Recent Posts

4976

General Software Discussion / Re: What purpose does browser-specific blocking serve?

« Last post by IainB on July 08, 2012, 07:42 PM »

Here is an example where they are not blocking IE, but openly suggesting that you upgrade from the older version IE6:
From: Meet The Team | 6Wunderkinder

Marvin may look like the boy living next door, but really, this guy is a total machine! He is one hell of a front end developer and, as the coffee cups on the picture indicate, he works at lightning speed. Thanks to him, you can look at this page even with your old IE6 browser. However, he really suggests that you should upgrade!

Needing maintain backwards compatibility with older versions of IE (or any other browser?) would presumably be a widespread issue.

4977

Finished Programs / Re: SOLVED: Compare locations and remove duplicate folders

« Last post by IainB on July 08, 2012, 11:58 AM »

Ok it's done! It took me so little time that I felt almost frustrated 

-dikiz (July 08, 2012, 10:10 AM)

Glad it solved the problem!
xplorer² really does seem to be a uniquely powerful file/folder explorer/manager.

4978

General Software Discussion / Re: Used Software Can Be Sold, Says EU Court of Justice

« Last post by IainB on July 08, 2012, 03:36 AM »

...
...Supap Kirtsaeng was a student...
...

-app103 (July 08, 2012, 02:25 AM)

What an interesting case...
Looks like it's time for a law change if you want to protect the US consumer from being ripped off through unfair commercial practices.
Probably need to wait for pigs to grow wings first though...

4979

General Software Discussion / Re: How to prove which Firefox add-on is trying to access 128.127.110.10 ?

« Last post by IainB on July 07, 2012, 11:21 PM »

...

• You have failed to prove whether it is repeatable, (ie. you didn't re-install the add-on to verify or you haven't said), and;
• You haven't installed the add-on into a new installation of Firefox, (preferably on a base Windows install), to prove whether it happens in conjunction with something else or not.

...
BTW, I looked through the GRIS javascript, (and the other files), and couldn't see anything other than barisderin.com, (and Google naturally), as a destination point.
Are you running any other add-ons that might perform an IP redirection, (like the MAFIAAFire add-on does) ?

-4wd (July 07, 2012, 10:36 PM)

Yes, you are quite right, of course.
I did consider pinning it down as you say, but decided against it - as I didn't really want to invest any more of my cognitive surplus in the thing by proving repeatability on the current or a new platform. I had spent enough time fiddling about over it already. I was just glad to be shot of it actually. I'm not intending to be a ß-tester or virus-hunter on this.
I too looked through the javascript and the other files, and could not identify anything amiss (could have missed something though).

The thing that surprised me was the conclusion that FF could actually be a big risk - in a corporate environment, never mind as a personal browser.
I had a degree of trust in FF and that trust was rather shattered.

I am using MAFIAAFire redirection, yes, but there's no more calls happening to IP 128...

4980

General Software Discussion / Re: Used Software Can Be Sold, Says EU Court of Justice

« Last post by IainB on July 07, 2012, 08:08 PM »

@tomos: I'm not so sure the "Adobe & maths" you provide is as completely off-topic as you seem to think.
The sort of obscene (read "profiteering") price-differential you refer to is usually the result of unfair pricing practices in a supply-chain controlled by monopolistic suppliers or their agents. Such practices are usually illegal inside most Western economies, but not necessarily between them - e.g., they seem to be common in otherwise unregulated "free trade" international transactions.
In fact, you theoretically (and usually in practice) couldn't have such obscene price differentials unless there was such a practice or supply-chain in operation.

The right to be able to sell "used" or pre-owned software is just a digital version of you exercising your existing right to sell (say) a piece of furniture that you had bought but might no longer want - that is what this EU Court of Justice decision confirms.
It's your property (as per Locke's definition), after all.
Similarly, the idea of selling music tracks on mp3 files. If you got tired of your old vinyl LPs or cassette tapes, then you could always sell them. They are your property.
Hmm...now, about ebooks...?   

You always know there is probably some kind of monopolistic, profiteering or restrictive trade practice in play the moment someone or something (e.g., statute or local bye-law) tries to block you from selling what is legally your property, or where you can only obtain the purchase of a property through specific and artificially highly-priced agents.
Price-rigging and cartels (price-fixing agreements between suppliers) are monopolistic and usually illegal, but are common - they keep popping up.
It really does seem that you can't keep a good idea (for profiteering or ripping-off other people) down.   
(Libor rate-fixing would seem to be the latest "exposure" of this - it's apparently epidemic and systemic in the financial system.)

