noted in the clinic medical record; satisfaction as noted by the follow up responses of all patients requesting refills, any comments received by the internet site (webmaster), and patient or physician comments noted in the clinic medical record; examinations and laboratory tests. Results: Fifty-six percent of Internet requests came from 46 states, and 44% from 8 foreign countries. Of 2104 requests, 2100 were granted. Three hundred ten patients have requested medication refills: All reported erections sufficient for intercourse and 69% said their satisfaction exceeded all expectations; none were at all dissatisfied. Side effect rates were comparable to those in the literature. Comparison of the medical history obtained from Internet patients with that recorded in clinic patientsí charts revealed that the former was far more complete. No clinic patient received any examination or laboratory test specific for erectile dysfunction or its causes. There were no reported deaths or serious complications in either group. Conclusions: Internet-based sildenafil prescribing provides the physician with a complete and very detailed medical and sexual history for 100% of patients without denying any information routinely obtained in a direct patient contact setting. Internet-based practice, which may be expected to require far fewer healthcare resources than traditional settings, rates very high in patient satisfaction among patients requesting a refill and because no negative comments were received from all other patients. Overall, these data support the safety and effectiveness of Internet prescribing of selected medications. -- Send mail for the `E-Drug' conference to `e-drug@usa.healthnet.org'. Mail administrative requests to `majordomo@usa.healthnet.org'. For additional assistance, send mail to: `owner-e-drug@usa.healthnet.org'. -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jul 24 21:51:20 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F6702A315 for ; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 21:51:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA32153 for ; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 21:51:17 -0400 Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 21:51:17 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] FCC protest on open access ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 20:26:20 -0400 From: Vergil Bushnell PROTECT THE INTERNET! OPEN ACCESS PROTEST AT THE FCC! WHEN: Thursday, July 27 from 12-1 pm. WHERE: Outside the Federal Communications Commission building, 445 12th St, SW, Washington, DC 20554. CONTACT: Vergil Bushnell email: vbushnell@cptech.org phone: 202-387-8030 fax: 202-234-5176 There will be a protest against the Federal Communications Commission from 12-1 pm on next Thursday, July 27. This demonstration will focus on the FCC's continued refusal to ensure that cable companies offer Open Access to their broadband platforms. The theme of the protest is "Protect the Internet." The July 27th demonstration will take place outside of the FCC's offices and will coincide with the Commission's hearing on the proposed AOL/Time-Warner merger. Here is a brief summary of the issues involved in the Open Access controversy. For more detailed background information, please refer to CPT's Open Access website: http://www.cptech.org/ecom/openaccess Currently, most residential consumers have two choices for broadband Internet connectivity -- DSL and cable modem. DSL operators, because they use telephone lines, are required by the FCC to open up their lines to competing ISPs. Cable modem operators, on the other hand, are not subject to any common carrier type obligations. Cable operators have announced a variety of plans to build an infrastructure with differential levels of service for content providers (fast, faster or slower pipes, depending upon the level of service). The history of the cable service is to discriminate in favor of affiliated services, and to use bottlenecks to influence the distribution of video content. Now cable operators want the freedom to speed up access to affiliated or favored Internet content, while deliberately putting others on a slower service. There are also issues regarding opportunities of the cable companies to pick winners and losers in software applications that run on higher tiered cable platforms. This has the potential to turn the present Internet platform, which is a level playing field, into something much different. Consider, for example, a quote from this 1999 document from Cisco Systems, "Controlling Your Network - A Must for Cable Operators." According to Cisco, a firm providing hardware and software for the proprietary cable platforms, cable operators will be able to: "restrict the incoming push broadcasts [from competitors] as well as subscribers' outgoing access to the push information site to discourage its use. At the same time, you could promote and offer your own or partner's services with full-speed features to encourage adoption of your services, while increasing network efficiency." The FCC chairman, Mr. William Kennard, has been outspoken in his opposition to proposals that the cable companies be required by the government to provide non-discriminatory (paid) access to the platforms for content delivery. In June, he issued an FCC press release, stating he trusted the AT&T CEO to do the right thing. The goal of this protest is to convince him that his passive policy of "watchful waiting" is a mistake, and that the F.C.C. needs to protect the Internet. Specifically, the FCC should require the cable companies to provide open and nondiscriminatory access to the platforms for Internet content delivery. Vergil Bushnell Consumer Project on Technology email: vbushnell@cptech.org phone: 202-387-8030 http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Jul 25 13:13:06 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3572F2A319 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:13:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA08013 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:13:06 -0400 Message-ID: <397DCB42.DAFD50F4@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:15:46 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] S. 2902 Tommorrow, the US Senate holds hearings on S 2902, the so called "Broadband Internet Regulatory Relief Act of 2000. I could not get a copy of the bill from Thomas. It was introduced on July 20, 2000. http://www.senate.gov/~commerce/press/106-200.htm -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Jul 25 18:12:11 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3CFF2A31C for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 18:12:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA13359 for ; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 18:12:11 -0400 Message-ID: <397E115E.B7322E0B@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 18:14:54 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] David Cassel on Hotel AOL http://ispworld.com/bw/jul/Welcome_AOL_Hell.htm -- Welcome to the Hotel AOL Where Customers Check In, But They Don?t Check Out by David Cassel Boardwatch Magazine One angry subscriber suggested AOL should simply re-write its slogan. ?You?re so easy to use, it?s no wonder we?re number one.? Is AOL retaining members against their will? Though AOL users love to chat sometimes, when they call to cancel their accounts, AOL won?t even answer the phone. And many users have reported that even after they?ve cancelled the accounts, AOL keeps taking their money. [snip] ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Jul 25 22:36:06 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A40A2A05E; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 22:36:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-10.essential.org [216.0.125.10]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA17264; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 22:36:05 -0400 Message-ID: <397E5B3B.75200CD3@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:30:04 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , nc-tlds@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Roving Reporter on ICANN Pretty interesting report on ICANN by the Revoing Reporter: http://www.tbtf.com/roving_reporter/ Tue Jul 25 00:54:25 EDT 2000 Three new gTLDs The roving_reporter "predicts" that ICANN will promote the following three new gTLDs: James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Jul 26 22:35:28 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F0082A061 for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:35:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA02824 for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:35:28 -0400 Message-ID: <397FA09F.C7D03D02@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:38:23 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Patent on Method of Putting: US Patent 5,616,089 The US PTO has changed its mind, much to my surprise, and I will be participating in tomorrow's roundtable on business methods patents, at least until I have to hurry off to the FCC to participate on the en banc panel on the AOL/Time-Warner merger. In reading John Thomas's September 1999 article, the Patenting of the Liberal Professions, I found this cite to US Patent 5,616,089, Method of putting, that was issued fittingly enough on April 1, 1997. That patent, which is real, has the following abstract: http://164.195.100.11/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1='5616089'.WKU.&OS=PN/5616089&RS=PN/5616089 Abstract A method of putting features the golfer's dominant hand so that the golfer can improve control over putting speed and direction. The golfer's non-dominant hand stabilizes the dominant hand and the orientation of the putter blade, but does not otherwise substantially interfere with the putting stroke. In particular, a right-handed golfer grips the putter grip with their right hand in a conventional manner so that the thumb on the right hand is placed straight down the top surface of the putter grip. The golfer addresses the ball as if to stroke the putter using only the right hand. Then, the golfer takes the left hand and uses it to stabilize the right hand and the putter. To do this, the golfer places their left hand over the interior wrist portion of the right hand behind the thumb of the right hand with the middle finger of the left hand resting on the styloid process of the right hand. The golfer presses the ring finger and the little finger of their left hand against the back of the right hand. The golfer also presses the palm of the left hand against the putter grip and squeezes the right hand with the left hand. The golfer then takes a full putting stroke with the above described grip. ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Jul 26 23:28:50 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 552CD2A061; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 23:28:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA03549; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 23:28:50 -0400 Message-ID: <397FAD21.2668BE65@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 23:31:45 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , upd-discuss Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] A few more golfing patents Here are a few more of the 2259 patents (for 1999-2000) that popped up searching on the word golf. Jamie http://164.195.100.11/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=4&u=/netahtml/search-bool.html&r=190&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=curr&s1=golf&OS=golf&RS=golf Number: 6,071,199 Method of correction of golf swing Abstract In order to correct a golf swing, a main grip formed at an end portion of a shaft of a golf club is held by a hand opposite to a writing hand of a user, and an auxiliary grip attached to a middle of the shaft is held by the writing hand of the user. While holding the main and auxiliary grips by the left and right hands, the shaft is swung. The auxiliary grip is located near and substantially parallel to the main grip and is disposed at a side ahead of the main grip in a swinging direction of the golf club to be spaced from the main grip for a predetermined space. Thus, when the main and auxiliary grips are grasped by left and right hands, the backs of the left and right hands contact each other between the main and auxiliary grips to restrain a wrist of the writing hand by the back of the hand opposite to the writing hand. Accordingly, the correct swing of the golf club can be practiced. http://164.195.100.11/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=4&u=/netahtml/search-bool.html&r=163&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=curr&s1=golf&OS=golf&RS=golf Golf handicap system and methods Number: 6,074,312 Abstract The invention provides systems and methods for the calculation and maintenance of a golfer's handicap index. In one exemplary embodiment, a method is provided for the maintenance of a golf handicap index by providing a card having golfer information relating to a particular golfer. The golfer information includes scores posted by the golfer which are used in the calculation of a handicap index. A local processing unit is also provided to compute the handicap index based on guidelines established by the United States Golf Association. Information is exchanged between the card and the local processing unit at the time the golfer posts a score. Handicap indexes are updated based at least in part on the entered scores and on a schedule consistent with USGA guidelines. ------------------------------------------ http://164.195.100.11/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=2&u=/netahtml/search-bool.html&r=56&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=curr&s1=golf&OS=golf&RS=golf Method for matching golfer with a ball Number 6,086,487 A method for selecting a golf ball whose performance characteristics match a golfer's critical playing characteristics for the purpose of reducing the golfer's score. The method comprises the steps of determining a golfer's critical playing characteristics, prioritizing ball performance characteristics, and selecting a golf ball from a predetermined set of golf balls which best matches the golfer's critical playing characteristics to ball performance characteristics. ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jul 27 00:08:36 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D0D52A061; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:08:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA04613; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:08:36 -0400 Message-ID: <397FB673.851C4DA3@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:11:31 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , Non-commercial TLDs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] BSF/Myers dispute over domain name for complaints Thanks to Hans Klein for this pointer: --------------------- From: jackmyers@peoplepc.com Date: 26 Jul 2000 07:21:28 -0700 To: Labornet@labornet.org Cc: laborlink@excite.com Subject: Pennsylvania Man Wins Internet Dispute With BFS, Inc. Press Release Mr. Jack Myers (my father) has won his domain name dispute battle at the WIPO with Bridgestone-Firestone. The World Intellectual Property Organization in Switzerland (see www.wipo.org) has voted to allow Mr. Myers, a former employee of BFS, to keep www.bridgestone-firestone.net, a complaint site directed at BFS. This decision has set a precedent for complaint sites to be legally established at non "dot.com" sites while using the target company name for the domain name. Previously, use of a company's mark in the domain name was grounds for having the domain name transferred to the company. Mr. Myers, from Norwood,PA claimed that the site was protected under free speech and that he used the company's name and marks for the purposes of news reporting and commentary. Mr. Myers, now a 66 year-old retiree, was not represented by counsel. BFS, a $19 billion per year in sales company represented by the international law firm of Jones, Day, Reavis, and Pogue, maintained that the site confused potential customers as to the source of sponsorship, and that the domain name "bridgestone-firestone.net" diluted the company's marks and tarnished its reputation. At the center of the dispute is Mr. Myers' claim that the company forced him to sign of waiver of criminal charges in order to receive severance pay, sick pay, and unused vacation pay when his Philadelphia store location was closed in 1988 and later reopened with non-union workers. Also, that the company backdated the store termination agreement in order to deprive Mr. Myers of early retirement benefits due upon reaching the age of 55. For more details about this dispute, see www.bridgestone-firestone.net. BFS' web site is at www.bridgestone-firestone.com. The text of the WIPO decision can be read at www.WIPO.org. See Internet Domain Names, Domain Name Disputes, Cases/Decisions. This is case D2000-0190. Click on the WORD file to read the document. For more information, you can EMail me at jackmyers@peoplepc.com and my father at BetRjack@AOL.com Jack Myers From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jul 27 02:07:37 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BA482A3A1 for ; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 02:07:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA05721; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 02:07:36 -0400 Message-ID: <397FD259.658D9F04@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 02:10:33 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , tacd-ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] CPT comments to July 27, 2000 FCC en banc hearing on AOL/Time Warner merger CPT comments to July 27, 2000 FCC en banc hearing on AOL/Time Warner merger Federal Communications Commission 445 12th Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20554 EN BANC HEARING ON AMERICA ONLINE, INC. AND TIME WARNER, INC. APPLICATIONS FOR TRANSFER OF CONTROL CS DOCKET NO. 00-30 Comments of James Love Director, Consumer Project on Technology July 27, 2000 Dear Members of the Commission Thank you for the opportunity to speak today about the proposed merger between AOL and Time-Warner. The Consumer Project on Technology (CPT) is a non-profit organization that was created by Ralph Nader in 1995. We are funded by charitable contributions, and receive no financial support from AOL, Time- Warner or any of their competitors or rivals. However, I should note that an affiliated group, Essential Information, has received funding from the Turner Foundation, for work on environmental issues, and my Father-in law is a former reporter for Time Magazine. CPT's work on electronic commerce and telecommunications issues is documented on our web page at http://www.cptech.org. CPT opposes the merger between AOL and Time-Warner. This is the second time that CPT has opposed a merger involving AOL. The first involved AOL's acquisition of Netscape. (See Appendix I). 1. Summary of CPT's opposition to the AOL/Time-Warner Merger. CPT opposes the merger of AOL/Time-Warner. Our opposition is based upon several considerations that I will briefly outline here. First, the merger will further concentrate the US media industry. AOL has an important role in providing Internet content and Internet navigation. Time-Warner is a giant content company. Both companies have announced that they will use various opportunities to cross promote each others' products, if the merger goes through. We are generally unhappy with the concentration of publishing and distribution of various content industries, and we regret that the current US antitrust guidelines do not provide an adequate framework for evaluating the negative consequences on society of concentrations of control of media outlets, or the importance of joint ventures and industry collaborations on competition and diversity. Second, and more central to our opposition to this merger is our concern that the merger will lessen competition in the market for broadband Internet services. AOL's primary and core business is providing residential Internet connectivity and navigation. For the most part, AOL currently delivers this service over analogue telephone lines -- a technology that will be replaced by higher bandwidth services in the not too distant future. The cable platform technology is now the most common platform for higher bandwidth residential Internet services, followed by DSL services provided largely over telephone wires. Prior to the merger, AOL was faced with the prospect of competing against cable systems that offer ISP services over a much faster connection. Time-Warner was the second most important cable operator in the United States, and a direct competitor to AOL for the higher bandwidth Internet services. In the absence of the merger, AOL's could not realistically survive as a US ISP without finding a way to offer a higher bandwidth service. AOL could build its own network, lease lines for DSL connections from the phone companies, or get the cable operators to open up their platforms to AOL. AOL was the most aggressive national force for open access to the cable platform, and approached my group and many others seeking coalitions to advocate in favor of open access to cable systems. Before AOL announced that it would merge with Time-Warner, there had been a series of comments from FCC Chairman William Kennard, expressing opposition to F.C.C. regulation of the cable Internet platform, and AOL had witnessed firsthand the difficulty of fighting open access battles at the local government franchise level. In our opinion, the proposed merger is a consequence of the failure of policy makers to protect the Internet from last mile monopolies. Finally, CPT asks the Commission to consider the impact of the proposed merger on privacy, and to ensure the merger will not lead to a loss of privacy by consumers. On this topic we will defer to Appendix II, which is resolution Ecom 17-00 by the Trans Atlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD, http://www.tacd.org), a group representing 64 consumer organizations in the United States and Europe. 2. The Open Access Issue. For residential consumers, the next generation of Internet will be different from what we have today. It will be faster, with higher bandwidth connections that will make it possible to download files faster, and receive higher quality multimedia services. But there will also likely be important innovations in the network architecture that could lead to profound changes in the character of the Internet itself. AT&T, Time-Warner and other companies are building new differentiated levels of service for Internet content, and mechanisms to control and manage Internet data. The cable companies are buying technology from firms like Cisco Systems. In its 1999 White paper, "Controlling Your Network - A Must for Cable Operators," (http://www.cptech.org/ecom/openaccess/cisco1.html) Cisco tells cable operators to build a "New World network," to replace "the Internet" as it exists today. The ability to prioritize and control traffic levels is a distinguishing factor and critical difference between New World networks employing Internet Technologies, and "the Internet." Part of the "New World" architecture is Cisco's Quality of Service "QoS" model. According to Cisco: . . . traffic-type identification allows you to isolate different traffic types in your IP network. Through Cisco QoS, you can identify each traffic type - Web, e-mail, voice, video. Tools such as type-of-service (ToS) bits identification allow you to isolate network traffic by the type of application, even down to specific brands, by the interface used, by the user type and individual user identification, or by the site address. Admission control and policing is the way you develop and enforce traffic policies. These controls allow you to limit the amount of traffic coming into the network with policy-based decisions on whether the network can support the requirements of an incoming application. Additionally, you are able to police or monitor each admitted application to ensure that it honors its allocated bandwidth reservation. Preferential queuing gives you the ability to specify packet types - Web, e-mail, voice, video - and create policies for the way they are prioritized and handled. For example, although voice and video traffic are intolerant of delays and drops, you still might want to ensure that lower-priority residential Web browsing is allocated enough bandwidth to deliver an acceptable level of service during peak usage. Among other things, Cisco points out that: QoS can also propel you forward by giving you the information you need to offer advanced differentiated services at a profit. For example, time-and usage-based billing via NetFlow measurements provide you with a means of encouraging (or shifting) demand during periods of light network loading by offering off-peak discount pricing. And, with the new levels of service: [cable companies] can optimize service profits by marketing "express" services to premium customers ready to pay for superior network performance. To appreciate the significance of this new approach to Internet traffic, consider the Cisco discussion of its Committed access rate (CAR) technology, and its use to enhance or diminish the performance of content services: Committed access rate (CAR) is an edge-focused QoS mechanism provided by selected Cisco IOS-based network devices. The controlled-access rate capabilities of CAR allow you to specify the user access speed of any given packet by allocating the bandwidth it receives, depending on its IP address, application, precedence, port, or even Media Access Control (MAC) address. For example, if a "push" information service that delivers frequent broadcasts to its subscribers is seen as causing a high amount of undesirable network traffic, you can direct CAR to limit subscriber-access speed to this service. You could restrict the incoming push broadcasts as well as subscribers' outgoing access to the push information site to discourage its use. At the same time, you could promote and offer your own or partner's services with full-speed features to encourage adoption of your services, while increasing network efficiency. . . . Further, you could specify that video coming form internal servers receives precedence and broader bandwidth over video sourced from external servers. With CAR, the choice is yours, and it's easy to make constant revisions and adjustments as traffic patterns shift. With a plethora of new tools and mechanisms to identify, control and discriminate the levels of quality for Internet content, cable companies can do to Internet data traffic what they have done for years to video content -- pick winners and losers, charge different content providers different rates for access and exclude rivals. There have been repeated attempts to get the F.C.C. interested in these issues. For example, in an April 1996 filing in an F.C.C. proceeding on Inside Wiring for Cable Systems (CS Docket No. 95-184), CPT described US West efforts in Omaha to withhold important interoperability video dialtone information and services from unaffiliated content providers. With respect to Internet services delivered over cable, CPT told the Commission: In our discussions with the cable industry we have been told of various plans for the deployment of cable modems. Some schemes would have the cable companies require the consumers to use proprietary software to use the cable Internet service.. One company told us that they did not want consumers to have the ability to offer their own home pages from their home servers, and that this would be a special service offered by the cable company. There are also various proposals by the cable operators to create special high speed servers for information service providers, that offer superior performance to that offered by ordinary Internet connections. We have not seen the details of these schemes, but we are concerned that the cable companies may attempt to limit the functionality of cable modems in order to favor services offered by affiliated providers. If the F.C.C. fails to act now on the policy issues of open and non-discriminatory access to different levels of services, the cable companies will later claim to have invested billions of dollars with the expectation of bottleneck controls, and the telephone companies will continue to press for de-regulatory parity for DSL services (another area where the FCC has failed to curb anticompetitive conduct) -- leading to a potential duopoly run by giant cable and telephone phone companies who will have the power to decide which Internet traffic gets on the fast pipe, and which Internet traffic moves at a crawl. 3. The FCC needs to protect the Internet. There is ample evidence that the cable industry has the economic incentive and the culture to impose highly discriminatory access to next generation platforms for Internet content. What is unclear is what if anything the Commission will do to protect the public. This is a case where policy should lead. Engineers at Cisco or its competitors can design networks that do many things. The Commission should do its job and make sure that the "New World" Internet of the future is as open as "the Internet" that we know today. Thank you for the opportunity to appear today. James Love Director Consumer Project on Technology http://www.cptech.org APPENDIX I CPT's opposition to AOL/Netscape Merger In 1998, CPT opposed AOL's acquisition of Netscape. CPT's opposition to the AOL acquisition in 1998 concerned the importance of the Netscape browser to the competitive Internet Service Provider (ISP) community. AOL and Microsoft (MSN) both offer online services that include Internet connectivity, but also feature proprietary content and services, including services that use proprietary software. The most important competition for AOL is from ISPs that offer generic connectivity to the Internet over standard open protocols. At the present there are two primary software programs, Netscape and Microsoft's Internet Explorer (MSIE), that are used to browse the Web. These are not the only software programs that can browse the web, but they are the most popular and have the most features. Once AOL purchased Netscape, the two firms that offered proprietary network services (AOL and Microsoft) would control the primary software used by the customers of the generic ISPs. CPT expressed concern that AOL and Microsoft would have an incentive to migrate network intelligence to their own proprietary platforms, noting that in the past, AOL had entered into agreements with Microsoft that limited competition, when AOL's own interests were served. For example, AOL earlier had switched from Netscape to MSIE, in return for favorable placement of an AOL icon on the Windows desktop. In the discussions on the AOL/Netscape merger, CPT met with AOL, and asked for a commitment to continue, for 5 years, the Netscape level of financial support for the Mozilla project. The Mozilla project was created by Netscape to support the creation of an open source browser. There were complex and controversial issues in the Mozilla project regarding the licensing of the original Netscape code, and the new code developed by Mozilla, but in general, the Mozilla project was considered an important safety valve for the openness of the Internet. AOL gave numerous public interviews expressing support for the Mozilla project, but specifically refused to make any binding legal commitments. AOL told us, "why would we want to make such a commitment?" To its credit, AOL has continued to support the Mozilla project, although it is unclear how the project will be managed over time. There were key resignations from the Mozilla team, such as Jamie Zawinski, which raised some eyebrows in the open source community, and it is unclear how the next commercial version of Netscape be licensed, and to what degree Netscape will be engineered as a portal to AOL's content. Already it is the case that the new version of Netscape for Windows is designed so that its mail program opens up with an advertisement for the Netscape portal, for example. Appendix 2 TACD Resolution Ecom 17-00 Merger of America Online and Time Warner and Privacy Protection see: http://www.tacd.org/ecommercef.html#aolmerge -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jul 27 16:42:11 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B6092A061; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:42:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA18608; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:42:11 -0400 Message-ID: <39809F5A.84D66F89@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:45:14 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] DeClan on AOL/TW protest These are Declan's photos from today's demonstration. http://www.mccullagh.org/theme/fcc-aol-protest.html http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,37840,00.html cenes From an Anti-AOL Protest by Declan McCullagh 1:10 p.m. Jul. 27, 2000 PDT WASHINGTON -- You can't blame Vergil Bushnell for being preoccupied: He's busy trying to derail one of the largest corporate mergers in history. [snip] -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Jul 27 10:09:14 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from mail.citizen.org (mail.citizen.org [207.226.63.142]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 887E72A061; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:09:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PUBCIT_DOM-Message_Server by mail.citizen.org with Novell_GroupWise; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:09:14 -0400 Message-Id: X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 5.5 Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:08:49 -0400 From: "Paul Levy" To: , , Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [Random-bits] Re: [Nc-tlds] BSF/Myers dispute over domain name for complaints Because we litigate in the area of trademark claims against internet = speakers, I learned about this from someone who unsuccessfully sought our = help. I do hear about others from time to time. Jamie, should I post = interesting decisions along these lines to the list? It seems slightly = off topic, thus my hesitation Paul Alan Levy Public Citizen Litigation Group 1600 - 20th Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20009 (202) 588-1000 http://www.citizen.org/litigation/litigation.html >>> James Love 07/27/00 12:11AM >>> Thanks to Hans Klein for this pointer: --------------------- From: jackmyers@peoplepc.com=20 Date: 26 Jul 2000 07:21:28 -0700 To: Labornet@labornet.org=20 Cc: laborlink@excite.com=20 Subject: Pennsylvania Man Wins Internet Dispute With BFS, Inc. Press Release Mr. Jack Myers (my father) has won his domain name dispute battle at the WIPO with Bridgestone-Firestone. The World Intellectual Property Organization in Switzerland (see=20 www.wipo.org) has voted to allow Mr. Myers, a former employee of BFS, to keep www.bridgestone-firestone.net, a complaint site directed at BFS. This decision has set a precedent for complaint sites to be legally=20 established at non "dot.com" sites while using the target company name for the domain name. Previously, use of a company's mark in the domain name was grounds for having the domain name transferred to the company. Mr. Myers, from Norwood,PA claimed that the site was protected under free speech and that he used the company's name and marks for the purposes of news reporting and commentary. Mr. Myers, now a 66 year-old retiree, was not represented by counsel. BFS, a $19 billion per year in sales company represented by the international law firm of Jones, Day, Reavis, and Pogue, maintained that the site confused potential customers as to the source of sponsorship, and that the domain name "bridgestone-firestone.net" diluted the company's marks and tarnished its reputation. At the center of the dispute is Mr. Myers' claim that the company forced him to sign of waiver of criminal charges in order to receive severance pay, sick pay, and unused vacation pay when his Philadelphia store location was closed in 1988 and later reopened with non-union workers.=20 Also, that the company backdated the store termination agreement in order to deprive Mr. Myers of early retirement benefits due upon reaching the age of 55. For more details about this dispute, see www.bridgestone-firestone.net. BFS' web site is at www.bridgestone-firestone.com. The text of the WIPO decision can be read at www.WIPO.org. See Internet Domain Names, Domain Name Disputes, Cases/Decisions. This is case D2000-0190. Click on the WORD file to read the document. For more information, you can EMail me at=20 jackmyers@peoplepc.com=20 and my father at BetRjack@AOL.com=20 Jack Myers _______________________________________________ Non-Commercial Top Level Domains mailing list nc-tlds@lists.essential.org=20 http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/nc-tlds=20 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jul 28 09:10:09 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FF832A390 for ; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:10:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA28809; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:10:05 -0400 Message-ID: <398186EC.7786B8EA@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:13:16 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , Roundtable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] BEUC press release on AOL/Time Warner/EMI mergers This is the press release issued yesterday by BEUC, the Bureau of European des Unions de Consommateurs. This is the umbrella organization that represents 29 independent national consumer organizations from 20 European countries. Jamie ----------------- FMI: Irene Donadio "Murray, Jim" Date 27/07/2000 RE: AOL/TIME WARNER and EMI Merger:Consumer Privacy and Choice at Stake BEUC has written to Commissioner Monti expressing serious concerns about the giant merger between AOL, Time Warner and EMI. We believe that such a merger might not only seriously hinder competition in the on-line as well as in some parts of the off-line business world but even worse might threaten consumers' choice and the fundamental right to privacy. AOL is the world's largest Internet service provider. Time Warner is one of the world's largest providers of music, magazines and movies. Time Warner and EMI are dominant in the music market. The new giant might be able to keep new competitors at bay and stop artists from signing to other companies. It could decide to increase the prices for music it owns the copyright of, making some very popular music unaffordable for its competitors and more expensive at retail level. There is also a potential threat for consumer privacy. As service provider AOL has already access to a huge number of informations on consumers' shopping and browsing habits1. This would certainly be an enormous advantage for this new multimedia company as compared to its competitors. It is highly questionable for any industry to have access to personal information. Furthermore the Trans Atlantic Consumer Dialogue already stressed that AOL and Time Warner have been subject of numerous privacy complaints in the US. There are serious concerns that in Europe also the current legal framework would not be sufficient for the challenges of the new technologies2. Finally there is also the risk that this new company controls, through copyright and technical barriers, any use individuals make of its products. The company could stop consumers from copying goods, legally paid for, for pure private purposes. It is of crucial importance to set up a precedent in view of other potential major deals in sight. The Canal +/Vivendi/Seagram merger plan might hinder potential competition to the same extent, depriving consumers from proper choice. These mergers could be followed by other industry attempts to create new oligopolies in the digital market. Therefore BEUC calls on the Commission to ensure consumer choice and privacy protection. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jul 28 09:17:57 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE6BB2A061 for ; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:17:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA28886 for ; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:17:56 -0400 Message-ID: <398188C3.45E8AE71@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:21:07 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] BEUC letter on AOL/Time Warner/EMI This is the text of the BEUC letter (the footnotes didn't make it in the export of this file, unfortunately). Jamie ----------------- BEUC BEUC/236/2000 14/07/2000 The European Consumers' Organisation Bureau Européen des Unions de Consommateurs Avenue de Tervueren, 36/4 B - 1040 Bruxelles Tel: (32 2) 743.15.90 Fax: (32 2) 740.28.02 For information: Dominique Forest, Econcomic Advisor, dfo@beuc.org Ursula Pachl, Legal Advisor, upa@beuc.org America -On-Line/ Time Warner Merger and Time -Warner / EMI Joint Ventures Submission to the European Commission by BEUC 1) Introduction This submission is made by BEUC, the European Consumers' organisation. BEUC is the Brussels based federation of independent national consumer organisations from all the Member States of the EU and from other European countries. Our job is to try to influence, in the consumer interest, the development of EU policy and to promote and defend the interests of all European consumers. The submission is made by way of an interested party comment in accordance with Article 18 (1) of Regulation 4069/89. This submission follows BEUC's letter to Commissioner Monti, dated 13 June 2000, concerning the Commission's Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.1845) between AOL and Time Warner published in the Official Journal on 11th May. BEUC has concerns to raise regarding the merger as well as the joint ventures in relation to vertical integration in general as well as concerns regarding the fundamental right of European citizens to access to information and the fundamental right of European consumers and citizens to privacy. 2) Concerns in relation to vertical integration Vertical integration as such might not be regarded as detrimental to competition conditions by national or European watchdogs. In principle, varying degrees of upstream or downstream vertical integration does not confer per se a clear cost advantage or disadvantage. It has to be assumed that the choice of each firm with respect to its own degree of vertical integration is a rational one. Therefore, if vertical integration would confer a definitive cost advantage, normally all the firms in the market would tend to reach a similar degree of vertical integration and therefore competition should hold sway. However, in the case of this specific deal between AOL, Time Warner and EMI, consumers will be faced with a key player able to significantly abuse its dominant position as a result of the combination of three factors: High concentration in the content market AOL/TW/EMI will account for a large portion of sales in the online market New entry into the content market is difficult. Potential competition could be significantly hindered, to the detriment of consumers' welfare. I - The EMI-Time Warner deal The joint venture between EMI and Time Warner would reduce the club of the world's big five music companies (Sony, Warner, BMG, Universal and EMI) to a oligopoly of 4 firms that would control 80% of worldwide sales. It goes without saying that music has to be considered globally as a world-wide market exists for film soundtracks and popular, classic and rock genres, whatever their language (with English being increasingly predominant, though). Indeed, international and national pop is sold by the same retailers and competes on the same market. The restrictive EC legislation on copyright (Directive on copyright in the information society COM (97) 628), which will be in force very soon (2001) - most probably will give a blank check to content industry (rightholders) to freely use copyright protection management systems, which can be used to control every use and every copy which is made, even for purely private, non-commercial purposes. Given the very high concentration of copyrights that would be created by this merger in the music sector, the use of copyright management systems to determine if uses and what kind of uses for what protected material will be possible and what has to be paid for, the merger will create a monopoly-like situation. This has to be seen in context with the fact that probably the above mentioned directive will allow that rightholders by contractual terms contract out all exceptions to copyright and therefore can create monopolies on the use of protected material they own not only through technological barriers but also through license practices, also in the consumer mass market. The impact of the merger would be even larger if one would consider more narrowly defined music markets (publishing, talent development, online delivery of music, individual categories of music from back catalogues (oldies are separate from rap)). For instance, the back catalogue has an impact on the assessment of the market share of the conglomerate. TW and EMI possess a large catalogue of popular music from the 30's, 40's, 60's and 70's and they were market leaders before the joint venture, meaning that they could charge a higher price than other major competitors. EMI and Time Warner would control over half of the world's repertoire. TW/EMI will own a huge number of copyrights to some of the most popular musical works and it will control the licensing market for use of such copyrights. AOL/TW/EMI will be able to increase the fees for use of their copyrights and exploit specific terms to licenses (e.g. short terms). The entity might also be able to adopt a predatory pricing scheme. In the recorded music and music publishing business, success might be highly dependent upon whether consumers like the music or not. However, marketing is more and more key to the success of an artist not to mention the tailor-made artist'. All this will make it more difficult for smaller record companies to sign up for new artists. Time Warner/EMI could become dominant in the digital delivery of music via the Internet with the merger AOL-TW. Indeed, a highly significant part of the emerging market for integrated internet services would be the online delivery of music, due to the importance of music to the group of users most active on the internet, i.e. teenagers and people in their twenties. Furthermore, TW-EMI could foreclose the access to the large catalogue of music that they control. II - The AOL-Time Warner deal: data protection fear In relation to data protection, European as well as US consumer organisations fear that the merger gives the companies more far-reaching and more sophisticated ability to collect information about consumer shopping and browsing habits and to use the personal data of subscribers from a merged database (see the attached Recommendation of the TACD on this issue). Although in the EU we benefit from a horizontal legal framework to protect personal data, the enforcement of data protection rules in the digital world is difficult and the current legal framework could prove not sufficient to deal with the challenges of the new technologies. Moreover, in the US the company has mixed records for compliance with privacy laws. This merger, as well as other mergers of multimedia companies that might follow, threatens to undermine consumers' privacy by giving much greater access to personal information. Furthermore, this aspect of the merger could well create a competitive disadvantage to other companies, who will not be able to compete against an entity which has access to such an amount of personal data. III - AOL Time Warner EMI According to the information available, AOL/TW/EMI would be involved in at least many different markets : Internet Access and content markets , such as financial news, TV programmes, films, on-line music , and magazine, book and music publishing; Furthermore the market of music-software would be affected, as regards copyright management systems as well as access control management systems. AOL has an interest in holding a dominant position on the market for Internet access in the United States (where it hold 40% of the market) and in several Member States in order to make its mark in the provision of pay content such as films, television broadcasting, financial information, etc. AOL/TW/EMI could use its control of online service to discriminate against competitors seeking to deliver their wares to consumers via the internet (gate keeper) in spite of the AOL/TW's pledge to provide access to their combined networks on a non-discriminatory basis. In the new market for integrated Internet services, will operate a 'walled garden' serving to discriminate against third party unaffiliated content and precluding access by third party content suppliers to users of the AOL/TW/EMI service. Similarly, consumers will be discouraged from switching to other suppliers as a bundle' of services covering most of their needs will be offered to them by the new entity. Uncertainty regarding quality of other suppliers and lack of a good reputation will constitute acute switching barriers, further amplified by proprietary products such as e-mail address that leads consumers to stay with the same ISPs. AOL could leverage its strong position in America and its proprietary content and services to achieve dominance in Europe, in particular, in a number of neighbouring Internet paid-for content markets such as films, TVs and financial news. AOL could also leverage its dominance in music publishing to consolidate its dominance in the new market for integrated internet services. Vertical integration will allow AOL to have preferential access to the leading source of music and publishing rights and music repertoire in most Member States, which could in turn allow it to dictate the technical standards for delivering music over the internet and monopolise the music player software Other integrated Internet service providers will have to face very significant barriers to entry. Indeed, owners of new technology or exclusive programme content can hinder new service operators either through imposition of unfair terms or conditions, or through lack of inter-operability of systems. Effective competition is needed at all stages and gateways to ensure there is full choice and open access on fair terms to all networks and services. There will be a foreclosure effect as a result of high entry costs in terms of functionality, know how and significant libraries of content. AOL/TW/EMI will benefit from a first mover advantage that few competitors will be able to emulate. In fact, being initially the sole provider of such integrated internet service under one roof', AOL/TW/EMI will control 100% of the market, i.e. it will be a monopolistic player and will remain dominant even following new entrants into the market. Conclusions In summary the vertical integration of Time Warner - AOL - EMI could have the impact of creating a monopolistic conglomerate that will work to the detriment of European citizens and consumers, negatively affecting consumers' choice, access to content and protection of personal data. The AOL/Time Warner/EMI case will clearly be a precedent and other deals could be assessed along its lines. Therefore, the Commission should take into account the fact that other major deals are on sight. The Canal +/Vivendi/Seagram merger which is in the pipeline will lead to a conglomerate which is only second to. AOL/Time Warner/EMI. The consequences of these deals on consumers welfare will be even more damaging if no account is taken of the potential oligopolistic dominance (i.e. parallel behaviour, price-fixing) such mega-mergers could lead to. Brussels, 13 July 2000 Dominique Forest Ursula Pachl Economic Advisor Legal Advisor -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Jul 28 09:54:29 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 260FF2A390 for ; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:54:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA29368; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:54:25 -0400 Message-ID: <3981914F.C6A02447@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:57:35 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] ISPs and DSL This is Bruce Kushnick's reminder about anticompetitive issues in the DSL platform. Jamie --------------------- Subject: about ISPs and advanced networks ---- Where's the data for Open Access? Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:10:30 -0400 From: Kushnick To: CYBERTELECOM-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM Right now the real battle for ISPs is staying alive. The Bells charges for DSL are predatory at best. We did the math with two NY ISPs and found that it is virtually impossible to make money and compete http://newnetworks.com/baadslscrewisp.htm Next, many of the ISPs and CLECs beleive there is a "Code Red" within the Bell system that is systematically trying to put them out of business through 'bad acts". In our survey with CIX and the USISPA, we found that the treatment of the ISPs was, at best sub-standard http://newnetworks.com/ispsummary.html The data from other sources seems to have corroborated these findings. http://newnetworks.com/Putting%20the%20Survey%20into%20Perspective.htm Remember, only two Bells have been able to show that their markets are even "minimially" acceptable. Also, this pattern of abuse of the ISPs driectly effects their business. In NYC, we found that approx. 30% of all orders, the Bell doesn't show up for the install, and about 75% the order didn't go through for weeks. We've argued that the ISP and the customer should be compensated for these problems... In our interviews we found that the small ISP has to dedicated staffers just to remedy the Bells' poor handling of customers. It cost them monery they do not have. And they do not have the money to take these problems to court. http://www.newnetworks.com/paycompensation.htm And is there serious violations of the laws? Here's just one quote. This ISP from Washington using US West, explains how the Bell promised to deliver DSL to its ISP customers, then has made it ?uneconomical" to compete. Even more surprising, according to this ISP, a former US West employee states that the Bell is not paying for their own Internet service but is getting it subsidized. This is a clear example of monopoly abuse. "Failed to offer DSL in our primary market area despite early promises to do so. We had a DSL connection and essentially NO customers for more than a year. I would not in good conscience advertise DSL when it was not available. More than a year later, after canceling our service and getting a full refund, US West is beginning to offer DSL in a limited area in our primary service area. Our experience with US West and DSL has been uniformly AWFUL. I currently do not offer DSL because the phone company (in my view) has made it deliberately uneconomical to compete in this arena. We have reports from a former US West employee that US West, by policy, is not making their internet arm pay their bills to US West, although they are being billed. She was told ?don't worry about it? and to ?ignore it? when she brought this to the attention of her supervisor. Part of her job, by the way (if I recall correctly), was collecting delinquent accounts." And the data for Open Access is --------???????????/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Kushnick Executive Director, New Networks Institute Bruce@newnetworks.com http://www.newnetworks.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Jul 31 12:43:01 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCE282A321 for ; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:43:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA31850 for ; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:43:01 -0400 Message-ID: <3985AD75.3E1AF855@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:46:45 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] European Patent Convention and Business methods exception July 31, 2000 I'm told that the European Patent Office (EPO) will be considering significant changes in the European Patent Convention, during a November 20-29 meeting in Munich, in part to comply with the WTO TRIPS accord on intellectual property rights. One issue that may be raised in this meeting will be the current EPO exemption for patents on methods of doing business. Persons at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) tell me that they believe the European Patent Convention exemption for patents on methods of doing business is not consistent with Article 27.1 of the WTO TRIPS agreement (see below). This is a controversial issue. The TRIPS does require patents on all fields of technology, but only "provided that they are new, involve an inventive step and are capable of industrial application," the last phrase being key. Under Article 1 of the TRIPS, countries are supposed to have broad discretion to implement the TRIPS accord under their own legal tradition. Right now the European Patent Convention excludes methods of doing business as a invention susceptible of industrial application. (see below). The revisions of the European Patent Convention will have huge implications for the future of patents on business methods. If Europe elimiates its current exemption for methods of doing business (see below), it will be very difficult for other countries to argue that the WTO does require patents on software and methods of doing business. I have attached several relevant documents on this important topic. European NGOs should be in touch with the European Patent Office, and request observor status for the November 20-29 meeting in Munich. Jamie Love http://www.cptech.org/ip/business/ -------------------- http://www2.european-patent-office.org/search?NS-search-page=document&NS-rel-doc-name=/ojft/eng/4_2000/4_1950.htm&NS-query=%22diplomatic+conference%22&NS-search-type=NS-boolean-query&NS-collection=OJ%20English&NS-docs-found=8&NS-doc-number=6 Notice from the President of the European Patent Office dated 24 March 2000 concerning revision of the European Patent Convention. In a decision dated 24 February 2000(1) the Administrative Council of the European Patent Organisation convened an EPC revision conference of the contracting states. The conference is to be held in Munich from 20 to 29 November 2000. Invitations to attend the conference as observers have also been extended to the states entitled to accede to the EPC, the other states with observer status on the Administrative Council and numerous intergovernmental and non-governmental organisations with an interest in the European patent system. [snip] <----------------EPO ON PATENT OF BUSINESS METHODS------------> http://www.european-patent-office.org/epo/pubs/oj000/7_00/7_3070.pdf Administrative Council Report on 80th meeting of the Administrative Council of the European Patent Organization (6 to 8 June 2000). Amtsblatt EPA /Official Journal EPO /Journal officiel OEB 7/2000 page 310 Another area where there is contro-versy about patentability is business and administrative methods. The EPC explicitly excludes the patent- ability of methods of doing business as such.Even so,there has been a large increase in the number of applications in these areas because of the expansion of e-commerce on the Internet and decisions handed down by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that business methods are not necessarily exclu-ded from patentability in the United States.The number of applications of this type waiting to be searched and examined has more than dou- bled over the last two years and at present totals around 400. In practice,the vast majority of these applications do not simply claim abstract business methods, but rather describe technical means (eg computer networks)for carrying out these methods.They are not considered to relate to methods of doing business as such,and are examined in exactly the same way as any other application.They are thus patentable in Europe if they fulfil the normal requirements for patentability,including novelty, inventive step and industrial appli-cability.However,it has to be stressed that,in a strict interpretation of patent law,an invention must overcome an objective technical problem in a non-obvious way.In other words,it is the technical inven-tion to which a business machine may relate which makes it patent- able, not simply its commercial ingenuity. page 311 Predictably,this topic has generated a great demand for information from representatives,applicants and the public alike.The Office has taken every opportunity to make its posi- tion clear and has frequently sup-plied speakers for seminars and conferences. [snip] <-----Excerpt of Article 52 of European Patent Convention----> Article 52 (2) The following in particular shall not be regarded as inventions within the meaning of paragraph 1 (a) discoveries, scientific theories and mathematical methods; (b) aesthetic creations; (c) schemes, rules and methods for performing mental acts, playing games or doing business, and programs for computers; (d) presentations of information. <--------------TRIPS PROVISIONS------------------------------> PART I GENERAL PROVISIONS AND BASIC PRINCIPLES Article 1 Nature and Scope of Obligations 1. Members shall give effect to the provisions of this Agreement. Members may, but shall not be obliged to, implement in their law more extensive protection than is required by this Agreement, provided that such protection does not contravene the provisions of this Agreement. Members shall be free to determine the appropriate method of implementing the provisions of this Agreement within their own legal system and practice. [snip] STANDARDS CONCERNING THE AVAILABILITY, SCOPE AND USE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS SECTION 5: PATENTS Article 27 Patentable Subject Matter 1. Subject to the provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3, patents shall be available for any inventions, whether products or processes, in all fields of technology, provided that they are new, involve an inventive step and are capable of industrial application.See footnote 5 Subject to paragraph 4 of Article 65, paragraph 8 of Article 70 and paragraph 3 of this Article, patents shall be available and patent rights enjoyable without discrimination as to the place of invention, the field of technology and whether products are imported or locally produced. 2. Members may exclude from patentability inventions, the prevention within their territory of the commercial exploitation of which is necessary to protect ordre public or morality, including to protect human, animal or plant life or health or to avoid serious prejudice to the environment, provided that such exclusion is not made merely because the exploitation is prohibited by their law. 3. Members may also exclude from patentability: (a) diagnostic, therapeutic and surgical methods for the treatment of humans or animals; (b) plants and animals other than micro-organisms, and essentially biological processes for the production of plants or animals other than non-biological and microbiological processes. However, Members shall provide for the protection of plant varieties either by patents or by an effective sui generis system or by any combination thereof. The provisions of this subparagraph shall be reviewed four years after the date of entry into force of the WTO Agreement. Footnote: 5. For the purposes of this Article, the terms "inventive step" and "capable of industrial application" may be deemed by a Member to be synonymous with the terms "non-obvious" and "useful" respectively. ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Aug 1 10:26:34 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9ECF2A060 for ; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 10:26:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA12318 for ; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 10:26:33 -0400 Message-ID: <3986DF03.663D4C7C@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 10:30:27 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Registered ICANN voters As of this morning, here are the ICANN stats: http://members.icann.org/pubstats.html Africa 787 Asia and Pacific 93,782 Japan 38,931 China 33,670 Twaian 9,193 Korea 6,439 Europe 35,942 Germany 20,476 Latin America 6,486 North America 21,596 Total 158,593 -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Aug 2 09:08:06 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E69A2A05E for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:08:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA29160 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:08:06 -0400 Message-ID: <39881E29.4528FDAC@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 09:12:09 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] AOL loses suit over telemarketing Subject: Judgement against AOL... (fwd) Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 01:20:21 -0400 (EDT) From: David Cassel To: James Love ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:37:51 -0700 From: C.A.T.S. To: webmaster@aolwatch.org Subject: Judgement against AOL... Thought you'd find this interesting..... Judge orders $5,000 penalty against AOL for telemarketing abuse August 1, 2000 Redlands CA - A Mentone California man who filed a lawsuit against America Online has won the largest judgement in California history against a telemarketer. Gerry E. Standefer, 46, filed the lawsuit after receiving over 15 telemarketing calls from AOL despite the fact that AOL assured him that he was on AOL's Do-Not-Call list. On Friday July 28, Judge Raymond Haight III made a preliminary ruling that AOL was in violation of the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act and thus had to pay the $500 per call statutory penalty. Although AOL failed to appear in court, California law still requires that a plaintiff must prove his case to the court in order to win a judgement against a defendant. The ruling will not be official until the judge puts it in writing, which is expected in about ten days. Standefer did not use an attorney. Instead he sought the help of two consumer groups, the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse and Californians Against Telephone Solicitation (C.A.T.S.). With the material provided by both organizations, Standefer was able to win his case without an attorney. "They called me over 14 times after I told them to stop calling me," said Standefer. "But they never called me once to apologize. I hope they learned their lesson and leave people alone." "Its about time" commented Robert Arkow, president and founder of C.A.T.S. "AOL has refused to release its Do-Not-Call policy despite the fact that federal law requires them to do so." Arkow provided the court with a "Friend of the court" letter in which he documented AOL's refusal to obey the law as far back as two years ago. Beth Givens, director of the nonprofit Privacy Rights Clearinghouse was happy the court ruled as it did. "It's not often that consumers can make the telemarketing law work for them," said Givens. "This is a great victory." AOL has 30 days to appeal the ruling. Phone calls to AOL's legal department seeking comments were not returned. Source: Joint press release from C.A.T.S. and the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse. -- Robert Arkow Founder: Californians Against Telephone Solicitations (C.A.T.S.) http://www.stopjunkcalls.com From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Aug 2 09:28:22 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 002142A31B for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:28:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA29407; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:28:21 -0400 Message-ID: <398822E9.B045237E@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 09:32:25 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Cc: Hans Klein Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN nomination committee candidates -- background info Hans Klein has provided this pointer to information about the newly announced candidates for the ICANN board, selected by the ICANN Nominating Committee. The biggest surprise for me was to see Larry Lessig's name. There will probably be others who seek to be placed on the ballot through the procedures for petitioning (I'm not exactly sure how this will work, other than that you have to get a unique group of 2 percent of a regions qualified voters to endorse a position on the ballot). http://www.cpsr.org/internetdemocracy/csif/candidates.html ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Aug 2 11:09:52 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23E6E2A31B; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 11:09:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA30872; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 11:09:52 -0400 Message-ID: <39883AB4.5400B2A3@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 11:13:56 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Bad UDRP decision - dodgevipers.com Subject: Bad UDRP decision - dodgevipers.com Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 11:10:07 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org To: "Bret A. Fausett" , NCDNHC http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0222.html According to Brett Fausett, this is a UDRP decision involving a web site, http://www.dodgeviper.com, which was run by a fan of Dodge Vipers, since 1996. Apparently Dodge had even provided a link to his site in one of the Dodge Viper magazines. Then the Dodge legal department went after the site. According to to Brett, the panelist "found bad faith registration and bad faith use on literally no supportive facts." There are other disputes involving sites such as vintagevolvos.com. If the NCC was to comment on these types of decisions, it might say: 1. Expansion of the TLD space could help address these problems, by creating TLDs such as .fans, .owners or .users. 2. There is a legitimate purpose in consumers creating web sites to discuss products. They should be permited to use the name of the product in the domain name, so long as the web site doesn't purport to be an official company site. The dodgevipers.com site is clear that it is a fan site, and not a Dodge site. 3. The UDRP should reverse its decision in the dodgevipers.com case. Jamie -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Aug 2 12:25:39 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEED22A31B for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 12:25:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA32261 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 12:25:39 -0400 Message-ID: <39884C78.2244EEF6@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 12:29:44 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] UDRP - Walmart Sucks Subject: UDRP - Walmart Sucks Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 12:26:27 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org To: NCDNHC http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0477.html The decision said: Based on its finding that the Respondents, Walsucks and Walmarket Puerto Rico, have engaged in abusive registration of the domain names "wal-martcanadasucks.com", "wal-martcanadasucks.com", "walmartuksucks.com", "walmartpuertorico.com" and "walmartpuertoricosucks.com" within the meaning of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy, the Panel orders that the domain names "wal-martcanadasucks.com", "wal-martcanadasucks.com", "walmartuksucks.com", "walmartpuertorico.com" and "walmartpuertoricosucks.com" be transferred to the Complainant, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Background: These domains were owned by Kenneth J. Harvey, apparently a speculator in domain names. Acccording to the decision: The "walmartcanadasucks.com" and "walmartuksucks.com" web pages each state that "This is a freedom of information site set up for dissatisfied Walmart Canada [or UK, respectively] customers." Each site invites visitors to "Spill Your Guts" with a "horror story relating to your dealings with Wal-Mart Canada [or UK, respectively]". On the "walmartcanadasucks.com" website, Respondent has posted "Wal-Mart Horror Story #1" which recounts his version of events in respect to the "walmartcanada.com" domain name. Each website posts a photograph of Respondent, labeled "President", and Respondent?s biography. Each "Spill Your Guts" page indicates "If we feel your story is interesting, it might be included in award-winning author Kenneth J. Harvey?s forthcoming book - "Wal-MartCanadaSucks.com" [or, on UK page, "about Walmart"]". Walmark indicated these domains were registered in bad faith, and indicated: Respondents' free speech argument is a convenient and transparent dodge. It does not even make sense with respect to three of the domain names: WAL-MARTCANADASUCKS.COM, WALMARTPUERTORICOSUCKS.COM, and WALMARTPUERTORICO.COM. There are no websites attached to these domain names. Respondents offer no evidence to support a claim that they have made legitimate use of any of these three domain names. The arbitrator indicated: Respondent has appended the term "-sucks" to domain names that are, in the absence of that term, confusingly similar to Complainant?s mark. The addition of the pejorative verb "sucks" is tantamount to creating the phrase "Wal-Mart Canada sucks" (and comparable phrases with Respondent?s other "-sucks" formative domain names). The elimination of the spacing between the terms of the phrase is dictated by technical factors, and by the common practice of domain name registrants. The addition of a common or generic term following a trademark does not create a new or different mark in which Respondent has rights. The decision noted that: Respondent argues that addition of the word "sucks" to the base names "walmartcanada", "wal-martcanada", "walmartuk" and "walmartpuertorico" causes such names to lose their confusing similarity with Complainant?s "Wal-Mart" trademark. Respondent contends that because an Internet user or consumer viewing a "-sucks" formative domain name would assume that Complainant is not the sponsor of or associated with a website identified by such address, Respondent?s "-sucks" formative marks cannot be confusingly similar to Complainant?s mark. In support of this argument, Respondent refers to Lucent Technologies, Inc., v. Lucentsucks.com, 95 F. Supp. 2d 528 (E.D.Vir. 2000). It is first important to note that the observations made by Judge Brinkema in the Lucentsucks.com opinion regarding the issue of confusing similarity are in the nature of dicta, since the court dismissed the action against defendant for lack of jurisdiction 10. Judge Brinkema?s opinion in Lucentsucks.com, and one decision on which she relies, Bally Total Fitness v. Faber, 29 F. Supp. 2d 1161 (C.D. Cal. 1998), each lend some support to Respondent's position. However, both cases are distinguishable. This defense was rejected, however, and the WIPO panel found on behalf of Walmart, that various "sucks" domains were "confusingly similiar" to the Walmart trademarks. In Bally, the court granted summary judgment in favor of a defendant that used the "Bally" trademark on a web page, appending the word "sucks", to create a "ballysucks" web page. In that case, "ballysucks.com" was not registered and was not used as a second-level domain name. The principal issue was whether the defendant could lawfully express itself on its web page using the trademark "Bally" in combination with the word "sucks". The court held that since the "ballysucks" web page was devoted to critical commentary regarding Bally, and the defendant did not have a commercial purpose in maintaining the site, the defendant had a valid free speech interest in using Bally?s mark. The court observed that even a "ballysucks.com" domain name might not constitute trademark infringement ("? even if Faber did use the mark as part of a larger domain name, such as ?ballysucks.com?, this would not necessarily be a violation as a matter of law." 29 F. Supp., at 1165). It made this observation in the context of applying the Sleekcraft factors. In Bally, the court found the defendant's intent in establishing its "ballysucks" web page was to criticize the trademark holder, and this factor weighed heavily in favor of the defendant. In the present proceeding, Respondent?s intent is different. In Lucentsucks.com, the court observed that "Defendant argues persuasively that the average consumer would not confuse lucentsucks.com with a web site sponsored by plaintiff" 11 . However, the court did not undertake any particularized analysis of the disputed domain name as compared with the plaintiff?s trademark. Moreover, the court observed that: "A successful showing that lucentsucks.com is effective parody and/ or a cite [sic] for critical commentary would seriously undermine the requisite elements for the causes of action at issue in this case." 12 No such showing had been made by the defendant in Lucentsucks.com. The court was speaking in the abstract - and in dicta -- about a future case in which the trademark issues would be fully litigated. Even so, the court indicated that the defendant?s intent in registering and using the disputed domain name would be an important element in determining whether cybersquatting had occurred. The Panel does not consider Lucentsucks.com to stand for the proposition that "-sucks" formative domain names are immune as a matter of law from scrutiny as being confusingly similar to trademarks to which they are appended. Each case must be considered on its merits. The Panel is not making any determination regarding the registrants and users of other "-sucks" formative domain names (such as "walmartsucks.com"). The record of this proceeding evidences that Respondent did not register "walmartcanadasucks.com" and his other "-sucks" names in order to express opinions or to seek the expression of opinion of others. The record indicates that his intention was to extract money from Complainant. An application of the Sleekcraft factors in another context involving Complainant?s mark and the word "sucks" might produce a different result than that reached here. The Panel notes that use of a domain name confusingly similar to a mark may be justified by fair use or legitimate noncommercial use considerations, and that this may in other cases permit the use of "-sucks" formative names in free expression forums. Complainant has met the burden of proving that Respondent is the registrant of domain names that are identical or confusingly similar to a trademark in which Complainant has rights, and it has thus established the first of the three elements necessary to a finding that Respondent has engaged in abusive domain name registration. Possible NCC action: 1. Domain names with a trademark plus the term "sucks" are not confusingly similar to a trademark. The term "sucks" is clearly a pejorative term, used for criticism and free speech. ICANN should not be in the business of preventing people from creating various "sucks" web pages. 2. Persons have a right to create both non-commerical and commercial web pages criticizing or engaging in parody of products, firms or organizations. (this too could be improved). ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Aug 2 15:59:12 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D2F12A31B for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 15:59:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA03334 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 15:59:12 -0400 Message-ID: <39887E86.E6F9E09@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 16:03:18 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] UDRP - "The Penguin" and Penguin Books Subject: UDRP - "The Penguin" and Penguin Books Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 16:02:06 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org To: NCDNHC http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0204.html This looks like a decent decision. Penguin Books Limited is a large publisher of paperback books, and the owner of penguin.com. Anthony Katz is known to his friends as "the Penguin." He had registered penguin.org He also appeared to have been very well represented in the WIPO proceeding. His side told the panel: i. Anthony Katz was known as "Penguin" long before said domain name was registered. ii Mr Katz has made only two uses of the said domain name , firstly as a personal e-mail address and secondly as the address of a personal www site. [Avery Dennison Corp. v. Sumpton, 1999 WL 635767 (9th Circuit. August 23, 1999), use of names a e-mail addresses does not constitute commercial use] iii. Mr Katz registered said domain name to establish a www site dedicated to penguins (the birds). [snip] xii. Mr Katz is not a cybersquatter: he is known as "Penguin"; he did not register the other domain names (registered August 24, 1998); (registered October 5, 1998) and (registered October 5, 1998) with the intention of re-sale. His circumstances can be distinguished from the position of the Respondent in Nabisco Brands Company v. The Patron Group, Inc. WIPO Case No. 2000-0032, February 23, 2000, David W. Plant, Presiding Panelist, as in that case the Respondent owned at least 53 domain names identical or virtually identical to registered U.S.A. trade marks of other companies such as Nestle, General Mills, Nabisco, AT&T, Pfizer, Proctor & Gamble and Warner-Lambert. In that case the Complainant established a continuous and obvious pattern of cybersquatting whereas Mr Katz registrations do not even remotely approach the pattern reviewed in Nabisco Brands. xviii. Hundreds, if not thousands of domain names have been registered in the name of families. It is not wrongful conduct so to do. xix. When registering a domain name, there is no obligation to disclose the nature of the entity identified as the registrant. There is no obligation under Texas law to register an alias of an individual or entity such as a partnership that does not conduct any business or commercial activities whatsoever. xx. There is no evidence that Mr Katz registered the domain name in the name of the Katz Family to conceal his identity, as the WHOIS database identifies him as the administrative contact and provides his e-mail address at his current place of employment. xxi. The word "Penguin" and the mascot character "Tux" have become irreversibly associated with the LINUX computer system. Accordingly there is no bad faith in Mr Katz electing to show his personal allegiance to the LINUX operating system by posting an image of Tux on his homepage. xxii. Non commercial sites often identify the software that underlie the site Mr Katz has elected to identify the LINUX software and he gives a number of examples of other sites that do this. [snip] In finding for Anthony Katz, who was permited to keep penguin.org, the WIPO panel noted: "This Administrative Panel is reluctant to engage in the activity of policing how much development the owner of a clearly personal Web site must do, in the absence of any other evidence of bad faith. Any attempt to apply any objective minimum standards for development could well impose a significant economic burden on innocent registrants as a precondition of holding their domain names. Possible NCC resolution language: 1. WIPO was correct in permitting Anthony Katz to retain the use of Penguin.org. 2. There was nothing on the Penguin.org page that would lead one to believe that it was the publisher of Penguin Books. 3. There are many legitimate uses of the word Penguin, including, for example, web pages about Penguin birds or about Linux, software which uses Penguins as a mascott, not to mention Penguin sporting or social clubs. 4. An expansion of the TLD space, creating such TLDs as .books, .birds, .software or other TLDs, would help avoid such disputes. 5. ICANN should not be in the business of deciding whether or not the Penguin domain should be used for the sale of books, for a site devoted to the Penquin birdds, to promote sporting teams, for Linux software, or for personal use. These are all legitimate uses of the word Penguin. 6. In this case, it appears as though the respondent was well represented. NCC is concerned about cases where the respondent is not able to obtain effective representation. -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 3 09:04:52 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 888B12A061 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 09:04:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA13491 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 09:04:52 -0400 Message-ID: <39896EF2.D4396092@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:09:06 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Michael Brick: Online Privacy Move Raises New Antitrust Concerns for Microsoft http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/financial/02tsc-msft.html August 02, 2000 Online Privacy Move Raises New Antitrust Concerns for Microsoft By MICHAEL BRICK NYTimes.com/TheStreet.com, 1:00 p.m. In defiance of antitrust prosecutors, Microsoft crushes competitors. In compliance with prosecutors, it seems the company sometimes does the same. A quietly simmering dispute over two different ways to ensure online privacy has exposed a new dilemma for the software giant. As it wins control over the market for Web browsers, the company is betting its future on its .NET initiative, selling software online. But in this new marketplace, Microsoft is learning that it can potentially trample rivals as a mere side effect of good public relations and other small matters. Matters may come to a head Wednesday when advertisers and online advertising agencies bring their concerns to Microsoft. A group of state attorneys general met Microsoft officials and engineers in Seattle recently to discuss Internet Explorer, the Web browser central to the long-running antitrust case that pits some of those attorneys against the company. With the ruling against the Redmond, Wash.-based company on appeal, these prosecutors wanted Microsoft's help on a seemingly unrelated issue. By making a few changes to Internet Explorer, they thought, the software maker could help consumers shrug off the monitoring devices used by online marketers to track purchases and movement on the Web -- and sometimes to gather personal data about customers. "The engineers and team came back overnight," said Bill Lockyer, attorney general of California. "That was technically a stunning response." But those changes placed Microsoft in an extraordinarily delicate legal position. Crashing the Party The software the engineers designed that night seemingly rendered obsolete months of negotiations over online privacy standards between Internet advertising agencies, the Federal Trade Commission and the Commerce Department. And Microsoft's unexpected involvement has brought new accusations that the company is using its dominance in the browser market to quash potential rivals. "They're able to now have this market impact with the browser because of the way in which they used the operating system to crush Netscape," Lockyer said. "They can cause a change in the businesses that succeed or fail." As online privacy has gained attention, two competing solutions have emerged. On July 27, the FTC approved a set of standards drafted by the Network Advertising Initiative, a group of online advertising agencies including DoubleClick and Engage. One week prior, Microsoft unveiled the changes to its browser. [snip] The change to Internet Explorer would warn users of the browser when a monitoring device, known as a cookie, is about to be placed on their computer. It would allow the user to block that cookie, all cookies, or just those placed by third-party advertising agencies like DoubleClick and Engage. The end results of each approach are nearly indistinguishable. Pace of Technology or Anticompetitive Intent? But Microsoft critics contend that, depending on how the prompts to users are phrased and how the default choices are set, the changes to Internet Explorer could steer Web users to reject cookies placed by third-party advertisers and accept those placed by first parties. Those parties would include Microsoft itself, which serves its own Microsoft Network of Web sites with advertising, as well as America Online and Yahoo!. "It gives them a huge competitive advantage," said a Senate staff member who is familiar with the dispute and who, like most Congressional aides, spoke on the condition of anonymity. (Members of the Senate Committee on Commerce have filed legislation that would require disclosure of online monitoring.) The advertisers are "pretty much out of business. If you wanted to place an ad and make sure it was effective, Microsoft or AOL or Yahoo! would be the only people you go to." But that does not necessarily constitute anticompetitive behavior. Like the advertising agencies and the government, Microsoft must understand that the business and privacy objectives are congruent. And if its patch tramples the advertising agencies, Lockyer said, well, "there aren't a lot of buggy-whip manufacturers active." Even when the company's intent is as benign as tending to its image with a consumer privacy effort, Microsoft does not operate in a vacuum, noted Richard Purcell, director of corporate privacy for Microsoft. [snip] On May 9, Richard Blumenthal, the Connecticut attorney general, wrote a letter to Steve Ballmer, the chief executive of Microsoft, on behalf of nine other state attorneys general. "We believe you are critically positioned to help educate consumers and to protect consumer privacy rights by using your browser to aggressively alert and educate consumers about their cookie options," Blumenthal wrote. He applauded Netscape, Internet Explorer's only real rival, which is owned by AOL, for allowing consumers to reject third-party cookies while accepting first party cookies. He sent Netscape a similar letter, to which it has not publicly responded. Although AOL is also a huge first-party advertiser and would seemingly enjoy similar advantages, that fact has garnered no public criticism from online advertising agencies. Suggestions and Fixes Microsoft had begun work on software applications to counteract online profiling in November, but the company was "somewhat behind the curve because we have to issue it as a patch," Purcell said. Blumenthal's missive "did quicken our attention, as those kinds of letters do." On June 21, some of the attorneys general, who were in town for their annual convention, gathered in Seattle with Microsoft officials and engineers. The company's team had programmed a PC to show how the browser handles cookies. They demonstrated their technological fix, which they were considering including in the next version of Internet Explorer, and attorneys general offered suggestions. The next day, the company's engineers met again with some of the same state officials and others who missed the first meeting. This time the Microsoft team had incorporated changes suggested the night before. For example, attorneys general had asked whether users could be allowed to completely erase cookies at the end of a session online, and the engineers had developed a new dialogue box prompting users to do just that. The state officials were impressed. But "the attorneys general carefully and specifically have not endorsed this particular product or approach," Blumenthal said. "The whole antitrust lawsuit raises issues of competition that may be implicated by exactly this sort of product." During the next week, Microsoft warned the advertising agencies it would soon announce the changes. Starting July 13, the online advertising companies called attorneys general, state by state, to raise those concerns. "They were very distressed about, 'We've been working with the FTC and this came out of the blue,'" said Linda Moran, a senior assistant attorney general of Washington. An Odd Position On July 20, Microsoft unveiled the change to Internet Explorer. Engage and DoubleClick issued news releases praising the software companies' commitment to privacy. However, Engage emphasized that a better solution was TrustLabels, a software specification it developed to reject third party cookies not certified by "trusted authorities." [snip] ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 3 09:32:31 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 845B12A061 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 09:32:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA13830 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 09:32:31 -0400 Message-ID: <3989756D.90DC30E0@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:36:45 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] UDRP --- catmachine.com and catmachines.com Subject: UDRP --- catmachine.com and catmachines.com Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:35:10 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org To: NCDNHC In looking the UDRP decision giving Caterpillar the domain catmachines.com, I discovered that a web graphic design firm (looks like a good one), is using catmachine.com. So WIPO took away catmachines.com from someone on the basis that it is identical or confusing similar to caterpillar.com or cat.com, and did not even notice that catmachine.com is in a bona fide site for a web designer. Maybe the web designers using catmachine.com can bring a UDRP against Caterpillar, claiming, with some justification, that catmachines.com is confusingly similiar to catmachine.com. Jamie James Love wrote: > > http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0275.html > > Roam the Planet had registered catmachines.com. Caterpillar was > successful in taking catmachines.com away from Roam the Planet. > According to the WIPO decision, Caterpillar had sales of $19 billion in > 1999. (Bulldozers and other products). Caterpillar already had > registered caterpillar.com and cat.com. It claimed that "catmachines" > was "identical, or confusingly similar" to its trademark in caterpillar > or cat. > > Roam the Planet, apparently a seller of domain names, complained that > Caterpillar was engaged in "Reverse domain highjacking." Roam the > Planet identified. > > "numerous legitimate domain uses" for a domain combining "cat" with > "machines", such as CAT for Computer Aided Technologies, Cat (the > animal) associated with machines (e.g. Littermaid), Category 5, CATscan, > Center for Advanced Technology (CAT), Computed Axial Tomography > (C.A.T.), Covert Action Teams (C.A.T.) and Catalog (abbreviation). > > > Apparently underminning its case was the fact that Roam the Planet had > tried to sell catmachines.com to Caterpillar for $9,000. > > WIPO transfered catmachines.com to Caterpillar. > > Possible NCC language. > > 1. catmachines.com is not "identical or confusingly similiar" to > caterpillar. > > 2. (suggestions welcome) > > ======================================================= > James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org > Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org > P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 > Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 > ======================================================= -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 3 12:32:57 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 393542A384 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 12:32:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA17004 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 12:32:57 -0400 Message-ID: <39899FB8.D051484@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 12:37:12 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] UDRP - Dispute over scientologie.org Subject: UDRP - Dispute over scientologie.org Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 12:34:36 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org To: NCDNHC http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0410.html Religious Technology Center v. Freie Zone E. V Dispute over http://www.scientologie.org Intellectual property disputes involving the Scientology are usually interesting, and this dispute is no exception. Apparently a German organization called the Freie Zone e.V. (Free Zone Association) owns the copyright to a book "Scientologie," that was published in 1934 by the philosopher Dr. Nordenholz, and was apparently an early foundation for the current religious philosophy, Scientology, which was proposed by L. Ron Hubbard in 1952. The Freie Zone group registered the domain scientologie.org from NSI in December 1995, with the intent of selling the book Scientologie, and offering information critical of the Church of Scientology. The Church of Scientology has registered trademarks in the word Scientologie in 9 countries, beginning in 1984, some fifty years after the Nordenholz book was published. The Freie Zone group also has a current registration for scientologie.de. The Church of Scientology complainted to WIPO that the Freie Zone group was "an international association of an "underground" nature that has, as one of its purposes, interference with the activities of Complainant and its affiliated organizations," and citing its trademark in Scientologie, they asked WIPO to give them scientologie.org. This is from the Respondent's May 31, 2000 Response: "Respondent is not an underground association. It was founded and registered publicly under the law of the Federal Republic of Germany. It runs webpages in many different languages to be found at and . The goal of the association is to support the philosophies of cognition and the free use of the technology and the philosophy of L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology. As the Book by Dr. Nordenholz is in the field of philosophy of cognition, Respondent inquired into that work. Respondent purchased the copyright, republished the Book, and registered the Domain Name in order to promote the philosophy of Dr. Nordenholz. According to Respondent, the free and unrestricted pursuit of Scientology is currently impossible both in the Church of Scientology and in society in general. Respondent explicitly separates itself from the official and unofficial organizations of the Church of Scientology. "After NSI suspended Respondent's Domain Name, Respondent registered a domain name with DE-NIC. Complainant never legally objected against this. Respondent uses the "de" domain as a substitute to , continues, however, to pay the annual fees to NSI in order to keep the domain name alive. Respondent is still interested in using the disputed Domain Name and considers the country domain "de" not as a suitable substitute. "The word "Scientologie" as a name for the philosophy is the intellectual property of Dr. Nordenholz and is protected as a "work title" according to § 5 Sect 3 of the German Trademark Act. This right was originally acquired by Dr. Nordenholz by publication of his Book in 1934 and did not expire. In addition, Respondent holds the copyrights for the Book, which entitles it to sell and market the Book. "It is Respondent's explicit interest not to be confused with the Complainant or its affiliated organizations. It is obvious to internet users that Respondent's home page does not have any affiliation with the Church of Scientology or Complainant. The WIPO panel found for the Freie Zone group, and rejected the request for a transfer of the domain, noting: "Looking at Respondent's history as stated on its website, it appears to be a renegade group of the Church of Scientology: Free Zone was founded around 1982 by "Captain" Bill Robertson, apparently the "right arm" of L. Ron Hubbard at the time. According to the Articles of Association of Respondent, the "purpose of the association is to inform the public about the philosophies of cognition, especially the philosophy of L. Ron Hubbard, as well as about organizations working in this field. The association emphatically differentiates itself from the official and unofficial organizations of the Church of Scientology. The members of the association do not agree with their practice as well as their interpretation of the philosophy of L. Ron Hubbard." "In summary, it is apparent that Respondent separated from the Church of Scientology, whose founder and leader, L. Ron Hubbard, assigned all rights to the trademark SCIENTOLOGY to Complainant. On the other hand, Respondent is holding genuine rights in the German Book entitled "Scientologie - Wissenschaft von der Beschaffenheit und Tauglichkeit des Wissens" which seems to be sharing philosophical roots with the philosophy of L. Ron Hubbard. The copyrights and other rights in this book have been licensed to Respondent by Dr. Nordenholz?s heirs, and these rights appear to be even older than Complainant's trademarks. Under these circumstances it cannot be said that Respondent has no right whatsoever and no legitimate interest in the Domain Name. In the contrary, to use the Domain Name as an international platform to disseminate information about Respondent?s book and its underlying philosophy appears to be a legitimate interest in itself of Respondent. Accordingly, Complainant has failed to sustain its burden of proof in this respect. Possible NCC resolution language: 1. The decision in the scientologie.org case was correct, and a good illustration of the need to protect the public's right to free speech and criticism. ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 3 12:54:57 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC95D2A061 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 12:54:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA17343 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 12:54:57 -0400 Message-ID: <3989A4E1.CAD1CC4E@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 12:59:13 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] UDRP - Eurotrash.com This is a note from one of the parties in the Eurotrash.com dispute. Apparently they have spent more than $40 thousand so far to defend their use of the Eurotrash.com domain name. I was unable to get the rapido.co.uk web page to respond to get the other side of the dispute. Jamie http://www.eurotrash.com/Aboutus/News/domainDispute.html Contact: Jan Duffy-King Telephone: 1-(212) 832-1207 Fax: 1-(212)-629-1140 email: jan@eurotrash.com W I T H O U T P R E J U D I C E This domain is currently under Dispute. Rapido TV in London have claimed in their Complaint that eurotrash.com have registered this domain in Bad Faith, that eurotrash.com have no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name and that the domain name is identical to a trademark or service mark in which they (Rapido TV) have rights. The case is being handled by WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) in Geneva, Switzerland. eurotrash.com registered this domain name over 4 years ago and have been doing business here since then as the rest of this site can testify (Check our Press Releases and our References throughout the site). eurotrash.com have supplied more evidence to WIPO than any other in a Domain Dispute (From Heidi Strom, Case Manager at WIPO) and defending this Domain Name Hijacking has cost us in the region of US$40,000 so far without including the cost legal expenses so far incurred. In the interests of being completely open, eurotrash.com have requested information from WIPO as to whether we can publish the Complaint, our Response, Rapido TV's further Complaint (in which they changed their original Complaint) and eurotrash.com's further Response. We also wish to publish all the appendix to our and Rapido TV's submissions. We believe strongly as does our Lawyers, and have supplied evidence to support, that Rapido TV are trying to HIJACK this domain and have asked the Panel (Presiding Member still to be Appointed) to find this in their findings. We believe that no panel has used this decision in the past. The Complaint was made on May 17th and we are still waiting on a full panel to be apointed. This has had an unsettling (to say the least) effect on our small staff. Please check back to this page, as soon as we receive word from WIPO that we are not breaking any copyright we shall publish everything here. Our staff have completed all the work to have the information here, we are just waiting on the permission. Rapido TV, through their Head of Legal Affairs have lied, throughout the process and supplied no documentary evidence of their claims. On the other hand, eurotrash.com have not only made their points truthfully and supplied documentary evidence to support this, but have also supplied documentary evidence to show that Rapido TV lied consistently. As it makes very good reading, if you wish to be informed when more information becomes available, please email me and I will send out an email to you when permission is granted from WIPO. Jan Duffy-King Principal eurotrash.com ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 3 14:58:22 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D97302A380 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 14:58:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA19463; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 14:58:22 -0400 Message-ID: <3989C1CF.C270A3D7@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 15:02:39 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , NCDNHC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Court orders owner of PETA parody site to relinquish address August 3, 2000 Court orders owner of PETA parody site to relinquish address By Sonja Barisic, Associated Press, 06/20/00 NORFOLK, Va. -- Animal-rights activists know the name PETA is an acronym for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. But in cyberspace, the letters briefly stood for People Eating Tasty Animals. From September 1995 to January 1996, a Maryland Internet entrepreneur used the Web address www.peta.org as the home page of the fictitious group. The site described itself as "a resource for those who enjoy eating meat, wearing fur and leather, hunting and the fruits of scientific research (and more!)." The animal-rights group wasn't laughing. They took Web site owner, Michael Doughney, to court and last week a federal judge ordered Doughney to relinquish the Web address to PETA and limit his use of domain names to those not "confusingly similar." "He did a selfish and self-serving thing by trying to profit from the name of an organization that serves to help animals," Lisa Lange, spokeswoman for Norfolk-based PETA, said Tuesday. PETA accused Doughney of trademark infringement and cybersquatting -- registering names of companies or groups in the hopes of selling them to their namesakes. [snip] ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 3 15:28:37 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D70BE2A385 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 15:28:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA19980 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 15:28:37 -0400 Message-ID: <3989C8E6.B59EBEFD@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 15:32:54 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Evidence of .com, .net and .org non-confusion There are many WIPO UDRP decisions that take away .org, or .net sites because they are considered confusingly similiar to existing .com sites. There are also .com sites taken away because they are considered similiar to .org site. The following example illustrate the these decisions are not necessary, and that the same name can be used by different organizations using different TLDs. Jamie abc.com ABC Television abc.org American Builders and Contractors nbc.com NBC Television nbc.org Northport Bapist Church Yale.com -- Yale Industrial Truscks Yale.edu - Yale University blue.com Blue Hypermedia Blue.org Blue Dot Blue.net Bluegrass Cellular Internet Services watch.com Natonal Watch Exchange watch.org Koenig's International News: WorldWatchDaily watch.net i2x Media Internet.com The Internet Industry Portal Internet.net Internet Shopping Network fish.com A personal web page fish.org Discussion of fisheries managment car.org California Association of Realtor car.net Car.Net An automobile portal cpa.com Ralphael & Associates, accountants cpt.net Dietrich and Wilson, accountants mpaa.net Michigan Patent Accounting Association mpaa.org Motion Picture Association of America WTO.com Wolf Technologies Online wto.int World Trade Organization baseball.com Baseball.com baseball portal baseball.net Baseball shopping network baseball.org Tribute to Erich Maria Remarque att.com AT&T Global Network Services att.net AT&T Worldnet Service att.org Associated Talmud Torahs -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 3 15:46:11 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F56E2A380 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 15:46:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA20291 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 15:46:11 -0400 Message-ID: <3989CD04.64A5FDBC@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 15:50:28 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] David Lawsky: Bush Advisors -- is current antitrust policy radical? Wednesday August 2 7:06 PM ET Ex-Antitrust Chief Questions Bush Adviser's Views By David Lawsky WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An antitrust chief to former President George Bush said on Wednesday that an economic adviser to Bush's son was wrong Tuesday to call today's antitrust policy ``radical.'' Lawrence Lindsey, an economic adviser to presidential candidate George W. Bush , had told Reuters television Tuesday at the Philadelphia Republican National convention: ``We saw a very vigorous and radical antitrust policy in this administration.'' Earlier this year a federal judge ordered a break-up of Microsoft Corp. to remedy violations of the nation's antitrust laws. The case was brought by the Justice Department. But James Rill, a lawyer with Howrey Simon in Washington who served under President Bush as head of the Justice Department antitrust division from 1989 to 1992, said it was ``certainly wide of the mark to call the current policy radical.'' ``In the final analysis I doubt that Larry Lindsey is speaking for the Republican Party or its candidate on antitrust policy,'' Rill said in a telephone interview. However, Rill's predecessor in the job, Charles Rule -- who served under former President Ronald Reagan starting in 1986 and briefly under President Bush in 1989 -- said Lindsey was right. 