Geek News and Musings

A few weeks back, we linked to the NY Times’ Ethicist, Randy Cohen, explaining why it’s not unethical to download a digital copy of a book, if you’d bought a hard copy of the book — even though it probably violates copyright law. That created quite a lot of anger from folks who felt that it was clearly an ethical violation as well. Mitch Wagner, apparently missed that kerfuffle, as he’s written up a short blog post for Computerworld asking people their thoughts on the ethics of downloading media that you purchased legally:

I recently got a hankering to re-read some of my favorite books. I already own them, in hardcover and paperback. But I’d like to re-read them as e-books. Do I need to buy the e-book versions, or can I download a pirated copy of the e-book for free?

The argument that says it's wrong is pretty simple, and clear-cut: When I bought the books, I bought individual copies of the books. All I own is that one copy. If I lost the copy, I wouldn't be entitled to a free replacement. It wouldn't be right for me to shoplift the book from the local Barnes & Noble. I'd have an obligation to buy a new copy, or borrow one legitimately, before re-reading the book.

On the other hand: I already paid for these books legitimately. They’re my books. The shoplifting analogy is specious, because in that case, I’m depriving the rightful owner — the owner of the bookstore — of their copy of the book. If I download a copy of the e-book, nobody else is deprived of their copy.

However, he goes on to make another point that also deserves some scrutiny:

Every couple of years, TiVo hiccups and fails to record a favorite TV show. In that case, I have to decide whether to wait for the show to come out on DVD, or just download the episode from the BitTorrents.

Now there will be people who will claim that, due to the fact that it likely infringes on copyright to do so, it’s automatically unethical. But morality isn’t determined by the law. In general, I’ve always argued that if the economics increase the overall market and opportunity, then there’s no moral issue to speak of — and it’s hard to see how someone downloading an episode their TiVo missed would harm the overall economy in any way. But, I’m guessing that some folks here will disagree…

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Over the last two weeks countless blog posts and articles have been written about the Gizmodo/iPhone leak and the subsequent police investigation. Few have been as scathing toward Apple as a segment that aired on tonight’s Daily Show. And while Apple has long made a habit of mostly ignoring what the press and media says about it, you can be sure this will get their attention.

In the segment, host Jon Stewart lambasts Apple for the police raid on Gizmodo editor Jason Chen’s house, and the fact that Apple employees showed up on the doorstep of the guy who originally found the phone. Stewart’s report glosses over some important points in the case and gets a few details wrong. But ultimately that doesn’t really matter — Stewart’s audience probably doesn’t care if there’s a chance a crime was committed here. To them, a guy found a phone in the bar, photos of it were posted on the Internet, and Apple responded by siccing the authorities on them.

The segment is full of great quotes, like:

“You guys are busting down doors in Palo Alto while Commandant Gates is ridding the world of mosquitoes. What the f**k is going on?”

“Apple you guys were the rebels man, the underdogs. People believed in you. But now, are you becoming The Man? Remember back in 1984, you had those awesome ads about overthrowing Big Brother? Look in the mirror, man!”

“If you want to break down someone’s door, why don’t you start with AT&T, for God sakes? They make your amazing phone unusable as a phone!”

But the most important, at least from Apple’s perspective, is this one:

“I’m telling you this because it’s important, man. And believe me, I’m taking a big chance here. This is my audience. And this is way more explosive than putting Muhammad in a bikini to my audience.”

And that right there is why Apple will probably be paying more attention to this than it did to myriad blog posts about the iPhone leak. Apple can often afford to ignore outraged tech bloggers and developers because its mainstream audience really doesn’t care about its inconsistent App Store policies or section 3.3.1 of the iPhone developer agreement. But the mainstream most definitely cares what Jon Stewart has to say, and I suspect the demographic watching this show plays a big part in making Apple’s laptops, iPhones, and iPods hits.

And if Stewart is tearing into them now, imagine what will happen if Gizmodo, Chen, and the unnamed iPhone finder get charged with crimes.

We just got done exploring how German privacy regulators are "horrified" about how Google is (just as many other companies have been doing for years) gathering publicly-available Wi-Fi hotspot data for GPS triangulation and localized search. Of course the data being collected can't really identify users outside of their router brand preference and use of nerd SSID humor — but that didn't stop a flood of hysterical articles that assumed Google was using this data for some nefarious purpose. As if on cue, Germany’s complaints have now drawn the attention of UK regulators — who say they’re now going to quiz Google about the practice. While Wi-Fi clearly confuses many regulators and the press (look at the usual reaction to war driving), it is important that Google is transparent about this process, but so far there’s every indication they’re doing a good job on that front. The company posted another blog post this week and sent this filing (pdf) to privacy regulators in multiple countries highlighting exactly what’s being collected, what it’s being used for, while reiterating that the data can’t identify specific users and isn’t being published. So the question then is: how long before U.S. and other European regulators start to freak out?

 

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

When it comes to designing a website, you can do all the tweaking you want, but you won’t know that your design actually works until people start using it. That’s where UserTesting.com, a startup that launched back in 2008, comes in. The service lets you quickly get usability feedback about your site by offering to pay people to complete certain tasks while recording their on-screen actions and voice. The site has recently added some key new features, and launched a new homepage to mark the occasion.

Previously, UserTesting only had a fixed set of standard questions that it would ask all testers after they had evaluated a website. Now, it allows you to specify exactly which questions you’d like to ask in your post-test questionnaire. In addition, the website owners can now ask the testers follow-up questions after the video and initial response questions are complete.