This EU Court of Justice ruling on used software helps to redress the balance on the consumer's behalf.
That's two (i.e., that and the rejection of ACTA by MEPs) eminently sensible things to have come out of the EU inside the last 30 days from unelected representatives. That must be a record achievement. One could arguably have been most surprising. Two could be amazing.   

4981

General Software Discussion / Re: How to prove which Firefox add-on is trying to access 128.127.110.10 ?

« Last post by IainB on July 07, 2012, 07:01 PM »

Many thanks to you for all the helpful suggestions above. What a "Brains trust"!
Situation so far:

• My Malwarebytes repeatedly announced, every time FF started up, that it had blocked an attempt to by FF (the Firefox process) to access 128.127.110.10 - which is in MWB's blacklist. This alert/block was logged by MWB.
• On googling, that IP address seems to come up with various mention as an undesirable source of malware.
• That IP address is apparently located (per whois, etc.) on a server in the Netherlands, and is registered to an India-based agent.
• Removing the FF Add-on GRIS (Google Reverse Image Search) caused the MWB alert to not repeat. (No other changes were made.)

Conclusions and implications at this stage:

• Therefore, by deduction, the GRIS (Google Reverse Image Search) add-on to Firefox was somehow making/enabling the call to access 128.127.110.10
• We have not identified a forensic IT method of otherwise proving whether this add-on was making the call, nor (by extension) how it might be doing so.
• The GRIS add-on either contained or enabled malware functionality.
• Firefox add-ons as a whole cannot be trusted/guaranteed to not contain either malware or malware-enabling functionality.
• MWB is successful at blocking running processes from accessing IP addresses in its blocklist database.
• MWB or similar provide a useful/necessary additional layer of security if the user wishes to overcome some of the potential lack of trust/insecurity of a FF process with malware or malware-enabling add-ons.
• Since the usefulness of FF is for many users dependent on its large library of add-ons, then it is safest to suppose that FF is always likely to be a potential security risk.

I find this quite surprising, really. Have I made a mistake somewhere?

4982

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: NoteFrog Pro (clipboard information manager) - Mini-Review

« Last post by IainB on July 07, 2012, 04:32 PM »

@rjbull: Thanks. I took a look at the forum. I see what you mean. You've been busy!   
By the way, you might have noticed that I have posted a request to have them provide an RSS feed for that forum. Would make life much simpler.

4983

Living Room / Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored

« Last post by IainB on July 07, 2012, 04:56 AM »

Berners-Lee: World Finally Realizes Web Belongs To No One
I wonder.

4984

Living Room / Re: Reader's Corner - The Library of Utopia

« Last post by IainB on July 06, 2012, 09:25 AM »

...the tricky part of the used software/ebook is that proving that you don't have / can't use your copy that you just sold requires some kind of DRM lock.
...

-TaoPhoenix (July 06, 2012, 09:07 AM)

Yes, I can see that. It's apparently a requirement of the DR owner. It's a monopolistic anachronism, like DVD zoning, held onto by the monopolies like grim death. It stands in the way of - blocks - economic market reformation.

4985

Living Room / Re: DOTCOM saga - updates

« Last post by IainB on July 06, 2012, 08:56 AM »

Interesting update from techdirt:
FBI Continues To Insist There's No Reason For Kim Dotcom To Be Able To See The Evidence Against Him

from the of-course-not dept

We already noted that the New Zealand judicial system apparently isn't as willing as the US expected to rubberstamp approval of the extradition of Kim Dotcom. Part of that ruling was a requirement that the US turn over the evidence they're using against Dotcom, so that he can counter it in fighting against the extradition. However, it appears that the US is still fighting this, having the New Zealand prosecutor (who is fighting on their behalf) argue that Dotcom should only be allowed to see a single document out of the 22 million emails the FBI collected and that this really isn't a matter for the New Zealand courts to concern themselves with, as they should just let the Americans handle it.