'Lack Of Trust' ``The antitrust policy of this administration has gotten increasingly radical and has exhibited a lack of trust in the wisdom of consumers and the workings of the marketplace,'' said Rule, now a lawyer with Covington & Burling. Rule, one of the lawyers representing Microsoft in its appeal of the break-up, said in the long run the Clinton administration's antitrust policy will hurt consumers and curtail innovation. Lindsey, who served as a Federal Reserve governor, said a new Bush administration would have ``greater sensitivity'' to ''respecting the private sector and respecting the need for innovation and profitability long-term.'' He asserted the Microsoft case was notable in part because it marks ``the first time in history we're not busting a trust'' in the use of antitrust law. But Rill said Lindsey was factually incorrect because he was ``forgetting about the AT&T case, which was brought by one Republican administration and concluded by another 10 years later.'' The case lasted from 1974 until 1982, when antitrust authorities under President Reagan negotiated AT&T's break-up into seven different operating companies. Rill said that Microsoft, another high-tech case, ``rests on a garden variety antitrust principle that challenges a monopolist's ability to engage in exclusive dealing to protect or expand monopoly power.'' Rill has on occasion done work for the firm's rivals. Lindsey said he preferred to ``let new competition come in the form of creative innovation. That's better than having the bureaucracy decide who should win.'' But Stephen Axinn, a lawyer with Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider in New York who consulted for the government on the failed Worldcom-Sprint merger, said sometimes government must act ''where the market would not be able to dissipate the power of a single firm monopoly because of that firm's ability to control innovation and bar competitors.'' And Phillip Proger of Jones Day said it can take so long for markets to solve problems by themselves that overcharges to consumers ``would never be recouped'' without government action. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 3 17:23:16 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 543D02A36B for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 17:23:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA21973 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 17:23:16 -0400 Message-ID: <3989E3C5.ABCB3126@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 17:27:33 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] new TLD application put off until 5 September Apparently ICANN will begin accepting new TLD applications on September 5, 2000. http://www.icann.org/announcements/icann-pr03aug00.htm - ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 3 22:56:08 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 013162A36B; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 22:56:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-4.essential.org [216.0.125.4]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA25836; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 22:56:06 -0400 Message-ID: <398A3DA6.ACFE8008@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 23:51:02 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] The Electronic Commerce and Consumer Protection Group This is an important group, and look at the statement regarding jurisdiction. Jamie http://www.ecommercegroup.org/ This is the URL for the "Electronic Commerce and Consumer Protection Group." The membership includes: AOL AT&T Dell IBM Microsoft NSI Time Warner Visa The group's statement on jurisdiction is found here: http://www.ecommercegroup.org/statement.htm "The application of traditional concepts of jurisdiction with respect to consumer protection law presents significant challenges to consumers, merchants, and governments alike. These challenges stem from the fact that merchants and consumers now do business on a global basis. Countries throughout the world have in place numerous different regimes intended to protect their citizens. It is impossible for the businesses, particularly small businesses, that are flocking to the Internet to comply simultaneously with inconsistent local consumer protection laws in the multiple jurisdictions where their customers may be located. At the same time, consumers will remain unnecessarily uncomfortable with shopping online if they do not know where the merchant they are dealing with is located and cannot be sure whether there is some reasonable prospect of obtaining relief if something should go wrong. [snip] "With respect to consumer protection for transactions, the group believes that at some point a framework will exist whereby local jurisdictions will be able to defer in the application of their laws to a new framework that provides both effective protections for consumers as well as legal certainty and simplification for merchants. After extensive consultation with businesses, governments, lawyers, consumers, and others, it is apparent to the Group that for such deference to be adopted, there needs to be significant operational experience to clearly demonstrate that a deference framework is best suited for dealing with transactional disputes in the online age. "It is for this reason that the E-Commerce Group has chosen to release these Guidelines at this time and encourage the development of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. [snip] These recommendations were presented to the FTC by NSI's Roger Cochetti and attorney Ron Plesser. http://www.ecommercegroup.org/testimony.htm Roger Cochetti, formerly with IBM, Comsat and the Department of State, is one of the architechs of ICANN, and "serves on committees or boards of a variety of Internet-related organizations, including the Internet Law & Policy Forum; R-SAC; the Internet Alliance; the Information Technology Association; the Online Privacy Alliance; the Coalition of Service Industries; the U.S. Internet Council; TRUSTe; the Internet State Coalition; the Internet Education Foundation (which sponsors programs of the Congressional Internet Caucus); and he has served as a consultant on Internet matters to the United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization." In his Testimony to the FTC on Alternative Dispute Mechanisms, Ron Plesser describes himself as an "Expert advisor to the US delegation in Ottawa on the Draft Hague Convention on Jurisdiction." He also points out that he has had "the honor of accompanying Commissioner Thompson and several Commission staff and staff of the Department of Commerce on the United States delegation to the OECD addressing issues of consumer protection in the global electronic marketplace." Ron Plesser represents a plethora of ecommerce interests, including the Direct Marketing Assocation and many other groups with interests in privacy and consumer protection legislation. James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 3 23:25:17 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00A882A36B for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 23:25:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-4.essential.org [216.0.125.4]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA26081 for ; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 23:25:16 -0400 Message-ID: <398A447C.750F2C64@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 00:20:12 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Fees to ICANN for ip numbers? http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg08627.html Interesting current IETF discussion involving Vint Cerf and others regarding possibilities of paying fees to ICANN for use of IP numbers. Jamie -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Aug 4 00:00:41 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCDCF2A32C for ; Fri, 4 Aug 2000 00:00:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-4.essential.org [216.0.125.4]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA26463; Fri, 4 Aug 2000 00:00:40 -0400 Message-ID: <398A4CC9.96BE318A@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 00:55:37 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , nc-tlds@cptech.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN's New TLD application process is now published http://www.icann.org/tlds/application-process-03aug00.htm ICANN's New TLD application process is now published. Here are a few comments. 1. One good item is that the $50,000 non-refundable fee can be applied to several strings, so long as the basic proposal is pretty much the same for each string. 2. A bad thing is the $50k fee, particularly the hard line that the money is basically gone once it is paid, and the clear statement that few will be chosen, regardless of the merits of proposals. This is about 10 times the non-refundable amount for the registrar applications, and according to some ICANN board members, a fundraising mechanism for ICANN. 3. The ICANN staff has separated the policy and the day to day management parts of the application somewhat, which I think is a good thing, and it has made it clear that groups should feel comfortable in thinking about doing just policy or just managment, depending upon their strengths, which should be a model less daunting for NGOs, once the $50k issue is resolved, or in later rounds where one hopes the fees will be more reasonable. Several firms have already indicated to me that they will offer services to groups who want to set policy but who don't want to run the day to day stuff. 4. The proposals will not be restricted very much, except for what looks like difficult bonding or other types of proof of financial or technical soundness. My guess is that the ICANN staff will go overboard on these criteria for the testbed. Jamie -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Aug 4 16:11:30 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BEF92A061 for ; Fri, 4 Aug 2000 16:11:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA04985 for ; Fri, 4 Aug 2000 16:11:26 -0400 Message-ID: <398B236B.D876FD83@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 16:11:23 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Ford claims rights to Model E term http://technews.netscape.com/news/0-1007-200-2432450.html Ford sues car-leasing site Model E By Erich Luening Staff Writer, CNET News.com August 4, 2000, 11:40 a.m. PT Ford Motor and Silicon Valley's Softbank Venture Capital are dueling over the name of an upscale car-leasing Web site: Model E. Ford filed a trademark infringement lawsuit in federal court in Michigan last week over the name, the company confirmed. Softbank is named in the suit because it is Model E's biggest investor. Model E plans to launch later this year. The automaker said the name Model E is too close to its well-known Model T, which rolled out of the factory in 1908 and became Ford's first mass success. Ford also said it has reserved the name Model E for an internal program that distributes computers to employees. [snip] ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Aug 6 21:16:42 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 048FD2A066 for ; Sun, 6 Aug 2000 21:16:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-9.essential.org [216.0.125.9]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA23394 for ; Sun, 6 Aug 2000 21:16:25 -0400 Message-ID: <398E1AC1.8FDE045C@cptech.org> Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 22:11:13 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Cavebear Privacy Policy Karl Auerbach is an interesting person, who may be a candidate for an at larage seat for ICANN. He also has a pretty cool "Privacy Policy" on his web page. This is it. http://www.cavebear.com/privacypolicy.html The CaveBear Privacy Policy We participate in no so-called "private" privacy initiatives. Indeed we feel that leaving the protection of privacy to anything less than well enforced laws would be a farce. The CaveBear site takes no active steps to protect your privacy. We collect the standard logs of access to our systems. We never have used the access logs for anything but our own administrative uses - primarily monitoring our sites to see whether someone has tried (or succeeded) to penetrate our security. And we have never opened those logs to anyone other than our own administrative staff, who, it may be said, tend to find the contents not merely uninteresting but downright boring. At the current time the CaveBear site has no interest in using our logs for any other purpose. At the present time we do not believe that we have any web pages that either put "cookies" on your computers or read such cookies that may have been put there by ourselves or by others. So, if you are concerned about your privacy, you luck out - our practices are consistent with your interest in protecting your privacy. However we do not guarantee that our practices will not someday change or that we will not accidentally disclose something. It is our recommendation to you that you take such self protections as you feel appropriate. And we further suggest that you do not look to protection of your privacy to come from the private sector - that sector's interests are not aligned with yours. The CaveBear site strongly urges that you support national legislation and international treaties that define and protect your privacy. Updated December 27, 1999 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Aug 8 15:13:14 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4010B2A05E for ; Tue, 8 Aug 2000 15:13:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA17472 for ; Tue, 8 Aug 2000 15:13:14 -0400 Message-ID: <39905BF1.5FB35E5B@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 15:13:53 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN Has Reserved All The Best Seats For The Corporate Elite A view from Germany on the ICANN at large election. Jamie http://www.commondreams.org/views/080400-102.htm Published on Friday, August 4, 2000 in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (Germany) Out Of Balance ICANN Has Reserved All The Best Seats For The Corporate Elite by Sandra Kegel -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Aug 8 15:23:31 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDDB32A31C for ; Tue, 8 Aug 2000 15:23:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA17658 for ; Tue, 8 Aug 2000 15:23:31 -0400 Message-ID: <39905E5A.16345A3F@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 15:24:10 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Cable and satellite operators will build "walled gardens" -- captive collections of commerce and ad-supported content Thanks to Jeff Chester for this pointer. jl http://www.forrester.com/ER/Press/Release/0,1769,366,FF.html Smarter TV Will Add $25 Billion To The Industry By 2005, According To Forrester Cambridge, Mass., July 21, 2000 . . . In the next five years, smarter TV devices and content will dramatically shift how viewers consume television programming. [snip] Cable and satellite operators will build "walled gardens" -- captive collections of commerce and ad-supported content -- generating more than $3 billion in commerce by 2002. But the true potential of smarter television won't arrive until 2003, when the networks and operators will finally agree on standards for metadata -- information about programs and commercials embedded in video streams. Metadata will unlock the door to new TV behaviors -- programs with embedded commerce, customized video assembled to viewer preferences, and layered commercials that invite viewers into ever-deeper interactions. [snip] ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Aug 8 16:49:45 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B55C12A05E for ; Tue, 8 Aug 2000 16:49:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA19224 for ; Tue, 8 Aug 2000 16:49:45 -0400 Message-ID: <39907291.DBB45184@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 16:50:25 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Mike Roberts on CPSR Civil Society Statement http://www.cpsr.org/internetdemocracy/Statement_July-13_Comments.html ICANN CEO Mike Roberts posted a comment to CPSR's Internet Democracy project's Civil Society Statement on ICANN Elections. My favorite quote was: "Railing away at ICANN because it doesn't meet some ideal model of democracy is likely to be about as effective as complaining that the US Congress is too dominated by the money of those who finance political campaigns. Everyone knows that, the question is how do you work from within the system to balance competing interests, many of which possess economic power." ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Aug 8 18:08:08 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C4082A05E for ; Tue, 8 Aug 2000 18:08:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA20509 for ; Tue, 8 Aug 2000 18:08:08 -0400 Message-ID: <399084F0.4080024D@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 18:08:48 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Washington Post and Cable Internet issues Jeff Chester points out that the Washington Post wrote an editorial urging regulatory restrain on cable Internet access, without disclosing their own interests in the cable/Internet industry. Jamie http://washpostco.com/cable.htm http://www.cableone.net/ http://www.cableone.net/Internet/cablemodemfaq.asp http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52591-2000Aug7.html Open Cable Tuesday, August 8, 2000, page A24 LAST WINTER, when AOL and Time Warner announced plans to merge, the two companies laid out the case against regulatory opposition to their union. True, the marriage would concentrate power in the brave new multimedia world: Time Warner cables would offer high-speed access to AOL's Internet service, which would in turn offer Time Warner TV, magazines and music. But the companies explained that this concentration would be redeemed by the principle of "open access." Time Warner cable would give consumers a choice of Internet services, not just AOL. And AOL would point customers to content from all manner of sources, not just from Time Warner. The firms now are trying to show that open access is more than a slogan. Time Warner has announced a deal with Juno, a company that provides dial-up access to the Internet in fierce competition with AOL. People living in areas served by Time Warner's cable network will be able to choose Juno as their high-speed Internet provider rather than being obliged to use a Time Warner affiliate. The competition should help keep Internet subscription rates down while increasing AOL's incentive to offer the widest possible variety of content, lest it lose customers. Open access in the Internet service market thus promotes open access to the Net for rival media companies. The question for regulators is whether the firms' voluntary actions need to be bolstered by government intervention. Critics argue that AOL-Time Warner is not to be trusted: The firm may abandon openness once the merger is done; it is already a jealous guardian of its dominance in instant messaging. But the danger must be weighed against the cost and difficulty of regulating a fast-evolving industry. So long as the firms prove serious about open access, regulatory restraint is wisest. ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Aug 9 18:41:55 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 080F62A316 for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 18:41:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA06231; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 18:41:53 -0400 Message-ID: <3991DE64.C214EA5B@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 18:42:44 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tacd-ecommerce , Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] Eur. Patent Office proposes unlimited patentability _________________________________________________________________ Eur. Patent Office proposes unlimited patentability IT professionals demand effective control of the EPO For immediate Release Munich, Berlin, Frankfurt, Ilmenau, Magdeburg - The European Patent Office (EPO) wants to induce European governments to remove all legal restrictions on patentability in november 2000. The German Federal Ministery of Justice (BMJ) distributed a "Base Proposal for the Revision of the European Patent Convention" dated 2000-06-27 to the "circles interested in the patent system" at the beginning of August. The Association for the Promotion of a Free Informational Infrastructure (FFII) sent an open letter to the BMJ, in which it pointed out some inconsistencies in the EPO's proposal and warned about devastative effects of the EPO's expansive patent policy on innovation, competition, prosperity, education and civil rights. Ralf Schwöbel, CEO of Intradat AG, a Frankfurt based market leader in e-shop systems, explains his support for the public letter: "With this proposal, the EPO creates a legal framework for patenting as many business methods as the US. As a publisher of e-commerce solutions, we believe that this is harmful, since it will deter many small and medium size enterprises from developping their own e-commerce solutions." Recent studies show, that the European Patent Office examiners tend to grant patents on immaterial objects (such as software and business methods) even more generously than the USPTO and JPO colleagues. According to a Japanese comparative study, the EPO applies even lower standards for assessing the inventivity of immaterial objects. Moreover, for the purpose of examining the technicity of business methods, the EPO even plans to abandon its traditional request that these methods should have an "additional technical effect" beyond the ordinary use of the computer, as soon as the limitations on patentability are removed by the legislator as proposed by the EPO. Matthias Schlegel, CEO of Phaidros AG, an Ilmenau based pioneer in meta-modelling of commercial processes, comments: "With tens of thousands of software and business method patents floating around, our customers are concerned about legal risks and asking for guarantees. Our board is considering the formation of millions of DEM of annual reserve funds to prepare for ligitation and patent applications. But even we apply for extensive software and business method patents, such as the EPO seems to be eager to grant, this would be of only limited use for protecting our copyrights on the modular systems into which we have been investing from patent attacks of third parties. It would mainly add to the drain on our ressources, which have to be shifted away from R&D investments to legal costs. As far as I can see, most of the typical European software SMEs share our experience. The patent offices do not know about this, and they don't really care. Therefore it is extremely important that the regulative competence about what can be patented stays with the parliaments and is not transferred to the patent offices." Co-signer Jens Enders, CEO of MDLink GmbH, a technology leader of web-based e-business systems from Magdeburg, adds: "Software patents are good for aging companies who want to fence in their territory for 20 years in order to repose on their laurels. For the protection of our competitive edge, copyright and human capital serve us well. Patent politicians who are trying to sell us further "strong IP protection", seem to simply ignore the rules of our trade." The "Base Proposal" completes the development, which the president of software patents workgroup of the Union of European Patent Consultants, patent attorney Jürgen Betten, predicted in several publications at the beginning of this year: By means of the ... development of jurisdiction ... the patent system has detached itself from its traditional restriction to the processing industry and is now of essential importance also for service companies in the fields of commerce, banking, insurances, telecommunication etc. Without building a suitable patent portfolio, it is to be feared that the German service companies in these sectors will find themselves in a disadvantaged position vis-a-vis their US competitors. ... Patent Law gives the patentee a right to exclude others from using the patented invention. ... In complex fields of technology, in which the establishment of a "standard" is often a prerequesite for success with the consumer, such as in the area of entertainment electronics, telecommunications or the Internet, cross-licensing has become a frequent and practical form of patent exploitation: using their own patents "as a currency", companies gain access to technologies which have been patented by competing companies. ... Since the governmental conference of the member states of the European Patent Organisation has in June 1999 in Paris entrusted the EPO with the mandate to propose before 2001-01-01 a revised version of EPC 52.2 concerning the exclusion of computer programs, so that the modified version can enter into force before 2000-07-01, it is now presumably only a question of time, until the "computer programs" as well as the other exemption rules are removed from EPC 52. The chairman of the German Parliamentary Commission on the New Media, Jörg Tauss, sees an urgent need for the legislator to act: In the circles of technological policy experts, you can often here people asserting that the patent system must be extended to certain areas of information technology, whose investments would otherwise not be sufficiently protected. This assertion has however until now always been touted like a self-evident truth, and nobody I know of ever cared to substantiate it in the light of facts from the German or European IT economy. Even if the patent advocates succeeded in finding areas of information technology, in which patents are having or have had some positive effects, it would nonetheless still be necessary to investigate, whether these effects are not outweighed by possible detrimental side-effects of the patent system. But while the legislative authorities are still completely clueless on this matter, the judicial authorities are already taking action, granting thousands of software patents and pressing for a change of the legal rules. We as legislators should therefore now take up these questions with highest priority. The FFII letter is designed to help clarify the questions for the legislator. It suggests means of making the EPO base proposal more specific, so as to subject the EPO to an effective control by the legislator. Thereby it turns out that currently no valid reason exists for changing the law (EPC art 52), while there are good legal reasons for introducing precise and restrictive definitions for pliable terms such as "technicity" and "industrial applicability". The public letter moreover cites economic studies and the EP, which has meanwhile been signed by approximately 30000 citizens, including 400 executives of IT companies, and supporting statements from nearly 300 European politicians. But even public protests of this amplitude have so far not prompted more than a "silence in the forest" on the part of the patent system's decisionmakers. Already in June 1999 the two BMJ officers in charge of negotiating for the German delegation at the intergovernmental conference in Paris did not react to an appeal based on 5000 signatures, and gave the EPO the mandate to change the European Patent Convention. Little later, both BMJ officers were promoted to new offices in Munich. One became a leading judge at the EPO, the other the president of the German Patent Office. And today's president of the European Patent Office and initiator of the "Base Proposal", Dr. Ingo Kober, also started his career in the BMJ. The EPO finances itself by patent fees, collected from the owners of the patents it grants. References * Eurolinux Petition for a Software Patent Free Europe - http://petition.eurolinux.org/index.en.html * Software Patents - http://swpat.ffii.org/indexen.html * Association for the Promotion of a Free Informational Infrastructure - http://www.ffii.org/indexen.html About FFII - www.ffii.org FFII is a non-profit association which promotes the development of open interfaces, open source software and freely available public information. FFII coordinates a workgroup on software patents which is sponsored by successful german software publishers. FFII is member of the EuroLinux Alliance. Press Contacts email: info@ffii.org Tel: Hartmut Pilch +49-89-18979927 Permanent URL for this PR http://swpat.ffii.org/news/epue28 _________________________________________________________________ http://swpat.ffii.org/news/epue28/indexen.html 2000-07 SWPAT-AG des FFII From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Aug 9 19:16:38 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 285E92A316 for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 19:16:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA06781 for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2000 19:16:37 -0400 Message-ID: <3991E688.F48CA19B@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 09 Aug 2000 19:17:28 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Technology transfer and Access to HIV/AIDS drugs This is a proposal for (1) save US consumers and taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars per year, and (b) obtain a cheap supply of raw materials for several HIV drugs to be used by the WHO or UNAIDS. The savings in the US and EU market could finance medicine purchases and infrastructure for treatment in poor countries. Jamie Love The US goverment currently has Bayh-Dole rights in the following HIV drugs: ddI ddC d4T Abacavir Ritonavir Under US law, the US government could declare that these drugs have been overpriced, given the public investment (not hard to prove), and issue additional licenses for production, creating competition and saving US (and possibly EU) taxpayers and consumers hundreds of millions of dollars every year. In addition, the US government could require, as a condition of getting entry into the lucative US and EU markets, that the company that obtained the additional license provide, at cost, the raw materials for the products, to the WHO or UNAIDS, for use in poor countries. This would solve several problems at once. First, it would allow a firm to exploit very large economies of scale. Second, it would save US taxpayers and consumers lots of money. Third, it would find a way to reward companies that produce cheap raw materials for poor countries. No only would this not cost the US government any money, it would save the US government hundreds of millions of dollars every year. The only losers would be producers who are ripping off consumers for government funded inventions, and two US Universities (Yale and University of Minnesota) that share in BMS and Glaxo profits through royalties. If it is possible to produce a three drug cocktail for $250 per year with large scale production (as one Thai producer estimates), it would cost $250 million per year to produce medicines for every one million persons. You could easily finance medicines for one million patients, and have money left over for infrastructure investments, from the savings in the US market for those 5 drugs. -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 10 15:59:14 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96DCF2A05E for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 15:59:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA25184 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 15:59:14 -0400 Message-ID: <399309CF.D17BF96@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 16:00:15 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] A few more links of WP/Cable investments Again, from Jeff Chester: http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/NYS/WPO/reports/ar99/bus/cable.htm Washington Post cable investments, from 1999 annual report http://www.corporate-ir.net/ireye/ir_site.zhtml?ticker=WPO&script=410&layout=-6&item_id=82003 Post and AT&T swap cable investments ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 10 16:06:09 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68BB42A066 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 16:06:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA25295 for ; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 16:06:09 -0400 Message-ID: <39930B6D.E6249676@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 16:07:09 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Cable proposals for "acceptable use" of Internet conectins, discriminatory downstream bandwidth Pointer from Jeff. See in particular the last paragraph. Jamie 46 FALL 1999 CTAM QUARTERLY JOURNAL "The dilemma is that our customers will increasingly have the option to use our networks to purchase and view video entertainment directly from third parties." Is the Internet a Threat to Our Core Revenue Streams? by David Large, Principal and Co-Founder, Media Connections Group Sometimes it pays to look beyond our immediate opportunities and goals and see the broader implications of new technology. Such is the case with our new Internet access or cable modem service. If we aren't careful here we could get bitten badly. [Snip] * AOL and Microsoft have included real-time video viewers in their most recent software releases for PCs. CED Magazine reported that there were 38 million registered users of AOL's video viewer as of Jan. 1999. * An increasing number of Web sites offer real-time video either advertising-supported or on a PPV basis. For instance, as reported in recent national and trade press articles: Digital Entertainment Network launched five channels in May; Warner Bros. Online and Sony Online Entertainment are planning multi-media entertainment "portals"; both Warner Bros. Online and Bravo are planning PPV online channels; @Home launched in April a "netcasting" service of short films; and pioneer broadcast.com delivers a wide range of video products. Taken together, these events mean simply that PC users can, and will, routinely purchase and view video entertainment video through the Web, rather than from their friendly neighborhood cable operator. There are problems, of course. For one thing, viewing on a PC is not exactly the same as viewing on a large-screen television - or is it? WorldGate, WebTV and ICTV all convert images from the Internet for display on television screens and they are also configuring their software so that it can be run within one of the new OpenCable set-top boxes. Not only will it appear on the TV, but it will be controlled from the same box used to select and view standard cable programming. Thus, TV viewers and PC users, can view programs delivered through the Internet. What about video quality? Surely video delivered at typical Internet data rates doesn't look as good as our own digital video product, does it? The answer is that, at "dial-up" telephone modem speeds, it doesn't and that has limited the appeal of Web-delivered video. But wait - your local cable engineer has solved that problem with cable modems. In fact, cable modems are quite capable of receiving broadcast-quality video if we allow them to do so. Not only that, but one of the options provided for in the OpenCable set-top box specification is the inclusion of an on-board cable modem. Combine the included cable modem with Internet-on-TV software and the quality problem is solved. Or, as stated by Mark Cuban, President of broadcast.com [CED, Jan.99], "As long as cable companies allow their customers onto the Internet, I can deliver full-motion video to those users." Should we avoid delivering boxes with all these features to our customers? Not an option. The FCC has ruled that by July 2000 customers will have the option to buy their set-top boxes at retail, from any vendor, with whatever features they want. In short, the dilemma is that our customers will increasingly have the option to use our networks to purchase and view video entertainment directly from third parties. To the extent that they do,we will evolve from an entertainment retailer to a passive carrier. What can we do? Among other options: We can restrict the maximum speed of modems to limit the quality of "streamed" video; we can adopt "acceptable usage" policies that don't include downloading real-time video; we can change to usage-based pricing, thus charging more when customers download movies; we can bring a compelling list of video retailers into our own Internet "portal" and compete directly; or we can ignore the whole thing and hope it goes away. I don't recommend the latter. Marketers need to carefully study these new trends in video entertainment and work with engineers and management to position their companies in this changing landscape. [snip] ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 10 16:15:19 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E9BB2A066; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 16:15:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA25452; Thu, 10 Aug 2000 16:15:19 -0400 Message-ID: <39930D93.5C173E9C@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 16:16:19 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , pharm-policy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] US Market for 2 clases of HIV drugs Thanks to Rachel for this info. Do these numbers look right? Source: Mirasol, Feliza, "New Drug Classes Drive Expanding HIV Market," Chemical Market Reporter, April 17, 2000 (9,18): Leading HIV Antivirals US Market in millions of dollars Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors 12 mos. ending Feb/00 Combivir $ 478.4 Zerit [d4T] $ 315.9 Epivir $ 260.2 Sustiva $ 178.6 Viramune $ 108.1 Ziagen [Abacavir] $ 107.5 Videx [ddI] $ 78.6 Retrovir $ 55.0 Hivid [ddC] $ 9.7 Rescriptor $ 7.4 Retrovir IV $ 0.7 Total $1,600.1 Protease Inhibitors 12 mos. ending Feb/00 Viracept $ 440 Crixivan $ 234 Norvir [Ritonavir] $ 101 Fortovase $ 80 Agenerase $ 48 Invirase $ 30 Total $ 933 All figures are rounded Source: IMS Health and CMR estimates ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Aug 11 15:28:21 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4FBF2A39B; Fri, 11 Aug 2000 15:28:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA06293; Fri, 11 Aug 2000 15:28:21 -0400 Message-ID: <3994541C.21FDAC9@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 15:29:32 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , Non-commercial TLDs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] CPT Comments to WIPO RFC on Domain Names August 11, 2000 RE: WIPO - RFC on Domain Names to: process.mail@wipo.int WIPO Internet Domain Name Process World Intellectual Property Organization 34 chemin des Colombettes P.O. Box 18, 1211 Geneva 20 Switzerland Dear Sir or Madam, Attached are comments of the Consumer Project on Technology on the current WIPO Request for Comment on the Terms of Reference, Procedures and Timetable for the Second WIPO Internet Domain Name Process. (http://wipo2.wipo.int/process2/rfc/rfc1/index.html). Sincerely, James Love Director, Consumer Project on Technology http://www.cptech.org CPT Comments On Terms of Reference, Procedures and Timetable for the Second WIPO Internet Domain Name Process 1. csa-canada.com and csa-international.net http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0071.html CSA International (a.k.a. Canadian Standards Association) v. John O. Shannon and Care Tech Industries, Inc. In this case, a firm named Care Tech Industries sought to obtain certification of an ozone generator from the Canadian Standards Association (CSA). The CSA has a trademark on CSA and CSA International, and owns the domain CSA-International.org. Care Tech then registered csa-canada.com and csa-international.net, which it used to criticize CSA, for its decision not the certify the Care Tech production. According to the WIPO panel: Respondents maintain websites at each of these addresses. At each website, Respondents attack and criticise the Complainant and its staff in relation, inter alia, to its failure to certify Respondents' Odatus generator. The content of each site is substantially identical, and each directs viewers to see "our homepage". Following that link leads to the "odatus.com" homepage which includes promotion of the Odatus ozone generator. . . . they are not using the domain names in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services and they do not claim to be commonly known by either of the domain names. Examination of Respondents' web pages clearly show that they are using their domain names to attract persons to their sites for the purpose of publicly attacking the Complainant and members of its staff and pleading its case in relation to a dispute between themselves and the Complainant in relation to a product which Respondents offer under the trade mark Odatus. Persons attracted to the site are likely to be persons seeking contact with Complainant, not persons seeking contact with Respondents. Respondents claim to rights and legitimate interests is essentially based on a claim to freedom of speech and, expression of opinion, but that right does not require the use of Complainant's trade marks in the domain names for that purpose. The WIPO panel concluded that Care Tech did not have rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain names, that they were registered and were used in bad faith, and ordered the domain names transferred to the Canadian Standards Organization. CPT Comment: 1. This decision was wrong. The right of a person or a firm to criticize a standards body or a government organization is a legitimate interest. There was no suggestion that the domains were used to confuse the public as to the identity of the CSA. 2. The use of the trademarked name in the domain name was appropriate, just as would be the use of the trademarked name in the title of a book or the title of a web page. As the decision notes, the web sites were clearly attacks on the CSA by an aggrieved party, and would not have been confused as an official CSA web page. 3. The fact that the interest of Care Tech was commercial did not mean that Care Tech did not have a legitimate free speech right to criticize the CSA. 2. DodgeViper.com http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0222.html This is a UDRP decision involving a web site, http://www.dodgeviper.com, which was run by a fan of Dodge Vipers, since 1996. Dodge had even provided a link to his site in one of the Dodge Viper magazines. Then the Dodge legal department went after the site. According to one observer, the panelist "found bad faith registration and bad faith use on literally no supportive facts." Comment: 1. Expansion of the TLD space could help address these problems, by creating TLDs such as .fans, .owners or .users. 2. There is a legitimate purpose in consumers creating web sites to discuss products. They should be permitted to use the name of the product in the domain name, so long as the web site doesn't purport to be an official company site. The dodgevipers.com site is clear that it is a fan site, and not a Dodge site. 3. The UDRP should reverse its decision in the dodgevipers.com case. 3. Crew.com http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0054.html This is the decision that gave J. Crew the rights to crew.com. Crew.com was registered by Telepathy, a speculator in domain names. It was not being used for a real web page. J. Crew tried to buy crew.com, but did not come to terms with Telepathy, and then used the UDRP to take it away. Crew is a generic word. J. Crew has apparently registered crew as a trademark. J. Crew also has jcrew.com for its web page. The MIT Dictionary Server gives quite a few definitions for Crew: Crew Crew (kr?), n. (Zo"ol.) The Manx shearwater. Crew Crew (kr?), n. From older accrue accession, reinforcement, hence, company, crew; the first syllable being misunderstood as the indefinite article. See Accrue, Crescent. 1. A company of people associated together; an assemblage; a throng. There a noble crew Of lords and ladies stood on every side. --Spenser. Faithful to whom? to thy rebellious crew? --Milton. 2. The company of seamen who man a ship, vessel, or at; the company belonging to a vessel or a boat. Note: The word crew, in law, is ordinarily used as equivalent to ship's company, including master and other officers. When the master and other officers are excluded, the context always shows it. --Story. Burrill. 3. In an extended sense, any small body of men associated for a purpose; a gang; as (Naut.), the carpenter's crew; the boatswain's crew. Syn: Company; band; gang; horde; mob; herd; throng; party. Crew Crew (kr?), imp. of Crow. Crow Crow (kr?), v. i. imp. Crew (kr?) or Crowed (kr?d); p. p. Crowed (Crown (kr?n), Obs.); p. pr. & vb. n. Crowing. AS. cr?wan; akin to D. kraijen, G. kr?hen, cf. Lith. groti to croak. root24. Cf. Crake. 1. To make the shrill sound characteristic of a cock, either in joy, gayety, or defiance. ``The cock had crown.'' --Bayron. The morning cock crew loud. --Shak. 2. To shout in exultation or defiance; to brag. 3. To utter a sound expressive of joy or pleasure. The sweetest little maid, That ever crowed for kisses. --Tennyson. To crow over, to exult over a vanquished antagonist. Sennacherib crowing over poor Jerusalem. --Bp. Hall. CPT agrees with the dissent by panel member G. Gervaise Davis III: We are not legislators, but arbitrators. The majority, in an effort to stop a practice that it seems to take upon itself to believe is an unstated purpose of the ICANN Policy, has completely over-stepped its mandate as arbitrators. The decision creates a new and unauthorized test out of whole cloth, based on assumptions of fact by arbitrators without evidence on the subject, instead of using the appropriate and carefully crafted three step test for required evidence set out by the ICANN Policy and Rules. In my judgment, the majority's decision prohibits conduct which was not intended to be regulated by the ICANN policy. This creates a dangerous and unauthorized situation whereby the registration and use of common generic words as domains can be prevented by trademark owners wishing to own their generic trademarks in gross. I cannot and will not agree to any such decision, which is fundamentally wrong. I respectfully dissent from the majority decision of my fellow professional panelists. CPT Comment: 1. The UDRP should not have given J. Crew the rights to crew.com. Crew is a generic word. J. Crew had registered jcrew.com, a domain name that was clearly different from crew.com. It is anticompetitive for the UDRP to take away domains based upon generic words to a company that has a different name. 4. Penguin.Org http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0204.html CPT agreed with this decision. Penguin Books Limited is a large publisher of paperback books, and the owner of penguin.com. Anthony Katz is known to his friends as "the Penguin." He had registered penguin.org He also appeared to have been very well represented in the WIPO proceeding. His side told the panel: i. Anthony Katz was known as "Penguin" long before said domain name was registered. ii. Mr Katz has made only two uses of the said domain name , firstly as a personal e-mail address and secondly as the address of a personal www site. [Avery Dennison Corp. v. Sumpton, 1999 WL 635767 (9th Circuit. August 23, 1999), use of names a e-mail addresses does not constitute commercial use] iii. Mr Katz registered said domain name to establish a www site dedicated to penguins (the birds). [snip] xii. Mr Katz is not a cybersquatter: he is known as "Penguin"; he did not register the other domain names (registered August 24, 1998); (registered October 5, 1998) and (registered October 5, 1998) with the intention of re-sale. His circumstances can be distinguished from the position of the Respondent in Nabisco Brands Company v. The Patron Group, Inc. WIPO Case No. 2000-0032, February 23, 2000, David W. Plant, Presiding Panelist, as in that case the Respondent owned at least 53 domain names identical or virtually identical to registered U.S.A. trade marks of other companies such as Nestle, General Mills, Nabisco, AT&T, Pfizer, Proctor & Gamble and Warner-Lambert. In that case the Complainant established a continuous and obvious pattern of cybersquatting whereas Mr Katz registrations do not even remotely approach the pattern reviewed in Nabisco Brands. xviii. Hundreds, if not thousands of domain names have been registered in the name of families. It is not wrongful conduct so to do. xix. When registering a domain name, there is no obligation to disclose the nature of the entity identified as the registrant. There is no obligation under Texas law to register an alias of an individual or entity such as a partnership that does not conduct any business or commercial activities whatsoever. xx. There is no evidence that Mr Katz registered the domain name in the name of the Katz Family to conceal his identity, as the WHOIS database identifies him as the administrative contact and provides his e-mail address at his current place of employment. xxi. The word "Penguin" and the mascot character "Tux" have become irreversibly associated with the LINUX computer system. Accordingly there is no bad faith in Mr Katz electing to show his personal allegiance to the LINUX operating system by posting an image of Tux on his homepage. xxii. Non commercial sites often identify the software that underlie the site Mr Katz has elected to identify the LINUX software and he gives a number of examples of other sites that do this. In finding for Anthony Katz, who was permitted to keep penguin.org, the WIPO panel noted: "This Administrative Panel is reluctant to engage in the activity of policing how much development the owner of a clearly personal Web site must do, in the absence of any other evidence of bad faith. Any attempt to apply any objective minimum standards for development could well impose a significant economic burden on innocent registrants as a precondition of holding their domain names. CPT Comment: 1. WIPO was correct in permitting Anthony Katz to retain the use of Penguin.org. 2. There was nothing on the Penguin.org page that would lead one to believe that it was the publisher of Penguin Books. 3. There are many legitimate uses of the word Penguin, including, for example, web pages about Penguin birds or about Linux, software which uses Penguins as a mascott, not to mention Penguin sporting or social clubs. 4. An expansion of the TLD space, creating such TLDs as .books, .birds, software or other TLDs, would help avoid such disputes. 5. ICANN should not be in the business of deciding whether or not the Penguin domain should be used for the sale of books, for a site devoted to the Penguin birds, to promote sporting teams, for Linux software, or for personal use. These are all legitimate uses of the word Penguin. 6. In this case, it appears as though the respondent was well represented. CPT is concerned about cases where the respondent is not able to obtain effective representation. 5. Esquire.Com http://www.arbforum.com/domains/decisions/93763.htm This is an arbitration decision that took away the domain esquire.com, and gave it to Hearst Magazines, the publisher of Esquire, the US mens magazine. There was apparently evidence that the original domain name holder, Mail.com, had plans to use this as a vanity email address. This is from the dissent in the opinion, written by Milton Mueller: "There is growing precedent within US law and within the UDRP that resale of domain names per se is not evidence of actionable bad faith. (See Avery Dennison Corp. v. Jerry Sumpton, D.C. Case No. CV-97-00407-JSL, Appeal No. 98-55810; General Machine Products Co., Inc v. Prime Domains NAF 0001000092531 re: craftwork.com, and Allocation Network GbmH v Steve Gregory, WIPO Case D2000-0016 re: allocation.com.) "Which leads to the issue of Mail.com's status in this proceeding. Respondents offered proof that Spencer sold the domain name to a party with a legitimate, non-infringing interest in the name. Mail.com provided evidence from 1997 - three years before this dispute - of plans to use the domain name as a vanity email address. Complainant Hearst offered no evidence or argumentation to challenge the intent or validity of this transaction. The Avery Dennison v. Sumpton precedent is directly applicable to this case, as the ruling specifically upholds the right of a domain name registrant to resell use of a domain name as a vanity address even when the character string of the second level domain name corresponds to someone's trademark. "I emphatically dissent from the majority opinion's statement that Mail.com's rights "are subject to whatever defects Spencer's claim may face." I find their contention that a subsequent permissible use cannot be considered as an important factor in this case to be insupportable. The majority panelists have decided - without any direct evidence - that Spencer's sole original intent was to sell the name to Esquire Magazine. When faced with the clear fact that Spencer sold the name to someone else, they say that this sale is invalid because of Spencer's imputed original intent. The argument is entirely circular, and has no validity. "The UDRP is intended to prevent trademark owners from being extorted by cybersquatters, but it is also intended to protect legitimate registrations from being threatened by overreaching trademark owners. A correct application of the spirit and letter of the UDRP gives each of these concerns equal weight. The majority opinion fails to balance these concerns. Absent any evidence that the original registrant was trading specifically on the value of the Esquire Magazine mark, I cannot conclude that the name was registered in bad faith. CPT Comment: 1. The Esquire.com decision should not have overlooked evidence of proposed legitimate uses of the Esquire.com domain name. In this, case, as a domain for personal email addresses. The registration of a trademark for the word Esquire in connection with the magazine does not prevent others from using the word Esquire for other legitimate uses, including, for example, as a personal email address. 2. If ICANN would expand the TLD space, to include such TLDs as magazine or even .esquire, it would not be necessary to choose between the use of Esquire as a personsal email domain and the name for the magazine publisher. 6. Walmartcanadasucks.com http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0477.html This is a decision that gave "walmartcanadasucks.com", "wal-martcanadasucks.com", "walmartuksucks.com", "walmartpuertorico.com" and "walmartpuertoricosucks.com" to Walmart. The decision said: Based on its finding that the Respondents, Walsucks and Walmarket Puerto Rico, have engaged in abusive registration of the domain names "wal-martcanadasucks.com", "wal-martcanadasucks.com", "walmartuksucks.com", "walmartpuertorico.com" and "walmartpuertoricosucks.com" within the meaning of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy, the Panel orders that the domain names "wal-martcanadasucks.com", "wal-martcanadasucks.com", "walmartuksucks.com", "walmartpuertorico.com" and "walmartpuertoricosucks.com" be transferred to the Complainant, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Background: These domains were owned by Kenneth J. Harvey, a speculator in domain names. Acccording to the decision: The "walmartcanadasucks.com" and "walmartuksucks.com" web pages each state that "This is a freedom of information site set up for dissatisfied Walmart Canada [or UK, respectively] customers." Each site invites visitors to "Spill Your Guts" with a "horror story relating to your dealings with Wal-Mart Canada [or UK, respectively]". On the "walmartcanadasucks.com" website, Respondent has posted "Wal-Mart Horror Story #1" which recounts his version of events in respect to the "walmartcanada.com" domain name. Each website posts a photograph of Respondent, labeled "President", and Respondent's biography. Each "Spill Your Guts" page indicates "If we feel your story is interesting, it might be included in award-winning author Kenneth J. Harvey's forthcoming book - "Wal-MartCanadaSucks.com" [or, on UK page, "about Walmart"]". Walmark indicated these domains were registered in bad faith, and indicated: Respondents' free speech argument is a convenient and transparent dodge. It does not even make sense with respect to three of the domain names: WAL-MARTCANADASUCKS.COM, WALMARTPUERTORICOSUCKS.COM, and WALMARTPUERTORICO.COM. There are no websites attached to these domain names. Respondents offer no evidence to support a claim that they have made legitimate use of any of these three domain names. The arbitrator indicated: Respondent has appended the term "-sucks" to domain names that are, in the absence of that term, confusingly similar to Complainant's mark. The addition of the pejorative verb "sucks" is tantamount to creating the phrase "Wal-Mart Canada sucks" (and comparable phrases with Respondent's other "-sucks" formative domain names). The elimination of the spacing between the terms of the phrase is dictated by technical factors, and by the common practice of domain name registrants. The addition of a common or generic term following a trademark does not create a new or different mark in which Respondent has rights. The decision noted that: Respondent argues that addition of the word "sucks" to the base names "walmartcanada", "wal-martcanada", "walmartuk" and "walmartpuertorico" causes such names to lose their confusing similarity with Complainant's "Wal-Mart" trademark. Respondent contends that because an Internet user or consumer viewing a "-sucks" formative domain name would assume that Complainant is not the sponsor of or associated with a website identified by such address, Respondent's "-sucks" formative marks cannot be confusingly similar to Complainant's mark. In support of this argument, Respondent refers to Lucent Technologies, Inc., v. Lucentsucks.com, 95 F. Supp. 2d 528 (E.D.Vir. 2000). It is first important to note that the observations made by Judge Brinkema in the Lucentsucks.com opinion regarding the issue of confusing similarity are in the nature of dicta, since the court dismissed the action against defendant for lack of jurisdiction 10. Judge Brinkema's opinion in Lucentsucks.com, and one decision on which she relies, Bally Total Fitness v. Faber, 29 F. Supp. 2d 1161 (C.D. Cal. 1998), each lend some support to Respondent's position. However, both cases are distinguishable. This defense was rejected, however, and the WIPO panel found on behalf of Walmart, that various "sucks" domains were "confusingly similiar" to the Walmart trademarks. In Bally, the court granted summary judgment in favor of a defendant that used the "Bally" trademark on a web page, appending the word "sucks", to create a "ballysucks" web page. In that case, "ballysucks.com" was not registered and was not used as a second-level domain name. The principal issue was whether the defendant could lawfully express itself on its web page using the trademark "Bally" in combination with the word "sucks". The court held that since the "ballysucks" web page was devoted to critical commentary regarding Bally, and the defendant did not have a commercial purpose in maintaining the site, the defendant had a valid free speech interest in using Bally's mark. The court observed that even a "ballysucks.com" domain name might not constitute trademark infringement ("even if Faber did use the mark as part of a larger domain name, such as "ballysucks.com", this would not necessarily be a violation as a matter of law." 29 F. Supp., at 1165). It made this observation in the context of applying the Sleekcraft factors. In Bally, the court found the defendant's intent in establishing its "ballysucks" web page was to criticize the trademark holder, and this factor weighed heavily in favor of the defendant. In the present proceeding, Respondent's intent is different. In Lucentsucks.com, the court observed that "Defendant argues persuasively that the average consumer would not confuse lucentsucks.com with a web site sponsored by plaintiff" 11 . However, the court did not undertake any particularized analysis of the disputed domain name as compared with the plaintiff's trademark. Moreover, the court observed that: "A successful showing that lucentsucks.com is effective parody and/ or a cite [sic] for critical commentary would seriously undermine the requisite elements for the causes of action at issue in this case." 12 No such showing had been made by the defendant in Lucentsucks.com. The court was speaking in the abstract - and in dicta -- about a future case in which the trademark issues would be fully litigated. Even so, the court indicated that the defendant's intent in registering and using the disputed domain name would be an important element in determining whether cybersquatting had occurred. The Panel does not consider Lucentsucks.com to stand for the proposition that "-sucks" formative domain names are immune as a matter of law from scrutiny as being confusingly similar to trademarks to which they are appended. Each case must be considered on its merits. The Panel is not making any determination regarding the registrants and users of other "-sucks" formative domain names (such as "walmartsucks.com"). The record of this proceeding evidences that Respondent did not register "walmartcanadasucks.com" and his other "-sucks" names in order to express opinions or to seek the expression of opinion of others. The record indicates that his intention was to extract money from Complainant. An application of the Sleekcraft factors in another context involving Complainant's mark and the word "sucks" might produce a different result than that reached here. The Panel notes that use of a domain name confusingly similar to a mark may be justified by fair use or legitimate noncommercial use considerations, and that this may in other cases permit the use of "-sucks" formative names in free expression forums. Complainant has met the burden of proving that Respondent is the registrant of domain names that are identical or confusingly similar to a trademark in which Complainant has rights, and it has thus established the first of the three elements necessary to a finding that Respondent has engaged in abusive domain name registration. CPT Comment: 1. Domain names with a trademark plus the term "sucks" are not confusingly similar to trademark. The term "sucks" is clearly a pejorative term, used for criticism and free speech. ICANN should not be in the business of preventing people from creating various "sucks" web pages. 7. Catmachines.com http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0275.html Roam the Planet had registered catmachines.com. Caterpillar was successful in taking catmachines.com away from Roam the Planet. According to the WIPO decision, Caterpillar had sales of $19 billion in 1999. (Bulldozers and other products). Caterpillar already had registered caterpillar.com and cat.com. It claimed that "catmachines" was "identical, or confusingly similar" to its trademark in caterpillar or cat. Roam the Planet, apparently a seller of domain names, complained that Caterpillar was engaged in "Reverse domain highjacking." Roam the Planet identified. "numerous legitimate domain uses" for a domain combining "cat" with "machines", such as CAT for Computer Aided Technologies, Cat (the animal) associated with machines (e.g. Littermaid), Category 5, CATscan, Center for Advanced Technology (CAT), Computed Axial Tomography (C.A.T.), Covert Action Teams (C.A.T.) and Catalog (abbreviation). Apparently undermining its case was the fact that Roam the Planet had tried to sell catmachines.com to Caterpillar for $9,000. WIPO transfered catmachines.com to Caterpillar. Interestingly, WIPO did not note that the domain catmachine.com is in use now, by a firm that designs web pages. CPT Comment: 1. Catmachines.com is not "identical or confusingly similar" to caterpillar. The owner the domain name did demonstrate that there were legitimate uses for the domain other than the one proposed by Caterpillar. 2. Ironically, the WIPO decision to give Caterpillar the domain catmachines.com creates a possible dispute involving the domain catmachine.com, which is clearly a bona fide use by someone other than Caterpillar. 8. Eurotrash.com http://www.eurotrash.com/Aboutus/News/domainDispute.html According to this URL, the current user of Eurotrash.com claims to have incurred expenses of more than $40 thousand to defend its domain names. CPT Comment: 1. This raises some questions about the costs imposed on domain name holders. 2. Eurotrash is a common slang term. I don't see how anyone could claim a "right" to use this in the .com space. 9. Scientologie.org http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0410.html Religious Technology Center v. Freie Zone E. V This is an interesting and complex dispute involving on the one hand, a group that owned the copyright to a book named Scientologie, and a religious organization that claimed a trademark on the word scientologie. The current domain name holder uses the domain to criticize the Church of Scientology, the owner of the trademark for Scientologie. WIPO rejected the request for a transfer, noting that the domain name holder's interest in criticizing the Church of Scientology was a legitimate use. CPT Comment: 1. The decision in the scientologie.org case was correct, and a good illustration of the need to protect the public's right to free speech and criticism. 10. bridgestone-firestone.net http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0190.html Bridgestone Firestone, Inc., Bridgestone/Firestone Research, Inc., and Bridgestone Corporation v. Jack Myers This is an important decision where WIPO upheld the right of a person to use bridgestone-firestone.net to criticize Bridgestone Firestone, which owned the domain bridgestone-firestone.com. The panel decision said: The question presented in this case is whether fair use and free speech are defenses to a claim for transfer of a domain name under the Policy. Under Paragraph 4 (c)(iii) of the Policy, noncommercial fair use is expressly made a defense, as noted above. Although free speech is not listed as one of the Policy's examples of a right or legitimate interest in a domain name, the list is not exclusive, and the Panel concludes that the exercise of free speech for criticism and commentary also demonstrates a right or legitimate interest in the domain name under Paragraph 4 (c)(iii). The Internet is above all a framework for global communication, and the right to free speech should be one of the foundations of Internet law. . . . For all of the foregoing reasons, the Panel decides that although the Domain Name registered by Respondent is identical or confusingly similar to the trademarks in which the Complainants have rights, the Respondent has legitimate fair use and free speech rights and interests in respect of the Domain Name, and the Respondent has not registered and used the Domain Name in bad faith. The Panel therefore denies the claim of the Complainants for transfer of the Domain Name. CPT Comment: 1. The panel decision was correct in affirming that criticism of a firm is a legitimate basis for using the company name in a domain name. 11. Evidence of Non-Confusion between .com, .net and .org domains. There are many WIPO UDRP decisions that take away .org, or .net sites because they are considered confusingly similar to existing .com sites. There are also .com sites taken away because they are considered similar to .org site. The following examples illustrate the these decisions are not necessary, and that the same name can be used by different organizations using different TLDs. abc.com ABC Television abc.org American Builders and Contractors nbc.com NBC Television nbc.org Northport Baptist Church Yale.com -- Yale Industrial Trucks Yale.edu - Yale University blue.com Blue Hypermedia Blue.org Blue Dot Blue.net Bluegrass Cellular Internet Services watch.com National Watch Exchange watch.org Koenig's International News: WorldWatchDaily watch.net i2x Media Internet.com The Internet Industry Portal Internet.net Internet Shopping Network fish.com A personal web page fish.org Discussion of fisheries management car.org California Association of Realtor car.net Car.Net An automobile portal cpa.com Ralphael & Associates, accountants cpt.net Dietrich and Wilson, accountants mpaa.net Michigan Patent Accounting Association mpaa.org Motion Picture Association of America WTO.com Wolf Technologies Online wto.int World Trade Organization baseball.com Baseball.com baseball portal baseball.net Baseball shopping network baseball.org Tribute to Erich Maria Remarque att.com AT&T Global Network Services att.net AT&T Worldnet Service att.org Associated Talmud Torahs -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Aug 15 10:48:24 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5855C2A31C for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:48:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA11160 for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:48:24 -0400 Message-ID: <399958A7.6D79DE64@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 10:50:15 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] BARCELONA.COM AWARDED TO THE CITY Thanks to Diane Cabell for this pointer: BARCELONA.COM AWARDED TO THE CITY http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0505.html The decision seemed to be based mostly on the fact that the Spanish city of Barcelona had trademarks for the name Barcelona. Diane notes, this might give the New York Times, which owns Boston.com, something to think about. Other possible violators of this new WIPO policy: http://www.seattle.com/ http://www.houston.com/ http://www.newyork.com/ http://www.LondonTown.com/ http://www.bellevue.com/ http://www.anchorage.com/ http://www.chicago.com/ Jamie -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Aug 15 11:01:49 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E4AD2A32C for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2000 11:01:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA11386 for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2000 11:01:49 -0400 Message-ID: <39995BCC.AB92C8F8@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 11:03:40 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Reueters loses a WIPO UDRP decision on ereuters.com Reueters loses a WIPO UDRP decision on ereuters.com This WIPO decision shows how non-uniform the WIPO decisions are on domains. Even though WIPO found that ereuters.com was confusingly similiar to reuters.com, and that the domain name holder had no legitimate rights in the domain, WIPO did not transfer the domain, on the grounds that it could not find bad faith. (Compare this, for example, the WIPO decision in Dodgeviper.com). http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0670.html "while the Panel decides that The Domain Name is confusingly similar to the corresponding Trade Mark of the Complainant and that the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in The Domain Name, the Panel is unable to find that The Domain Name was registered and is being used in bad faith. Accordingly, in light of the foregoing, the Panel dismisses the complaint." This is a bit surprising, because ereuters.com looks like the type of domain that WIPO should be transfering. The current web page doesn't seem that impressive, and has links to various register.com services, is here: http://www.ereuters.com/ Company Profile: A non-profit forum to maintain and ensure high standards of training in domestic help and services. Objectives: "Ideas/Help to ensure Maid Training Services all over Asia are first class standard" This was the domain name owner's apparently successful defense: "Dear Panelist This is my response. I want to refute all charges against me by Reuters. First, I have no intention of registering the name for the intention of selling, renting, for disruption purposes prevent the registering the disputed domain name of any trademark names. There are no intentions or attempts to attract for any commercial gains, internet users to my site, thus creating confusion, nor any reason to disrupt the business of Reuters. There is significant differences as to the lines of business. My domain is a forum for maid improvement discussions and non-profit orientated, while Reuters is in the financial and news world. There has never been any attempts to sell the domain name back to Reuters, and an email has been sent to them indicating that the domain name is not up for sale. There is only a registered company by name of Reuters Ltd, but there is no company or any registration for ereuters. Further, I have obtained this name prior to any Reuters claims. Meaning they are now turning around and say I am prohibiting the launch of their internet business unit, hence delaying their business unit launch. This is very absurb indeed. Last of all, Reuters came to me before by threatening legal actions, but I responded by telling them to go ahead as they have no case, and I have engaged a lawyer on standby ready for them. Now they?re using WIPO as the percentage of cases favouring the complainant is a high of 86%, while successful defence is only 14%, denoted from your website. This shows why they are using you to help them in this dispute as they felt the chances of winning is very high indeed. My plead to you is to please judge fairly. Thank you and I shall await your decision." ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Aug 15 17:29:32 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 457A62A317 for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2000 17:29:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA17698 for ; Tue, 15 Aug 2000 17:29:32 -0400 Message-ID: <3999B6AE.C43B76B6@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 17:31:26 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Diamond.com Thanks for MF for the pointer. Jamie ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 11:36:41 -0400 (EDT) From: intanet-l@inta.org To: undisclosed-recipients: ; Subject: (INTA) Diamond.com On June 13, 2000, the owners of the domain name Diamond.com filed a lawsuit against the owners of the domain Diamonds.com in the Southern District of Florida, alleging unfair competition and defamation. Specifically, the owner of Diamonds.com published an article on the web which analyzes the future of the B2C business model in the jewelry industry on the web, and stated that the owner of Diamond is "in our opinion illegally and unfairly encroaching on our proprietary use of Diamonds.com as a consumer site for and about diamonds." Commentators have mischaracterized this action as a cybersquatting action under the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy or under the Anti-Cybersquatting Act. However, this is basically a trademark lawsuit involving domain names and is essentially a cyber-turf battle for the exclusive right to use the word diamond in the domain name for purposes of retail diamond sales. The fact that a lawsuit contains a dispute regarding domain names does not mean that the suit necessarily deals with the issue of cybersquatting. The unfair competition portion of the lawsuit will ultimately turn on the issues of whether the domains Diamond.com or Diamonds.com are protectable service marks, and if so, whether there is a likelihood of confusion between the domains. In order for either party to be entitled to trademark rights in the domains, they will likely have to demonstrate that the respective domains are protectable. Since both domains are used to sell diamonds, arguably the domains at first blush are descriptive with regard to that portion of the business. If the domains are descriptive then both parties are going to have to demonstrate that their use of the respective domain has acquired distinctiveness. If the domains are in fact generic, then neither party will likely be able to stop the other party from using their respective domain. Assuming the domains are protectable, then the issues will turn on whether there is a likelihood of confusion and which party used the domain first. In this regard, Diamond.com was first registered by Diamond.com, LLC, an industrial user of diamonds, who sold the domain in 1993 to a domain name speculator, who ultimately sold the domain in May of this year to the current owner. On the other hand, Diamonds.com was registered in August of 1994 and was assigned to the current owner in April of 2000. The issue will likely turn on which party used the wording first and whether their use was continuous. INTA Internet Subcommittee on DNS Governance -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Aug 16 10:06:45 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89C7B2A318 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:06:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA24931 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:06:45 -0400 Message-ID: <399AA06F.84F971DC@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:08:47 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN's 15 August Criteria for new TLD applications Subject: [Nc-tlds] ICANN's 15 August Criteria for new TLD applications Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 10:07:38 -0400 From: James Love To: Non-commercial TLDs Thanks to Bret Fausett for this pointer. ICANN has posted new information (15 August 2000) regarding new TLD applicaitons. http://www.icann.org/tlds/tld-application-process.htm TLD Application Process: Information Applicants Criteria for Assessing TLD Proposals Among the many interesting Criteria are what appears to be a highly anticompetitive requirement. 1. The need to maintain the Internet's stability. ICANN's first priority is to preserve the stability of the Internet, including the domain-name system (DNS). Proposals should demonstrate specific and well-thought-out plans, backed by ample, firmly committed resources, to operate in a manner that preserves the Internet's continuing stability. The introduction of the proposed TLD should not disrupt current operations, nor should it create alternate root systems, which threaten the existence of a globally unique public name space. The idea that ICANN would explicitly seek to outlaw alternative root systems is surprising, because ICANN so far has downplayed its monopoly power over the Internet by mentioning that others could set up different root systems. Jamie -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Aug 16 12:39:57 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B12502A32D for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 12:39:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA27278 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 12:39:57 -0400 Message-ID: <399AC458.41755804@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 12:42:00 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] UDRP: kwasizabantu.org I got a pointer to this decision from Emerson Tiller's icannvote.com site (which appears to be his campaign site). http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0279.html The following summary is taken from Tiller's web page: Religious Rights v. Free Speech?: South African Religious Sect Recovers Domain Name From Critic (Mission KwaSizabantu v. Benjamin Rost, Case No. D2000-0279, June 7, 2000) On June 7, 2000, an ICANN panel held that an African religious sect (Mission entitled to domain names (kwasizabantu.com, kwasizabantu.org, kwasizabantu.net) on which sites criticism and comment on the Mission KwaSizabantu sect were posted. Benjamin Rost had registered the domain sites to offer alternative and critical views of KwaSizabantu. The word "KwaSizabantu" was said to be a Zulu word meaning "The Place Where People are Helped" and is only found in the Zulu language. The panel ordered the domain names transferred to Mission KwaSizabantu. With respect to free speech, the panel stated: "It is beyond the scope of the present adjudication to consider any such issues as the boundaries of free speech ... The admitted nature of the use of the domain names ... includes alternative views and indeed critical views concerning ... [KwaSizabantu] and its activities. The Panel holds such activity amounts to tarnishing the activities associated with the trademark or service mark "KwaSizabantu" ... . Therefore, ... [Rost] does not establish any rights or legitimate interests ... ...[I]t is no rebuttal for ... [Rost] to assert that any disruption is merely a consequence of him publishing his view of the truth." ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Aug 16 13:50:20 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21CF52A330 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:50:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA28480 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:50:20 -0400 Message-ID: <399AD4D7.4F1FB1D0@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:52:23 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] eBay: Vote of One US Citizen - NO RESERVE! Item #410721373 http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=410721373 Vote of One US Citizen - NO RESERVE! Item #410721373 -- The 2000 election vote of ONE US citizen who is a registered voter in Maryland in the United States. You are purchasing my vote. You may specify whom I vote for in the presidential and all other elections in my district, by name or by party. Why should the American Citizen be left out? Congressmen and Senators regularly sell THEIR votes to the highest bidder. Democracy for sale! ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Aug 16 13:54:50 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D6482A330 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:54:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA28585 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:54:50 -0400 Message-ID: <399AD5E5.F8932705@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 13:56:53 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] MasterCard sues Nader Campaign for trademark infringement Apparently Mastercard has sued the Nader campaign for $15 million for infringement of the MasterCard trademark on its "Priceless" ads that are parodied by the Nader campaign. MasterCard apparently has a trademark on "priceless." I just saw Ralph, and he said, "I guess MasterCard doesn't think the word 'priceless' is really priceless." I'm trying to get a copy of the 22 page complaint. Jamie ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Aug 16 14:20:44 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91C1A2A330 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 14:20:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA29048 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 14:20:44 -0400 Message-ID: <399ADBF8.49D265CD@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 14:22:48 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] MasterCard suit The lawsuit was filed in the US District Court, Souther District of New York. We'll try to get a digital copy of the complaint. You can also ask the Mastercard legal department for a fax. Contact Robert E. Norton, 914.249.5301, fax 914.249.4262 -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Aug 16 14:25:39 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D8E42A330 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 14:25:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA29137 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 14:25:38 -0400 Message-ID: <399ADD1E.4CFD2709@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 14:27:42 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS References: <399ADBF8.49D265CD@cptech.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] MasterCard suit - contact info People who want comments on the Nader/MasterCard suit should contact the Nader campaign directly rather than CPT. Best would probably be Laura Jones or Jake Lewis , at 202.265.4000. One MasterCard contact is Robert E. Norton, 914.249.5301, fax 914.249.4262 ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Aug 16 19:04:12 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB9A92A316 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 19:04:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA00700 for ; Wed, 16 Aug 2000 19:04:12 -0400 Message-ID: <399B1E6A.84FB7FF9@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 19:06:18 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Stinger Thanks to Tony Olsen for pointing out this interesting trademark issue. Last year Be announced an Internet applicance platform, that it code named "Stinger." In August of this year, Microsoft announced an Internet cell phone technology, named "Stinger." http://www.be.com/press/pressreleases/99-11-16_semi.html National Semiconductor and Be Incorporated Team to Grow Internet Appliance Market November 16, 1999 Companies Jointly Developing Information Appliance Reference Platforms Based on Be's Stinger Technology and National's Geode(TM) WebPAD(TM) Design [snip] Be's Stinger Internet Appliance Platform Be has developed a system foundation and architecture for the emerging Internet appliance segment. At the basis of Internet appliances lies a critical need for exceptional media handling, unfaltering stability, and broad application flexibility. BeOS has won critical acclaim in these areas and the company is extending this core technology for this emerging class of devices. Building on the strength of BeOS, and teaming with key companies such as National, Be's new application system foundation is intended to offer a complete development and application platform for a wide range of Internet appliances. Be plans to formally introduce this new platform, code-named Stinger, in the first quarter of 2000. http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1006-200-2479539.html Microsoft abuzz over Web-enabled cell phone By Stephanie Miles Staff Writer, CNET News.com August 9, 2000, 10:55 a.m. PT MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif.--Microsoft yesterday demonstrated the first working prototype of Stinger, its next-generation Web-enabled cell phone. -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 17 16:03:27 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5AF72A3A4; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:03:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA12063; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:03:26 -0400 Message-ID: <399C4595.FB7DF5B3@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:05:41 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , Non-commercial TLDs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] NTIA releases Request for Comment on managment of .us ccTLD http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/usrfc2/dotusrfc2.htm -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 17 16:11:14 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B6B12A3B0 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:11:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA12180 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:11:14 -0400 Message-ID: <399C4769.C3FC5FFB@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:13:29 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Paul Thurrott: Microsoft working to port its applications to Linux http://www.wininformant.com/display.asp?ID=2874 Microsoft working to port its applications to Linux By Paul Thurrott [8/16/00] ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 17 17:38:27 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B1A92A3B3 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:38:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA13553 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:38:27 -0400 Message-ID: <399C5BD9.3A4BB215@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:40:41 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Basic Proposal for European Patent Convention The basic proposal for revisions in the European Patent Convention are now on the web here: http://www.european-patent-office.org/news/headlns/2000_08_17.htm BASIC PROPOSAL FOR THE REVISION OF THE EUROPEAN PATENT CONVENTION CA/100/00 e "The notice from the President of the European Patent Office dated 24 March 2000 (OJ EPO 2000, 195) gave information about the forthcoming revision of the European Patent Convention. "The draft Basic Proposal for the revision is published below. The text will be finalised by the Administrative Council of the European Patent Organisation at a meeting from 5 to 8 September 2000, and then form the basis for discussion at the revision conference in Munich from 20 to 29 November 2000. ------------------------------ Comment: Of particular interest are changes to Article 52 and 53, which concern scope and exceptions to patentability, and Article 54, which concerns the issue of new uses of known product (so called "Swiss claims"). In Article 52, the proposal would use the broader language from the WTO TRIPS agreement to extend patents to "all fields of technology," and eliminate the current exception for software patents. The proposal appears to bracket the issue of the exclusion of methods of doing business, for further discussion, I think. The changes in Article 54 would strengthen the legal status of patents on new uses for known products. ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 17 18:05:14 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68C332A05E for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 18:05:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA13965 for ; Thu, 17 Aug 2000 18:05:14 -0400 Message-ID: <399C6221.81A5578A@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 18:07:29 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Mainsoft and ports to Unix of MSEI and MS Media Player http://www.mainsoft.com/ http://www.mainsoft.com/press/pr-internetexpl.html Mainsoft MainWin Product and Professional Services To Be used By Microsoft To Port Internet Explorer Technologies To UNIX http://www.mainsoft.com/press/pr-mplayer.html MAINSOFT'S TECHNOLOGY SELECTED TO BRING WINDOWS MEDIA PLAYER 6.3 TO SOLARIS Microsoft and Mainsoft Continue Collaborative Relationship with Release of New Windows Media Technology for UNIX platform About Mainsoft Corporation Mainsoft provides a Windows platform for UNIX, including Linux. Its flagship product MainWin allows developers to create applications and deploy the software code to several different operating environments simultaneously. ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Aug 18 12:21:55 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF70F2A3C3; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:21:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA23144; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:21:52 -0400 Message-ID: <399D6330.7B19DD77@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 12:24:16 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Non-commercial TLDs , Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] newyorktimes.com This is a bit on the dispute involving the newyorktimes.com (http://www.newyorktimes.com/) dispute. The page is supposed to be offering comment and criticsm of the New York Times, but there isn't much of this on the newyorktimes.com web page. What one does see are banner ads for web hosting, and background on the dispute, including in particularly info here: http://www.newyorktimes.com/legal.html or http://www.newyorktimes.com/developements.html Jamie from the "developments" page: SUMMARY OF EVENTS January 1994: The New York Times Company ("NYT") chooses the domain name nytimes.com as its web address, foregoing all other domain names available. June 1996: NYIS registers the domain name newyorktimes.com 2-1/2 years after NYTs' ignoring this domain name while it was available. November 1996: NYT writes to NYIS, alleging infringement of its trademark rights, objecting to its "registration and use of this domain name" while in the same paragraph acknowledging that "the domain name is not in use" and threatening "legal proceedings" and "civil action in the United Stated District Court". January 1997: NYIS responds to NYT's letter, stating that "the Registrant's proposed non-commercial use of the Domain Name will not cause confusion by leading the public to believe that the Registrant is somehow affiliated with or that its services are offered by, sponsored or approved by your client." In an effort to address NYT's concerns NYIS proposes to post the following disclosure on its site: "This site is in no way affiliated with, offered, sponsored or approved by the New York Times" or an alternate language agreeable to NYT. February 1996: NYT, by merely "alleging" trademark infringement to NSI places the domain name on "hold", whereby no party is able to use it. NYT, despite all its legal and financial resources does not take legal action as it knows that US trademark laws do not support its position: "the mere registration of a domain name does not constitute a commercial use."(Lockheed Martin Corp. v. Network Solutions, Inc) and "the mere fact that a person registered a SKUNK WORKS or a variation thereof as a domain name does not mean that the person infringed or diluted Lockheed's mark." (Lockheed Martin Corp. v. NSI, 43 U.S.P.Q.2d 1056, 1997 U.S. Dist. Lexis 10314, 1997 WL 381967 (C.D. Cal. 1997) Its best course of action is to take advantage of NSI's biased dispute resolution policy. June 2000: Recognizing its flawed domain dispute policy NSI changes its policy and removes the domain name from "hold". July 2000: As originally stated in its response to NYT, NYIT begins using the domain name for non-commercial purposes, namely for commentary and expression of opinions. Disclosure statements appear prominently on top of the web page along with a link to NYT's site. August 2000: Once again recognizing that the US trademark laws do not support its position, NYT seeks to take advantage of WIPO's biased dispute resolution history which, in conflict with the Policies set forth by ICANN, favors trademark holders. Although ICANN's UDRP requires "commercial-use" of a domain (or non-use as an indication of commercial intent) WIPO has repeatedly ignored this requirement, misinterpreting the UDRP as well as US trademark laws. Although WIPO is pledged to being impartial, it shamelessly boasts about its pro-trademark holder position in its statistics page, offering a better than 4 to 1 odd for trademark holders. The WIPO web site states that domain name registration and use is permitted: "if the Respondent is making a legitimate non-commercial or fair use of the Domain Name, without intent for commercial gain misleadingly to divert consumers or to tarnish the trademark(s) or service mark(s) at issue." Notice that any non-commercial use is legitimate, without regards to the specific nature of use and personal taste of a WIPO panelist, weather fair-use or not, as long as there is no "intent for commercial gain". [snip] ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Aug 18 14:40:01 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A91D82A05E for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 14:40:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA25002 for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 14:40:01 -0400 Message-ID: <399D8391.F54DBD96@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 14:42:25 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Eurotrash.com successfully defended itself in UDRP decision Yesterday Eurotrash.com successfully defended its right to use the eurotrash.com domain name, following a ICANN UDRP complaint filed by a UK television program. One interesting bit from the unpublished decision, is the WIPO panel's discussion of the name Eurotrash. "the expression eurotrash was an apt expression for Respondent. It was coined in New York in the early 1980's as a slang term to describe, apparently light-heartedly, upwardly mobile, and somewhat affectatious, Europeans in that city. Respondent provides a copy of a letter from Mr O'Connell, an Irishman working at Thomas Regional Directory Co., with Respondent, a Scot, stating that the nick-name eurotrash had been applied to them both by Eileen Markowitz, the President of Thomas Regional Directory Co. A confirming letter from Eileen Markowitz is also supplied (Annexures 4 and 14 to the Response); ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Aug 18 16:26:58 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDA472A05E for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 16:26:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA26436 for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 16:26:58 -0400 Message-ID: <399D9CA3.A72EAF22@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 16:29:23 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Chris Oakes: Comcast Internet restricts use of virtual networks http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,38227,00.html Home customers are miffed over a new restriction that prevents them from dialing into their corporate networks. Subscribers say the company is using its monopoly to dictate usage policies. By Chris Oakes. 3:00 a.m. Aug. 18, 2000 PDT Customers of cable Internet service ComcastAtHome are protesting a new clause in the service's subscriber agreement that forbids the use of virtual private networking (VPN) software. . . . ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Aug 21 07:20:46 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9D2E2A32F; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 07:20:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-1.essential.org [216.0.125.1]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA14282; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 07:20:45 -0400 Message-ID: <39A11D59.B9D9E80D@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 08:15:21 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , nc-tlds@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Oscar S. Cisneros: Legal Tips For Your 'Sucks' Site http://wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,38056,00.html Legal Tips For Your 'Sucks' Site by Oscar S. Cisneros 3:00 a.m. Aug. 14, 2000 PDT Bad corporate citizens beware. A website that promises to put a spotlight on companies with poor practices is scheduled to launch in September. Corporatespotlight.org, where site visitors vote on corporations that act irresponsibly, will join the ranks of dozens of corporate criticism pages already on the Internet known affectionately as "sucks sites." Starbucked, Aolsucks, and noamazon.com are among the most-well known of these forums, where disenchanted consumers can post their beefs. [snip] -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Aug 21 08:07:05 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BEE12A326; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 08:07:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-1.essential.org [216.0.125.1]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA14507; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 08:07:04 -0400 Message-ID: <39A12834.7A967C6A@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 09:01:40 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: nc-tlds@Venice.essential.org, Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] all 5 new WIPO UDRP "Sucks" decisions go against domain owner http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0681.html The Panel accordingly requires that the Domain Name STANDARDCHARTEREDSUCKS.COM be transferred forthwith to the Complainant. http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0636.html The Panel accordingly requires that the Domain Name NATWESTSUCKS.COM be transferred forthwith to the Complainant. http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0583.html e Panel accordingly requires that the Domain Name DIRECTLINESUCKS.COM be transferred forthwith to the Second Complainant as specified in the Complaint. http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0584.html The Panel accordingly requires that the Domain Name DIXONSSUCKS.COM be transferred forthwith to the Complainant. http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0585.html The Panel accordingly requires that the Domain Name FREESERVESUCKS.COM be transferred forthwith to the Complainant. James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Aug 21 08:25:01 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97F3B2A05E for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 08:25:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-1.essential.org [216.0.125.1]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA14606 for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 08:25:00 -0400 Message-ID: <39A12C67.A2E12CBC@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 09:19:35 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] WIPO confused over "sucks" in domain name Here is an example of the twisted WIPO assertion that consumers will confuse "sucks" sites with the trademark owner's own domain. Jamie http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0681.html The Respondent's registration, consisting of the Complainant's name with the suffix, "sucks" (plus ".com"), is not identical to the Complainant's marks and the question arises whether the registration is confusingly similar to those marks. Given the apparent mushrooming of complaints sites identified by reference to the target's name, can it be said that the registration would be recognised as an address plainly dissociated from the Complainant? In the Panel's opinion, this is by no means necessarily so. The first and immediately striking element in the Domain Name is the Complainant's name and adoption of it in the Domain Name is inherently likely to lead some people to believe that the Complainant is connected with it. Some will treat the additional "sucks" as a pejorative exclamation and therefore dissociate it after all from the Complainant; but equally others may be unable to give it any very definite meaning and will be confused about the potential association with the Complainant. The Complainant has accordingly made out the first element in its Complaint. (See the rather similar conclusion on this Element in Case D2000-0477 (walmartcanadasucks.com etc.)). -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Aug 21 09:41:04 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 564522A331; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 09:41:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA15150; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 09:41:04 -0400 Message-ID: <39A1321E.E9C381@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 09:43:58 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , Non-commercial TLDs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] PORSCHEFANCLUB.COM Porsche claims Infringement and Dilution of Porsche Trademarks LAW OFFICES HOWARD, PHILLIPS & ANDERSEN A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION JENNIFER LAMBERT 560 East 200 South, Suite 300 Telephone: (801) 366-7471 Direct Dial: (801) 366-7746 Salt Lake City, UT 84102 Facsimile: (801) 366-7706 E-MAIL: JLL@HPALAW.COM July 21, 2000 VIA E-MAIL and REGULAR MAIL guardian@xlink.net Christian Leukers Gontardstr. 5-7 Mannheim, D-68163 Germany Re: Infringement and Dilution of Porsche Trademarks Dear Mr. Leukers: This law firm represents both Dr. Ing. h.c.F. Porsche AG and Porsche Cars North America, Inc. ("Porsche") on trademark matters and in trademark litigation. Porsche takes policing and enforcement of its trademark rights on the Internet seriously. This letter is an attempt to resolve your infringement and dilution of the Porsche trademarks short of litigation. You should be aware that Porsche recently obtained a preliminary injunction against the registrant of PORSCHESOURCE.COM in Porsche Cars North America, Inc., et al. v. Spencer, 2000 WL 641209 (E.D. Cal.). Porsche is also seeking $100,000 in statutory damages in this lawsuit under the recently enacted Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act. As you may also be aware, Porsche has filed a lawsuit against 128 Internet domain names that use the trademarks Porsche® or Boxster®, or variations of the trademarks Porsche® or Boxster® in Internet domain names. This lawsuit is presently pending before the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Eastern District of Virginia held that "the mere act of registration [of domain names containing Porsche trademarks] creates an immediate injury [to Porsche] . . . [c]ustomers might try to contact Porsche through 'PORSCHE.NET,' for example, only to find that they have reached a 'dead end' on the Web and then to conclude that the strength of Porsche's brand name is not as great as they first thought." Porsche Cars North America, Inc. et al. v. PORSCH.COM, et al., -F.Supp.2d-, 1999 WL 378360 (E.D.Va. 1999). In short, the law is well settled that the misappropriation of famous trademarks as domain names violates the Lanham Act and dilutes trademarks. See, e.g., Panavision International, L.P. v. Toeppen, 1998 WL 178553 (9th Cir. April 17, 1998). It has recently come to Porsche's attention that you have registered the Internet domain name PORSCHEFANCLUB.COM that uses the world famous trademark Porscheâ. It appears from the many other domain names that you have registered and that are listed in the Internic Whois Database that you are a cyberpirate and a cybersquatter. You should be aware that the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act makes it unlawful to register famous trademarks in an Internet domain name and provides for statutory damages of up to $100,000.00 per domain name. PORSCHE®, the Porsche Crest®, CARRERA®, TARGA®, and BOXSTER® are some of the registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c.F. Porsche AG, and are proprietary property of that corporation. Usage of the Porsche trademarks or any confusingly similar variation thereof, without consent, violates state and federal law, is misleading to the public, and constitutes a misappropriation of the goodwill and reputation developed by Porsche. In order to resolve this issue amicably and without litigation, please sign and return a copy of the enclosed Declaration of Cancellation of Domain Names. This matter will then be fully resolved as far as you are concerned. If the Declaration is not signed and returned to me on or before August 4, 2000, Porsche will initiate legal action against you with respect to the Internet domain names that you have registered and seek damages in the amount of $100,000 per domain name as the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act allows. This letter is without prejudice to all rights of Porsche, including past or future royalties, past or future damages, attorneys' fees, and to bring enforcement actions for all past or future infringement, dilution, or unauthorized uses. Should you or your attorney have any questions concerning Porsche's position in this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Jennifer Lambert Trademark Paralegal cc: Patricia R. Britton, Esq. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION PORSCHE CARS NORTH AMERICA, INC., et al. ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ) PORSCH.COM, an Internet domain name, et al., ) Civil Action No. 99-0006-A ) Defendants. ) DECLARATION OF CANCELLATION OF INTERNET DOMAIN NAME(S) I, Christian Leukers, hereby declare and certify that I am the registrant of the following Internet domain name(s) (the "Domain Name(s)"): PORSCHEFANCLUB.COM. I hereby request that Network Solutions, Inc., the registrar of the Domain Name(s), cancel my registration for and delete the Domain Name(s). I also agree that I will not in the future register or use any Internet domain name that uses a trademark of, or a variation of a trademark of, Porsche including Porsche® or Boxster® without the express, written consent of Porsche. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on this ____ day of _____________, 2000. ______________________________________________________ Signature of Authorized Representative of Domain Name Registrant Print Name: __________________________________________ Title: ________________________________________________ From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Aug 21 10:01:12 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58F192A05E for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 10:01:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA15396 for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 10:01:12 -0400 Message-ID: <39A136D6.714F7EA8@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 10:04:06 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] "Fixing" the free speech problem with WIPO James Huggins asks what can be done to "fix" the problem of WIPO decisions taking away domain names that are used for criticism of a trademark owner. I'm sure there are various strategies. Certainly US court challenges to these decisions would be one possibility. WIPO arbitrators would probably be influenced by such decisions. There is, of course, the issue of decisions outside the US that might go the other way. ICANN, the public or governments could also propose guidelines to WIPO for the UDRP on issues that relate to free speech, or on particular issues, such as the WIPO decisions regarding confusion. The ICANN Non-Commerical Constituency is looking at the UDRP, and will attempt to adopt some type of resolution on the issue of free speech and the UDRP. There are, however, some people in that constituency who are clearly opposed to any actions to protect free speech, so the outcome is not certain. Other non-ICANN bodies should consider addressing these issues too, to provide some sense of global norms. For example, I will be proposing language on this issue for the Trans Atlantic Consumer Dialogue, and I hope other groups pass resolutions on these topics, and send communications to WIPO, which is beginning a second review of the UDRP process. In looking over the WIPO decisions, people should look at "bad" free speech decisions such as: http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0681.html STANDARDCHARTEREDSUCKS.COM http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0279.html Mission KwaSizabantu v. Benjamin Rost http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0071.html csa-international.net and "good" decisions, such as: http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0410.html scientologie.org http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0190.html bridgestone-firestone.net Jamie --------------------- From: "James S. Huggins (dot com)" To: "Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS" Subject: RE: [Random-bits] WIPO confused over "sucks" in domain name Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 07:32:56 -0500 So, what, if any, opportunities exist to "fix" this problem? -----Original Message----- Here is an example of the twisted WIPO assertion that consumers will confuse "sucks" sites with the trademark owner's own domain. Jamie http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0681.html -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Aug 21 10:55:12 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F6C12A05E; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 10:55:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA16275; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 10:55:12 -0400 Message-ID: <39A1437F.CECB2BEC@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 10:58:07 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , Non-commercial TLDs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] More on the 5 "Sucks" decisions In the 5 WIPO decisions against the UK based Purge I.T., WIPO panelist William R. Cornish wrote that the owner of the sites wanted to protect the domains from being used by critics of the companies, and that in two cases he had sought to sell the domains to the owners of the related domains. In one case, for 20 thousands UK pounds. Jamie http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0681.html "The Respondent, contrarily, makes it plain that its purpose is to have none of such free expression. It wants, so it says, to protect against such engines of free speech. It claims as its own legitimate interest that it is in the business of obtaining Domain Names which might embarrass well-known enterprises if the names were allowed to fall into the hands of critics. The Respondent does not, however, act in a wholly altruistic spirit, since, as will be discussed further under Element 3, it seeks substantial sums beyond its own costs before it will transfer over the offending registration. This latter aspect has to be brought into account in considering whether the Respondent therefore has any "right or legitimate interest" in the Domain Name, with which it otherwise has no association whatsoever and which it admits to have selected by reference to the Complainant's reputation in its own marks. The Panel finds that there is no justification for the role of officious interferer which the Respondent has taken upon itself to provide in the manner in which it has chosen to do so. The Complainant has accordingly made out the second element (see likewise Case D 2000-0477 (walmartcanadasucks.com)). Element 3: that the Respondent registered and is using the Domain name in bad faith, in one of the senses of that term set out in Paragraph 4b of the Dispute Resolution Policy. The Complainant's legal representative has filed as Annex E of the Complaint a record of a conversation with Mr Joseph Rice of the Respondent in which he offered to sell the Domain Name in issue to the Complainant and suggested that an appropriate figure for an offer to him would be "many thousands" and mentioned a McDonalds domain name which "went for Ł20,000". The Respondent has not sought to deny this conversation or its accuracy. Taken together with Mr Rice's assurance that the whole purpose of registering the name was to enable its transfer to the Complainant, the Panel finds it to constitute plain evidence of circumstances indicating that the Respondent registered the name primarily for the purpose of selling, renting or otherwise transferring the domain name registration to the Complainant who is the owner of the relevant marks for valuable consideration in excess of documented out-of-pocket costs directly related to the domain name. Paragraph 4b(i) of the Policy states that such conduct is of itself to count as use of the Domain Name in bad faith. Accordingly the third and final Element of the Complaint is made out. -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Aug 21 11:09:40 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B3092A05E for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 11:09:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA16473 for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 11:09:40 -0400 Message-ID: <39A146E3.9C917B2C@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 11:12:35 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Steven Bonisteel: Domain Arbitrator Blows Away More "Sucks" Addresses Article on the 5 sucks decisions http://www.32bitsonline.com/article.php3?file=news/200008/nb200008181&page=1 Domain Arbitrator Blows Away More "Sucks" Addresses By: Steven Bonisteel Date: 08/18/00 Location: GENEVA, SWITZERLAND, ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Aug 21 11:53:43 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFA912A05E for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 11:53:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA17302 for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 11:53:43 -0400 Message-ID: <39A15137.89985334@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 11:56:39 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] estreetjournal vrs wall street journal Thanks to Judith Oppenheimer for this pointer. http://www.estreetjournal.com/threat.html http://www.estreetjournal.com/reply.html These are a letter from the WSJ to a person that owns and apparently has tried to sell estreetjournal.com, and the response. estreetjournal actually has a pretty cool logo, and real content. The WJS is offering to buy the domain for $70. Jamie From the response: http://www.estreetjournal.com/reply.html I started E Street Journal in June of 1999 with the intent of making it a journal for creative writers and Mainframe Rexx programmers. The main purpose of this site was to try and create a web site consisting of my hobby (creative writing) and my livelihood (Mainframe rexx programming). Running this web site has helped me tremendously in improving my writing abilities (two of the stories are mine, 'Hit and Run' and 'A Killing in the Woods', as well as my Rexx knowledge (I personally answer every Rexx question). I worked very hard to establish and run this site by myself. As hard as it was, it was a pleasure for me building this web site and to help beginning writers and Rexx programmers. The others sections of the site (Shopping mall, Financial corner, Consumer, Headline news, Museums, Online Art ? and affiliate advertising were all added within the past several months in an attempt to cover the Web hosting costs. Prior to this there was no advertising nor any other attempts to make money from this site. The reason I am trying to sell the Web Site is that I would like to start spending time with my kids while they are still young. Between running the web site and volunteering almost every Friday for the past two years here in Milford at the public library I've been neglecting my family and would like to change that. I do not know how much it would cost to pay someone to build a web site of this size, but I can probably guess that it is much more than I am asking. This site in no way, shape or form is similar to or infringes on the Wall Street Journal or attempts to mislead. The site averages about 100 page views per day (paltry by Web standards) with an average user session length of 13 minutes, which shows that they are looking for my site, not yours. No one has ever complained that they were misled on this site, or that they came here looking for your site, or that they were looking for an E commerce site. The 'Djia companies' only show up on the menu bar in the financial corner as initials only because of space constraints. The actual page has the heading 'Companies of the Dow Jones Industrial Average' with only a list of the companies and links to their home pages. The remainder of this section only has headlines provided by Isyndicate and Newshub and links to research sites, trading sites, option information and exchanges. This section does not even have any banners or advertising and of the 45000 hits (including Gifs) since March 2000 that the entire site received, this entire section only had 315 hits, or 0.69% of total. A search on AltaVista.com found a total of 81,130 web pages containing Djia. There is no resemblance to the Wall Street Journal anywhere on this site nor has there ever been. To state that I am cybersquating is a false accusation that I resent. To say that I am infringing on your copyright is another false accusation that I resent. If I was doing either I would have also registered the .NET and .ORG as well, which I did not, even though Network Solutions tried to sell them both to me. I was also not aware that every site that begins with an 'E' is an E-commerce site; my site must be the only non e-commerce site that begins with 'E'. If you are saying that any name that ends with Street Journal is cybersquating and infringing on your trademark then I assume you also sent letters to the following: Law Street Journal, Monroe Street Journal, Broad Street Journal, Wadsworth Street Journal, College Street Journal, StreetJournal.Com to name a few. It appears to me that this powerful conglomerate is using intimidation to obtain what it wants. I will not fall victim to these scare tactics and will use the public support to fight this. I will post your letter and this response on my web site as well as on the news groups so that we can see who the public feels is right and stands behind. [snip] ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Aug 21 12:06:45 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F9772A36D for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 12:06:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA17574 for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 12:06:45 -0400 Message-ID: <39A15444.DEBE262D@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 12:09:40 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Jesus seeks loving woman http://Jesus.com/ I wonder if there will be any UDRP action on this domain . ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Aug 21 16:54:16 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32F102A05E for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 16:54:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA22367 for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2000 16:54:16 -0400 Message-ID: <39A197A9.86B0B46D@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 16:57:13 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Election of ICANN Board Director by the DNSO Subject: [ga] Election of ICANN Board Director by the DNSO Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2000 18:59:05 +0200 (MET DST) From: DNSO Secretariat To: ga@dnso.org [ To: council@dnso.org ] [ To: announce@dnso.org, ga@dnso.org, GA Voting Registry subscribers ] Since 31 July the DNSO General Assembly is in the process of selection of ICANN Board Director. Nominations and acceptances of candidates has been closed today, 21 August. Five nominees accepted their nomination for the ICANN Board position, listed below in alphabetical order: * Jonathan Cohen (NorthA) * Peter de Blanc (NorthA) * Jill Keogh (NorthA) * James P. Love (NorthA) * Ronald N. Weikers (NorthA) Endorsements of candidates starts today, 21 August, and will last for 3 weeks, ending 11 September 2000, 18:00 CET (16:00 UTC). Endorsements should be emailed to the DNSO Secretariat at the following email address: icann-endorsements@dnso.org and use the provided Template for endorsement: 3a. Full name of the endorser: 3b. E-mail address of the endorser: 3c. Full name of the accepted nominee you wish to endorse: (specific statements of endorsements may also be submitted and are encouraged) In order to be considered for the ICANN Board selection a nominee must have the support of, at least, 10 members of the General Assembly of the DNSO. The DNSO Names Council will select the ICANN Board Director between 11 and 16 September. All information about the ongoing election is available on the www.dnso.org website, in the section "Sujets du jour. Important topics." DNSO Secretariat -- This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list. Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message). Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html -- ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Aug 29 16:12:47 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from prserv.net (out1.prserv.net [32.97.166.31]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A9552A315 for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 16:12:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org ([32.101.209.202]) by prserv.net (out1) with SMTP id <2000082920114725201uccqje>; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 20:11:48 +0000 Message-ID: <39AC2056.73FCF8B5@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 16:43:02 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , Non-commercial TLDs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Dan Gillmor on Domain names and Free Expression on Net http://www.mercurycenter.com/svtech/columns/gillmor/docs/dg082700.htm Posted at 4:51 p.m. PDT Saturday, August 26, 2000 Restoring balance in the battle over free expression on the Net BY DAN GILLMOR Mercury News Technology Columnist SUPPOSE you found yourself looking at a Web site called ''mercurynewssucks.com,'' an online attack on this newspaper and its contents. You'd be remarkably dense if you failed to understand that the Mercury News was not the online publication's creator or owner. [snip] From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Aug 29 16:37:52 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from prserv.net (out1.prserv.net [32.97.166.31]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA8592A314 for ; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 16:37:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org ([32.101.209.202]) by prserv.net (out1) with SMTP id <2000082920365225202seaq5e>; Tue, 29 Aug 2000 20:36:52 +0000 Message-ID: <39AC2637.8BC8BF7D@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 17:08:07 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Comcast restriction on Virtual private networks Thanks to AJ for this pointer. The "show changes" version of the Comcast subscriber agreement (available at http://www.comcastonline.com/subscriber-v3-red.asp). Section 6(b)(viii), outlaws the use of the residential Internet service in "CONJUNCTION WITH A VPN (VIRTUAL PRIVATE NETWORK) OR A VPN TUNNELING PROTOCOL." From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Aug 30 09:20:55 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D8B52A066; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 09:20:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org ([216.0.124.7]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA11468; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 09:20:55 -0400 Message-ID: <39AD1188.FBB965E3@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 09:52:08 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Anharonian: Another idiotic ecommerce patent Subject: PATNEWS: Another idiotic ecommerce patent infringement lawsuit Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 23:46:28 -0400 (EDT) From: Gregory Aharonian To: patent-news@world.std.com !20000829 Another idiotic ecommerce patent infringement lawsuit The Nov/Dec issue of Internet Retailer reports yet another idiotic ecommerce patent infringement lawsuit, this time concerning Web sites that allow you to design and purchase clothing electronically. (NOTE: for the record, nothing on my web site, www.bustpatents.com, provides any capabilities, information or assistance towards the design and purchasing of clothing online and/or electronically). The patent, 5,930,769, titled "System and method for fashion shopping", was filed October 1996, and I list the patent abstract and claim below. It is assigned to and being asserted by an individual, Andrea Rose (she has a Web site, www.andrearosefashions.com). Last fall, she sued J.C. Penney, Land's End, Broderland Software, Mattel (owner of the Learning Company), and Federated Department Stores (owner of Macy's). I do not know the current status of the case, but can wish for the defendants that it has been dismissed after some motion for summary judgment. Once again, the problem is, ..... NON-DISCLOSED NON-PATENT PRIOR ART. The patent cites one non-patent prior art item, and you have to believe that sometime in the twenty year time period from the mid-1970s to the mid-1990s, that at least one effort at one fashion institute developed at least one fashion/textile design computer program. I mean, this is a no brainer bet even without doing any prior art searching. But no, the applicant, in applying for the patent and then asserting the patent, cared little to research the field of computerized fashion design. Heck, if I remember correctly, didn't Mrs. and Judy Jetson design and buy clothes online in some episodes of the Jetsons cartoon? Shouldn't that be prior art? :-)))))) Anyway, those of you tracking this nonsense, here is one more case to add to your records. Anyone with a copy of the complaint, I wouldn't mind getting a copy. ==== 5930769 System and method for fashion shopping (filed Oct. 7, 1996) Abstract: The present invention provides a method of manual fashion shopping and method for electronic fashion shopping by a customer using a programmed computer, CD-ROM, television, Internet or other electronic medium such as video. The method comprises receiving personal information from the customer; selecting a body type and fashion category based on the personal information; selecting fashions from a plurality of clothes items based on the body type and fashion category; outputting a plurality of fashion data based on the selected fashions; and receiving selection information from the customer. What is claimed is: 1. A method of fashion shopping by a customer comprising the steps of: receiving personal information from the customer; selecting a body type and fashion category based on the personal information; selecting fashions from a plurality of clothes items based on the body type and fashion category; outputting a plurality of fashion data based on the selected fashions; receiving selection information from the customer; and processing order information to place an order for the selected fashions. ==== Greg Aharonian Internet Patent News Service From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Aug 30 09:35:46 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 240662A066 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 09:35:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org ([216.0.124.7]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA11711 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 09:35:46 -0400 Message-ID: <39AD1502.21BA7722@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:06:59 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Subject: RE: [Random-bits] Anharonian: Another idiotic ecommerce patent Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit ----------- Subject: RE: [Random-bits] Anharonian: Another idiotic ecommerce patent Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 09:23:19 -0400 From: "Brian McWilliams" To: "James Love" Hi Jamie, Looks like Andrea Rosenguard has settled her suit: http://www.internetretailer.com/html/news/020800_4.htm Dressing Room Software Dispute Settled (February 8, 2000) Software developer Andrea Rosengard and Public Technologies Multimedia Inc. have agreed to settle a patent infringement suit that Rosengard filed against Public Technologies and six of its customers. Under the terms of the settlement, Rosengard granted Public Technologies Multimedia a non-exclusive license covering the items in dispute. The settlement also covers Public Technologies customers who were defendants in the action, including JCPenney, Land's End and Federated Department Stores. Rosengard, known in the fashion industry as Andrea Rose, holds a patent for virtual dressing room software known as StyleFitter. She is founder and CEO of Fashion Integration Technology. Public Technologies Multimedia Inc. is the developer of Web personalization technology known as My Virtual Model. No other terms of the agreement were disclosed. Copyright © 2000. This content is the property of Faulkner & Gray. Brian |-----Original Message----- |From: random-bits-admin@venice.essential.org |[mailto:random-bits-admin@venice.essential.org]On Behalf Of James Love |Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 9:52 AM |To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS; ecommerce |Subject: [Random-bits] Anharonian: Another idiotic ecommerce patent | | |Subject: PATNEWS: Another idiotic ecommerce patent infringement lawsuit | Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 23:46:28 -0400 (EDT) | From: Gregory Aharonian | To: patent-news@world.std.com | |!20000829 Another idiotic ecommerce patent infringement lawsuit | | The Nov/Dec issue of Internet Retailer reports yet another idiotic |ecommerce patent infringement lawsuit, this time concerning Web sites |that allow you to design and purchase clothing electronically. (NOTE: |for the record, nothing on my web site, www.bustpatents.com, provides |any capabilities, information or assistance towards the design and |purchasing of clothing online and/or electronically). | | The patent, 5,930,769, titled "System and method for fashion shopping", |was filed October 1996, and I list the patent abstract and claim below. |It is assigned to and being asserted by an individual, Andrea Rose (she |has a Web site, www.andrearosefashions.com). | | Last fall, she sued J.C. Penney, Land's End, Broderland Software, |Mattel (owner of the Learning Company), and Federated Department Stores |(owner of Macy's). I do not know the current status of the case, but |can wish for the defendants that it has been dismissed after some motion |for summary judgment. | | Once again, the problem is, ..... NON-DISCLOSED NON-PATENT PRIOR ART. |The patent cites one non-patent prior art item, and you have to believe |that sometime in the twenty year time period from the mid-1970s to the |mid-1990s, that at least one effort at one fashion institute developed at |least one fashion/textile design computer program. I mean, this is a |no brainer bet even without doing any prior art searching. But no, the |applicant, in applying for the patent and then asserting the patent, cared |little to research the field of computerized fashion design. Heck, if I |remember correctly, didn't Mrs. and Judy Jetson design and buy clothes |online in some episodes of the Jetsons cartoon? Shouldn't that be prior |art? :-)))))) | | Anyway, those of you tracking this nonsense, here is one more case to |add to your records. Anyone with a copy of the complaint, I wouldn't |mind getting a copy. | | ==== | |5930769 |System and method for fashion shopping |(filed Oct. 7, 1996) | |Abstract: | The present invention provides a method of manual fashion shopping |and method for electronic fashion shopping by a customer using a programmed |computer, CD-ROM, television, Internet or other electronic medium such |as video. The method comprises receiving personal information from the |customer; selecting a body type and fashion category based on the personal |information; selecting fashions from a plurality of clothes items based on |the body type and fashion category; outputting a plurality of fashion data |based on the selected fashions; and receiving selection information from |the customer. | | |What is claimed is: | | 1. A method of fashion shopping by a customer comprising the steps of: | | receiving personal information from the customer; | | selecting a body type and fashion category based on the personal | information; | | selecting fashions from a plurality of clothes items based on the body | type and fashion category; | | | outputting a plurality of fashion data based on the selected fashions; | | receiving selection information from the customer; and | | processing order information to place an order for the selected | fashions. | | ==== | |Greg Aharonian |Internet Patent News Service | | |_______________________________________________ |Random-bits mailing list |Random-bits@lists.essential.org |http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/random-bits | From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Aug 30 14:00:00 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BA472A063 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:00:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (flip.essential.org [216.0.124.53]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA15993 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:00:00 -0400 Message-ID: <39AD536A.E3468C97@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 14:33:14 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Edward Baig's DSL story Thanks to WR for the pointer to this DLS story. Jamie http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20000830/2595867s.htm Page 3D DSL stands for doesn't seem likely There's nothing high speed about joining the broadband revolution By Edward C. Baig Judging by the numerous DSL solicitations populating my mailbox recently, you'd think lightning-fast Internet access was breaking out all over my Manhattan neighborhood. ''Finally, Broadband is Here!'' proclaims Juno Express. ''Internet access up to 100 times faster!'' boasts Flashcom. ''Act now. The World Wide Wait is over!'' declares Telocity. [snip] -- James Love http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 200036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Aug 30 16:33:07 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CCF92A063 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:33:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA18913 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:33:07 -0400 Message-ID: <39AD60C7.498782F8@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 15:30:15 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Privacy Foundation: Microsoft Word Documents, Among Others, Can Be "Bugged," I saw a note about this on Declan's list. Jamie http://www.privacyfoundation.org/story2.html Microsoft Word Documents, Among Others, Can Be "Bugged," According to New Research From the Privacy Foundation The Previously Undocumented Feature Can Allow the Surreptitious Tracking of Computer Files on the Internet DENVER - 8/30/00 - Readers of email document attachments beware: the author of a computer file may be able to track the path of the file to your computer and others through the use of "Web bugs," the Privacy Foundation reported today. [snip] ======================================================= James Love, Director | http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology | mailto:love@cptech.org P.O. Box 19367 | voice: 1.202.387.8030 Washington, DC 20036 | fax: 1.202.234.5176 ======================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 31 09:59:59 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64D992A060; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 09:59:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA29625; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 09:59:59 -0400 Message-ID: <39AE64E2.B6981E71@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 10:00:02 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: upd-discuss , Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] Who are the current ICANN board members I was asked my Mickey Davis to give some information on the current ICANN board members. This is taken from: http://www.icann.org/general/abouticann.htm Esther Dyson, chairman of EDventure Holdings Jean-François Abramatic is Chairman of W3C, the World Wide Web Consortium Amadeu Abril i Abril teaches European Union Law, Competition Law, and IT Law at ESADE Law School, Ramon Llull University (a private University based in Barcelona) ROBERT BLOKZIJL is currently employed by the National Institute of Nuclear Physics and High Energy Physics (NIKHEF). Géraldine Capdeboscq is Executive Vice President for Strategy, Technology and Partnerships, BULL (France). Vinton G. Cerf is senior vice president of Internet Architecture and Technology for MCI WorldCom. Jonathan Cohen is the Senior, Managing Partner of the Shapiro Cohen Group of Intellectual Property Practices. George Conrades is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Akamai Technologies, Inc. and also serves as a venture partner at Polaris Venture Partners Greg Crew is currently Chairman of the Australian Communications Industry Forum Ltd., Chairman of the Australian Information Technology Engineering Centre Ltd., and a director of ERG Ltd. (Perth) and of Silicon Wireless Ltd. (California). Phil Davidson is Head of BT Group Standards in the BT Group Engineering and Technology Directorate. Frank Fitzsimmons is Senior Vice President, Global Marketing for Dun & Bradstreet Ken Fockler is the President of Tenac Consulting Hans Kraaijenbrink is a member of the Executive Board of ETNO, the European Telecommunications Network Operators association, located in Brussels. He is also Manager, European Policy and Regulation with Royal KPN N.V., the Netherlands where he is responsible for European and international regulatory strategic affairs. Sang Hyun Kyong, (I don't have information on his employer) Jun Murai is currently Professor, Faculty of Environmental Information, Keio University (Japan); Adjunct Professor at the Institute of Advanced Studies, United Nations University; Instructor at Tokyo University of Art and Music; President of the Japan Network Information Center (JPNIC); General Chairperson of the WIDE Project (a Japanese Internet research consortium). Alejandro Pisanty is currently Director of Computing Academic Services at UNAM, the National Autonomous University of Mexico, in Mexico City. Michael M. Roberts is President and CEO of ICANN Eugenio Triana is an International Management Consultant on telecom policy, space and satellite systems, copyright and intellectual property rights in Madrid, Spain. Linda S. Wilson is president emerita of Radcliffe College, a member of the Board of Directors for Citizens Financial Group, Inc., Inacom, Inc., and Value Line, Inc. Pindar Wong is the Chairman of the Asia & Pacific Internet Association, Executive Committee Chairman of the Asia Pacific Regional Internet Conference on Operational Technologies, advisor to the Asia Pacific Networking Group and member of the Editorial Advisory Board of Cisco Systems' Internet Protocol Journal. He is also the Chairman of VeriFi (Hong Kong) Ltd., a discrete Internet infrastructure consultancy. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 31 10:30:01 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACDDE2A060 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 10:30:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA30316 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 10:30:01 -0400 Message-ID: <39AE6BEC.3F157365@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 10:30:04 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] John Wilke on EU opposition to Time-Warner/AOL merger A while ago Jeff Chester, Ed Mierzwinski and I meet with the EU competition authorities about the AOL/Time Warner merger. We were pleased to read today's story in the WSJ by John Wilke. Jamie http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB967687873210096017.htm Time Warner, AOL Are Criticized By European Antitrust Enforcers By JOHN R. WILKE Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL WASHINGTON -- European antitrust enforcers are taking a hard line on America Online Inc.'s acquisition of Time Warner Inc., concerned that AOL's online service could become a "walled garden" dominating Internet access in Europe. In a confidential statement of objections given to the parties in the antitrust review, European regulators were sharply critical of the transaction, warning that the combined companies could dominate digital delivery of music and theemerging markets for online delivery of film, sports and entertainment programming. The 45-page document details the commission's objections, which reach further than previously known and set the stage for a confrontation between European officials and senior executives of AOL and Time Warner next week in a closed session in Brussels. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 31 10:38:43 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FCFB2A060; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 10:38:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA30471; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 10:38:42 -0400 Message-ID: <39AE6DF6.10D32809@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 10:38:46 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , IP-Health list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] NZ on online pharmaceutical sales From: Pippa Lawson Subject: online pharmaceutical sales NEW ZEALAND CHANGING ONLINE DRUG RULES New Zealand is changing its legal regulation of prescribing pharmaceuticals by removing a loophole that permitted export of drugs without prescription. http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,38499,00.html -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 31 11:45:36 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B51442A060 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:45:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA31665 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:45:36 -0400 Message-ID: <39AE7DA4.F03110E5@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:45:40 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Joe Wilcox: Sorting out the Office-on-Linux rumors http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-2605044.html Sorting out the Office-on-Linux rumors By Joe Wilcox Staff Writer, CNET News.com August 24, 2000, 3:50 p.m. PT -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 31 13:24:17 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C78E02A060 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 13:24:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA00545 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 13:24:17 -0400 Message-ID: <39AE94C6.E1E1B6FD@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 13:24:22 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] DNSO ICANN board seat, responses to GA questions Part of the "campaigning" for the DNSO seat on the ICANN board is to respond to questions on the ICANN DNSO "General Assembly" discussion list. These were my responses to Jefsey Morfin's questions. Jamie ----------------- -- Subject: Re: [ga] DNSO ICANN board member Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 15:09:11 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org To: Jefsey Morfin CC: ga@dnso.org Returning from a week offline, I am working my way through some mail. Jefsey asks some good questions, and I'll respond as best I can. Jefsey Morfin wrote: > But I would ask from every of the five candidates to address the following > questions I feel important: > > - what is your definition of a domain name? On which grounds do you think > IP is concerned? Do you consider that owning a domain name is the same as > using it? Which solutions would you propose to get rid legally and fairly > of cybersquatting? From a perspective of national law in most developed countries, I think we are past the point where there is a serious effort to assert that domain names have nothing to do with trademarks. I am not aware that developing countries have been very aggressive on this topic in international fora, such as WIPO. So it seems to me, the issue both (a) what is good policy, and (b) who should be making and enforcing policy. From a traditional consumer/public interest perspective, trademark rights should protect the public from misleading representations, but they should also be limited in important ways, to avoid anticompetitive uses of trademarks, or to accommodate a number of other important values, such as free speech. Much of the current problems stem from the artifical scarcity of TLDs. If ICANN would permit an expansion of the TLD space, for a variety of names and TLD management policies, there would be far less need to litigate disputes. Give the airline industry .air or .airlines, and let them manage it they way they want. Let the labor unions have .union, or a rival group have .workers, to manage as they want. Let the music industry get .music, the film industry .cinema or .film (or other language versions), and then we would not have everyone fighting over .com and .org. I think the cybersquatting issue is real, particularly now with few TLDs. I can't get cpt.org, an unused domain. Many of the really twisted WIPO UDRP decisions are efforts by the panel members to take domains away from speculators. Unfortunately, in their efforts to attack the speculators, WIPO panels are creating global trademark policy that is far too restrictive, in term of the public's rights. For example, in several cases WIPO panels take away generic names and award them to firms that have registered trademarks that use the generic name. WIPO panels have been very aggressive with respect to the issue of what constitutes a confusingly similiar name. The notion that natwest.com will be confused with natwestsucks.com is absurd, of course, but so are the decisions in domains such as catmachine.com and caterpillar, crew and jcrew and others. Decisions like kwasizabantu.org (http://lists.essential.org/pipermail/random-bits/2000-August/000260.html) are particularly troubling, where the WIPO panel flatly rejected free speech or critiscim as a legitimate use for a domain. In my opinion, the ICANN board has to be more responsive to the problems with the UDRP. I would push for a clearer statement regarding the public's rights in these disputes, particularly in the areas of the public's rights to use names of firms, products or organizations in a domain that was used for criticsm (walmartsucks.com), parody, organizing (exxon.union), or for competitive purposes, such as comparisons of rival products (cokevpepsi.comparison, aolflaws.com, etc). See http://lists.essential.org/pipermail/random-bits/2000-August/thread.html for links to discussions of some of the recent WIPO decisions. > - is the address semantic part for IP or part of free speech? I explain: is > there a difference for you between http://support.france.ibm.com (Saxon > semantic) and http://support.ibm-france.com (Latin semantic) I don't understand the point you are making here. However, in my opinion, domain names are speech, and the public has legitimate interests in using domains names for speech. > - a network may two architectures: central operations with slave stations > (star network) or distributed stations and central services (meshed > network). What is the Internet on your opinion? How do you relate this to > Roots, ICANN, DNSO WGs? My uneducated opinion is that ICANN should avoid unnecesary expansions of its authority, and not seek to exercise control over network operations that do not deal directly with domain names and numbers. I think the question of roots is interesting, because it is not obvious what would constitute an alterantive root system. Some have suggested that AOL's keyword system could be considered an alternative root system, for example. I would hope that ICANN would stay out of as many areas as possible. > - how important to you is IP numbering plan management? do you support the > concept of a de facto worldwide control of the people through their IP > addresses? what is your opinion on privacy in the IP context? The privacy issues regarding ip and domain name management are not trival, and I regret not having addressed this in any detail in my earlier statement on the DNSO web page. In my opinion, the current ICANN restrictions on the anonynous registration of domains is a mistake -- it is too broad. I can see how this might make sense for web pages that are engaged in commerical transactions. But the current ICANN restriction applies to any domain registration, used for any purpose. I wish I knew more about where things are going in terms of IP numbering managment. I was looking at this page today, trying to appreciate the privacy consequences: http://www.arin.net/announcements/policy_changes.html > > - every nominated candidate is from NorthA. Have you previously committed > clearly to the opening of the Internet structures and technologies to new > cultures, character sets, national, regional, local interests? > ICANN should be a real international body. This should be made clear > through the recognition of several languages and the geographical location > of its instances (not only through the tourism of its meetings). DNSO paved > the way. Would you support equal right ICANN offices (even unstaffed) in > every geographical area?Do you have suggestions to make such local presence > useful? I don't think local presence is a good idea, because it is expensive. One might want to insist on staff who could speak more than one language, if only to insure that you hired people who understand there is more than one culture. My wife is french, and she used to work in the R&D office for Berlitz, testing teaching materials in different cultures, and in distance education in Malyasia, so I have learned a little from her. Most of my own work is international, much in developing countries. In international groups I work in, I have found translations to be mixed blessing. They are expensive, and can slow things down quite a bit. With ICANN, how many languages would be enough? India has something like 40 official languages. I think the EU is being buried by the costs of servicing so many languages, but ICANN covers the whole world, so the problem is much more difficult. Where ICANN can do more is in terms of multilingual character sets, domain names and TLDs, but here one would expect the IETF to be taking the lead on the technical issues. With respect to different legal traditions regarding trademarks, freedom of speech and privacy, ICANN should not migrate toward the policies with the least freedom and least privacy. > > - new industries and automation will have a tremendous use of Internet, > opening new ways to use, develop, control and pay for it. Would you support > innovative avenues in studying this aspect, like - this is only an example > - in having test/experimental gTLD sponsored by the DNSO (out of the > current ICANN work)? Other suggestions? ICANN should let others experiment with different gTLDs. I think restricted TLDs will be interesting, if ICANN premits easy entry to run a TLD. At some point ICANN should give some indication of the number of TLDs that the DNS system can support. > > - ICANN charter is to work out consensus. The "stay @large" experience is > not satisfactory in its present form (over representation of Japan and > Germany, unequal number of ICANN nominated person, short period during > vacations, 70% of the voting PINs not received). This is therefore an > anti-consensus operation: which strategy would you propose? Which is your > vision of the ICANN and what are the bylaws modifications you would support? Good questions. I don't have many answers. I would start by working to get consensus on a statement about where ICANN's mission ends -- an "I CAN'T" statement. Just having ICANN claim that it doesn't do policy work, when that is most of what it does, isn't working very well. Once you have a better handle on where ICANN's mission ends, you can make better decision on how to run ICANN. I think it is important to keep the elections for the at large members, so there is at least a possibility that the public can participate. I am concerned that ICANN will impose fees on at large voting rights. > > - ICANN needs a budget and people dedicating time and resources to the > common good should deserve to be correctly compensated (do you approve). > ICANN seems to weave links, financial expanses, working culture, etc... to > become a need for a court of large interests and real or self nominated > experts, making itself necessary as a business would do. Do you agree? Do > you support this strategy? Which alternative would you support? Would you > support the concept of SO having an independent budget and resources? The funding issue is a tough one, because ICANN is looking for money everywhere, including IP numbers, registry fees, and things like the $50k fee for even applying for a new TLD. Meanwhile, some ICANN staff claim the public should not have a say in ICANN policies (for example Mike Roberts comments in Cario). I personally think ICANN could cut the costs of the meetings quite a bit, and as much as I enjoy the trips to Cario and other places, this may not be a good way to operate, particularly if generous hosts don't appear. A much more boring but frugal approach much be a good idea. > - there are in the world many worldwide organizations representing > interests using Internet, from IATA to Churches, Red Cross to Interpol, GAC > to CCITT. Would you support the concept of an International Organization > Internet Club for them to periodically meet, exchange informations and > experience, share projects, describe needs, etc..? Would you support the > idea of a ad hoc Working Group to study this and propose a Supporting > Organization set-up? I don't think ICANN should be responsible for all of these various Internet agendas. It is not at all qualified to do many of these things. > - if elected at the BoD, do you consider that you will have to represent > the then current opinion of the DNSO General Assembly even if changing, or > that you owe the DNSO and the people who voted for you to stay cleverly > consistent with your own views. I think you have to respond to new information. You can look at what I have said about ICANN over the past two years here: http://www.cptech.org/ecom/icann > I apologize to have been long, but IMHO some of these 10 issues will decide > of the survival of the ICANN and we need to know where our director will stand. > Sincerely yours. > Jefsey Morfin > Thanks, it was fun to respond. Jamie -- James Love http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 200036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Aug 31 14:52:04 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D64B82A319 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 14:52:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA02016 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2000 14:52:04 -0400 Message-ID: <39AEA959.AC6B48B8@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 14:52:09 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] UDRP: bodacious-tatas.com In this WIPO case, someone who used bodacious-tatas.com to show porographic materials lost the domain to Tata Sons Limited. This is the part of the decision where the WIPO panel explains why bodacious-tatas.com is "identical or confusingly similar" to tata.com Jamie http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0479.html ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION Tata Sons Limited v. D & V Enterprises Case No. D2000-0479 a) Domain Name "Identical or Confusingly Similar" It is clear to the Panel that an integral part of the Domain Name registered by the Respondent in this case, namely "tatas", is confusingly similar, and almost identical, to the Complainant's TM TATA. It is true, of course, that the Respondent, in its Domain Name registration, has used "tata" plus the addition of the letter "s" whilst the Complainant's trademark has no "s". This, however, is of no benefit to the Respondent. In the Complainant's submission, which is amply substantiated by copies of articles and reports submitted (see: Complaint - Annexures "E" and "F") the Tata Group of Companies is collectively referred to as "Tatas" throughout the world. One might think, nevertheless, that the inclusion of the word "bodacious" in the domain name registered by the Respondent, taken together with the addition of the letter "s" to TATA, could create a sufficient distinction, for trademark purposes, between the Complainant's TM TATA, on the one hand, and the Respondent's Domain Name on the other. Such a contention, however, is untenable in the view of the Panel, by virtue of the very high level of goodwill that both TATA and TATAS have acquired. Further, TATA, without any vestige of doubt, constitutes a famous (or, in international parlance, well known) mark - a subject to which the Panel will return. [SNIP] It must be said, also, that it is now generally accepted in most countries that well-known marks, particularly those surrounded by an aura of high repute, excellent quality and respectability, deserve wide protection. This the Panel holds to be the case with the TM TATA and its corresponding service mark. In this area, therefore, the addition of a word like "bodacious" ["South Midland and Southern U.S.-1."thorough"; "blatant"; "unmistakable"; 2."remarkable"; "outstanding"; 3. "audacious"; "bold"; "brazen" - "Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language": (1989)], and the addition of the letter "s", does not render the Domain Name less identical or less confusingly similar to a trade or service mark. Indeed, the opposite is true, particularly when one considers most of the meanings attributed to the word "bodacious". -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Sep 1 12:38:30 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F8F52A060 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 12:38:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA13864 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 12:38:30 -0400 Message-ID: <39AFCCD1.CD7D49F4@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 11:35:45 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] http://www.voteauction.com/ Well, ecommerce is truly making the markets more efficient, that is for sure. Jamie http://www.voteauction.com/ -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Sep 1 13:24:45 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 325E22A060 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 13:24:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA14595 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 13:24:45 -0400 Message-ID: <39AFD7A8.883DB@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 12:22:00 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] UDRP: Kur- und Verkehrsverein St. Moritz v. StMoritz.com http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0617.html Kur- und Verkehrsverein St. Moritz v. StMoritz.com Case No. D2000-0617 This is a pretty interesting case. "An official organization of the community of St. Moritz" asked WIPO to take away stmoritz.com from a domain owner from the United Arab Emirates. The domain name owner did not both to contest the proceeding. A lone WIPO panel member rejected the transfer, largely on the grounds that there was no evidence that the domain was being used in bad faith, based upon his own exaimination of the web page and his investigation into the firm that owned the stmoritz.com domain. A decision that went the other way was Barcelona.com http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0505.html Excelentisimo Ayuntamiento de Barcelona v. Barcelona.com Inc. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Sep 1 13:35:57 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0D9C2A060 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 13:35:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA14852 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 13:35:56 -0400 Message-ID: <39AFDA48.ED65B66D@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 12:33:12 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] UDRP: =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=FCd=2DChemie?= AG v. tonsil.com http://arbiter.wipo.int/domains/decisions/html/d2000-0376.html Süd-Chemie AG v. tonsil.com Case No. D2000-0376 In this case, a WIPO panel took way the domain tonsil.com from Virginia Comito, and gave it to a german chemical products firm, that claimed that tonsil was "an invented word that has no meaning or significance other than to identify and distinguish its products from those of its competitors." The one person WIPO panel made much of the fact that Virginia Comito was alledgedly involved with the registration of a different domain for use by a pornographic sites, and that it wasn't clear who the "owner" of the domain was (even though she had responded to the proceeding to defend the domain from the transfer. This is one of several cases where a generic name has been taken away from a domain holder. My MIT online dictionary defines tonsil as follows: Tonsil Ton"sil, n. L. tonsill?, pl.: cf. F. tonsille. (Anat.) One of the two glandular organs situated in the throat at the sides of the fauces. The tonsils are sometimes called the almonds, from their shape. From the decision: 4. Factual Background The Complainant is a large chemical products manufacturer organized under the laws of Germany. Since 1952 the Complainant has been producing, selling and marketing bleaching earths and clays under the trademark "Tonsil". 1999 sales of "Tonsil" exceeded DM 50 million. [snip] 5. Parties? Contentions The Complainant asserts that: (1) The domain name tonsil.com is identical or confusingly similar to the trademark "Tonsil" in which the Complainant has world-wide exclusive rights; (2) the Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in respect of the domain name; and that (3) the domain name was registered and is being used in bad faith. The Complainant further asserts that the term "Tonsil" is an invented word that has no meaning or significance other than to identify and distinguish its products from those of competitors; and that as an invented word "Tonsil" is not a word traders would legitimately use except to create an association with the Complainant. [snip] Virginia Comito asserts that: (1) Tonsil and tonsil.com are not identical or confusingly similar; (2) the Respondent has rights and a legitimate interest in the domain name; and that (3) the domain was not registered and used in bad faith. Virginia Comito further alleges that the Complainant has submitted false and misleading evidence, acted in bad faith by raising arguments it knew were untrue, harassed herself, interfered with her business relationships, succeeded in shutting down her website by its actions thereby damaging her personal and business interests, and deprived her of the use of tonsil.com. 8. Decision The Panel decides that: 1) the domain name tonsil.com is confusingly similar to the trademark "Tonsil"; 2) Ms. Comito has no rights or legitimate interest in respect of the domain name tonsil.com; 3) the domain name tonsil.com has been used in bad faith by Ms. Comito. Pursuant to paragraph 4(i) of the Policy and pursuant to paragraph 15 of the Rules, the Panel requires that the Registrar, Network Solutions, Inc., transfer the name tonsil.com to the Complainant. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Sep 1 16:33:42 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F5502A060 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 16:33:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA17496 for ; Fri, 1 Sep 2000 16:33:38 -0400 Message-ID: <39B01221.99D31169@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 16:31:29 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Uzi Nissan, Nissan Computer Corporation and Nissan Mortor Company http://www.ncchelp.org/ Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. Versus Nissan Computer Corporation "My name is Uzi Nissan. I was born August 18, 1951, in Jerusalem, Israel. My father's last name was Nissan; his father's last name was Nissan, and so on. Nissan is a biblical term originally identifying the first month in the Hebrew calendar, and is the contemporary name for the seventh month in the Hebrew calendar. The term Nissan also is Arabic for the month of April. I came to America from Israel on December 16, 1976, and have used my surname for years to identify a number of business enterprises. The first was "Nissan Foreign Car Mobile Repair Service" in 1980. In December 1987, I started an import/export business known as "Nissan International, Ltd. At that time, Nissan Motor was not well known as Nissan, but primarily as "DATSUN". As with the earlier business, I chose to use Nissan in my business name because it was my last name. On May 14, 1991, "Nissan Computer Corp. was incorporated in the state of North Carolina. I was then, and still am, the company President. I have used Nissan as part of my trade name in connection with the sale of computer hardware, computer maintenance, installation, networking, computer training and other consulting services related to computers and computer networks. On June 4, 1994, we registered the domain name "nissan.com" with InterNic (now Network Solutions) and created a web site to promote computer related products and services on the Internet. Nissan Motor has been aware of our domain name and us since at least July of 1995, when I received a letter from the auto maker's senior legal counsel. The letter did not claim we were illegally using our domain name nor their trade name, but expressed only "concern" by our use of nissan.com. The letter requested further information in order to evaluate our web site. I chose not to respond because I believed it was clear we were a computer company and that there was no conflict. Nissan Motor's lawyer never contacted me again, confirming my belief that they had no valid concern about me. In July of 1995, I obtained a service mark registration for Nissan and my logo from the State of North Carolina. On March 17, 1996, I registered the domain name nissan.net, and began offering Internet services, including dial-up connections and direct data connections to business. Almost four years later, legal action was instituted by Nissan Motor seeking to restrain me from the use of my family name for business purposes on the Internet. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Sep 2 22:59:40 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22E502A05E; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 22:59:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-1.essential.org [216.0.125.1]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA29030; Sat, 2 Sep 2000 22:59:38 -0400 Message-ID: <39B15EFF.43F40CCB@cptech.org> Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 16:11:43 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , nc-tlds@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] UDRP: Pueblo International, Inc. v. Pueblo On-Line http://www.arbforum.com/domains/decisions/95250.htm Pueblo International, Inc. v. Pueblo On-Line Claim Number: FA0007000095250 Everyone once in a while you read a really good UDRP decision, and this is one of them. The arbitrator, in this case retired Judge Irving H. Perluss, who was acting on behalf of the National Arbitration Forum, rejected the domain name owners concession that pueblo.org was identical to the service mark of a supermarket chain. Indeed, Judge Perluss said that pueblo.org was clearly different, because the top level domain, .org, was not the same as the .com domain that would normally be associated with a supermarket. Moreover, the Judge discussed in some detail the 1997 IAHC plan to create 7 new gTLDs, which he said were designed to permit more than one firm to use the same name in different gTLDs. The decision itself should be useful for those applying for new TLDs, who are faced with questions regarding how they will address trademark concerns. Jamie From the Decision: <----------------------------------------------------> Identical and/or Confusingly Similar The Panelist does not understand, nor is he willing to accept, Respondent's concession that its domain name is identical to Complainant's service mark, for it is not when appropriate domain names are considered. This is because a domain name combination must include a top-level domain which can be "com.," "net.," "org.," "gov.," or "edu.," among others. The combination also must include a second-level domain, which can be any word not already reserved in combination with the top-level domain. [See, Avery Dennison Corporation v. Jerry Sumpton (9th Cir. 1999) 189 F.3d 868, 871. The top-level domain "org" customarily is in usage by non-profit or "miscellaneous" entities and not by a supermarket chain such as Complainant's. Professor McCarthy teaches us in 4 McCarthy (4th ed. 1996) Trademarks and Unfair Competition, §25:72.1, as follows: [text appears to be missing from the html version] The 1997 IAHC (Internet International Ad Hoc Committee) recommended the adoption worldwide of seven new generic top level domains (gTLDs) in addition to existing ones: .firm (for companies) .shop (goods for sale) .web (world wide web activities) .arts (culture) .rec (recreation) .info (information) .nom (individuals? web sites). This new agreement is called the Generic Top Level Domain Memorandum of Understanding (gTLD-MoU) and was published on February 4, 1997. While implementation of the seven new top level domains was originally scheduled for 1998, transfer of Internet authority to ICANN in 1999 put that plan on hold. One reason for the opening of new top level domains was to permit more domain names to be available to companies with the same name. Under trademark law, several concurrent users can legally coexist in different territories (parts of the U.S. or in separate nations) or in different product and service markets. But there can only be one domain name. Thus, although there are several concurrent users of marks like ACME, BEST or NATIONAL, there can only be one "acme.com," "best.com," and "national.com." The new gTLDs would permit, for example, four different companies using the name or mark ACME to have "acme.firm" (for a furniture company); "acme.web" (for an Internet service provider); "acme.rec" (for an owner of a soccer team); and "acme.info" (for a trade journal). [Emphasis supplied.] Thus, by a parity of reason, it must follow that the domain name of "PUEBLO.ORG" is not identical to the domain name of "PUEBLO.COM," or "PUEBLO.NET," either of which would be a more appropriate domain name by custom and usage for an enterprise such as Complainant?s. [See, Avery Dennison Corporation v. Jerry Sumpton, supra, at 880-881.] -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Sep 3 09:25:25 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEFE32A05E; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 09:25:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-1.essential.org [216.0.125.1]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA31351; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 09:25:24 -0400 Message-ID: <39B1F1AD.88EE6667@cptech.org> Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 02:37:33 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , nc-tlds@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] UDRP: Pueblo.Net given to Pueblo International This Pueblo dispute went the other way, and Pueblo.net, which was to be a "virtual city," was taken away and given to the grocery firm that has pueblo.com. The Panel member, Judge Harold Kalina, found that the owner of Pueblo.net had registered the domain in bad faith, even though there was no evidence that the domain had been used or intended for use for anything related to the Pueblo grocery business. In fact, the domain owner seemed more interested in the use of the same as it related to the city, Pueblo. Apparently the domain owners plan was to sell a package of the domain name and some web hosting services for $50 per month, apparently, not a legitimate use according to this UDRP panel. "Your virtual city can be your-city-name.net, or your-city-name. vcv.com and you can offer our complete line of internet services... Take this scenario... Imagine the leverage of spending only $50.00/month and have the effect of $50,000.00/month of national advertising. http://www.arb-forum.com/domains/decisions/94337.htm PUEBLO INTERNATIONAL, INC. COMPLAINANT, Vs. VCV INTERNET/VIRTUAL CITY VISION, INC. RESPONDENT. DECISION Forum File No.: FA0003000094337 -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Sep 3 09:46:09 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FE0D2A05E for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 09:46:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-1.essential.org [216.0.125.1]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA31417 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 09:46:08 -0400 Message-ID: <39B1F689.4D4272D3@cptech.org> Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 02:58:17 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] UDRP: ASTROCARTOGRAPHY.COM While I have identified several UDRP decisions where generic names are taken away and given to people who have trademarks on the use of a particular generic name, not all decisions have this result. In this complaint, the National Arbitration Forum 3 member panel rejected the transfer of Astrocartography.com, on the grounds that it was a generic name, even though the complainant, Ron Mahka, had a US service mark on Astro*Carto*Graphy. http://www.arb-forum.com/domains/decisions/94267.htm ASTRO*CARTO*GRAPHY LIVING TRUST Ron Mahka, Trustee COMPLAINANT, vs. ADVANCED LOCATIONAL RESEARCH (Domain holder of ASTROCARTOGRAPHY.COM) RESPONDENT. DECISION Forum File No.: FA0003000094267 -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Sep 3 10:37:08 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BA652A05E for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 10:37:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-1.essential.org [216.0.125.1]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA31691 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2000 10:37:06 -0400 Message-ID: <39B2027C.9F087F21@cptech.org> Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 03:49:16 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] UDRP: shack.com and David Shackleton vrs Radio Shack http://www.arb-forum.com/domains/decisions/94807.htm In this dispute over shack.com, David Shackleton, who has been known by the nickname, Shack, successfully opposed an effort by Radio Shack to take his domain. shack.com. Jamie -- FACTUAL FINDINGS The Complainant Technology Properties, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Tandy Corporation and owns the trademark "Shack". This trademark is licensed to RadioShack, a division of Tandy Corporation. RadioShack and its predecessors have used the mark "Shack" since 1977. The Respondent, Design Shack, David Shackleton, Administrative Contact, is an entrepreneur who is involved in the design of web-based companies and business models. He formed a web-based company named DesignShack in 1996. DesignShack offered visual guides to product information on the web. It showed thumbnail pictures of products such as mountain bikes and automobiles and provided links to manufacturer information. The name of the company was chosen in part because of its association to its creator, Shackleton, whose nickname is Shack. Although he had registered the domain name designshack.com, he decided that this was not memorable enough and sought to shorten the name to shack.com. He discovered that this domain name was registered to an individual named Adam Solesby and in 1996, Shackleton purchased the name from Solesby for the sum of $1,000. Since purchasing the domain name shack.com, Shackleton has used that site as a method of providing product information on the web. In 1997, that website won numerous awards, including Yahoo Site of The Day. In 1997, Shackleton started another company and closed the shack.com because he did not have the time or resources to maintain both websites. The domain name shack.com has remained dormant since 1997. Shackleton states that he intends to launch a series of web-based companies in the coming years and has plans for using shack.com. None of these plans involve competing with the Complainant. Shackleton states the he has never sold or intended to sell products that would compete with RadioShack under the domain name shack.com. He says he has never intended or tried to get people to associate shack.com with RadioShack or to mistake shack.com for a website sponsored, endorsed or affiliated in any way with RadioShack. There is no evidence before the panel to dispute these assertions. It appears to be undisputed that in 1998, Shackleton was contacted by an attorney for RadioShack seeking to obtain a transfer of the domain name shack.com to RadioShack. Shackleton informed the attorney that he was not interested in transferring the name and was then offered $100 by RadioShack. That offer was rejected. RadioShack then filed a complaint and the name was put on hold for year. During that period of time, RadioShack offered $500 for the name. After further consideration and discussion with his attorney, Shackleton offered to transfer the name for $20,000. That offer was rejected. It appears from the evidence that there are 258 trademarks using the word "shack" registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office. And, over the past few years, several people have expressed interest in acquiring the name from Shackleton. Shackleton has told all of them that he was not interested in selling the name. RadioShack has registered twenty-six domain names including RADIOSHACK.COM. RadioShack's web site is located at http://www.radioshack.com. James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Sep 4 20:33:08 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D237D2A063 for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 20:33:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-6.essential.org [216.0.125.6]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA12547 for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 20:33:07 -0400 Message-ID: <39B3DF9D.B35453DC@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 13:45:01 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Network Solutions' Common Name Resolution Protocol Network Solutions' Common Name Resolution Protocol The text below is from: http://cnrp.research.netsol.com/ So just what is CNRP? The Common Name Resolution Protocol allows you to send queries and receive results for a specific set of things that we call Common Names. Common Names (CNs) are names that are engineered to behave the way human beings use names. For example, people are perfectly comfortable with two different things being called the same thing. When we say something about "Joe Smith" we don't worry about the fact that there are probably several thousand Joe Smiths in the world. We know that we're probably limiting the scope of our discussion to some known understood geographic area or circle of friends. On the Internet the names that have been used to date are all engineered to make life easy for the machines. We as humans don't need dots, dashes, squiggles and colons to be able to get by. So why should we have to conform to the machines? Why can't we get them to handle names for things the way we do normally? That's where common-names come into play. CNs have three attributes that ordinary Internet names such as email addresses and URLs don't have: non-uniqueness, parameterization and an unlimited character set. Those big words just mean that 1.Non-uniqueness -- two objects can have the same name. This means that very often when you use a common-name you will be asked which one out of a list is the one you are really looking for. 2.Parameterization -- a common-name query can include other information such as the location, topic or language you happen to be interested in. This means that you can contain a given common-name to the geographic region that it applies to. For example, there may be two "Joe's Pizza". One is in Atlanta and the other is in New York. CNRP allows you to specify the area in which you live so that when you look up "Joe's Pizza" you don't get the one on the other side of the planet. 3.Unlimited character set -- A common name can include any character in any language. In your common name you can include spaces, puncuation spaces, exclamation marks, chinese language characters, etc. The options are unlimited and allow you to best symbolize your name. Examples Here are some examples. If you have our Internet Explorer plugin installed then click below to see to it in action: go:Microsoft go:Network Solutions go:Michael Mealling -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Sep 4 21:49:57 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F19A32A063 for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 21:49:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA13338 for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2000 21:49:56 -0400 Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 21:49:56 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] More on Network Solutions' CNRP Pilot >Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 16:15:58 -0400 >From: Michael Mealling >Subject: Network Solutions' CNRP Pilot is available >To: CNRP-IETF@LISTS.NETSOL.COM > >Network Solutions' CNRP Pilot Is Online! >--------------------------------------- >Network Solutions' Applied Research group is announcing the availability >of its new CNRP Pilot which includes a CNRP Service, client software, and >a registration system for inserting common names into the service's database. >The pilot can be found at http://cnrp.research.netsol.com/ > >The pilot includes a service that has been seeded with data from the >over 8 million domain-names found in Network Solutions' registrar >domain-name database. Users can add to this database by registering >as a user and adding any common-name they desire. The database currently >supports three types of properties: categories in the form of North American >Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes, locations using ISO 3166-1 >country and ISO 3166-2 region codes, and languages using RFC1766 language >codes. Registered users have each of these parameters at their disposal for >inserting new common-names into the database. > >The pilot also includes the recently demonstrated Internet Explorer plugin >that enables the user to type "go:" in the URL bar and have >access to all of their favorite CNRP services. The plugin allows the user >to register and query any number of CNRP services simultaneously. It is >written using Microsoft standard COM tools which will allow the plugin's >internal CNRP client engine to be used by any experience Visual Basic >programmer. > >The future direction of the pilot includes enhancements to the database >and plugin. Future client software includes a Mozilla plugin, a set >of cross platform client libraries, and a Java implementation. > >For more information please visit the pilot's website at: >http://cnrp.research.netsol.com/ >or send email to michaelm@netsol.com >--------------------------------------- > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Michael Mealling | Vote Libertarian! | www.rwhois.net/michael >Sr. Research Engineer | www.ga.lp.org/gwinnett | ICQ#: 14198821 >Network Solutions | www.lp.org | michaelm@netsol.com > From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Sep 5 00:01:22 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A74A2A063 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 00:01:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA14606 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 00:01:22 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 00:01:22 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] BlueYonder.Com and Telewest This is a pretty interesting story involving Telewest and a small business that operates blueyonder.com. According to Michael Mahoney, Telewest tried to buy his domain. He refused to sell. But Telewest started using it anyway, in what he calls cyberbulldozing. Jamie ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 14:12:09 -0700 From: Michael Mahoney To: love@cptech.org Cc: Bob Cahune Subject: Inverse Cybersquatting by Large Corporations. Individual Rights Violations Dear Mr. Love, I located this email address for you on the ICANN site. I admire the work that you and Mr. Nadar have dedicated yourselves to, upholding the rights of the individual. I may be the first recipient of harrassment due to inverse cybersquatting by a partnership of giant corporations. I fear that this may become an alarming and unethical trend, due to the scarcity of good available domain names. ATT and Microsoft are majority shareholders on Telewest PLC in the UK. Telewest, to the best of my understanding, was set up by John Malone, former head of TCI Cable. Being a TV cable, telephone and internet provider, Telewest is the ideal test bed for ATT and MS to implement and refine new software and systems. I was approached Jan. 25, 2000 by a broker representing Telewest, to sell them my domain name, BLUEYONDER.COM I have owned and operated BLUEYONDER.COM since 1996 and used BLUE YONDER in connection with my graphic design business since 1995. I have also applied for the US Tradmark, based on first use. No satisfactory agreement was reached, and I did not sell my domain name to them. Telewest bought the domain name BLUEYONDER.CO.UK from a jeweler in the UK, and began changing the name of it's internet service from CABLEINET.CO.UK , as well as the name of it's servers, to BLUEYONDER, using the CO.UK extension. In discussions with Philip Jansen, Marketing, Simon Read, Telewest's legal council, and other TW representatives, the negative effect that a large service provider signing up thousands of customers using a domain name confusingly similar to mine, would have on my wife and my businessess was presented. The upshot was that Telewest PLC would use the name regardless of the impact on me, and their opinion was that each of their FIVE FINAL OFFERS was adequate to compensate me. Telewest then withdrew it's offer to me and refused to communicate further. Since the launch of their name change, I have received and continue to receive in ever escalating volume, thousands of emails meant for Telewest engineers, employees, partners and customers. I also have received email from Telewest customers telling me that they were assigned blueyonder.com addresses, and Telewest engineering staff using my domain in their email addresses. Email meant for me has apparently been diverted to the UK since Jan 28, 2000, including confidential emails from my legal council. In addition, Telewest released and distributed a customized version of Internet Explorer on CD to it's customers that has links to my domain, BLUEYONDER.COM Microsoft's partner in producing web servers and other internet devices, Dell Computer, registered the domain name wild-blue-yonder.com, May 11. 1999 Dell Computer http://www.wild-blue-yonder.com Please visit my site http://www.blueyonder.com Then go to Telewest's http://www.blueyonder.co.uk I have coined a new bit of technojargon to describe this somewhat inverse cybersquatting situation. CYBERBULLDOZING When a giant corporation deliberately uses a domain name so confusingly similar to that of a small business, that the small business is plowed under with unwanted email. I hope that you see that this is the first instance of what could become a trend by large companies against individuals who cannot muster the large amount of money involved to hire lawyers to fight for their rights in court. Please be aware that email to this address may be monitored and/or diverted and use caution. Thank you for your time and attention. Best Regards, Mike Mahoney websergeant@blueyonder.com Blue Yonder Design http://www.blueyonder.com cc: Robert Cohune Atty at Law From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Sep 5 10:54:08 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A60E2A063 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:54:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA19014 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:54:08 -0400 Message-ID: <39B508B6.61BBDDB7@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 10:52:38 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Reuss on Porsche Carrea, Feld on Nissan Here are two notes from subscribers about the domain name disputes. One from Christoph Reuss about the use by Porsche of Carrea, and one by Harold Feld about the word Nissan. Jamie Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2000 01:38:46 +0200 To: JLL@HPALAW.COM From: creuss@bluewin.ch (Christoph Reuss) Subject: Re: PORSCHEFANCLUB.COM Porsche claims Infringement and Dilution of Porsche Trademarks Cc: love@cptech.org, random-bits@venice.essential.org, Leukers@aol.com On 21-July-2000, LAW OFFICES HOWARD, PHILLIPS & ANDERSEN wrote: > Re: Infringement and Dilution of Porsche Trademarks [snip] > PORSCHE=AE, the Porsche Crest=AE, CARRERA=AE, TARGA=AE, and BOXSTER=AE are some of > the registered trademarks of Dr. Ing. h.c.F. Porsche AG, and are > proprietary property of that corporation. Usage of the Porsche > trademarks or any confusingly similar variation thereof, without > consent, violates state and federal law, is misleading to the public, > and constitutes a misappropriation of the goodwill and reputation > developed by Porsche. Don't you know that there is a village with the name "Carrera" in Switzerland? (its postal code is 7122) The village Carrera existed prior to the Porsche trademark, so I hope you are aware that Porsche's use of that name constitutes a misappropriation of the goodwill and reputation developed by the villagers of Carrera: The village emits much less noise and pollution than Porsche Carrera; in fact, this village in the mountains of Grisons has very clean air and a very quiet scenery!! I do hope you are aware of the legal consequences that this infringement and dilution of the village's good reputation will have for Porsche. Sincheerely, Christoph Reuss Switzerland Subject: Re: [Random-bits] Uzi Nissan, Nissan Computer Corporation and Nissan Mortor Company Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 07:54:17 -0400 From: Harold Feld To: James Love Minor caveat: the word "Nissan" is only biblical if we go to the book of Esther. The original custom as outlined in Exodus, Lev., Num. and Deut. (Gen. doesn't deal with months or holidays as I recall) is to number months. thus, the Passover holiday occurs: "On the 15th Day of the First Month." Then names of the months do not enter the biblical writings until the Babylonian Exile. The names are of Babylonian origin, and appear to have been adopted in exile. We first see reference to this in the Book of Esther, which defines months and names. Thus, "and in the First Month, that is, the Month of Nissan, Haman threw lots...and it fell upon the 13th day of the 12th month, that is, the Month of Adar." I believe the books of Ezra, Nechemiah, and other post-exhilic books (such as Daniel) use the names of months, including Nissan. Harold (being pendantic) -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Sep 5 21:45:54 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48A592A063 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 21:45:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA29844 for ; Tue, 5 Sep 2000 21:45:54 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 21:45:54 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] CYBER-FEDERALIST NO.5: The ICANN Member Nomination Process This is the CPSR analysis of the ICANN "at large" elections. Jamie Please forward ******************************************************** CYBER-FEDERALIST No. 5 September 6, 2000 THE ICANN MEMBER NOMINATION PROCESS Civil Society Democracy Project (CivSoc) of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) (CivSoc of CPSR) http://www.civsoc.org http://www.internetdemocracyproject.org/ http://www.cyber-federalist.org (archive) ******************************************************** The Member Nominations phase of the ICANN elections ends this Friday (September 8). With just a few days left, we can begin to see some likely nominations and some electoral trends. The most useful website for following the elections is the ICANNnot site, which summarizes each region's election. That site is located at: http://www.ICANNnot.org (Many thanks to Mr. Andrew Bloch for creating that site!) In what follows, I summarize the present state of each regional election and speculate about the future. EUROPE ====== Europe has had the highest turnout of any region, with over 32% of all activated members voting (21% of all members in the region.) Europe also has the fewest open positions for member nominations -- only 2 of 7, with the other 5 positions already filled by ICANN's nominees. The two candidates most likely to win a nomination are Andy Mueller-Maguhn and Jeanette Hofmann, both from Germany and both with strong credentials for representing civil society concerns on the ICANN Board. The clear leader is Mueller-Maguhn, with more than twice the endorsements of any other candidate. Mueller-Maguhn is the Speaker of the Chaos Computer Club (www.CCC.de), an organization that promotes issues like privacy and freedom of information. (My German colleagues have uniformly emphasized that the term "chaos" refers to its philosophy of freedom and non-hierarchical organization.) Jeanette Hofmann is a university-based social scientist who has done extensive studies of the IETF. She is a founding member of the European chapter of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (www.CPSR.org) and a signatory to the Civil Society Statement (www.civilsocietyinternetforum.org). Two other leading European candidates are Lutz Donnerhacke and Dmitri Bourkov. Donnerhacke is a co-founder of FITUG (www.FITUG.de), which is a member of the Global Internet Liberty Campaign (www.GILC.org). With about 800 endorsements, he is only about 250 votes behind the Jeanette Hoffman at the time of this writing. Bourkov, the only non-German candidate with large numbers of endorsements, has a background in the technical areas of network development in Eastern Europe and Russia. Election data for Europe is available at: http://www.icannnot.org/icannel.cgi?s=e&r=EU&l=e An archived discussion forum for Europe is available at: http://www.fitug.de/icann-europe/index.html ASIA/AUSTRALIA/PACIFIC ====================== The region with the greatest contrast to Europe is Asia. There, only about 12% of activated members have voted (less than 5% of all Asia regional members.) Asia has three candidate positions still open, but so far only one member has passed the 2% threshold for nomination. The leading candidate is Hong Jie Li from China, who has over 1000 votes. He has a business background and expresses concerns about business development. Three other candidates each have between 400 and 500 votes. Kuo-Wei Wu, from Taiwan, has a background in the technical and research community and is active in APNIC. Jon Ho Kim, from Korea, is an expert in intellectual property law. The fourth candidate is Yukika Matsumoto from Japan. She is the only leading Asian candidate to strongly advocate civil society issues. She has worked with NGO's, most notably JCA-NET, which is the Japanese member of the Association for Progressive Communications (www.APC.org). At the time of this writing she has the third-highest number of votes, but has still not passed the 2% threshold needed to win a nomination. Election data for Asia is available at: http://www.icannnot.org/icannel.cgi?s=e&r=AP&l=e NORTH AMERICA ============= The North American region has three clear leading candidates for its three open positions. All three have strongly supported values of civil society. Karl Auerbach was a co-founder of the Boston Working Group, which played an important role in ICANN's creation, ensuring that there would be an At Large membership. His extensive reform platform for ICANN can be seen at: http://www.cavebear.com/ialc/platform.htm . Barbara Simons is the former President of the Association for Computing Machinery (www.ACM.org) and founded its Internet Governance Project (http://www.acm.org/serving/IG.html), which supported the work of Kathy Kleiman. Simons is also a long-time member of CPSR. Both Auerbach and Simons have endorsed the Civil Society Statement (Auerbach contributed significantly to its creation.) The third candidate who has also passed the 2% threshold is Emerson Tiller, whose platform supports free speech and open democratic governance of ICANN. Election data for North America is available at: http://www.icannnot.org/icannel.cgi LATIN AMERICA/CARIBBEAN ======================= In this region one candidate has emerged as a clear leader, although a second person may still pass the 2% limit. With the majority of ICANN members located in Brazil, it is not surprising that both candidates are from that country. Claudio Silva Menezes has over 800 votes out of a total of 924 at this time. He works for the Banco do Brasil in IT management. In a distant second place is Aluisio Nunes, with 60 votes. He is an independent consultant in strategic management and marketing research. Election data for Latin America are available at: http://www.icannnot.org/icannel.cgi?s=e&r=LA&l=e AFRICA ====== Although only 54 votes have been cast so far in this region, the rates of participation are roughly equivalent to North America. Here the threshold to surpass is the fixed limit of 20 voters. Two of the three candidates are still far below that, with 8 and 6 votes. The leading candidate here is Calvin Browne of South Africa. He is a director of the corporation managing the .co.za domain name space, which is the South African equivalent of .com. He also has years of experience participating in activities of ICANN and the Internet Society. Election data for Africa is available at: http://www.icannnot.org/icannel.cgi?s=e&r=AF&l=e COMMENTARY ========== These data allow one to speculate on what the future holds. Clearly nationalism is a strong factor in these regional elections. In each region, the leading candidates are citizens of the countries with the most voters. The big countries are Brazil, Germany, United States, South Africa, and China and Japan. In two regions -- Europe and North America -- voters have shown a clear preference for candidates expressing concerns for free speech, privacy, and democracy (what I here call "civil society values.") Every single successful candidate in Europe and North America has advocated civil society values. For the final elections in North America, where Lawrence Lessig is also a candidate, fully 4 of the 7 Board candidates in October will likely be explicit supporters of such values. (This multiplicity of candidates does not risk splitting the vote and causing them all to lose, because the election rules will allow for the aggregation of votes.) In Europe, only 2 of the 7 likely candidates in October seem to have a strong background in civil society issues. However, they are both from Germany, the country likely to exercise the greatest influence on outcomes. Thus, 2 of the 3 final German candidates will almost certainly be strong supporters of such values. In Asia, there is still some chance that one civil society candidate may make it on the ballot -- Yukika Matsumoto. Otherwise, that region's electoral choices in October will largely be among candidates from the industry and technology communities. In Africa and Latin America, the candidates with the clearest civil society orientation will be those nominated by ICANN. Both of ICANN's African nominees endorsed the Civil Society Statement (see: http://www.cpsr.org/internetdemocracy/friends-of-civsoc.html ). One of ICANN's Latin American nominees, Raul Echeberria, also endorsed the Statement and was the recipient of an endorsement from the Association for Progressive Communications (www.APC.org). Between now and Friday's election deadline, a few questions remain. The biggest question is whether Asia voters will nominate Yukika Matsumoto, the only advocate of privacy, speech, and the public interest who has a chance to get on the ballot. In Europe, Jeanette Hoffman could still lose her position to Lutz Donnerhacke, although support for Hoffman seems to be increasing as the deadline approaches. The election rules do allow members to switch endorsements. Yukika Matsumoto could still benefit from a last-minute wave of switched endorsements, particularly of other candidates with no prospect of success declare their support for her. That may allow her to pass the 2% threshold. In October the big question will be whether voter behavior in this phase will be repeated in the October election. Today's voter behavior has been characterized by considerable support for candidates supporting civil society values. If the October elections look like the Member Nomination phase, then new Directors may be elected who will supplement ICANN's current concern with property rights with a concern for speech, privacy, and consumer rights. The Civil Society Statement is available at: http://www.CivilSocietyInternetForum.org/ ### Candidates and readers are welcome to comment on this analysis. Comments on the previous Cyber-Federalist, No.4, have been offered by: Vint Cerf, Christoph Weber-Fahr, Carl Malamud, Hans Klein, and David Reed. See: http://www.cyber-federalist.org ========================================================= CYBER-FEDERALIST is a regularly-published series of analyses and commentaries on Internet governance and ICANN elections. It is produced as part of the Internet Democracy Project. See: http://www.civsoc.org http://www.internetdemocracyproject.org/ http://www.cyber-federalist.org Subscribe to the CYBER-FEDERALIST! send an Email to: cyber-federalist-subscribe@cpsr.org ========================================================= From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Sep 6 09:43:12 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3A6B2A063 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 09:43:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA01815 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 09:43:12 -0400 Message-ID: <39B649A1.52D9A458@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 09:41:53 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] AOL and AOLBETA.com Ted Byfield ran across this interesting URL: http://observers.net/aolbeta.html AOLBeta.Com stolen from 16 year old by AOL By Scott (updated 9/5 9:30am EST, see bottom) The latest owner of AOLBeta.com has lost the domain to America Online, adding to a list of problems with this domain. 16 year old Nickolas Grove registered the domain AOLBeta.com on August 20 after seeing the domain was free to purchase. Nickolas started noticing trouble on August 30 when he had trouble uploading his completed webpage, which took him over a week to construct. After contacting his web hosting provider, it was determined that the DNS (Domain Name Server) settings were incorrect. America Online had simply transferred the domain to their ICANN Registrar, therefore pulling any control that Nickolas had of the domain, regardless of the fact that the domain was not paid for by AOL. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Sep 6 10:44:10 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3B792A063 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 10:44:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA02753 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 10:44:10 -0400 Message-ID: <39B657EB.6044D138@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 10:42:51 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Brenda Sandburg: Boalt Professor Masters Possibilities in Nader Suit Berkley law professor Mark Lemley and the law firm Fish and Richardson are defending the Nader presidential campaign in the law suit filed by Mastercard over its "priceless" trademark claims. This stands to be an important case from a free speech point of view. Jamie Page printed from: http://www.law.com Boalt Professor Masters Possibilities in Nader Suit Brenda Sandburg The Recorder September 6, 2000 When Boalt Hall School of Law professor Mark Lemley got a call from Green Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader recently, he found a cause he could support. Nader wasn't calling for donations to his long-shot campaign. Instead, he was seeking legal representation in a trademark infringement suit filed against him by MasterCard International Inc. after Nader put out a campaign ad that is a send-up of a famous MasterCard commercial. Lemley, a well-known copyright scholar, saw an important legal principle at stake and agreed to represent Nader pro bono. "It would be a bad precedent to be enjoining political ads on the basis of trademark claims," Lemley said. It's important that the law allow "for both humor and politics and IP not take it over." Although Nader's television ad elicited chuckles around the country, MasterCard claimed the candidate's 30-second spot infringes its trademark advertising campaign. In MasterCard v. Nader 2000 Primary Committee Inc., filed in the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of New York, the company requests an injunction against the ad and damages in excess of $1 million. A hearing on the case is scheduled before Judge Richard Casey on Sept. 12. A court brief says the ad is "core political speech." Further, the brief says the spot is clearly a parody of MasterCard commercials and thus protected, expressive speech. "This is the first time anyone has tried to enjoin a campaign ad in the middle of an election," says Lemley, who is also of counsel at Fish & Richardson. The Nader promo, which began airing last month, spoofs MasterCard's well-known "priceless" commercial. Like MasterCard's ad, Nader's TV spot depicts a series of items and the cost of each. The ad reads: "Grilled tenderloin for fund-raiser: $1,000 a plate. Campaign ads filled with half-truths: $10 million. Promises to special interest groups: over $10 billion. Finding out the truth: priceless." The ad concludes: "Without Ralph Nader in the presidential debates, the truth will come last." MasterCard's commercials, which began running in 1997, each conclude with an intangible item (e.g., "an evening with your husband") with the voice-over: "There are some things money can't buy. For everything else there's MasterCard." In addition to infringing its trademark and copyright, MasterCard says Nader's ad misleads consumers into believing that the company is connected with his presidential campaign. Nader dismisses this reasoning. "It seems quite clear that everyone except MasterCard 'gets' the joke," a court brief by Lemley and others at his firm states. "Virtually all the news commentary on the ad comments on the ironic juxtaposition of Nader 2000's ad with MasterCard's campaign." MasterCard contends, however, that the Nader ad is commercial speech rather than parody. "There is a major difference between a spoof -- as Jay Leno, David Letterman and Saturday Night Live" have done in takeoffs on the ad, and the promotion of a product, said Chris O'Neill, MasterCard's vice president of global marketing communications. "Nader is doing the ad to promote his candidacy" and get consumers involved in his campaign. But Lemley contends the ad has no commercial use. "If Visa ran this ad, they'd have a legitimate complaint," Lemley said. "But Ralph Nader is not Visa." From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Sep 6 15:06:45 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 124152A333 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 15:06:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA08000 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 15:06:44 -0400 Message-ID: <39B69577.5C508353@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 15:05:27 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Jamie Love's candidancy for the DNSO seat on the ICANN board of directors I finally created a web page for my candidacy for the DNSO seat on the ICANN board. http://www.cptech.org/jamie/dnso-icann.html -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Sep 6 16:32:56 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9F1A2A063 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 16:32:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA09751 for ; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 16:32:56 -0400 Message-ID: <39B6A9AC.2D1262BB@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 16:31:40 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Berkman transcripts of interviews on ICANN http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is99/governance/introduction.html Someone passed on a recent article in "The Register" on ICANN, and I noticed a link to an interview that I gave to Harvard's Berkman center a while ago about ICANN. Also including in these verbatim interviews are: Karl Auerbach Fred Baker John Perry Barlow Dave Crocker Jay Fenello Carl Kaplan Michael Krieger Jamie Love Eric Menge Charles Nesson Mike Roberts Joe Sims -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Sep 6 21:48:19 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from prserv.net (out5.prserv.net [32.97.166.35]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B22882A063; Wed, 6 Sep 2000 21:48:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org ([129.37.49.171]) by prserv.net (out5) with SMTP id <2000090701443120502n62voe>; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 01:44:32 +0000 Message-ID: <39B5F8A6.85189172@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 03:56:22 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] LINDA ROSENCRANCE: Amazon charging different prices on some DVDs http://www.computerworld.com/cwi/story/0,1199,NAV47_STO49569,00.html Amazon charging different prices on some DVDs BY LINDA ROSENCRANCE (September 05, 2000) Consumers who shop for the DVD Planet of the Apes -- The Evolution on Amazon.com Inc.'s Web site today could be charged as much as $10 more than other customers purchasing the same product at approximately the same time -- a practice the company described as a periodic test that it runs on the prices of certain items. For example, at 2:40 p.m. today, a search for the Planet of the Apes DVD on the Amazon site that Computerworld conducted using a Netscape Web browser turned up a quoted price of $64.99 -- 35% off the original price of $99.98, according to the online retailer. But several seconds later, a similar search performed with Microsoft Corp.'s Internet Explorer browser resulted in a price of $74.99 for the same product. And that's not the only DVD that has different prices at different times. On Sunday, online shoppers logged on to the DVD Talk Forum, a chat room dedicated to discussions about DVDs, and noted that Amazon's price for a limited-edition copy of the Men in Black DVD could differ depending on a number of factors. Included among the determining factors, they said, was which browser was being used, whether a consumer was a repeat or first-time customer and which Internet service provider address a customer was using. Computerworld also checked the price of the Men in Black DVD today and discovered that on Netscape the quoted price was $25.97, while it cost $23.97 on Internet Explorer. After completely clearing the cache and cookie files of the PC being used, the price remained $25.97 using the Netscape browser but had risen to $27.97 with Internet Explorer. [snip] -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Sep 7 18:47:52 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2F542A061 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 18:47:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA31221 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2000 18:47:52 -0400 Message-ID: <39B81AD8.59A1B772@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 18:46:48 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] FTC report on jurisdiction in ecommerce This is an important, if inadequate, document, on the issue of jurisdiction in ecommerce. http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/icpw/lookingahead/global.htm -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Sep 8 09:06:36 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88F9B2A061 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 09:06:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA04843 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 09:06:35 -0400 Message-ID: <39B8E421.AFF5DCA8@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 09:05:37 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] David Streitfeld: Making Bad Names for Themselves http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30525-2000Sep7.html Making Bad Names for Themselves By David Streitfeld Washington Post Staff Writer Friday , September 8, 2000 ; A01 SAN FRANCISCO -- No one has ever heard of Stonepath Group. In fact, a company by that name won't exist for another two weeks, when the stockholders of Net Value Holdings will vote to dump that dull moniker and go with the sleeker Stonepath. But if Stonepath is yet to be officially born, it's already prepared for a lifetime of brickbats. Among the Internet addresses it has reserved for itself are StonepathLosers.com and StonepathBadThings.com, as well as half a dozen other cruder variations. [snip] "Ultimately I suppose you can't control what anyone says about you," said President Lee Hansen. "But why make it easy for them? You can call this paranoid, but it's also proactive and protective." You can also call it popular. The start-up Stamps.com just registered six Internet names, all variations on its corporate title with a vulgarism attached. The consumer-products conglomerate Johnson & Johnson locked up 43. United Parcel Service signed up for UPSstinks.com, IHateUPS.com and UPSBites.com as well as four names containing words that UPS executives probably don't let their children use. [snip] . . . Intuit, whose best-known product is Quicken financial software, just registered a Web address whose name boldly states that the program is despicable. Intuit officials will probably never activate this site. They just didn't want someone else to be able to register and activate it. [snip] That tussle was nothing compared with the high passions aroused by Verizon Communications, the telecommunications company formed by the merger of GTE and Bell Atlantic. Before the new brand name was announced on April 3, Verizon registered 724 new Internet addresses that had Verizon in them, according to Company Sleuth. On April 4, the hacker magazine 2600--best known for being the leading defendant in Hollywood's ongoing legal efforts against those who would break the encryption on DVD movies--decided to tweak Verizon by registering VerizonSucks.com. "If our experience with past phone companies is any indication, Verizon will in all probability be thought of this way in the near future," the editors later explained. But that name, it turned out, had already been registered by the company itself, along with 56 other self-critical names. So 2600 registered VerizonReallySucks.com. Shortly thereafter, the magazine received a letter accusing it of trademark infringement violating the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, and demanding the transfer of the unused domain name to Verizon under threat of suit. The editors for 2600 fired back that this was a misapplication of the anti-squatting act. "This law was designed to protect companies against those who would register their name and hold it for ransom," they responded. "But this is a statement, an opinion, one which in no way would be confused with the actual name of the company." The magazine essentially turned over its anti-Verizon domain name to the Communication Workers of America; it now documents CWA's strike against Verizon. The magazine called on other hackers to exercise their free speech rights by criticizing Verizon in domain names, and registered for itself VerizonShouldSpendMoreTimeFixingItsNetworkAndLessMoneyOnLawyers.com. At this point, Verizon--confronted with Web sites like VerizonDoesReallySuck.com, VerizonMonopolisticBastards.com and dozens of others that can't be printed in a newspaper--says it's so sorry the whole thing happened. [snip] Of course, none of the companies interviewed said its goal was to squelch free speech. But a few said they didn't mind making it a bit harder. "You build a lot of brand equity in a name," said Hansen of Stonepath. "The last thing you want to do is see it tarnished." [snip] Danaher Corp., the huge tool manufacturer based in the District, has not only registered the usual self-critical variations on its corporate name, but gone a step further. Danaher's chief executive is George Sherman. Among the domain names recently registered by the company: GeorgeShermanSucks.com. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Sep 8 09:07:30 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBCD02A061 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 09:07:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA04851 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 09:07:29 -0400 Message-ID: <39B8E457.D0716A74@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 09:06:31 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] LAURIE J. FLYNN: Trademarks Winning Domain Fights, I-DNS AND THAI URL - I-DNS AND THAI URL DISPUTES UNRESOLVED http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/09/biztech/articles/04neco.html September 4, 2000 NEW ECONOMY Trademarks Winning Domain Fights By LAURIE J. FLYNN I-DNS AND THAI UR - I-DNS AND THAI URL DISPUTES UNRESOLVED Seven tentative names are dot-com and dot-net for companies, dot-ongkorn for organisation, dot-suksa for education, dot-taharn for military, dot-rat for government and dot-isara for individuals. Regarding the new Thai domain name standard family, Mr Pipat said once the standard was announced, existing customers would receive all those extensions automatically since ThaiURL.com believed that the name should belong to the legitimate owner solely, he added.CONTINUED HERE: http://www.icbtollfree.com/article.cfm?articleId=4437 -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Sep 8 09:14:11 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17F132A061 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 09:14:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA04929 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 09:14:11 -0400 Message-ID: <39B8E5E8.E26D3198@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 09:13:12 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] FTC report on jurisdiction This is an important, if inadequate, document, on the issue of jurisdiction in ecommerce. http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/icpw/lookingahead/global.htm -- -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Sep 8 10:05:37 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CADDD2A061 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 10:05:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA05618 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 10:05:37 -0400 Message-ID: <39B8F1F7.B42DEE78@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 10:04:39 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] AOL/TW and access to set-top boxes Thanks to Jeff Chester for this forward. JL reshma.kapadia@reuters.com Fri Sep 8 09:47:41 2000 Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2000 09:46:09 -0400 From: Reshma Kapadia Subject: article To: jeff@cme.org By Reshma Kapadia NEW YORK, Sept 7 (Reuters) - America Online Inc. and Time Warner Inc. said Thursday the combined company would open up its cable system to Internet services providers, but that set-top boxes are not included. In a filing to the Federal Communications Commission, the companies expanded on the open access issue they had addressed in a memorandum of understanding signed in February. Open access, or the ability for AOL-Time Warner's rivals to access its cable pipeline, has been at the heart of regulators' concerns over the proposed deal between the Internet services provider and media giant that is now valued at $127 billion. [snip] AOL and Time Warner said in the filing made Wednesday responding to queries from the FCC that they would keep their promises to not discriminate against Internet services providers (ISPs) and let multiple ISPs use their cable lines. However, the companies excluded access for unaffiliated ISPs or Internet telephony services via interactive set-top boxes. They said the devices were not part of the memo of understanding they signed in February pledging that they would let rivals access Time Warner's cable system. Set-top boxes are currently used to convert digital signals from cable or satellite to enable two-way interactive programming on a television set. "The next generation for the Internet is interactive television and the set-top is key to that access," said Jeff Chester of the Center for Media Education. "The set-top must be included in open access for this merger to go through. It underscores everything. They are foreclosing on any type of competition." [snip] Time Warner said in the filing it is always willing to discuss relationships with potential providers of any other services. Time Warner Cable said it will also not restrict streaming video delivered by the ISPs. The two companies also said they would keep their promise to let consumers access their competitors' content, emphasizing that the roles of Time Warner as a cable system operator and AOL's role as an ISP will remain distinct. With this distinction, AOL will not have any special ability to monitor cable modem connectivity that is not available to another ISP. In terms of pricing, Time Warner Cable said it expects that financials and terms of any broadband pacts would vary with each ISP, but the economic relationships would not be based on any type of affiliation with AOL-Time Warner. The companies also updated the progress of Time Warner's multiple ISP trial in Columbus, Ohio, and said the first of the planned three phases began on July 28 and is expected to run for one to two months. The ISPs included in the first phase are AOL, CompuServe Classic, Juno Online Services Inc. and Time Warner high-speed joint venture Road Runner. The pact with Juno was reached in late July but exact terms have yet to be hammered out. The second phase of the trial will involve offering the service to a larger group of subscribers and the final phase will involve a roll-out throughout the Columbus area. The last phase aims to provide the final refinements for the migration of AOL Time Warner's cable system to include multiple ISPs. ((-- New York technology desk, (212) 859-1860)) From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Sep 11 05:35:31 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFBCC2A05E for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 05:35:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-2.essential.org [216.0.125.2]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id FAA05187 for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 05:35:30 -0400 Message-ID: <39BCA763.6B5F4207@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 05:35:31 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] /. on IP Tunneling Through DNS /. on IP Tunneling through namesevers http://slashdot.org/articles/00/09/10/2230242.shtml IP Tunneling Through Nameservers Posted by CmdrTaco on Sunday September 10, @10:28PM from the surfing-for-free dept. I'm always interested in seeing protocols extended to do silly (and in many cases, not so silly) things that they were never intended to do. I've seen DNS extended to do a lot of crazy stuff, but until today, the coolest was DNS server based MUDs. Read on to read about an IP tunnel implemented through DNS. Its crazy. FrodoID (for Skyp and FrodoID) writes "In many countries, it is possible to use the Internet completely free of charge using Microsft PPP dialin numbers. These numbers, of course, normally won't allow you to do this. But did you know that you can build up a fullfeatured and even bidirectional IP tunnel through Nameservers? Yes, that's right: "IP-over-DNS". Using some toll free numbers which normally only allow outgoing packets to some few chosen servers, you can now surf the internet - completely and doing everything you could do with your normal, fullfeatured internet account. Microsoft has some of those restricted, toll free numbers. [snip] -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Sep 11 09:50:27 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from localhost.localdomain (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F6772A05E for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 09:50:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (IDENT:jamie@localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.localdomain (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA08546 for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 09:50:01 -0400 Sender: jamie@localhost.localdomain Message-ID: <39BCE309.10ADC079@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 09:50:01 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Chinese government and the Internet /A few intereseting stories from this newsletter: CHINA INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY LAW NEWSLETTER Vol. 1, No. 11 - September 11, 2000 Chinese President Calls for International Treaty to Police Web Speaking at the opening of the 16th World Computer Congress on 21 August, Chinese President Jiang Zemin called for an international treaty designed to police the World Wide Web. "The fast-paced development of the Internet has played an important role in the world's economic growth and strengthened exchanges between peoples of all nations. But we must see that on the Internet there exists an overflow of trash information that is anti-scientific, sham science, unhealthy and even harmful," Jiang said. Without offering further details, Jiang called for an international agreement to "strengthen the administration of healthy information" available on the Web. Such statements are consistent with the Communist Party? policy of supporting the growth of the Internet while attempting to block sites that contradict its own political views. (Source: Agence France Presse) -------------------------------- Chinese Police Seize Book on Internet Erotica Chinese police have for the first time confiscated certain volumes of "Special Websites," a book specializing in listing erotic websites, the Ministry of Public Security disclosed today. The 191-page book contains more than 400 erotic websites in 24 categories, with detailed captions and pornographic pictures attached to each website. The book was recently found on sale in some bookstores in Kunming and Dali, two cities in Yunnan Province, southwest China, the ministry said. Cracking down on the publication and trading of pornographic books is one of the targets of the ongoing nationwide campaign against prostitution, gambling, and narcotics trade, which was kicked off on the 1st of July this year. (Source: Xinhua News Agency) -------------------- Hong Kong Customs Smashes First Illegal Website The Hong Kong Customs officers of the Anti-Internet Piracy Task Force have smashed an illegal website for downloading MP3, RealAudio Clip musical files, and MTV of Dat format. "This is the first case [in which] Customs detected an illegal website for downloading pirated music since the establishment of the Anti- Internet Piracy Task Force at the end of last year," said a spokesman for the Customs and Excise Department. He appealed to the public not to provide any pirated files for downloading in their websites, a possible criminal offense under the Copyright Ordinance. Acting on information provided by the International Federation of Photographic Industry and follow-up investigation by Customs officers, the officers seized a computer server and two computers from three premises, totally worth about 40,000 HK dollars. In the operation, the officers arrested three men, aged between 19 and 23. "The three arrested men made use of a hyperlink to place 68 pieces of music and MTV at seven servers, two in Hong Kong and five in overseas," the spokesman said. According to the Copyright Ordinance, anyone found distributing infringed copies without the license of the copyright owner, other than for the purpose of trade or business, to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the owner of the copyright, is liable to prosecution. The maximum penalty for the offense is a fine of 50,000 HK dollars per disc plus four years' imprisonment. "We shall continue conducting vigorous enforcement action against piracy activities in an effort to protect the intellectual property rights here in Hong Kong," the spokesman stressed. (Source: Xinhua News Agency) -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Sep 11 09:53:02 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from localhost.localdomain (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 831562A05E for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 09:53:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (IDENT:jamie@localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.localdomain (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA08551 for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 09:52:36 -0400 Sender: jamie@localhost.localdomain Message-ID: <39BCE3A4.29AE6203@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 09:52:36 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] China Creates Website Name Registry CHINA INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY LAW NEWSLETTER Vol. 1, No. 11 - September 11, 2000 China Creates Website Name Registry In light of the increasing incidence of website name infringement in China, the Beijing Municipal Administration for Industry and Commerce (BMAIC) has begun regulating website names by issuing the "Interim Procedures on Registration and Filing Website Names" and its implementing regulation late last month. Such infringement occurs when a domain name is translated into Chinese. For instance, China.com and Zhongguo.com both mean the same thing, Zhongguo being the pinyin for China in Chinese. So either website could potentially use the same characters to describe itself. Under the new regulations, website names are subject to completely distinct regulations from those governing domain names. Each domain name can have no more than 3 names. BMAIC is in charge of all website-name registration thoughout China, and applies a first-to-file rule to settle conflicts. After registration, the owner of the name has legal power to sue infringing entities. However, the owner is required to keep the website in operation; BMAIC will check website-name owner's compliance annually. The registration process can be done online, at http://hd315.gov.cn/ -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Sep 11 12:48:39 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C04C2A05E for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 12:48:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA10475 for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2000 12:48:39 -0400 Sender: jamie@genoa.essential.org Message-ID: <39BD0CCE.70DE3270@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 12:48:14 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] Les logiciels font tourner la planche =?iso-8859-1?Q?=E0?= brevets On business methods patents http://www.liberation.fr/quotidien/semaine/20000908venzd.html Les logiciels font tourner la planche ŕ brevets L'inflation fait rage aux Etats-Unis. La polémique gagne désormais l'Europe qui entend officialiser l'adoption d'un systčme de protection similaire. Par PASCAL RICHÉ Le vendredi 8 septembre 2000 -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Sep 16 05:49:57 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from lagavulin.euronet.be (lagavulin.euronet.be [195.74.193.31]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6733F2A05E for ; Sat, 16 Sep 2000 05:49:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (i105.bru.euronet.be [195.74.194.73]) by lagavulin.euronet.be (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e8G9npK11244 for ; Sat, 16 Sep 2000 11:49:51 +0200 (MET DST) Message-ID: <39C34D69.3D6A8EF0@cptech.org> Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 06:37:29 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] European Patent Office on Software Patents http://slashdot.org/articles/00/09/14/1913209.shtml "The Administrative board for the European Patents Office has voted 10-9 to allow patents for software in Europe. There's still a final conference to be held in Novemeber to ratify the decision" http://www.heise.de/newsticker/data/odi-14.09.00-000/ Meldung vom 14.09.2000 12:08 Europäisches Patentamt befürwortet Software-Patente Der Verwaltungsrat des Europäischen Patentamts (EPA) hat sich für die uneingeschränkte Patentierbarkeit von Software ausgesprochen. Wie das Handelsblatt berichtet, empfiehlt die Behörde die Streichung der bislang bestehenden Klausel des Europäischen Patentübereinkommens, wonach Computerprogramme "als solche" nicht patentierbar sind. -- James Love http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 200036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Sep 16 05:57:34 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from islay.euronet.be (islay.euronet.be [195.74.193.24]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67E9B2A05E; Sat, 16 Sep 2000 05:57:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (i105.bru.euronet.be [195.74.194.73]) by islay.euronet.be (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e8G9vSc27023; Sat, 16 Sep 2000 11:57:29 +0200 (MET DST) Message-ID: <39C34F2F.8A9760C2@cptech.org> Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2000 06:45:03 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Annoy.com on threats of violence This is annoy.com's policy on cooperation with law enforcement authorities, if their service of sending anonymous notes to persons to annoy them is used to for threats of violence or harm to others. Jamie http://www.annoy.com/scripts/censure/index.asp WARNING It has come to our attention that certain people have been using annoy.com to deliver what some might consider to be threats of physical violence or harm to others. Do not mistake our commitment to freedom of speech for a license to abuse our service in this manner. We plan to cooperate fully with law enforcement agencies in whatever efforts they make to find you and punish you - even if it's some renegade authoritarian dictatorship that might crucify your stupid ass if they catch you. Free speech and annoy.com are not about harassment and definitely not about harm or violence. If you think for a second we will allow cowardly idiots to spoil our free speech party you are making a mistake. A huge mistake. -- James Love http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 200036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Sep 18 09:32:28 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7DB12A05E for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 09:32:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA26693; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 09:32:28 -0400 Message-ID: <39C6199D.2023A82C@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 09:33:17 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , upd-discuss Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] IPR and antitrust: ABA Antitrust Section Intellectual Property Committee Brown Bag September 20 Subject: ABA Antitrust Section Intellectual Property Committee Brown Bag S eptember 20 Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 11:09:09 -0400 From: "Morse, M. Howard ." To: AT-MEMBERS@MAIL.ABANET.ORG THE ABA ANTITRUST SECTION INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY COMMITTEE announces the first of a series of brown bags scheduled over the coming year to discuss current developments at the intersection of antitrust and intellectual property law, to be held Wednesday September 20 in Washington, DC. The first brown bag will address pending cert. petitions in CSU, L.L.C. v. Xerox Corp., and will feature as speakers Jonathan Franklin of Hogan & Hartson, counsel to CSU, and Jonathan Gleklen of Arnold & Porter, counsel to Xerox. CSU argues the CAFC decision in this matter, which held that the ownership of patents or copyrights immunizes unilateral conduct that may otherwise constitute an antitrust violation (absent illegal tying, sham petitioning or fraud), is in conflict with the 1997 Ninth Circuit decision in Image Technical Services, Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Co. Xerox argues that the unilateral right to exclude others is the essence of intellectual property, that the Ninth Circuit decision in Image Technical Services was a departure from precedent, and that since the CAFC has exclusive jurisdiction in cases involving patent claims, its decision enhances uniformity of the caselaw. FTC Chairman Robert Pitofsky has criticized the CAFC decision in this matter as upsetting the "traditional balance" between intellectual property and antitrust and an "unwise and unfortunate departure from the traditional approach in this area" of the law. In a June speech, Chairman Pitofsky argued that the Federal Circuit's "sweeping language that exalts patent and copyright over other considerations ... throws into doubt the validity of previous lines of authority that attempted to strike a balance between intellectual property and antitrust." The discussion at the brown bag of these issues should be interesting. I attach copies of the cert. petition and opposition in .pdf format for those interested. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Sep 18 10:03:55 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3F412A31C; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 10:03:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA28735; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 10:03:55 -0400 Message-ID: <39C620FC.20C5A6F9@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 10:04:44 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] CARL S. KAPLAN: Playboy Ruling Recognizes Limits to Online Rights of Trademark Holders http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/15/technology/15CYBERLAW.html September 15, 2000 CYBER LAW JOURNAL Playboy Ruling Recognizes Limits to Online Rights of Trademark Holders By CARL S. KAPLAN In an important decision that recognizes limits to intellectual property rights online, a federal judge earlier this week ruled that a company's well-known trademarks may be used without authorization by search engines in some programming and sales practices. The four-page decision, published Tuesday by Judge Alicemarie H. Stotler of the United States District Court in Santa, Ana, California, dismissed a lawsuit brought by Playboy Enterprises against Excite, Inc. and its search engine licensee, Netscape Communications. The summary judgment ruling, if not reversed on appeal, may serve as a precedent to safeguard a common but controversial Internet advertising practice known as "keying," said lawyers who were familiar with the decision. Under the scheme, a search engine offers advertisers the ability to display specific banner ads whenever users enter selected search terms, including trademarks. Playboy sued Excite and Netscape last year, claiming that the search engines displayed banner ads from pornography companies whenever "playboy" or "playmate" were used as a serch term. Both words are trademarks owned by the Bunny Empire. The decision, which has already touched off some disagreement among intellectual property experts, may also remind companies that their rights to capitalize on their trademarks on the Internet are subject to traditional restrictions. Barry G. Felder, Playboy's lead lawyer in the case, said that his client plans to appeal. "We're essentially puzzled by the decision," he said. He added that under the reasoning expressed by Judge Stotler, some sales of trademarks "have been essentially legitimized." [snip] "Search engines do engage in selling keyword advertising -- it's an important business model," he said. Riffer, who works at Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Marmaro, a Los Angeles law firm, said search engines can continue to offer their services to consumers for free only because of robust advertising revenues. Excite is one of many search engine portals that, for a premium rate, cause a pre-selected banner ad to pop up when certain search terms are used. Often a generic search term, such as "car," will trigger related ads. But sometimes search engine companies take the more controversial approach of displaying a company's banner ad whenever a competitor's trademark is used as a search term. Marissa Gluck, an online advertising analyst with Jupiter Communications, estimated that portals garner about 20 to 30 percent of theirad revenues from keyword banner ads. [snip] In her most recent decision dismissing Playboy's case, Judge Stotler essentially found that in its advertising scheme Excite did not use the trademarks "playboy" and "playmate" in an unlawful manner. She suggested that rather than using the words to identify its own goods and services -- which might be illegal -- Excite merely used the terms in an appropriate manner to refer to Playboy. This "non-trademark use of a mark," she said, is a use to which the infringement laws do not apply. Moreover, said Judge Stotler, even if there were a trademark use, there could be no finding of infringement because there was no evidence that consumers confused Playboy products with the services of defendants. Elsewhere in the opinion, Judge Stotler said that Playboy's claim for dilution could not be sustained because there was no evidence that either Excite or Netscape "on its products" made use of Playboy's marks. Jessica Litman, a law professor at Detroit's Wayne State University School of Law who specializes in intellectual property and the Internet, said that Judge Stotler was "clearly right" on the infringement point. [snip] "It's a short decision and it's hard to know how far it will extend," she said. "But given the increasing tendency among some courts to grant trademark owners expansive rights over the use of their marks on the Net, it's always nice to see a court applying traditional principles. In that sense it's a sounddecision." Jeffrey R. Kuester, an Internet law expert at Thomas, Kayden, Horstemeyer & Risley, an Atlanta law firm, said in an interview that he disagreed with the court's ruling. "I come back to a basic premise," he said. "Excite is making money using Playboy's trademarks to send people to Playboy's competitors. Doesn't something sound wrong with that?" Kuester said that if the court's ruling held sway, then Fuji Film would be able to key its banner ads to the search term "Kodak" and Pepsi to "Coke." More likely, he said, the search engines would approach the trademark holders and offer, for a fee, to not sell keyword-linked banners to competitors. "You shouldn't have to pay to keep your own name," he said. The Playboy case is not the only lawsuit that challenges keyed banner ads. Last year, three subsidiaries of the Estee Lauder Companies, Inc. filed lawsuits against Excite and an online cosmetics company, Fragrance Counter, Inc., in the U.S., France and Germany. The Lauder Companies claimed, among other things, that when a consumer used the Excite search engine and typed in the search term "Estee Lauder," a Fragrance Counter banner ad appeared. Earlier this month, the Estee Lauder Companies and iBeauty, a successor to the Fragrance Company, announced a settlement under which iBeauty voluntarily agreed to refrain from using the Estee Lauder trademarks as Internet keywords. But the multi-national lawsuit against Excite is still pending, said Joshua Paul, a lawyer for the Estee Lauder Companies. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Sep 18 16:56:07 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37EE62A060; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 16:56:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA07246; Mon, 18 Sep 2000 16:56:07 -0400 Message-ID: <39C6819A.6A3BD349@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 16:56:58 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , nc-tlds@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] UDRP: kelsonmd.com In this ICANN UDRP case, Virginia Mason will lose the domain kelsonmd.com, which she was using to criticize Kelson Pediatric Partners, her former employer. The UDRP panel rejected her "freedom of speech" defense. Jamie http://www.kelsonmd.com/ From the web page: "I am a former leased employee of Kelson Pediatric Partners, and have been the practice administrator of Hampshire Pediatrics since August, 1988. This site is owned and maintained by me, and is in no way connected to either Kelson Pediatric Partners or Hampshire Pediatrics. Kelson Pediatric Partners in no way endorses any material contained herein. My employers, Dr. Andrew J. Schuman, F.A.A.P., Dr. Julius H. Simon, F.A.A.P., and Dr. Margaret L. Wiegand, F.A.A.P. have graciously allowed me to obtain and utilize any publicly available information concerning the affair of Hampshire Pediatrics vs. Kelson Pediatric Partners to create this site. However, I am the only one responsible for the contents of Kelsonmd.com. With the advent of PPMC's, PHO's, PO's, PPO's , hospital and corporate practice buy-outs, and vast numbers of other "solutions" alleged to offset decreasing physician reimbursements and increasing practice overhead, many practices feel pressured to change. I put this site in place to document what happened to Hampshire Pediatrics when they bowed to that pressure. I believe that the same thing could happen to anyone else. Virginia A. Mason, N.R.E.M.T.I., [snip] From the UDRP decision: http://www.cpradr.org/ICANNDecisionCPR003-000905.htm CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution ADMINISTRATIVE PANEL DECISION Under the ICANN Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy File Number: CPR003 Domain Names: kelsonmd.com Arbitrator: Louise E. Dembeck RIGHTS AND LEGITIMATE INTERESTS: Complainant alleges that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interest with respect to the domain name at issue. As support for this allegation, Complainant notes that, to the best of its knowledge, Respondent, whose name is Virginia A. Mason, has never offered goods or services for sale under the name "kelson," has never been known as or by the name, nickname or maiden name "Kelson," and has no logical connection to or interest in the term "kelson," except for her involvement in an ongoing dispute between her employer, Hampshire Pediatrics, and Complainant. Respondent, on the other hand, neither claims to have used or intended to use the term "kelson" on or in connection with the offering of goods or services nor to have been commonly known by the name "kelson." Rather, Respondent alleges that her website, which incorporates the domain name at issue, "is a freedom of speech cite with no commercial content or value." UDRP Paragraph 4(c) provides that Respondent's rights or legitimate interests in a domain name may be demonstrated, without limitation, by (i) before any notice to Respondent of the dispute, Respondent's use of, or demonstrable preparations to use, the domain name or a name corresponding to the domain name in connection with a bona fide offering of goods or services; or (ii) Respondent has been commonly known by the domain name; or (iii) Respondent is making legitimate noncommercial or fair use of the domain name, without intent for commercial gain to misleadingly divert consumers or to tarnish the trademark or service mark at issue. Respondent's contention that her website "is a freedom of speech cite with no commercial content or value" seeks to raise a First Amendment issue and suggests reliance upon the circumstances described in Paragraph 4(c)(iii) which, if proved by Respondent, could demonstrate Respondent's rights or legitimate interests in the domain name at issue. Although deciding a First Amendment Constitutional issue is outside the scope of this arbitration, several federal court decisions have held that incorporating the registered trademark of another into one's domain name in order to attract internet users to a site with competing or critical views to those of the legitimate trademark owner is not protected by the right of fair use. [Compare Planned Parenthood Fed'n of America v. Bucci, 1997 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 3338 (S.D.N.Y. 1997); Jews for Jesus v. Brodsky, 993 F. Supp. 282 (D.N.J. 1998), and Bally Total Fitness v. Faber, 29 F. Supp. 2d 1161 (C.D. Cal. 1998).] [snip] BAD FAITH: In support of the contention of Respondent's bad faith registration and use, Complainant alleges that Respondent's intent in registering and using the domain name at issue is to disrupt Complainant's business and tarnish its reputation by luring current and potential customers of Complainant to Respondent's website where they will likely encounter respondent's "opinions" as to Complainant's alleged nonperformance of contractual duties with Respondent's employer (Hampshire Pediatrics). This is the subject of an ongoing contractual dispute between Complainant and Hampshire Pediatrics having nothing to do with the domain name at issue. Respondent contends, as discussed earlier, that her website is "a freedom of speech site with no commercial content or value." Paragraph 4(b) of the UDRP provides that indications of bad faith include, without limitation, (i) registration for the purposes of selling, renting or transferring the domain name to the Complainant for value in excess of Respondent?s cost; (ii) a pattern of registration in order to prevent Complainant from reflecting the mark in a corresponding domain name; (iii) registration for the primary purpose of disrupting the business of a competitor; or (iv) an intentional attempt to attract, for commercial gain, Internet users to Respondent's web site by creating a likelihood of confusion with Complainant's mark as to the source, sponsorship, affiliation or endorsement of Respondent?s web site or location, or of a product or service on Respondent?s web site or location. It is clear from the record that Respondent is integrally involved in the longstanding dispute, between Complainant and Hampshire Pediatrics, a company in competition with Complainant, and that the outcome of that dispute, in one way or another, will have an impact on Respondent as the impact of Respondent's website is likely to inure to the benefit of Hampshire Pediatrics. I find that the Respondent has registered the domain name at issue with the primary purpose of diverting present and potential customers of Complainant to Respondent's website and from there to the website of Hampshire Pediatrics, thus disrupting the business of its competitor, the Complainant. Having determined that Respondent satisfies the criteria for a finding of bad faith registration pursuant to Paragraph 4(b)(iii), it is unnecessary to examine the criteria set forth in Paragraph 4(b)(iv). Accordingly, I find that, whether or not Respondent established and maintained the domain name for direct or indirect commercial gain, Respondent did register and use the domain name in bad faith, as that term is defined in the UDRP. CONCLUSION In light of my findings above that (a) the registered domain name is identical or confusingly similar to Complainant's protected mark; (b) Respondent does not have rights or legitimate interest with respect to the domain name at issue; and (c) Respondent did register and use the domain name in bad faith, as that term is defined in the UDRP, I find in favor of the Complainant. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Sep 19 11:26:34 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9401B2A060 for ; Tue, 19 Sep 2000 11:26:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA19646 for ; Tue, 19 Sep 2000 11:26:34 -0400 Message-ID: <39C785E6.C2413B7D@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 11:27:34 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] www.wiposucks.org Is WIPOsucks.org "confusingly similar to wipo.int? http://www.wiposucks.org/ -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Sep 19 16:42:57 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59BF02A060; Tue, 19 Sep 2000 16:42:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA26828; Tue, 19 Sep 2000 16:42:57 -0400 Message-ID: <39C7D00F.DD179E4A@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 16:43:59 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , nc-tlds@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] www.NewWorldCoffeeFraud.com defeats TRO in corporate disparagement case Subject: FC: Judge denies Manhattan Bagel a restraining order against critics Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 16:24:57 -0400 From: Declan McCullagh To: politech@politechbot.com CC: info@newworldcoffeefraud.com, frissell@panix.com, lbode@bgls.com, roccof@bgls.com ----- Forwarded message from Duncan Frissell ----- From: Duncan Frissell Subject: No New World Coffee Disparagement Site TRO Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 14:24:31 -0400 Last Friday in Union County (NJ) Superior Court in Elizabeth, the operator of www.NewWorldCoffeeFraud.com won a solo victory against three sets of lawyers when he convinced the judge not to issue a TRO against his corporate disparagement site. New World Coffee a NJ-based coffee and bagel franchise company was represented by PIPER MARBURY RUDNICK & WOLFE LLP (the Washington DC firm that represented AOL in its anti-spam litigation), RABINOWITZ, TRENK, LUBETKIN & TULLY (a NJ firm), as well as New World Coffee's General Counsel. The company made a series of claims in seeking a TRO including breach of franchise agreement by franchisees who are supposedly saying unkind things about it. It is also claiming that the domain names newworldcoffefraud.com and newworldfraud.com are likely to confuse innocent surfers looking for coffee (dilution). There was also and Anti-Cybersquatting Act claim. The judge didn't seem too concerned about the contract claims but was initially inclined to block the defendant's use of domain names for dilution and cybersquatting. But once the defendant presented a whois list of the hundreds of domain names containing the words "new world" (New World Coffee does not control newworld.com, .org, or .net) she dismissed the cybersquatting argument. Dilution was thrown out after the defendant argued that all of the cited cases involved domain names that were initially confusing versions of trademarks (jews-for-jesus.org, plannedparenthood.org, etc.) The judge agreed that even the most casual viewer would not confuse newworldcoffeefraud.com with the trademark holder's site. The underlying case is still active and plaintiffs are seeking early discovery to see if they can uncover the defendant's sources. He is defending using the NJ shield law for journalists. Any New Jersey lawyers interested in the case? DCF ---- "Di-electrical materialism dooms the Ancien Regime, the Treaty of Westphalia, the Communist International, the whole shooting match" ----- End forwarded message ----- -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Sep 19 17:45:21 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BDB92A316 for ; Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:45:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA28058 for ; Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:45:21 -0400 Message-ID: <39C7DEB0.4D854CFF@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 17:46:24 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] STEP Board announces commissioned research on intellectual property rights Subject: Update: STEP Board announces commissioned research on intellectual property rights Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 12:22:38 -0400 From: "Craig Schultz" To: "Craig Schultz" The National Academies Board on Science, Technology and Economic Policy (STEP) As part of its examination of intellectual property rights, the National Academies STEP Board is pleased to announce the results of its March 23, 2000 request for proposals. It is expected that this research will help inform the deliberations of the Committee on Intellectual Property Rights in the Knowledge-based Economy over the coming months, and that final reports of this research will be presented and discussed at a public conference in early Fall 2001. The following activities were chosen to receive full or partial support by the STEP Board. In addition to the commissioned work, the Committee will have access to results of work being supported by other sponsors or provided on a primarily pro bono basis. The researchers and project descriptions are both pasted below this message and attached as a .pdf file. We are grateful for the support of the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, who are helping support this initial research endeavor. If you do not wish to receive future updates on this project, please respond to this email with REMOVE in the subject line. For further information on this research activity, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/ipr, or contact: Craig Schultz Research Associate STEP Board cschultz@nas.edu 202.334.2200 www.nationalacademies.org/ipr (See attached file: Researchagenda2.pdf) PATENT ADMINISTRATION AND LITIGATION 1. Patent Examiner Productivity and Quality In the absence of a solid understanding of the process of assigning patent rights, it is difficult to assess the likely effect of changes to the PTO in terms of management and personnel practices, financial resources, and information sources, etc. Through a series of structured interviews with PTO managers, current and former patent examiners, private patent attorneys, and inventors, followed by an analysis of a sample of recent granted patents, the research team will analyze the relationship between patent examiner characteristics (such as tenure, educational background and degree of specialization) to patent productivity and quality (such as time to approval, citation rate, litigation outcomes, etc.). The interviews and the analysis will take into account the fact that examination is conditioned not only by law and factors within the PTO but also by the structure of applications and interaction with attorneys. Scott Stern, MIT Sloan School Sam Kortum, Boston University Iain Cockburn, Boston University 2. Effects of Patent Oppositions: A Comparison of U.S. and European Patent Histories An important institutional difference between the U.S. and European patent systems is the European opposition process whereby interested parties can contest the validity of an issued patent for a period after its issuance. The U.S. reexamination procedure is more circumscribed and much less frequently used. Opportunity for opposition has been cited as an efficient and effective means to improve patent quality, especially in novel technological areas, and to reduce costly litigation; but the effects of the procedure have not been studied empirically. The research team will assemble experimental and control samples of identical USPTO and EPO patents and determine what conclusions can be drawn about the parties to and effects of opposition on patent examination and quality and subsequent litigation. Dietmar Harhoff, University of Munich Bronwyn Hall, U.C. Berkeley David Mowery, U.C. Berkeley Haas School of Business 3. Enforcing IPRs: the Incidence and Outcomes of Patent Suits Patent litigation is on the rise and the costs of patent suits can be substantial, but we do not know the extent to which those costs reduce the value of patents vis- ŕ-vis other means of protecting IP and the incentives for firms of different types to invest in research and development. Using a database on patent suits, a research team will investigate how the frequency and probability of suits and their outcomes (settlement rates and win or loss rates in trials) vary across patents, technology fields, and patent owners with different characteristics. Jean Lanjouw, Yale University and the Brookings Institution Mark Schankerman, London School of Economics 4. Cooperation and Conflict Over Patent Rights in Cumulative Technologies This study investigates the breakdown of private bargaining over patent rights in one industrial context, semiconductors, involving cumulative technological development. Previous research has shown that semiconductor firms ramped up their patent portfolios during the 1980s in part to improve their abilities to negotiate with external owners of IP and to deter patent-related suits. Yet the number of semiconductor-related patent suits filed in U.S. federal courts has risen steadily over this period. This study tracks the patent litigation histories of a sample of 97 U.S. semiconductor firms between 1995 and 1998 to address two main questions: 1) what types of technologies (e.g., process or product) and entities are involved in these disputes? and 2) how, if at all, have the characteristics of these disputes changed during the period associated with stronger U.S. patent rights? Rosemarie Ham Ziedonis, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania SOFTWARE AND BUSINESS METHOD PATENTS 1. Software Copyrights and Patent Rights: The Causes and Consequences of Regime Change in IP Protection Although software patenting has accelerated, it is not clear which types of firms with respect to what types of products have shifted from one form of IP protection to the other or supplemented one with the other and why. Nor is it known whether the greater propensity to patent is associated with increased licensing of computer program components or is largely defensive in nature. Whatever the trends, what are their implications for the future of the computer software industry? The investigator will relate data on software patents with copyright registrations identifiable by firm to shed light on these questions. D. Mowery, U.C. Berkeley Haas School of Business 2. Internet-Related Business Method Patents Although the USPTO has been issuing patents relating to business methods embodied in software for several years, the numbers were small and their significance largely unnoticed until the growth of the Internet and the 1998 Federal Circuit Court of Appeals decision in the State Street Bank case. To assess the causes of the acceleration of patenting and its implications for financial services, electronic commerce, and other services, there is a need for baseline data on patent holders, examination characteristics, patent references and scope, and litigation trends. The research team will develop a profile of Internet-related business method patents that will be useful to a variety of further research projects as well as policy discussions. A careful effort to develop intelligible definitions of related terms (i.e., software, Internet, business methods, e-commerce, etc.) and relate them to USPTO classifications will accompany this analysis. John R. Allison, Graduate School of Business, University of Texas at Austin. Emerson H. Tiller, University of Texas at Austin BIOTECHNOLOGY 1. Intellectual Property Licensing in Pharmaceuticals and Biotechnology As a result of changes in policy (the Bayh-Dole Act allowing publicly funded research institutions to acquire and dispose patent rights on their inventions), technology (molecular biology and DNA sequencing), and participants (the rise of university participation in commercial activity and growth of small biotechnology companies, including ones marketing genomic information), there is concern how the acquisition and use of patents is affecting the conduct and communication of fundamental research and innovation. In particular, there is concern that the strengthening and proliferation if patent rights to upstream products and processes are making it more difficult for 1) research scientists to communicate methods and results, collaborate, and share research materials and 2) downstream product developers to commercialize new products. Through a series of structured interviews with representatives of all parties, the research team will ascertain what the trends and patterns are and especially whether reasonable arrangements for licensing IP are evolving. Wesley Cohen, Carnegie Mellon University Ashish Arora, Carnegie Mellon University John Walsh, University of Illinois at Chicago. RELATED RESEARCH ACTIVITIES In addition to the above commissioned work the STEP Committee on Intellectual Property in the Knowledge-Based Economy will have access to results of work being supported by other sponsors or provided on a primarily pro bono basis: 1. Patent Examination, Patentability, and Patent Reform Analytical papers addressing three inter-related topics: 1) How should "prior art" be defined given the development and future predominance of "information age" sources for memorializing and accessing prior art technology and the needs and capabilities of patent offices to access prior art examining inventions for patentability. A case study will consider the issues related to the definition of and access to prior art in computer software and so-called "business method" technology. 2) How should the patent system be limited or bounded in areas where public policy issues or concerns become manifest. A case study will consider the issue of limits on patent eligibility for genomics and business method inventions. 3) How should the patent system operate in the 21st Century, focusing on proposed reforms for increasing the efficiency and quality of patent examination and reducing the incidence and cost of disputes over patents. Fellows of the American Intellectual Property Law Association Robert Armitage, Lilly Research Laboratories Michael Kirk, American Intellectual Property Law Association 2. The Role of Intellectual Property in Financial Services An analytical paper on how intellectual property rights have affected the development of financial services and what role they may play in the future. Robert Hunt, Research Department, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia 3. Patent Examination Procedures An empirical analysis of the relationship between the administration of patent examination at the PTO unit level and litigation of patent validity. John L. King, Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture 4. Opportunity Costs of Litigation A survey component to ascertain the costs other than attorney fees and court costs entailed in litigation. These include costs associated with the time and attention that firms' high-level managerial and technical personnel must devote to avoiding, defending against, and supporting the prosecution of patent suits. W. Cohen and A. Arora, Carnegie Mellon University J. Walsh, University of Illinois at Chicago -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Sep 20 11:31:15 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E14172A316 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:31:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA07067 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:31:15 -0400 Message-ID: <39C8D88A.C404957D@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 11:32:26 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] 42 ways to distribute DeCSS How hard is it to stop people from distributing information on the Internet? This web page gives 42 examples of ways to download the DeCSS code that is used to copy data on DVDs. Apparently one of the 42 ways is to download the forbidden code is by looking at the source code for this page, but some of the other ways are much more clever and surprising. Jamie http://decss.zoy.org/ "This page is about distributing DeCSS, the famous CSS descrambler which the MPAA tries to stop being distributed but which is also the only program available out there which lets you play DVDs under various operating systems such as Linux or FreeBSD." -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Sep 20 14:05:15 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32C6C2A316 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 14:05:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA10848 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2000 14:05:15 -0400 Message-ID: <39C8FCA2.901601DE@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 14:06:26 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] WIPO Committee Reaches Agreement On Protection of Trademarks on Internet Thanks to J.O. for this pointer. I could not find anything about this on the WIPO web page. jamie http://pubs.bna.com/ip/BNA/eip.nsf/id/a0a3m0h5y0_ WIPO Committee Reaches Agreement On Protection of Trademarks on Internet GENEVA--Experts from more than 80 member countries of the World Intellectual Property Organization have reached an agreement in principle on a draft proposal which would set out international guidelines on the protection of trademarks and other distinctive signs on the Internet. The agreement was reached at a Sept. 11-15 meeting of WIPO's Standing Committee on Trademarks. WIPO officials attending the meeting said that consensus was reached on all substantive provisions of the text and that the proposal could be finalized at the next SCT meeting in March 2001. The SCT is then expected to decide whether to send the text to WIPO's annual governing body meeting in September 2001 for formal approval from all of the organization's 171 member countries. A decision must also be taken on whether to incorporate the proposal into WIPO's 1994 Trademark Law Treaty, thus giving the text more legal weight. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Sep 21 08:55:50 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BA8C2A060 for ; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 08:55:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA26558 for ; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 08:55:50 -0400 Message-ID: <39CA05A6.3EA5CA3D@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 08:57:10 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Publius Live Trial Subject: Publius Home Page Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 22:40:26 -0700 From: Clare Love To: James Love Jamie, If you haven't seen this already, check it out. It is a "Censorship Resistant Publishing System" which allows information to be dispersed on the internet in a manner that is essentially untraceable, but readable using a Publius proxy program. It can handle web pages, or data files. The reader also enjoys anonymity. The system is described in this month's Scientific American. http://www.cs.nyu.edu/~waldman/publius/ -- Clare Love cmlove@techline.com -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Sep 21 09:30:00 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A068B2A060; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 09:30:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA27103; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 09:30:00 -0400 Message-ID: <39CA0DA8.F94CF9B4@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 09:31:20 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Gregory Aharonian on Open end mutual fund securitization process patent This from Gregory Aharonian, as the European Patent Office gets ready for its November meeting to consider the formal repeal of the European Patent Convention exemption for software patents. Jamie -------------- Subject: PATNEWS: Wall Street Journal exaggerates crappy mutual fund patent Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 02:21:49 -0400 (EDT) From: Gregory Aharonian Reply-To: patent-news@world.std.com To: patent-news@world.std.com !20000921 Wall Street Journal exaggerates crappy mutual fund patent Wednesday's Wall Street Journal, front page of the Money & Investing section (page C1), has a big article on how a couple of self funded guys invented and patented a way of trading open end mutual funds, and are now going around Wall Street demanding royalties, hoping to make tens of millions of dollars a year licensing their patent to the stock exchanges, with ex-Commissioner Lehman on the board for a touch of credibility. The Greg analysis: IN THEIR DREAMS WITH THIS CRAP Yet another example of an ill-searched patent application, ill-searched at the Patent Office, and ill-searched when the patent infringement lawsuit was prepared (they are suing AMEX). And frankly for such a long worded article, the WSJ article was just as ill-researched - the reporter did no investigation into the technical merits of the claimed invention such as searching the economic literature databases, nor called anyone on Wall Street or at NYU/Columbia. How could such a major newspaper be used as a public relations tool for some this company? [GREG note: anyone looking to bust the DE Technologies about to be issued ecommerce patent, another patent that recently got a really long article in the Wall Street Journal, please contact me. I am trying to pool some monies to do the invalidity search. The Sept 25 issue of the National Law Journal, page B8, has a more balanced article.] The patent in question is patent 5,806,048 (sister is 6,088,685, and speaking of these numbers, is it that hard for reporters the Journal and Times to look up the numbers of these patents to save their readers a bit of time when they go to the PTO Web site to retreive the patent?), titled "Open end mutual fund securitization process", filed in October 1995. The two inventors are Kenneth Kiron and Kevin Bander (reported on in the Journal article), assigned to their company Mopex. What's wrong with the patent? Once again, a dearth of non-patent prior art, in this case, from the wide body of literature from the economics field from the mid-1970s to mid-1990s dealing with derivatives and portfolios. Other than a few mass media articles on stock trading, the prior art cited reflects none of the advanced academic work published for over 20 years prior to the filing of the patent. For example, since 1974 a journal has been published, "Journal of Portfolio Management", which has all sorts of papers covering topics like this patent, a journal neither the inventors nor examiner knew about or cited because of their lack of experience in this field. Any patent dealing with portfolio management not citing at least one article from the Journal of Portfolio Management, should a priori be presumed to be invalid. To see this, let's look at claim 1: 1. An electronic data processing method for administering a financial product having a fixed number of shares over a predetermined period of time, so that the financial product can be traded as a security, the price of which can be determined in real time on the basis of information about a plurality of securities, comprising the steps of: a) directing a computer processor to select from said plurality of securities a selected portfolio of securities, the risk/return performance of which over a predetermined period of time meets a predefined benchmark performance, including: i) providing a database of information on securities available for trading; ii) electronically processing information in said provided database to identify securities, the asset size of which is above a predetermined threshold; and iii) electronically searching the identified securities to select a subset of N securities, the risk/return performance of which is superior to the risk/return performance of all identified securities; b) receiving information on each of said plurality of securities in an electronic data format; c) storing at least the received information on each security in the selected portfolio in a computer memory; d) electronically processing said stored information to determine in real time the price of the financial product on the basis of a user-defined method of weighing the select subset of N securities; and e) outputting an indication of the in real time determined price of the financial product in humanly readable format. Now clauses b), c), d) and e) are neither novel nor unobvious, little more than techniques to downloading price information on a basket of securities, adding them up using a weighting scheme, and displaying the result - utterly totally obvious where it isn't non-novel. Wall Street has been manipulating stock price data for decades, in many cases in products sold in magazines like Technical Analysis of Stocks and Commodities. This leaves as the essential aspect of the claim, clause a), which seems to me to be little more than a financial derivative product that tracks the performance of some mutual fund or market index (financial products that have known risk/reward ratios, returns, and volatilites). Indeed, in clause a), subclauses i) and ii) are neither novel nor unobvious, leaving as the essential element of claim 1), that being subclause iii) iii) electronically searching the identified securities to select a subset of N securities, the risk/return performance of which is superior to the risk/return performance of all identified securities; And that subclause is not novel. The idea of using a basket of securities or other financial products to create something synthetic is very well known. For example, there was a paper published in the 1980s that used a basket of futures contracts (which are traded daily) to track the Consumer Price Index (which is published monthly). The idea here was if you could choose the right combination of futures contracts to create a derivative that highly correlated with the Consumer Price Index, than you use the underlying futures contracts to predict the Consumer Price Index, say a few days before the next month's CPI was published (you would want to do this because changes in the CPI move the stocks and indexes in somewhat predictable ways, so if you have a good prediction for where the CPI was going, you could pay some options or futures contracts and make a nice profit). With the same mathematics, you could make a synthetic CPI by using stock prices (for example, instead of using the Heating Oil futures contract, you could use the stocks of oil companies), and if you can do this to the CPI, you can do it to other indexes and/or mutual funds, since all of these financial instruments can be described with the same set of statistical models with different parameters. Another set of papers published in the 1980s proposed a super-portfolio, a basket of stocks recalculated every day that could out-perform any index you choose. This 1980s paper would make obvious all such synthetic optimized portfolios, and the mathematics in this paper is so advanced I doubt highly either of the inventors of the '048 patent would understand it. The paper is a super-generalization of the '048 patent, published years earlier, making the patent not novel. If you are wondering whatever happened to this 1980s effort, it was great in theory, but had a few implementation problems. One was that it required a multi-dimensional integral where the number of dimensions was equal to the number of stocks in your portfolio - 100 stocks meant a 100-dimensional integral, which is a very complicated numerical integration requirement (in fact, a patent issued to do nothing more than calculate these types of multidimensional integrals). Another problem, which plagues many theoretical trading systems, was transactions costs. In light of such papers, and many more (yes, the actual references will cost whoever has to bust this patent :-) that were published mostly by academic economists in the 1980s and early 1990s, this patent faces big obviousness problems where it isn't novel. And given the minimal length specification (and minimal use of mathematics), and the invocation of obvious electronic stock information and trading techniques, it is easy to believe that the inventors were generally unaware of much of what was going on in the fields of portfolio analysis and electronic trading, and didn't bother to do any research to find out. One of the inventors, Ken Kiron, lives in New York City, and could have easily visiter either NYU or Columbia, the libraries and faculty of which have much materials in this area. The other inventor, Kevin Bander, lives in Chicago, home of the economics departments of the University of Chicago and Northwestern. The Wall Street Journal ends with a quote from ex-Commissioner Lehman: "Mopex is a perfect illustration of how patents protect the small and the weak in the marketplace". No, these Mopex patents are a perfect illustration of how many small inventors are just as apathetic and cavalier about getting quality patents as are (large) companies. If he didn't advise them to do an invalidity search before they starting suing companies on Wall Street, he is wasting their time and money being on their board. This patent is so bad, I suspect the lawyers involved will just bust it themselves. Whoops, maybe I shouldn't have said that. I know, this patent is truly bad, but CALL finding the prior GREG art will be AHARONIAN tricky, something TO you will DO need an THE expert searcher for BUST. Greg Aharonian Internet Patent News Service -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Sep 21 21:42:48 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 524DE2A060 for ; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 21:42:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA08896 for ; Thu, 21 Sep 2000 21:42:48 -0400 Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 21:42:48 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Robert Cannon's Cybertelecom News For those haven't seen this, Robert Cannon has a nice list on cyber telecom issues. In this issue of Cybertelecom News, the links to various AOL/TW merger stories are amusing. The "announce only" version of his list is available at this URL: http://www.lawlists.net/mailman/listinfo/cybertelecom-l-announce Jamie ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:38:03 -0400 From: Robert Cannon Reply-To: Telecom Regulation & the Internet To: CYBERTELECOM-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM Subject: CyberTelecom News 9/21 "Leak?? What Leak??" |====================================| | CyberTelecom News | | September 21, 2000 |====================================| Public Service Link: Telecommunications Policy Research Conference Alexandria VA Sept 23-25 www.tprc.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ MERGERS ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > FTC Preparing AOL/TWX Suit? < http://cnnfn.cnn.com/2000/09/21/deals/aol_time/ > FCC Staff Has Not Forwarded AOL Advice < http://news.excite.com/news/r/000921/15/net-timewarner-fcc-dc > FCC Staff Proposes AOL Terms < http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46622-2000Sep20.html > Report: FCC Staff Backs AOL-Time Warner Deal < http://news.excite.com/news/r/000921/01/net-aol-fcc-dc > U.S. Prepared To OK AOL Time Warner < http://www.ecommercetimes.com/news/articles2000/000921-7.shtml > FCC denies reports of AOL-Time Warner decision < http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-2829393.html > Report: FCC to approve AOL-Time Warner < http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/nb/nb3.htm =========== DISABILITIES ============== > Clinton Pursues Disabled Divide < http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,38951,00.html ============ E Commerce =============== > U.S. DEPARMENT OF COMMERCE TO HOST CONFERENCE ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY: The U.S. Department of Commerce is co-organizing and will host a conference that will examine various sectors of the economy and how they are changing with and because of e-commerce. Leaders from industry, academia and government will meet on September 26 and 27 to discuss the economic impact of the Internet and other information technologies on the U.S. and the world. < http://osecnt13.osec.doc.gov/public.nsf/docs/7C7E85CA300FF4B98525695B0066F58A ============= INDUSTRY ================ > ISP Associations Join Forces < http://www.ispworld.com/bs/BS_92100a.htm > ISP Associations announce Merger < http://www.newsbytes.com/pubNews/00/155566.html > ISPC Press Release < http://www.ispc.org/press/cix-loi.shtml > AT&T to test interactive TV service < http://www.nandotimes.com/technology/story/0,1643,500260372-500401713-502415830-0,00.html |=============================================| | Support Cybertelecom | | Shop at www.cybertelecom.org/support.htm | |=============================================| | To [un]subscribe to Cybertelecom-l send mail| | to LISTSERV@LISTSERV.AOL.COM with the | | command [un]SUBSCRIBE CYBERTELECOM-L. | | Announce only list information available at | | http://www.lawlists.net/mailman/listinfo | |~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| | Robert Cannon | | Washington Internet Project | | www.cybertelecom.org | |=============================================| From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Sep 22 11:32:49 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0945C2A060; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 11:32:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA16612; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 11:32:48 -0400 Message-ID: <39CB7BFC.27396CD2@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 11:34:20 -0400 From: Ned Daly Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Priceline gets booted by the BBB How useful are self regulation and alternative dispute resolution processes for the future of e-commerce? September 21, 2000 6:55pm Priceline gets booted by the BBB By Ben Charny ZDNet News Priceline.com Inc. has been kicked out of its home state's Better Business Bureau after generating about 300 consumer complaints since 1998. The company, whose pitchman is William Shatner, said it was "shocked" to hear of the Connecticut Better Business Bureau's decision. It has about a month to appeal. Nearly 80 percent of the complaints came from customers who bought the low-cost airline tickets from Priceline and "didn't like one aspect of the itinerary," said Priceline spokesman Brian Eck. Although Better Business Bureau membership is voluntary, getting booted could have disastrous public relations consequences for any business. Not everybody belongs Some companies, including Amazon.com Inc. and eBay Inc., do not belong to the consumer advocacy group. In fact, Amazon doesn't belong to any consumer group. Ebay is a member of Truste, which has become the online answer to the business bureau. Priceline said it first learned of the 300 complaints in June. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Sep 22 11:35:47 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 813F92A060; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 11:35:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA16658; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 11:35:47 -0400 Message-ID: <39CB7CAE.FD6B7321@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 11:37:18 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce References: <39CB7BFC.27396CD2@cptech.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Re: [Ecommerce] Priceline gets booted by the BBB Ned Daly wrote: > > How useful are self regulation and alternative dispute resolution > processes for the future of e-commerce? Actually, that should have been, James Love wrote: Ned Daly used to work here, and lately our system has been routing his mail from his old email address to me. I've been struggling to unsub from several lists that send me mail as ndaly@tap.org, and so I had to "spoof" my email address to get off some lists. And, I forgot to switch it back. Jamie -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Sep 22 12:53:54 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 587382A315; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 12:53:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA18358; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 12:53:54 -0400 Message-ID: <39CB8EFE.D7410CF@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 12:55:26 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Cc: Ned Daly Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] who is Ned Daly? Apparently my screw-up spoofing Ned Daly's name and address to unsub Ned from some lists has caused some confusion, and I apologize for that. As noted in a previous message, Ned Daly used to work here. He now works for a different NGO (the Consumers Choice Council) on a campaign involving genetically modified foods. Recently our system administrator started sending me mail from his older tap.org email account, including several lists that Ned had subscribed to. To get off the lists, I had to "spoof" ned's email address, by changing my Netscape mail "identity" settings. When I changed them back, Netscape didn't change my name, until I actually exited Netscape and restarted it. Thus, I sent out a missive to random-bits and ecommerce lists that had "Ned Daly" as the sender. It wasn't from Ned, it was from me. Sorry about the confusion. Jamie -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Sep 22 13:02:00 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B3D12A315; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:02:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA18528; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:02:00 -0400 Message-ID: <39CB90E4.81F3B0DD@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 13:03:32 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] german CD party wants 2-yr moratorium on software patents Subject: german CD party wants 2-yr moratorium on software patents Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 12:02:11 -0400 From: t byfield To: Jamie Love hi, jamie-- this just floated by, courtesy of a mailing list maintained by keith dawson, the editor of TBTF ; this is all i've heard about this turn of events, but it seems like a Good Thing. chers, t From: PILCH Hartmut To: patents@aful.org Subject: [Patents] leaders of all German parties against swpat Today the speaker of the Christian Democrats announced their position: request of a 2 years moratorium on art 52 and commencement of discussion about a sui generis protection scheme. The positions of the Green and Liberal party were announced earlier and are even more uncompromisingly anti-swpat. There is no official position of the Social Democrats, but several of their opinion leaders and the people in the ministery of economics have expressed either an anti-swpat or a moratorium position. -phm -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Sep 22 17:29:57 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B90D2A060; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 17:29:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA23261; Fri, 22 Sep 2000 17:29:56 -0400 Message-ID: <39CBCFB3.21B4707E@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 17:31:31 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , IP-Health list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] WHO to WIPO on domain names and generic drug names These are the World Health Organization comments regarding International Nonproprietary Names (INNs) for Pharmaceutical Substances and domain names. These comments are in response to the current WIPO RFC on new areas for WIPO regulation of domain names, trademark rights and abusive registration of domain names. http://listbox.wipo.int/wilma/process2-comments/2000/msg00174.html ------------------------- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Sep 23 14:17:51 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC4392A05E for ; Sat, 23 Sep 2000 14:17:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-3.essential.org [216.0.125.3]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA05164 for ; Sat, 23 Sep 2000 14:17:49 -0400 Message-ID: <39CD05E9.A7693D91@cptech.org> Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 15:35:05 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Dale Buss: Weber Gets Grilled This is a trademark dispute involving Weber barecue grills. The small business won an ICANN/WIPO panel decision. Jamie http://www.thestandard.com/article/display/0,1151,18484,00.html September 18, 2000 Weber Gets Grilled A family-owned hardware store remains the premier online dealer of Weber barbecue equipment, even as it faces challenges from the grillmaker. By Dale Buss Brian O'Donnell's e-mail handle is "grillmaster." His family's hardware store was the Weber grill national dealer of the year in 1996. In addition to courting customers with a spiffy Weber grill showroom, the business annually sells about $1 million worth of Weber-related products online. The guy may love Weber grills, but Weber-Stephen Co., the Tiffany of barbecues, doesn't like him. Earlier this year the company sued him in federal court in Chicago and filed a claim before the World Intellectual Property Organization in Geneva that could have smothered his lucrative e-commerce operation. The bone of contention is that www.webergrill.com is O'Donnell's Web site, and Weber-Stephen wanted it for itself. It's another in the hundreds of cases in which a big company is fighting someone who has registered its corporate brand as a domain name on the Internet. In the vast majority of cases, the big guy wins. But not this time. Last month Weber withdrew the lawsuit in the wake of a WIPO arbitrator's denial of Weber's complaint. "[Weber] argued that we were cybersquatters, which we're not," says the 38-year-old O'Donnell, whose father opened their store in the well-to- do Lincoln Park neighborhood of Chicago in 1941. "We just used the URL as a different way to market the product - like putting up a sign in our window saying, 'Weber grills.'" [snip] -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Sep 23 16:11:47 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D96C2A05E for ; Sat, 23 Sep 2000 16:11:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-8.essential.org [216.0.125.8]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA06336 for ; Sat, 23 Sep 2000 16:11:46 -0400 Message-ID: <39CD20A1.F1C0E62@cptech.org> Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 17:29:05 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Statement of FCC Spokesperson regarding AOL/Time Warner Transaction Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 13:08:27 -0700 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS From: Jim Warren Subject: fwd: FCC denies staff has agreed on AOL/TimeWarner deal http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/News_Releases/2000/nrcb0023.html Statement of FCC Spokesperson regarding AOL/Time Warner Transaction The FCC staff is engaged in ongoing analysis and review of the proposed AOL/Time Warner merger transaction and has made no recommendations to the full Commission on the matter. Any media stories about potential staff recommendations or draft reports can only be based on incomplete and speculative analysis and do not accurately reflect the decision-making process at the FCC. The FCC staff is continuing its analysis of the record in this transaction and will make its recommendations to the Commission upon completion of this review. At that time, the Commission will review the staff recommendations and make its decision. - FCC - -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Sep 25 13:45:29 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 137892A05E for ; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 13:45:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA00962 for ; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 13:45:28 -0400 Message-ID: <39CF8FB5.8B85A6DE@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 13:47:33 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] DNSO election for ICANN board seat I should have posted this earlier. During the week of the 17th, ICANN's DNSO election for an ICANN board seat was held. Jonathan Cohen, the trademark lawyer who is the incumbent, won. This was not a surprise to most ICANN/DNSO observers. I asked the DNSO secretariat to provide me with a detailed vote from the 19 names council members (one of whom apparently did not vote), and was told I would have to wait until October 1 for such a tally, But based upon what I understand to be the case, each of the seven DNSO constituencies voted as a block, I believe as follows: the ccTLD constituency voted for Peter de Blanc (Peter is part of that constituency, and started the .vi ccTLD). Apparently all three votes from the Non-Commercial constituency voted for me. The other five constituencies, intellectual property, business, ISP, registrar and gTLD registry, all voted for Jonathan Cohen. Jonathan Cohen is the strongest voice for big corporate trademark interests on the ICANN board, and the DNSO election results were a pretty good indication of the DNSO power structure. The results below also provide the number formal endorsements each candidate received during the election process. Jamie Cohen de Blanc Weikers Love Endorsements 31 45 53 127 Names Council Votes (10 needed to win) Intellectual Property 3 0 0 0 Business 3 0 0 0 Internet Service Provider 2 0 0 0 Registrar 3 0 0 0 Registry 1 0 0 0 (gTLD) 2 digit country registry (ccTLD) 0 3 0 0 Non-Commercial 0 0 0 3 Totals: 12 3 0 3 *Incumbent -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Sep 25 15:24:14 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 606CD2A316; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 15:24:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA03312; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 15:24:13 -0400 Message-ID: <39CFA6DA.87C8D6A4@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 15:26:18 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] United States Council for International Business on Jurisdiction in the Context of Electronic Commerce http://www.uscib.org/policy/jurrdfin.htm This is a pretty useful discription of events taking place to shape policy on jursidiction of law in cyberspace. Jamie -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Sep 25 15:45:55 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 250BD2A05E; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 15:45:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA03944; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 15:45:55 -0400 Message-ID: <39CFABF0.524F5891@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 15:48:00 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] ILPF Conference: Protecting Consumers in a Global Marketplace The Internet Law and Policy Forum (ILPF) is a very important private organization shaping policy on the future legal environment for e-commerce. Here are there members: http://www.ilpf.org/members.htm The ILPF Conference: Jurisdiction II, was held in San Francisco on Sept 11-12, 2000. http://www.ilpf.org/confer/program00.htm Among the speakers were: Roger Cochetti (NSI) Mark Bohannon (SIIA) Hank Perrit (Chicago-Kent Law School) Barbara Wellbery (DOC) Paul Gooldstein (Stanford copyright professor) Catherine Kessedjian (Deputy Secretary General, Hague Conference on Private International Law) Steward Baker (for general counsel for NSA, partner with Steptoe and Johnson Masanobu Katoh (Fujitsu, GIIC, IIIC, JEIDA, AGB, etc) Lisa Rosenthal, FTC Philippa Lawson, PIIC) Robert Kohn (EMusic) Ute Decker (IFPI) Peter MOller Jensen (Visa) Takashi Kume (MITI) Greg Wrenn (Yahoo) plus other of ohters. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Sep 25 16:04:38 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 432E52A05E for ; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:04:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA04407 for ; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:04:38 -0400 Message-ID: <39CFB053.6151445E@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:06:43 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Hague Convention - key meetings These are some details of the most important story in e-commerce that has never been written about -- the negotiations over the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction on Private Judgments. Apparently it is now known that there will several meetings, including: December 11-12 in the Hague, a meeting co-sponored by OECD/International Chamber of Commerce and Hague Conference, on Alternative Dispute Resolution (number one top e-commerce trade priority for Clinton/Gore administration), and proposed as alternative to national jurisdiction on b-c transactions, at least in terms of consumer remedies. January 30-31, 2001 in Geneva, sponsored by WIPO, on IPR aspects of Hague treaty. Last week of February, "Ottawa II" meeting on Hague Convention and e-commerce. Part 1 of the Diplomatic Conference on the Treaty, June 2001. Personally I find the lack of interest in this story by the press a bit surprising. Hello defending yourself for libel in foreign jurisdictions. Jamie PS... try finding any real information about these meeting on any US government/OECD/ICC or Hague web page. http://legalminds.findlaw.com/list/intpil/msg00234.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marc Pearl" Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2000 6:53 PM Subject: Hague Update > Dear All - > Before everything and everyone moves too deeply into a Summer slumber, I > wanted to bring you up to date on the potential chronology of events > surrounding the Hague Convention process following a conversation I had with > Jeff Kovar this afternoon. This outline further emphasizes the need for > everyone to look at last week's email/documents and forward to David Fares > at the USCIB your comments and answers to the Response Survey asap. > > Tentative Schedule of "Events" - > > * Possible initial informal discussions involving USG, international > colleagues and private sector representatives at Internet Law & Policy Forum > Conference: Jurisdiction II: Global Networks / Local Rules, San Francisco, > California, 11-12 September 2000 > > * "Very tentative" Hague delegates Working Group discussion in late > October/early November in either Washington, DC or Europe. No date set, no > agenda yet discussed. > > * Following the OECD/ICC Meeting on ADR scheduled for 11-12 December in the > Hague there are tentative plans to hold another informal Working Group > meeting (this is the one that was originally scheduled for September) for > the 3 days following [13-15 December]. If private sector representatives > are invited to be part of the OECD/ICC meeting, then there may be > opportunities to 'button-hole' representatives prior to (and possibly > during) their meetings. > > * WIPO has scheduled a Seminar (not an Experts Meeting) on "Jurisdiction and > Choice of Law" (the issue of the Hague Convention proposal would be one part > of the session) in Geneva - 30-31 January 2001. > > * The Hague is scheduling "Ottawa II" [E-Commerce Experts Meeting] the last > week of February for "up to 3 days." > > * DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE - PART I (where the rules will be suspended, but > technically still a Diplomatic Conference) will convene in JUNE 2001. > > * The results of these events, discussions, and intervensions between now > and June 2001 will determine when and if the more formal PART II/Diplomatic > Conference would be held. No decision on dates have been made (though some > delegates have thrown around late 2001 or early 2002). > > Marc > > Note: This will be my last communication with you as a member of ITAA's > staff. I am leaving the association at the end of this month and will be > heading to Shaw Pittman to head up their Technology Policy Practice in the > government relations group of the law firm. I plan to remain active on this > issue and to continue to work with you all in furthering our goals in > relation to the e-commerce community's concerns on the Hague Convention > proposal and other issues of mutual concern. After August 1, I can be > reached at or (202) 663-8993. Have a great > rest of the summer! > > ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ > Marc A. Pearl > Senior Vice President, Government Affairs and General Counsel > Information Technology Association of America (ITAA) > > PLEASE NOTE: ITAA has moved to: > 1401 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1100 > Arlington (Rosslyn), VA 22209-2318 > > Direct: 703-284-5331 > Direct Fax: 703-522-0374 > Email: MPearl@itaa.org > Mobile: 202-422-5401 > Web Site: http://www.itaa.org/govt/index.htm > > Executive Assistant: Lauren Frazier - 703-284-5358 - LFrazier@itaa.org > ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* > * Electronic Commerce Conference--September 11-12, 2000 --Denver, CO* > * Global Information Security Summit - October 16-17, 2000 --Washington, DC* > ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* > This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. > Unless > you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may > not use, > copy or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the > message. > If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by > "reply" e-mail > mpearl@itaa.org, and delete the message. Thank you very much. > ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* > > -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Sep 25 16:12:53 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFFE82A05E; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:12:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA04598; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:12:53 -0400 Message-ID: <39CFB243.E5B35EBE@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 16:14:59 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] How close does USG work with Industry on Hague Convention? Pretty nice discription of Industry/USG players in Hague Convention.... Jamie http://legalminds.findlaw.com/list/intpil/ -- Fw: Hague Convention: Update, Action Plan and New Materials/Documents To INTPIL@MAIL.ABANET.ORG From Houston Putnam Lowry Date Fri, 30 Jun 2000 17:21:23 -0400 Approved-By Houston Putnam Lowry Organization Brown & Welsh, P.C. Reply-To Houston Putnam Lowry Sender To harmonize and unify private international law The latest breaking news. I am sorry the file is so big for those of you who have slower connections. Houston Putnam Lowry, Esq. Brown & Welsh, P.C. Phone: +1 (203) 235-1651 Fax: +1 (203) 235-9600 http://www.BrownWelsh.com My PGP public key is available on PGP's server. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marc Pearl" To: ; "'van Schaack, Elizabeth M. '" ; ; ; ; ; "Shannon Kellogg" ; ; ; ; "'DEUTSCH, SARAH B.'" ; ; ; ; "'Ruth Day'" ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; "'Marilyn Cade (E-mail)'" ; "'Maxeiner, James'" ; "'Maria Martin-Prat'" ; ; ; ; ; ; ; "Kimberley Claman" ; "Kimberley Claman" ; ; "'Corbett-Sanders, Karen'" ; ; ; "'Jennifer Jacobsen (E-mail)'" ; ; ; ; ; ; ; "'Gasster,Elizabeth J - LGA'" ; ; "'David Fares'" ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; "Anders Halvorsen" ; "Eric Massant (E-mail)" ; "Harris Miller" ; "Mark Bohannon (E-mail)" Cc: "Marc Pearl" ; ; ; "'Mary Streett'" ; "'Kate Rodriguez'" ; ; ; "'Elliot E. Maxwell'" ; ; "'Brian Hengesbaugh'" ; ; ; "Mark Bohannon (E-mail 2)" Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 4:33 PM Subject: Hague Convention: Update, Action Plan and New Materials/Documents > To: Ad Hoc E-Commerce "Informal" Working Group on Hague Conference and > others Interested in the Process > (please note that the cc's are USG representatives in case you plan to > "reply to all" and do not wish to include the public sector in your message) > > A number of significant "events/things" have occured since the last > communication with you. Despite efforts so far, the process is lurching > towards a Diplomatic Conference, working off of the current draft > Convention. > > Our meeting at AT&T with a broader cross-section of industry and the USG > brought us up to date on the Hague process and how it is proceeding to an: > * "informal drafting group" meeting in mid-September in Berne (tentatively > scheduled for Sept 20-22); > * a tentative January 2001 WIPO Symposium in Geneva which will have at least > one panel devoted to the IP issues contained in the Draft Convention; > * a 2nd E-Commerce Experts meeting in Ottawa (tentatively scheduled for the > last week in February 2001); > and > * a proposal by the Hague to convene an unprecedented 2 part Diplomatic > Conference beginning in > > Jeff Kovar mentioned during that meeting that it was important for us to > look at the 1971 treaty and see the general letter of concern that was sent > to the Hague in February of this year (documents attached below) > > Additionally, a House Judiciary Committee oversight hearing on the "Internet > and Federal Courts" was held yesterday. I've attached below the Judiciary > Committee's URL to all of the statements and also electronic versions of > ITAA's written testimony and my oral statement (FYI: much of my testimony > was based on the PowerPoint presentation David Fares and I gave in Ottawa > and the never-publicly-distributed list of questions and concerns the > e-commerce community identified for the USG in advance of the Ottawa > meeting.) > > Acton Plan > Following the suggestion made at our meeting of a couple of weeks ago, > together with the conclusions reached at a briefing by the USCIB yesterday a > special survey/questionnaire will be prepared in the next few days for > distribution to (1) the e-commerce and IP communities; (2) a broader > cross-section of industry/associations who have "other"/additional > interests; and (3) our foreign counterparts/colleagues. > > The survey's purpose is to collect as close to empirical data as possible to > see if there is a baseline need or justification for a treaty dealing with > foreign enforcement of domestic judgments in the first place; and if so, > would such a need outweigh "other" provisions that we see in the current > draft. > > It is our hope that by August 1 a sufficient response would be received so > that a more 'objective' communication to the USG and 'receptive' foreign > governments will take place in advance of the September informal working > group meetings. > > Bernie Sorkin, David Fares and I will be working on this survey over the > next week or so and hope to have it in your hands (and will be calling upon > you to further distribute it to those not on the current Hague list) by > mid-July. > > When you receive the survey - and even now, by sending out the attached to > your colleagues - please get the word out that the process IS moving forward > and NOW is the time to provide substantive guidance to the USG. > > Have a great 4th of July weekend - or better yet, I hope you didn't even > read this until you got back! > > Marc > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Documents Attached: > * All Witness Statements from the Hearing - 6/29/00 on Judiciary Website: > http://www.house.gov/judiciary/4.htm > * Better copy of ITAA's Testimony/Summary Presented to House Judiciary > Committee - 6/29/2000 > <> <> > > * Dept of State February letter to the Hague > <> > > * June 16 Outline of Important dates re: Hague process (newer information * > above) > <> > * Hague Convention of 1 February 1971 on the Recognition and Enforcement of > Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters > <> > > * Supplementary Protocol to the Hague Convention of 1 February 1971 on the > Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial > Matters > <> > > ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ > Marc A. Pearl > Senior Vice President, Government Affairs and General Counsel > Information Technology Association of America (ITAA) > > PLEASE NOTE: ITAA moved its office on June 12 to: > 1401 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1100 > Arlington (Rosslyn), VA 22209-2318 > > [Our phone numbers and email addresses remain the same.] > Direct: 703-284-5331 > Direct Fax: 703-522-0374 > Email: MPearl@itaa.org > Mobile: 202-422-5401 > Web Site: http://www.itaa.org/govt/index.htm > > Executive Assistant: Lauren Frazier - 703-284-5358 - LFrazier@itaa.org > ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* > * Electronic Commerce Conference--September 11-12, 2000 --Denver, CO* > * Global Information Security Summit - October 16-17, 2000 --Washington, DC* > ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* > This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged. > Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), > you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any information > contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please > advise the sender by "reply" e-mail mpearl@itaa.org, and delete the message. > Thank you very much. > ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* > James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Sep 25 17:29:59 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 464852A05E for ; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 17:29:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA06337 for ; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 17:29:59 -0400 Message-ID: <39CFC455.21B5277D@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 17:32:05 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] WSJ's nameprotect web page WSJ's nameprotect web page.... pretty nifty free trademark search engine. Jamie http://wsj.nameprotect.com/ -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Sep 25 22:26:35 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 434FE2A05E; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 22:26:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-2.essential.org [216.0.125.2]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA11785; Mon, 25 Sep 2000 22:26:33 -0400 Message-ID: <39D01B82.C80E6F87@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 23:44:02 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , upd-discuss Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Felicity Barringer: Olympics, IPR and speech This is an amazing story about the expansion of intellectual property rights and the control over the expression and speech of individuals. Jamie http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/25/technology/25WEB.html Web-Leery Olympics Limit News By FELICITY BARRINGER Christie Ambrosi, the hard-hitting outfielder for the United States Olympic women's softball team, has long had friendly dealings with her hometown newspaper, The Kansas City Star. So, when asked, she readily agreed to write an Olympic diary for The Star's World Wide Web site. But shortly before she left for Sydney, Australia, in August, she sent an e-mail message to the newspaper, saying, "As far as the diary entry, we aren't allowed to do them during the Olympics." The International Olympic Committee was putting teeth into its often-ignored rule against publication of athletes' Olympic diaries during the Games. Ms. Ambrosi was not alone. Siri Mullinix, the North Carolina-born goalkeeper of the women's soccer team, stopped her online chats with The Greensboro News & Record and said she could not contribute a diary during the Games. The Hartford Courant got the same message from Karen Scavotto, the 18-year-old archer from Enfield, Conn. The 27th Olympic Games may be remembered for many things - world records, peacetime logistical planning - but it will surely be a benchmark in the struggle between those who hold intellectual property rights in sporting events and those seeking to cover sports, especially for the ever-expanding universe of news outlets on the Internet. Concerned that the power of the Internet could eventually undermine the economic foundation of the modern Olympic movement, the Olympic committee is going to great lengths to control how and where the images and accounts of the Sydney extravaganza reach the public. The committee's actions echo what is happening in other areas of sports, as both amateur and professional teams and leagues aggressively invoke their property rights to control how and by whom events are covered. Most of the committee's attention is focused on the Web. Here, streaming video - still in its infancy - may eventually attain both the technical quality and reach to cut into television audiences. This could, in turn, dilute the value of the most valuable asset of the Olympics: broadcasting rights. The Web could also spawn a horde of virtual storefronts where those with no rights to Olympic trademarks piggyback on the Olympic name to hawk their wares without returning anything to the nonprofit committee, which supports the athletes and the Games. [snip]  More than 20 private Web monitors on three continents are using the latest search engine technology to monitor possible violations of the I.O.C.'s property rights. The strict enforcement of the diary rule hit local newspapers hard. Mike Fannin, the sports editor of The Kansas City Star, said, "I would assume that it is their ball and if you want to play, you play by their rules." But, he added: "The readers miss that connection with their local athlete. Christie Ambrosi's a softball player in the Kansas City suburbs. When she walks into a bar, people know who she is. The Olympics - it's all about representing your hometown, your city, your country." Franklin Servan-Schreiber, the director of communications and new media for the International Olympic Committee, is keenly aware of the tension between property rights and unfettered coverage of the Games. But, he said, "I don't think the I.O.C. can be seen in any way limiting speech about the Olympics." He pointed out that 20,000 journalists are in Sydney - nearly twice as many media people as athletes, all free to cover the Games as they see fit. [snip] The aggressive enforcement effort, he said, is meant to ensure that "the association between the athlete, the sport, the values and the symbol that represents all this is clear." The Internet has offered little revenue to the Olympics so far. There are concerns that the Web could cut into television audiences and undermine the economic underpinnings of the Olympic movement. The committee took in about $1.3 billion for television rights to the Sydney games alone. NBC paid $705 million for United States rights. [snip] Floyd Abrams, a constitutional lawyer with Cahill, Gordon & Reindel, said it was odd that "the increased availability of a means of communication leads to a ruling seeking to assure that less is said." But he said the I.O.C. was not a United States agency and so was not bound by the First Amendment. The gradual fencing off of information and imagery by sports franchises was well under way before the Olympics. In the last few years, debates have been joined over whether game developments can be distributed instantly by pager (they can, a federal appeals court has ruled). [snip] -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Sep 26 04:43:41 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 421AB2A05E for ; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 04:43:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA15667 for ; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 04:43:41 -0400 Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 04:43:41 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Brussels regulation on jurisdiction ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 10:23:41 +0200 From: Ursula Pachl Reply-To: tacd-ecommerce@oneworld.org To: "'tacd-ecommerce@oneworld.org'" Subject: Brussels regulation on jurisdcition Finally some good news on the jurisdiction issue, at least on a European level: Last week the Parliament - after more than one year of struggle between industry and consumer interests..- confirmed the basic principle that the consumer has the right to take legal action in his home country in case of cross-border transactions, including e-commerce . All the "bad" amendments that the Parliament's lead Committee (the Legal Affairs Committee) had recommended - mainly on the initiave of MEP Ana Palacio, who represents the EU today at the GBDe in Miami on the Consumer Confidence Roundtable (!) - , were rejected, including the amendments which would have permitted businesses to use choice of jurisdiction clauses in consumer contracts. The EPP (Peoples Party) , which holds the majority in the Parliament, supported this approach, but finally was not successful. The text as adopted by the Parliament is not very good, but most importatn is that it does support the "consumers-can -sue in -their -home-country -principle" and makes it clear that a consumers' agreement to submit a dispute first to an ADR may not deprive him/her from going to court in his/her Member State. A provisional version of EPs opinion can be found at: http://www3.europarl.eu.int/omk/omnsapir.so/calendar?APP=DOC&TYPE=PV2&FILE=p 000-09-21en.doc&LANGUE=EN Under the applying procedure the Parliament is only consulted and the final word is with the Council now. Council always supported the original consumer-friendly proposal and we are therefore optimistic that the the regualtion will soon be adopted without significant changes. Ursula Pachl Legal Advisor BEUC, The European Consumers' Organisation From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Sep 26 14:01:18 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 528282A30E for ; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 14:01:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA23559 for ; Tue, 26 Sep 2000 14:01:18 -0400 Message-ID: <39D0E4F5.C8D6779B@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 14:03:33 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Possible Microsoft Litigation Over NTFS Support In Linux This rather geeky bit over NTFS support in Linux was featured on slashdot today. Jamie http://kt.linuxcare.com/kernel-traffic/kt20000925_86.epl#13 13. Possible Microsoft Litigation Over NTFS Support In Linux [snip] We've started our "clean room" NTFS core and I've spent some late nights working on it, and we doubt they will take any action since we dissolved the agreement. The last thing they need is for me to take the stand and testify just what kind of deals they offered to get us to leave Novell in 1997 and divide the NetWare markets by using the "Linux IP Laundry-Mat" to launder Novell's NDS for their consumption (Oh! Look what we found on the internet and downloaded today!). NDS would be a useless wart on the rump of Linux. It's for managing large numbers of file and print servers, not internet/intranet servers like Linux. Linux already has vastly superior internet directory capabilities. Andre replied to Jeff's first paragraph: Wait, this was a proposal of mine to MicroSoft to grant permission development in a clean room model that only used white papers or other stuff that could be extracted passively. I alos pointed out that this simple act of allowing open development of a public NTFS would help them blow holes in the DOJ monopoly issue. Jeff replied: The way they took this was that we had changed sides in the war, since I was perceived to be approaching them with you. Here's what they said about you, "... We are concernd about the veracity of your associates. Despite the representations they have made to you, we have not been taking GPL code from Linux and using internally at Microsoft. This approach by these Linux people is little more than an attempt to [blackmail Microsoft] with unsubstanciated rumors. We see no benefit whatsoever to provided NTFS R/W capabilities on Linux ..." Not very nice to be sure. I know that black and white markings (like a penguin) are in style right now, but white and black stripes are not ! :-) But he concluded, "I have the ability to litigate against them. They know this and I doubt will go any further than to bluster and threaten." End Of Thread (tm). -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Sep 27 09:32:08 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A989C2A30E; Wed, 27 Sep 2000 09:32:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA08581; Wed, 27 Sep 2000 09:32:08 -0400 Message-ID: <39D1F768.CDD7E882@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 09:34:32 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] by David Streitfeld: On the Web, Price Tags Blur Another fine e-commerce story by David Streitfeld, this one on dynamic pricing. http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15159-2000Sep25.html On the Web, Price Tags Blur by David Streitfeld [snip] The Internet was supposed to empower consumers, letting them compare deals with the click of a mouse. But it is also supplying retailers with information about their customers that they never had before, along with the technology to use all this accumulated data. While prices have always varied by geography, local competition and whim, retailers were never able to effectively target individuals until the Web. "Dynamic pricing is the new reality, and it's going to be used by more and more retailers," said Vernon Keenan, a San Francisco Internet consultant. "In the future, what you pay will be determined by where you live and who you are. It's unfair, but that doesn't mean it's not going to happen." With its detailed records on the buying habits of 23 million consumers, Amazon is perfectly situated to employ dynamic pricing on a massive scale. But its trial ran into a snag early this month when the regulars discussing DVDs at the Web site DVDTalk.com noticed something odd. One man recounted how he ordered the DVD of Julie Taymor's "Titus," paying $24.49. The next week he went back to Amazon and saw that the price had jumped to $26.24. As an experiment, he stripped his computer of the electronic tags that identified him to Amazon as a regular customer. Then the price fell to $22.74. "Amazon was trying to figure out how much their loyal customers would pay," said Barrett Ladd, a retail analyst with Gomez Advisors. "And the customers found out." [snip] "Amazon knows who has the ability and perhaps the incentive to pay more based on demographics, on purchasing history, on income and urgency," said Jupiter Communications analyst Mike May. "The variable that they're deficient on is which customers won't mind paying more. They don't know the level of outrage." [snip] "This is a very strange business model, to charge customers more when they buy more or come back to the site more," said one user who goes by the online name Kuroiinu. "I have no problem with coupons for first-time customers as marketing enticements, but I thought the idea was to attract customers first and then work hard to keep them. This is definitely not going to earn customer loyalty."  [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Sep 27 16:56:58 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E9E12A3C5 for ; Wed, 27 Sep 2000 16:56:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA21995 for ; Wed, 27 Sep 2000 16:56:58 -0400 Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 16:56:58 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] M France and D Berman: Location technology in devices such as cell phones will make you easy to Find http://www.businessweek.com:/2000/00_39/b3700104.htm BUSINESSWEEK ONLINE : SEPTEMBER 25, 2000 ISSUE Big Brother Calling Location technology in devices such as cell phones will make you easy to find Imagine that you carried a miniature homing device in your wallet. As you dropped the kids off at school, drove to work, met with a friend for lunch, then visited the doctor's office, it would send out a signal identifying your exact location. This transmitter would enable anybody to track you down at any time--or to figure out where you had been at a particular point in the past. It would also give marketing companies the ability to build a detailed profile of your travel patterns. That valuable data could then be sold to local restaurants, dry cleaners, clothing stores, collection agencies, or anybody else who wanted it. Guess what? You may very well be carrying such a device--or its functional equivalent--one day soon. Thanks to the government's decision to open up the Global Positioning System (GPS) to the general public, as well as lightning-fast advances in wireless technology, it is now cheaper and easier than ever to figure out where somebody is. As a result, sophisticated location-tracking technology is rapidly finding its way into cell phones, personal digital assistants, cars, trucks, and boats. One Long Island (N.Y.) company, Digital Angel, even wants to put it into a tiny chip that can be implanted into people's bodies. Already, many trucking companies use GPS to keep track of their fleets, estimate delivery times, locate stolen vehicles, and ensure drivers don't violate federal regulations governing how many hours they can be out on the road each day. One insurer, Progressive Corp. (PGR), is running a pilot program in Texas in which customers are eligible for lower car insurance rates if they agree to have a GPS device in their car and let the company monitor their driving habits. In Britain, BT Cellnet's FINDme service can identify users within 300 feet and send information about banks, restaurants, and movie-theater listings. And, in a little-noticed regulation, the Federal Communications Commission is requiring cell-phone companies to be able to identify the exact location of most callers by 2002 so that 911 calls can be tracked down. [snip] GAPING LOOPHOLES. What's more, it wouldn't be all that hard, in theory, to develop guidelines that would protect people's location privacy. Indeed, the Wireless Communications& Public Safety Act of 1999 already restricts the ability of telecommunications companies to use information about customers' whereabouts without their consent. Meanwhile, Progressive Corp. and General Motors Corp. (GM), which provides some location services through its OnStar unit, both have privacy policies that prohibit them from sharing customer-tracking data with other companies. ''The whole purpose of our service is to be of value to consumers. We are certainly not going to do anything they don't want,'' says OnStar spokesman Todd Carstensen. But privacy advocates warn that the 1999 law is full of gaping loopholes. And so, they claim, are most corporate privacy policies. Meanwhile, they fret that the rush to capitalize on tracking technology is only now gaining speed. According to Washington research firm Strategis Group, the overall market for providing location data and services will reach $4.9 billion by 2004. [snip] SALIVATING. It is the advertising industry, though, that is really salivating over the potential for consumer-location data. Knowing where a potential customer is can be phenomenally valuable information. Consider a suburban mother pulling her sport-utility vehicle into the local mall. As she parks, her dashboard or cell phone could offer her coupons for kids' clothing. Already, prototype versions of this type of service are starting to appear. New York-based Vindigo Inc., which makes a mobile city guide for Palm Pilots, has a sponsorship deal with Finlandia Vodka. When Manhattanites use Vindigo to search for a nearby bar, a small ad for Finlandia may flash on their screen. The ad could include a drink recipe that the bar patron can show to a bartender. ''This is the holy grail of marketing,'' says Vindigo's Jason Devitt. ''Every time you use the service, you're in the street, looking for advice on how to spend your money.'' [snip] By Mike France and Dennis K. Berman in New York From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Sep 28 14:36:46 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F01D22A060 for ; Thu, 28 Sep 2000 14:36:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA08220 for ; Thu, 28 Sep 2000 14:36:45 -0400 Message-ID: <39D3905A.9E4501AE@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 14:39:22 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] GBDe meeting in Florida For those who wonder why we are concerned about the December meeting regarding ADR and the Hague treaty on jurisdiction, read this story. Jamie Published Wednesday, September 27, 2000, in the Miami Herald Globe's giants discuss future BY JOHN DORSCHNER As leaders of global corporate giants listened in Miami on Tuesday, government representatives of the United States and Europe announced that they had serious problems with industry plans to improve international consumer confidence in e-commerce. The criticisms concerned industry leaders' suggestions on how to protect privacy and how to resolve purchasing problems by bypassing courts in favor of new systems promoting alternative dispute resolutions. ``I believe your privacy statement this morning falls short,'' said Norman Mineta, U.S. secretary of commerce, speaking at the second annual meeting of the Global Business Dialogue on Electronic Commerce, which attracted 350 business and government leaders from around the world. [snip] Jean-Marie Mesier, chief executive of French communications giant Vivendi, told the group that the Internet required ``freedom of information, freedom of trade and the respect of intellectual property rights.'' What must be avoided, warned Gustavo Cisneros of the Latin conglomerate Cisneros Group, is a spreading of piecemeal laws ``country by country -- a crazy quilt of regulations that would hold down the progress of the Internet.'' Started in 1999, the GBDe tries to set standards and institute self-regulation to keep government interference to a minimum. For the Miami session, the group produced position papers on cybercrime, trade and taxation, intellectual property rights and bridging the digital divide that separates tech-rich countries from the tech-poor. Steve Case, chief executive of America Online and one of the founders of the GBDe, said the group's goal was not to completely avoid government intervention, but to start a new kind of private-public cooperation. ``The real challenge of the GBDe is building a framework for dialogue to answer very complicated questions,'' Case said. ``We're not just building a business. We're building a medium. It's a global medium, and that means we need global cooperation.'' MOOD CHANGES Many of the sessions were studded with mutually admiring comments from business and government representatives, but that changed during an afternoon session on building consumer confidence in which three powerhouses presented the industry's position. Carleton Fiorina, chief executive of Hewlett-Packard, spoke on `the need for alternative dispute resolutions, or ADRs. Tadashi Okamura, CEO of Toshiba, explained how Internet companies were moving to protect users' personal data. And Michio Naruto, chairman of Fujitsu, talked about how ``trustmarks'' could create consumer confidence. The trustmarks were generally well received. ``Kind of like the old Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval,'' observed moderator Wolf Blitzer, the CNN newsman. Although there are several competing standards, consumers would know that each stood for particular rules of conduct concerning such issues as privacy and resolution of customer disputes. Reaction was considerably tougher on the issue of protecting personal information. POSITION PAPER The GBDe's six-page position paper said websites should clearly tell consumers what they planned to do with personal information, but other provisions were fuzzy. The proposed GBDe standard would allow websites to use data ``for a purpose not disclosed in company's notice,'' as long as it notified the customer and allowed him or her to opt out of the new use. What's more, the company would have no responsibilities about data obtained from a third party and would be able to transfer personal data to a third party after ascertaining ``the adequacy of the personal data protection practices of the third party.'' Robert LaRussa, undersecretary for international trade in the U.S. Department of Commerce, said he thought the privacy standard ``did not go far enough'' on controlling data that went to third parties and seeking consumers' permission before it did. ``The industry must do more,'' he said. John Mogg, a director general with the European Commission, said Europeans had an ``extremely high'' standard of privacy that was far above what the GBDe was recommending. He urged the GBDe to reconsider its position. ADRs also sparked concerns. CONFUSING LAWS Fiorina said ADRs were important for Internet commerce to simplify life for consumers and businesses. With myriad laws around the world, consumers need consistent protections, regardless of which country they're buying from, and businesses need to know that they can sell to many countries without running into legal quagmires. ADRs, she said, ``are a practical way to avoid this dilemma.'' LaRussa said the United States was bothered by the suggestion that consumers might have to agree to ADRs before they made an international purchase online. ``Predispute binding arbitration is very controversial,'' LaRussa said. ``Many countries prohibit such agreements.'' Ana Palacio, a Spaniard who's a member of the European Parliament, said she was worried that ADRs could turn into a new bureaucracy. ``It is very important to think cross-border,'' she said, and she didn't want a new tier of institutions interfering in the process. The GBDe discussions will continue. Work groups meet regularly. The next annual conference is scheduled for Tokyo. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Sep 28 14:39:57 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB31F2A060 for ; Thu, 28 Sep 2000 14:39:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA08313 for ; Thu, 28 Sep 2000 14:39:57 -0400 Message-ID: <39D3911A.71936A96@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 14:42:34 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Oct 5 NGO meeting on Hague treaty E-Commerce Roundtable meeting announcement There will be a brown bag lunch meeting on October 5, 2000, from noon to 2 pm, at the American Library Association, located at 1401 Pennsylvania Ave, NW (Actually, corner of 14th and E St.), fourth floor, Suite 403. The meeting will focus on the negotiations over the proposed Hague treaty on jurisdiction. I'll have some more details on the meeting soon. Jamie Love -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Sep 28 16:34:38 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 728732A060; Thu, 28 Sep 2000 16:34:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA10939; Thu, 28 Sep 2000 16:34:38 -0400 Message-ID: <39D3ABFC.75A378FC@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 16:37:16 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] DC-ISCO debate on patents and the Internet This is the web page for this interesting DC ISOC event, on October 3. http://www.dcisoc.org/welcome1.html -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Sep 28 19:04:54 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CA552A060 for ; Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:04:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA13657 for ; Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:04:54 -0400 Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 19:04:54 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Subject: [Random-bits] Al Gore's support of the Internet, by V.Cerf and B.Kahn ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 17:43:58 -0400 From: vinton g. cerf To: Declan McCullaugh , farber@cis.upenn.edu Cc: rkahn@cnri.reston.va.us Subject: Al Gore and the Internet Dave and Declan, I am taking the liberty of sending to you both a brief summary of Al Gore's Internet involvement, prepared by=20 Bob Kahn and me. As you know, there have been a seemingly unending series of jokes chiding the vice president for his assertion that he "took the initiative in creating the Internet." Bob and I believe that the vice president deserves significant credit for his early recognition of the importance of what has become the Internet.=20 I thought you might find this short summary of sufficient interest to share it with Politech and the IP lists, respectively. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Al Gore and the Internet By Robert Kahn and Vinton Cerf Al Gore was the first political leader to recognize the importance of the I= nternet and to promote and support its development.=20 No one person or even small group of persons exclusively =93invented=94 the= Internet. It is the result of many years of ongoing collaboration among pe= ople in government and the university community. But as the two people who= designed the basic architecture and the core protocols that make the Inter= net work, we would like to acknowledge VP Gore=92s contributions as a Congr= essman, Senator and as Vice President. No other elected official, to our k= nowledge, has made a greater contribution over a longer period of time. = =20 Last year the Vice President made a straightforward statement on his role. = He said: =93During my service in the United States Congress I took the ini= tiative in creating the Internet.=94 We don=92t think, as some people have= argued, that Gore intended to claim he =93invented=94 the Internet. Moreov= er, there is no question in our minds that while serving as Senator, Gore= =92s initiatives had a significant and beneficial effect on the still-evolv= ing Internet. The fact of the matter is that Gore was talking about and pro= moting the Internet long before most people were listening. We feel it is = timely to offer our perspective. As far back as the 1970s Congressman Gore promoted the idea of high speed t= elecommunications as an engine for both economic growth and the improvement= of our educational system. He was the first elected official to grasp th= e potential of computer communications to have a broader impact than just i= mproving the conduct of science and scholarship. Though easily forgotten, n= ow, at the time this was an unproven and controversial concept. Our work o= n the Internet started in 1973 and was based on even earlier work that took= place in the mid-late 1960s. But the Internet, as we know it today, was no= t deployed until 1983. When the Internet was still in the early stages of i= ts deployment, Congressman Gore provided intellectual leadership by helping= create the vision of the potential benefits of high speed computing and co= mmunication. As an example, he sponsored hearings on how advanced technolo= gies might be put to use in areas like coordinating the response of governm= ent agencies to ! ! ! natu ral disasters and other crises. As a Senator in the 1980s Gore urged government agencies to consolidate wha= t at the time were several dozen different and unconnected networks into an= =93Interagency Network.=94 Working in a bi-partisan manner with officials= in Ronald Reagan and George Bush=92s administrations, Gore secured the pas= sage of the High Performance Computing and Communications Act in 1991. Thi= s =93Gore Act=94 supported the National Research and Education Network (NRE= N) initiative that became one of the major vehicles for the spread of the I= nternet beyond the field of computer science. As Vice President Gore promoted building the Internet both up and out, as w= ell as releasing the Internet from the control of the government agencies t= hat spawned it. He served as the major administration proponent for contin= ued investment in advanced computing and networking and private sector init= iatives such as Net Day. He was and is a strong proponent of extending acce= ss to the network to schools and libraries. Today, approximately 95% of ou= r nation=92s schools are on the Internet. Gore provided much-needed politic= al support for the speedy privatization of the Internet when the time arriv= ed for it to become a commercially-driven operation. There are many factors that have contributed to the Internet=92s rapid grow= th since the later 1980s, not the least of which has been political support= for its privatization and continued support for research in advanced netwo= rking technology. No one in public life has been more intellectually engag= ed in helping to create the climate for a thriving Internet than the Vice P= resident. Gore has been a clear champion of this effort, both in the counc= ils of government and with the public at large. =20 The Vice President deserves credit for his early recognition of the value o= f high speed computing and communication and for his long-term and consiste= nt articulation of the potential value of the Internet to American citizens= and industry and, indeed, to the rest of the world.=20 Version 1.2 Word count: 709 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D WorldCom 22001 Loudoun County Parkway Building F2, Room 4115, ATTN: Vint Cerf Ashburn, VA 20147 Telephone (703) 886-1690 FAX (703) 886-0047 "INTERNET IS FOR EVERYONE!"=20 INET 2001: Internet Global Summit=20 5-8 June 2001=20 Sweden International Fairs=20 Stockholm, Sweden=20 http://www.isoc.org/inet2001 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology You may redistribute this message freely if it remains intact. To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Sep 28 21:01:49 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E0F72A060 for ; Thu, 28 Sep 2000 21:01:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-2.essential.org [216.0.125.2]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA15208; Thu, 28 Sep 2000 21:01:45 -0400 Message-ID: <39D3E7E4.BBE467C7@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 20:52:52 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dcave@salon.com, Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Damien Cave: Why Netizens can't learn to stop worrying and love ICANN. This is Damien Cave's ICANN article from the online New Republic. It is mostly about how, in his opinion, people are silly to worry about the power ICANN has over the DNS and IP numbers. Apparently this could never lead to any real issues, as he sees things. As someone who has worked for non-profit organizations for years, I was surprised Damien was so impressed with the idea that ICANN has, gasp, bylaws -- make that, "strick bylaws." He doesn't mention that thoese bylaws are changed frequently, certainly at every ICANN board meeting that I have attended, or that the "non binding" UDRP process is out of control on important trademark issues, or that there are any bona fide free speech concerns when (some) UDRP panels decide that trademark owners should have exclusive rights to use company or product names in domain names, or that future policies on this or a hundred other issues might be important enough to worry about who makes the decisions. Or that the President of ICANN and several board members have indicated that are considering eliminating the "at large" membership's right to elect any board members (see below), and indeed, that the bylaws were changed in Yokohama to require the board to approve any future elections, and that the whole decisions to even have an election was basically forced on ICANN by the US Department of Commerce, which in turn was pressured by ICANN's critics, and motivated also by ICANN proposal to levy a $1 fee on every domain. Nor is there any mention of current proposals to place "user fees" on IP numbers, or various proposals by music and movie industry advocates to have ICANN play a larger role in enforcing copyrights, including, for example, the policy adopted recently making it illegal to register a domain name anonymously, regardless of how the domain is used. Jamie http://magazines.enews.com/online/cave092600.html Why Netizens can't learn to stop worrying and love ICANN. Freaked Geeks By DAMIEN CAVE Online only Post date: 09.26.00 [snip] What ICANNwatch, and, by the looks of it, most of the people who registered to vote, seem not to realize is that it's just ICANN. The non-profit has nine full-time employees. It operates under strict bylaws that prevent it from getting involved with most of the Net's hot-button issues, such as kicking child pornographers off the Web or protecting privacy. Its authority over domain-name contracts--such as those between you and the registrar of your personal domain-name--only allows it to enforce decisions made by outside judges or arbitrators. And while it's true that ICANN has a process for guiding disputes into arbitration, the uniform domain-name dispute-resolution policy,) it's far from binding. If Verizon used the UDRP to enter arbitration and try to take the domain name "Verizonreallysucks.com" away from the current owner, 2600 Magazine, and lost, the cellular company could simply sue in a federal or international court to get its way. [snip] http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#II Then, there is this, from the current version of the bylaws: -- Section 5. Study of "At Large" Membership Beginning immediately following the conclusion of the Annual Meeting of the Corporation in 2000, the Corporation shall initiate a comprehensive study of the concept, structure and processes relating to an "At Large" membership for the Corporation. The study shall be structured so as to allow and encourage the participation of organizations worldwide, and shall be a "clean sheet" study meaning that previous decisions and conclusions regarding an "At Large" membership will be informative but not determinative, and that the study will start with no preconceptions as to a preferred outcome. The study shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following issues, taking into account the limited technical and administrative responsibilities of ICANN: Whether the ICANN Board should include "At Large" Directors; If so, how many such Directors there should be; How any such "At Large" Directors should be selected, including consideration of at least the following options: selection by an "At Large" membership; appointment by the existing Board; selection or appointment by some other entity or entities; and any combination of those options; If selection by an "At Large" membership is to be used, the processes and procedures by which that selection will take place; and What the appropriate structure, role and functions of an "At Large" membership should be. The Board shall establish, by the Annual Meeting in 2000, a process and structure for the study that will enable it to meet the following deadlines: a. The results of the study should be presented to the Board no later than the second quarterly meeting of the Corporation in 2001; b. The Board shall review the study, and propose for public comment whatever actions it deems appropriate as a result of the study, on a schedule that would permit the Board to take final action on the study no later than the Annual Meeting of the Corporation in 2001; and c. Any actions taken by the Board as a result of the study that require the selection of any "At Large" Directors should be implemented on a schedule that will allow any new "At Large" Directors to be seated no later than the conclusion of the Annual Meeting of the Corporation in 2002. --------- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Sep 29 02:28:39 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3A042A060 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2000 02:28:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA19755 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2000 02:28:39 -0400 Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 02:28:39 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Questions to USG regarding Hague Treaty To: Mary Streett US Department of Commerce Jeff Kovar, US Department of State From: Jamie Love Consumer Project on Technology Date: Sept 29, 2000 Re: Questions about the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgements in Civil and Commercial Matters First, thanks much for your efforts to address specific questions about the Hague treaty on jurisdiction. I'm not a lawyer, and am trying to ask fairly simple questions, using specific hypotheticals to explore the consequences of the treaty. 1. How will the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction affect labor unions in the US, that engage in boycotts or corporate campaigns against union busting firms? For example, suppose a union engages in a campaign that urges global consumer boycotts, using the Internet to spread the message. Could the anti-union employer sue a US labor union in a foreign country, get a judgment abroad, and collect the judgment in the US, where the US labor union has assets? 2. This is a question about the Hague treaty and libel and slander claims, based upon Internet communications, from web pages to email lists. a. Could a corporation sue me in England, under the more restrictive laws in England regarding libel and slander, get a judgment in the UK, and collect it from me here? b. If I was sued for libel or slander in the UK, for something I published on a US web site, would I be protected by the 1st amendment in the UK? Would I rely upon a UK judge to interpret my first amendment protections? c. Could a public official in China bring a private law suit in China against a critic living in the US who published critical information on the Internet, alleging damages under Chinese law, and collect the money from the critic in the USA? 3. The Hague Convention currently includes, according to its web page, 47 members (http://www.hcch.net/e/members/members.html), including countries such as China, Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey, Japan, Korea, or Switzerland (to name a few), that have much different legal traditions. Some of these countries have very restrictive "unfair competition" laws, that make it illegal to disparage or criticize products, even when there is no issue of confusion. Would a US web page that criticized a firm's products create a liability in one of these countries, that could result in a judgement issued by a foreign court that would be recognized in the US? 4. Regarding the Hague treaty and copyright and fair use on the Internet, what national laws would apply if I download an article, data, music or software from a European web site, to my US based computer, and make an unauthorized use, for teaching, reverse engineering, commentary, parody or some other use that would be fair use in the US, but possibly not fair use in Europe. a. Could I be sued in Europe for violating the European copyright laws? Would a judgment be collected against me in the USA? b. Could US firms simply publish virtually from Europe to have the benefits of tougher copyright protections in Europe? 5. This is a question that concerns the relationship between the Hague Treaty and contracts of adhesion. Our interests include not only contracts between business and consumers, but also between business and libraries, business and small business, more generally, mass market contracts of adhesion. a. Has the USG effectively blocked the current draft language in Article 7, on the grounds that consumers should not have a right to bring an action in the courts where they are resident? b. If the USG has blocked approval of Article 7, what is the USG in favor of? c. Is the USG in favor of or opposed to having jurisdiction of court or law determined by contract between the buyer and seller. d. How will this work with contracts of adhesion? e. What is the relationship between the various model contracts on ecommerce, such as UCITA, and the Hague Convention? Would UCITA type contracts, if recognized in the US, give US firms the ability to sue foreign customers in US courts and collect the money in the foreign country? f. If a "contract" involves a service or product provided over the Internet, does the supplier of the service or product have a right to sue a consumer in the country where the product or service is located? Is this determined by the virtual presence on the web, or some other standard for location? g. What if you cannot afford to defend your self in a foreign country. Are you going to have to default the case? Will the judgment be automatically valid in the USA? h. What if one country has restrictions on contracts of adhesion, but another does not? How are these differences resolved? Thank you both so much for reviewing these questions. We look forward to your response. Sincerely, James Love Consumer Project on Technology ================================== Appendix, Articles 6 7 of the current draft Article 6 Contracts A plaintiff may bring an action in contract in the courts of a State in which - a) in matters relating to the supply of goods, the goods were supplied in whole or in part; b) in matters relating to the provision of services, the services were provided in whole or in part; c) in matters relating both to the supply of goods and the provision of services, performance of the principal obligation took place in whole or in part. Article 7 Contracts concluded by consumers 1. A plaintiff who concluded a contract for a purpose which is outside its trade or profession, hereafter designated as the consumer, may bring a claim in the courts of the State in which it is habitually resident, if a) the conclusion of the contract on which the claim is based is related to trade or professional activities that the defendant has engaged in or directed to that State, in particular in soliciting business through means of publicity, and b) the consumer has taken the steps necessary for the conclusion of the contract in that State. 2. A claim against the consumer may only be brought by a person who entered into the contract in the course of its trade or profession before the courts of the State of the habitual residence of the consumer. 3. The parties to a contract within the meaning of paragraph 1 may, by an agreement which conforms with the requirements of Article 4, make a choice of court - a) if such agreement is entered into after the dispute has arisen, or b) to the extent only that it allows the consumer to bring proceedings in another court. -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Sep 29 07:47:30 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E9002A060 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2000 07:47:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-10.essential.org [216.0.125.10]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA21303 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2000 07:47:29 -0400 Message-ID: <39D47F3E.F5AFAD14@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 07:38:38 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Slashdot on ACT/Liebowitz defense of Microsoft/ Motley fool on MS too http://slashdot.org/articles/00/09/28/2016247.shtml Would you pay $1,000 for Windows? Stan J. Liebowitz, a prof at the U of Texas Management School, has released a screed saying that the world economy could take a $300 billion dollar bite in the ass if Microsoft is broken up. Tales of $2000 computers with Windows costing an additional $1000. The whole 39-page PDF file can be found here . The whole thing was bankrolled by M$ apologists extraordinaire the Association for Competitive Technology and should be taken with an extremely large grain of salt." (More below.) http://www.fool.com/portfolios/rulemaker/2000/rulemaker000928.htm Microsoft's Split Personality Splitting up Microsoft might not be a bad idea. How so? Carving up the company would separate its two personalities once and for all. One business could do what it does best -- protect the Windows franchise. The other would be free to innovate without worrying about stepping on the Windows monopoly. . . By Rob Landley (TMF Oak) September 28, 2000 -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Sep 29 09:59:49 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62E482A060 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2000 09:59:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA22981 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2000 09:59:49 -0400 Message-ID: <39D4A0FA.A69A5AD9@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 10:02:34 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Agenda for Dec 11-12 meeting on Hague treaty on jurisdiction http://www.cptech.org/ecom/hague/AgendaPublic9-26-00.doc BUILDING TRUST IN THE ONLINE ENVIRONMENT: BUSINESS TO CONSUMER DISPUTE RESOLUTION JOINT CONFERENCE OF THE OECD, HCOPIL, ICC The Crowne Plaza Promenade Hotel The Hague 11-12 December 2000 -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Sep 29 11:20:42 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 660CD2A060 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2000 11:20:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA24598 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2000 11:20:42 -0400 Message-ID: <39D4B3F0.2082FC85@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 11:23:28 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Ford litigation on ford, volvo and jaguar domains Ford moves against a long list of people who hold domains that involve the words volvo, ford or jaguar. One defendant says that he offered to give up his domain, vintage volvos, but that Ford's attorneys demanded $3,000 is costs, for him to avoid potential $100,000 fine under US cybersquating legislation. Jamie ps... some examples of domains Ford is seeking: volvos4sale.com, fordrepairs.com, win-a-mustang.com, preownedmustang.com, 4AJAGUAR.COM, JAGUARENTHUSIASTSCLUB.COM, FORDBODYPARTS.COM, vintagevolvos.com, and many many others. ------------------ http://ford.launchpad.com/fordcase.html http://ford.launchpad.com/fc/uploads/4/Complaint.htm http://ford.launchpad.com/cgi-bin/thread.cgi?14,0 Sept 26, 2000 Well it is finally official. Last night I received a summons from a local constable concerning the Ford case. What is strange is that it is dated as March 29, 2000 (date of issuance) and it says that I have 20 days to respond! Chalk another one up for "Ford quality as nob none. I also heard from the owner of classicvolvo.com in Sweden. He is going to get television coverage this week. Maybe now the U.S. media will start to cover this thing. Finally, EFF hired another attorney recently and she contacted me. EFF wants to support us. More on that as it develops. Tom Cooper owner VintageVolvos.com [ Reply to this thread ] [ Start a new thread ] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Sep 29 14:49:56 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0920D2A060 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2000 14:49:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA28604; Fri, 29 Sep 2000 14:49:55 -0400 Message-ID: <39D4E4FB.5CFA76A0@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 14:52:43 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , upd-discuss Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Hague treaty: IPR issues and January 30-31 WIPO meeting To: Mary Streett US Department of Commerce Jeff Kovar, US Department of State From: Jamie Love Consumer Project on Technology Date: Sept 29, 2000 Re: Second missive regard Hague Treaty on Jurisdiction, with questions about software and ecommerce patents and other IPR questions, including those involving the free software movement, and request for information about January 30-31 Geneva WIPO meeting on Hague treaty. This is a follow up to the missive sent earlier this morning, on the Hague Convention. This follow-up addresses questions on software and ecommerce patents, the free software, other IPR questions, and a request for information regarding the January 30-31 WIPO meeting on the Hague Treaty. 1. Under the proposed Hague Treaty on jurisdiciton (information about this on the web at http://www.cptech.org/ecom/jurisdiction/hague.html), what would be the treatment of civil litigation in cases involving software and ecommerce patent claims? For example: a. If the USA authorizes patents on ecommerce business methods, but the EU does not, can a US patent owner sue an EU ecommerce business in the US, for infringement of the US ecommerce patent, and then collect the judgment in the EU, even though the EU does not recognize the patent? For example, in cases where the EU web site provided services or goods to US customers. Would this include US treble damages for willful infringement? If so, could Priceline, for example, sue in a US court to obtain damanges when an EU businesses used its "name your price" patent, or could Amazon do the same if an EU businesses infringed on its one click shopping patent? b. If Europe issues overly broad patents for software or business methods, under proposed changes to the European Patent Convention, could an EU firm sue in the EU to obtain damages from a US ecommerce firm, if it is thought to infringe on the EU business methods patent (if the US company sold goods or services in the EU market)? 2. Regarding the free software movement, I have some quesitions. a. Could an author of free software that is widely distributed on the Internet be sued in any of the 47 Hague convention member states, for alledged violations of any intellectual property violations (copyright, patent, etc), and if so, would the judgement be collected in the country where the author lived? What would be the case if the author was acting as an individual, and could not afford to defend themselves in a foreign legal action. Would they still be liable for the foreign judgement? Would the authors have an opportunity to defend themselves in their home country? Which laws would apply? The patent and copyright laws in the place where the author resides, or where the alleged infringment takes place? b. Will the increased liability for infringement actions in foreign countries provide a chilling effect on the development of free software? Will this harm the development of the Internet, which relies upon free software to avoid monopolistic technologies? c. Will the enhanced judgment recognition shift the burden from the importing country to the author of the software, to address country specific IPR protections? Comment here on problems such as overly broad or not novel patents, that can be issued in countries that do not have good examination systems, and rely upon a registration and litigate approach (such in South Africa, for example). d. Will enhanced judgement recognition provide incentives to firms like Microsoft to engage in patent harassment claims against free software authors, filing foreign patents in countries where there is poor exaimination, and forcing authors to mount costly defenses to write free software. e. How will the Hague treaty deal with the legal status of the GNU Public License (GPL), which is used to prevent embrace and extend strategies to make free software not free. Have you consulted with Richard Stallman, Tim O'Reilly, Eric Raymond, Professor Larry Lessig, companies that sell Linux distributions (there are many) or others to determine special issues for the free software movement that should be addressed? 3. How will the treaty address cross country differences in moral rights of authors or inventors? 4. Will the treaty affect cross country judgment recognition in cases involving sui generis property rights where the right would be recognized in one country, but not another, including, for example: a. Rights in folklore, indigious knowledge or biopiracy. For example, could farmers in one country sue a biotechnology firm the USA for infringement of its sui generis law on biopiracy, using as a standard for damange the lowering of the export price of a crop, caused by a genetically engineered substitute that was based upon a plant variety from a country with biopiracy laws? b. Europe has a directive on sui generis "sweat of the brow" protections for databases. Lexis and West Publishing are both foreign owned. Could they sue US publishers in the EU, and obtain damages for US web sites that infringe on the EU database laws? Would this have an effect on services such as Findlaw or the Cornell free law library? 5. Crown Copyright. Some countries have crown copyrights on all public documents, including laws or court opinions. If I publish government documents on the Web, could I be sued in a foreign country for crown copyright violations, and have the judgment recognized in the USA? Are you familiar with the UK case involving a crown copyright judgment against a former intelligence employee now living in France? Could this be used to suppress state criticism? 6. Access to medicines. a. Under the judgement recognition provisions of the Hague treaty, could Glaxo sue a generic company, for providing inexpensive AIDS drugs in Ghana, and collect the judgement in a country where the company has assets? 7. Has anyone proposed excluding intellectual property from the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction? 8. Have you consulted with US education organizations to assess the impact of the treaty on distance education programs? 9. Regarding the January 30-31 WIPO meeting on the Hague Convention. Could you tell me: a. What is the agenda? b. How do citizens and NGOs participate? c. Which participants will represent consumer groups? d. Which participants will represent the free software movement? e. Which participants will represent labor unions representing creators of works? Thank you very much for addressing these important questions. Sincerely, James Love Consumer Project on Technology -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Oct 1 21:05:29 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 660902A05E for ; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 21:05:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA29620 for ; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 21:05:29 -0400 Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 21:05:29 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Santa Clause: the Trademark ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 21:15 +0100 (BST) From: Wendy Grossman Subject: Santa Clause: the Trademark Got a press pack today from the people at www.Santa-Claus.com saying they applied to the US Patent and Trademark Office in April 1999 to trademark both the terms "Santa Claus" and "Father Christmas" (the latter being in extremely common usage in the UK) for online retail stores. This class of trademark is not available in the UK. This trademark has now been awarded to Stephen Bottomley, a former artist and owner of a recording studio (it says here), and a Web developer with a company called Click and Tell Media Ltd. He has, the press pack says, registered a number of other festive domain names. The www.santa-claus.com Web site was set up in 1998 and now will add a department store to it for the holiday season 2000. Quoth Bottomley in the press release: "The trademarking of these names will effectively future proof my business should proposed domain suffixes such as .web or .shop become a reality and further strengthen the barriers to entry regarding competition in the USA. In addition, the TM will also help shoppers come straight to my legitimate site for the Christmas needs and shopping, particularly when using sophisticated but user friendly search engines such as Real Names and their partners." I note through searching on Betterwhois (http://www.betterwhois.com) that santaclaus.com is reserved for an outfit in Florida and santa.com is reserved for someone in San Jose. But that's not the point. The point is that it's ridiculous that such a trademark was ever granted. The press release notes that there was a 30-day period for public comment, which apparently no one noticed. Are we now going to see Bottomley's lawyers trying to put every electronic Santa's grotto out of business? wg From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 2 00:12:12 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 280B52A05E for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 00:12:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA32630 for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 00:12:12 -0400 Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 00:12:12 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Background on Hague Treaty on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgements To: Richard Stallman From: Jamie Love Date: October 1, 2000 Re: Proposed Hague Treaty on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgements in Civil and Commercial Matters This is a response to your request for a basic explanation of the Hague Treaty. I don't consider myself an expert on the treaty, and am still trying to understand how it works, so these comments are preliminary. For additional information, you might contact Jeff Kovar from the US Department of State or see: http://www.cptech.org/ecom/jurisdiction/hague.html I. Background The formal title is the "Hague Treaty on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgements in Civil and Commercial Matters." The treaty will affect a lot of different things. It was first proposed in 1992, I believe by the US government. It was in the beginning primarily about recognition of judgements from private litigation. As I understand the background, the US wanted to make it easier to collect judgements when a party did not have assets in the country where the money was owed. At this point, no one was thinking about the Internet, and the treaty was probably not of interest to very many people. Beginning in 1995, the use of the Internet and Internet commerce began to expand dramatically, and some persons began to see that the treaty would have significant consequences for ecommerce. Lots of what is done on the Internet crosses borders. The main purpose of the treaty is to provide for recognition of foreign judgements. When there is cross country litigation, the treaty addresses such issues as the jurisdiction of the court (where will the case be litigated) and which laws will apply. Different combinations are possible. You could be sued in China, but your rights might be based upon a US law, or the other way around. You could also be sued in the UK under UK laws, and if you lost the case, the judgement would be recognized in the country where you live. The treaty is designed to address nearly all private commercial litigation, so its scope is very broad. In its present draft, it would involve, for example, intellectual property claims (patent, copyright, trademark, trade secret, unfair competition, etc), libel, slander, contractual disputes, fraud, private antitrust litigation and just about anything where a court would award damages in private litigation. II. What does the Treaty Change? Individuals, organizations or firms can now be sued in foreign jurisdictions, but since it is very difficult to collect foreign judgements, people don't have to worry much, unless they have assets in that country. And, before the Internet became important, there were also fewer cases where what people did was considered of legal consequence in a foreign country. Today the Internet is important, and now speech, the distribution of software and music, and lots of other things done on the Internet are considered cross border transactions. Thus, if the Hague treaty creates domestic liability for foreign judgements, it will be a big thing. This is a form of globalization, but it is different from approaches that are based upon the international harmonization of laws. While institutions like WIPO and the WTO seek to create a global system with the same laws, the Hague treaty would create a world where things you do on the Internet could give rise to liability under laws in any Hague convention member, even when the foreign laws are far different from the laws where you live. This would be true, for example, for different laws (and legal traditions) on libel, slander, copyright, patents, trade secrets and many other things. III. ADR for Business/Consumer transactions I should also note one area where there are special rules and controversy. For Internet business to consumer transactions (B2C), the US government has blocked language in the draft treaty (Article 7) that would ensure that consumers could sue businesses in courts where the consumer lives. Business interests (with lots of help from US trade officials) are pushing for a system where consumer protection and privacy issues would be resolved by business run "alternative dispute resolution" (ADR) systems, that would largely enforce contracts of adhesion or consider industry codes of practice, like the Truste program. This is a huge priority for AOL, Microsoft, IBM and many ecommerce businesses, who seek to avoid dealing with different consumer protection and privacy laws in different countries. Thus, in the B2C transactions, businesses see the treaty as a way to reduce liability from foreign courts. IV. How would the treaty affect the free software movement? There are many areas where the treaty would present problems for the free software movement. This is a list of only a few issues. 1. People who write free software will likely be sued in foreign countries for infringement of software patents. Of course, people who live in countries without software patents will face liability for patents issued in countries where such patents are issued. But also, there will be the increased risk of being sued for really bad (overly broad, not novel) foreign patents. Many Hague member countries do not have much of an examination system, where it is even easier to get patents approved than in the US or Europe. 2. Likewise, there will be potential liability in cases alleging infringements of copyrights, violations of trade secrets, restrictive unfair competition laws, foreign sui generis database protection laws, and other types of intellectual property laws, including those foreign laws that are far more restrictive in terms of the public's rights. 3. For example, some countries do not permit reverse engineering. A software developer living in the US who does reverse engineering could face being sued in a country that banned reverse engineering. So too with other types of fair use exceptions that exist in some countries, but not in others. 4. Different national laws on digital copyright and even hyper-text linking could give rise to liability for web pages that pointed to software considered illegal under various national laws protecting digital copyrighted works. Even if the software was considered legal where you lived, it might be considered illegal somewhere else. 5. Although this isn't directly related in software development, the treaty would make it possible to be sued in libel or slander in foreign countries, where libel or slander laws would be far more restrictive than the USA. V. Where does the process stand? The Treaty has been discussed since 1992, and it was supposed to be finished this year. I only learned about the treaty earlier this year, when US NGOs heard about it from European consumer groups. The FTC and the US department of commerce provided its first NGO briefing on the treaty earlier last spring. Some American Bar Association committees and several business groups have been engaged for some time. Right now there are four important intergovernmental meetings scheduled for the proposed treaty. They include: 1. ADR and the Hague Treaty. December 11-12 in the Hague. This is a meeting co-sponsored by OECD/International Chamber of Commerce and the Hague Conference. Businesses and US trade officials are pushing to have Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) become a substitute for national jurisdiction on consumer protection and privacy aspects of business to consumer transactions. Apparently only 250 people will be invited to attend this meeting. 2. WIPO meeting on Hague treaty and IPR. January 30-31, 2001 in Geneva. This is potently a very important meeting for the free software movement. I am trying to find out how to participate in the meeting. 3. Ottawa II meeting on Hague Treaty and E-Commerce. Last week of February. This is a follow up to earlier experts meetings looking at the treaty in terms of ecommerce. In the last meeting a CPT lawyer was not permitted to read our statement at the meeting, but we were allowed to distribute the statement to the experts who attended the meeting. This meeting may be difficult to attend. 4. The Diplomatic Conference on the Treaty, June 2001. In theory, this is when the treaty would be adopted, or parts of it adopted, depending upon progress in negotiations. In general, there is quite a bit of work yet to be done on the treaty, including precisely those areas of interest: ecommerce and intellectual property rights. We are a big late in the process, but not too late to make a difference. VI What can be done? There are several things that could be done to address concerns about the treaty, but I might group them into the two categories of (1) fix it or (2) kill it. 1. Make it more acceptable. Specific concerns about the treaty could be addressed in the negotiations. For example, among the "fixes" that we might pursue: a. Ask the US government to push for changes that would protect US traditions in free speech, looking specifically as issues such as recognitions of foreign judgements for libel or slander, for example. b. Ask the US government to push for changes in the treaty to protect consumer IPR rights found in US laws, such as fair use under patent, copyright and trademark laws. c. Ask that intellectual property issues be excluded from the treaty altogether. This is a pretty promising strategy, given the difficulty of reconciling different national laws and the existence of other global fora (WIPO and WTO) for harmonization. d. Ask the US government to push for changes that would address problematic "unfair competition" laws in some countries. Note, for example, that in some national laws on unfair competition, it is illegal to mention a competitor's products, or to say anything critical about a brand. Under Germany competition laws Wal-Mart recently ran into trouble for lowering prices. e. CPT and other consumer groups oppose proposals for binding arbitration consumer and privacy protections. This is a very sensitive area of the treaty. f. Exclude all Internet ecommerce transactions from the treaty. This would limit the impact of the treaty to the types of transactions for which it was first intended. (2) Kill the treaty. This is feasible, but would require a fair amount of mobilization. Right now few members of Congress or the public know anything about the treaty. My own inclination is to begin by seeking fixes in the treaty, and to see how things go. If the negotiators are not interested in making changes, then option (2) becomes more important. I would add that our concerns about the treaty are very deep, and we are troubled by many different aspects of the treaty, but we are also still learning, and seeking new information. VII. Final comments. We have an NGO meeting with the US government, at the Washington, DC offices of the American Library Association on October 5, from noon to 2 pm. The US Department of Commerce and the US Department of State have agreed to try to answer several sets of questions we have submitted on the treaty. Let me know who is interested in following this. We may set a list to discuss the treaty. Sincerely, James Love Consumer Project on Technology cc: kovarj@ms.state.gov <------Members of the Hague Convention=-------> http://www.hcch.net/e/members/members.html Argentina Australia Austria Belgium Bulgaria Canada Chile China Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Egypt Estonia Finland Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia France Germany Greece Hungary Ireland Israel Italy Japan Republic of Korea Latvia Luxembourg Malta Mexico Monaco Morocco Netherlands Norway Poland Portugal Romania Slovakia Slovenia Spain Suriname Sweden Switzerland Turkey United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland United States of America Uruguay Venezuela -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 2 12:04:11 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D96932A05E; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 12:04:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA07426; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 12:04:11 -0400 Message-ID: <39D8B2C2.64AACDAC@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 12:07:30 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] GBDe membership and working groups This is the GBDe chairs and regional membersip list. http://www.gbdeconference.org/bsc.html The GBDe working groups are on: Advocacy (Chair, Martin Velasco, Telefónica Consumer Confidence: ADR (Chair Klaus Mangold, DaimierChrysler) Consumer Confidence: GBDe Trustmark IPR (Chair, Michael Eisner, Disney) Outreach Privacy (Chair, Tadashi Okamura, Toshiba) Trade and Taxation (Chair, Louis Gerstner, IBM) -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 2 12:25:43 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 193E02A05E for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 12:25:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA07996 for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 12:25:43 -0400 Message-ID: <39D8B7CD.3AE74B96@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 12:29:01 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Members of the Ad Hoc E-Commerce "Informal" Working Group on Hague Conference Someone asked me who from industry was following the Hague conference. This is from an earlier June 30, 2000 missive by Marc Pearl to the Ad Hoc E-Ad Hoc E-Commerce "Informal" Working Group on the Hague treaty, that someone reposted to an ABA list. http://legalminds.findlaw.com/list/intpil/msg00228.html Ad Hoc E-Commerce "Informal" Working Group on Hague Conference and others Interested in the Process ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marc Pearl" To: ; "'van Schaack, Elizabeth M. '" ; ; ; ; ; "Shannon Kellogg" ; ; ; ; "'DEUTSCH, SARAH B.'" ; ; ; ; "'Ruth Day'" ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; "'Marilyn Cade (E-mail)'" ; "'Maxeiner, James'" ; "'Maria Martin-Prat'" ; ; ; ; ; ; ; "Kimberley Claman" ; "Kimberley Claman" ; ; "'Corbett-Sanders, Karen'" ; ; ; "'Jennifer Jacobsen (E-mail)'" ; ; ; ; ; ; ; "'Gasster,Elizabeth J - LGA'" ; ; "'David Fares'" ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; "Anders Halvorsen" ; "Eric Massant (E-mail)" ; "Harris Miller" ; "Mark Bohannon (E-mail)" Cc: "Marc Pearl" ; ; ; "'Mary Streett'" ; "'Kate Rodriguez'" ; ; ; "'Elliot E. Maxwell'" ; ; "'Brian Hengesbaugh'" ; ; ; "Mark Bohannon (E-mail 2)" -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 2 15:59:56 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24CC22A05E; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 15:59:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA13580; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 15:59:56 -0400 Message-ID: <39D8EA04.71ED32FB@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 16:03:16 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] FTC pushes for judgment recognition in FTAA treaty --------------------------------- Subject: FTAA negotiations/enforcement of judgments Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2000 15:02:51 -0400 From: Houston Putnam Lowry Organization: Brown & Welsh, P.C. To: INTPIL@MAIL.ABANET.ORG The FTC proposed making the following recommendations to the ministers involved in the FTAA process: To ensure effective remedies in cross-border cases, FTAA Governments should cooperate and work to provide for recognition and enforcement of judgments resulting from disputes between consumers and businesses, as well as law enforcement actions taken to combat fraud and misleading and unfair conduct. In light of the difficulties encountered in the Hague Judgments negotiations, I suggested the private bar would not support such a statement at this time. It is likely the statement will be modified during the next revision, possibly to reflect ADR instead of judgments. Houston Putnam Lowry, Esq. Brown & Welsh, P.C. Phone: +1 (203) 235-1651 Fax: +1 (203) 235-9600 http://www.BrownWelsh.com My PGP public key is available on PGP's server. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 2 22:26:53 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 515FE2A05E for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 22:26:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-6.essential.org [216.0.125.6]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA22355 for ; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 22:26:52 -0400 Message-ID: <39D941F1.ED992DF2@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2000 22:18:25 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] BW, Internetnews on AOL/TW contracts with ISPs http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/sep2000/nf20000929_701.htm SEPTEMBER 29, 2000 ISPs to AOL Time Warner: You Call This Open Access? Earthlink and other small ISPs are telling trustbusters that the broadband deals they're being offered are so onerous they can't possibly accept http://www.internetnews.com/isp-news/article/0,,8_474191,00.html InternetNews - ISP News October 2, 2000 Cable Contracts Belie Time Warner Assurances By Brian McWilliams and Jim Wagner From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Oct 3 09:32:36 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A44B2A05E for ; Tue, 3 Oct 2000 09:32:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA28930 for ; Tue, 3 Oct 2000 09:32:36 -0400 Message-ID: <39D9E0C3.C0CEDA59@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 09:36:03 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN received 44 applications for new TLDs http://www.icann.org/tlds/tld-applications-lodged-02oct00.htm And, many applications involve more than one string. Paul Garin's Name.Space asks for the most strings. There are several non-commercial TLD applications, and several applications that compete for the same strings. Popular TLD strings are .biz (5), .kids (4), .tel (4), .inc (3), and .nom (2). There are only 2 applications for .web, one of which asked for three strings. There is one .union application, and one .museum application. The .co-op and .coop proposal is by the Cooperative League of the USA. Novell is seeking .dir. Nokia is seeking eight TLD strings, including .mobile. The Association Monegasque des Banques is seeking .fin. The Société Internationale de Télécommunications Aéronautiques is seeking .air. The International Air transport Association wants .travel. Core is seeking .nom, but has competition from a 7 member group that includes Lycos, .tv, Korean firms 7DC and SK Telecom, onlincenic from China and the dotNOM consortium. Jamie -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Oct 3 12:09:15 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8C8B2A05E for ; Tue, 3 Oct 2000 12:09:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA32428 for ; Tue, 3 Oct 2000 12:09:15 -0400 Message-ID: <39DA057C.67B15C5@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 12:12:44 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] CPT statement on new TLD applications my quote: "The new TLD applications illustrate how limited the current domain space is, and how rich it could be. The old policy of stopping innovation will be permanently discredited by this application process. ICANN now needs to move ahead to permit greater choice and more innovations in the TLD name space. "Among the surprises were the large number of applications, and the wide range of strings and management models. We are very pleased to see the various non-commercial proposals such as .union, .museum, .coop and .health, and we are also pleased to see the proposed competitors to .com, the personal domains and the various industry trade association proposals for restricted domains, plus the innovative proposals such as .geo, which would involve new technologies. In looking at the various proposals, it will be interesting to see how they address issues such as protection of trademark interesets, free speech, and the protection of consumers on pricing issues. There are many different approaches on each of these issues. It was funny to see .xxx and .kids on the same application. "I don't see how the ICANN board can approve only 3 and have any creditability with the Internet community. Now it is time to expand the root, and let innovation and competition move forward. -- Jamie Love, Director, Consumer Project on Technology 1.202.387.8030 love@cptech.org -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Oct 3 16:17:30 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14E1D2A3BC; Tue, 3 Oct 2000 16:17:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA05837; Tue, 3 Oct 2000 16:17:29 -0400 Message-ID: <39DA3FAC.2D02FD4F@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 16:21:00 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , nc-tlds@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Steve Metalitz/IPC letter to new TLD applications From: Copyright Coalition for Domain Names To: Image Online Design, Inc.; dotWAP Domain Registry (DDR), Inc.; International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU); International Air Transport Association; Telnic Limited; Number.tel LLC; Glenn W. Marschel; David P. Peek; Jeff Pulver; RegistryPro, Ltd.; Universal Postal Union; DADA Spa; Group One Registry, Inc.; WorldNames, Inc.; De Breed Holdin B.V.; OnlineNIC, Inc.; XO Communications, Inc.; Lycos, Inc.; The .TV Corporation International; CORE Internet Council of Registrars; Kenneth Hamma; Museum Domain Management Association; Nokia Corporation; Commercial Connect, LLC; dotlaw, Inc. (2); dotlaw, Inc.; .KIDS Domains, Inc.; ICM Registry, Inc.; DotKids, Inc.; Blueberry Hill Communications, Inc.; The Global Name Registry, Limited; Afilias LLC; NextDNS Inc.; Atomic Tangerine, Inc.; Sarnoff Corporation; World Health Organization; SRI International; Monson Assets Limited (BVI) (2); Monson Assets Limited (BVI); Association Monegasque des Banques; Dubai Technology; Novell Inc.; Cooperative League of the USA; Diebold Incorporated; KDD Internet Solutions Co., Ltd.; iDomains Inc.; Affinity Internet, Inc.; Abacus America, Inc.; JVTeam, LLC; Societe Internationale de Telecommunication; Rathbawn Computers Limited (2); Rathbawn Computers Limited; Name.Space Incorporated Sent: 10/3/00 2:37 PM Subject: New TLD Applications October 3, 2000 Dear New TLD Applicant: Your name appears as a contact person for an application to ICANN to operate one or more new Top Level Domains. On behalf of the Intellectual Property Constituency (IPC) of the ICANN Domain Name Supporting Organization, I write to request a copy of your application, and to initiate a dialogue with you on those aspects of new TLD applications that the IPC has identified as critical. The IPC and its constituent members have made careful review of the new TLD applications a high priority, and plan to participate actively in the public debate leading up to ICANN's decision on the roll-out of new TLDs. We have developed a list of safeguards which we believe are needed in any new TLD for the protection of intellectual property. As you may know, these criteria have been posted at http://ipc.songbird.com/New_TLD_Safeguards.htm . We would welcome the opportunity to review your application in light of the criteria we have posted, and to discuss with you any changes or refinements that might be needed in order to fulfill them. Please send a copy of your application to me at ccdn @smithandmetalitz.com . I will make sure that it is distributed to the IPC membership, and that our comments and reactions are shared with you in a timely fashion. We will also be glad to discuss our comments with you through some mutually convenient means, whether by e-mail, telephone, or in person. Of course, if you have any questions about this request, please let me know. I look forward to receiving your application materials as soon as possible. Steven J. Metalitz Executive Vice President, IPC Partner, Smith & Metalitz, LLP Counsel, Copyright Coalition on Domain Names Vice President and General Counsel, International Intellectual Property Alliance ccdn@smithandmetalitz.com + 1-202-833-4198 (voice) + 1-202-872-0546 (fax) From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Oct 4 09:40:28 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80F9C2A066 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 09:40:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA21311 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 09:40:28 -0400 Message-ID: <39DB3427.BC1367B9@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 09:44:07 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Lesia Stangret: Should a common name be allowed to be monopolized? http://www.nationalpost.com/search/story.html?f=/stories/20001003/417003.html October 3, 2000 Toronto.com v. Toronto2.com Should a common name be allowed to be monopolized? Lesia Stangret Financial Post -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Oct 4 10:13:29 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39E0D2A066 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 10:13:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA22138 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 10:13:29 -0400 Message-ID: <39DB3BE3.5D5A73F0@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 10:17:07 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Oct 5 Brown Bag NGO meeting on Hague treaty Reminder for Brown Bag NGO meeting on Hague treaty on jurisdiction and foreign judgments, and correction regarding address. The e-commerce roundtable will have a meeting on the Hague treaty this thursday (Oct 5) from noon to 12 pm, at the American Library Association. The correct address for the meeting is: 1301 Pennsylvania Ave, NW (Actually, corner of 14th and E St.) fourth floor, Suite 403. Jeff Kovar and perhaps other US government persons will attend, to answer questions about the treaty. Some background on the treaty, including some questions already presented to the government, are on the web here: http://www.cptech.org/ecom/jurisdiction/hague.html James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Oct 4 10:36:57 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F59C2A066; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 10:36:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA22723; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 10:36:56 -0400 Message-ID: <39DB4164.D6AC90CF@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 10:40:36 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] John Schwartz: Disney to Deter Children From Some Areas of Its Web Sites This story discusses briefly the relationship between governemnt regulation and "self regulation" Jamie http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/04/technology/04WEB.html Oct 4, 2000 Disney to Deter Children From Some Areas of Its Web Sites By JOHN SCHWARTZ [snip] An advocate of regulation of child- oriented Web sites, however, said that calling yesterday's agreement with Disney "self-regulation" only told half of the story. "It isn't just self regulation - it's self-regulation within a regulatory context," said Kathryn C. Montgomery, president of the Center for Media Education, a Washington-based policy group. "Had we not passed the law to protect children's privacy, it's doubtful that there would be effective self-regulation." Elizabeth Lascoutx, director of the Children's Advertising Review Unit of the Council of Better Business Bureaus, said the child privacy act was a "boon" since in the past the bureaus had little to hold over recalcitrant offenders besides bad publicity. The law, she said, "gives us somewhere to refer noncompliance." She estimated that just 2 percent of companies contacted over child privacy violations by her group refuse to change their ways. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Oct 4 16:03:47 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E3932A05E for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 16:03:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA32010 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 16:03:47 -0400 Message-ID: <39DB8E00.88FDAF0A@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 16:07:28 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Kathleen Ellis: Net Patent Bill Introduced http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39238,00.html Net Patent Bill Introduced by Kathleen Ellis 1:50 p.m. Oct. 3, 2000 PDT WASHINGTON -- The way current regulations are written, you could probably get a patent for the practice of selling hair dryers over the Internet. If two congressional Democrats get their way, the days of "obvious" business practice patents are numbered. Congressmen Rick Boucher (D-Virginia) and Howard Berman (D-California) have introduced the Business Method Patent Improvement Act of 2000, which will be debated during what is likely to be a very busy year for patent and copyright issues on Capitol Hill. "This bill is going to be the leading intellectual property (subject) of the next session," said Boucher. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Oct 5 09:25:45 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1240C2A05E; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 09:25:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA14029; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 09:25:44 -0400 Message-ID: <39DC823E.9A0F129F@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 09:29:34 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Patent Office director: My hands are tied http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/04/2035225 Patent Office director: My hands are tied Wednesday October 04, 05:10 PM EDT [ Patents and Trademarks ] By Grant Gross Managing Editor An often raucous debate on the effect of patents on the Internet ended Tuesday night with a leading cyberlaw expert calling for a moratorium on most business-related software patents and the director of the U.S. Patent Office saying Congress has tied his hands. Lawrence Lessig, a Stanford law professor specializing in the Internet and advisor to the judge in the Microsoft anti-trust trial, argued that most developers of internet-related software have worked in a culture where they built on each other's work and patents weren't considered. Those companies seeking hundreds of patents on software each year should have to prove those patents won't hinder the further development of the Internet, he said during a debate sponsored by D.C. Area Chapter of The Internet Society. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Oct 5 09:49:15 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 462292A05E for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 09:49:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA14495 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 09:49:15 -0400 Message-ID: <39DC87C0.81374393@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 09:53:04 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] KATIE HAFNER: Debate Over School Computers http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/05/technology/05KIDS.html October 5, 2000 Debate Over School Computers By KATIE HAFNER WHEN it comes to assessing the relative benefits of computers in their children's lives, parents don't have it easy. The signals are decidedly mixed. As computer manufacturers and software companies promote computers as indispensable educational tools, some educators agree, but certain scholars and technology skeptics denounce the reliance on the machine. Sorting through the arguments is no small task. Last month, for example, a little- known organization called the Alliance for Childhood issued a statement (allianceforchildhood.org) calling for a moratorium on the further introduction of computers into the nation's elementary schools until their effect on young children is assessed more carefully. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Oct 5 09:52:42 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 123B92A05E for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 09:52:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA14557; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 09:52:42 -0400 Message-ID: <39DC888F.EE504720@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 09:56:31 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] REBECCA S. WEINER: Do Students Need a Computer Time Out? http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/27/technology/27EDUCATION.html September 27, 2000 EDUCATION Do Students Need a Computer Time Out? Teachers Question Technology Report By REBECCA S. WEINER aying new technology can make more students eager to learn, elementary school teachers using the new tools in the classroom are questioning a recent study that calls for young children to take a "time-out" from computers. The new study underwritten by the Alliance for Childhood, argues that more research needs to be conducted into the impact computers could have on the developing minds and bodies of young children. "The reason we're calling for a time-out is we think we need to get more information before we put a computer in front of each kid," said Edward Miller, co-author of the study -- "Fools Gold: A Critical Look at Computers in Childhood" -- and an education policy analyst based in Cambridge, Mass. "We don't think computers are evil." [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Oct 5 10:02:14 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E7762A05E for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 10:02:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA14730 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 10:02:14 -0400 Message-ID: <39DC8ACB.13139B07@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 10:06:03 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Greg Aharonian's notes on Valenti/Lessig debate Subject: PATNEWS: Copyrights: Lessig versus Valenti; rapper Chuck D & Napster Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 01:14:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Gregory Aharonian !20001004 Copyrights: Lessig versus Valenti; rapper Chuck D & Napster Last Sunday and Monday, I had a chance to sit in on an interesting debate between Prof. Lawrence Lessig and Jack Valenti over the future of copyrights and intellectual property on the Internet (given at the Harvard Law School on Sunday) followed the next day by a talk by the rapper Chuck D on copyrights, music, the Internet and Napster. What follows below are my best attempts to capture the gist of what they said, all quite interesting. [snip] -- ==================== VALENTI v. LESSIG The Future of Intellectual Property on the Internet Ames Courtoom - Harvard Law School October 1, 2000 - 7pm VALENTI: I am not a lawyer, wanted to be one, go to Harvard Law School. Ended up at Harvard Business School - if I am arrogant, that's what they taught me - haha. Consider William of Occam - Occam's Razor - in essence, "keep it simple". This is about private property, intellectual property, in the Internet era, is easy to "steal". Judge Kaplan (DeCSS case) - last paragraph of the decision - "in excitement of easy access, when you take what is not your ... it is stealing". At Stanford Law School lecture, I asked the audience, and found out that 9/10 law students were using Napster. One student said "Yea, I guess it is stealing, but everyone is doing it." What are they teaching at Stanford Law School? Internet is breeding people who think if it is on Internet, it is free. In March, for MPAA, I organized a new Digital Strategies department. I talk with cyberspace people. I am on the board of two Internet companies. MPAA DS department is going to organize, online, offering movies in a variety of business models at fair and reasonable prices. When we do this, it will be an alternative to stealing. We will use encryption, watermarks, in conjunction with hardware and software developers. Again, Judge Kaplan's comment "if it isn't yours, it is stealing". LESSIG: Jack is sweet, but I have made a career of people hating me. Lawyers created this problem. "Future of IP" - has the word "property". "Intellectual Property" is not in the Constitution of the United States, didn't exist back then, instead they had government-backed monopolies. Thomas Jefferson was a strong opponent of patents. In Pennsylvania, didn't ratify Constitution until clause in First Amendment to override control of free speech inherent in copyright. Original copyright was for 14 years, with no control over translation, abridgement, performance uses. In 1790, there were 127 publishers. For 100 years, copyright protection was only extended to Americans. It was supposed to be a limited right for authors, but has expanded dramatically in 200 years, to today's life of author plus seventy years, with much control of publishing/sales, and now performance, translation and derivatives. Until the Internet era, who cared? But with the Internet, everyone can be creative. Copyright now regulates all 200+ million citizens, not the original 127 publishers. It is not a simple question of stealing, but how far control will be extended. Some say "it is too easy to copy and steal on the Internet will kill entertainment industry". But they said that about the VCR. I won't deny stealing goes on. But the future is technologies to control distribution of IP to give owners more control without bloated copyright laws. Rights in real world to use books work fine (like libraries) ---> these practices are easily extended into Internet world. The question is will copyright holders get complete control over all aspects of their works? Current cases such as DVD / Napster is about control of use. But constitution is about fair return to authors. Walt Disney classics (such as Snow White) were already in the public domain. Why stop future entertainment innovation by allowing complete control of content of these existing works? Technology will provide in the next few years plenty on control of cyberspace IP access. We don't need more controls. VALENTI: What are you proposing for copyright? LESSIG: 1) A reasonable term - say 14 years 2) No retroactive extensions of copyright 3) People should be able to make fair use of copyright materials - get rid of anti-copyright protection schemes 4) Stronger conception of importance of public domain materials for creating new works VALENTI: Some history. Kant wrote: "Injustice of pirating books. It is moral right of author to profit from his works." French revolutionaries abolished copyright. Within a year, 20% of French publishing houses went bankrupt. For the movie business in Internet era, a threat on opening nites is someone copying the new movie and send it out over the Internet. Average movie costs $52 million. 2/10 ever profit from theatre sales. American copyright term extended to be compatible with rest of the world's copyright schemes. MPAA working with Europeans to improve copyright. Esther Dyson doesn't think we need copyright for anyone, but she sells high priced, printed (not easily stolen electronic), non-Internet newsletter with a copyright symbol on each issue. Without protection, who will make these investments? If you can't protect what you own, you won't own anything. LESSIG: But our founding fathers rejected European views of copyrights, so compatibility not a priori necessary. We are more oriented towards a fair return copyright system. But incentive? You cannot incent a dead person. We need an intellectual commons. Question: Were our founding fathers pirates or not for providing the copyright protections we have today? VALENTI: Well, today's Congress passed these changes. Don't like it, introduce your own bill in Congress. LESSIG: But incentives for dead people (i.e. extension of existing copyright terms). Are such retrospective extensions compatible with the founding father's intent? VALENTI: Yes. An issue over which intelligent men can differ. LESSIG: None that I have met. (Ha Ha) What's your reason? I know in Washington DC, they only give dollars. Not here in Cambridge. VALENTI: Intellectual property is books, movies, software, etc. America is supreme in this world - people like our stuff. IP is America's greatest export - greater than agriculture and automobiles, etc. LESSIG: I agree we need a sufficient incentive to produce. VALENTI: Do you believe that it is OK for people to download music and movies? LESSIG: Yes, in some cases. VALENTI: Why is it OK in these cases? Should students be able to download using Napster? LESSIG: Private sharing of content - sure that's OK. Even if some people are violating the law, it shouldn't allow the control of technologies [like that in the DeCSS case]. The question is their potential for substantial non-infringing use of things like Napster. Instead of controlling the use of Napster, recording industry wants to shut down something it can't control. This is all about maintaining control of distribution. VALENTI: Boies for Napster uses the same arguments. Look at Sony-Betamax - because VCR had substantial non-infringing use, for example if you timeshift (tape now and playback later). But court in Sony-Betamax did not rule on shifting to ten million people. So watch how you cite Sony-Betamax. Napster is not timeshifting - but sharing with anonymous millions. LESSIG: Consider RecordTV's "online VCR" - is this analogous to the VCR case? VALENTI: If legitimate, yes. LESSIG: MyMP3.com case. You upload your CD's so you can listen to them anywhere you have Internet access - call it spaceshifting. Yet this was shut down. But if you agree with Sony-Betamax, can you support spaceshifting? VALENTI: I agree with whatever the courts rule, who shut down MyMP3. In all cases, the courts have said these systems are illegitimate. Further, we will be coming up with reasonable and fair alternatives for the 98-99% of Americans who are honestly interested in such access. [Greg note: at this point, questions were taken from the audience. The first audience member was Emmanuel Goldstein, publisher of the hacker's 2600 magazine, and one of the defendants in the DeCSS case.[ GOLDSTEIN: We just lost big lawsuit. Millions were spent on the DeCSS case. I lost the lawsuit, but I don't know what I learned about being a thief. I guess writing software is theft, and pointing to it is theft. But why? Why am I a thief for my links? VALENTI: Read Judge Kaplan's decision. He looked at fair use, reverse engineering, encryption and rejected them in light of the DMCA? GOLDSTEIN: Why is it important to control encryption through DMCA? VALENTI: Laws are there to be changed - if you don't like DMCA, have it changed. My view is to keep the DMCA intact, to allow authors to protect their property. LESSIG: There is a big difference between perfect control and right to be paid. Nothing should be free costwise, but free to use/manipulate. Perversion of language to call it theft (like in DVD/DeCSS). No evidence people were pirating DVD works, just deencrypting. Where is theft/piracy in so using DeCSS software? It isn't theft, but issue is free use of content. In its first 150 years, American copyright law changed twice. In my life, it has changed a dozen times. Just to protect Mickey Mouse? VALENTI: "Limited" in Constitution. Founding father's didn't put in a specific number of years. QUESTION: Why is music so expensive - do musicians have to be that rich? VALENTI: Yes. QUESTION (Erik Eldred): I offer books for free (even copyright books, with permission). About harmonization of copyright extensions, two writers in Paris late 1800s, asked manager "Why aren't we being paid for playing our music". Manager didn't pay, so they didn't pay for food, and were arrested. Outrage led to copyright performance rights being passed. Extension had exemption for music for small bars and restaurants. Suppose it had exemption for movies - is that theft? VALENTI: Yes. ELDRED: Even is law says you can do it? VALENTI: I guess so. QUESTION: Can your efforts to enforce your rights have negative rights to everyone else? VALENTI: I don't know of any detrimental effect of defense of copyrights. LESSIG: Suppose technology takes fair use away? VALENTI: I support fair use. LESSIG: Yes, but if technology could reduce attempts by people to have fair use? Like preventing sampling or copying a section, would you oppose these technologies? VALENTI: Yes, I would oppose. All I want is people to be paid for their efforts. LESSIG: I really misunderstood you. You do get it. Passed DMCA and technologies and in five years complete control of use. But hearing you talk, you don't see this (like getting rid of fair use). If so, we agree a lot. Difference is over how much control should technology allow. But listen to fears of people (like the DSS/DeCSS crowd) who are worrying about too much control of copyright occuring. VALENTI: I believe authors have a right to protect their works. And with the Internet, we can do so for a fair and reasonable price. ==================== The next day, at a conference hosted by Cap Gemini Ernst & Young, the rapper Chuck D spoke at one of the sessions. He is a hugh supporter of Napster, is known as the "conscience" of the rap world, and an adopter of ecommerce technologies. His comments: CHUCK D: Today the courts are ruling on Napster's existence. I am a big fan of Napster. I am a fan of fans. Interested in downloadable music future. Artist is something you do, not what you are. I have been in the Internet world for six years, not as something trendy, but rather as a necessity, to be a bigger player in the music industry (dominated by five big players: BMG, Universal, Sony, Thorn/EMI and Time Warner). In 1994, I got involved with the Def Jam label, who had been around since the 1980s, when they got a lousy deal from the record business, and therefore had to offer lousy deals to artists they signed up. In 1980s, record companies came up with CD technology, and got everyone to rebuy existing records at 3 times the price. Music industry also prided itself on controlling the hardware while owning the software. Industry used CDs to control what audience played and used. Music industry started buying independent labels for more control. Internet's downloadable music changes everything. No need for middleman record companies. Industry can't control technologies like Napster. Now people can share more freely. Major record labels have price-fixed everything. $17 for CDs? Why so expensive? Who knows. "Great Big CD Scam", that's what it is. In 1970s, music controlled by artists. Eventually in the music business, these artists partied too much - major music companies called lawyers and accountants to fix the mess. Got technologists to help clean things up. Used opportunity to take control of the labels, do mergers and used CDs to make better deals with record stores (CDs take less room) who could make more profits off of the higher prices. Artist's contracts haven't changed though, so they are getting less profits. Lawyers in music business shifty shady people - representing both sides (artists & labels). Industry making 300% to 400% on the dollar, but not the artists. Music industry boomed to companies' benefit, not artists. Started having disposable artists, who couldn't renegotiate once they tasted success. Music industry squeezed out all other entrepreneurs. We have had majors and indies. Internet creates a new level for promotion and distribution, "inties". Three corporations control most radio stations, institutionalizing once illegal payola. In 1994, I started my own mini-industry. But I needed outlets, which the Internet provides. A parallel and parasitic channel for content distribution. Much like trains challenged by airplanes. So I got involved with the Internet as a necessity. I first was sued, then called a parasite, not called a competitor. I have a company, rapstation.com, for rap music and hip-hop. Billion dollar music sub-genre. We can't rely on radio and television to get out rap/hip-hop - but can rely on the Internet, not only for US distribution, but to parts of the world that record industry doesn't get to (or want to get to) - including West Virginia (ha ha). I look at rapstation.com as the ESPN of rap/hip-hop. By 2002, there will be millions of artists and millions of labels on the Internet providing contact to majors and independents. We won't need expensive recording studios, with the availability of inexpensive home recording equipment. Copyright & control & infringement: Rules of last century will have to remain there. Value of content comes down as more artists in marketplace. Artists will have to get used to no more limo rides. For the first time, the public has control, allowing new artists to come in more easily. People have the flexibility to choose how to consume. It is false for major labels to sell downloads for $17. They are not adapting. The major labels are starting to list like the sinking Titanic. They need help, so they are begging the government through these court actions for help. I can't trust government to decide fairly about content distribution and copyright laws. A rally cry can be "We bought vinal, we had to buy CDs, but now we are Napstering". Enough having to buy the same music in each new format. I don't mind paying for download, but not $17. Little of these prices is benefitting the artists. I am a business, boostrapping, and want to become bigger. But not at the price of unfair artist's contracts like the big labels. QUESTION: Some artists look at the Internet as a threat re Napster. What is their business model to be? ANSWER: You need a team. Napster and Gnutella and the others are fantastic exposure areas to let you get into the game, to be heard. You need to keep writing songs, make a catalog. Be realistic with your prices - you might have to charge $1 for your first albums, not $17. This price setting can challenge industry. In 1999, I sold an online album for $5 - $9. Caused war when stores wanted to charge $17. I threw a wrench into their pricing systems. They fear dismediation of their middle tier. QUESTION: The future could see venture capital like funding of music "startups". ANSWER: I am here today to find out. But they will have to make many more smaller deals - not the big deals of the old major labels. QUESTION: Why hurt your efforts by relying on slightly illegal things like Napster? ANSWER: Let people determine reality, and let the laws catch up. There is some wrong in everything. James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Oct 5 16:24:09 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59CAB2A063 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 16:24:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA23821 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 16:24:09 -0400 Message-ID: <39DCE451.D95FF30F@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 16:28:01 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] WinME and Media Player 7 This is from a discussion on the ABA antitrust list about the Microsoft investment in Corel. Jamie Subject: RE: Forwarded mail.... (fwd) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 09:27:51 -0700 From: Wayne Jones To: 'James Love'" , AT-MEMBERS@MAIL.ABANET.ORG Microsoft has already been allowed by the DC circuit to essentially eat the browser market alive (how, exactly was Netscape supposed to beat a free, integrated browser?)so I have no reason to believe they won't be allowed to devour what's left of the competition in office application suites. If one looks at their new OS, WinME, they are doing the same thing to Real Networks that they did to Netscape: WinME has a mandatory installation of Media Player 7, which supports all APIs except those used by Real. Microsoft's new "video editing" tool can use all of the video codecs, except the one used by Real. This video editor is also a mandatory install when you put WinME in place. Look familiar? I have had my doubts for some time as to the viability of Section 2, and the further MS progresses in their blatant efforts to acquire, extend and preserve monopoly power not just in the OS space but in the various applications and potential cross-platform middlewares, the more I become convinced that Section 2 enforcement has become a dog with no teeth, a bad leg, and one good eye. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Oct 5 18:12:42 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED2CE2A061 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 18:12:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-6.essential.org [216.0.125.6]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA26220; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 18:12:40 -0400 Message-ID: <39DC7558.8E22B57@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 08:34:32 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] BellSouth SBC wireless joint venture First PacBell/SBC and Ameritech merge. This is about SBC's joint venture with Bell South for wireless. Don't these mergers and joint ventures reduce the prospects for competition? Jamie http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,39277,00.html Telephone companies BellSouth and SBC Communications have launched their wireless telephone joint venture, Cingular Wireless. The venture expects to have about $12 billion in revenue. The two companies combined their operations in an effort to gain broader geographic reach, attract new customers with national pricing plans and reduce costs. [snip] -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Oct 6 09:44:02 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F23852A060 for ; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 09:44:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA04903 for ; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 09:44:01 -0400 Message-ID: <39DDD811.989E60AD@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 09:48:01 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] NYT on copyright extention challenge http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/06/business/06LEGA.html Copyright Extension Stifles Creativity, Lawyer Tells Court By THE NEW YORK TIMES WASHINGTON, Oct. 5 - A lawyer challenging a recent law that extends copyrights told a federal appeals court here today that the extension restricted an artist's First Amendment right to draw on works from other artists, thus stifling creativity and competition. The law, enacted two years ago with heavy support from companies like Time Warner and Walt Disney, extended the life of copyright protection for creators of original works by 20 years. It effectively prevents several of Disney's most lucrative cartoon characters, for example, from becoming public property in the next several years. Mickey Mouse had been set to pass into the public domain in 2004; Pluto, Goofy and Donald Duck would have followed in 2009. Under the law, those characters (or songs and other images) will remain copyrighted just as the potential for their use increases sharply with the popularity of new media like digital television, cable services and the Internet. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Oct 6 10:56:59 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E9AF2A060 for ; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 10:56:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA06392 for ; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 10:56:59 -0400 Message-ID: <39DDE92B.AA26C757@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 11:00:59 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] UDRP: "STOPCOMPUSA.COM" and "BANCOMPUSA.COM" Thanks to Judith Oppenheimer's newsletter for the pointer to this good UDRP decision. "STOPCOMPUSA.COM" and "BANCOMPUSA.COM" http://www.arbforum.com/domains/decisions/95082.htm Complainant has failed to show that any of the three elements of Policy Paragraph have been violated. First, there is absolutely no confusion or similarity, much less identity, between the domain names and the trademarks held by Complainant. No one could confuse "COMPUSA", or anyone of the registered trademarks, and "STOPCOMPUSA.COM" and "BANCOMPUSA.COM". Complainant has also failed to show that Respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the domain names. Respondent's rights clearly exist under the First Amendment. His right to offer criticism of the goods and services provided by Complainant are as legitimate as any commercial activity. Finally, there is simply no evidence of "bad faith" as that term is defined at Policy Paragraph 4(b). Respondent has not registered the domain names for the the purpose of selling the name to the Complainant or a competitor; he has not registered the names to prevent the Complainant from registering the names; he has not registered the names for the purpose of "disrupting the business of a competitor" - yes, he has registered the names for the purpose of disrupting the business of Complainant, but he is not a competitor. He is a commentator, if anything. Lastly, Respondent has not attempted to attract internet users "for commercial gain" by use of a confusing domain name. There is certainly no commercial use here and no confusion concerning the Respondent?s purposes. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Oct 6 12:29:21 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47D772A3C3 for ; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 12:29:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA08954 for ; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 12:29:21 -0400 Message-ID: <39DDFED2.822DADC9@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 12:33:22 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Another IP dispute with a political ad Subject: Another IP dispute with a political ad Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 12:26:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Weissman To: upd-discuss@venice.essential.org From today's Congress Daily: POLITICS ... As Mattingly's First Ad In Georgia Race Ruffles Some Feathers Former GOP Sen. Mack Mattingly, who is facing Sen. Zell Miller, D-Ga., in the special election to fill the remaining four years of the late GOP Sen. Paul Coverdell's term, has ruffled some feathers with his first ad. The commercial, which began airing Wednesday, parodies the popular AFLAC ad that features a duck quacking the name of the Georgia-based insurance company, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported. In Mattingly's ad, the duck repeatedly quacks, "Back Mack" in exasperation as two people assess their options in the special election. But AFLAC is crying foul, claiming Mattingly borrowed the image without permission. "We are pleased with the AFLAC duck's popularity. But the duck is copyrighted. And he sells supplemental insurance, not campaigns or candidates," an AFLAC spokeswoman said. AFLAC officials would not comment on possible action. However, the company's CEO, Dan Amos, is a member of Miller's finance committee. And Miller's campaign was not amused. "What's he going to steal next?" a Miller spokesman asked. "Coke's polar bears? Chick-fil-A's cows?" Robert Weissman Essential Information P.O. Box 19405, Washington, DC 20036, USA Tel: 1-202-387-8030 Fax: 1-202-234-5176 www.essential.org -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Oct 6 14:41:23 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDB1C2A060; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 14:41:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA11941; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 14:41:22 -0400 Message-ID: <39DE1DC5.3E9232D4@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 14:45:25 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] "almost half" of Canadians think cash for data is ok Apparently Declan thinks that if "almost half" of Canadians think that cash for data is ok, Americans should figure out that "a little corporate marketing can't hurt us." What about the other half? Jamie Subject: FC: Canadians like sharing their private data -- for cash Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 13:49:14 -0400 From: Declan McCullagh To: politech@politechbot.com http://www.cluebot.com/article.pl?sid=00/10/06/1737248&mode=nested Canadians Like Sharing Data For Cash posted by cosmo on Friday October 06, @12:31PM from the canooks-for-cash dept. Canada's privacy commissioner recently released a study showing that "almost half of Canadians are perfectly comfortable with retailers compiling personal data...if there's a reward paid to the consumer." Canucks seem to sense what some Americans just haven't figured out yet: Sticks and stones may break our bones, but a little corporate marketing won't hurt us. Privacy activists, apparently worried that they'll be left without a cause if the so-called problem isn't understood properly, have been posting like mad to a CBC chat board on the issue. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Oct 6 15:28:31 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD7BA2A060; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 15:28:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA13356; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 15:28:31 -0400 Message-ID: <39DE28D2.2D4DA48@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 15:32:34 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Declan's quote wasn't him. My mistake! I do apologize. I need to be more careful. Jamie ------------------ Subject: Re: [Random-bits] "almost half" of Canadians think cash for data is ok Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 15:42:58 -0400 From: Declan McCullagh To: James Love Jamie, I did not write that article. I merely forwarded it. (I know and respect the person who did write it, but those are not my views.) As I'm sure you know, I forward articles with with I don't agree (like speech restrictions, http://www.politechbot.com/p-00062.html), and resending does not imply endorsement. I'm not sure that you owe me an apology -- it was an honest mistake -- but I do think you owe me a correction. -Declan -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Oct 7 10:05:39 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81ED32A317; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 10:05:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-3.essential.org [216.0.125.3]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA23337; Sat, 7 Oct 2000 10:05:38 -0400 Message-ID: <39DDEA06.36A6DBB9@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 11:04:38 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , IP-Health list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Testimonies before US House Subcommittee on Courts & Intellectual Property For those who follow IPR disputes, this is a useful URL to several House Judicary hearing testimonies on IPR issues. Hearing Testimony Presented to Subcommittee on Courts & Intellectual Property http://www.house.gov/judiciary/4.htm -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Oct 8 09:29:45 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F4DE2A30E for ; Sun, 8 Oct 2000 09:29:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA03232 for ; Sun, 8 Oct 2000 09:29:45 -0400 Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 09:29:45 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Subject: [Random-bits] RNC unsolicted political missives Just received this bit of unsolicited email this morning. Jamie =20 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2000 02:39:18 -0700 (PDT) From: RNC_eLeader@mail.echampions2000.com To: jamie@essential.org Subject: Media Assails Al "Pinocchio" Gore Congratulations! We made a dramatic impact on CNN=92s on-line polling during the first presidential debate: George W. Bush crushed Al Gore, winning with an overwhelming margin, 64% to 36%! It shows your vote matters! [snip] - - -=20 Jim Nicholson Chairman Republican National Committee --------------------------------------------------------- P.S. I am appealing to you, as part of a select group of eChampions to SPREAD THE WORD BY FORWARDING THIS MESSAGE to your own email list today! = =20 Please feel free to add a personal message to the top of the message you forward. P.S.S. You can help the GOP reach more people by contributing online. =20 Click the link below to help the Republican Team! https://www.econtributor.net/Contribution/Contribution.cfm?CFID=3D69732&CFT= OKEN=3D67843457 --------------------------------------------------------- PAID FOR BY THE REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE --------------------------------------------------------- If you wish to unsubscribe from the eChampion mailing list, simply click he= re: =20 http://mail.echampions2000.com/GoNow/a14064a25110a57204431a0 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 9 09:14:47 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E724A2A30E; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 09:14:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA19054; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 09:14:46 -0400 Message-ID: <39E1C5D6.C41B00AF@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 09:19:18 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Judge Calls AOL Litigation Terms Unfair Good court decisions on jurisdiction and contracts of adhesion. Jamie http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/09/28/BU80948.DTL Judge Calls AOL Litigation Terms Unfair Henry K. Lee, Chronicle Staff Writer Thursday, September 28, 2000  America Online users who sue the Internet giant should not be forced to transfer their lawsuits to the company's home state of Virginia because it is ``unfair and unreasonable,'' an Alameda County judge has ruled. In a decision Monday, Superior Court Judge Ronald Sabraw said legal remedies in Virginia are not comparable to those in California, which AOL has acknowledged. The decision comes in a lawsuit filed in June by Al Mendoza Jr. of Sacramento, who accused AOL of continuing to charge his credit card --which he was forced to cancel -- three months after he canceled his trial subscription. ``If I am required to sue in Virginia, I will drop the matter because the cost of travel alone is obviously many times more'' than the $65 that AOL owed him, Mendoza said in court papers. Mendoza said he was surprised when he learned that AOL had a standard membership agreement requiring all lawsuits to be filed in Virginia. Mendoza said he did not remember reading a clause saying all lawsuits had to be filed in Virginia and lambasted AOL for using it ``as a way to avoid its legal responsibilities.'' He has asked the case to be deemed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of ``many hundreds of people who I believe have suffered from the same unfair billing practice.'' Nicholas Graham, an AOL spokesman, said yesterday that he could not discuss the lawsuit because he was unfamiliar with its details. Everett Johnson, a Washington, D.C., attorney representing AOL, did not return a call seeking comment. Mendoza said he signed up for AOL in early October using an unsolicited free disc he received in the mail that promised free trial service for 30 days. He remembered following numerous instructions and reading ``densely worded, small-size text that was hard to read on the computer screen.'' Kennedy Richardson, an Oakland attorney representing Mendoza, said AOL routinely mails formal requests for dismissals to local small- claims courts, citing the Virginia requirement. In most cases, the claimants drop the matter. E-mail Henry K. Lee at hlee@sfchronicle.com.  From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 9 09:36:40 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55C5D2A30E for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 09:36:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA19353 for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 09:36:40 -0400 Message-ID: <39E1CAF8.6EF4CEE1@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 09:41:12 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Questions to NCC candidates for ICANN/names council seat The ICANN non-commerical domain owners constituency (the NCC) is holding an election for a seat on the DNSO names council. These are questions that I have put to the three candidates. Jamie 1. ICANN is going to approve new TLDS. Some will be unrestricted TLDs, like .com or .org, and others will be resitricted, like .edu or .int. How far should ICANN go in defining the terms of the restricted TLDs, and how much should ICANN play a role in monitoring the content on the new restricted TLDs? For example, should the ICANN contract with the new registry specific how the TLD is to be used, in terms of content, and should ICANN retain the right to revoke the charter if the content on the TLD does not conform to that contract? 2. This question concerns the relationship between trademarks and domains. a. Does the current UDRP policy, as adopted by ICANN, provide sufficient protections for the public's rights in the areas of free speech, criticism, parody and rights of association? If not, how should this be addressed? b. Does the current ICANN/UDRP policy result in bad decisions on issues such as the use of generic names, or in giving over-broad rights to trademark owners, for example, by assuming exclusive rights to use a trademarked name or phrase in domain strings, when non-exclusive use would be permitted in other uses? What if anything should be done with the UDRP to address these problems? c. Should ICANN create a list of "famous names" that would be reserved in domain names? If so, how would this work? Would this preclude the use of domains such as exxonsucks.com? d. Should new TLDs be required to adopt the IPC proposals for "sunrise" preferences for trademark owners? e. Will the trademark issues be different for unrestricted TLD strings, such as .biz, .inc or .web, than for strings that narrow the apparent meaning, such as .plumber, .books, .air, .travel, .union or .museum? 3. This question concerns ICANN's role in protecting domain holders from bad performance or abusive practices by registries, and on protecting privacy. a. Should ICANN protect domain name owners from incompetence or poor technical performance by registry operators? b. Should ICANN protect domain name owners from abusive business practices by registries? If so, what types of problems would be appropriate for ICANN oversight? c. Would you support the idea of creating alternative dispute mechanisms (ADRs) to address disputes by domain owners against registries (or registrars), on issues relating to consumer protection or privacy? Do you have suggestions on how this might work? d. Should there be price regulation of the new TLDs? Would this depend upon the structure of the TLD? How would this work? e. Should ICANN adopt a policy on privacy for domain registrations and IP number assignments? How would ICANN do this? Would it create a working group or some other public forum for discussing privacy issues? Jamie -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 9 09:56:56 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3075C2A30E for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 09:56:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA19653; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 09:56:56 -0400 Message-ID: <39E1CFB8.3C373E87@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 10:01:28 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Alec Klein: Time Warner Terms for Cable Criticized http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28372-2000Oct6.html Alec Klein Time Warner Terms For Cable Criticized October 6, 2000 Time Warner Inc. has offered nearly 40 Internet service providers in Texas access to its cable television lines, but only under conditions that would give the New York media giant a huge piece of their revenue and control over crucial content. Time Warner outlined terms of the deal Aug. 28, six months after it joined with America Online Inc. to pledge that it would open its high-speed cable lines to multiple Internet service providers. The companies made the pledge to reassure federal regulators that their $183 billion merger would not harm Internet rivals seeking access to a Time Warner system serving 18.8 percent of all cable customers nationwide.

