Samantha Tumpach claims that she should not face the harsh punishment intended for bootleggers, because all she was doing is recording family members singing "Happy Birthday" to her sister in the theater. Any footage of the movie screen was completely accidental, according to Tumpach.

I honestly don't care about whether she was trying to bootleg the movie or not, I just plain think she should be jailed for considering a surprise birthday party at a showing of New Moon a wise idea. [Sun Times via Digg]

Photo by Squidoo

At this point, file sharing warnings via snail mail and e-mail are pretty commonplace. But this is the first time I've heard of an ISP taking the matter straight to the browser. At first I was worried, and then I was a bit annoyed, but I have to say, I give them credit for giving me the benefit of the doubt here.

The purpose of this email

and by email they mean the electronic message they forced onto my screen

is to remind you that the distribution of copyrighted material in this fashion may violate both copyright laws and Road Runner's terms of service, and to tell you a bit about peer-to-peer programs, the dangers they can pose to your computer and our network, and the steps you can take to protect yourself.

Considering all of the horror stories you hear, this was a pretty reasonable intervention. All I had to do was click, "I am aware of this issue and will take steps to resolve it," and I was on my merry way. Whether those steps should be deleting all the copyrighted material off my computer, removing my P2P software, getting my shit together and using a private tracker, or just trying a little bit harder to resist the urge to download Nic Cage's entire filmography on Mininova, they don't say. But as Road Runner didn't treat me like a criminal, I'll respect them by not being one. Or at least being a sneakier one.

For some people, one copyright violation notice from their ISP is enough to scare them straight forever. Others wear their warnings like badges of honor. What are your experiences with ISPs and copyright infringement? Weigh in in the comments.

At first thought, Henrik Anderson seems crazy for doing something like this, but he's actually attempting to force clarification of the contradicting laws by bringing them in front of a court. He's doing this after his attempts to contact the Danish anti-piracy Antipiratgruppen, their lawyers, and the Association of Danish Video Distributors and discuss the issue were blown off, so he's definitely not just randomly deciding on an extreme approach.

So far no actual arrest has been made, so we'll have to wait to see how the whole thing plays out. Either way, Anderson's protesting an entirely paradoxical set of laws in a pretty ballsy way. [Torrent Freak via Boing Boing]

There's a whole bunch of greedy "artists"—represented by the SGAE, the Spanish version of the RIAA, and some cinema associations—who most of the times are used by the Spanish socialist government to support their political agenda. I say greedy because, in Spain, there's an "artist tax" on everything that can be used to record something. You buy a CD to do data backup at work? Doesn't matter, the government's friends assume you are a thief copying stuff, and charge you an extra for it. Maybe you want a new camera to record your newborn baby? Well, that's more expensive too because of the "artistic" tax. Want an iPod? Pay extra. A DVD-R unit? Give them more money.

Their argument for that tax was that, since people were pirating music and movies using the internet, the artistic associations should get a cut of all media and gadgets that could be used to copy music and movies. I can argue that I don't give a rat's ass about the mostly lousy music produced in Spain, not to talk about their craptastic movies, but it's ok. Let's say that I accept that premise and gladly pay the extra, even while it destroys the presumption of innocence. P2P was legal in Spain—and still is—and everyone was happy.

Everyone but them. They wanted more, and they got it as an obvious favor, returned by the socialist government now in power. After passing the law hidden in another law, the artist associations can now close any web site they want, without a court order. They only have to argue that the site may be used to share media, and the Minister of Culture will have to the power to close the site without any judge giving the go ahead, a true "Cultural Police." Goodbye democracy, hello National Socialism. What's more, they also want to be able to close the Internet connection of any user who uses the internet for P2P sharing, also without any due process.

This leaves everyone without any defense. The artists associations and the Minister of Culture can shut down a business that can be perfectly legal, without having to answer to anyone. Just because they say so. Or they can close the internet connection of someone who wasn't doing anything wrong. All without confronting any judge with any solid evidence. This means that the business or user would have to go to court to defend themselves after the damage is done, something that requires money.