• Crown lawyer John Pike argued that there was no need for Dotcom to have access because he was not being tried in New Zealand.
• The judge in the extradition case needed only to decide if there was a case for him to answer in the US, Mr Pike said, and that question was answered by the record of case.

That's kind of amazing when you think about it. He shouldn't be allowed to even see the evidence against him... even if it might prove that there is no "case for him to answer to in the US." That's what's so troubling about the US position on cases like this one and the O'Dwyer/TVshack case. They seem to assume that it shouldn't be of any concern if they drag someone thousands of miles across oceans to face trumped up charges in the US.

It's always nice to see justice being done. That's one thing I like to see in this case too.

4986

Living Room / Re: Reader's Corner - The Library of Utopia

« Last post by IainB on July 06, 2012, 08:51 AM »

I don't like this: Is Big Brother Watching You Read?

Spoiler

By Mercy Pilkington
Jul. 06 2012

Be careful not to linger too long on the sexy parts of books like Fifty Shades of Grey. GoodeReader reported last week on a Wall Street Journal article that demonstrated how ebook retailers like Amazon, Barnes and Noble, and Kobo, among others, can now access more intrusive statistical information on how consumers read. This data, ranging from the obvious things like titles purchased to the more obscure data on how long consumers read certain passages, how much time was spent interacting with different sections of books, and how much of a book was finished, can be used for very real world information gathering.

The plus side to this invasion of reading privacy—if there is a benefit to be found—is that retailers are sharing this data with publishers. Ideally, that will translate into better books, since publishers will have access to a page-by-page break down of what consumers choose to spend their time interacting with.

On the other hand, how far does this information go? Does it stop with just the publishers, or can it be used against the consumers? One state has already put through legislation to protect readers from having the data on their reading habits turned over to law enforcement agencies without a court order. This legislation would protect individuals from the very real threat of being profiled or investigated for crimes based on the taboo subject matters they like to read.

Todd Humphrey of Kobo spoke to The Guardian about the rising concerns over a digital invasion of readers’ privacy:

“We are just starting out on this and we want to be cautious on privacy…. We want to understand how people are engaging in the content, but not to cross the line where we are sharing information about their reading habits which they wouldn’t approve of. So we are looking in bulk – at a particular book or genre – and feeding that back to publishers.”

Hopefully, the worst thing to come from this data collection would be a stab at the artistry of writing, where publishers only take on projects that meet the guidelines of the latest reports on digital reading or where authors feel pressured to adapt their plots lines and characters to the latest figures on what readers want. But the reality is, the worst thing to come from intrusive data collection could be far more detrimental to the individual readers.

4987

General Software Discussion / Re: How to prove which Firefox add-on is trying to access 128.127.110.10 ?

« Last post by IainB on July 06, 2012, 08:23 AM »

Maybe what we need is a security auditing add-on to audit the installed add-ons...   

4988

General Software Discussion / Re: How to prove which Firefox add-on is trying to access 128.127.110.10 ?

« Last post by IainB on July 06, 2012, 08:18 AM »

Presumably the outgoing call was up to no good - 128.127.110.10 is on the MWB blacklist, for example, and when you google it, it is not a good look.
If that is true, then it raises concerns about what sort of trojans etc. developers might be building into their add-ons.
Made me even more cautious anyway.

4989

General Software Discussion / Re: How to prove which Firefox add-on is trying to access 128.127.110.10 ?

« Last post by IainB on July 06, 2012, 08:13 AM »

Simple - disable 50% of your addons and see if it goes away

-Carol Haynes (July 06, 2012, 07:48 AM)

Yes, that's exactly what I did - that's what I mean by "a process of elimination".
I felt sure there could be a more techie approach though!

4990

Found Deals and Discounts / Re: InfoRecall - $5.99?!?!

« Last post by IainB on July 06, 2012, 05:26 AM »

Not one of the 3 confirmation emails included a link to the file or even to the site.

-Curt (July 06, 2012, 03:39 AM)

Yes, the software seems to be in a dubious state, if you read the thread I mentioned:

Not sure whether you have seen it, but there is some interesting discussion re this InfoRecall special offer (and other PIM-related software) at outlinersoftware.com - http://www.outliners...are.com/topics/tlist

-IainB (July 05, 2012, 10:25 PM)

4991

General Software Discussion / How to prove which Firefox add-on is trying to access 128.127.110.10 ?