Attorneys and economists for the Federal Trade Commission, which is reviewing the AOL-Time Warner merger, have spent several hours interviewing other Internet service providers who have received similar term sheets in an attempt to judge whether the terms live up to the merger partners' promises, according to sources familiar with the meetings. Under a confidential term sheet provided to the Texas companies and obtained by The Washington Post, Time Warner would receive 75 percent of the Internet service providers' revenue from all subscriber fees--which are often their biggest source of sales. Time Warner also would get 25 percent of the Internet service providers' revenue from other sources--such as advertising and other e-commerce fees--even though they are financial transactions not directly related to Time Warner's cable business. "Totally ridiculous," said Dave Robertson, vice president and general manager of Stic.net, an Internet service provider in San Antonio with more than 10,000 subscribers. "The bottom line is, they don't have a desire to open their network." The terms, as they stand, "provide a barrier to entry so folks would be scared off and not sign it," he said. "There'd be no way to reach the break-even point." [snip] Under the terms being offered to the Texas Internet firms, Time Warner also would receive $50,000 as an upfront deposit, a sum some rivals say would be difficult for small mom-and-pop Internet firms to pay. In addition, Time Warner would get approval control over the Internet service providers' home pages and "prominent above-the-fold areas on the home page of the service for use." Those provisions would effectively give Time Warner the ability to co-brand the Web sites and control the content on the most important page of the Internet providers' sites, according to some rivals.< Moreover, if the Internet service providers offer telephone service over the Internet or video streaming, Time Warner would not be obligated to "provide [quality of service] support," according to the term sheet. That means that Time Warner would not be responsible should the service not respond fast or clearly enough. Scott McCollough, the attorney representing the Texas Internet firms, said they are "all unhappy with the terms. No way is this open access. This is a death sentence." [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 9 10:49:06 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D677F2A30E for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 10:49:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA20684 for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 10:49:06 -0400 Message-ID: <39E1DBF3.EDF70075@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 10:53:39 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] WSJ on AOL-TW merger http://interactive.wsj.com/articles/SB971040113187516590.htm requires password Understanding the Stakes In AOL-Time Warner Deal October 9, 2000 [snip]  Q: What exactly is "open access" for cable, and why does it matter? A: Remember when you first signed up for a dial-up Internet account? You had a choice of AOL, EarthLink, Prodigy and scores of other services, all of which link to you over your phone line. That line happens to be owned by your local phone company, which is required to carry all kinds of services. It worked out great for consumers: Online services once charged by the minute, but competition forced them to offer cheap flat-rate access, which attracted legions of new users. Those users fueled the dot-com boom. On some level, Yahoo, Amazon.com and AOL itself owe their very existence to open access. Now consider high-speed cable-modem services. Your cable company owns that particular wire into your house, but the way the rules are written, it isn't obligated to carry any Internet service but its own. Owning Time Warner will give AOL control of a huge cable system. jamiRegulators and consumer advocates fear that will give AOL an unbeatable edge in high-speed services. Requiring AOL to provide open access to those cable lines could help keep competition alive. Q: But AOL says it is willing to open up the cable lines. Isn't that enough? A: Not if you want to see the kind of competition we enjoyed in the dial-up market. So far, in exchange for access, Time Warner wants competitors to fork over 75% of their subscription revenue and give Time Warner veto power over what's on the welcome screen. Time Warner also wants a permanent ad on the welcome page. (Imagine if the phone company could have forced you to listen to an ad for its service every time you dialed up to AOL!) But it's even more complicated than that. Most of the open-access debate has focused on wiring your PC to the Net over that zippy cable line, but the PC is only part of the equation. The Net could eventually become a big part of television viewing, too. You may wind up checking your e-mail, chatting and doing online shopping on your TV thanks to cable set-top boxes that combine a Net connection with a television signal. Unless regulators figure out a way to open up those set-top boxes to AOL Time Warner rivals, open access for your PC connection could eventually prove meaningless. Q: AOL's Buddy List is great. Why is the government meddling in instant messaging? A: AOL rules the market for these popular chats, and so far it hasn't allowed members of competing systems, such as those offered by Yahoo and Microsoft, to talk to its members. AOL says that isn't a problem, because it will give anyone a free account on its system. And at some unspecified future date, it says, it will open up the system. In the meantime, though, AOL's instant-message window is becoming important for a lot more than just chatting about playoff scores. The latest version of AOL Instant Messenger turns the Buddy List into a speed-dial directory for placing Internet phone calls. So AOL's instant-messaging dominance could give it a leg up in the nascent market for Internet phone calls, as well as other services we can't yet imagine. If leveraging power in one market to gain an advantage in another sounds familiar, it should. Microsoft used its dominance over computer operating systems to bundle in a free Internet browser and defeat Netscape. You know how that one turned out. Q: Will AOL stop me from using Napster or, if it's shut down, a Napster successor? A: Good question. After all, AOL Time Warner would be a record company as well as an Internet company. And AOL was embarrassed earlier this year when Justin Frankel, who works for AOL's Nullsoft unit, wrote and released the Gnutella file-sharing program. Traditionally, though, AOL and all of the other Web services have been loath to block members' access to specific sites or services. Instead, armed with music from its record labels and technology from Nullsoft, industry experts look for AOL Time Warner to field its own online music services. Napster-like access to thousands of songs could then become simply one more extra that AOL could charge you for. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 9 12:01:14 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 724FA2A373; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 12:01:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA22516; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 12:01:14 -0400 Message-ID: <39E1ECDB.E38C44A4@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 12:05:47 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Hey Al, Where's the Competition? Declan kindly set up this debate between Ralph Nader and Reed Hundt, which will appear over the next six days on wired.com, with alternating posts. Jamie http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39291,00.html Hey Al, Where's the Competition? by Ralph Nader 3:00 a.m. Oct. 9, 2000 PDT (Editor's Note: This week, Wired News is hosting a debate between Green Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader and Al Gore advisor Reed Hundt, former chairman of the FCC during the Clinton-Gore administration. The topic is technology policy. The other campaigns will have a chance to respond later in the week.) [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 9 16:39:21 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from prserv.net (out1.prserv.net [32.97.166.31]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2FDD2A3BA for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 16:39:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org ([32.101.208.126]) by prserv.net (out1) with SMTP id <2000100920391825200va83fe>; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 20:39:19 +0000 Message-ID: <39E22D09.76946EB6@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 16:39:37 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Gore/Bush Privacy Forum Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 17:36:33 -0400 From: Joanna Cohn Subject: Gore/Bush Privacy Forum To: Comnet@gwu.edu ADVISORY GORE/BUSH FORUM ON PRIVACY TO BE HELD OCTOBER 16 10:30 AM, THE MONARCH HOTEL, WASHINGTON, DC Congressman Edward Markey (D-MA) will present the Gore campaign's views on privacy; Bush's senior domestic policy advisor and former mayor of Indianapolis, Stephen Goldsmith, will present the views of the Bush campaign. Amitai Etzioni, author of The Limits of Privacy will moderate. Open to the public and to the press: feel free to invite your students or colleagues. A Q&A will follow the presentations. Sponsored by the Institute for Communitarian Policy Studies at The George Washington University. For more information, contact: Joanna Cohn Outreach Coordinator 202.994.8190 comnet@gwu.edu From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 9 16:41:48 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from prserv.net (out1.prserv.net [32.97.166.31]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A02232A3BA; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 16:41:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org ([32.101.208.126]) by prserv.net (out1) with SMTP id <20001009204142252009s0spe>; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 20:41:43 +0000 Message-ID: <39E22D99.9A3568C6@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 16:42:01 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Oct 5 meeting on Hague Treaty on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments October 5, 2000 (corrected Oct 9) Meeting of E-Commerce Roundtable on Hague Treaty Held at American Library Association Offices These are my notes from our October 5 meeting on the Hague Convention Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgements. Jamie Love Participants: USG: Jeff Kovar, State Department Hugh Stevenson, FTC Maneesha Mithal, FTC NGO/unions: Sarah Andrews, Electronic Privacy Information Center Thiru Balasubramanian, Consumer Project on Technology (CPT) Alan Bushnell, CPT Jamie Love, CPT Rick Weingarten, ALA (chair of meeting) Miriam Nisbet, American Library Association (ALA) Carrie Russell, ALA Manon Ress, Debs, Jones, Douglass Institute Rob Weisman, Essential Action Joel Yudken, AFL-CIO Press: Dugie Standeford, Washington Internet Daily Will Rodger, USA Today Documents: Jeff Kovar provide copies of a 10 page letter from him to UK official Alasdair Wallace, dated September 10, 2000, that discussed specific issues in the negotiations, and his June 29, 2000 testimony on the treaty to the House Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property. We asked that these documents be put on the USDOS web page. US-DOS was also asked to provide details of the various Hague meeting dates and agendas on its web pages. Basic rationale for treaty and dates of meetings The treaty was described at a litigation convention. The basic rationale for the USG pushing the treaty goes something like this: 1. The USA is the most receptive country to recognizing foreign judgments. 2. Foreign judgments are already regularly enforced in US courts. 3. Few countries recognize US judgments. 4. Better foreign recognition of judgments would allow US citizens to collect US judgements abroad. Why then would foreign countries want to have the treaty? Apparently there is some foreign resistance to the treaty, in part, for example, over the big US judgments, and resentment over the fact that the US system which allows jury verdicts in many civil trials. There is also foreign opposition to the US practice of permitting extensive off shore discovery, and other aspects of the US assertion of "long arm" jurisdiction. Some governments would like to force the USA into a more consistent framework regarding jurisdiction, cutting back of the current "long arm" approach to jurisdiction. This is a simplified version of things, of course, and it was mentioned, for example, that currently in France any French citizen can sue anyone, anywhere in the world, for anything, in a French court. The push for the treaty by the US was described as coming from "middle class" litigants -- apparently relatively small parties (not giant corporations), who had claims against foreign parties that would not pay. "It's a plaintiffs treaty," USG says. Apparently some plaintiff lawyers emphasized cases such as foreign sales of unsafe children cribs or other goods, where they are seeking to make US judgements collectable abroad. Europe is now also dealing with changes in the Brussels convention, which addresses the same issues regarding judgements and jurisdiction. The talks on the treaty began in 1992, but the first drafts did not appear until 1998, and the first complete drafts were made available in June and then October 1999. The treaty was supposed to be finished this month (Oct 2000). Of course, when people started talking about the treaty, no one was thinking about the Internet, and how the treaty would affect the Internet, where the amount of cross border transactions has skyrocketed. In October 1999, the US government opposed many aspects of the Draft the treaty, registering opposition, for example, to articles 7 and 8 of the October 1999 text, and raising a number of other issues, as outlined in Mr. Kovar's September 10, 2000 letter to Alasdair Wallace. The U.S., along with a several other countries, pressed for the negotiating schedule to be revised and for additional negotiating sessions to be held. The current schedule for discussions on the treaty are: October 30- November 1, international negotiations on the text, held at the US Department of State in Washington, DC December 11-12, ICC/OECD/Hague meeting in the Hague on ADR, with discussion of relationship between ADR and Hague. December 13-15, Basel, Switzerland, government negotiations on the treaty text January 30-31, Geneva WIPO meeting on jurisdiction and choice of Law for intellectual property disputes Last week in February (3 to 5 day meeting), in Ottawa, on E- Commerce June 2001, the first session of a two-part diplomatic conference to complete the treaty Date unknown, the second part of the diplomatic conference, which may be the end of 2001, or the beginning of 2002. The rules are different for each meeting. NGOs can seek to have a Representative become a member of the US delegation at several of these meetings. Indeed, business groups already have requested. The October Washington, DC meeting will be closed, except to members of the country delegations. The December 11-12 Hague meeting will be restricted to 250 participants, worldwide. The Basel meeting will be closed, unless you can get on a country delegation. The WIPO meeting is open, according to WIPO. It is possible to be invited as an expert to the Ottawa meeting. International NGOs can also ask to participate (business NGOs do), and there will be private citizens on the US delegation. The ordinary Hague Conference rules will be for the diplomatic convention in June: government delegations (which may include private advisers) and international NGO's accredited to the Hague Conference. Mr. Kovar said to contact him for specific guidance on attendance at any of these meetings. He also asked whether consumer NGO's wished to put forward one person to be considered as a member of the U.S. delegation. He noted that this would entail some loss of independence to the individual while serving as a member of the delegation but offered the opportunity for direct input. Substantive Issues The USG will be provide written answers to the two letters I sent on September 29, 2000, regarding questions about the Hague treaty. Here are some notes from discussions about some of these issues. Libel and Slander Foreign libel or slander judgments that raise US first amendment issues are currently difficult to collect in the US. Under the proposed treaty, there are specific "Grounds for refusal of recognition or enforcement of judgments." These are set out in Article 28. Apparently the relevant 1st amendment provision is Article 28 (f), which is: 28(f) recognition or enforcement would be manifestly incompatible with the public policy of the state addressed. There was some question about broad the 28(f) provision would be. The USG seemed to think the 1st amendment would fit here, but it also seemed to be the case that many intellectual property concerns would likely not qualify. The American Library Association asked that Article 28 be expanded to include specific reference for US concepts on fair use. (Not discussed in the meeting was the controversy over Article 10.4, which concerns limits on damages for torts where injuries are alleged in more than one county, a section said to be relevant to defamation suits.) Default judgments There was discussion about cases where someone could not afford to be represented in foreign litigation. According to Article 27(2), the draft treaty says: Article 27 Verification of jurisdiction 2. In verifying the jurisdiction of the court of origin, the court addressed shall be bound by the findings of fact on which the court of origin based its jurisdiction, unless the judgment was given by default. Thus, if you are subject to the judgement by default, the US court is not bound by the foreign findings of fact. However, you can still be liable for the foreign judgment, even if it involves laws which are different from the US laws. Intellectual Property On the issue of intellectual property, both CPT and the American Library Association expressed interest in an exclusion for all intellectual property issues from the treaty. I suggested the exclusions could be based upon the rights defined under the WTO TRIPS accord. (This may not be broad enough). One argument for the exclusion is that there exists separate mechanisms for global harmonization of minimum rights (WIPO and WTO). But more generally, there was a concern that the public's rights would be extremely narrow if everyone was subject to claims from all Hague member countries. The examples of this were the fact that the EU has restrictive laws on fair use under copyright and trademark, while the US has very aggressive expansions of patents to business methods, and some countries have very poor examination processes, and issue very broad patents. With foreign judgement recognition, one could imagine a very small sub-set of public rights. The issue of which laws will apply for intellectual property is not addressed directly in the treaty -- it addresses choice of court rather than choice of law, but often the choice of court will have consequences in terms of the choice of law. Article 12 of the treaty deals with special cases of exclusive jurisdiction. Paragraphs 12.4 and 12.5 of the draft deal with intellectual property issues. In 12.4, there is bracketed language that would provide for exclusive jurisdiction based upon country of registration for matters involving infringement of patents, trademarks and "similar" rights. This would not apply to copyrights. In 12.5, there is bracketed language that would seem to permit broader jurisdiction in patent cases. There was talk that IPR issues could sink the whole treaty, because lots of people did not want to be subject to all of these IPR laws, and lose rights under national laws. And, it was also discussed that IPR laws are in a state of flux, and that we didn't even know what the laws would be in the future, and that it was important to retain the right to obtain national protection from foreign judgements that do not reflect national policy values, for example on the scope of rights, fair use or other matters. The treaty does in fact have carve-outs. In Article 1.1 the treaty begins with a statement on scope: "The Convention applies to civil and commercial matters. It shall not extend in particular to revenue, customs or administrative matters." Then, in Article 1.2, there are several exceptions, including such things as wills, social security, insolvency proceedings, matrimonial property disputes, and admiralty or maritime matters. (Interestingly, in Article 1.3 a dispute is not excluded solely because a government or agent is involved.) It would seem that there could be a campaign for an exclusion for intellectual property, and indeed, apparently the maritime exclusion came about after it was clear that the US maritime industry could not reach consensus on its position under the treaty. (See too excerpts from Kovar to Loon letter, below) Contracts of Adhesion For contracts concluded by consumers, Article 7.3 of the current draft of the treaty excludes contractual provisions that determine the choice of court. And, Article 7.2 would require a business to sue a consumer in the courts where the consumer lives. However, both of these provisions have been opposed by the US negotiators as (they said) being too broad and therefore inconsistent with U.S. law. The Global Business Dialogue, the International Chamber of Commerce and a dozen other business groups say that Article 7 must be eliminated, and they are asking that the treaty take an approach whereby rights and jurisdiction would be determined by choice of forum clauses in contracts. They say that ecommerce would otherwise be hampered by a system based upon a patchwork of national laws. This debate is very similar to the US debate over UCITA, and will likely cover a lot more than consumer protection and privacy issues. Today there are countless contractual provisions that address issues such as restrictions on criticisms of products, reverse engineering, rights to link web pages, rights to collect prices (ebay), the redistribution of data, software, music and other content, and a plethora of other issues (see http://www.cptech.org/ecom/ucita/licenses/ for examples). The US government has asked for the elimination of Article 7, in part upon the grounds that it changes US law, a position challenged by others in our meeting. There was discussion of a US Supreme Court case, where the Court indicated that contracts on jurisdiction could be considered unreasonable for remote jurisdictions. There is some difference of opinion, within the US government, on this issue, and the FTC has expressed some concern about contracts that would force US consumers to seek redress in foreign jurisdictions. But there is also considerable concern by NGOs that high level policy makers in the USG are pushing a "safe harbor" private sector ADR approach as a way of privatizing policy making and law enforcement for consumer protection and privacy rules. (See the TACD statements on jurisdiction, safe harbor and ADR). There was also a discussion of Article 8, concerning individual contracts of employment. In the current draft, Article 8 is very favorable to the employee, and gives the employee the right to bring an action against his employer in a court where he lives, and requires the employer to sue the employee where the employee lives. Again, the US has opposed Article 8 for similar reasons to Article 7 on consumers. This Article is significant for many reasons. An employer can include in contracts a wide variety of issues concerning limits on speech, prohibitions on future employment, disclosures of company information, the rights to intellectual property, compensation, and countless other items. Treatment of electronic commerce I asked if it would be possible to exclude electronic commerce from the treaty. The answer was no -- because the sense was that this was the future of commerce and it was unclear to the US government how You could separate ecommerce from other modes of commerce. Other topics We did not really get much of an opportunity to further into substantive issues at this meeting. It should be noted that there are many areas of controversy, including such topics as the treatment of antitrust and human rights litigation. ---------------------------- Excerpts from: Jeff Kovar letter of February 22, 2000 to J.H.A. van Loon: . . . the United States is opposed to scheduling a diplomatic conference this year or next. We believe it would be helpful to convene a stock-taking session where delegations can discuss in a frank, informal, and serious way whether there is the desire and political will to depart from the current text and seek new avenues for agreement. If there is such a will, then a much more open-ended schedule of work may be possible along with agreement on more consensus-based negotiating methods. Indeed, the informal experts sessions on electronic commerce and intellectual property issues are examples of the kind of process that should be given time to explore critical issues before any decision can be made on a future diplomatic conference. . . . . . . this would leave open the possibility that the underlying views and dynamics could mature over time, with the hope that achieving a viable Hague convention would ultimately be possible. This would also be the safer course in relation to the revolutionary changes underway in our lives through the electronic medium, which we have not even begun to assess as part of this negotiation. During a suspension, technical discussions could continue on specific issues, major shifts in domestic and regional law and legal institutions could be completed and consolidated, and revolutionary changes in commercial practice in the area of electronic commerce could have time to mature and be evaluated. * * * * It is impossible to give an adequate point-by-point assessment of the preliminary draft convention because of the enormous scope and complexity of its provisions. Nevertheless, a summary of some of our more pronounced concerns is offered here as an illustration of the obstacles facing the current text from a U.S. perspective. It is important to stress, however, that this list is not intended to be comprehensive or final. The list does not, for example, attempt to address crucial concerns related to electronic commerce and intellectual property issues. . . . - Article 7 (Consumer Contracts): This article repeats formulations from the Brussels Convention. These formulations have raised a storm of controversy in the electronic commerce world. It is an important illustration of the broader problems with electronic commerce mentioned above to note the severe policy problems this article raises. - Article 8 (Employment Contracts): This article, which is derived from the Brussels Convention, seems to us to be out of touch with modern employment practice, good economic policy, and evolving practices. It does not permit even sophisticated employees (e.g., senior and middle management of major multinationals from all Conference member states) to agree to a choice of forum. . . . In short, we believe serious discussions about the future of the project are necessary. If those discussions, and the experience of alternative work methods in experts meetings on electronic commerce and intellectual property issues, do not reveal an adequate basis to be confident that a text representing a wide global consensus can be negotiated, then we believe the project should be suspended so that it can be resumed at a more propitious time. -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 9 17:11:05 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from prserv.net (out4.prserv.net [32.97.166.34]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D3BA2A490; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 17:11:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org ([32.101.208.126]) by prserv.net (out4) with SMTP id <2000100921110223903djivme>; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 21:11:03 +0000 Message-ID: <39E23478.39E9F228@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 17:11:20 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] AP; Gore and Bush on Internet Privacy http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2000/10/06/politics0313EDT0457.DTL&type=tech_article Candidates on the issues: Internet Privacy The Associated Press Friday, October 6, 2000 Breaking News Sections (10-06) 00:13 PDT Three days a week, The Associated Press picks an issue and asks the leading presidential candidates a auestion about it. Today's question and the responses: Internet Privacy Republican George W. Bush: ``I believe privacy is a fundamental right, and that every American should have absolute control over his or her personal information. Now, with the advent of the Internet, personal privacy is increasingly at risk. I am committed to protecting personal privacy for every American and I believe the marketplace can function without sacrificing the privacy of individuals. [snip] In Texas, I banned identity theft, safeguarded genetic information, protected driver's license information and provided for a new Internet Bureau Task Force to combat emerging cyber crimes. As president, I will prohibit genetic discrimination, criminalize identity theft, and guarantee the privacy of medical and sensitive financial records. I will also make it a criminal offense to sell a person's Social Security number without his or her express consent.'' Democrat Al Gore: ``I believe that, in this time of unprecedented possibility, we must ensure that new technology is usedto renew and strengthen our oldest and most cherished values. That is why I have called for an Electronic Bill of Rights for this electronic age. It includes the right to choose whether personal information is disclosed; the right to know how, when, and how much of that information is being used; the right to see it yourself; and the right to know if it's accurate. In many areas, I believe that industry self-regulation of Internet privacy is an effective response. [snip] I am proud of my role in pushing for effective privacy protection in the area of online profiling. In 1998, before most people were even aware of the problem, I called for the government to study this issue and to create an effective response. Last year, the administration and the FTC held a workshop that pushed the industry to come to the table and negotiate a privacy code of conduct. That code of conduct is now in place.'' -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 9 17:14:06 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from prserv.net (out4.prserv.net [32.97.166.34]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F3C82A45E for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 17:14:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org ([32.101.208.126]) by prserv.net (out4) with SMTP id <2000100921140323903h40t3e>; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 21:14:04 +0000 Message-ID: <39E2352E.3759B584@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 17:14:22 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Ralph Nader questions on privacy Press Release October 9, 2000 CONTACT: Jake Lewis or Laura Jones (202) 265-4000 NADER ASKS GORE AND BUSH TO STATE THEIR POSITIONS ON PRIVACY WASHINGTON, D. C. Oct. 9---Ralph Nader, the Green Party candidate for President, today released a questionnaire to Vice President Albert Gore and Governor George W. Bush seeking their positions on personal privacy for U. S. citizens. "Our fundamental rights are threatened by new information technologies, and by the buying and selling of personal information," Nader wrote the Democratic and Republican candidates. "Personal information about Americans is routinely collected and abused by government agencies, and by corporations for private gain." Nader said citizens are "demanding that their personal information be protected." He said polls show that individuals want legal controls and penalties for abusers of personal information. "The U. S. government needs to take action, both to rein in its own agencies and to limit the abuses of private companies" Nader told Gore and Bush. "Instead of action, the response has been hollow promises of 'industry self-regulation.'" Nader sent the questionnaire to Gore and Bush on September 21. Neither has responded. In addition to the letters to Bush and Gore, Nader released his own answer to the questionnaire. [Copies of the letter to Gore-Bush and Nader's answers are attached.] ------------------- 21 September 2000 Vice President Albert Gore Gore 2000 2410 Charlotte Pike Nashville TN 37203 Dear Vice President Gore: As you should be aware, privacy is a crucially important issue in the information age. Our fundamental rights are threatened by new information technologies, and by the buying and selling of personal information. Personal information about Americans is routinely collected and abused by government agencies, and by corporations for private gain. The damage is vast. This year alone, hundreds of thousands of individuals will have their identities 'stolen' and their credit records threatened by thieves who make use of stored personal data. Workers will lose their jobs because of intrusive genetic and psychological tests. Insurance companies will deny coverage because of possible illnesses hidden in people's genes. Video cameras will track consumers and citizens throughout private and public spaces. Internet companies will secretly monitor millions of users activities as they surf the Internet. Meanwhile, law enforcement agencies are increasing their powers to conduct surveillance of citizens. Tens of millions in taxpayer dollars are used to pay telephone companies to make it easier to wiretap and to track the location of cellular phone users. The FBI's Carnivore system can sift through millions of emails. Citizens are demanding that their personal information be protected. Polls show that individuals want legal controls, and penalties for abusers. The U.S. government needs to take action, both to rein in its own agencies and to limit the abuses of private companies. Instead of action, the response has been hollow promises of "industry self-regulation." I request that you answer the following questions about your positions on personal privacy: 1. Do you think the use of social security numbers by businesses and government agencies should be regulated? 2. Should patients have the right to control the collection, use and dissemination of medical information, including genetic information? 3. Should Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and other companies on the Internet be prohibited from misusing customer information and from selling information without their customers' permission? 4. What is your stand on supermarkets and other businesses that use hidden surveillance cameras to capture information from their customers? Do you think that covert surveillance technology should be regulated? 5. Do you support a legally guaranteed right of individuals to see all information kept about them by companies? 6. Should the US Government create a watchdog agency to protect US citizens from privacy invasions from other government offices or from corporations? 7. Should the US support the establishment of an international convention on privacy? I have sent a similar letter to Vice President Gore, and am also enclosing my answers to these questions. Thank you. Sincerely, Ralph Nader ------------ Ralph Nader's Responses to Privacy Questionnaire 1. Do you think the use of social security numbers by businesses and government agencies should be regulated? Yes. The use and sale of social security numbers by private firms and most government agencies should be banned. It leads to identity theft, and enables the linking of disparate databases, leading to invasions of privacy. 2. Should patients have the right to control the collection, use and dissemination of medical information, including genetic information? Yes. Today health maintenance organizations (HMOs) and insurance companies, pharmacies, employers, and others are routinely selling, sharing or misusing access to medical records. As a consequence, patients may have an incentive to withhold truthful information from physicians. Unless we can protect patient records, people will be forced to choose between invasions of privacy and possible discrimination, or forgoing needed medical care. 3. Should Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and other companies on the Internet be prohibited from misusing customer information and from selling information without their customers' permission? Yes. Internet companies should follow basic rules about privacy, just like telephone companies and cable companies are required to. As e-commerce becomes ever more common and data collection on Internet usage more detailed, we need to limit the information collected and stored by ISPs. Most other countries protect their consumers from invasions from e-commerce companies. 4. What is your stand on supermarkets and other businesses that use hidden surveillance cameras to capture information from their customers? Do you think that covert surveillance technology should be regulated? Yes. The use of hidden surveillance for security purposes should be strictly regulated. The use of hidden surveillance to gather personal information for commercial purposes should be banned outright. 5. Do you support a legally guaranteed right of individuals to see all information kept about them by companies? Yes. This right exists in the US only to a very limited extent, in the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and it is time to expand this right to other areas of commerce. Every major privacy standard, including the OECD privacy guidelines and the European Union privacy directives, allows citizens to do this. 6. Should the US Government create a watchdog agency to protect US citizens from privacy invasions from other government offices or from corporations? Yes. The US is the only major industrialized country in the World without such an agency. More than 40 countries have them. An aggressive, independent watchdog agency is essential to protect citizens' privacy from corporate and governmental invasions. 7. Should the US support the establishment of an international convention on privacy? Yes. It is clear that in this electronic age it is necessary to have international standards for the protection of privacy. Instead, the US government has lobbied against privacy standards by the ISO and other bodies, and has lobbied against the European and Canadian government efforts to protect privacy. We should support the human right to privacy over corporations' desire to trade information. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Oct 10 09:14:23 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C0D52A066 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:14:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA11642 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:14:22 -0400 Message-ID: <39E31749.99BC618B@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:19:05 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Mintz and O'Harrow, Jr.: Software Digs Deep Into Lives of Voters http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40787-2000Oct9.html Software Digs Deep Into Lives of Voters  By John Mintz and Robert O'Harrow Jr. Washington Post Staff Writers Tuesday, October 10, 2000; Page A01
This Election Day, Republican campaign workers will tape personalized letters on the front doors of thousands of voters in Missouri. People who recently hinted to telephone solicitors a concern about taxes will receive notes highlighting that issue. Others who mentioned guns or homosexuality will get letters on those topics. People whose spotty voting records suggest they need a ride to the polls or a reminder to vote will receive seemingly prescient offers of help.  These personal touches are the result of computer software that helps political operatives intuit voters' beliefs and predilections based on data about their income, lifestyles, past electoral participation and other personal information. Taking their cues from the world of direct marketing, candidates and political organizations across the ideological spectrum are harnessing high-tech tools to identify which voters to target with their calls, letters, visits and, increasingly, e-mails. In a neck-and-neck election in which turnout could be crucial, this effort will personalize many politicians' pitches to voters as never before. "I see us on the cusp of a completely new politics, a marriage of old shoe-leather organizing with the high-tech of the Internet age," Ralph Reed, former executive director of the Christian Coalition and now an adviser to Texas Gov. George W. Bush, said of the new computerized targeting. "Many believe that this race is so close, and that the two sides will fight to a draw on TV and in the debates. So it'll come down to the night before the dance, and these techniques could be the major factor."  [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Oct 10 09:17:51 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7043B2A066; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:17:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA11702; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:17:51 -0400 Message-ID: <39E31819.72F2FFA3@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:22:33 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Alec Klein: AOL Restricts Alleged http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40250-2000Oct9.html AOL Restricts Alleged By Alec Klein Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, October 10, 2000; Page E01 America Online Inc. has imposed contractual conditions on Walt Disney Co. in recent years that aim to deter users from leaving AOL's network to reach competitors on the Web, according to sources who have reviewed the confidential documents.

The Disney contracts, from 1996 to 1999, offer a window into AOL's business practices as the world's largest Internet service provider seeks regulatory approval of its $183 billion takeover of Time Warner Inc. A key issue for regulators is whether the combined company would use its corporate power to discriminate against competitors.

Critics say the terms contradict public pronouncements by the Dulles-based online company that it does not--and will not--favor its content over that of its rivals. But AOL executives say customers can freely leave their online offerings to surf wherever they wish on the Web. They say the contract language is intended to prevent companies from using AOL resources to promote competitors of AOL or its partners. Under one contractual provision, Disney's ABC News unit agreed in 1997 to deter users from leaving the AOL network by limiting or removing special highlighted connections called hyperlinks to other Web sites. If 25 percent or more of the traffic left AOL's offerings, AOL could cancel the contract. Disney, of Burbank, Calif., agreed to similar restrictions in online shopping agreements with AOL in 1998 and 1999. "What these contracts are [is] evidence of the games AOL is playing, which is to use its power through contracts and through architecture to channel people into their service, which discriminates against people on the outside," said Lawrence Lessig, professor of law at Stanford University and author of "Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace." Lessig added, "That should make us more skeptical of AOL's claims that it wants to give people nondiscriminatory access to the Internet. This belies that claim." [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Oct 10 09:26:05 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 529A02A066 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:26:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA11824; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:26:05 -0400 Message-ID: <39E31A07.28859952@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:30:47 -0400 From: James Love Reply-To: jake@votenader.org Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Kathleeen Pender: Cisco and Microsoft Didn't Pay Any Federal Income Tax http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/10/09/MN3707.DTL Kathleen Pender, Chronicle Staff Writer Monday, October 9, 2000 Giant Cisco Didn't Pay Any Federal Income Tax Businesses get break on employee stock options SAN JOSE -- Cisco Systems, the second-most valuable company in America, paid no federal income taxes for its latest fiscal year thanks to a little-known corporate tax break on employee stock options. Microsoft, which ranks No. 4 in market value, did not pay any federal taxes either, it seems. Like many high-tech firms, Cisco and Microsoft are allowed to take a tax deduction for money their employees earn when they ``exercise'' options andbuy stock in the company at a preset price. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Oct 10 09:27:50 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED2A82A066 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:27:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA11855 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:27:49 -0400 Message-ID: <39E31A70.4B47650B@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:32:32 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Subject: Re: [Random-bits] Kathleeen Pender: Cisco and Microsoft Didn't Pay Any Federal IncomeTax References: <39E31A07.28859952@cptech.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The reply-to in this missive was a typo....... I was trying to send a copy to Jake, who follows corporate tax issues, and by mistake clicked on the roply to... Jamie James Love wrote: > > http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/10/09/MN3707.DTL > > Kathleen Pender, Chronicle Staff Writer > > Monday, October 9, 2000 > > Giant Cisco Didn't Pay Any Federal Income Tax > Businesses get break on employee stock options > > SAN JOSE -- Cisco Systems, the second-most valuable company in America, > paid no federal income taxes for its latest fiscal year thanks to a > little-known corporate tax break on employee stock options. > > Microsoft, which ranks No. 4 in market value, did not pay any federal > taxes either, it seems. > > Like many high-tech firms, Cisco and Microsoft are allowed to take a tax > deduction for money their employees earn when they ``exercise'' options > andbuy stock in the company at a preset price. > > [snip] > > -- > James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org > Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 > voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 > > _______________________________________________ > Random-bits mailing list > Random-bits@lists.essential.org > http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/random-bits -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Oct 10 09:33:05 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4DB12A066; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:33:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA11929; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:33:04 -0400 Message-ID: <39E31BAB.218EAECA@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:37:47 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Reed Hundt's first response in Wired debate http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39292,00.html Hundt: Ralph Forgot Some Details by Reed Hundt 3:00 a.m. Oct. 10, 2000 [snip] "The Internet economy of the United States is the most robust and widespread of any in the world, and that is chiefly caused by the robust competitive markets we have created by the new policies led more by Al Gore than by any other single person in public life." [snip] Mr. Nader says that DSL companies are not "protected" from CLECs. In fact, DSL companies exist because of the pro-DSL and pro-attacker regulations of the FCC. Any of their CEOs would say so. I know them and know this is true. Indeed, many if not all of them are public supporters of Al Gore. [snip] Mr. Nader asserts that cable companies will use their "gatekeeper" role to limit access to the Internet. Today's newspapers show attention to this potential issue in real time by real Clinton appointees. In any event, there is absolutely no marketplace evidence to prove Mr. Nader's claim. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Oct 10 11:41:07 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AAC62A066 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:41:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA14930 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:41:07 -0400 Message-ID: <39E339AE.178D0C97@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:45:50 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Supreme Ct Seeks Clinton Admin Views On Antitrust and intellectual property Interesting story that could have broader signficance on issues such as ecommerce patents. Jamie  October 10, 2000 Supreme Ct Seeks Clinton Admin Views On Antitrust Case By SCOTT RITTER Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Supreme Court asked the Clinton administration to weigh in on a case involving Xerox Corp. (XRX). The appeal asks the high court to decide whether a company can sometimes use its patents and copyrights to claim immunity to federal antitrust laws. The case comes to the justices from a company called CSU LLC, which in 1984 began servicing Xerox photocopiers and printers in Kansas City. CSU claimed Xerox refused to sell replacement parts and diagnostic software in a bid to monopolize the copier-service market. But a federal appeals court here this spring sided with Xerox, concluding that the company didn't have to sell its patented parts and copyrighted software to CSU and "did not violate antitrust laws by refusing to do so." [snip]  -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Oct 10 14:06:31 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 973692A066 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:06:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA18688 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:06:31 -0400 Message-ID: <39E35BC3.F18FD8A4@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:11:15 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Time Warner: Term Sheet for ISP/TWC Broadband ISP Service Thanks to Jeff Chester for this pointer. jl http://www.ispworld.com/src/OA_term.htm Time Warner's Full Disclosure Time Warner's draconian term sheet has gone over like a kick in the teeth to ISPs. "At first blush, their proposal looks OK," said David Baker, vice president of Earthlink, in The Wall Street Journal on October 2. "But they are proposing economic terms that would make it difficult, if not impossible to make a profit." ISPworld obtained a copy of the confidential term sheet that Time Warner has offered to ISPs. The opening paragraph regarding good faith and sections 5, 6 and 7 have been the main focus of controversy. Term Sheet for ISP/TWC Broadband ISP Service This term sheet (the "Term Sheet") is a list of key business points that are intended to be memorialized in a definitive agreement (the "Definitive Agreement") between Time Warner Cable ("TWC") and the Internet Service Provider (the "ISP") identified below. Except for the provisions of Section 21 of this Term Sheet, this Term Sheet is not intended to create any rights for, or impose obligations upon, either party including without limitation any obligation to negotiate in good faith. 1.Service The "Service" will be ISP?s Internet access, content, applications and functionality delivered over TWC?s broadband cable infrastructure, as jointly provided by the parties within the Network Architecture to be specified by TWC in the Definitive Agreement. The Service will be tiered based on a maximum line speed and overall consumption of bits per billing period. Initially, the parties will offer two tiers of Service. The maximum line speeds for the lower tier Service will be 2mbps, downstream, and 384 kbps, upstream. Line speeds for the initial higher tier of Service, and bit consumption for both initial tiers of Service will be specified in the Definitive Agreement. Following execution of the Definitive Agreement, the parties may modify the foregoing service specifications and/or add service levels solely upon mutual agreement.. The Service will be optimized for the personal computer, but the parties understand that the Service may be capable of working on another device if so connected by a customer. TWC?s obligations under the Definitive Agreement will be limited to a customer?s use of the Service through a personal computer. 2.Non-Exclusive. The parties? rights and obligations under the Definitive Agreement will be non-exclusive. 3.Scope and Rollout. The rollout of the Service will be on a TWC divisional level, except with respect to the National Division, for which rollout will be on a cable system by cable system level (Each division, and in the case of the National Division, each system, may be referred to herein as an "Operator"). Each Operator will have the option ( but not the obligation) to rollout the Service to potential customers in its operating area, subject to ISP?s agreement to offer the Service through such Operator and subject also to ISP?s payment of the Advance (as defined herein) with respect to each Operator that offers the Service Rollouts will occur 30 days after the Operator determines that its cable systems are capable of providing the Service. TWC will have the right to terminate the Definitive Agreement with respect to Operators which are divested or are no longer under management by TWC. Systems which are acquire by TWC after the effective date of the Definitive Agreement but during the term thereof will have the option to offer the Service under the terms of the Definitive Agreement. 4.Distribution. Each of ISP and TWC will sell the Service and will determine the pricing of the Service when sold by it. 5.Subscriber Revenue Splits. TWC shall retain seventy-five percent (75%) of gross Service subscription revenues and ISP shall receive twenty-five percent (25%) thereof. Notwithstanding the foregoing, for subscriptions to the lower tier Service: (a) TWC shall receive a minimum monthly payment of $30 for each subscription sold by ISP to existing TWC cable television service subscribers; and (b) ISP shall receive a minimum monthly payment of $10 for each subscription sold by TWC. TWC shall be entitled to higher minimum monthly payments, specified in the Definitive Agreement, with respect to subscriptions sold by ISP to customers who are not TWC cable television service customers. 6.Service Home Page. ISP will have sole control of, and responsibility (including without limitation editorial and technical responsibility) for the homepage for the Service, provided however that: (a) the home page will be subject to TWC?s approval; and (b) at all times during the term of the Definitive Agreement there will be a dedicated availability of prominent above-the-fold areas on the home page of the Service for use by the Operator in its discretion, but which may, without limitation link to content, applications, services and functionality provided by such Operator. The Operator presence on the home page for the Service shall be defined in the Definitive Agreement. 7.Advertising and Other Fees. TWC will receive twenty-five percent (25%) of gross revenues received by ISP for advertising, transactions, communications, premium services, e-commerce and other fees (e.g. web hosting surcharges) related to ISP?s ability to offer the Service ("Ancillary Revenues"). Except as expressly set out in this Term Sheet, all revenues generated by the Operator in connection with the Service and whether or not through the Service Home Page (including advertising, transactions, communications, premium services, e-commerce and other fees and service revenues) will be retained by TWC. 8.Advance. ISP will pay TWC an advance payment to be recouped against revenues to be received by TWC under the Definitive Agreement in the amount of dollars ($___) for each Operator which the parties agree shall offer the Service (the "Advance"). The Advance will be due and payable thirty (30) days following ISP?s receipt of notice from TWC that the Pre-Existing Obligations have terminated. The Advance will be applied to revenues due to TWC hereunder until such advance had been fully recouped, at which time TWC and ISP shall make appropriate payments as set forth herein. The advance is refundable upon expiration of the Agreement, provided however that in the event the Definitive Agreement terminates for any reason before TWC has earned at least $50,000. TWC will be entitled to retain an amount equal to the difference between $50,0000 and the actual amounts earned by TWC under the Definitive Agreement. 9.Minimum Subscriber Level. TWC will have the right to terminate the Definitive Agreement with respect to any particular Operator after one year from the commencement of rollout by such Operator unless the Service has, upon the one-year anniversary of the rollout, in such Operator?s operating area, a number of subscribers equal to the greater of (a) 100 or (b) .5% of homes passed by the particular Operator. 10.Marketing and Service Packages. ISP will market and promote the availability of the Service. TWC may package the Service with TWC?s other services, subject to the terms and conditions of the Definitive Agreement, including without limitation the payment of minimum fees. 11.Facilities. TWC will be responsible for all aspects of the Service infrastructure facilities from a point of demarcation at the Operator headend to Service subscribers. TWC will provision and install (except to the extent that self-provisioning is available) the Service for users using personal computers to utilize the Service. Whichever party sells the Service to a customer will determine whether it wishes to charge an installation fee. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if ISP sells the Service, ISP will reimburse TWC, at TWC?s cost without markup, for TWC?s direct costs (including labor and equipment) of provisioning and installing the Service. ISP will be responsible for all aspects of the Service, infrastructure facilities, software, hosting, caching, peering and general Internet connectivity and transport to the point of demarcation at the Operator headend. ISP?s transport facilities to the TWC headends will meet maximum and minimum capacity specifications as will be specified in the Definitive Agreement. If tunneling protocols are used, the tunnels will terminate at TWC headend. ISP will be responsible for obtaining and managing blocks of IP addresses to support the Service. The Definitive Agreement will set forth minimal technical performance requirements with which the ISP must comply. The Definitive Agreement will provide for appropriate credits for Service outages caused by failure of either party?s facilities to meet specifications. If outages or performance failures reach a specified level, or if the ISP does not respond reasonably to increased volume or usage of the Service in any particular operating area, TWC may terminate the Definitive Agreement with respect to the Operators in such areas. 12.Billing and Customer Service. TWC will invoice the customers to which it sells the Service. ISP shall have the option to invoice customers to which it sells the Service, or to have TWC invoice such customers at a monthly billing charge payable by ISP of $.50 per Service subscriber invoiced. The invoicing party will remit payment to the other party for the other party?s share of subscriber revenues no later than 30 days after the end of month in which such revenues were received revenues from Service customer. If a TWC invoiced customer pays only a partial payment, the payment will be allocated proportionately among the Service and other TWC services, with TWC remitting twenty-five percent (25%) of the amount allocated to the Service to ISP (subject to minimum payments as set forth herein. TWC will have sole discretion over Subscriber termination policies, including without limitation for non-payment. ISP will remit to payment to TWC for TWC?s share of Ancillary Revenues no later than 30 days after the end of the month in which ISP received such revenues. The Definitive Agreement will define "Tier I" and "Tier II" issues. Each party will handle any Tier I calls or emails directed to it, with a handoff to the other party if necessary. ISP will handle Tier II customer service, except that TWC will handle Tier II customer service for those aspects of the service and facilities TWC is responsible for providing. 13.Local Franchise Requirements. ISP will agree to abide by the terms of any local franchise obligation regarding the provision of the Service on the TWC cable systems that, in TWC?s judgment, are applicable to it, including, without limitation (x) charging and remitting to TWC for payment to local franchise authorities (or, if directed by TWC, paying to franchise authorities directly) the applicable franchise fee on the Service when sold by ISP; and (y) complying with any customer service, disclosure, quality of service and other requirements (including providing subscribers with copies of the privacy policy); and (z) the provision of the Service to persons, places or institutions without charge. TWC will provide ISP with notice of such requirements and the parties will cooperate on such compliance matters. 14.Privacy. Each party will comply, and assist the other in complying, with all applicable laws and regulations respecting collection, use, disclosure and protection of subscriber information. TWC shall use reasonable efforts to comply with ISP?s customer privacy policies, provided however that to the extent ISP?s privacy policies are inconsistent with, and in some way a limitation on TWC?s current or anticipated business uses of such information, ISP agrees to take whatever action necessary to modify its policies with respect to conform with TWC?s business objectives. 15.Customer Policies and Procedures. The parties will agree upon policies and procedures to be maintained by each of them with regard to the customers, for the benefit of each other and the customers. Areas will include, without limitation, (I) acceptable use policies; (ii) procedures to enable each party to take advantage of the notice and takedown provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act; (iii) procedures for other takedowns of posted content and denial of service; (iv) response to subpoenas; (v) response in emergency situations; and (vi) minimum standard service terms, including limitations of liability for the benefit of both parties. 16.Video Streaming: Telephony. Video streaming and telephony will be permitted as part of the Service, subject to the following provisions: The Service will not include any local telephony services requiring special gateways, powering, software or equipment, or that otherwise could cause TWC to be subject to regulation as a common carrier of telecommunications services by any state public utilities commission, the FCC or otherwise, or other adverse regulatory consequence. TWC will not be required to provide QoS support for telephony or video streaming for the Service QoS may be provided upon request and at an additional cost. To the extent ISP wishes to offer any functionality as part of the Service which: (a) is outside the scope of the Network Architecture; (b) requires an Operator acquire equipment or software or implement a change in the way the Operator processes, TWC shall have the right to approve such new functionality , provided however that in the event TWC approves such functionality, ISP will be obligated to reimburse for TWC its direct, out-of-pocket costs in implementing such new functionality. 17.Term. With respect to each Operator, three years from launch of the Service by such Operator. 18.Responsibility. Subject to any restrictions and exceptions specified in the Definitive Agreement, ISP will have control over and responsibility for all content, applications, functionality and services included in the Service, except that TWC will have control over and responsibility for the portion of the Service allocated to the TWC local service. 19.Subject to Pre-existing Obligations. Any Definitive Agreement which the parties may reach will be subject to TWC?s compliance with pre-existing obligations, including those with ServiceCo LLC d/b/a/ Road Runner, as described in the Memorandum of Understanding dated February 29, 2000 between AOL and Time Warner (the "Pre-Existing Obligations"). 20.Costs. Except as specifically provided in the Definitive Agreement, or as otherwise agreed by the parties, each party will bear the costs of performing its obligations. 21.Confidentiality. ISP agree to keep the Term Sheet, any of the terms set forth herein, and any discussions with respected to the contemplated arrangement confidential, and ISP agrees not to disclose such information to any person except employees or agents of ISP with a need to know in connection with services they provide to ISP. Each party agrees not to make any press release or public announcement mentioning the other party?s name or identity without such other party?s express written consent. The provisions of this Section 21 are intended to be binding. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Oct 10 16:30:34 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DBBF2A319 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 16:30:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA22429 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 16:30:34 -0400 Message-ID: <39E37D87.FA073E@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 16:35:19 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Microsoft: Naked PCs - Don't Expose Yourself Thanks to CL for this. http://www.microsoft.com/oem/nakedPC.htm Naked PCs - Don't Expose Yourself WHAT IS A NAKED PC? Naked PCs are those sold without operating systems preinstalled. Machines are useless until customers install system software themselves. It's like selling a house without a roof. And, in the end, it leaves your customer just as exposed. SELL YOUR CUSTOMER A SOLUTION, NOT A PROBLEM? Your customers depend on you. Trouble is, if you act on your customers' willingness to buy Naked PCs-knowing full well they are at risk of acquiring pirated operating systems elsewhere-you expose them to legal risks, viruses, and frustrating technical troubles. Hardly the stuff of great business relationships, particularly when they come back to you for help. And even if your customer manages to illegally acquire and install operating systems elsewhere, it still costs them far more time and money than they bargained for. No matter how you look at them, Naked PCs are bad for your customers. Which means they are also bad for you. [snip]  In short, protect your customer and your good name. Sell your PCs fully equipped with legally licensed operating systems preinstalled. Otherwise, who knows what you're leaving your customers-and yourself-open to? Acquire software from Authorized Microsoft OEM Product Distributors-your only assured source of legal Microsoft products. BE SURE IT'S LEGAL -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Oct 10 23:11:59 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 018832A319 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 23:11:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-4.essential.org [216.0.125.4]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA31970 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 23:11:58 -0400 Message-ID: <39E3456E.8E34F7E8@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 12:35:58 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] 5 elected to ICANN board North America: Karl Auerbach Asia: Masanobu Katoh Europe: Andy Mueller-Maguhn Latin America: Ivan Moura Campos Africa: Nii Quaynor -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Oct 11 00:44:21 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB6982A316; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 00:44:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-9.essential.org [216.0.125.9]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA00532; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 00:44:19 -0400 Message-ID: <39E3F932.454F4AD4@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 01:22:58 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN at large board members The ICANN at large election is over, and there are five new ICANN board members. Both Karl Auerbach from North America and Andy Mueller-Maguhn from Europe are strong critics of ICANN. Karl's platform called for sacking the ICANN President, General Counsel and Jones Day, the law firm that represents ICANN. Mueller-Maguhn is a member of the Chaos Computer Club, which he reports "stands for free flow of information." He was quite critical of ICANN in pre-election interviews.  Despite large voter registrations from China, it would seem as though very few Chinese voters actually cast ballots. The new Asia at large board member is Masanobu Katoh, a Fujitsu official who lives in Potomac Maryland. Katoh is the Chair of the Internet Law and Policy Forum (ILPF), and active in a many other ecommerce business groups. Plus, while representing Asia on ICANN, he also serves on the US State Department Advisory Committee on International Communications and Information Policy, where he is co-chair of the US Department of State Working Group on Intellectual Property, Standards and Interoperability. Nii Quaynor, representing Africa, has long been active in ICANN, including serving on the ICANN/DNSO names council, as a representative of the Ghana country code registry. Claudio Silva Menezes works for the Banco do Brazil, and in interviews offered fairly cautious and conserative views regarding ICANN. North America: Karl Auerbach Asia: Masanobu Katoh Europe: Andy Mueller-Maguhn Latin America: Ivan Moura Campos Africa: Nii Quaynor -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Oct 11 01:22:22 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14FBB2A316; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 01:22:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-9.essential.org [216.0.125.9]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA01037; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 01:22:20 -0400 Message-ID: <39E4021C.E164E98D@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 02:01:00 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce References: <39E3F932.454F4AD4@cptech.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Correction: ICANN at large board members Well, a stupid mistake... at the bottom, the results are right, but in the text, I said that Claudio Silva Menezes won the Latin America seat, and the winner was, as noted at the bottom, Ivan Moura Campos, also from Brazil, who is the CEO of Akwan Information Technologies. Official bios of all 5 winners are here: Quaynor: http://members.icann.org/cand/191.html Campos: http://members.icann.org/cand/207.html Mueller-Maguhn: http://members.icann.org/cand/84.html Auerbach: http://members.icann.org/cand/16.html Katoh: http://members.icann.org/cand/196.html James Love wrote: > > The ICANN at large election is over, and there are five new ICANN board > members. > Both Karl Auerbach from North America and Andy Mueller-Maguhn from > Europe are strong critics of ICANN. Karl's platform called for sacking > the ICANN President, General Counsel and Jones Day, the law firm that > represents ICANN. Mueller-Maguhn is a member of the Chaos Computer > Club, which he reports "stands for free flow of information." He was > quite critical of ICANN in pre-election interviews.  > > Despite large voter registrations from China, it would seem as though > very few Chinese voters actually cast ballots. The new Asia at large > board member is Masanobu Katoh, a Fujitsu official who lives in Potomac > Maryland. Katoh is the Chair of the Internet Law and Policy Forum > (ILPF), and active in a many other ecommerce business groups. Plus, > while representing Asia on ICANN, he also serves on the US State > Department Advisory Committee on International Communications and > Information Policy, where he is co-chair of the US Department of State > Working Group on Intellectual Property, Standards and Interoperability. > > Nii Quaynor, representing Africa, has long been active in ICANN, > including serving on the ICANN/DNSO names council, as a representative > of the Ghana country code registry. Claudio Silva Menezes works for the > Banco do Brazil, and in interviews offered fairly cautious and > conserative views regarding ICANN. > > North America: Karl Auerbach > Asia: Masanobu Katoh > Europe: Andy Mueller-Maguhn > Latin America: Ivan Moura Campos > Africa: Nii Quaynor > > -- > James Love, Consumer Project on Technology > v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 > love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org > > _______________________________________________ > Ecommerce mailing list > Ecommerce@lists.essential.org > http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/ecommerce -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Oct 11 08:08:50 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB8702A316 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 08:08:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA04118 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 08:08:50 -0400 Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 08:08:50 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN at large board members This missive from the German co-chair of the TACD working group on ecommerce. Jamie ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 08:59:35 +0200 From: "Klasen, Dirk" To: 'James Love' Subject: AW: [Ecommerce] ICANN at large board members M=FCller-Maguhn is a good guy and very well know in Germany as an independe= nt representative of private users against abusive practices in the internet b= y state authorities or commercial interests regarding, e.g., privacy or technical developments. In the past, his CCC has made, inter alia, some goo= d tests of business security systems for data security of payment cards or PCs to provide evidence that many of these systems can't deliver the promised security. Good decision ! Dirk From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Oct 11 09:52:52 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17FF52A316; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 09:52:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA05996; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 09:52:52 -0400 Message-ID: <39E471D9.C6F7F04A@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 09:57:45 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Day 3 of Wired Nader/Hundt debate http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39293,00.html Nader: Al Takes Too Much Credit by Ralph Nader Oct 11, 2000 This is Ralph Nader's second contribution in Wired's six day debate between Nader and Hundt. This missive, which runs 4 pages on the Wired web page, continues the discussion of telecommunications regulation and competition policy, and also raises issues concerning privacy policy, consumer protection, and other Internet related issues. Reed Hundt's next response will appear tomorrow. Jamie ----------------- earlier parts of debate:  http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39291,00.html Hey Al, Where's the Competition? by Ralph Nader 3:00 a.m. Oct. 9, 2000 PDT http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39292,00.html Hundt: Ralph Forgot Some Details by Reed Hundt Oct. 10, 2000  James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Oct 11 10:00:19 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 928592A316 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 10:00:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA06194 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 10:00:19 -0400 Message-ID: <39E47398.8F12886B@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 10:05:12 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] EU release on AOL/Time Warner Merger http://europa.eu.int/rapid/start/cgi/guesten.ksh?p_action.gettxt=gt&doc=IP/00/1145|0|RAPID&lg=EN Commission gives conditional approval to AOL/Time Warner merger ------------------------------------------------------------------------ DN: IP/00/1145 Date: 2000-10-11 Ip/00/1145 Brussels, 11 October 2000 Commission gives conditional approval to AOL/Time Warner merger The European Commission has approved the proposed merger between America Online Inc (AOL) and Time Warner Inc after AOL offered to sever all structural links with German media group Bertelsmann AG. The proposed undertakings will prevent AOL from having access to Europe's leading source of music publishing rights thereby eliminating the risk of dominance in the emerging markets for on-line delivery of music over the Internet and software-based music players. Time Warner is one of the world's biggest media and entertainment companies with interests in television networks (e.g. CNN and TNT), magazines (e.g. Time, People) and book publishing, music, filmed entertainment and cable networks. AOL is the leading Internet access provider in the United States and the only provider with a pan-European presence. In Europe AOL operates mainly through two joint ventures : AOL Europe, a 50/50 deal with Bertelsmann, and AOL Compuserve France, a venture with both Bertelsmann and Vivendi subsidiaries Cegetel and Canal Plus. The merger will create the first Internet vertically-integrated content provider, distributing TW branded content (music, news, films, etc.) through AOL's Internet distribution network. Because of the structural links and some existing contractual arrangements with Bertelsmann, AOL/TW would also have had preferred access to Bertelsmann content and, in particular, to its large music library. As a result AOL/TW would have controlled the leading source of music publishing rights in Europe, where TW and Bertelsmann together hold approximately one third of the market. Against this background, nothing would have prevented AOL from dominating the emerging market for Internet music delivery on-line, which includes both digital downloads and streaming. AOL/TW would have become the gatekeeper to this nascent market, dictating the conditions for the distribution of audio files over the Internet. AOL/TW could also have been tempted to format TW's and Bertelsmann's music in a way compatible only with AOL's music player Winamp, but not with competing music players. Winamp would have been able to play the music of competing record companies, which generally use non-proprietary formats. By contrast, competing players could not read TW and Bertelsmann audio files and consequently play their music. Because of the technical limitations of the other music players, AOL/TW would have been able to impose Winamp as the dominant player. According to third parties the deal also raised concerns with respect to the European market for Internet broadband access, but the Commission concluded that those fears were unfounded since AOL/TW have no broadband infrastructure in Europe. Similarly, the Commission's four-month probe also set to rest fears that the new entity could have dominated the Internet paid-for content market other than music (films, TV programmes, etc.) as Time Warner video content cannot be regarded as dominant in Europe. In order to ease the competition concerns raised by the transaction the parties offered a package of commitments, whose ultimate goal is to break the links between Bertelsmann and AOL. In particular, AOL and Bertelsmann have put in place a mechanism by which Bertelsmann will progressively exit from AOL Europe and the French joint venture AOL Compuserve. In addition, the parties will take interim measures to ensure that the relationships between AOL and Bertelsmann will be kept at arm's length until Bertelsmann's exit has been completed. In particular, AOL Time Warner will not take any action that would result in Bertelsmann music being available online exclusively through AOL or being formatted in a proprietary format that is playable exclusively on an AOL music player. With Europe's largest media company, particularly its leading music unit BMG, freed to compete alone, the Commission concluded that AOL/TW would not have the critical mass in terms of music publishing rights to dominate the market. « The Commission has a duty to prevent creation of dominant positions in all sectors, be they in the old or new economy. In a music market already characterised by a high degree of consolidation, the danger, which has been averted, was that by allowing AOL to team up effectively with three of the five music majors the resulting integrated company could have dominated the on-line music distribution market and music players », European Competition Commissioner Mario Monti said. The Bertelsmann undertaking also solved concerns in the UK Internet market, where AOL is one of the leading dial-up access providers and where the bundling of TW's and Bertelsmann's music content with Internet subscriptions could have achieved dominance in this market. An Independent Compliance Monitor will be appointed to ensure compliance with the undertakings concerning Bertelsmann until Bertelsmann exits from AOL Europe and AOL Compuserve France.  From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Oct 11 10:11:09 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 693592A316 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 10:11:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA06503 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 10:11:09 -0400 Message-ID: <39E47622.777A56B6@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 10:16:02 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Alec Klein: Groups Seek Watchdog System for AOL-Time Warner http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48663-2000Oct10.html Groups Seek Watchdog System for AOL-Time Warner (washingtonpost.com) by Alec Klein Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, October 11, 2000; Page E03 Several public interest groups called on federal regulators yesterday to establish an independent enforcement system to ensure that America Online Inc. and Time Warner Inc. do not discriminate against rivals after the two companies merge to create a media powerhouse. Leaders of Consumers Union and other groups said they hope to meet with regulators at the Federal Communications Commission soon to discuss their plan to create an arbitration panel that would monitor the actions of Dulles-based AOL if regulators approve its $183 billion takeover of Time Warner. "The cable services bureau is looking forward to meeting with them," said Deborah Lathen, the FCC's cable chief.

