-Caveat Lector- Three articles, essentially about the same thing; Your Privacy over what you view, see, read, listen, talk, when, and with whom online.
[This first one shows how Americans are fighting against it:] http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1986000/1986616.stm Tuesday, 14 May, 2002, 10:49 GMT 11:49 UK Digital video maker fights 'spying' order The ReplayTV 4000 sells for $699 (L460) in the US By Alfred Hermida BBC News Online technology staff Imagine if every time you pressed a button on your TV remote control, information was kept to record your viewing habits. This is what a California court has ordered the hi-tech consumer electronics company SonicBlue to do with people who have bought its ReplayTV 4000 digital video recorder. The company has now formally requested an immediate reversal of the order, describing it as "breathtaking and unprecedented". SonicBlue said the court order "violates consumers' privacy rights, including those guaranteed by the First and Fourth Amendments". Copyright battle The court order is part of the wider struggle between the entertainment and technology industries over how digital advances are changing the way people consume films, TV and music. The plaintiffs in this case include the film studios Paramount, Universal and Disney, as well as the TV networks CBS, ABC and NBC. Lawyers of the media companies say they need this information to find out the extent to which the ReplayTV 4000 allows customers to copy and share TV shows and films. Under the court order, the information collected would record whether the consumer skipped the ads, watched the same show more than once or deleted the programme from the unit. SonicBlue's ReplayTV 4000 went on sale in the US last September. It works like a normal VCR but it records shows to a hard drive, rather than video tape. Like other personal video recorders, the machine can pause and instantly replay live television or it can skip the ad breaks. The unit also has a high-speed internet port that allows users to share film files. "We've done a lot of research in the past that shows that once someone had a ReplayTV, the number of hours of TV they watched actually went up," SonicBlue's Jonathan King told the BBC programme, Go Digital. "So they're going to be watching more TV and more quality TV, not just the fluff that just comes up." But the entertainment industry is uneasy about the range of features offered by the player. It argues these features threaten to deprive it of the revenues needed to pay for new shows, since the machines allow ads to be cut out and premium shows on subscription services to be forwarded to non-subscribers. One senior television executive has gone so far as to equate skipping the ads with theft. But SonicBlue argues it is not doing anything illegal. "We're not deleting the commercial," insisted SonicBlue's Lanc Ohara. "We're just giving the consumer the ability to not watch the commercial. If they want to see them, they can," he said. 'Invasion of piracy' Privacy groups and consumer electronics firms are up in arms over the ruling, which effectively orders SonicBlue to spy on thousands of customers to see if they are breaking copyright law. "The court's order is highly troubling," said the trade body, the Consumer Electronics Association, in a statement. "It forces SonicBlue to violate the trust of its customers and commit an incredible invasion of privacy." SonicBlue has been given until 24 June to impose a tracking system on its customers. It is appealing against the order, arguing it will be forced to redesign its machine for the express purpose of collecting information to be used against it. It says the changes will cost $400,000 and take four months to implement. Earlier versions of the Replay recorder and similar digital devices from Tivo, which allow users to copy TV shows and keep them for later viewing, have been on sale for several years. -- [But this one shows how the whole world is losing the battle:] http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/25311.html World leaders use terror card to watch all of us. Forever By John Leyden Posted: 16/05/2002 at 17:40 GMT Pronouncements from this week's G8 Justice and Interior Ministers meeting about data protection and the retention of Internet traffic data have created concern among privacy activists. Controversy centres around whether blanket retention of traffic data on the entire population should be permitted (effectively making every Internet user susceptible to continuous surveillance of their online activity), or whether data should only be recorded on specifically designated targets or groups. Although the G8 refers to September 11 and terrorism as justification for data retention, there is no proposal to limit the use of data to terrorist cases. Influential IT think tank, the Foundation for Information Policy Research (FIPR), notes that statements from the G8 parallel controversy on the new EU Communications Privacy Directive. A policy document from the G8 states: "To the extent that data protection legislation continues to permit the retention of data only for billing purposes, such a position would overlook crucial legitimate societal interests - particularly when applied to the Internet service provider area, where flat rate pricing and free Internet and E-mail services foreclose the need to retain traffic data for billing purposes - and thereby seriously hamper public safety." "The G8 also believes that when data protection legislation allows specific derogation to the general regime on specific grounds, this should not be the exclusive means for recognizing these other interests, since the default rule would continue to require destruction." G8 ministers do recognise economic implications to the collection and retention of data, and note privacy concerns, but are pushing governments to move towards the blanket retention of data, with ISP logs been of particular interest. Critics of this approach, like the FIPR, argue that putting an entire population under computerised surveillance is incompatible with human rights in a democratic society, and question whether such measures will prove effective in preventing terrorism. It proposes a new type of data preservation order, judicially authorised case-by-case, which could require ISPs to perform detailed logging and preservation of specific traffic data on specified targets, only for the same purposes as interception. � http://www.euobserver.com/index.phtml?selected_topic=9&action=view&article_id=6226 13.05.2002 Crucial vote on data surveillance postponed Statewatch warns the EU states plan to bypass the current legislative process and introduce binding measures on the retention of data for state agencies use ahead of the adoption of the revision of the 1997 directive. (Photo: Notat) A controversial report on the retention of data and access by law enforcement agencies was removed from the European Parliament�s plenary session agenda. The Europarliamentarians were set to vote on Wednesday on the Cappato report on the revision of the 1997 EU Directive on privacy in the telecommunications sector, but the report was at the last minute removed from the agenda. The rapporteur Marco Cappato fights the approach supported by the EU member states, which privilege the retention of telecommunications traffic data and the granting of it by law enforcement agencies. Civil liberties groups believe the decision on the issue will be a defining moment for the future of democracy in Europe. Statewatch, monitoring the state and civil liberties in the European Union also warns the EU states seek to bypass the adoption of this directive to impose retention of data and access by state agencies. Parliament fights the change The 1997 Directive on privacy in the telecommunications says data can only be retained for a short period for �billing� purposes and then it must be erased. In the drive to enhance security, strengthened by the terrorist attacks of September 11, the EU states now want this data to be retained and be made available to law enforcement agencies (police, customs, immigration and internal security agencies). However, the European Parliament opposes the move to retain data and gives state agencies permanent access to it. The EP wants to maintain the current situation whereby such telecommunications traffic data can only by accessed for the purposes of national security and criminal investigations where it is authorised in a case-by-case basis by judicial authorities. The European Parliament was expected to endorse in plenary this week the report adopted by the Committee on Citizens� Rights on 18 April. Watchdogs warn against undermining freedom Civil Liberties group Statewatch warns the vote on the Cappato report will be deciding for the quality of the EU governance: �The vote in the European Parliament and the final decision on this issue will be a defining moment for the future of democracy in the EU. If all telecommunications �phone calls, e-mails, faxes and internet usage- are placed under surveillance not only will data protection be fatally undermined but so too will be the very freedoms that distinguish democracies from authoritarian regimes,� Statewatch editor Tony Bunyan said. Statewatch warns the EU states plan to bypass the current legislative process and introduce binding measures on the retention of data for state agencies use ahead of the adoption of the revision of the 1997 directive. �Statewatch has learnt that a number of EU governments are drafting a binding framework decision to ensure that all EU member states introduce a law requiring the retention of telecommunication traffic data and the granting of access to it by law enforcement agencies,� shows a press release by Statewatch. Written by Daniela Spinant Edited by Lisbeth Kirk <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