« Last post by IainB on July 06, 2012, 05:19 AM »

For some time now, my Malwarebytes has kept announcing that it has blocked an attempt to access 128.127.110.10 - which is in MWB's blacklist. I checked, and it seems to be an IP address in Denmark. The certainty of this location may be in some doubt, as, when I googled it, various diverse and misleading results popped up in the search.

The MWB announcement occurred every time I started up Firefox. I therefore concluded that a FF Add-on was probably making the outgoing call - i.e., rather than FF itself.
I was going to post a query in DCF today to ask for help but have luckily discovered, by a process of elimination, that it is the FF add-on Google Reverse Image Search that is apparently making the calls.

The call to that IP address occurs every time FF is started up, without fail.
Disabling/removing the add-on causes the calls to not occur when FF is started up (all other features of FF remaining the same).

I had previously searched for that IP address string inside the files in the directory for FF and for its add-ons, but did not come up with any hits.

I would be interested if anyone has any ideas as to how you could identify/prove the source of such an outgoing call from an add-on, other than the hit-or-miss process of elimination that I employed.

4992

Found Deals and Discounts / Re: InfoRecall - $5.99?!?!

« Last post by IainB on July 05, 2012, 10:25 PM »

Not sure whether you have seen it, but there is some interesting discussion re this InfoRecall special offer (and other PIM-related software) at outlinersoftware.com - http://www.outliners...are.com/topics/tlist

4993

Living Room / Re: Google's "Take action" - Celebrate freedom. Support a free and open Internet.

« Last post by IainB on July 05, 2012, 10:00 PM »

...or maybe this is a more likely pointer: Google hired former UK data privacy official
In case the post "disappears", I have copied it below, sans embedded links and images:

Spoiler

Google hired former UK data privacy official
Google Street View car
Some Google managers had been notified about data collection during the Street View project
Continue reading the main story   
Related Stories
    UK reopens data probe into Google
    Google staff 'knew of snooping'
    Google's UK wi-fi data 'deleted'

Google UK's privacy policy manager held a senior role at the UK's data privacy watchdog during the time of its original probe into Street View.

A freedom of information request revealed that Steven McCartney left the Information Commissioner's Office to join Google in November 2011.

The ICO had been criticised for its initial investigation - which has since reopened - into data privacy breaches.

The ICO said Mr McCartney "played no part" in the investigations.

In its own statement, Google said: "We don't comment on individual employees."

Rob Halfon, Tory MP for Harlow, told the Guardian that the news was a "shocking revelation".

"Now it seems they [the ICO] have had a cosy relationship with the company they have been investigating," he told the newspaper.

Mr McCartney was head of data protection promotion at the ICO where he had worked, according to his LinkedIn profile, since 2004.

During this time, the ICO conducted an investigation into allegations that Google had knowingly gathered personal data while collecting photographs as part of its Street View mapping project.

The ICO ruled that there had been a "significant breach" of the Data Protection Act, but opted not to fine the company, a decision heavily criticised by campaign group Privacy International and others.

Of the 2010 investigation, deputy information commissioner David Smith told the BBC: "We spent less time searching than others did. If we had searched for days and days we would have found more."

It later emerged that several Google staff had been told that data was being collected, prompting the ICO to reopen its inquiries.
Email correspondence

After joining Google, Mr McCartney shared email correspondence with ICO officials discussing issues relating to the ongoing probe.

The documents, obtained by campaigner Peter John, showed Mr McCartney had outlined what he had said were "significant errors" in the media's reporting of the issue in an email dated 4 May 2012.

Christopher Graham, the information commissioner, responded to the email with "thanks for this, Stephen".

In a statement released today, the ICO said: "The published correspondence between Google and the ICO clearly shows that Stephen McCartney was treated like any other organisation's representative, with his emails receiving nothing more than a polite acknowledgement.

The spokesman added: "ICO employees continue to be legally bound by a confidentiality agreement after they leave the organisation, as part of the Data Protection Act.

"Stephen Eckersley, the ICO's Head of Enforcement, continues to investigate Google's actions with regard to the Street View project."

Mr Eckersley is currently considering a response to Google's most recent letter on the matter which was received by the ICO last month.