The consumer groups are seeking a separate meeting with the Federal Trade Commission, which also is reviewing the deal. [snip] AOL has imposed contractual conditions on Walt Disney Co. in an attempt to deter users from leaving AOL's network to reach competitors on the Web, sources have told The Washington Post. Also, Time Warner has offered several Internet service providers access to its cable television lines, but only under conditions that would give Time Warner a big chunk of their revenue and control over key content, documents show.< "These [reports] reflect in essence the smoking gun, a pattern of deviating from open, nondiscriminatory access principles through onerous contractual terms," said Gene Kimmelman, co-director of the Consumers Union, the advocacy group that publishes Consumer Reports magazine. Kimmelman said he will be joined in these meetings by the Consumer Federation of America, the Media Access Project and the Center for Media Education. [snip]  Separately, AT&T Corp. General Counsel James W. Cicconi met recently with FCC Chief of Staff Kathryn Brown to press the agency to require Time Warner to buy AT&T's 25.5 percent stake in Time Warner Entertainment, according to FCC filings. AT&T and Time Warner are far apart on coming to financial terms, according to sources. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Oct 11 11:05:00 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A02D2A061 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 11:05:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA07983 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 11:05:00 -0400 Message-ID: <39E482C2.AA8D8259@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 11:09:54 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Views of new ICANN board members The links below provide prehaps the most interesting quotes regarding the positions of the new ICANN board members. Jamie -------------------- Subject: ICANN Elections results are in Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 10:31:40 -0400 From: "Christopher Chiu" To: "Ncdnhc-Discuss@Lyris. Isoc. Org" As some of you may have heard, the results of ICANN's At Large elections are already in. The winners are: Masanobu Katoh (Asia/Australia) Karl Auerbach (North America) Ivan Moura Campos (Latin America) Nii Quaynor (Africa) Andy Mueller-Maguhn (Europe) To see the official results, click http://www.election.com/us/icann/icannresult.html If you're curious about their views (on Civil Society and so forth), see http://www.internetdemocracyproject.org/IDPanswerskatoh.htm http://www.internetdemocracyproject.org/IDPanswersauerbach.htm http://www.internetdemocracyproject.org/IDPanswerscampos.htm http://www.internetdemocracyproject.org/IDPanswersquaynor.htm http://www.internetdemocracyproject.org/IDPanswersmueller.htm Sincerely, Christopher Chiu Global Internet Liberty Campaign Organizer American Civil Liberties Union -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Oct 11 12:43:10 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D454D2A061 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 12:43:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA10555 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 12:43:10 -0400 Message-ID: <39E499C5.D9FB33F0@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 12:48:05 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Mixing the sex trade and child protection This pointer from MR. http://www.icmregistry.com/reg_arch.asp This is how icm, which seeks ICANN approval .xxx and .kids, mixes the sex trade and child protection. Apparently, fees for good porn domains will fund wholesome .kids content. Jamie -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Oct 11 12:50:55 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24A182A061 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 12:50:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA10777; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 12:50:55 -0400 Message-ID: <39E49B95.4292D97A@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 12:55:49 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Cc: "Murray, Jim" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] BEUC press release on EU AOL/TW announcement http://www.beuc.org/public/press/pr2000/content.htm B E U C - Bureau Européen des Unions de Consommateurs - The European Organisation Avenue de Tervueren 36, bte 4, B-1040 Bruxelles, Tél: (+32-2) 743 15 90, Fax: (+32-2) 740.28.02 Information: Jim Murray / Dominique Forest / Ursula Pachl Date: 11 October 2000 Reference: PR 2000/31 AOL TIME WARNER REACTION OF BEUC, THE EUROPEAN CONSUMERS' ORGANISATION The Commission has announced its conditional approval of the AOL/Time Warner merger. In BEUC's arguments against the proposed merger, we expressed particular concern on the issue of data protection and privacy. AOL has access to an enormous amount of data about the web-surfing, buying and consumption behaviour of their subscribers - including, for example, information about the extent to which their subscribers log onto competitors of Time Warner. If Time Warner have access to this data they will enjoy a huge competitive advantage and consumer privacy will be reduced correspondingly. We call on the competition and data protection authorities around the EU to carefully monitor the effects of the merger, both in terms of data protection and competitive advantage. One of the objectives of AOL is to improve the "stickiness" of their web-site. They want their subscribers to spend as much time as possible on the AOL site, dealing with companies directly available on that site and not leaving that site to contact competing companies. Access to Time Warner content will improve the stickiness of the AOL web-site and act as a disincentive for subscribers to go elsewhere. It would also discourage new entrants into the market. This is a matter which competition authorities must monitor very carefully. END  From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Oct 11 16:35:14 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E7992A316 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 16:35:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA16785 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 16:35:14 -0400 Message-ID: <39E4D02A.113284E@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 16:40:10 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Japan voter mobilization for ICANN election This is an interesting, and I think important account of voter mobilization in Japan for the ICANN election. http://www.lares.dti.ne.jp/~sakichan/essays/icann-election.txt -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Oct 12 06:22:56 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECF772A060 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 06:22:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA30276 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 06:22:55 -0400 Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 06:22:55 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Brenda Sandburg: Domain Dilemma http://www.callaw.com/stories/edt1012c.shtml Domain Dilemma Some worry mediators may go too far when settling domain name fights By Brenda Sandburg The Recorder October 12, 2000 It's cheap. It's quick. And it's designed to keep disputes over Internet domain names out of court. The nearly year-old arbitration system to resolve conflicts between domain name holders and trademark owners established by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) has been -- by most accounts -- a success. But there are a few glitches. Some lawyers worry established copyright law is sometimes undermined by arbitrators, giving trademark owners rights they don't really have. Decisions are occasionally inconsistent, and ICANN panelists don't have set guidelines to follow when they rule in a dispute, they say. [snip] Dubed the Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy, the ICANN procedure arose as a way to handle cybersquatting cases in which someone registers a domain name that is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark in order to make a profit off the name or draw traffic to a Web site. Under the system, a trademark owner who objects to a domain name registration can file a complaint with one of four ICANN-accredited bodies which then appoint a panel to hear the dispute. The parties can select either a one-person or three-person panel, which issues an opinion within about two weeks. In making their decision, panelists must consider whether a domain name is identical or confusingly similar to a service mark, if the registrant obtained the name in bad faith, and if the registrant has a legitimate interest in it. The types of cases the panelists have reviewed have become more complex over time. While initial disputes involved clear cases of cybersquatting, panels are now handling "more questionable cases that are not as clear cut," Donahey said. Take for instance, fights over domain names that use a generic word that also serves as a trademark. J.Crew International Inc. was incensed when it learned an individual had registered the domain name "crew.com" and was attempting to sell it. The company filed a complaint, and a mediation panel ruled 2 to 1 in its favor. On the other hand, a man who registered penguin.org won his fight to keep the domain name, despite a complaint from publishing giant Penguin Books Ltd. Jamie Love, director of Consumer Project on Technology, a consumer advocacy group founded by Ralph Nader, said decisions like the one in the J.Crew case are unjustly expanding trademark law "to give trademark holders broader rights in cyberspace than they have in the real world." Love and others contend the use of a generic name as a service mark does not guarantee that the trademark owner has exclusive rights to all uses of the word. But David Bernstein, a lawyer who serves as an ICANN arbitrator, said the issue is not as simple as that. The key question, in his mind, is what is the domain name holder's motivation. "You need to look beyond the name itself to the motivation of the registrant and the way the name is being used," said Bernstein, a partner at New York's Debevoise & Plimpton. Panelists have also been split in cases where a registrant claims fair use rights to a trademark, such as to criticize a company or set up a fan site. A former employee of Bridgestone Firestone Inc. registered bridgestone-firestone.net for a Web site that included critical information about the tire manufacturer. A panelist ruled that the registrant had legitimate fair use and free speech rights to the domain name. In another case, a mediator ordered the registrant of wal-martsucks.com to transfer the domain name to Wal-Mart Stores Inc. The panelist concluded that the domain name was identical or confusingly similar to Wal-Mart's trademark and that the registrant had registered the name in bad faith, intending to sell the domain name for profit. [snip] Mediators are also concerned that their colleagues are going beyond their mandate. "It's not clear to some people whether traditional infringement is or should be grounds for finding a violation of the [domain name] policy," said Mark Partridge, a partner at Chicago's Pattishall, McAuliffe, Newbury, Hilliard & Geraldson. Partridge, who was among a panel of experts that recommended creation of ICANN's dispute resolution system, said he believes panels were not intended to rule whether domain names constitute infringement. Panelist Dana Haviland agrees. "The process is designed to provide a quick remedy -- not binding -- to cybersquatting," Haviland, a partner at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, said. "The proceeding is not intended as a substitute to going to court to prove trademark infringement." FINE-TUNING THE SYSTEM Nevertheless, panelists, IP attorneys and consumer advocates believe the system can be fixed. Donahey, for one, advocates creation of an appellate process that can overturn improper decisions and establish precedent. "No one analyzes contradictory opinions," Donahey said. "We need someone to say 'this is the standard.'" But A. Michael Froomkin, a professor at the University of Miami School of Law who has closely followed ICANN procedures, argues an appeals process will make the system more expensive. Instead, he thinks the fix lies in a stricter set of rules. "There ought to be a set of agreed examples of the application of the rules" that would serve as guideposts for panelists mediating certain issues, such as free speech, Froomkin said. Others suggest ways to cut down on the docket of disputes. Love argues that there would be fewer battles if the domain space was expanded to include top-level domains that define one's Internet address by what one does (e.g. .airline, .union). ICANN plans to select a test bed of new top-level domains by the end of the year. IP attorney Carl Oppedahl, of Frisco, Colo.-based Oppedahl & Larson, believes trademark owners who act in bad faith should be dinged. There should be "a meaningful penalty" imposed on those who misuse the system in an attempt to steal a domain name by claiming it to be a trademark -- so-called reverse domain name hijacking, Oppedahl said. ICANN is open to hearing recommendations about the dispute system. Andrew McLaughlin, ICANN's chief policy officer, plans to see how the rules are being applied and if they need to be tightened up. As to the proposal for an appellate body, McLaughlin said he was personally opposed to the idea. "The right appeals forum is a court," he said. ICANN's system "was intended as a cheap, quick alternative to court. If the UDPR goes into the appeal process, everyone will appeal and it will double the amount of time" to resolve a dispute. -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Oct 12 07:02:07 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 001F42A060 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 07:02:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-1.essential.org [216.0.125.1]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA30514; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 07:02:03 -0400 Message-ID: <39E59A30.BFC5440D@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 07:02:08 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Reed Hundt on day 4 of Nader/Hundt debate http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39294,00.html Hundt: Nader Should Back Gore by Reed Hundt Oct. 12, 2000 PDT On the open access issue, Mr. Hundt says: ". . .for Mr. Nader to espouse the cause of Disney in its lobbying fights with Time Warner is, if you permit, Mickey Mouse behavior. Disney does not need the shilling of one of America's foremost champions of the little guy, and Mr. Nader should stick to the concerns of his historic constituency -- the people Al Gore has said he would stand up for, and whom he has stood up for all his public life. "Sixth, Cisco's vision of the Internet fundamentally reinforces the concepts of openness, and the transfer of market power to the individual and/or enterprise user. The tools discussed by Cisco can work for the individual: Every person with a server is part of the vision. [snip] "consumer protection actions at the FCC and FTC have never been so sweeping and effective." [snip] "Join us, Ralph, in electing the most visionary leader our political process perhaps has ever produced from one of the two major parties. Help elect Al Gore the next president of the United States." Also from Hundt's Oct 12 response: "I notice that Mr. Nader stoops momentarily to the Bush-like tactic of mocking Al Gore for asserting accurately that he was responsible for certain initiatives that have promoted the Internet in America. Presumably no one thinks that in his well-publicized Larry King interview Al Gore meant to say that he invented the software protocols that allow communication across interconnecting networks (hence the name "Internet")." What Ralph Nader actually said was" Oct 9, "While the vice president has been unfairly criticized for overstating his role in the development of the Internet, he has not received enough recognition for the fundamental shortcomings of the administration's policies." Oct 11, "Mr. Hundt doesn't claim that Mr. Gore invented the Internet, but he does lay claim to credit for its success as a technology. And while Mr. ^XGore surely deserves some credit, particularly for his early congressional backing of government investments in the research and ^Xdevelopment which created the Internet, Mr. Hundt should be more expansive in terms of the reasons for the Internet's success." -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Oct 12 09:29:49 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A8F52A46B; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 09:29:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA32210; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 09:29:48 -0400 Message-ID: <39E5BDFC.B6C66348@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 09:34:52 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] UNCITRAL on electronic signatures UNCITRAL is the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law. Among other things, it has developed model laws on ecommerce and specifically, for digital signatures. This is rather technical stuff, and not a casual read, but important for those who follow these things. One related topic that UNCITRAL and other global bodies will be dealing with are the legal effect of contracts of adhesion in business to consumer contracts, executed over the Internet. This is an ongoing work program. Jamie ------------------------------- Subject: UNCITRAL & electronic signatures Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 08:45:09 -0400 From: Houston Putnam Lowry Organization: Brown & Welsh, P.C. To: INTPIL@MAIL.ABANET.ORG In case anyone is interested in the recent preliminary work done by UNCITRAL on electronic signatures, the reports can be found at: http://www.uncitral.org/english/sessions/unc/UNC-33/acn9-465.pdf http://www.uncitral.org/english/sessions/unc/UNC-33/acn9-467.pdf I would appreciate any comments anyone would be interested in sharing with me... Houston Putnam Lowry, Esq. Brown & Welsh, P.C. Phone: +1 (203) 235-1651 Fax: +1 (203) 235-9600 http://www.BrownWelsh.com My PGP public key is available on PGP's server. A few interesting quotes from http://www.uncitral.org/english/sessions/unc/UNC-33/acn9-465.pdf Article 1. Sphere of application 36. The text of draft article 1 as considered by the Working Group was as follows: "These Rules apply to electronic signatures used in the context of commercial* relationships and do not override any law intended for the protection of consumers.  41. A suggestion was made that uses of electronic signatures involving consumers should be excluded from the scope of the Uniform Rules. It was recalled that the matter of consumers had been considered by the Working Group at its previous session (see A/CN.9/457, paras. 20, 56 and 70). After discussion, the Working Group reaffirmed the decision made at that session not to displace any law intended for the protection of consumers. However, under that same decision, consumers should not be excluded from the scope of the Uniform Rules since there might be cases where the Uniform Rules might prove useful to consumers. ----------------------- Subject: UNCITRAL Commission work status Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 08:27:35 -0400 From: Houston Putnam Lowry To: INTPIL@MAIL.ABANET.ORG The following is a summary of what happened at UNCITRAL this past summer. Houston Putnam Lowry 203-235-1651 http://www.uncitral.org/english/news/exec-rpt.htm -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Oct 12 21:13:37 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 253E32A324 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 21:13:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA16126 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 21:13:37 -0400 Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 21:13:37 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Japan: proposed new law protecting personal information ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 08:59:46 +0900 From: Takeshi Muramoto To: Ecommerce@venice.essential.org Subject: [Ecommerce] Government panel proposal Info Government panel proposed new Law regarding personal information protecting law. However, the proposal is for private-sector law rather than comprehensive one. Takeshi Muramoto Consumer Law News Network musan@mba.sphere.ne.jp Asahi Shinbun http://www.asahi.com/english/asahi/1012/asahi101206.html October 12, 2000 A report submitted by a government panel to Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori on Wednesday demands private-sector organizations be required by law to properly control personal information in their possession. Although computer-processed personal data held by governmental organizations is protected by law, there is no similar protection for personal information held by organizations in the private sector. The government plans to draft a bill based on the panel's proposals, which it hopes to pass during the ordinary Diet session early next year. Under the proposal, a company that leaks personal information, including the addresses of customers and information on their assets, can be ordered to block the leakage immediately. Ministries will also be empowered to take steps to secure the protection of personal information. Companies that do not comply will face punitive measures. The proposal consists of five basic principles. Organizations and individuals will be required to follow the guidelines when handling personal information. One principle states that companies must explain why they need the personal information and how it will be used. Another states that personal information must be obtained legally and that companies should attempt to confirm that the data is correct. Individuals would be allowed to request that personal information be disclosed. Concerns have been voiced that the principals included in the proposal could lead to restrictions in journalism, religion, academia and politics. To curb restrictions of this nature, the proposal goes to some length to indicate the restrictions are not meant to curb activities necessary to protect public interests and proper business activities. The proposal stipulates that some of the obligations will not be imposed on news media and states the need for further discussion with representatives of religious, academic and political circles. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Oct 13 07:49:09 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 410AA2A324 for ; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 07:49:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-8.essential.org [216.0.125.8]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA22746 for ; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 07:49:08 -0400 Message-ID: <39E6F6BF.DF6BD957@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 07:49:19 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Ralph Nader's 3rd missive in Wired debate with Reed Hundt http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39295,00.html Nader: Al Isn't Net's Best Friend by Ralph Nader 3:00 a.m. Oct. 13, 2000 PDT Topics, access to government information competition policy in telecom open access privacy free software movement intellectual property rights ICANN -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Oct 13 15:41:59 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FC562A392 for ; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 15:41:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA32302 for ; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 15:41:59 -0400 Message-ID: <39E766C4.74C72613@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 15:47:16 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Article on the E-Sign and UETA http://www.consumerlaw.org/e_sign.html Subject: Article on the E-Sign and UETA Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 15:15:49 -0400 From: "Margot Saunders" To: "'James Love'" , " 'Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS'"  Gail Hillebrand of Consumers Union and I have finally completed the attached article on the relationship of the recently passed E-Sign law with the state UETAs. We expect the article to be published in a law review, however, we thought you might be interested in it sooner. The article is attached below in html and word perfect, or you can access it at www.consumerlaw.org or at www.consumer.org. [Interior link: http://www.consumerlaw.org/e_sign.html ] Please let me know if you have any questions. Margot Saunders Managing Attorney National Consumer Law Center 1629 K Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 986-6060 fax (202) 463-9462 margot@nclcdc.org www.consumerlaw.org  From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Oct 13 16:22:47 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E57DA2A392; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 16:22:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA00416; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 16:22:46 -0400 Message-ID: <39E77054.11172732@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 16:28:04 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , nc-tlds Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] New TLD applications now on web http://www.icann.org/tlds/ -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Oct 14 09:30:42 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCAAD2A31B; Sat, 14 Oct 2000 09:30:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-8.essential.org [216.0.125.8]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA09705; Sat, 14 Oct 2000 09:30:40 -0400 Message-ID: <39E86012.E8F1925F@cptech.org> Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 09:30:58 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Reed Hundt's last word in Wired's Nader/Hundt debate This Reed Hundt's last word in Wired's Nader/Hundt debate. It includes his continued attack on the open access issue (which he continues to refer to as if it is mostly about Disney), and a wide range of other defenses for the Administration's policies. Jamie http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39296,00.html Hundt: Love the Net? Vote Al by Reed Hundt 3:00 a.m. Oct. 14, 2000 PDT "Of course, the fact that the multiple protocols that create the Web experience are shared is one of the key reasons for the widespread adoption of the Net. And yet it is also true that the code that constitutes MS-DOS has also had widespread adoption. [snip] "You raise the open-access issue, again embracing the Disney argument that because a cable company unlawfully and briefly did not carry a broadcast TV show, it therefore follows that a new regime of regulating Internet access should be invented and applied, presumably to any and all bandwidth companies. I might call this overreaction -- or an excessive attachment to Regis Philbin. "But if we really wanted the most number of people in the United States to have a crack at being a millionaire -- i.e., if we want to maximize value creation -- it would not be by expanding to the Internet space the clear obligation of cable companies to carry broadcast. Rather, we would promote competition and investment in alternative bandwidth providers. "We should always prefer robust competition over monopoly-encouraging regulation. Because that is what the open-access debate is really about beneath the surface: letting cable monopolists perpetuate monopolies in return for granting access to a powerful few, such as the estimable and effective Disney. I assure you that if the cable companies could obtain monopoly status in return for granting open access, they would do so. That is what they did in the 1984 Cable Act, which in turn led to record increases in cable prices, which in turn led to the mandate for me, at the FCC, to check those price increases, which I did, until the Republican Congress stripped us of that authority in 1996. [snip] "As to privacy issues, I have said before and say again that a new paradigm for privacy protection should be the subject of federal legislation. There can be no doubt that a Democratic White House and Democratic Congress can make this happen, and that a Republican Congress will pervert those goals. [snip] "But is it a lot or a little for Al Gore to have taken the essential initiative to create: 1) the largest new national program for K-12 education in the last 20 years; 2) the fastest-spreading innovation in education since chalk; 3) a platform for new training, curriculum, charter schools, individualized testing, new business models, online community creation, tutoring, and addressing disabilities; and 4) obtaining the greatest amount of participation from local school districts ever (nearly 90 percent)? To me, it is a lot. It certainly took a lot of effort --- not a bit of which came from Mr. Nader, I add with regret. [snip] "Mr. Nader also states with insouciance that "putting existing government information on the Internet should be the easy part. Really, almost no business thinks so. -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Oct 14 10:34:24 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA6F42A31B for ; Sat, 14 Oct 2000 10:34:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA10191 for ; Sat, 14 Oct 2000 10:34:24 -0400 Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 10:34:24 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Grahn Lea: Software patents: will Europe roll over for the multinationals? http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/13942.html -- Software patents: will Europe roll over for the multinationals? By: Graham Lea Posted: 12/10/2000 at 13:38 GMT Software patents could become the kiss-of-death for many software developers, because it is becoming impossible to write a program without a serious risk of falling foul of some patent - frequently, an undeserved and opportunist one. The threat is also grave for many smaller businesses in Europe. They could easily be threatened by out-of-the-blue demands for patent licensing fees for their software, or for some process on their Internet site. At a well-attended meeting sponsored by French MEP Gilles Savary and arranged by the Eurolinux Alliance at the European Parliament in Brussels this week, attention was drawn to new moves in Europe to legalise software patents. In Europe there exist two totally independent bodies with responsibility for legal issues connected with patents: the European Union set up by the Treaty of Rome and now having 15 members, and the European Patent Office (EPO) set up by the Munich Convention and having 19 members. The EPO has granted more than 10,000 patents that include software, despite it being clear that, at the moment, patents based on computer programs are illegal in Europe. For example, a patent is likely to be granted by the EPO if a relational database is involved, whilst exactly the same process using a document database would not receive a patent because it is deemed to be not technical. Software patents also fly in the face of the 1991 EU software directive. Unfortunately, software patents cannot easily be successfully challenged at the EPO, not just because of the expense to the smaller organisations who are likely to suffer from the enforcement of software patents that should not have been granted, but because the EPO Boards of Appeal are the same building in Munich, and they lunch together... In the US (and Japan), software patents and patents on business processes are being granted at an alarming rate, although they may be at odds with the 1947 GATT treaty and the TRIPS agreement. Legality in retrospect? Now the EPO wants to ensure that software patents are made legal, and plans to revise the European Patent Convention (EPC) at a diplomatic conference in Munich from 21 to 29 November. The EPO's legal sleight of hand is to claim that although article 52 (2) (c) of the EPC says that "programs for computers... shall not be regarded as inventions", with total disdain for any notion of integrity the EPO argues that this was interpreted so that it "in no way excludes appropriate protection for software-related inventions, i.e. inventions whose subject matter consists of or includes a computer program". The ponderous EU, with three of the European Commission directorates involved in the patents issue as well as the two co-legislators (the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers) that superintend it, has been threatening a directive (as European laws are called) on software patents, but has been too slow and now accepts that its directive will not appear until after the EPO meeting. The EU does have a champion in enterprise and information society commissioner Erkki Liikanen, who said in an email read at the Brussels meeting (yes, he replies to his own email): "I am absolutely against the US patent practice in this field" and is urging internal market commissioner Frits Bolkestein to arrange a consultation about the EPO's plans. The EPO is the close buddy of the multinationals, who see intellectual property as being a source of income. With more than 60 per cent of Europeans being employed in small and medium sized businesses (and also accounting for 60 per cent of European GDP), the multinationals are hoping to stifle creativity by filing patents on the fundamental processes in computer programs. Their intention is to extract upfront payments, licensing fees, and to set restrictive conditions (for example, geographical limitation). Meanwhile, through cross-licensing with other multinationals with large patent portfolios, they can protect their own position. [snip] A preliminary administrative EPO roll call has shown that the countries wearing the white hats are the UK, France and Germany, who remarkably have reversed their previous stance in the face of the mounting evidence of harm to their economies if software patenting is approved by the EPO. They are supported by Denmark, Italy, Portugal, Spain and Sweden in calling for more time to study the issue. The guys wearing the black hats and wanting software patents in Europe are Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Switzerland, Ireland, Liechtenstein, Monaco, Greece, and the Netherlands, with Finland not having voted and new-member Turkey also thought likely to be wearing a black hat. To change the EPC, a 75 per cent majority is required, and each country, regardless of size, has one vote. Questions need to be asked as to how much lobbying it took to get Liechtenstein's vote, and why France didn't get the message across to Monaco. The issue has been elevated from a nice little earner for the multinationals, patent lawyers and the fonctionnaires of the patents issuers to an important political issue with fundamental consequences for employment and software development. Although Eurolinux is to be congratulated for drawing attention to the issue, it is something of far more fundamental importance than the concerns of, for example, the 6,000 members (that's a lot) of the Skane Sjaelland Linux Group based in Copenhagen. Software patents, when enforced - for that is the next stage - will have a fundamental effect on software development and the use of software by smaller organisations who cannot maintain a gang of patent lawyers. Software patents are also fundamentally against EU objectives decided at the June Feira meeting, which declared support for European open software initiatives and the promotion of open source software in the public sector. It's also beginning to look as though enforced software patents may be used as a way of countering the threat posed by the open software movement, which is particularly ironic in view of the fact that much of the fundamental software in the industry - BIND and SENDMAIL for example - was via this route. Nor is this just a European issue: it is of fundamental world-wide importance to all developers and users of software who are concerned that their freedom is being usurped by multinationals and their patent lawyers: they do not deserve to profit from the work of those who have given their time and software development expertise to the community. Patents are a controlled grant of exemption from competition law, in that they give a limited waiver from competition rules, and are intended to protect the inventors of physical objects. But to suggest that "distributing cooking recipes in a supermarket to generate more sales" is patentable because computer can be involved in printing out the list of ingredients is plain bonkers. Software is best protected through copyright patent law, and if software patents are not de-legalised, it will only be a matter of time before Bill Gates gets a patent on binary code. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Oct 15 11:51:48 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39CB82A30E for ; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 11:51:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA25197 for ; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 11:51:48 -0400 Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 11:51:48 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Coble database bill dead for now http://www.newsbytes.com/pubNews/00/156576.html By Robert MacMillan, Newsbytes WASHINGTON, DC, U.S.A., 12 Oct 2000, 1:20 PM CST A controversial approach to protecting databases from misappropriation will have to be reintroduced next year after its chances for any passage this year have essentially been extinguished, said Rep. Howard Coble, R-N.C. [snip] Chairman Thomas Bliley, R-Va., whose own bill, H.R. 1858 - the Consumer and Investor Access to Information Act - has received more support from the high-tech industry than Coble's bill. IT industry groups largely believe that Coble's bill would hinder the growth of electronic commerce. The Coble bill sets up a number of intellectual property protections for database owners, but according to the Commerce Committee, makes them so stringent that private citizens, companies and investors would be punished by fines and jail time for the relatively innocuous appropriation of material contained in other people's databases. Opposition to Coble's bill is fierce, coming from many sources, including the US Chamber of Commerce, AT&T Corp., MCI WorldCom Inc., Bell Atlantic Corp., and Yahoo Corp., as well as Bliley, Commerce Committee Ranking Democrat John Dingell, D-Mich., and Commerce Committee member Michael Oxley, R-Ohio. One of Coble's star supporters, however, is the National Association of Realtors, which chiefly is interested in protecting its Multiple Listing Services database, especially after a member sold it to an outside source, violating NAR code. Judiciary staffers were unwilling to say how Bliley's retirement from Congress would affect the strategies for supporting the Coble bill, but one said that "there is forever a jurisdictional flare-up between these two committees on these issues." "It was very artfully drafted to invoke jurisdiction on their part," the staffer said of Bliley's bill. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Oct 15 15:27:58 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D7FB2A05E for ; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 15:27:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA28733 for ; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 15:27:47 -0400 Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 15:27:47 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Corel/Microsoft ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 23:54:48 -0400 From: James Love To: AT-MEMBERS@MAIL.ABANET.ORG Subject: Corel/Microsoft http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/zd/20001012/tc/microsoft_net_for_linux__1.html [snip] Some industry pundits likened the Microsoft investment in Corel to other investments Microsoft made a few years ago in both Apple Computer Corp. and Inprise Corp. (Nasdaq:INPR - news) -- in terms of providing quick ends to pending lawsuits by those two companies against Microsoft. But, according to the SEC document, it was Microsoft that was poised to sue Corel for patent infringement. The three patents in question involved Microsoft's equation editor, table formatter, and spelling and grammar checker. "Microsoft covenants to Corel that neither Microsoft nor any of its Affiliates shall sue Corel based on any claim that current or past versions of Corel Office Professional or Corel WordPerfect Suite (and successor Corel WordPerfect office productivity products) (collectively, the "Covenanted Products") infringe Microsoft's U.S. Patents 5,510,980; 5,272,628; 5,287,514; and 5,437,036," specified the Corel SEC filing. [snip] -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 16 10:22:09 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 652C629AE8 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 10:22:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA14651 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 10:22:09 -0400 Message-ID: <39EB106C.B5BBF2CD@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 10:27:56 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] ICANN Channel Europe Europe seems to be getting organized with respect to ICANN. Jamie http://www.icannchannel.org/ ICANN Channel was first launched in German, inspired by the first ICANN Studienkreis meeting in Leipzig. The German pages can be found at http://www.icannchannel.de. The At Large elections show the need for more information and debate about ICANN in Europe and among European At Large members. ICANN Channel Europe will provide links to ICANN-related sites all over Europe and additional ICANN information. It may obviously be of value for people interested in ICANN from all over the world; the focus on Europe is not due to parochialism, but due to limited resources. Editor: Alexander Svensson Blumenau 20 D 22089 Hamburg info@icannchannel.de ICANN Channel © Alexander Svensson 2000 -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 16 11:05:07 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DBEE2A05E for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 11:05:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA15937 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 11:05:06 -0400 Message-ID: <39EB1A7E.BD1BE082@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 11:10:54 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Cecily Barnes: Catchy domain names lose their luster Last spring I predicted the expansion of the TLD name space would lead to a collapse in the big prices for generic names + .com domains. Jamie http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-3185398.html Catchy domain names lose their luster By Cecily Barnes Staff Writer, CNET News.com October 16, 2000, 4:00 a.m. PT Pat Patten vividly remembers negotiating for the domain name Jewelry.com in October 1999, before the launch of his online jewelry site. Although he and his partners had purchased Netjewelry.com as a backup, he really wanted "jewelry." "Our thought was that it would be very significant in raising capital," Patten said. "Obviously, to have the generic industry URL gave the group instant credibility." Such thinking was common during the go-go days of the Internet, when a generic URL plus some research figures about the potential size of a market often equaled millions of dollars in venture capital and even a high-flying IPO. But as the rise and fall of Jewelry.com and countless other sites shows, playing the name game has often been a losing proposition. Jewelry.com folded last month soon after it was bought by Miadora.com. Patten won't say how much he and his partners paid for the Jewelry.com domain, but he acknowledges that a good name does not make a successful business. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 16 13:04:13 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD7D629AE8 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:04:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA19540 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:04:13 -0400 Message-ID: <39EB3669.AFF41679@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:10:01 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Deborah Scoblionkov: Qwest slams Peter Pan Sue Ashdown passed on this interesting slaming story. Jamie http://www.salon.com/business/feature/2000/10/16/slammed/index.html Qwest slams Peter Pan By Deborah Scoblionkov A case of mistaken identity exposes how a long-distance telephone company is targeting Asian immigrants. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 16 13:18:36 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10D8B29AE8 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:18:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA19987 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:18:36 -0400 Message-ID: <39EB39C8.FE29544F@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:24:24 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Material Girl Kicks Cybersquatter Off Madonna.com http://dailynews.yahoo.com/htx/nm/20001016/wr/madonna_suit_dc_1.html Monday October 16 12:27 PM ET Material Girl Kicks Cybersquatter Off Madonna.com By Elif Kaban GENEVA (Reuters) - Pop superstar Madonna has won her case at an international panel to evict a New York cybersquatter from the Internet address madonna.com which was initially a porn site, U.N. arbitrators said on Monday. The American singer, whose famous hits include ``Like a Virgin'' and ``Material Girl'', filed the complaint in July at the Geneva-based World Intellectual Property Organization against businessman Dan Parisi who was first to register the Internet address. A three-member panel at WIPO, the United Nations copyright and intellectual property agency which runs an arbitration system that evicts cybersquatters, ordered Parisi to transfer the site to Madonna. The panel said Parisi, who is a Web site developer, had no trademark right to the name Madonna and failed to prove legitimate interest in the Internet domain name which he had registered in bad faith. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 16 19:35:09 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B18C02A372 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 19:35:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-10.essential.org [216.0.125.10]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA30549 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 19:35:08 -0400 Message-ID: <39EAB6B3.DE7389DD@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 04:05:07 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Damien Cave: Get ready for Radical Karl Auerbach Pretty interesting interview with Karl Auerbach  http://www.salon.com/tech/view/2000/10/16/auerbach/index.html ICANN-oclast Get ready for a shake-up: Radical Karl Auerbach just got elected to the Internet's top governing body.  By Damien Cave Oct. 16, 2000 | For the past two years, Karl Auerbach has made a hobby of criticizing ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. He has called the Net's controlling authority over domain names everything from inept to "an organ of the trademark lobby." But on Tuesday the 50-year-old "wild-eyed radical," as he often calls himself, became part of that which he loathes: one of five new members of ICANN's board of directors. [snip] -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 16 21:25:55 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF8782A36B for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 21:25:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-6.essential.org [216.0.125.6]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA00519 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 21:25:54 -0400 Message-ID: <39EAD0AA.838BA9AA@cptech.org> Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 05:55:54 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Ben Charny: An ousider looks in on ICANN The Europe side of the ICANN revolt. Jamie An ousider looks in on ICANN By Ben Charny ZDNet News  In November, the ultimate ICANN outsider will become one of its ultimate insiders. When Andy Mueller-Maguhn of Germany takes his seat on the ICANN (International Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) board, he says he'll start tearing down the Internet governing body and rebuilding it from the bottom up.  [snip] -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 16 22:19:55 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F5B72A36B for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 22:19:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA01917 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 22:19:55 -0400 Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 22:19:55 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Subject: Re: [Random-bits] Ben Charny: An ousider looks in on ICANN In-Reply-To: <39EAD0AA.838BA9AA@cptech.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII I forgot the URL: http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2640449,00.html On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, James Love wrote: > The Europe side of the ICANN revolt. Jamie > > An ousider looks in on ICANN > By Ben Charny > > ZDNet News > > In November, the ultimate ICANN outsider will become one of its ultimate > insiders. > > When Andy Mueller-Maguhn of Germany takes his seat on the ICANN > (International Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) board, he > says he'll start tearing down the Internet governing body and rebuilding > it from the bottom up. > > [snip] > > > -- > James Love, Consumer Project on Technology > v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 > love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org > > > _______________________________________________ > Random-bits mailing list > Random-bits@lists.essential.org > http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/random-bits > -------------------------- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology, http://www.cptech.org love@cptech.org, v. 1.202.387.8030, f 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Oct 17 10:00:54 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 613B52A327 for ; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:00:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA10312 for ; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:00:54 -0400 Message-ID: <39EC5CFB.D411E99C@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:06:51 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Julia Angwin: 'Business-Method' Patents Create Growing Controversy Oct 3, 2000 'Business-Method' Patents Create Growing Controversy By JULIA ANGWIN Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL On his lunch break recently, Lloyd Roberts stopped at a Kentucky Fried Chicken outlet in New York City and ordered chicken and macaroni with cheese. The total came to $6.48. Before the 53-year-old camera-store manager could pull out his wallet, the cashier said, "I have a deal for you. For your leftover change, you can either get a small drink or a chicken strip." He chose the small soda, which normally sells for $1.29, bringing his total to an even $7. Such "upselling," as the promotion is called, has boosted the chicken outlet's revenue by about 4% over the past few weeks. Yet the store won't keep all of this sales growth to itself. Instead, a cut will go to Jay Walker, the billionaire founder of Priceline.com Inc. Another of his companies, Walker Digital Corp., of Stamford, Conn., holds a patent on this particular form of upselling. A Walker Digital subsidiary called Retail DNA plans to collect a royalty on each successful upsell at restaurants that are testing the system, including outlets of Burger King and McDonald's. Walker Digital thought up the idea and patented the method of putting together such an offer. Retail DNA then built software that plugs into the cash registers at fast-food outlets. The companies that provide the cash register software and hardware also will get a portion of the upselling revenue. It's a pretty sweet business proposition -- and one that is increasingly controversial. Such patents on "business methods," which have been soaring in recent years, have been denounced for allowing the patent owners to put a lock on innovation or to profit unfairly from it. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has been accused of issuing way too many such patents, and for dubious innovations. The issue is heating up in Washington. Tuesday, two House Democrats plan to offer a bill they say would make it easier and quicker to challenge business-method patents, in part by proposing a controversial step: making such patent applications publicly available, unlike applications for other types of patents. The bill would permit a challenger to present evidence why the patent shouldn't be granted. Opponents of such a move worry about theft of ideas. But the measure's two authors, Reps. Howard Berman of California and Rick Boucher of Virginia, say that revamping the system would, in the end, benefit patent holders by making their claims stronger. No one expects the issue to be settled anytime soon. The bill, which isn't likely to go anywhere in the current Congress's final days, is more an initial shot across the bow. "The bill I am introducing is a work in progress, and one that will likely generate great debate," Rep. Berman says. The proposal is likely to face opposition from independent inventors and people who don't like the idea of creating different procedures for different types of patents. Such a move could create conflicts with international treaties that bar the U.S. from discriminating among types of patents, some experts say. Moreover, Congress generally has shied away from these sorts of distinctions. Patents today have become an increasingly popular business tool, particularly for business methods. Many have been controversial -- such as a patent won by British Telecommunications PLC for a method of clicking between Web pages similar to hyperlinks and Amazon.com Inc.'s patent for "1-Click" shopping, which allows online customers to buy things with a single mouse click. Patent proponents argue that such intellectual property is the fuel of the New Economy -- that without these patents, inventors would be too afraid of copycats to go forward with their creations. Mr. Walker says that business-method patents are no different than patented factory processes for making steel or chemicals; it's just that the raw material of the digital age is information. Critics say just the opposite is true: that patent protections stifle innovators who are afraid of getting sued by patent holders. They argue that business-method patents often allow the "first mover" to corner a market. "What I find most offensive about business-method patents is that fundamentally they allow somebody to patent an idea," says Tim O'Reilly, a California publisher of technology books who is a leader in the fight against such patents. "That is at odds with so much that we hold sacred." [snip] Microsoft Corp. has a similarly conflicted position. As one of the most prolific customers of the patent office, winning 352 patents in 1999 alone, it can ill afford to criticize patents. But when Priceline.com sued Microsoft for copying its name-your-own-price system on the Expedia travel Web site, Microsoft lashed out. "We respect intellectual-property rights, but we don't respect some companies abusing the system," says Microsoft spokesman Jim Cullinan. He contends Priceline's patent is not valid, but he declines to elaborate on why. The lawsuit between Priceline and Microsoft is pending. [snip] Traditionally, patents were granted primarily for physical inventions such as the light bulb and the telephone. But in the 1981, the Supreme Court ruled that a computerized method of molding tires was patentable despite its reliance on software algorithms. An avalanche of software patents followed. The floodgates were opened further in 1998 when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled in favor of Signature Financial Group's patent for a method of managing mutual funds. The decision legitimized the business-method patent, which the court defined as "the transformation of data." The patent office argues that business-method patents were around before. It points to patents from the 1800s for things such as a method of compiling statistics that were the foundation of the tabulating machine. Even so, the trickle of business-method patents has become a flood since the 1998 court decision. The patent office says applications in the category of software and business methods have soared to 1,300 in 1999 from 700 in 1996, becoming the fastest-growing category. Mr. Walker is one of the patent office's best customers. Walker Digital earns money from licensing its inventions -- including, most notably, the patents for Priceline.com's name-your-own-price Web site. Closely held Walker Digital says its portfolio of 66 patents and 400 pending patents has earned it a $1 billion valuation with private investors. Walker Digital has raised more than $200 million from a roster of high-profile investors including Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen's Vulcan Ventures, media financier Herb Allen's Allen & Co., Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Bain & Co. and Wit Soundview Group Inc. To keep its patent machine humming, Mr. Walker has launched an aggressive lobbying operation that is focused on speeding up the patenting process. In July, Walker Digital hired Jim Rowe, a former top lobbyist for General Electric Co.'s NBC and former staffer for Rep. Chuck Schumer, to open a full-time Washington office. Mr. Rowe says his most pressing goal is to oppose the budget cuts being proposed in Congress for the patent office, which could slow down patent issuance. Mr. Walker says the lobbying is perfectly normal for a company the size of Priceline.com, though the office is run on behalf of the smaller Walker Digital. He also says he feels an obligation to "educate" lawmakers about the validity of business-method patents. Mr. Walker became interested in patents when he started a company that stuffed magazine subscription pitches into credit-card billing statements. He decided to patent the idea. When Mr. Walker started researching his application, he became fascinated by the idea that many successful business ideas could have been even more successful if they had been patented. To test his theory, in 1994, Mr. Walker paid a group of 20 influential Manhattan attorneys to have lunch and talk about patent law. He asked them if the credit card could have been patented. They said yes. Then he asked about the ATM machine. They said yes. Finally, he asked about frequent-flier miles. And they said yes. Mr. Walker was stunned. He couldn't figure out why nobody was patenting these great ideas. Later, at a conference, he asked Robert Crandall, the former chief executive of American Airlines parent AMR Corp., why he had never patented his creation of frequent-flier mileage. Mr. Crandall said he doesn't recall the exact conversation, but that patenting frequent-flier miles never occurred to him at the time. However, he added that he's not entirely sure that patenting such things is a good idea. "It seems to me that if business processes were patentable you would very severely limit competition," he says. Spurred by the prospect of patenting the next "big idea" like credit cards, Mr. Walker formed Walker Digital in 1995. He envisioned it as a think tank similar to Thomas Edison's laboratory in Menlo Park, N.J., which produced more than 1,000 patents during the late 1800s. Unlike Mr. Edison, however, Mr. Walker wasn't looking to hire brainy technologists. He wanted marketing men like himself. Walker Digital employs about 50 inventors -- many of them marketing and business experts -- who spend their days dreaming up better ways to do business and filing patent applications for them. On average, his firm files for a patent every two weeks. The inventors sit in standard-issue conference rooms to brainstorm on topics ranging from how to help employers find the right hires to how to motivate shoppers to spend more. "We try to break apart a marketing moment and say how can we add more value to the moment and more value to the retailer," says Vikas Kapoor, president and chief operating officer of Walker Digital. Some inventions that have emerged include an online system of selling expert advice, a method of comparison shopping for payment plans at a retail checkout and a way for news organizations to sell information that ends up unused in articles. Walker Digital's best-known creation, however, is the name-your-own-price process that is used to sell airline tickets, groceries, gasoline and other goods and services on Priceline.com's Web site. Walker Digital has a stake of almost 4% in Priceline. Mr. Walker says the Priceline patents have given him an important right: to sue to protect the effort he put into creating and obtaining them. "This is a perfect example of the system working," he says. -- Robert S. Greenberger and Scott Thurm contributed to this article. Write to Julia Angwin at julia.angwin@wsj.com  From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Oct 17 11:37:53 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDE962A327; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 11:37:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA13003; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 11:37:53 -0400 Message-ID: <39EC73B7.DA53CE3E@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 11:43:51 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , nc-tlds Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Skippy.com Thanks for John Berryhill for this pointer. Cites from CPC International v. Skippy Inc. 55 USPQ2d 1033 [I]f a trademark owner could 'enjoin the use of his mark in a non-commercial context found to be negative or offensive, then a corporation could shield itself from criticism by forbidding the use of its name in commentaries critical of its conduct' LL. Bean Inc. v. Drake Publishers Inc., 811 F2d 26, 33 (1st Cir. 1987) ... It is important that trademarks not be 'transformed from rights against unfair competition to rights to control language'. Mark A. Lemley, The Modern Lanham Act and the Death of Common Sense, 108 Yale L.J. 1687 (1999) <---------------More here------------------------> http://www.skippy.com/ Welcome to Skippy.com Home of Percy Crosby's Lovable Cartoon "SKIPPY" 6/5/00 - Panel Finds Skippy Trademark Ruling Hurt Free Speech - Dow Jones Report U.S. Fourth Circuit Decision, June 2, 2000 Read the Story Bestfoods Tried To Suppress with A Court Order Lower Court Denies Bestfoods Motion to Silence the Real Skippy -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Oct 18 21:09:12 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F7DE2A060 for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2000 21:09:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA23203 for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2000 21:09:12 -0400 Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 21:09:12 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] bountyquest.com http://www.bountyquest.com/ See AP Story: New Web-based Bounty System The Associated Press, Wed 18 Oct 2000 SAN JOSE, Calif. (AP) - A new startup hopes to appeal to the mercenary and educated masses, rewarding individuals with bounties of $10,000 or more when they provide information that helps companies settle high-stakes patent disputes. By using the power of the Web and cash incentives, Boston-based BountyQuest Corp. is positioning itself as a much-needed vehicle to get the hard-to-find evidence of so-called ``prior art'' that can quash or validate a patent - a tool some say is increasingly being used by companies to not only protect their innovations but stifle their competitors. Until now, such searches have been left in the hands of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and, more recently, a growing legion of lawyers and private patent research firms, all of whom rely largely on database searches. ``But in a world where documents are evanescent - like how someone can put an idea in the form of a Web page and then change the page - it's a hard problem,'' said Tim O'Reilly, a publisher of software books and a vocal critic of the patent system. ``It's all moving so fast, and imagine the patent office looking for that stuff.'' [snip' -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Oct 18 21:45:02 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 390962A060 for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2000 21:45:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-2.essential.org [216.0.125.2]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA24131 for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2000 21:45:01 -0400 Message-ID: <39ED7820.1634AED1@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 06:14:56 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] WN.com I have no idea how they do this, but wn.com, and the zillion related web sites, is the most amazing news searching engine I've seen. Jamie http://www.wn.com -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Oct 19 12:14:34 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE7832A060; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:14:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA03942; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:14:34 -0400 Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:14:34 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Random-bits@venice.essential.org Cc: Ecommerce@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Brussels to probe patents http://news.ft.com/ft/gx.cgi/ftc?pagename=View&c=Article&cid=FT3XLFXTFEC&live=true&tagid=ZZZAN4NOD0C Brussels to probe patents By Jean Eaglesham, Legal Correspondent Published: October 17 2000 The question of whether software should be patentable, which divides industry and governments alike, is to be formally addressed by the European Commission. A senior official said on Tuesday the Commission would launch a two month public consultation next week, as a precursor to agreeing its policy early next year. Some companies are pushing for Europe to follow the US lead and allow patents - monopoly rights - on software. But other businesses argue that this would stifle, rather than encourage, innovation. "There is a passionate debate raging on both sides," said Alison Brimelow, chief executive of the UK patent office. The Commission recognises that any policy move is likely to prove controversial, but believes it has to address the issue. "We have a big problem but we have it anyway, whatever decision is taken," said Heinz Zourek, deputy director general of markets. "We are trying to get a view of the positions of member states and interested parties on how to proceed." Mr Zourek added that the consultation paper, which will be posted on the Commission's website, would use structured questions to try to "avoid a philosophical debate". The consultation will run until December 15. The Commission announcement coincided with an agreement by several countries on European patents which Kim Howells, the UK minister for consumer and corporate affairs, on Tuesday claimed would cut translation costs by up to 50 per cent. Rather than having to pay to have each European patent translated into every national language, companies in countries that have signed up to the new agreement - Denmark, Germany, the UK, Liechtenstein, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Monaco - can rely on patents in English, French and German only. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Oct 19 20:21:25 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 343802A318 for ; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 20:21:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA16229 for ; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 20:21:25 -0400 Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 20:21:25 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] memo to Pacifica from Amy Goodman Interesting memo from Amy Goodman regarding censorship of Democarcy Now! on Pacifica. Jamie ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 19:24:34 -0500 From: Institute for Public Accuracy To: institute@igc.org Subject: FYI -- memo to Pacifica from Amy Goodman To: Pacifica Executive Director Bessie Wash and Board of Directors From: Amy Goodman Cc: Personnel File Date: 10/18/00 CRACKDOWN ON DEMOCRACY NOW! A few days ago, I was given a shocking memo from Pacifica Program Director Stephen Yasko and Pacifica attorney Larry Drapkin. In the 3-page memo, Yasko listed a series of Pacifica policies and work rules that I was ordered to immediately adhere to or face "disciplinary actions up to and including termination." Yasko handed me the memo during a meeting in the law offices of my union, AFTRA, at a gathering that my union representatives and I had been led to believe was meant to resolve a series of escalating conflicts which have erupted in recent months between Yasko, Executive Director Bessie Wash, myself and the Democracy Now! staff. In fact, union officials dissuaded me two weeks before the meeting from filing a formal grievance against Yasko and Pacifica for harassment because they had been led to believe Pacifica wanted to resolve these conflicts amicably. Instead, we were suddenly faced with this list of "ground rules" and the threat to fire me. My union lawyer accused Yasko and the Pacifica lawyer of acting in bad faith, immediately cancelled the meeting and approved the filing of a formal grievance. I have now filed grievances against Pacifica management charging harassment, gender harassment, and censorship, among other violations of the union contract. Several of the new "rules" target me with restrictions not applied to other Pacifica employees, and are outright attempts to curtail my constitutional rights of free speech. Some rules go against the very principles of community radio on which Pacifica was founded, while still others will have the effect of hampering Democracy Now!'s ability to reach the widest possible audience. Given their timing and seen in their totality, the ground rules are a transparent attempt to retaliate against me for seeking union representation in a management-labor dispute, a right protected by the National Labor Relations Act. But in my opinion, there is something far bigger than a mere "work rules" dispute involved here, something which should deeply concern the Pacifica Board, our listeners and the greater community radio listenership. It is the desire of management to reign in and exert political control over Democracy Now! It intensified this summer when Pacifica Executive Director Bessie Wash had our press credentials pulled after we brought Ralph Nader into the Republican Convention to be interviewed and do color commentary. Management's action made it much more difficult to cover the Democrats in the same hardhitting, confrontational way we had reported on the Republicans, especially when it came to our focus on corporate control of the Conventions. This punishment was such an unprecedented act that it prompted my co-host and award-winning veteran journalist Juan Gonzalez to write an official protest to Steve Yasko, the new program director, the content of which Yasko never responded to. Our election project, "Breaking With Convention: Power, Protest and the Presidency," was a milestone in Pacifica National Programming, encompassing the largest expansion of audience in Pacifica history. We engaged in an unprecedented collaboration with community public access cable tv stations as well as satellite television, beaming Democracy Now! into millions of homes across the country. Instead of building on that collaboration and continuing the televising of our radio program, and despite meeting and exceeding every stated objective for the show--i.e. audience growth, fundraising, new listeners, groundbreaking programming--Democracy Now! is being subjected to a withering assault by Pacifica management. The motivation is blatantly political. Democracy Now! is a hardhitting grassroots program that is not afraid of tackling controversial issues day after day in the Pacifica tradition. We are not only being censored for our critical coverage of the Democrats as well as the Republicans, but for giving voice to a growing grassroots movement that fundamentally challenges the status quo--people fighting sweatshops, police brutality, prison growth, and corporate globalization. On September 14, Steve Yasko called me to a meeting with Pacifica General Managers. KPFK Manager Mark Schubb, expressed his repeated criticism that audiences don't want to hear graphic details of police brutality before breakfast, or as he said last year "before I have my coffee." He criticized our coverage of Mumia Abu-Jamal, East Timor and questioned why I asked Spike Lee about his affiliation with Nike. Pacifica's Chief Financial Officer weighed in with her criticism of American prisoner Lori Berenson in Peru, (we had just aired an exclusive interview with her that received widespread national press.) After the meeting, Yasko took me into the hotel lobby and shouted, "I am your boss! I am your boss!" I'm being subjected to a concerted campaign of abuse and harassment by Pacifica management. Despite repeated appeals to Executive Director Bessie Wash, there has been no redress. Yasko regularly makes new demands on me and Democracy Now! with wild outbursts of unprofessional yelling and screaming. This has happened during a period when Democracy Now! has been unique in radio by reporting extensively on the refusal of the Commission on Presidential Debates or many in the corporate media to provide fair coverage and inclusion of third parties. It has also happened during a time when Democracy Now! is growing in audience, in media coverage, and in fundraising from both listeners and foundations. That is, we are growing in all the areas the Pacifica board says it is concerned with. Just as the presidential campaign reaches its climax, we are confronted with new restrictions and threats. Among those new work rules are a requirement to provide Yasko each Friday "a list of possible shows the following week and a short status report on each," adding we must "determine the topics of at least three shows the preceding week." Yasko notes that "the Administrative Council (of Pacifica) stated that the show does not sound like breaking news either to the station staffs or the listeners." Are we living in the same world? Our show breaks more national news, as measured by actual press coverage in the mainstream media, than perhaps any show in Pacifica history, e.g., Chevron in Nigeria, the Lori Berenson interview, Seattle WTO coverage, Nader at the Republican convention, Tulia, Texas, East Timor, etc. etc. But instead of congratulations and kudos for our many accomplishments, Pacifica has clamped down and threatens me at every turn with dismissal! As I write this, Yasko is forging ahead with imposing two new producers on Democracy Now! with or without the consent of co-host Juan Gonzalez and me. The two producers--our only producers-- are the heart of this show. It is clear from all of management's actions, they are using this opportunity to change the political direction of the program. This is the first time that we have been clearly told that our consent is not necessary. In his memo, Yasko goes on to demand, "All use of volunteers on Democracy Now! must cease immediately." Why?! Volunteers have always played a pivotal role in Democracy Now! and are the lifeblood of Pacifica. For violation of this ban or any of the other dictates management has laid down, I am threatened with dismissal! Take this section from the Yasko memo: "To establish an appropriate balance between your programming obligations and any speaking engagements and related travel, you are not to accept any speaking engagements without first informing the Foundation and obtaining approval. It is also important to know whom you are speaking to." This is an outrageous intrusion into my personal life and an illegal attempt to control my right of free speech. Given the many large and enthusiastic audiences I am often invited to address, I would think Pacifica would be glad for the positive publicity. Instead, Yasko demands veto power over when I speak and whom I speak to, and he tries to camouflage the crackdown with concern for my welfare or statements such as "you are, of course, a valued voice in spreading the word of our mission, programs and goals." I am so valued that he is ready to fire me if I don't follow unethical and illegal orders. Yasko should be worried less about where I am speaking and more about why our Ku satellite system suffers avoidable catastrophic foul-ups, an area he oversees. I thought the Pacifica board had learned from the bitter battle in Berkeley last year that attempts to silence free speech are the last things this network wants to revisit. But apparently not. Maybe the stakes are too high in this presidential election year to permit too free a press -- even at Pacifica. I truly hope that is not the case. I plead with those of you on the board who still remain dedicated to the grand mission of Lew Hill to reject this poorly disguised attempt at censorship of Democracy Now! and of me personally. Please direct Steve Yasko to cease his harassment and retaliation against me immediately, and Pacifica's attempts to exert political control and undermine the editorial independence of this hardhitting grassroots program. We are not NPR. We are not US government media. We are not the corporate media. We are Democracy Now!: The Exception to the Rulers. Sincerely, Amy Goodman Host, Democracy Now! From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Oct 19 22:43:17 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C96B2A318; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 22:43:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-10.essential.org [216.0.125.10]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA19227; Thu, 19 Oct 2000 22:43:16 -0400 Message-ID: <39EFB09C.2ACCBDFF@cptech.org> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 22:40:28 -0400 From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Pitney Bowes Sues Stamps.com Pitney Bowes Sues Stamps.com Tuesday, September 19, 2000 Byline: Bloomberg News Pitney Bowes Inc. said it filed a lawsuit against rival Stamps.com Inc. for infringing four patents on processes that let consumers track and compare shipping-rate information using the Internet. Pitney, the largest maker of postage meters, filed the suit in the U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Texas. The companies each sell postage services online, including the ability to compare rates for different freight carriers and to track packages and parcels. Stamps.com called the lawsuit "baseles -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Oct 20 09:35:58 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E315A2A318 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 09:35:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA26028 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 09:35:57 -0400 Message-ID: <39F04BC2.A21598C5@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 09:42:26 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Declan: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story Subject: FC: I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 18:46:27 -0400 From: Declan McCullagh To: politech@politechbot.com http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39301,00.html The Mother of Gore's Invention by Declan McCullagh (declan@wired.com) 3:00 a.m. Oct. 17, 2000 PDT WASHINGTON -- If it's true that Al Gore created the Internet, then I created the "Al Gore created the Internet" story. I was the first reporter to question the vice president's improvident boast, way back when he made it in early 1999. Since then, the story's become far more than just a staple of late-night Letterman jokes: It's now as much a part of the American political firmament as the incident involving that other vice president, a schoolchild, and a very unfortunate spelling of potato. Poor Al. For a presidential wannabe who prides himself on a sober command of the brow-furrowing nuances of technology policy, being the butt of all these jokes has proven something of a setback. I mean, who can hear the veep talk up the future of the Internet nowadays without feeling an urge to stifle some disrespectful giggles? It would be like listening to Dan Quayle doing a please-take-me-seriously stump speech at an Idaho potato farm. Case in point: Mars Inc. lampoons the vice president in a hilarious new commercial for Snickers. In it, a cartoon Al brags that he, variously, invented the Internet, trousers, and when he wasn't busy elsewhere, "lots of other stuff too." When you're getting mocked by a candy company, you know your statesmanship rating has plummeted to a terrifying new low. No wonder one recent poll shows Gore to be solidly ahead of his Republican rival in only 11 states. It's simple: He's got no respect. Which brings us to an important question: Are the countless jibes at Al's expense truly justified? Did he really play a key part in the development of the Net? The short answer is that while even his supporters admit the vice president has an unfortunate tendency to exaggerate, the truth is that Gore never did claim to have "invented" the Internet. During a March 1999 CNN interview, while trying to differentiate himself from rival Bill Bradley, Gore boasted: "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet." That statement was enough to convince me, with the encouragement of my then-editor James Glave, to write a brief article that questioned the vice president's claim. Republicans on Capitol Hill noticed the Wired News writeup and started faxing around tongue-in-cheek press releases -- inveterate neatnik Trent Lott claimed to have invented the paper clip -- and other journalists picked up the story too. My article never used the word "invented," but it didn't take long for Gore's claim to morph into something he never intended. The terrible irony in this exchange is that while Gore certainly didn't create the Internet, he was one of the first politicians to realize that those bearded, bespectacled researchers were busy crafting something that could, just maybe, become pretty important. In January 1994, Gore gave a landmark speech at UCLA about the "information superhighway." Many portions -- discussions of universal service, wiring classrooms to the Net, and antitrust actions -- are surprisingly relevant even today. (That's an impressive enough feat that we might even forgive Gore his tortured metaphors such as "road kill on the information superhighway" and "parked at the curb" on the information superhighway.) Gore's speech reverberated around Democratic political circles in Washington. Other Clinton administration officials began citing it in their own remarks, and the combined effort helped to grab the media's attention. Their timing was impeccable: In July 1993, according to Network Wizards' survey, there were 1.8 million computers connected to the Internet. By July 1994, the figure had nearly doubled to 3.2 million, a trend that continued through January 2000, when about 72 million computers had permanent network addresses. Small wonder, then, that as the election nears, Gore's defenders have been rallying to defend him. In a recent op-ed piece in the San Jose Mercury News, John Doerr and Bill Joy claim "nobody in Washington understands" the new economy as well as Gore does. Net-pioneers Robert Kahn and Vint Cerf, a Democratic party donor, have written an essay saying "no other elected official, to our knowledge, has made a greater contribution over a longer period of time" than the veep. Scott Rosenberg, in a recent Salon article, joined the fray: "The 'Gore claims he invented the Net' trope is so full of holes that it makes you wish there were product recalls for bad information." It's also true that, as a senator, Gore in the 1980s supported universities' efforts to increase funding for NSFNet, a measure that became law in the High Performance Computing Act of 1991. Gore's guest columns in Byte magazine at the time showed an appreciation of technology that was far from usual on Capitol Hill. But it's also difficult to argue with a straight face that the Internet we know today would not exist if Gore had decided to practice the piano instead of politics. By the time Gore took notice of the Net around 1987, the basics were already in place. The key protocol, TCP/IP, was written and the culture of the Net had blossomed through Usenet and mailing lists, as chronicled in Eric Raymond's Jargon File. At best, Gore's involvement merely hastened its development. Instead of the orderly interstate highway system that Gore had repeatedly used as metaphor, the spread of the Net has resembled something closer to a self-organizing, almost anarchic sprawl. Instead of a government/corporate-controlled system that might have looked like France's wretched Minitel system -- or, more charitably, a 500-channel interactive TV network -- the Net's popularity grew because of far more mundane applications like email and downloading porn. And it's fair to say that other Gore pet projects, like the Clinton administration's abandoned Clipper chip, are hardly ways to protect privacy and security online and promote the development of this technology. Then again, it's also true the Clipper chip was first concocted under a George Bush Sr. administration, and another Bush occupying the Oval Office might well have similar inclinations. We know that George W. Bush may not be any tech-savvier than Gore -- as anyone who caught the governor's the-Net-made-them-do-it comments about the Columbine High School killers can attest. But he seems to have successfully neutralized Gore's advantage on tech issues. In the first debate, Bush jabbed at Gore during a figure-rich discussion of HMO coverage. The delivery was wooden, but it was no joke: "Not only did (Gore) invent the Internet, but he invented the calculator," Bush said. The big surprise was not that Bush used the quip. It has, after all, also shown up in his stump speeches and Republican jibes. No, the surprise was that Gore remained silent. When he had a chance to respond, Gore only talked about prescription drugs: "You can go to the (Bush) website and look. If you make more than $25,000 a year, you don't get a penny of help under the Bush prescription drug proposal." At least he mentioned a website. ### ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology You may redistribute this message freely if it remains intact. To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Oct 20 09:48:10 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E54302A318 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 09:48:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA26291 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 09:48:09 -0400 Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 09:48:09 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Phil Agre on Who Invented "Invented"? Who Invented "Invented"?: Tracing the Real Story of the "Al Gore Invented the Internet" Hoax Phil Agre http://dlis.gseis.ucla.edu/pagre/ 17 October 2000 An extraordinary article appears in today's Wired News. In this article, the Wired News reporter who gave rise to the flap about Al Gore and the Internet reviews the controversy. 10/17/00: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 358182A380 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 11:00:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA27859; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 11:00:13 -0400 Message-ID: <39F05F82.FBF3F8FF@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 11:06:42 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Forum 2000: "Technology and Innovation: Latest of the Department of State, ACICIP meetings ------------------- Forum 2000 "Technology and Innovation: How are Governments Responding?" The State Department's Advisory Committee on International Communications and Information Policy (ACICIP) will have a not-to-be-missed special forum on Thursday, October 26, 2000, 9:30 a.m. - 12:30 p.m., room 1107, at the Main State Department building at 2201 "C" Street, N.W., Washington. The meeting is open to the public. The meeting is being organized as "Forum 2000" at which three prominent governmental representatives from the European Union and the United States will address the issue of "Technology and Innovation: How are Governments Responding?" The three representatives will be Sibylle Frucht of the Washington Delegation of the European Commission; Kathy Brown, Chief of Staff, Federal Communications Commission, and Donald Russell, Chief, Telecommunications Taskforce, U.S. Department of Justice. Members of the public are welcome to attend the meeting as room capacity allows. As access to the Department of State is controlled, persons wishing to attend the meeting must be pre-cleared by e-mailing the following information to ACICIP Executive Secretary Timothy C. Finton at fintontc@state.gov: name; company or organization affiliation (if any); date of birth; and social security number, no later than noon on October 25. On the day of the meeting, pre-cleared persons must use the 23rd Street entrance to the State Department (between 9:15 and 9:30 a.m.) and have a driver's license with photo, a passport, a U.S. Government ID or other valid photo identification. Those members of the public wishing further information should contact Mr. Finton at the e-mail address above or by phone at (202) 647-5385. The meeting is not open to the electronic media. Attached is the draft agenda for the meeting. Meeting of the Advisory Committee on International Communications and Information Policy Thursday, October 26, 2000 9:30 a.m., Room 1107 U.S. Department of State, Washington, D.C. AGENDA I. Opening by Chairman Ed Black: Introduction of ACICIP Members and Members of the Audience II. Discussion of ICAIS (International Charging Arrangements for Internet Services) and the WTSA (World Telecommunication Standardization Assembly) Malcolm R. Lee, U.S. Coordinator for International Communications and Information Policy III. Forum 2000 Technology and Innovation: How are Governments Responding? Sibylle Frucht Delegation of the European Commission Washington Kathy Brown Chief of Staff Federal Communications Commission Donald Russell Chief, Telecommunications Taskforce U.S. Department of Justice IV. Working Group Report: Internet: Content, Taxation, and Miscellaneous Reporting: Lew Cramer, Summit Ventures V. Future Committee Meeting Date -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Oct 20 13:41:13 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EABED2A31C for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 13:41:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA31464 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 13:41:12 -0400 Message-ID: <39F0853F.3D16D6E6@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 13:47:43 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Advertising standards and the regulation of content in European Audiovisual policy Subject: Advertising standards and the regulation of content in European Audiovisual policy Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 13:00:06 -0400 From: David Banisar To: tacd-ecommerce@oneworld.org SPEECH/00/388 Mrs Viviane Reding Member of the European Commissioner responsible for Education and Culture Advertising standards and the regulation of content in European Audiovisual policy European Publishers' Council, Sweden Stockholm, 19 October 2000 http://europa.eu.int/rapid/start/cgi/guesten.ksh?p_action.gettxt=gt&doc=SPEECH/00/388|0|RAPID&lg=EN -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Oct 20 16:11:31 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 560782A315 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 16:11:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA02189 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 16:11:31 -0400 Message-ID: <39F0A87B.4617F60F@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 16:18:03 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Verisign/Namezero This is a real interesting story, where it appears as though VeriSign was giving money to a firm to buy domain names from VeriSign, allowing Verisign to report higher sales, and have an equity stake in a firm that "loans" free domain names in return for looking at ads. Jamie http://aol.thestreet.com/comment/siliconstreet/1123774.html What's in a Namezero? To VeriSign, a Way to Sign Up Users By Adam Lashinsky Silicon Valley Columnist 10/13/00 7:00 AM ET SAN FRANCISCO -- In late August, a Silicon Valley start-up called Namezero.com, which supplies free Internet domain names, announced that it had raised $25 million in venture financing. In its news release, Namezero was vague on exactly who had invested in its "strategic third round." However, the newsletter VentureWire reported that an unidentified corporate investor had joined the firm's existing venture firms in the round. At the time, I speculated in RealMoney.com's Columnist Conversation that the investor was VeriSign (VRSN:Nasdaq) , owner of Network Solutions, the leading provider of domain-name registrations. Later that day, Aug. 30, Verisign confirmed that it had made a "small" investment in Namezero, though it wouldn't say how much because it doesn't make a practice of disclosing the size of its investments. Investors who are puzzled about the 21% drop to $147.50 in Verisign's stock over the last three days (erasing $7.6 billion in value) can look to tiny Namezero for an explanation. Namezero buys domain names (such as you@you.org or .net or .com) from VeriSign and lets its users "borrow" them, assuming the user is willing to view Namezero's advertising. Namezero pays VeriSign between $8 and $10 for the use of the name, a service for which VeriSign typically charges retail customers $35 per year. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Oct 20 17:05:49 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94AE52A315; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 17:05:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA03339; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 17:05:49 -0400 Message-ID: <39F0B535.CB2FDFF1@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 17:12:21 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] BSA To Press Need For Single Net Contract Law Next step, Hague convention, and applying this to the whole world. Jamie http://www.newsbytes.com/pubNews/00/156927.html BSA To Press Need For Single Net Contract Law By Robert MacMillan, Newsbytes WASHINGTON, DC, U.S.A., 19 Oct 2000, 1:28 PM CST The Business Software Alliance (BSA) and the Digital Commerce Coalition next week will use a Federal Trade Commission (FTC) forum on e-commerce to highlight the need for states to adopt uniform laws for governing online contracts. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Oct 24 18:08:50 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from prserv.net (out2.prserv.net [32.97.166.32]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6D2E29AEE; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 18:08:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org ([139.92.111.64]) by prserv.net (out2) with SMTP id <2000102422084520203416j7e>; Tue, 24 Oct 2000 22:08:47 +0000 Message-ID: <39F616EF.C941263B@cptech.org> Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 19:10:39 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] WTO rules on ecommerce AFAIK, the US government has given no briefings on this to NGOs. We have asked to be on the loop on these issues, but this one is news to me. Jamie -------- U.S. looking to level e-commerce playing field By Reuters Special to CNET News.com October 23, 2000, 3:25 p.m. PT WASHINGTON--The Clinton administration said Monday it would launch a "networked world" trade initiative aimed at creating a set of international rules to ensure fair competition in rapidly growing e-commerce. U.S. Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky said the initiative would be put forward at the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum, and other international trade groups. "This new initiative will create a lasting set of rules and agreements which help to ensure that the trading system provides for electronic business the same guarantees of freedom, fair competition, respect for intellectual property rights, and access to markets that more conventional commerce enjoys," Barshefsky told a Washington lawyers group. A set of general principles is needed to protect consumers and incentives for innovation, as well as to integrate open markets, she added. E-commerce totaled about $200 billion last year and is expected to soar to $700 billion this year, according to industry experts. In addition to retail sales to consumers on the Internet, all major industries have begun using e-commerce to buy and sell supplies and services for internal use. A global consensus should establish principles that encourage technological advances and the proper treatment of digital products under WTO rules, Barshefsky said. The WTO has not yet decided how to classify products delivered in digital form. But whatever the WTO decides, it should not place digital products at a disadvantage to identical products delivered physically, she said. For example, a software program downloaded from an Internet site that is identical to a CD purchased in a store should be subject to no greater trade restrictions. The U.S. initiative also aims to liberalize trade rules for existing services and ensure similar rules for emerging industries such as online auctions. "We will seek the broadest possible cross-border market access in services--building on the financial services and basic telecom agreements and moving on to the professions, distribution and much more," Barshefsky said. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Oct 25 17:36:51 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from prserv.net (out5.prserv.net [32.97.166.35]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 543F829AE8; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 17:36:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org ([139.92.111.221]) by prserv.net (out5) with SMTP id <2000102521364820504t0kc6e>; Wed, 25 Oct 2000 21:36:49 +0000 Message-ID: <39F760F1.1B5BC351@cptech.org> Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 18:38:41 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] UNCITRAL Working Group on Abritration More of USG push for ADR in ecommerce. Jamie ------- FEDERAL REGISTER - Vol. 65, No. 207 DEPARTMENT OF STATE [Public Notice No. 3444] Uncitral Working Group On Arbitration: Possible New Uniform Rules On Written Form for Arbitration Agreement, Interim Measures of Protection, Mediation and Councilation; Meeting Notice 65 FR 63905 DATE: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 ACTION: The Arbitration and ADR Study Group of the Department's Advisory Committee on Private International Law will hold a meeting in Washington, DC at the Department of State on Thursday, November 9, 2000, from 9:30 am to 1:00 pm. The subject will be to provide advice to the U.S. delegation to the next meeting of the UNCITRAL Working Group on Arbitration. Agenda The meeting will consider the Report of the Secretary-General of UNCITRAL on "Possible Uniform Rules on Certain Issues Concerning Settlement of Commercial Disputes: Written Form for Arbitration Agreement, Interim Measures of Protection, Conciliation." This document (no. /CN/WG.II/WP.110) may be found at the UNCITRAL web page: www.uncitral.org. To find it, click on "Preparatory Documents," then on "Working Group on Arbitration," then on "33rd Session." Depending on the time available, the meeting will also consider the Report of the Secretary-General of UNCITRAL on "Possible Future Work: Court-Ordered Interim Measures of Protection in Support of Arbitration, Scope of Interim Measures that may be Ordered by Arbitral Tribunals, Validity of the Agreement to Arbitrate." This document (no. A/CN/WG.II/WP.111) may also be found at the same location on the UNCITRAL website. Background In response to requests from arbitration and mediation experts around the world, United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) has reestablished its Working Group on Arbitration. The Working Group has been charged with considering a number of pressing issues involving application and interpretation of the 1958 New York Convention on the Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards and the UNCITRAL Model Law and Rules on Commercial Arbitration. These issues include the requirement of written form for arbitral agreements under Article 2 of the Convention, about which U.S. courts have taken different approaches, and the desirability of preparing model provisions on the enforcement of interim measures of protection. In addition, the Working Group is charged with considering the desirability of drafting a new UNCITRAL Model Law on Conciliation to pair with the UNCITRAL Conciliation Rules. (Note that the New York Convention and the UNCITRAL Model texts may all be found on the UNCITRAL website.) The Working Group met in March 2000 and agreed in principle to begin to draft a Model Law on Conciliation, as well as consider the preparation of legal texts in the areas of the written form for arbitration agreements and interim measures of protection. The UNCITRAL Secretariat has now prepared the Report described above with proposals in these areas (Doc. No. A/CN/WG.II/WP.110). In addition, the UNCITRAL Secretariat has prepared some preliminary background analysis on a number of additional topics that could form the basis for future consideration by the Working Group (Doc. No. A/CN/WG.II/WP.111). These proposals involve aspects of the use of court-ordered interim measures of protection, the scope of interim measures that may be issued by arbitrators, and the validity of agreements to arbitrate. Attendance The meeting will be held from 9:30 am to 1 pm in Conference Room 1105 at the Department of State, 2201 C St., NW., Washington, DC, and is open to the public. Because of security requirements for entering the building, persons wishing to attend must contact Ms. Rosie Gonzales, Office of the Legal Adviser, at 202-776-8420, fax 202-776-8482, email onzaler@ms.state.gov > no later than Monday November 6. Persons wishing to attend should provide Ms. Gonzales with their name, date of birth, and social security number. Copies of the pertinent documents may be found free of charge on the UNCITRAL website as indicated above, or will be provided free of charge by contacting Ms. Gonzales at the above numbers. Persons not able to attend may provide written comments to Mr. Jeffrey Kovar at the following address: 2430 E St., NW., South Bldg., Suite 203, Washington, DC 20037-2851. Jeffrey D. Kovar, Assistant Legal Adviser for Private International Law, Department of State. [FR Doc. 00-27430 Filed 10-24-00; 8:45 am] -- James Love http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 200036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Oct 27 09:40:04 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F347229AF3 for ; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 09:40:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA00390 for ; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 09:40:03 -0400 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 09:40:03 -0400 (EDT) From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] USG responses to questions on Hague Treaty October 26, 2000 DRAFT HAGUE CONVENTION ON JURISDICTION AND THE RECOGNITION AND ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN CIVIL JUDGMENTS BRIEF ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS POSED BY CONSUMER GROUPS Jeffrey D. Kovar Assistant Legal Adviser for Private International Law U.S. Department of State GENERAL NOTE In answering the following questions, reference will be made to the preliminary draft of the Hague Convention, which was adopted by the Special Commission of the Hague Conference in October 1999 (www.hcch.net/e/conventions/draft36e.html). It is important to realize, however, that this text is not final and will be subject to intensive negotiations over the next 12 - 18 months. The United States and some other delegations have stated that the preliminary draft Convention is not a suitable basis for final negotiations without significant additional work. As a result, governments will be engaging in informal negotiations in a variety of settings over the next several months, then will meet in the Hague in June for the first part of a Diplomatic Conference to prepare a final convention. The second part of the Diplomatic Conference has not yet been scheduled, but could be as early as late 2001 or early 2002 if sufficient progress is made. QUESTIONS 1. How will the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction affect labor unions in the U.S. that engage in boycotts or corporate campaigns against union busting firms? For example, a campaign that urges global consumer boycotts, using the Internet to spread the message. Could the anti-union employer sue a U.S. labor union in a foreign country, get a judgment abroad, and collect the judgment in the US, wherethe US labor union has assets? ANSWER: It is not clear that the draft Hague Convention would affect the litigation status quo involving labor unions in the United States. Article 8 provides special jurisdictional rules in cases involving individual contracts of employment, but does not address collective bargaining agreements. It would be very helpful, however, if labor law experts could focus on the jurisdictional provisions of the draft Convention and flag any special concerns that might arise in international cases involving unions. As for the question whether U.S. labor unions could be sued abroad in tort for boycotts or alleged defamatory statements and have the resulting judgments enforced against them in the U.S., in principle parties could attempt that now since U.S. courts are very receptive to the enforcement of foreign judgments. Nevertheless, it would seem that an argument could be made that such judgments should not be enforced on the ground that they are contrary to public policy in this country. Similarly, under the draft Convention, Article 28(f) contains a public policy exception to enforcement that could be used to deny enforcement under the Convention. 2. This is a question about the Hague treaty and libel and slander claims, based upon Internet communication. a. Could a corporation sue me in England, under the more restrictive laws in England regarding libel and slander, get a judgment in the UK, and collect it from me here? ANSWER Currently, corporations can sue American defendants under English defamation law, receive a judgment, and attempt to enforce that judgment in the United States. However, U.S. courts have been generally reluctant to enforce English defamation judgments because the underlying English law is inconsistent with fundamental U.S. free speech traditions protected by the First Amendment. This U.S. case law would most likely not be affected by the Convention, which, as indicated above, contains an exception to the general rule of enforcement where necessary for public policy reasons. b. If I was sued for libel or slander in the UK, for something I published on a U.S. web site, would I be protected by the 1st amendment in the UK? Would I rely upon a UK judge to interpret my first amendment protections? ANSWER Nothing in the Convention addresses questions of choice of law. It addresses only choice of jurisdiction (the courts of which country has competence to hear the case -- not the law it would apply to the case). Thus, UK judges would no more be obligated by the Convention to apply or interpret U.S. First Amendment protections than they are today. 3. Regarding the Hague treaty and copyright and fair use on the Internet, what national laws would apply if I download an article, data, music or software from a European web site, to my U.S. based computer, and make an unauthorized use, for teaching, reverse engineering, commentary, parody or some other use that would be fair use in the U.S., but possibly not fair use in Europe. ANSWER The Hague Convention, as noted above, would not affect how choice of law is decided under national law. Thus, current choice of law rules that address copyright and fair use would apply as they do now. a. Could I be sued in Europe for violating the European copyright laws? Would a judgment be collected against me in the USA? ANSWER Yes, you may in principle be sued (as you may be today), but the Convention will provide some additional protections for you. To the extent you might be subject to the required grounds of jurisdiction in Articles 3 - 16, you are probably subject to suit today. Moreover, there are some exorbitant grounds of jurisdiction -- such as jurisdiction in France based on the French nationality of the plaintiff -- that the draft Convention would prohibit in Article 18. Keep in mind as well that enforcement is now generally available in the U.S. for foreign judgments. Article 28 has a substantial list of defenses to enforcement that are consistent with the practice of U.S. courts. b. Could U.S. firms simply publish virtually from Europe to have the benefits of tougher copyright protections in Europe? ANSWER To the extent that U.S. firms believe they would gain litigation benefits from publishing virtually from Europe, they could do so now. However, normally liability is adjudged based on where the infringement occurred rather than the publication. It is not clear what extra benefit the Convention would provide here. 4. This is a question that concerns the relationship between the Hague Treaty and contracts of adhesion. Our interests include not only contracts between business and consumers, but also between business and libraries, or business and small business. a. Has the USG effectively blocked the current draft language in Article 7, on the grounds that consumers should not have a right to bring an action in the courts where they are resident? ANSWER No. The U.S. Delegation to the Hague Convention negotiations opposed the language in Article 7 because it would create an absolute rule against choice of forum clauses in consumer contracts. That is not consistent with U.S. law, where such clauses may be enforced if they are not unjust and unreasonable. We would expect vigorous opposition to the Convention in the U.S. if we were to accept an outright prohibition on choice of forum clauses. We will continue to explore how best to reconcile the competing interests here for purposes of the convention. b. If the USG has blocked approval of Article 7, what is the USG in favor of? ANSWER The U.S. did not block Article 7, which was included by majority vote in the current draft. As noted above, the U.S. is continuing to explore how best to reconcile the competing interests here for purposes of the convention. c. Is the USG in favor of or opposed to having jurisdiction of court or law determined by contract between the buyer and seller. ANSWER The U.S. has expressed certain specific concerns about the unqualified use of choice of forum clauses in consumer contracts concluded over the Internet. If used inappropriately, these clauses have the potential to hinder consumer confidence in e-commerce by: (1) encouraging a race to the bottom, whereby companies choose jurisdiction and laws with the least protection for consumers; (2) frustrating the ability of law enforcement to protect its own citizens; (3) impeding informed decision-making by consumers; and (4) depriving consumers of meaningful access to judicial recourse. On the other hand, in many cases, it may be appropriate and beneficial to the growth of e-commerce to allow parties (including consumers) to agree to valid and binding choice of forum clauses. For these and other reasons, we continue to explore how best to reconcile the competing interests here for purposes of the convention. d. How will this work with contracts of adhesion? ANSWER If a court finds that a choice of forum clause amounts to a contract of adhesion it will generally not be enforceable. The U.S. would like to see such practice respected by the Convention. f. What is the relationship between the various UNCITRAL model contracts on ecommerce and UCITA and the Hague Convention? ANSWER Article 4(2)(b) (Choice of Court) reflects the modern standard incorporated in the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce for determining if an electronic transmission should constitute a writing. The rule in the Uniform Computer Information Technology Act (UCITA) with regard to choice of forum is that parties in their agreement may choose an exclusive judicial forum unless the choice is unreasonable and unjust. Otherwise there is no relationship between the Hague Convention, which deals exclusively with jurisdiction and enforcement of judgments, the UNCITRAL model law on electronic commerce, the draft UNCITRAL model law on electronic signatures, and UCITA. g. If a contract involves a service or product provided over the Internet, does the supplier of the service or product have a right to sue a consumer in the country where the product or service is located? Is this determined by the virtual presence on the web, or some other standard for location? ANSWER A provider of goods or services over the Internet can sue the consumer where authorized by local law. The draft convention would require in Article 7(2) that the seller may only sue the consumer in the place of the consumer's habitual residence, but U.S. law is not necessarily so restricted. We will continue to explore ways to reconcile the competing interests here for purposes of this convention. h. What if you cannot afford to defend yourself in a foreign country. Are you going to have to default the case? Will the judgment be automatically valid in the USA? ANSWER Default judgments are enforceable under the Convention, just as they are today under U.S. law. Nevertheless, courts generally look more closely at default judgments to ensure defendants were treated fairly. Similarly, under Article 27(2) of the draft Convention, when a court is asked to enforce a foreign default judgment it is not bound by the findings of fact with respect to jurisdiction in the judgment court. Thus, the defendant in a default action under the Convention could litigate again the factual basis on which the original court found jurisdiction. i. What if one country has restrictions on contracts ofadhesion, but another does not? How are these differences resolved? ANSWER In the current draft they are resolved in favor of never enforcing choice of forum clauses in the business to consumer context. We will continue to explore how best to reconcile the competing interests here for purposes of the convention. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Oct 27 10:10:54 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B1C329AF3 for ; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 10:10:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA01072 for ; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 10:10:54 -0400 Message-ID: <39F98EBE.E0B518A0@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 10:18:38 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Note from Jeff Kovar on UNCITRAL Working Group on Abritration ject: RE: [Ecommerce] UNCITRAL Working Group on Abritration Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 13:24:07 -0400 From: "Jeffrey D. Kovar" To: "'James Love'" , Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce The public meeting of the Study Group on Arbitration and ADR will not/not focus on online ADR issues. It will focus on the issues laid out in the notice. I encourage you all to read the UNCITRAL working paper where that is clear (directions for finding it on the UNCITRAL website are included). Those of you who are interested in legal issues under the 1958 New York Convention and the preparation of an international Model Law on Mediation/Conciliation may find the meeting very useful. We would welcome your participation. Issues related to online ADR may be addressed sometime next year or in 2002 at UNCITRAL, but there will be plenty of notice if/when those issues come up. If they are to be discussed at UNCITRAL, the U.S. Government will want to coordinate closely with consumer groups and experts. Jeff Kovar U.S. Department of State -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Oct 27 12:18:48 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F31129AF2; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 12:18:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA04563; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 12:18:48 -0400 Message-ID: <39F9ACB9.5CF2BC8F@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 12:26:33 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] US Trade Agreement with Jordon requires patents on business methods and software MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON ISSUES RELATED TO THE PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS UNDER THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND JORDAN ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A FREE TRADE AREA The Government of the United States of America ("United States") and the Government of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan ("Jordan"), recognizing the need to promote adequate and effective protection of intellectual property rights, to provide enhanced intellectual property protection to account for the latest technological developments, and to promote greater efficiency and transparency in the administration of intellectual property systems in order to strengthen the international trading system; Agree, . . . 5. Jordan shall take all steps necessary to clarify that the exclusion from patent protection of "mathematical methods" in Article 4(B) of Jordan's Patent Law does not include such "methods" as business methods or computer-related inventions. . . . Agreement, with the exception of paragraph 3, which shall be implemented within two years from the date of entry into force of the Agreement. Done at Washington, in duplicate, this twenty-fourth day of October, 2000, which corresponds to this twenty-sixty day of Rajab, 1421, in the English language. An Arabic language text shall be prepared, which shall be considered equally authentic upon an exchange of diplomatic notes confirming its conformity with the English language text. In the event of a discrepancy, the English language text shall prevail. FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: HASHEMITE KINGDOM OF JORDAN: -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Oct 27 14:35:47 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F0C929AF2; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 14:35:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA08242; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 14:35:47 -0400 Message-ID: <39F9CCD5.F4584849@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 14:43:33 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Librarians appalled by Librarian of Congress on fair use rules Thanks to Jim Warren for this forward. ALAWON: American Library Association Washington Office Newsline Volume 9, Number 85 October 26, 2000 In this issue: NEW DIGITAL COPYRIGHT RULES BAD FOR THE AMERICAN PUBLIC The Librarian of Congress James Billington has ruled against the American public and library users by negating fair use in the digital arena. Billington allowed only two exceptions in the fair use proceeding involving the 1201 anticircumvention provision of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). A preliminary review of the ruling reveals that Billington adopted recommendations by Marybeth Peters, Register of Copyrights, to provide exemptions only for malfunctions and to determine which sites are blocked by filtering software. The exemption related to circumventing filtering software may be useful although problematic. The library community as well as members of Congress, the U.S. Department of Commerce, the K-12 and higher education communities, and many others have argued in the 1201 proceeding and elsewhere, that the longstanding principle of fair use must continue in the digital era. Because of this decision users of digital information will have fewer rights and opportunities than users of print information. In fact, the pay-for-use scenario that librarians have feared appears to have now become a reality with this rule. "The Copyright Office has issued a misguided ruling taking away from students, researchers, teachers and librarians the long standing basic right of "fair use" to our Nation's digital resources," said Nancy Kranich, ALA president. "All library users will be impacted." ALA, in conjunction with the American Association of Law Libraries, the Association of Research Libraries, the Medical Library Association and the Special Libraries, submitted strong filings and testimony in the proceeding arguing that there should be exemptions from the Copyright Act's new restrictions against accessing copyright works that are protected by technological measures. Peters' conclusion in her recommendations to the Librarian of Congress reads as follows: CONCLUSION Pursuant to the mandate of 17 U.S.C. 1201 (b) and having considered the evidence in the record, the contentions of the parties, and the statutory objectives, the Register of Copyrights recommends that the Librarian of Congress publish two classes of copyrighted works where the Register has found that non-infringing uses by users of such copyrighted works are, or are likely to be, adversely affected, and the prohibition found in 17 U.S.C., 1201 (a) should not apply to such users with respect to such class of work for the ensuing 3-year period. The classes of work so identified are: 1. Compilations consisting of lists of Websites blocked by filtering software applications; and 2. Literary works, including computer programs and databases, protected by access control mechanisms that fail to permit access because of malfunction, damage or obsoleteness. The Register notes that any exemption of classes of copyrighted works published by the Librarian will be effective only until October 28, 2003. Before the period expires, the Register will initiate a new rulemaking to consider de novo what classes of copyright works, if any, should be exempt from 1201 (a)(1)(A) commencing October 28, 2003. ALA is reviewing the ruling in great detail. Options now include requesting a reconsideration of the ruling as well as litigation. For background see ALAWON volume 9, number 16: (http://www.ala.org/washoff/alawon/alwn9016.html) and volume 9, number 33: (http://www.ala.org/washoff/alawon/alwn9033.html) and the ALA Issue Brief: http://www.ala.org/washoff/Rulemaking.PDF The Librarian's ruling is expected to be published in the Federal Register on October 27th or 30th. For information about the rulemaking process, see the Library of Congress web site: http://www.loc.gov/copyright/1201/anticirc.html ****** ALAWON (ISSN 1069-7799) is a free, irregular publication of the American Library Association Washington Office. All materials subject to copyright by the American Library Association may be reprinted or redistributed for noncommercial purposes with appropriate credits. To subscribe to ALAWON, send the message: subscribe ala-wo [your_firstname] [your_lastname] to listproc@ala.org or go to http://www.ala.org/washoff/alawon. To unsubscribe to ALAWON, send the message: unsubscribe ala-wo to listproc@ala.org. ALAWON archives at http://www.ala.org/washoff/alawon. ALA Washington Office, 1301 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Suite 403, Washington, D.C. 20004-1701; phone: 202.628.8410 or 800.941.8478 toll-free; fax: 202.628.8419; e-mail: alawash@alawash.org; Web site: http://www.ala.org/washoff. Executive Director: Emily Sheketoff. Office of Government Relations: Lynne Bradley, Director; Mary Costabile, Peter Kaplan, Miriam Nisbet and Claudette Tennant. Office for Information Technology Policy: Rick Weingarten, Director; Jennifer Hendrix, Carrie Russell and Saundra Shirley. ALAWON Editor: Bernadette Murphy. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Oct 27 17:00:03 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCAB429B0C; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 17:00:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA11726; Fri, 27 Oct 2000 17:00:00 -0400 Message-ID: <39F9EEA3.3B72D935@cptech.org> Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 17:07:47 -0400 From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] WIPO RFC-2 on domain names http://wipo2.wipo.int/process2/rfc/rfc2/index.html WIPO2 RFC-2 REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON ISSUES ADDRESSED IN THE SECOND WIPO INTERNET DOMAIN NAME PROCESS 1. This is a Request for Comments on the substance of the issues to be addressed by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in the Second WIPO Internet Domain Name Process (WIPO2 RFC-2). 2. The deadline for the submission of comments on this WIPO2 RFC-2 is December 29, 2000. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Oct 29 20:29:22 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0455329AF2 for ; Sun, 29 Oct 2000 20:29:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA19762 for ; Sun, 29 Oct 2000 20:29:21 -0500 From: James Love X-Sender: love@milan.essential.org To: Random-bits@venice.essential.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] European consultation on software patents Date: Sun Oct 29 20:29:22 2000 I missed this when it was first announced, but the European Commission has announced a study and consultation on software patents. Public comments are accepted through December 15, 2000. This issue is closely tied to the issuance of business methods patents. There has also been quite a bit of attention, in Europe, to the impact of software patents on the free/(open source) software movement. Jamie http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/en/intprop/indprop/studyintro.htm http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/en/intprop/indprop/softpaten.htm http://slashdot.org/yro/00/10/27/1228207.shtml -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Oct 30 09:02:52 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A66829AEE for ; Mon, 30 Oct 2000 09:02:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07DCE181F0 for ; Mon, 30 Oct 2000 09:02:52 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <39FD817B.FD5C9A86@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Alexander Wolfe: Intel's patents on IA-64 instruction set Date: Mon Oct 30 09:02:52 2000 http://www.eet.com/story/OEG20001027S0028 Intel Moving to Block IA-64 Cloning FRIDAY, OCTOBER 27, 2000 Alexander Wolfe, EE Times NEW YORK -- A flurry of more than 20 new patents suggests Intel Corp. is expanding its time-tested legal strategy to prevent cloning of its new, flagship IA-64 architecture. Some experts wonder whether Intel, Santa Clara, Calif., is taking a new tack in corralling its rights to IA-64. That is, rather than submit garden-variety claims to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Intel is trying to patent the functions carried out by specific instructions. In doing so, the company appears to be, in effect, trying to patent the IA-64 instruction set itself. [snip] "It looks very much like a strategy to keep people out of this space by locking up these patents," said Ron Abramson, a partner at the law firm of Hughes, Hubbard and Reed, New York. [snip] "What's happened is things are becoming more liberalized in the patent area," said Leonard Rubin, an intellectual-property (IP) lawyer at Gordon, Glickson (Chicago). "Patents on business methods are being granted where they never would have been before." Rubin pointed as one example to a patent Amazon.com received on its one-click shopping method, and noted that, once awarded the patent, Amazon sued competitor Barnes & Noble. Whereas physical hardware dominated applications in the old days, today, said Rubin, "some companies are seeking patents they never would have before." Rubin said that this change was likely due to a philosophical loosening up within the USPTO. However, he also noted that many IP attorneys were not happy with the trend. [snip] Intel today seems uncertain as to whether its patent strategy is an evolutionary or a revolutionary development. "We and HP are much better at the patent process than 20 years ago - everybody is," said an Intel spokesman. [snip] Looking at that same patent from a legal perspective, attorney Abramson said: "This looks like a patent on something an instruction does. If nobody ever did an instruction like that before, why not patent it?" Indeed, patents often contain some claims that seem obvious to the practicing engineer. For example, dissecting the language of the abstract of patent No. 6,119,218, Abramson noted that it discusses executing a prefetch instruction, a function that's widely performed, so it's not the crux of the matter. Back-door patent? However, the patent appears to hinge on the discussion about handling an exception during a prefetch. If that is new, and cannot be discerned from prior art, then the patent should be rock-solid. Asked if patenting the functionality of an instruction set was a back-door way to patent the instruction set itself, Abramson answered: "Well, it is tantamount to trying to patent an instruction set, to the extent that the instruction set has new instructions. If the instruction set has 'add with carry,' you can't patent that." -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Nov 1 06:53:16 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D20029AE8 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 2000 06:53:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (ppp-1.essential.org [216.0.125.1]) by genoa.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9840F18187 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 2000 06:53:15 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3A00041A.391DBDBC@cptech.org> From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Jamie McCarthy on WIPO and guinness-really-sucks Date: Wed Nov 1 06:53:16 2000 http://slashdot.org/yro/00/10/31/1719237.shtml -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Nov 1 11:36:31 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4947229AF3 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 2000 11:36:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35DEE18187 for ; Wed, 1 Nov 2000 11:36:31 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3A004895.714235A7@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Andrew Shen: Welcome to Safe Harbor! Date: Wed Nov 1 11:36:31 2000 Subject: Welcome to Safe Harbor! Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 10:08:56 -0500 From: Andrew Shen Reply-To: tacd-ecommerce@oneworld.org To: tacd-ecommerce@oneworld.org Safe Harbor has begun. As with all Internet related topics, the beginning of a new program entails the development of a new website. The U.S. Department of Commerce has launched http://www.export.gov/safeharbor/. As of this morning, only one company has signed up - BAE Systems of Virginia, apparently some kind of defense contractor that does business in Austria. I am reading through all the materials provided on the site but one of the most interesting documents provided is the "Safe Harbor Workbook", a primer on Safe Harbor and privacy law written by the DOC. Excerpt from section entitled "U.S. Approach to Privacy": In the United States, the importance of protecting the privacy of individuals' personal information is a priority for the federal government and consumers. Consumers repeatedly cite fears that their personal information will be misused as a reason for not doing business online. In this way, moves to bolster on-line privacy protect consumer interests and fuel the broader growth of on-line communications, innovation, and business. Self-regulatory initiatives are an effective approach to putting meaningful privacy protections in place. In certain highly sensitive areas, however, legislative solutions are appropriate. These sensitive areas include financial and medical records, genetic information, Social Security numbers, and information involving children. Excerpt from section entitled "The European Approach": The EU's approach to privacy grows out of Europe's history and legal traditions. In Europe, protection of information privacy is viewed as a fundamental, human right. Europe also has a tradition of prospective, comprehensive lawmaking that seeks to guard against future harms, particularly where social issues are concerned. The EU began examining the impact of technology on society over fifteen years ago; the inquiry culminated in the adoption of a directive in July 1995 specifically addressing privacy issues. Best, Andrew. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Nov 2 10:14:08 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E98C729AE8 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 2000 10:14:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8A4718185 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 2000 10:14:08 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3A0186D0.D4A5BE76@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] MITI 's proposal for WTO E-Commerce Initiative Date: Thu Nov 2 10:14:09 2000 Subject: [Ecommerce] MITI 's proposal for WTO E-Commerce Initiative Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 12:32:19 +0900 From: "Takeshi Muramoto" To: Info Global E-CommercePresets Digital Opportunity to Close the Divide Between Developed and Developing Countries. MITIs Proposal for WTO E-commerce Initiative (2nd Draft)wards eQu http://www.miti.go.jp/english/information/data/cw001019e.html Background and Purpose This draft proposal reflects our firm belief that the future of the Internet and E-Commerce shall be for the betterment of all people and all nations. E-Commerce is, and will become more, vital not only to business, but also to society itself throughout the world. The "quality of life" of every person in the information society is surely based on reliable and stable system of networks. The confidence of ordinary people as well as business towards activities on the Internet is our common public policy goal. In the Okinawa Charter on Global Information Society, the G8 emphasized that Information and Communications Technology (IT) is one of the most potent forces in shaping the twenty-first century. The Charter also states that the G8 renews its commitment to the principle of inclusion: everyone, everywhere should be enabled to participate in and no one should be excluded from the benefits of global information society. E-Commerce presents opportunities for all consumers and small businesses to obtain easy access to the world market via the Internet. In the past, the world market was readily accessible only to large global companies located mainly in developed countries. E-Commerce is a new and powerful medium which can help close the digital divide among countries and achieve global eQuality in the new world economy. This can only be accomplished if member countries take balanced steps between consumers and businesses now and in the future to ensure that an international framework related to E-Commerce benefits both developed countries and developing countries. In undertaking this initiative, member countries should take into consideration the viewpoints of both consumers and the industries. "Digital trade policy" is crucially important from these viewpoints. This paper is the firstsecond draft proposal for a WTO E-Commerce initiative crafted by the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) of Japan. The primary purpose of this document is to present a list of issues to facilitate domestic and international discussions at the WTO. Benefit for Developing Economies E-Commerce can have positive effects for all economies contributing to the mutually supportive goals of sustainable economic growth, enhancing the public welfare, and fostering social cohesion. It also can be instrumental in helping developing economies participate in the multilateral trading system. Benefits accruing to developing economies from the rapid growth of E-Commerce will help them meet more effectively their vital development goals, such as poverty reduction, health and education. To achieve global eQuality in the information society by benefit from the tremendous power of E-Commerce, the WTO Members should build a policy environment on a global scale, not only to stimulate and facilitate the transition to the information society, but also to reap its full economic, social and cultural benefits. At the same time, Members should recognize the need to build up the capacity in developing economies to use effectively the opportunities presented by E-Commerce which can help close the digital divide. In the Okinawa Charter, the G8 reaffirmed its commitment to the efforts underway to formulate and implement a coherent strategy to bridge the digital divide. The WTO Members should contribute to this vital issue taking into account the diverse conditions and needs of developing economies. 1. Trade Liberalization of E-Commerce Related Sectors *Members shall identify and liberalize "E-Commerce Enabling Sectors" which provide the essential infrastructure for E-Commerce. *Though the existing GATS agreements and commitments apply to the services provided through E-Commerce, "E-Commerce Contents Sectors" further trade liberalization of these services shall be pursued to create a truly global environment that enhances the development of E-Commerce. *The definition and coverage of sectors need to be discussed in close consultation with industries. International coordination among industries also needs to be promoted. Interests of consumers should be taken fully into account to improve convenience, choice and the range of transactions. *Some products can be delivered both online and in physical form. Careful consideration should be given to avoid favoring one form of delivery over another. 2. Principles for Domestic Regulations *When Members take domestic regulatory measures to achieve legitimate domestic policy including avoiding fundamental risks to the Internet society, each Member shall agree to the following principles concerning the nature and extent of regulatory measures. These principles which are based upon GATT, GATS (e.g. Article VI) and TRIPS, the principles of domestic regulations discussed at the OECD and other fora, and elaborated by the characteristics of E-Commerce. *This approach avoids the situation in which a particular Member unilaterally introduces excessive regulatory measures as "disguised trade barriers" to the Internet world, or in which providers are obliged to cope with individual Members' numerous and mutually contradictory regulations. (1) Transparency -- Each Member shall promptly publish all measures of general application that are related to or affect E-Commerce at the time the relevant measure enters into force, except in case of emergency. (2) Non-Discriminatory Treatment -- The national treatment and most-favoured-nation treatment principles shall be applied. (3) Avoidance of Unnecessary Trade Restrictions -- In implementing domestic regulations (e.g. consumer confidence), each Member shall not utilize trade restrictive regulations that are more burdensome than necessary. This is especially important for small and medium seized enterprises in general as well as enterprises in developing economies because they can provide cross border services and enter the "Global Marketplace" more easily through E-Commerce. Therefore, to adapt these measuresavoid unnecessary trade restrictions adapting domestic regulations to the characteristics of the Internet without harming necessary consumer protection, Members shall establishfocus on "commercial presence" requirements, paper document requirements, face-to-face meeting requirements and person designation requirements for supplying services on the Internet that may not be justified. (4) Use of Internationally Harmonized Rules of Regulations and Standards -- Domestic regulations and standards shall be based on market-oriented principles that are internationally harmonized and reflect market realities to the extent adequate and feasible. Members should also pay attention to the role of standards to protect consumers and to facilitate the dissemination of technologies to Members, particularly, developing ones. Adopting of international rules and standards will have the effect of increasing predictability for businesses and consumers. (5) Recognition of Equivalence of Foreign Regulatory Measures --When internationally harmonized measures are not possible, necessary, or desirable, the negative trade effects of cross-country disparities can be reduced by recognizing the equivalence of trading parties'regulatory measures or the results of conformity assessment performed in other countries. 3. Creating a Pro-Competitive Environment in E-Commerce Related Market *E-Commerce poses opportunities in which both small businesses and large global corporations can conduct business in a world-wide market if we successfully take balanced steps in the international public policy arena, thereby mitigating the divide between developed and developing Members. On the other hand, the failure to take balanced steps could allow this divide to continue. *To succeed in mitigating the divide, Members must do more than merely liberalize domestic regulations. To ensure fair chances for entrepreneurs in both developed and developing countries to succeed in the E-Commerce related market, not only the liberalization but also a pro-competitive environment which prevents the anti-competitive practices of market players shall be needed. We should take into consideration network effects that could lead to a dominance or monopoly, the power of which can be abused on a global scale. Fair participation of developed and developing Members and fair reflection of developed and developing Members' views are especially important for the development of global E-Commerce. Pro-competitive environment in E-Commerce related markets enhances the interests of consumers as well. *In this context, building upon Article VIII and IX of the GATS, further discussions are needed about what kind of impact the network effect has on the development of E-Commerce, taking into account the following issues. (1) Access to Essential Facilities -- how to ensure access to and utilization of essential facilities (tangible and intangible) which are essential for the supplier/provider to compete in E-Commerce related market, except where there is justifiable reason for denying access to or utilization of these facilities. (2) Patent related issues -- taking account of the current concerns over patents for software-implemented business methods, Members shall be encouraged to discuss international programs which will contribute to achieving harmonized patent protection for inventions in this technology area, including build-up of a solid data base of prior art, as well as to secure a competitive market. In the Okinawa Charter, the G8 welcomes the joint work already underway among intellectual property authorities and further encourage its experts to discuss further direction in this area. (3) Exclusive Practices in the Cyberspace -- further discussion on the implications of exclusive business practices on the Internet, and their adverse impact on E-Commerce related market. Any such discussions shall take into account technological innovations. (4) International Framework for Cooperation -- Members will promote bilateral, plurilateral or multilateral cooperation programmes to achieve above mentioned objectives. 4. Cooperation with Relevant International Organizations *With regard to the formation of international rules, including intellectual property rights, contract law, electronic signatures and authentication, consumer protection, jurisdiction and others, E-Commerce issues have been addressed in other international fora such as WIPO(World Intellectual Property Organization), UNCITRAL(United Nations Commission on International Trade Law), the Hague Conference on Private International Laws, ISO(International Standard Organization) (including COPOLCO(Consumer Policy Committee), OECD and others. Each forum should continue to work on these issues as they relate to specific areas of expertise. *The WTO should pay attention to such work, and consider such work in its own efforts to address various E-Commerce issues. *When an international agreement has been made in other international fora, the WTO should harmonize its own efforts through provisions such as: "When relevant international rules exist or are to be established in the relevant international organization, Members should reflect the international rules when introducing their own domestic laws and regulations." 5. Capacity Building of Developing Countries Members that fails to keep up with the accelerating pace of growth of the information society will not have the opportunities to participate fully in the information society and enjoy benefits presented by E-Commerce. Members should pursue contributions by the WTO to achieve Global eQuality recognizing the diverse conditions and needs of developing economies. Emphasis should be made in the following areas. *Technical cooperation -- Developed Members will undertake technical cooperation (e.g. setting up the hard and soft infrastructure, human capital for E-Commerce, trade facilitation) intended to achieve wider use of E-Commerce in developing Members and share the benefits of global E-Commerce with developing Members. We highlight the establishment of a global legal framework for E-Commerce in the WTO. *Infrastructure requirement -- To enhance the use of E-Commerce, developing economies should focus on enhancing infrastructure. Assistance from the international community should be required in development and improvement of infrastructure for E-Commerce combined with technical cooperation. To pool intellectual and financial resources the WTO should cooperate closely with international and regional organizations such as World Bank, ADB(Asian Development Bank), IDB(Inter-American Development Bank) and UNDP(United Nations Development Programme). *Demonstration -- Successful experiences of enhancing E-Commerce in developing Members shall be presented at the Committee on Trade and Development for the purpose of sharing information and experiences. *Policy dialogue -- Members should promote policy dialogue among partners to facilitate the sharing of information and experience between developing countries and other partners, and raise the global awareness of the importance in closing the digital divide. *International framework for cooperation -- Members should pay attention to recent developments in APEC(Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation) and other fora for capacity building in the field of E-Commerce. 6. Promotion of Private Sector Initiatives *Private sector initiatives such as self-regulation to deal with social issues should be promoted. Self-regulation shall be strengthened through public policy support.(Co-regulation) *Governments should pursue this initiative with close dialogue with private sector-led fora such as GBDe(Global Business Dialogue on e-commerce), GIIC(Global Information Infrastructure Commission) and consumer groups. The Okinawa Charter states that the G8 welcomes contributions from the private sector to the bridging the international digital divide. *Members should consider a scheme that effectively reflects the views of industries and consumers in developing economies. 7. Other *Moratorium on Customs Duties -- Members should ensure that the current moratorium on customs duties on E-Commerce is maintained. Discussions on the further extension of the moratorium should take place at the 4th Ministerial Conference. Procedure for discussions The discussion focusing on Trade Liberalization of E-Commerce Related Sectors should be included in the on-going service negotiations. We welcome reinvigoration of the Work Programme on E-Commerce which reflects to the activities in the four subsidiary bodies. Cross cutting issues which are related to GATT, GATS, TRIPS, and developmental aspects should be discussed at a horizontal task force under the auspices of the General Council. The task force can build upon, not duplicate, the work already done in the four subsidiary bodies. The outcome of discussions at the task force shall be input into the service negotiations if necessary. The task force will help the WTO more effectively to catch up with rapid technological change, share information and understand broad aspects that traverse all WTO disciplines in a coherent manner. It will also reduce burdens on the delegations, particularly, those delegations from developing economies which now have to attend the four subsidiary bodies. Members should take into account messages from inter-governmental and inter-industrial fora such as APEC and GBDe which call for setting up a horizontal task force as soon as possible. ---Takshi Muramto (CLNN) Takshi Muramoto -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Nov 2 11:13:44 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35E6E29B78; Thu, 2 Nov 2000 11:13:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2446218185; Thu, 2 Nov 2000 11:13:38 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3A0194C2.765E1521@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] USPTO RFC on IPR aspects of Hague Treaty on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments Date: Thu Nov 2 11:13:46 2000 RE: USPTO RFC on Hague Treaty on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments This is a very important RFC on the IPR aspects of the proposed Hague Treaty of Jurisdiction, which is scheduled for a diplomatic convention in June 2001. The basic issue is should the US government support a treaty making it much easier for Hague member countries (there are now 47) to collect foreign judgments, including, for intellectual property disputes? The treaty is now covering all copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret and other IPR matters, as well as nearly all other commercial litigation. The MPAA, RIAA and USCIB (US affiliate to International Chamber of Commerce) is supporting strong cross border enforcements of IPR judgments, meaning, for example, that there will be greater liability from law suits filed in foreign countries, over allegations of infringements of foreign rights, even when, for example, substantive law differs across countries, on issues such as the scope of rights, fair use, or other limitations and execptions to rights. In the view of CPT, these treaty presents huge risks and problems for the free software movement, and will likely substantially decrease the public's rights in all intellectual property matters, by expanding the reach of foreign IPR laws, which has a practical effect of reducing the public's rights to those that are common to all 47 member countries. CPT has more information about the treaty here: http://www.cptech.org/ecom/jurisdiction/hague.html FMI about the treaty process, contact Manon Ress Jamie Love -------------------------- [Federal Register: October 17, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 201)] [Notices] [Page 61306-61309] >From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr17oc00-37] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office RIN 0651-AB25 Request for Comments on Preliminary Draft Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce. ACTION: Request for comments. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Hague Conference on Private International Law is negotiating a convention designed to create common jurisdiction rules for international civil and commercial cases and to provide for international recognition and enforcement of judgments issued under these rules. A Diplomatic Conference to conclude these negotiations is scheduled to begin in June 2001, with a final session sometime in early 2002. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is seeking views of the public on this effort and the consequent potential changes to United States law and practice. DATES: Comments should be submitted on or before December 1, 2000. ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to offer written comments should address those comments to Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Box 4, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Washington, DC 20231, marked to the attention of Elizabeth Shaw. Comments may also be submitted by facsimile transmission to (703) 305-7575 or by electronic mail through the Internet to elizabeth.shaw2@uspto.gov. All comments will be maintained for public inspection in Room 902 of Crystal Park II, 2121 Crystal Drive, Arlington, Virginia. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Lucas by telephone at (703) 305-9300; by facsimile at (703) 305-8885; by electronic mail to jennifer.lucas@uspto.gov; or by mail marked to the attention of Jennifer Lucas, Attorney-Advisor, addressed to Director of the United States Patent and [[Page 61307]] Trademark Office, Box 4, Washington, DC 20231. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The Hague Conference on Private International Law is in the process of negotiating a new convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments in civil and commercial matters. The draft convention would create jurisdictional rules governing international lawsuits and provide for recognition and enforcement of judgments by the courts of Member States. Member States would be required to recognize and enforce judgments covered by the Convention if the jurisdiction in the court rendering the judgment were founded on one of the bases of jurisdiction required by the Convention. Discussions began in 1992, at the request of the United States. The impetus behind the request was to gain recognition and enforcement of U.S. judgments in other countries. While U.S. courts generally recognize and enforce judgments from other countries, U.S. judgments do not always receive the same treatment abroad. The Hague Conference is planning a two-part Diplomatic Conference to finalize the draft convention. The first session would take place in June 2001, followed by a second session in late 2001 or early 2002. The text of the proposed convention and other documents relating to the proposal are available via the Hague Conference's web site at http://www.hcch.net/e/workprog/jdgm.html. Brief Summary of Draft Convention The draft convention would create three categories of jurisdiction: (1) required bases for jurisdiction (generally Articles 3-16); (2) prohibited bases for jurisdiction (Article 18); and (3) everything else not covered by (1) or (2) (Article 17). Articles 3-16 set out jurisdictional rules for specific types of actions that the courts in Contracting States must provide, and from which any resulting judgment may gain the benefits of the recognition and enforcement provisions of the Convention. Article 12 creates exclusive jurisdiction for certain actions that ``have as their object'' the registration, validity, nullity, and possibly revocation or infringement of patents, trademarks, or other similar rights required to be deposited or registered, in the courts of the country in which the deposit or registration has been applied for or has occurred. Copyrights are excluded from the exclusive jurisdiction rule; however, actions concerning copyrights could fall under the other non-exclusive required jurisdictional provisions. Specifically, Article 12 provides: ``4. In proceedings which have as their object the registration, validity, [or] nullity [, or revocation or infringement] of patents, trade marks, designs or other similar rights required to be deposited or registered, the courts of the Contracting State in which the deposit or registration has been applied for, has taken place or, under the terms of an international convention, is deemed to have taken place, have exclusive jurisdiction. This shall not apply to copyright or any neighboring rights, even though registration or deposit of such rights is possible. [5. In relation to proceedings which have as their object the infringement of patents, the preceding paragraph does not exclude the jurisdiction of any other court under the Convention or under the national law of a Contracting State.] [6. The previous paragraphs shall not apply when the matters referred to therein arise as incidental questions.]'' The brackets identify potential language alternatives to be considered and discussed in detail during the Diplomatic Conference. Article 4 provides that parties may enter into agreements designating a choice of court; however, such agreements shall be without effect if they conflict with the provisions of Article 12. In addition, Article 5, which confers jurisdiction on a court when the defendant proceeds on the merits without contesting jurisdiction, is subject to Article 12 as well. Article 10 defines jurisdictional rules for tort actions. This provision would cover copyright infringement proceedings. It also could apply to patent and trademark infringement proceedings if the bracketed language in Article 12(4) is not approved. Article 10 provides for jurisdiction either in the State in which the act or omission causing injury occurred, or the State in which the injury arose so long as the injury in that State was reasonably foreseeable. Article 10(4) would limit available damages, where jurisdiction is founded on the place of injury, to the damage suffered in the place the suit is filed unless that is also the plaintiff's habitual residence. Article 18 defines grounds of jurisdiction that are prohibited in Contracting States. Article 18(1) would place a general limitation on the exercise of jurisdiction based on the absence of a ``substantial connection between that State and the dispute.'' Article 18(2)(e) is of particular interest to U.S. litigants because it states that jurisdiction cannot be based solely on the fact that the defendant carries on commercial or other activities in that State, except where the dispute is directly related to those activities. This provision would prohibit the exercise of general ``doing business'' jurisdiction as currently recognized under U.S. law. Article 18(2) also would prohibit the exercise of ``tag'' jurisdiction in a court based on service upon the defendant in the State. Everything that does not fall under either of these categories is included in the ``gray area'' as defined in Article 17. With some exceptions, countries can continue to act as they normally do under their national law; however, judgments resulting from actions covered by this provision will not get the benefits of recognition and enforcement under the Convention. Chapter III provides rules for the recognition and enforcement of judgments based on a ground of jurisdiction provided for in Articles 3- 16. Current U.S. Jurisdictional Law U.S. courts must have both personal jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter jurisdiction over the case before a court can act on a dispute. I. Personal Jurisdiction Generally, in order to exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant, district courts interpret the long-arm statute of the state in which they reside, as restricted by the limitations imposed by the due process clause of the U.S. Constitution. Courts first apply the state long-arm statute, which defines what types of conduct would bring a nonresident defendant within the boundaries of the court's reach. Activities that can create jurisdiction under most long-arm statutes include transacting business, committing a tortious act within the forum, or committing a tortious act outside the forum that has an effect within the forum. Once the court finds that the exercise of jurisdiction over the nonresident defendant is consistent with the relevant long-arm statute, the court then must determine whether the due process requirements are satisfied. The due process rule of the U.S. Constitution requires that a nonresident defendant have ``minimum contacts with [the forum] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend `traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.' '' International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316 (1945) (quoting Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 463 (1940)). In evaluating whether minimum contacts have been established in a given case, the courts ask if a [[Page 61308]] nonresident defendant, through his conduct and connection with the forum, ``purposefully avails itself of the privilege of conducting activities within the forum state, thus invoking the benefits and protections of its laws.'' Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 475 (1985) (quoting Hanson v. Denckla, 357 U.S. 235, 253 (1958)). A court must establish that it has either general or specific jurisdiction over a defendant before it can proceed with an action against the defendant. General jurisdiction is personal jurisdiction exercised over a defendant when the cause of action is unrelated to the defendant's contacts, but the defendant has sufficient contacts with the forum. Specific jurisdiction arises out of, or is related to, the defendant's contacts with the forum. See Helicopteros Nacionales de Colombia v. Hall, 466 U.S. 408, 414 (1984). General jurisdiction has been found where the defendant was engaging in ``continuous and systematic [though unrelated to the cause of action] business.'' Perkins v. Benguet Consolidated Mining Co., 342 U.S. 437, 438 (1952). To assert specific jurisdiction, a court is required to find that the defendant purposefully directed activities at residents in the forum, the claim arose out of those activities, and the assertion of personal jurisdiction is fair and reasonable. See Burger King, 471 U.S. at 471-76. Courts are cautious in exercise of jurisdiction over foreign defendants. See Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court, 480 U.S. 102, 114 (1987) (holding ``unique burdens placed upon one who must defend oneself in a foreign legal system should have significant weight in assessing the reasonableness of stretching the long arm of personal jurisdiction over national borders.''). Considered critical to due process analysis is whether the foreseeability exhibited by defendant's conduct and its connections with the forum State demonstrate that the defendant would reasonably anticipate being brought into the forum court. See World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, 444 U.S. 286, 297- 298 (1980). With respect to Internet-related cases, the law of personal jurisdiction is in flux. The traditional minimum contacts approach has been used to determine whether a court has jurisdiction over a non- resident defendant in Internet-related intellectual property disputes. In such cases, the courts have looked to a variety of factors, including but not limited to the level of interactivity of the Web site; whether the tortious act was committed in state or out-of-state with impact in the state; the number of hits on the Web site; or the foreseeability of use by forum residents. See, e.g., Cybersell, Inc. v. Cybersell, Inc., 130 F.3d 414 (9th Cir. 1997); Zippo Mfg. Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, 952 F. Supp. 1119 (W.D. Pa. 1997); Eskofot A/S v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., 872 F. Supp. 81 (S.D.N.Y. 1995). II. Subject Matter Jurisdiction Federal district courts have jurisdiction over civil actions involving patents, trademarks and copyrights pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1338(a), which provides: ``The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action arising under any Act of Congress relating to patents, * * * copyrights and trademarks. Such jurisdiction shall be exclusive of the courts of the states in patent * * * and copyright cases.'' A. Patents As mentioned above, federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over all suits ``arising under any Act of Congress relating to patents.'' This includes all patent validity and infringement actions. Jurisdiction under this section extends ``only to those cases in which a well-pleaded complaint establishes either that federal patent law creates the cause of action or that the plaintiff's right to relief necessarily depends on resolution of a substantial question of federal patent law.'' Christianson v. Colt Industries Operating Corp., 486 U.S. 800, 809 (1988). B. Trademarks Actions involving trademark infringement under the Lanham Act can be heard in either state or federal courts in the United States. However, most trademark actions arising out of the Lanham Act take place in federal court. Federal district courts have subject matter jurisdiction over all actions arising under the Lanham Act pursuant to Sec. 39 of that Act, 15 U.S.C. 1121, as well as 28 U.S.C. 1338(a). Section 14 of the Lanham Act creates an administrative proceeding within the USPTO where a party can petition to cancel a registered trademark. 15 U.S.C. 1064. Federal courts have concurrent jurisdiction with the USPTO to hear proceedings to cancel a mark, so long as the challenge arises from an existing trademark-related proceeding, as a result of Sec. 37 of the Lanham Act. 15 U.S.C. 1119. Section 37 provides that a court may order the cancellation of a trademark registration ``[i]n any action involving a registered trademark.'' This section, however, does not create an independent ground for exercising jurisdiction over an action--the court must have subject matter jurisdiction based on another ground before considering cancellation of a registered trademark. See 5 J. Thomas McCarthy, McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition, Sec. 30:110, pp. 30-186-88 (4th ed. 2000). C. Copyrights Federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over actions based on the Copyright Act, including copyright infringement proceedings. 28 U.S.C. 1338(a). Issues for Public Comment The USPTO is interested in assessing support for or opposition to the effort to negotiate a convention on jurisdiction and enforcement of judgments and in obtaining comments on the proposed convention as it relates to intellectual property. Interested members of the public are invited to present written comments on any issues they believe to be relevant to protection of intellectual property or any aspect of the proposed convention as it relates to intellectual property. Comments also are welcome on the following specific issues: 1. What are your experiences in having judgments involving intellectual property from one jurisdiction recognized in a foreign court? 2. Have you had different experiences in having those judgments recognized in U.S. courts? 3. Are uniform rules for international enforcement of judgments desirable? 4. Do you support or oppose the United States becoming party to a jurisdiction/enforcement of judgments convention? 5. What would be the benefits or drawbacks of the United States becoming a party to the proposed Hague convention? 6. Would the elimination of tag or general ``doing business'' jurisdiction have any impact on intellectual property owners' ability to protect their rights either domestically or internationally? 7. What other changes to U.S. law would be needed to implement the proposed convention? Please identify any drawbacks and/or advantages to such changes. 8. What effect, if any, could this Convention have on other international intellectual property obligations, including, but not limited to, the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), the Paris Convention, and the Berne Convention? 9. What effect, if any, could this Convention have on the enforcement of intellectual property with respect to the Internet? [[Page 61309]] 10. Would application of Article 10 change existing jurisdictional principles as applied to intellectual property infringement actions? If yes, please describe any changes in detail and provide any relevant legal authority. 11. Would the limitation of worldwide damages in Article 10(4) have any significant impact in cases involving worldwide infringement of trademark or other intellectual property rights? 12. With respect to Article 12(4), under what circumstances would application of this subsection change existing jurisdictional principles, with and without the bracketed language included? Please describe any changes in detail and provide any relevant legal authority. 13. What effect, if any, would Article 12(4) have on trademark owners seeking to litigate rights related to registered versus common law marks? 14. Is exclusive jurisdiction needed for infringement and/or validity actions involving patents, trademarks, and/or copyrights? 15. What changes, if any, should be made to the proposed Convention? Please describe any changes in detail and provide any relevant legal authorities that support such suggestions. 16. Please identify any other potential concerns or advantages raised by the proposed convention. In your response, please include the following: (1) clearly identify the matter being addressed; (2) provide examples, where appropriate, of the matter being addressed; (3) identify any relevant legal authorities applicable to the matter being addressed; and (4) provide suggestions regarding how the matter should be addressed by the United States. Dated: October 11, 2000. Q. Todd Dickinson, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. [FR Doc. 00-26634 Filed 10-16-00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-16-P -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Nov 2 13:25:56 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC45A29AE8 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 2000 13:25:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8C3118185 for ; Thu, 2 Nov 2000 13:25:56 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3A01B3C6.4F437808@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Brian McWilliams: AOL Facing New Legal Action Over Latest Software Date: Thu Nov 2 13:25:57 2000 AOL Facing New Legal Action Over Latest Software [November 2] Early adopters and lawyers say AOL 6.0 is a buggy replay of last year's AOL 5.0 fiasco http://www.internetnews.com/wd-news/article/0,,10_501941,00.html Audio version is in the Thursday November 2 edition of InternetNews Radio http://www.internetnewsradio.com -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Nov 17 19:25:32 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F21B29AEE for ; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 19:25:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (coleonyx.essential.org [216.0.124.52]) by milan.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA25144 for ; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 19:25:32 -0500 Message-ID: <3A15CD79.834ABAC3@cptech.org> From: James Love X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] E-commerce Roundtable Tue Nov 21 Date: Fri Nov 17 19:25:33 2000 The next E-commerce Roundtable will be held Tuesday, November 21st from 12-2pm. The meeting will be held at USPIRG, which is located at at 218 D Street, SE, Washington, DC, near the Capitol South Metro stop on the Orange or Blue line. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss what impact the next Administration will have on e-commerce. Ed Mierzwinski will chair the meeting. There will also be a few other short presentations, including: Mark Cooper, Consumer Federation of America - protecting consumers in B2C transactions and protecting competition in the B2B marketplace. Jean Ann Fox, also of CFA - the use of alternative dispute resolution procedures, whether to implement the OECD guidelines by voluntary self regulation or by legal requirements, and use of payment methods to resolve disputes. Manon Ress, Essential Information - Report on Hague treaty discussions and meetings. DIRECTIONS The Roundtable will be located at U.S. PIRG's office (Phone 202-546-9707) on the 2nd floor, 218 D St, SE, Washington, DC. (right next to a health club on a little park.) U.S. PIRG's office is 2 blocks from the Capital South metro stop. The metro is on First street, turn right off escalator and go down the hill half a block and turn left on D--up the hill one and one-half blocks. CONTACT For more information or questions about the E-commerce Roundtable please contact Alan Bushnell, akb@cptech.org or (202) 387-8030. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Nov 20 10:32:11 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97DF729AF2 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2000 10:32:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87319181EC; Mon, 20 Nov 2000 10:32:11 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3A1946CB.FA445650@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Roundtable , Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] E-commerce Roundtable Tue Nov 21 Date: Mon Nov 20 10:32:12 2000 Subject: [Ecommerce] E-commerce Roundtable Tue Nov 21 Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2000 19:23:58 -0500 From: Alan Bushnell The next E-commerce Roundtable will be held Tuesday, November 21st from 12-2pm. The meeting will be held at USPIRG, which is located at at 218 D Street, SE, Washington, DC, near the Capitol South Metro stop on the Orange or Blue line. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss what impact the next Administration will have on e-commerce. Ed Mierzwinski will chair the meeting. There will also be a few other short presentations, including: Mark Cooper, Consumer Federation of America - protecting consumers in B2C transactions and protecting competition in the B2B marketplace. Jean Ann Fox, also of CFA - the use of alternative dispute resolution procedures, whether to implement the OECD guidelines by voluntary self regulation or by legal requirements, and use of payment methods to resolve disputes. Manon Ress, Essential Information - Report on Hague treaty discussions and meetings. DIRECTIONS The Roundtable will be located at U.S. PIRG's office (Phone 202-546-9707) on the 2nd floor, 218 D St, SE, Washington, DC. (right next to a health club on a little park.) U.S. PIRG's office is 2 blocks from the Capital South metro stop. The metro is on First street, turn right off escalator and go down the hill half a block and turn left on D--up the hill one and one-half blocks. CONTACT For more information or questions about the E-commerce Roundtable please contact Alan Bushnell, akb@cptech.org or (202) 387-8030. -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Nov 20 14:33:40 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A066129AF2; Mon, 20 Nov 2000 14:33:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (flip.essential.org [216.0.124.53]) by milan.essential.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA28971; Mon, 20 Nov 2000 14:33:40 -0500 Message-ID: <3A198D81.7C1E9828@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Joseph Menn on UCITA Date: Mon Nov 20 14:33:41 2000 http://www.latimes.com/business/20001120/t000111452.html Support for Software Law Eroding Technology: Makers campaigned to limit buyers' rights. Now they're forced to water down the proposal. By JOSEPH MENN, Times Staff Writer After more than a year of conflict, a campaign by America Online, Microsoft and other powerful software companies to pass legislation dramatically limiting the rights of software buyers appears to have stalled in the face of growing opposition. [snip] -- James Love http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 200036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Nov 20 17:12:05 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5CDE29AF1 for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2000 17:12:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B12D2181EC for ; Mon, 20 Nov 2000 17:12:05 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3A19A488.C6B6B4B1@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Domain lock-in and abusive pricing in .md ccTLD Date: Mon Nov 20 17:12:06 2000 In LA, the ICANN non-commerical constituency could not agree on a resolution that addressed the issue of abusive pricing of domains. Here is a post from today ICANN's Off Topic forum, which addresses abusive pricing of domains in the .md country code (ccTLD). Jamie http://www.icann.org/cgi-bin/mbx/rpgmessage.cgi?offtopic;3A197BAF000002BE Username: larreeeee date/Time: Mon, November 20, 2000 at 7:29 PM GMT Subject: Letter to the FTC. Message: Here is a copy of the letter I sent to the FTC regarding this matter. My problem is very simple. I registered two domain names with register.md last year for $300 a year each and now they want me to pay $9,999 to renew the domain names. In essence they are simply shaking down their customers and stealing back the names. I registered these names as a longterm investment. Now Register.MD is stealing my investment from me. Thanks for your help in this matter. My domain names will be expiring in a matter of weeks. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Nov 21 10:10:51 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BED0B29AF1 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 10:10:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB7A0181EC for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 10:10:51 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Subject: [Random-bits] Internet Jurisdiction in Quebec Date: Tue Nov 21 10:10:52 2000 This interesting article covers several issues, including libel and consumer proteciton disputes. Jamie http://www.butterworths.ca/sampleinternetandecommercelawincanada.htm Sample Issue, November 2000 INTERNET JURISDICTION: THE VIEW FROM THE QUEBEC COURTS Don McGowan Stikeman Elliott, Montreal As with many commercial matters, legal questions pertaining to the Internet first arose in the United States. Accordingly, Canadian common law courts, which are accustomed to considering American precedent in many areas, have looked to judgments from the United States for guidance with many Internet law issues. However, especially with respect to questions of procedure, the courts in Quebec do not have this same habit, and have developed certain "made-in-Quebec" solutions to topics that might be treated differently outside of Quebec. One such topic is the question of jurisdiction over Internet matters. [snip] IF THE DEFENDANT IS NOT LOCATED IN QUEBEC After a brief period in which they considered the Internet to be analogous to a constantly playing advertisement, and in which courts would take jurisdiction over any Internet matter if the activity in question could be accessed by a computer in that jurisdiction,2 courts outside of Quebec now have adopted the more nuanced "passive vs. active" test to determine whether they should exercise jurisdiction over a particular matter. The "passive vs. active" test assumes that different activities can occur on the Internet, and that the legal response should differ with the specific nature of the activity. An e-commerce site that requires significant interaction from the user of that site will be an "active" site, and such a site can be controlled by any court in a jurisdiction where that site can be accessed, based upon the assumption that, by creating a site that asks for input from its users, the site provider has intended to engage in a relationship with people in various jurisdictions. In contrast, a "passive" site that simply provides information in the same manner as an electronic brochure and that cannot be used to take orders for a product will not attract the courts other than those of the site provider's own jurisdiction.3 The Supreme Court declined to review this decision.4 Just as with the common law provinces, Quebec courts will exercise jurisdiction over matters where the defendant is not domiciled in Quebec, so long as certain criteria are met. Article 3148(3) CCQ states that the Quebec courts have jurisdiction where "a fault was committed in Quebec, damage was suffered in Quebec, an injurious act occurred in Quebec or one of the obligations arising from a contract was to be performed in Quebec." Case law under art. 3148(3) CCQ has held that, where the injurious act occurring in Quebec was a breach of contract causing the Quebec resident to suffer damages, that will be sufficient for Quebec to take jurisdiction under art. 3148(3).5 Article 3148 CCQ only comes into play where one of the parties is located outside of Quebec; when the two parties are located within Quebec, the Quebec Code of Civil Procedure ("CCP") governs, and unambiguously grants jurisdiction to Quebec courts. The CCP does contain certain articles with respect to the place of introducing actions within Quebec, and one of these, art. 68(2) CCP, has drawn the attention of the two reported Quebec judgments on Internet jurisdiction. Pursuant to art. 68(2) CCP, "in an action for libel published in a newspaper," the action may be instituted "before the court of the district where the plaintiff resides if the newspaper has circulated therein."6 The Superior Court of Quebec has twice considered this article in the context of the Internet, and has twice reached radically different conclusions. In the first reported judgment on point, Investors Group v. Hudson,7 Cohen J. of the Superior Court held that a website is analogous to a newspaper distributed simultaneously all around the world, and that therefore art. 68(2) CCP would apply, allowing a Quebec court to exercise jurisdiction over that website. In this case, Hudson, a disgruntled ex-employee of Investors Group, lived in Quebec operated a website critical of Investors Group. Article 68(1) CCP indicates that a personal action may be instituted before the court of the defendant's real domicile, so Investors Group pursued Hudson in Quebec. Hudson's website was hosted on a server located outside of Quebec, and Hudson raised objections to the jurisdiction of the Quebec court because his postings, if defamatory, were placed on a server outside of Quebec. The court rejected Hudson's arguments as to jurisdiction, but instead of limiting its ratio to the fact that Hudson was domiciled in Quebec, the court added that it would have jurisdiction over Hudson because of art. 68(2) CCP: "As a result, by analogy to article 68(2) [CCP], applicable in cases of libel, the present action can be instituted in the place of the Plaintiffs residence, as the material on Hudson's website is available not only here [Montreal] but worldwide, as in the case of any Internet site." In a judgment rendered three months after Investors Group but not citing that case, Convectair N.M.T. v. Ouellet Canada,8 de Grandpré J. of the Superior Court also considered art. 68(2) CCP, but held that a website was not analogous to a press libel, and therefore the Quebec courts could not use art. 68(2) CCP to establish jurisdiction over that site. In this case, Ouellet, a company based in Montmagny, Quebec, had inserted the term "Convectair" into the metatags of the various pages of its website a total of 44 times, causing the Ouellet site to be found by search engines looking for "Convectair," Ouellet's competitor. Convectair itself was based in Saint-Therese, Quebec, but sued Ouellet in Montreal on the basis that the cause of action occurred in Montreal. According to the judgment, Convectair did not allege any fact or act that was committed in Montreal, and it seems that in oral argument the attorneys for Convectair raised the argument that, because Ouellet's act constituted a press libel, it constituted offending conduct that was committed in Montreal because the offending site could be accessed there. Making reference to the line of case law in virtue of which art. 68(2) CCP does not apply in the context of defamation transmitted over television or radio and quoting from the case of Marion v. Société Radio-Canada,9 the court held that interpreting the term "press libel" as including materials transmitted over the Internet would broaden the scope of art. 68(2) to such an extent that it would be equivalent to legislating, which the courts should not do. Accordingly, the court held that Montreal was not the appropriate forum for the litigation between these parties and dismissed the action.10 IMPLICATIONS OF THESE JUDGMENTS FOR PROCEEDINGS IN QUEBEC Neither Investors Group nor Convectair has been appealed. Accordingly, the law in Quebec is wholly inconsistent: one judgment has ruled that a website is a press libel in virtue of art. 68(2) CCP allowing Quebec courts to take jurisdiction over the content of that site wherever it can be accessed in Quebec (i.e., everywhere), and a second judgment has ruled that a website is not a press libel and therefore the traditional criteria for attribution of jurisdiction apply to the Internet. [snip] In a contract case, attribution of jurisdiction would be relatively simple; Quebec law recognizes choice of forum clauses (art. 3148 CCQ specifically provides for them), and therefore Quebec courts would defer to the forum chosen by the parties. The one exception in this regard is consumer protection. The Quebec Consumer Protection Act12 is entirely of public order, and accordingly the Quebec courts will always retain jurisdiction over matters where the consumer is domiciled in Quebec. The two articles of the CCQ dealing with the private international law of consumer contracts, namely arts. 3117 and 3149 CCQ, clearly indicate that Quebec will retain jurisdiction over consumers domiciled in Quebec. Article 3117 stipulates that a choice of law clause in a consumer contract does not deprive the consumer of protection under the consumer protection law of the jurisdiction of their residence if the formation of the contract was preceded by "a special offer or an advertisement" in that jurisdiction and if the consumer took all necessary steps for formation of the contract while in that place; if the parties do not choose a law, the law of the consumer's residence governs. Is a posting on a website a "special offer or an advertisement"? Under the holding from Investors Group, a website is analogous to a newspaper distributed in Quebec, and therefore even a notice on a website with a 1-800 number for orders would constitute an advertisement in Quebec, attracting the application of Quebec law. Under the holding from Convectair, a website is not a newspaper, and traditional conflict of laws provisions should apply. [snip] Article 3149 sets forth that a Quebec court has jurisdiction over any consumer contract if the consumer has a domicile or residence in Quebec, and that waiver of such jurisdiction may not be set up against the consumer. The application of art. 3149 CCQ could be quite draconian. A "consumer contract" is defined at art. 1384 CCQ as covering any situation where a physical person acquires, rents, borrows, or otherwise procures goods or services for their personal, family, or domestic use from another party that offers these goods or services in the context of a business. That is, any e-commerce contract involving a consumer is, for the purposes of Quebec law, a consumer contract, and where that consumer is present in Quebec, the courts in Quebec will have jurisdiction over that consumer and, therefore, over that contract. In this context, the "active vs. passive" test is meaningless. The fact of a consumer's being in Quebec will give the courts in Quebec jurisdiction over even a passive site, and this even if the contract between the parties contains a choice of laws or choice of forum clause. [snip] With respect to extracontractual liability, where (obviously) no election of forum would exist, the Quebec courts should adopt the "active vs. passive" test. The judgment in Investors Group takes exactly the position that was rejected in Braintech. To quote the Braintech court at para. 63: "It would create a crippling effect on freedom of expression if, in every jurisdiction the world over in which access to Internet could be achieved, a person who posts fair comment on a bulletin board could be haled before the courts of each of those countries where access to this bulletin could be obtained." At present, following the judgment in Investors Group, a Quebec court could exercise jurisdiction over any Internet site because, just like a press libel, that site was accessible in the province of Quebec. A Quebec-based company discovering an adverse posting about it on the Internet would be able to access the offending site and, having accessed it in Quebec, will have created jurisdiction for the Quebec courts. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Nov 21 10:20:34 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E2E329AF1 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 10:20:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7AB8181EC for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 10:20:33 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3A1A959C.10B9EC31@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Michelle Delio on EPO debate on software patents Date: Tue Nov 21 10:20:34 2000 http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,40299,00.html Europe Starts Debate on Patents by Michelle Delio 2:00 a.m. Nov. 21, 2000 PST A new battle between European open-source advocates and the European Patent Office is being waged at the Diplomatic Conference to Revise the European Patent Convention in Munich, Germany. A key issue at the conference, which opened Monday, will be whether software developers should be allowed to patent their applications. Current European law does not allow software to be patented, but the European Patent Office (EPO) is heavily in favor of an extension of the patent system that would extend its coverage to software. [snip] -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Nov 21 11:10:56 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B06529B0D for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 11:10:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA43D18239 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 11:10:55 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3A1AA16A.E7B89444@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] British Trade Unions: Corporate lobbying stopped .union internet domain Date: Tue Nov 21 11:10:56 2000 Subject: Corporate lobbying stopped .union internet domain Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 15:30:49 +0000 From: Chris Bailey To: csif-l@jca.apc.org, ncdnhc-discuss@lyris.isoc.org Press statement by British Trade Union Congress Corporate lobbying stopped .union internet domain The refusal to grant a new .union top level domain to the internet, to join domains such as .com, is not only deeply disappointing but suggests that corporate America now runs the internet, says the TUC today. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) meeting in Los Angeles yesterday granted applications for seven new top level domains including .biz and .museum, but turned down an application from the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, backed by the TUC, for a union domain. The ICANN staff had recommended support for the .union domain and the proposal had also won the support of the non-commercial internet users meeting in advance of the ICANN. However US employers and intellectual property lawyer groups had opposed the proposal. Nigel Stanley, Head of Campaigns and Communications at the TUC said, "This is a deeply disappointing decision. Given the support of the technical experts and other non-commercial users, it is hard to conclude anything other than this is simple anti-union prejudice stoked up by corporate interests in the US. Dissatisfaction with internet governance can only now grow. However this will not stop unions using the net to promote our message." Notes to Editors: All TUC press releases can be found at www.tuc.org.uk A series of TUC rights leaflets are available on the know your rights line 0870 600 4 882. Lines are open every day from 8am-10pm. Calls are charged at the national rate. Contacts: Media enquiries: Nigel Stanley on 020 7467 1244 or 076 99 755102 (pager) From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Nov 21 23:32:24 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7583029B9A for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 23:32:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6599B181EC for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2000 23:32:24 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] CPT comments in USPTO RFC on IPR and Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments Date: Tue Nov 21 23:32:24 2000 Attached are the November 21, 2000 comments of the Consumer Project on Technology, submitted in the current United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) request for comments on the intellectual property provisions of the Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments. We are concerned that this proposed Convention would create a "worst of all possible worlds" situation for intellectual property, as all national IPR laws would have greater reach, creating particularly significant risks for the Internet. While we have asked for an extension, the current deadline for comments is December 1, 2000. (People can email comments directly to the USPTO by email at this address: elizabeth.shaw2@uspto.gov). We encourage others to submit comments to the USPTO on this issue. Background on the Convention and the USPTO RFC, and a new email discussion list for the Convention, are here: http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/notices/prdrconjud.html http://www.cptech.org/ecom/jurisdiction/hague.html http://lists.essential.org/mailman/admin/hague-jur-commercial-law/ Jamie Love <---------CPT comments on Hague Convention------------> To: Elizabeth Shaw From: James Love Re: Public Comments on IPR aspects of Hague Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters Date: November 21, 2000 I request that the United States Patent and Trademark Office extend the deadline for this comment period to January 15, 2000, to permit broader public debate on this issue. In addition, I present the preliminary comments of the Consumer Project on Technology to the 16 questions raised in the USPTO's October 17, 2000 Federal Register Notice, that is on the web here: (http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/notices/prdrconjud.html) Preliminary Answers to 16 questions by the Consumer Project on Technology: 1. What are your experiences in having judgments involving intellectual property from one jurisdiction recognized in a foreign court? No personal experience. 2. Have you had different experiences in having those judgments recognized in U.S. courts? N/A 3. Are uniform rules for international enforcement of judgments desirable? As a general rule, no, if the uniform rules are bad rules. The benefits or disadvantages of uniform rules will depend upon the content of the rules. Harmonization on bad rules is a bad thing. Harmonization on good rules is a good thing. But since not everyone agrees on what would be good or bad rules, this presents a problem. In the area of intellectual property rules, there are special reasons to avoid extending the reach of all foreign IPR regimes. The US has strong traditions for fair use that are not followed in all countries. The US has a stronger system for patent examination than do some countries, and indeed, some countries have a registration system that places every greater burdens on the public to defend infringement suits. Some countries will predictably issue overly broad patents, patents that do not represent real or important inventions, or patents that offend the sensibilities, such as patents on life forms or business methods. Some countries have sui generis IPR regimes that lead to anticompetitive or monopolistic outcomes. The European laws on protection of databases create rights in facts that do not exist in the United States. Some countries have crown copyrights in government documents, and use those rights to prevent citizens from publishing information about governments on the Internet. The United States issues ill advised patents on business methods, creating a nightmare of litigation and anticompetive outcomes, and these patents should not be forced on the whole world. Some countries have trademark or unfair competition laws which make it illegal to engage in comparative advertising, or even to criticize commercial products. In some countries, it is against the law to link to documents from a web page, without a license. In some countries, the first sale doctrine is extremely limited. Trade secret protections in some countries can be used as a weapon against whistle blowers or to prevent criticism or debate on company practices. In general, if countries think they can collect money abroad more easily, they will have incentives to be even more aggressive in issuing intellectual property, including overly broad patents, sui generis rights that don't make sense, restrictive copyright rights, etc, because the "consumers" will often be foreign consumers, and the countries will seek to exploit the foreign consumers. 4. Do you support or oppose the United States becoming party to a jurisdiction/enforcement of judgments convention? We oppose the United States entering into a treaty on the enforcement of judgments for intellectual property claims at this time. The laws on intellectual property on the Internet are undergoing enormous change and are subject to much controversy. It makes no sense at all to lock in the whole world to a system that extends every nation's IPR regime to everyone. The fact that IPR regimes are so different now, and undergoing so much change, is a good reason to exclude IPR issues from the Hague Convention, as has been done for maritime law and other areas where there is not agreement upon jurisdiction issues. 5. What would be the benefits or drawbacks of the United States becoming a party to the proposed Hague convention? The drawback would be an enormous shrinkage of the public's rights, as people would be subject to the most restrictive IPR regimes in the world. Publishers, patent owners and others could pursue litigation in the most restrictive jurisdictions. People who do nothing more than publish web pages or use the Internet would be exposed to all sorts of new risks, including the costs of defending oneself in foreign courts. 6. Would the elimination of tag or general ``doing business'' jurisdiction have any impact on intellectual property owners' ability to protect their rights either domestically or internationally? Under review. 7. What other changes to U.S. law would be needed to implement the proposed convention? Please identify any drawbacks and/or advantages to such changes. The Article 4 provisions regarding contracts determining jurisdiction will place burdens on US citizens who are forced to litigate disputes in foreign courts. 8. What effect, if any, could this Convention have on other international intellectual property obligations, including, but not limited to, the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), the Paris Convention, and the Berne Convention? The Convention will have the practical effect of limiting country freedom to authorize certain exceptions and limitation on intellectual property rights, as the rights will be determined by contracts, and litigated in foreign courts, often under foreign laws. 9. What effect, if any, could this Convention have on the enforcement of intellectual property with respect to the Internet? The Convention will create enormous risks for those who develop free software that is distributed over the Internet, or used for Internet servers or applications software. Volunteer developers may find themselves the subject of foreign infringement suits involving infringements of patents, trade secrets, copyrights or other rights, even when their efforts are completely legal under the laws of the country where they live. Anyone who links web pages, reports facts or news, or forwards articles in newsgroups or mailing lists will risk being sued in foreign courts where IPR laws are very restrictive. 10. Would application of Article 10 change existing jurisdictional principles as applied to intellectual property infringement actions? If yes, please describe any changes in detail and provide any relevant legal authority. Under review. 11. Would the limitation of worldwide damages in Article 10(4) have any significant impact in cases involving worldwide infringement of trademark or other intellectual property rights? Under review. 12. With respect to Article 12(4), under what circumstances would application of this subsection change existing jurisdictional principles, with and without the bracketed language included? Please describe any changes in detail and provide any relevant legal authority. Under review. 13. What effect, if any, would Article 12(4) have on trademark owners seeking to litigate rights related to registered versus common law marks? Under review. 14. Is exclusive jurisdiction needed for infringement and/or validity actions involving patents, trademarks, and/or copyrights? IPR should be excluded from the Convention, as is maritime law. 15. What changes, if any, should be made to the proposed Convention? Please describe any changes in detail and provide any relevant legal authorities that support such suggestions. IPR should be excluded from the Convention, as is maritime law. 16. Please identify any other potential concerns or advantages raised by the proposed convention. I do not believe the US government appreciates the extend to which this Convention would shrink the public's rights, harm the development of free software, or create incentives for countries to adopt bad IPR regimes. The Consumer Project on Technology has created a web page on the Convention here: http://www.cptech.org/ecom/jurisdiction/hague.html We have also created a public discussion list on the Convention here: http://lists.essential.org/mailman/admin/hague-jur-commercial-law/ -- James Love, Consumer Project on Technology v. 1.202.387.8030, fax 1.202.234.5176 love@cptech.org, http://www.cptech.org From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Wed Nov 22 10:17:19 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 187EE29AF1; Wed, 22 Nov 2000 10:17:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09368181EC; Wed, 22 Nov 2000 10:17:19 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3A1BE664.BAF58C53@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] /. on European Patent Office rejecting software patents Date: Wed Nov 22 10:17:20 2000 http://slashdot.org/articles/00/11/22/1337203.shtml "On the CONVENTION ON THE GRANT OF EUROPEAN PATENTS all 20 memberstates have decided to not change the regulations to the patentability of software and to allow by this basically no patents on software." E -- James Love mailto:love@cptech.org http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sun Nov 26 11:17:51 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from prserv.net (out1.prserv.net [32.97.166.31]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51A9A29B18; Sun, 26 Nov 2000 11:17:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org ([139.92.111.45]) by prserv.net (out1) with SMTP id <2000112616174920105d3ec4e>; Sun, 26 Nov 2000 16:17:50 +0000 Message-ID: <3A214916.E118508B@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] AP on HP to pay antipiracy fee for CD burners Sender: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org Errors-To: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org X-BeenThere: random-bits@lists.essential.org Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Odds and ends, selected by Jamie Love List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sun Nov 26 11:18:07 2000 X-Original-Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 12:32:06 -0500 This is more evidence of the problems in the proposed Hague Convention of Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments, that would create a global framework for cross-border collections of judgements for IPR suits (and other commerical law). Jamie http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/review/crh737.htm 1/24/00- Updated 01:40 PM ET HP to pay antipiracy fee for CD burners FRANKFURT, Germany (AP) — Computer giant Hewlett-Packard has become the first company to be snagged by a German law requiring firms to pay fees for making CD burners that are being used to illegally lift the latest hits off the World Wide Web. The case sets the stage for other European countries to possibly adopt similar rules to stem an epidemic that cost the music industry an estimated $5 billion last year. But analysts blasted the agreement reached Thursday as another example of Germany's notorious thatch of regulations. ''The manufacturers are scapegoats,'' said Robert Labatt, a new media analyst at research group Gartner. ''It's the individual works of art, books, songs, videos, that need to be protected.'' Many of Germany's neighbors, including France, Italy and Greece, have similar laws meant to protect authors and musicians by nailing makers of equipment used to violate copyright laws. But the laws date back decades and focus on devices like tape recorders and video players. The German case against Hewlett-Packard extends Germany's pre-existing law into the digital age, when such things as CD burners, computer printers, hard drives and high-speed modems make it easier to copy and transfer copyrighted items. According to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, about 500 million CDs are pirated annually by people creating their own CDs from downloaded tunes off the Internet. More than 25 million pirated music files are available online, the group estimates. All told, that racked up $1 billion for Europe's $10 billion music industry last year, and cost EU governments around $72 million in lost tax revenues, the group says. Several lawsuits have been filed around the world, including an ongoing lawsuit a number of record companies have brought against Napster, which provides software that allows users to easily swap music files. GEMA, German's main licensing group, targeted Hewlett-Packard as a test case in May, reasoning that the company leads the German market leader in CD burners. But Hewlett-Packard dug in its heels when it was ordered to pay 30 marks ($12.90) for each CD burner sold in Germany since February 1998. The legal battle continued until Thursday, when an agreement was reached to have Hewlett-Packard pay 3.60 marks ($1.54) for each unit sold during that period while agreeing to pay 12 marks ($5.16) for each one sold in the future. Hewlett-Packard spokeswoman Jeannette Weisschuh refused to say how much that would set the company back. But she criticized the settlement for putting Hewlett-Packard at a disadvantage against foreign online retailers who, unburdened by such fees, can sell cheaper CD burners. ''This was a trial to set an example for the whole market,'' said Weisschuh. ''It's unfair to the consumers who have to pay more and unfair to the manufacturers because it gives us a competitive disadvantage.'' Other companies selling CD burners in Germany will also be subject to the fees, which could vary depending on what kind of agreement they reach with GEMA. The Hewlett-Packard settlement is expected to set a benchmark, however. Currently, equipment manufacturers pay 2.50 marks ($1.07) for each cassette recorder and 18 marks ($7.74) for each video recorder sold in Germany. The fees, which are not collected by the government, are distributed by GEMA to copyright owners through recording houses and music distributors. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Nov 27 12:02:01 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from prserv.net (out2.prserv.net [32.97.166.32]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72C2C29AF2 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 12:02:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org ([139.92.111.126]) by prserv.net (out2) with SMTP id <200011271701542020349gr2e>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 17:01:58 +0000 Message-ID: <3A22A687.C3D94837@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] ABA Transition Task Force on Antitrust enforcement Sender: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org Errors-To: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org X-BeenThere: random-bits@lists.essential.org Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Odds and ends, selected by Jamie Love List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon Nov 27 12:03:01 2000 X-Original-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 13:23:03 -0500 ICANN counsel Joe Sims co-chair's ABA transition task force on antitrust enforcement. jl Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 10:18:19 -0600 From: "Woodward, Stacy" To: AT-MEMBERS@MAIL.ABANET.ORG A Message from Joe Sims and Mary Cranston... The Antitrust Section has appointed us to co-chair a Task Force to evaluate and offer recommendations concerning federal antitrust enforcement and related competition policy issues to the next Administration. The Task Force is made up of Dale Collins, Mike Denger, Bill Kovacic, Richard Steuer and Patti Vaughan, along with the undersigned, and we are charged with completing our work so that it can be submitted to the Council for its review and action prior to the new Administration taking office. As a group, we are reaching out for opinions and suggestions that could inform our report, both from the agencies themselves and from any others that have views to offer. We encourage any of you who wish to offer views or suggestions that might be incorporated in the report of the Task Force to provide those to any of the task force members personally, or to direct them to the undersigned at the email addresses noted below. Given the schedule, it is critical that we receive any such input ASAP, and no later than December 8, 2000. Thanks in advance for your help in this project. Mary Cranston Joe Sims cranston_mb@pillsburylaw.com jsims@jonesday.com P.S. Committee Chairs please forward this email to your committee listservs. Thank you! Stacy Woodward Member Services and Publication Manager Section of Antitrust Law woodwars@staff.abanet.org http://www.abanet.org/antitrust From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Mon Nov 27 12:51:28 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from prserv.net (out1.prserv.net [32.97.166.31]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DDC629B06; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 12:51:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org ([139.92.111.126]) by prserv.net (out1) with SMTP id <2000112717512620100cakoue>; Mon, 27 Nov 2000 17:51:27 +0000 Message-ID: <3A22B22B.E2095BEA@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] Jurisdiction Dispute Heats Up in Europe Sender: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org Errors-To: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org X-BeenThere: random-bits@lists.essential.org Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Odds and ends, selected by Jamie Love List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Mon Nov 27 12:52:03 2000 X-Original-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:12:43 -0500 http://www.thestandard.net/article/display/0,1151,20366,00.html November 22, 2000, 12:02 PM PST Jurisdiction Dispute Heats Up in Europe The EU is expected to rule that e-commerce disputes should be settled in the courts of the consumer's country. Trade groups say this would be a big mistake. By Paul Meller BRUSSELS – The European Commission is set to hand down regulations at the end of the month that could have major effect on the development of electronic commerce in Europe, and some trade groups don't like what they see. Ambassadors from the 15 member states of the European Union are preparing the agenda for a meeting of justice and home-affairs ministers in Brussels at the end of the month. Those ministers will decide the final shape of a regulation that would decide whose court cross-border legal disputes go to. For instance, which country has jurisdiction when there is a dispute over an online transaction between a consumer in one EU country and an e-commerce Web site based in another? The commission has proposed that courts in the consumer's country should handle online disputes. Industry groups, however, want jurisdiction to go to the country where the supplier is based. "Industry believes that the commission's approach could hamper the growth of e-commerce in Europe," the groups said. The trade groups that signed the statement include the European Mail Order Traders Association, the European Publishers Council, the Federation of European Direct Marketing, the Internet Advertising Bureau and the American Chamber of Commerce in Belgium. Financial institutions are also concerned about the shape of the new regulation. [snip] Consumer representatives sound equally alarmist when defending the country-of-destination principle. "If the 'country of origin' principle were applied to e-commerce, as industry is demanding, then in a cross-border legal dispute, the consumer would have to deal with different legislative codes," said Ursula Pachl, legal adviser to European consumer watchdog BEUC. "It's even more unreasonable to demand that of consumers," she said. "Who needs more protection? I'd say it is the consumer." [snip] Three countries are believed to have concerns with the proposed regulation: the U.K., Ireland and Luxembourg. However, none has said it will veto the regulation at the ministers' meeting on Nov. 30 and Dec. 1. [snip] If all 15 justice ministers decide to side with consumers, a glaring contradiction in EU laws would be created because the member states are adopting an e-commerce directive that says that the laws of the country of destination should apply to cross-border online transactions. If the jurisdiction regulation is adopted before the e-commerce directive becomes law in the EU nations, the directive might be thrown back to the commission for rewriting, said Alastair Tempest, director general at FEDMA, the European federation of direct and interactive marketing. [snip] From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Sat Dec 2 20:07:38 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@lists.essential.org Received: from prserv.net (out2.prserv.net [32.97.166.32]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F00729B31 for ; Sat, 2 Dec 2000 20:07:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org ([32.102.91.244]) by prserv.net (out2) with SMTP id <2000120301073420202d3of6e>; Sun, 3 Dec 2000 01:07:34 +0000 Message-ID: <3A299A1C.E5E6D13E@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] CPT bits Sender: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org Errors-To: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org X-BeenThere: random-bits@lists.essential.org Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Odds and ends, selected by Jamie Love List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Sat Dec 2 20:08:11 2000 X-Original-Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 19:55:56 -0500 As some members of random-bits know, I'm often out of the office, and hard to reach by voice mail or even email sometimes. I've been on the road for a week, and will be in Bangladesh next week, and Bombay for a few days the week after, returning to the USA on the 14th. If anyone wants info about the Hague convention, they can contact Manon Ress. Vergil Bushnell has also returned to CPT. Both can be reached at the CPT office at 202.387.8030. Jamie -- James Love http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 200036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Dec 7 23:35:54 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from localhost.localdomain (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 142AB29B0B; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 23:35:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org ([203.190.32.212]) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eB84ouP08873; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 23:50:56 -0500 Message-ID: <3A3066BF.CC95B783@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] EU Copyright directive Sender: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org Errors-To: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org X-BeenThere: random-bits@lists.essential.org Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Odds and ends, selected by Jamie Love List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu Dec 7 23:36:03 2000 X-Original-Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 23:42:39 -0500 Subject: FYI: EU Copyright directive, common position published Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 10:34:40 +0100 From: "Stefan Bechtold" To: Multiple recipients of list On September 28, 2000, the Council of the European Union adopted a Common Position concerning the draft of a copyright directive. This common position is now officially published in the Official Journal of the EU, no. C 344 of December 1, 2000, pp. 1-22 and is available on the WWW at http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/dat/2000/c_344/c_34420001201en00010022.pdf. Amongst other things, it contains an anti-circumvention regulation in art. 6. As in the U.S. DMCA, one of the main problems is the relationship between the protection of technological measures and copyright limitations (like fair use). In the version of the common position, it is fairly easy to override copyright limitations by using a combination of technological measures and contracts; art. 6 (4) (4) says "The provisions of the first and second subparagraphs [which limit the protection of technological measures in order to preserve several copyright limitations] shall not apply to works or other subject-matter made available to the public on agreed contractual terms in such a way that members of the public may access them from a place and at a time individually chosen by them." If the copyright directive gets adopted in its current version, it is my feeling that we'll get the same problems in Europe as they occured in the U.S. with the DMCA and ProCD... (There are other things which are at least problematic with the anti-circumvention provision; there is no "right to hack" as in the U.S. DMCA; there are several cases where copyright law is limited but there is no equivalent limitation to the protection of technological measures in art. 6 (4) etc.). Stefan -- # Stefan Bechtold stef@n-bechtold.com Tuebingen, Germany # # http://www.jura.uni-tuebingen.de/~s-bes1 # # Time is what prevents everything from happening at once. # -- James Love http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 200036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Thu Dec 7 23:38:55 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from localhost.localdomain (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD9D029B0B; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 23:38:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org ([203.190.32.212]) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eB84rtP08881; Thu, 7 Dec 2000 23:53:58 -0500 Message-ID: <3A306770.948451B1@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Settlement of Mormon Linking Case Sender: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org Errors-To: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org X-BeenThere: random-bits@lists.essential.org Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Odds and ends, selected by Jamie Love List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Thu Dec 7 23:39:03 2000 X-Original-Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 23:45:36 -0500 Sbject: Settlement of Mormon Linking Case Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 08:02:13 -0800 From: Bob Stock Reply-To: cni-copyright@cni.org To: Multiple recipients of list The parties in Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry have reached a settlement subject to court approval. http://www.utlm.org/underthecoveroflight_news.htm#Permanent Injunction The details are in the papers, but it would appear that the Mormon Church got most of what it wanted (although one could maintain that it had what it wanted before it even arrived in court). The upside for those who felt that the district court's opinion was wrong, or that not all of the issues were fully aired and argued, is that the settlement vacates the preliminary injunction and its accompanying decision. "'Settlement of the case includes a withdrawal of the court's opinion as to the posting of internet addresses (URLs) which may contain copyrighted material. That opinion which affected the rights of people that use the internet had to be removed either by an appeal or by this agreement.'" http://www.utlm.org/underthecoveroflight/pressreleasesettlement.htm. The saddest part from my perspective is that copyright law continues to be a place where institutions can hide from public scrutiny and criticism. This had been demonstrated previously in the Scientology cases and continues unabated in the Mormon case. ------------------------------------- Bob Stock http://www.geocities.com/Paris/1206/ ------------------------------------- -- James Love http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 200036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Dec 15 12:44:20 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7584929B1A for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 12:44:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5ED7918239; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 12:44:20 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3A3A5AD8.2225DD05@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Random-bits] WIPO forum on Jurisdiction and IPR Sender: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org Errors-To: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org X-BeenThere: random-bits@lists.essential.org Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Odds and ends, selected by Jamie Love List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri Dec 15 12:45:01 2000 X-Original-Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 12:54:32 -0500 http://www.wipo.int/pil-forum/en/ WIPO Forum on Private International Law and Intellectual Property Geneva, January 30 and 31, 2001 A Forum on Private International Law and Intellectual Property will be organized by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in Geneva on January 30 and 31, 2001, at the International Conference Center of Geneva (CICG – 15 rue de Varembé). The Forum will address issues of interest to experts in intellectual property as well as experts in private international law. The program includes items on: emerging issues in the field of electronic commerce and the role of alternative dispute resolution current international initiatives issues concerning copyright and related rights issues concerning industrial property (patents and trademarks) There will also be panel discussions on private international law aspects of intellectual property protection (with panelists from Egypt, France, Hungary, Mexico, Singapore, South Africa and the United Kingdom) as well as on practical implications for intellectual property business and users. Speakers and panelists are drawn from academic and business circles and from inter-governmental and non-governmental organizations. Those interested in attending the Forum are requested to register before December 29, 2000 by using the on-line registration facility -- James Love http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 200036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Dec 15 13:59:38 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C09E29BAA for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 13:59:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from milan.essential.org (milan.essential.org [216.0.124.12]) by genoa.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D86B1822D for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 13:59:38 -0500 (EST) From: James Love X-Sender: To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [Random-bits] Public Citizen case involving anonymous criticism of company Sender: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org Errors-To: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org X-BeenThere: random-bits@lists.essential.org Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Odds and ends, selected by Jamie Love List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri Dec 15 14:00:01 2000 X-Original-Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 13:59:38 -0500 (EST) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 10:42:28 -0500 From: Angela Bradbery Subject: Public Citizen press release Dec. 15, 2000 Internet Critic of Atlanta Company Should Remain Anonymous, Public Citizen Tells Court Identities of People Who Post Anonymous Messages on the Internet Should Not Be Disclosed WASHINGTON, D.C. -- A Georgia court should block an Internet consulting firm's efforts to learn the identity of a man who anonymously posted comments about the company on an Internet message board, Public Citizen has told the court. The firm, Atlanta-based iXL Enterprises, sued to learn the name of an individual who posted comments on a Yahoo! message board about the reasons for the company's declining fortunes. After filing its lawsuit, iXL obtained a subpoena that it served to Yahoo! to learn the person's name. Public Citizen is representing the individual, identified in court papers only as John Doe. iXL's efforts violate the man's First Amendment rights, as well as his privacy rights under the Georgia Constitution, Public Citizen said in a brief filed on Monday in the Superior Court of Fulton County. "iXL is attempting to use the court as a private detective service, to locate a member of the public who has engaged in speech critical of the company" said Paul Alan Levy, an attorney for Public Citizen Litigation Group, which is representing Doe. "It's a blatant attempt not only to violate this man's rights but to intimidate other people from expressing themselves freely." In its complaint, iXL alleges that Doe is an iXL employee and that his postings violated an employment agreement. However, Doe is not an iXL employee and has produced evidence to prove it, the brief says. iXL also claims that Doe made false and derogatory statements containing confidential business information, but the company has not said what those statements were. Nor did the company say that Doe's comments damaged the company in any way. Further, company officers had adequate chance to post their own rebuttal to the man's comments, Public Citizen said. The Internet, Levy argued, is "a forum for public discourse on any subject. People have a right to participate in public debates, and that's just what these message boards are -- ongoing public debates." Doe posted a number of messages on the iXL chat site, some of which were critical of iXL or staff members. Others were complimentary, but none were "even arguably defamatory," the brief states. When Yahoo! contacted Doe to alert him to iXL's court action, Doe contacted the company's lawyer and was promised that iXL would drop its court action if Doe could prove he was not an iXL employee. Levy, of Public Citizen, followed up with the company's attorney, but he has refused to discuss the matter, claiming "the existence of other pressing business," the brief states. Doe is concerned that the lawsuit could cost him his current job if his employer were to learn about it, the brief states. Public Citizen filed the brief because it champions free speech rights. The non-profit consumer advocacy organization has defended the right of anonymity in several similar suits, including one filed by Thomas & Betts Corporation, a Tennessee manufacturer of electrical components, and another filed by Dendrite International, a New Jersey supplier of sales force software products and support services for the pharmaceutical industry. The Tennessee company dismissed the case with a statement that it did not want to chill free speech on the Internet. In the New Jersey case, a court in November rejected the company's attempt to discover the identities of the anonymous Internet message posters, saying the company had failed to meet the stringent legal standards required for them to obtain those names. Also representing Doe in the current case are Jeffrey D. Sodko and Robert S. Giolito of Stanford, Fagan & Giolito in Atlanta. ### The brief in this case may be viewed at http://www.citizen.org/litigation/briefs/iXLmem.htm. The court decision in the Dendrite case is posted at http://www.citizen.org/litigation/briefs/dendrite.pdf. From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Dec 15 14:37:29 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 081D929B1A for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 14:37:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED33318239 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 14:37:28 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3A3A759A.D0B7EE3D@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] USPTO extends comment period on Hague/IPR issues Sender: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org Errors-To: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org X-BeenThere: random-bits@lists.essential.org Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Odds and ends, selected by Jamie Love List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri Dec 15 14:38:00 2000 X-Original-Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 14:48:42 -0500 We asked for an extention on the comments, and the US PTO has granted an extention. Jamie [Federal Register: December 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 238)] [Notices] [Page 77347] >From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr11de00-38] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office RIN 0651-AB25 Reopening of the Time Period for Acceptance of Comments on Preliminary Draft Convention on Jurisdiction and Foreign Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters AGENCY: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce. ACTION: Reopening of time period for acceptance of comments. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: On Tuesday, October 17, 2000, the United States Patent and Trademark Office published a notice seeking comments on a convention being negotiated by the Hague Conference on Private International Law that is designed to create common jurisdictional rules for international recognition and enforcement of judgments issued under these rules (65 F.R. 61306 (2000)). Interested members of the public were invited to present written comments on the topics outlined in the Issues for Public Comment section of the Notice by December 1, 2000. This notice reopens the time period for submission of comments. Comments will be accepted through January 12, 2001. EFFECTIVE DATE: All comments are due by January 12, 2001. ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to offer written comments should address those comments to Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Box 4, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Washington, DC 20231, marked to the attention of Elizabeth Shaw. Comments may also be submitted by facsimile transmission to (703) 305-7575 or by electronic mail through the Internet to elizabeth.shaw2@uspto.gov. All comments will be maintained for public inspection in Room 902 of Crystal Park II, 2121 Crystal Drive, Arlington, Virginia. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Lucas by telephone at (703) 305-9300; by facsimile at (703) 305-8885; by electronic mail at jennifer.lucas@uspto.gov; or by mail marked to the attention of Jennifer Lucas, Attorney-Advisor, addressed to Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Box 4, Washington, DC 20231. Dated: December 5, 2000. Albin F. Drost, Acting General Counsel. [FR Doc. 00-31355 Filed 12-8-00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-16-U From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Fri Dec 15 15:37:34 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AE9829B1A; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 15:37:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (jamie.essential.org [216.0.124.36]) by genoa.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 265AE181EC; Fri, 15 Dec 2000 15:37:34 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3A3A83AF.A1933540@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] EU views on discounts and "unfair competition" Sender: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org Errors-To: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org X-BeenThere: random-bits@lists.essential.org Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Odds and ends, selected by Jamie Love List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Fri Dec 15 15:38:03 2000 X-Original-Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 15:48:47 -0500 Manon ran across this in looking at the issue of cross border jurisdiction disputes. Jamie http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/comcom/newsletter/edition19/page04_en.htm Unfair Competition - Official Documents Expert group on commercial communications: Solution to obstacles to cross-border discount services Expert group on commercial communications: Solution to obstacles to cross-border discount services Position statements of the individual Member States -- James Love http://www.cptech.org Consumer Project on Technology, P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 200036 voice 1.202.387.8030 fax 1.202.234.5176 From owner-random-bits@venice.essential.org Tue Dec 19 12:41:42 2000 Return-Path: Delivered-To: random-bits@venice.essential.org Received: from genoa.essential.org (genoa.essential.org [216.0.124.11]) by venice.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0422C29B3F; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 12:41:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from cptech.org (flip.essential.org [216.0.124.53]) by genoa.essential.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFD831823E; Tue, 19 Dec 2000 12:41:41 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <3A3FA0B1.FBDC23EF@cptech.org> From: James Love Organization: http://www.cptech.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Multiple recipients of list RANDOM-BITS , ecommerce Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Random-bits] Aharonian on the BT hyperlinke patent Sender: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org Errors-To: random-bits-admin@lists.essential.org X-BeenThere: random-bits@lists.essential.org Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Odds and ends, selected by Jamie Love List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue Dec 19 12:42:00 2000 X-Original-Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 12:53:53 -0500 Subject: PATNEWS: Prior art for the British Telecom hyperlink patent Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 11:37:26 -0500 (EST) From: Gregory Aharonian To: patent-news@world.std.com !20001219 Prior art for the British Telecom hyperlink patent [snip] Yesterday, I sent out a PATNEWS that mentioned how British Telecom is shamelessly suing Prodigy over BT's hyperlink patent. That's all I was going to report on the matter, until I got a response from a lawyer from one of the big London law firms, apparently a firm that does a lot of work for BT, that I think is an insult: "Greg, fuck off you git!". After turning down this generous offer and kicking him off the list, while eating Hamm and cleaning my plates with Suds, I decided to have some more fun at BT's expense. What follows is some prior art, a letter from an editor of a Linux Journal castigating both British Telecom and BT's lawyers (Kenyon and Kenyon), followed by my earlier analysis of BT's case. First the prior art. To critics of the BT patent, keep in mind one thing. The priority date of their US patent is July 1976. It doesn't matter that the patent issued in 1989. Any prior art has to be before July 1976, and to be honest, there isn't much, and what there is, part of it is BT's own work with hyperlinks for their teletext and videotext systems. You have to keep in mind that BT was one of the first companies to get involved with and commercialize hyperlinks. But the key phrase is "one of the first", not "the first". What will come to haunt BT's efforts are four papers published in the 1960s: A hypertext editing system for the IBM 360 (Nelson) 1968 Univ. Illinois COnference on Computer Graphics, 291 "Any text structures may be interconnected (LINKED) in arbitrary ways, and the user may jump along connections in this linkage structure." A research center for augmenting human intellect (Englebart) 1968 AFIPS Fall Joint Computer Conference, 395 "User files are organized as hierarhical structures of data entities, each composed of arbitrary combinations of text and figures. ..... with provisions of arbitrary CROSS-REFERENCING among the elements of a hierarchy." This system made use of a mouse. To see a video: http://sloan.stanford.edu/MouseSite/1968Demo.html AUTONOTE: a personal information storage and retrieval system 1969 ACM National Conference, 67 "... He has available mechanism for deleting, replacing, LINKING and hierarchically organizing text items." SHOEBOX - a personal file handling system for technical data 1970 AFIPS Fall Joint Computer Conference, 535 cites Engelbart's and Nelson's papers - had a nice search facility. (Speaking of shoeboxes, if someone at the PTO wants a copy of these papers for the examiners shoeboxes, let me know.) LINKED. CROSS-REFERENCED. LINKING. All in the 1960s. If BT is not aware of these papers, it should fire whoever was involved with assessing this patent. And if BT is aware of these patents, they should be spanked for then suing anyone. At best, BT's patent in light of these papers will be narrowed to protect what the patent was meant to protect - BT's specific implementation of hypertext in their 1980s teletext and videotext efforts. Once again, I will argue something that makes me an outcast: that there is nothing wrong about patenting software (which upsets the free software crowds) and much wrong about the examining of software patents (which upsets everyone else - seriously there has been zero improvement in the quality of issued software patents because no one really gives a damn). The same will hold true for business method patents. The only reason that so many bad business method patents will issue is because Rule 56 is pathetic, and no one who is whining and crying like a baby has the guts to publicly support patent fee increases or toughening Rule 56. So I ask you, who is the git? Greg Aharonian Internet Patent News Service www.bustpatents.com/subscribe.htm ==================== http://www2.linuxjournal.com/articles/briefs/0070.html -= Open Letter to Mr. Charles J. Roesslein, CEO, Prodigy =- by Don Marti 15-December-2000 To: Charles J. Roesslein, CEO, Prodigy Dear Mr. Roesslein, As a company, you just got infested with worms. Parasites trying to nourish themselves from your success -- software patenteers. If any of us other Internet builders and users can offer you some assistance fighting them, please let us know. Since I work for a company that makes hyperlinks among other things, and since I make (burnallgifs.org) some links in my spare time, I naturally got worried about the fact that British Telecom is actually suing you over their ridiculous claim that they, not Vannevar Bush, Ted Nelson, Doug Engelbart, or anybody else invented hyperlinks. Could this be the end of the Web as we know it? But then I started to relax a little. You see, BT's law firm is Kenyon and Kenyon, a protection racket that makes its living shaking companies down for royalties on bogus patents. Bottom feeders. They would probably be sending out green card spam if they knew how to work a computer. The Internet community has beaten Kenyon & Kenyon harassment before, and we can do it again. Do a web search on "+CueCat +Linux" and you'll find that they're the firm that tried to intimidate a bunch of Linux hackers into ceasing, desisting, and otherwise caving in to legal threats over independent software developed to make the CueCat work with Linux. As we should all know by now, the Linux software that these latter-day Stamp Taxers tried to stomp out now flies free over the land of the free and the home of the brave. Brave. That's the key word here. If a few low-budget C programmers can stand up and be counted, and assert their right to advance the common computing goals of humanity, then you can too. Settlements don't buy you peace in any time -- they just attract more parasites. Ever hear of a dog with "worm", singular? No matter what they offer, no matter how much they threaten, fight. Your shareholders will thank you next year, when the next batch of parasites leaves you alone. So, it's not fair for us professional and amateur hyperlink fans to urge you to resist a harassing lawsuit and then leave you to do it by yourself. So what do you need? A well-publicized search for prior art to strike their patent down? Mozilla got help from the Internet community to beat a similar bogus patent lawsuit (Wang claimed they invented bookmarks), and maybe people can find some more good examples of systems that look like today's hyperlinks a hell of a lot more than whatever old crap BT is waving around looks like today's hyperlinks. Or does Prodigy need any other help, for that matter -- a hand truck or two for your file cartons full of prior art? Or a cool beverage? Just ask. The Internet stands with you on this one as long as you don't back down. BT and Kenyon and Kenyon may think that they can make you pay up first before they move on to bigger prey such as AT&T and AOL. But they're pulling on the essential wires of the Internet, and the rest of us would be fools not to help defend it. What do you need? Don't be shy. When clueless companies start throwing "intellectual property" claims around to suppress competitors or to extract money from innovators who have left them in the dust, that's a threat to our economy and, when they attack free communication protocols, it's a threat to our freedom. In the long run, I hope that this case will make you as dedicated a software patent reform advocate as I am. But for now, don't give the bastards an inch and you'll get all the help you need. Don Marti Technical Editor, Linux Journal Copyright 2000 Specialized Systems Consultants, Inc. (GREG NOTE: I doubt that Kenyon & Kenyon cares that the open source world doesn't hold it in high regard. Still they might want to consider some spin control.) ==================== MY EARLIER PATNEWS ANALYSIS OF THEIR CASE 20000621 British Telecom patent: too lachey, uninfringeable and invalid (Quick note: this week's Barron, 19 June 2000 issue, page 52, has a short article about how Microsoft's 1200+ patents will be split if the company is split.) Now that everyone inside and outside of British Telecom has had their fantasies of cashing in on BT's patent that is being asserted against Internet Service Providers, and the folks at Aurigin have nominated the BT patent for the "'Rembrandt' in the Attic" of the year award, and the press have made long term plans for something new to write about, let's hear from Greg's peanut gallery on why this patent's strength is up there with wet spaghetti. In short, this patent probably better qualifies for the "'Dogs Playing Poker' in the Basement" award. How will this patent (4873662, Information handling system and terminal apparatus therefor) be attacked? Three modes: laches (possibly but unlikely), noninfringement (probably) and invalidity (more probably). I don't know what British Telecom was doing in its past few years analysis of this patent, but it has major problems. First laches, which is lawyer lingo for the situation sometimes that if you wait too long to assert your patent, you can't. BT's patent issued in 1989, and the Internet took off commercially in the 1995 time period, so filing lawsuits in the year 2000 does indicate an inordinate amount of time to assert the patent. However, this is an unlikely attack mode against the patent, in view of the comment of one lawyer who gets PATNEWS: Greg, Yes, digging really old patents out of the closet to belatedly sue someone has become a lucrative "lawyer cottage industry", because of the above [the right to sue six years after a patent has expired for past damages] and also because: (1) the U.S. has never [stu