In other words, no due process, no presumption of innocence, just shutting down web sites because someone with no judicial power says so.

They want to get their money from the artist tax and destroy P2P at the same time, demolishing some Spanish Constitutional rights in the process. Needless to say, this has originated a huge response by Internet users, Human Rights activists, journalists, and bloggers, who have signed a manifesto against it. Also needless to say, nobody in the government will do anything about it, which is one of the reasons why I don't live in my home country anymore. [MuyComputer—Google Translation]

Phil Schiller Talks App Approval, Avoids Saying Much of Anything

There are lots of legitimate concerns about Apple's app approval (app!) policy, and in a recent profile in Business Week, Senior VP Phil Schiller goes out of his way to not respond to any of them. Yes, we understand that there are legitimate reasons for having an extensive approval process, and we even appreciate the complication-free results. But Schiller neglected to respond to any of the real problems with the process, like, say, the Google Voice ban. We're always interested to hear an Apple higher-up discuss the App Store, but we prefer it when something's actually said. [Business Week]

Microsoft Reiterates Smackdown on Pirate Xbox Users

In response to Microsoft's mass banning of Xbox Live users with pirate leanings, said pirates are contemplating hitting them with a class-action lawsuit—but Microsoft doesn't seem even a little bit scared. MS's response:

Piracy is illegal and modifying an Xbox 360 is a violation of the Xbox Live Terms of Use. Microsoft is well within its legal rights to ban these users from Xbox Live.

Translation: Hey, you guys down there, you piratey types? Cute lawsuit and all, but you ain't got a chance in hell of winning this.

This winds up in Remainders because the lawsuit is still, as of now, speculative—no such suit has actually been filed. Still, that's about as big an ice burn as you're likely to see from the big MS. [Kotaku]

iPhone Magnification Camera Mod Came From the Recycle Bin

Bummed about the iPhone's lack of zoom? Bummed enough to attach the lid from a pickle jar to the back of your iPhone? Here's a tutorial for how to create a multi-zoom add-on with items found in your recycle bin and a few lenses pried off deceased cameras. It's ungainly as hell, and I'm not totally sure the iPhone's camera is good enough to be worth such effort ugliness, but it does seem like it would work and it even has an external flash. And, of course, we've seen much dumber mods before. [Instructables via Engadget]

Another Anonymous Netbook/Sleeping Aid Hits Wireless Carrier

Another day, another netbook. AT&T brings the LG X120 10.1-incher Stateside to be sold, subsidized of course, through Radioshack.com and the obviously so much more hip brick and mortar version, The Shack. It'll be sold for $180 with a 2-year contract, which requires a $60 per month data charge. As far as specs, it's got a 160GB hard drive, 1GB memory, a 1.6GHz Atom and Windows XP, and in case of emergency will function as a sleeping aid so potent you might never wake up. What I'm saying is, it's in Remainders because seriously you guys, snore. [Engadget]

A few days ago, we found out that Apple Corps and EMI would finally release the Beatles' catalog in a digital format. It's not that we couldn't have just purchased CDs and ripped them—that's what everyone's been doing for years now—it's just that it felt like progress. In reality, it was just the near-random actions of someone who has no idea what's going on, at all. From the Guardian via Ars, Paul McCartney's view on selling the Beatles' music online:

I met [EMI's chief executive] on a plane once. I said: "What is the problem? I want to do it, we all want to do it." And he explained that in the deal that we want, they feel exposed. If [digitised Beatles music] gets out, if one employee decides to take it home and wap it on to the internet, we would have the right to say, "Now you recompense us for that. And they're scared of that."

Just to be clear, Paul McCartney says he wants to sell music online, but he—and his record company—are worried that someone could conceivably download it, upload it back to the internet, and open the floodgates to piracy. As opposed to just uploading the higher-quality digital files you're selling to people on Apple-shaped USB drives right now, or on CDs, more than a decade ago. McCartney expects an agreement by which he would be compensated if people share his music, as if it would be somehow correlated with the release of Beatles' tracks online, which EMI—no stranger to releasing music online—is scared of because it's insane.