When it comes to designing a website, you can do all the tweaking you want, but you won’t know that your design actually works until people start using it. That’s where UserTesting.com, a startup that launched back in 2008, comes in. The service lets you quickly get usability feedback about your site by offering to pay people to complete certain tasks while recording their on-screen actions and voice. The site has recently added some key new features, and launched a new homepage to mark the occasion.

Previously, UserTesting only had a fixed set of standard questions that it would ask all testers after they had evaluated a website. Now, it allows you to specify exactly which questions you’d like to ask in your post-test questionnaire. In addition, the website owners can now ask the testers follow-up questions after the video and initial response questions are complete.

For many years, we’ve pointed out the futility of the entertainment industry’s constant focus on “shutting down” any source of unauthorized material. Every time they do so, the content sharing continues to grow — it just moves further underground and makes it that much more difficult for the industry to actually use it to their own advantage. It appears this happens not just online, but offline as well. We’ve noted recently that China has been paying lip service to external pressures to “crack down” on infringement, often by using copyright and patent laws to go after foreign companies as well. But it appears to also be playing itself out in other ways.

The NY Times is covering how Chinese officials have been going around to DVD and CD shops that have lots of unauthorized bootlegs, and telling them that for the World Expo (which begins May 1), they need to stop selling that content so directly. It appears most of the shops all responded in nearly identical ways: cutting their stores in half by putting up a wall in the middle, then placing legitimate discs upfront, and putting all the bootlegs on the other side of the wall, with a “secret” doorway. The effort was so consistent that some accuse Chinese officials of suggesting this to store owners. Some stores readily admit that after the Expo ends, they’ll tear down the wall and return to a single storefront.

Either way, it’s quite similar to what we’ve seen online. You can “crackdown” all you want, and it never actually slows down the trade in unauthorized content. It just moves it further underground… or, perhaps, behind a (not so) secret wall.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Post-punk 80s icon Adam Ant is back in action! From The Quietus:

After a troubled and turbulent decade, one of the most iconic faces on the planet during the post-punk era is returning to active service, and in a most unpredictable and chaotic style. Over the last few weeks, Adam Ant has been turning up unannounced at assorted club nights for quick guerrilla gigs - a dandy highwayman in the underworld - and joining other artists onstage for surprise duets

I am informed that my love of dancing to Adam Ant as a toddler ultimately resulted in My First Emergency Room Trip and, accordingly, the scar on my left eyebrow.

Photo: The Foxling.

A Wild Nobility: An Adam Ant Exclusive By Simon Price [quietus via JWZ]

"I feel lucky because I'm alive."—Colle Carpenter, a grad student in Long Beach, CA, who survived a knife attack this week. The attacker carved “IT” into his chest. A rally is planned for Thursday. Here is a public statement from Carpenter, who is an active LGBT community member in the area. More on this LA Times blog. (via Kalaya’an Mendoza)

The IFPI has put out its latest report on the state of the music business (sent in first by Nastybutler77). There aren’t too many surprises. Some of the data in the report (such as the growth in the UK and elsewhere) were already covered a few weeks ago in a presentation by Will Page, the chief economist for PRS in the UK. But there were some interesting points in the report that suggest the industry is still in quite a bit of denial. Thirteen markets saw “a return to growth” in music sales — though, amusingly, the IFPI chooses to highlight two of them — South Korea and Sweden — both of which passed ridiculously draconian anti-piracy laws, mostly due to pressure from folks like the IFPI.

Not surprisingly, the IFPI credits the “improving legal environments” in those countries for the increasing sales. Similarly, it notes that sales declines happened in Spain and Canada — two of the countries most regularly singled out by the entertainment industry for having consumer friendly copyright laws. Of course, that’s not how the industry describes it. They talk about how those countries’ laws are “out of touch” or not in line with “international standards.”

Of course, what the IFPI totally ignores (not surprisingly, since they only represent record labels) is that while the sales of music directly may have declined in some markets, the overall market for music grew tremendously. In other words, the decline in sales of recorded music has not done harm to the music industry, but just to a few record labels. This new report is really just an attempt to pretend (yet again) that the “music industry” is really “the recording industry.” And, of course, what this report doesn’t come close to acknowledging, is that in putting in place these “legal environments” in places like Sweden and South Korea, it has cut off many more efficient and effective ways for musicians to create, promote and distribute their works.

That’s what this report really shows. It shows that the IFPI wants to be the gatekeeper to make sure that more of the money going through the music ecosystem goes to its labels, rather than to others. It doesn’t care if the overall market for music is smaller, just as long as more of the money goes to its members.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Earlier this month when Twitter bought Atebits, aka Loren Brichter, the maker of the best iPhone Twitter client, Tweetie, they promised that Tweetie wouldn’t die. Instead it was to be turned into Twitter for iPhone. That update now appears to be coming soon.

In the final update to Tweetie 2 (2.1.2) that just went live in the App Store, the “What’s New” notes tell of a “Suprise!” The surprise is that when you pull down your tweet stream to refresh, you’re greeted with a new slot machine graphic. Hold it down long enough and the slot machine starts spinning. If it comes up with the right combo, you get a message that reads, “Coming Soon! Tweetie will be Twitter for iPhone (Look for the next app update)“

So there you go. Meanwhile, the app I’m more concerned about is Tweetie for the iPad. In its blog post, Twitter promised that was coming “eventually.” The last time I talked to Brichter about it (pre-Twitter sale), all he said to me was, “Can’t say just yet, but I don’t think you’ll be disappointed.” It’d be great to hear something about the new version of Tweetie for Mac too, which Brichter was hard at work on before the acquisition.

It’s worth noting that this Tweetie update also fixes the Foursquare integration.

You can find Tweetie 2 in the App Store here — though I wouldn’t buy it since Twitter has said that Twitter for iPhone will be free.

« Previous entries