Poor Paul! Someone should tell him, you know, about all the wapping. [Ars Technica]

UPDATE: From anonymized (not anonymous) source who researched similar subjects in the past, a possible explanation:

It's not the music for sale they're worried about but the raw remasters (this is why McCartney specifically refers to an employee potentially uploading the music). I don't know how much you've read about the making of [Beatles Rock Band] but they went to incredible lengths to protect the masters. It was only towards the end of the project that Harmonix received the (heavily encrypted) music they needed; before then, Apple Corps had been sending them "dirtied-up" copies of the music just in case it was intercepted halfway.

The real threat from McCartney and the other Beatles (and er, spouses of Beatles) is that if, somewhere in the process of turning their music into iTunes-friendly files, the MASTERS get leaked... then they will sue the pants off of EMI. And EMI allegedly said they are in such a precarious financial position that they do not want to take the risk of getting hit by a lawsuit that could take the company down.

An alternate theory, which still doesn't quite work. If masters leaked to the internet, presumably they'd be encoded in something like FLAC at best, which would be indistinguishable from the files the Beatles are OK with selling on USB drives right now. Or if this refers to the recording's component parts, like the ones used to create Rock Band, still: This seems avoidable. And in either strain of paranoia: Paul McCartney doesn't understand the internet. (And possibly other things, too!)

This is by no means the first time the MPAA has stepped on the little guy in their crusade to eradicate piracy, but it is a particularly egregious instance of it. The free Wi-Fi network in Coshocton, Ohio supported anywhere from "a dozen people a day to 100 during busy times," all of whom are left without Internet after the shut down. As nations like Finland move to make broadband access a legal right, it is unfortunately clear that some powerful people in our country still consider it a privilege and not a necessity.

Let this be a lesson to those who not only enjoy but depend on free Wi-Fi networks. Enjoy it while it lasts, because if Dennis the Menace down the block can't wait for Transformers 3 to come out on DVD, you might be out a connection. [Via BoingBoing]

So says a new survey out of the U.K., anyway. [The Independent via Boing Boing]

Sharp, at the request of Japan's National Institute of Informatics, has developed a method to ruin the camcorder footage shot by pirates in movie theaters. By placing mega IR lights behind the screen (which are invisible to the human eye, of course), the light can tunnel through tiny holes that are already in screens for the passage of sound.

The result is a wash of light protruding from the screen, ruining camcorder footage. The other result is that, while you'll still never buy a ticket to Wolverine, you'll never get to know how bad the movie really was until, hungover on the couch one afternoon, you catch it on TBS or something. [Fareastgizmos]

Note: Unfortunately, the IR blast won't look nearly as awesome as it does in this photo. I imagine a lame grid of lights, not a reworking by JJ Abrams.

It kind of sux that even a monitoring app got banned. But, according to Apple:

…this category of applications is often used for the purpose of infringing third party rights. We have chosen to not publish this type of application to the App Store.

So no torrent apps, at all, period. Right then.

Instructions on how to install µMonitor on a Jailbroken iPhone can be found here: [µMonitor via TorrentFreak]

Even though large parts of Internets and many old and famous trackers have fallen or may fall into the grip of the Ifpi and all the odious apparatus of MPAA rule, we shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France...[Full version]

You can't really blame the ISP. Yesterday's rulings meant it faced $70,600 in fines if it didn't yank the cord.

And what of Swedish software outfit Global Gaming Factor? It votes this Thursday on whether or not to go ahead with its Pirate Bay buy out. But between all this, and its chairman stepping down, will it still go ahead with plans for a legal version?

If you're looking for help to get your torrent on in the meantime, check out the Pirate Bay clone, or our favorite 5 Pirate Bay BitTorrent Alternatives. [TorrentFreak]

A few days ago, amidst talk of how a new, improved, crowd-powered Pirate Bay would work should the sale go through, the trading of Global Gaming Factory shares on the Swedish Aktietorget exchange was frozen. Why? Its administrators found out that the CEO owes quite a few people quite of bit of money, including the government, for taxes. Today, the company's chairman has stepped down for no obvious reason, and the stock exchange has said that they're going to keep a freeze on stock trading until they figure out what on earth is going on. Something strange, is a good guess!

What does this mean for the Pirate Bay? Well, GGF's debt-ridden CEO has previously said that the deal to purchase the torrent site—which, remember, hasn't actually happened yet—would be "rubber stamped" by shareholders by Thursday. That date is pretty much out of the question now, and the whole plan is starting to look like it was doomed from the start. So what was the point? Was it some kind of weird share-inflating publicity stunt? An intentional distraction? An earnest bid to buy an illegal filesharing site, by idiots? As much as I like the last one, I don't think that's it. [TheLocal via Slashdot]

• Child abduction: Fine of $25,000 and up to three years in prison, which can be accounted as $50,233 per year (that was the median household income in 2007, probably down because of the economic crisis). Total: $175,699.

• Steal the CDs: A total of $275,000, $52,500 fine for the CDs.

• Steal a lawnmower from your neighbour: A total of $375,000.

• Burn someone's house while playing The Doors: Another $375,000.

• Stalk a Gizmodo editor (yes, you know who you are): A Class 4 felony that will result in just $175,000.

• Start a dogfighting ring: $50,000.

• Murder someone on the second degree, a Class 1 felony: $778,495, which accounts for a $25,000 fine and four to 15 years in prison.

Heck, you can do all these crimes, and the total amount will be only $2.2 million. Of course, you can't really quantify years spent in prison using dollars, but I don't care. The case of Jammie—and many like hers—is still absolutely outrageous.

Ms. Thomas got fined $1.92 million for downloading 1700 songs songs. For some reason, a popular jury thought that was fair. That's ok. There are mentally disturbed people everywhere. But I don't care if it's 1700 or 17000 songs, nobody can be punished like this for downloading songs. It may follow a draconian law to the last comma and period, but that doesn't make the verdict just. The law is what is at fault here, with a punishment that is not proportional to the magnitude of the "crime." This goes against the most basic sense of justice.

I know that el Señor Presidente has more serious issues to worry about that this case, but something needs to be done about it. Something drastic. Unfortunately, nothing will happen, given the "class" of people now at the Department of Justice:

What a crying shame. [Gapers Block]

In his interview on the fantastic podcast The Sound of Young America, Kot states that the music industry was actually one of the primary causes of piracy. The explosion of boy bands and bubblegum pop in the late 1990s was due to the labels' insistence on pouring a huge amount of money into just a few dumbed-down, impersonal, lowest-common-denominator acts, which meant in turn that commercial radio was almost completely garbage. There was little room for genuine weirdo geniuses like, say, Prince or David Bowie, and devoid of good music, the market was bound to react—hence Napster.

Kot goes through the standard points all dedicated pirates know—artists have never made money on record sales, the mp3 revolution encouraged the indie movement and a huge variety of new and exciting acts, the RIAA's insistence on trying to sue piracy out of existence led to the public having absolutely zero guilt about pirating music. But what's nice is Kot's recognition that iTunes, the much-applauded champion of legal music downloads, is still far inferior to pirate options.

I'll toss this out there: I think the dear departed OiNK, an invite-only torrent site that was forcefully shut down in late 2007, was the greatest music distribution service ever created. It was leagues ahead of iTunes: Faster downloads, better mandated sound quality, an incredibly vast library, vibrant forums full of knowledgeable music dorks, and, of course, totally without DRM. Even now that iTunes has abandoned DRM, it can't hold a candle to a service that hasn't even been operational in nearly two years. Record labels seem to have pinned their hopes to iTunes, but Kot stresses that iTunes is far from perfect, and the labels should be busting ass trying to come up with a viable business model that attracts, not polices, customers, and can at least hold pace with the illegal options.

Cue the "screw the RIAA" comments. [The Sound of Young America]

This is the second big victory for the RIAA this month, after the even-more-ridiculous decision that filesharer Jammie Thomas should pay $80,000 per song. But unlike Thomas, Tenenbaum hasn't come out and said he will outright refuse to pay the fine, and it looks like this is a more concrete win for the RIAA dirtbags.

The RIAA specified to TorrentFreak that the money won will go to more lawsuits, not to the artists the RIAA supposedly represents. It looks like yet another episode in this long public relations attack in which the organization mercilessly kills any sympathy for their cause that might have existed. [TorrentFreak]

Really, it's good that Universal has embedding disabled. If I could put it in this post, you'd be able to watch it. It might even get stuck in your head. And then, perhaps, you could buy the song on iTunes or Amazon via the link to purchase it that's over the video. Instead, I won't, because I can't. Universal will keep protecting its property by slowly killing it, and their unembeddable video will continue to kill their radio stars.

Maybe in 30 more years they'll have figured out how to survive on the internet, but at that point there will probably be something else that's come along that will take them a decade to figure out. [YouTube]

Gizmodo '79 is a week-long celebration of gadgets and geekdom 30 years ago, as the analog age gave way to the digital, and most of our favorite toys were just being born.

As you will see in the following hard-hitting 60 Minutes report on the state of video piracy in 1979, insiders with access to films were able to command as much as $1000 ($3,308 with inflation) for masters that were later copied and sold by resellers for between $50 and $500 a pop ($155 to $1654 with inflation). Apparently the novelty of watching a movie in your home was enough to justify the expense at a time when a movie ticket cost $3 or less.

"They said it would happen, and it has. The day when you could go to the movies without leaving your living room!"

Gizmodo '79 is a week-long celebration of gadgets and geekdom 30 years ago, as the analog age gave way to the digital, and most of our favorite toys were just being born.

The piece goes more in depth about the security risks in having a cellphone confiscated by anonymous theater cops, and Doctorow seems upset that nobody would tell him exactly what happens to these phones during the movie. I'm less concerned; I think the reason nobody knows what happens is that nobody cares, and there's probably never been an instance of data theft in that situation. But it is definitely a bad sign for the film industry that anybody anywhere thinks that's where leaks come from.

As any diligent pirate knows, there are levels of illegally-obtained films that vary wildly in quality, and at any reputable Bittorrent site, they're clearly labeled (or at least noted in the comments). The first type that usually appears is the camcorder version, which is almost always a complete waste of time. "Cams," as they're called, are often shot from corners of the theater to avoid detection, and sound quality is praised if dialogue even the least bit understandable. Most pirates will skip this garbage and wait for a more legit copy, so it's not worth getting worked up about people with camcorders. Next up, the last thing to leak before the actual DVD release of the movie, is the one that's actually worth stealing: The screener.

Screeners are preview DVDs sent out to critics and others in the industry, and that's where nearly all of the leaks happen. I repeat: Leaks come from inside the industry. So maybe the MPAA should stop whining and figure out a more secure DRM system, some kind of watermark, or just a way of tracking which copy gets leaked instead of taking silly action like confiscating cellphones. [The Guardian]

There's an update at the end of the post from Global Gaming Factory X CTO Johan Sellström that's as bizarrely worded and unclear as their original announcement and press release, so who knows what it really means:

"We had discussed closing it down initially so I think that's why he said so. The plan is to use technology from Peerialism that makes bandwidth utilization more efficient and then it would not make sense to shut it down. Peerialism will modify the tracker but it will be backwards compatible. But all this is subject to change if for some reason it would not work. It is our ambition to do so.

So, um, if their new thing doesn't work, then they'll shut it down? Ooookay.

The idea, Sunde said, is that The Pirate Bay will live on whatever happens—but would shutting down the tracker and scattering to the wind be really living? I think not. I also think it's gonna take a few days to figure out what the hell is really happening.

Possibly unrelated, but The Pirate Bay is down at the moment. [Torrent Freak - Thanks Brenden!]