4994

Living Room / Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored

« Last post by IainB on July 05, 2012, 08:54 PM »

^ +1 from me   
- though I would suggest consideration be given to using something more appropriately dense than a cinderblock - e.g., use an aggregate of granite gravel, rather than cinders.

4995

Living Room / Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored

« Last post by IainB on July 05, 2012, 10:49 AM »

Useful guidelines here that I had not been aware of, nor understood before now: Avoiding Censorship: How Blocked Websites Stay Online and Accessible [MakeUseOf Explains]
(There are useful embedded links and graphics in the post that are not copied in the spoiler below - see the actual article per link above for those.)

Spoiler

• July 4, 2012 - By Chris Hoffman
  We’ve been hearing a lot about website-blocking recently, particularly with anti-piracy organizations forcing Internet service providers to block access to The Pirate Bay in the UK and elsewhere. However, when UK Internet service provider BT blocked The Pirate Bay, the block was only in effect for a few minutes before The Pirate Bay bypassed it.
  How exactly do supposedly blocked websites like The Pirate Bay remain accessible to so many people, in spite of all the efforts to block them? The answer lies in the way the Internet works.
• How Websites Are Blocked
  When you load a website – say, by going to thepiratebay.org – your computer contacts its domain name system (DNS) server and locates the numerical IP address associated with that website. The DNS server responds with the website’s IP address and your computer contacts the IP address. Domain names like thepiratebay.org and makeuseof.com are human-readable shortcuts that DNS servers translate to numerical IP addresses.
  Blocking can cut off access at the DNS level or block access to the website’s IP address itself. Your Internet service provider runs your default DNS servers, so it can modify them and point thepiratebay.org or another domain name to a “Blocked” page.
  There are several ways around this – you can switch your DNS server to an alternative DNS server that isn’t run by your Internet service provider (ISP), such as Google DNS or OpenDNS. You could also visit the website’s IP address directly – for example, 194.71.107.80 is one of The Pirate Bay’s IP addresses, so you can access The Pirate Bay by plugging this number into your web browser’s address bar.
  Blocking can also cut off access at the server level. To prevent people from using the above methods to get around the blocks, ISPs can block access to specific IP addresses, preventing their users from communicating with the IP addresses entirely.
• How Websites Bypass Blocks
  If only DNS blocking is occurring, websites can tell their users to switch DNS servers or access specific IP addresses directly. Even if specific IP addresses have been blocked, a website can quickly add a new IP address that point to the website.
  For example, after The Pirate Bay’s IP addresses were blocked, The Pirate Bay immediately added several new IP addresses that pointed to their website. While users could no longer access thepiratebay.org or 194.71.107.80, The Pirate Bay was now also available at 194.71.107.82.
  A Pirate Bay representative told Torrent Freak that “they can continue adding new addresses for years to come.” It’s like whack-a-mole – when an ISP blocks an address, a new one immediately springs up.
• Legal System Slowness
  Compounding the problem for those who would block websites is the way the legal system works. The blockers often require court orders to block specific domains and IP addresses. Some of these court orders may allow the blockers – anti-piracy groups in the case of The Pirate Bay – to add new IP addresses to the block on short notice, while some do not. As some ISPs in the Netherlands responded when Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN told them to block The Pirate Bay’s new IP addresses – “we will do not comply without a court order”.
  Even if all court orders allowed anti-piracy groups to block new IP addresses without going through the legal system again, court orders would have to be obtained in a variety of countries against a large amount of ISPs. On the other hand, The Pirate Bay can add a new IP address accessible to the entire world and circumvent the block in a few seconds.
• Other Ways to Bypass Blocks
  The Pirate Bay doesn’t even need to bypass the blocks itself. Pirate Bay users have a variety of ways to bypass the block, including accessing The Pirate Bay through proxies or virtual private networks (VPNs), which “tunnel” the traffic to another ISP. From The Pirate Bay’s perspective, the user is accessing their website from another country without website blocking. The tunnel then passes the traffic in encrypted form back to the user – as the traffic is encrypted and the user isn’t communicating directly with The Pirate Bay, their ISP has no way of blocking this traffic.
  In fact, The Pirate Party UK hosts a proxy that UK residents can use to access The Pirate Bay on ISPs where it’s been blocked. Tor, designed for accessing websites anonymously and circumventing government censorship of the web, can also be used.
• The Streisand Effect
  Word spreads about new ISP addresses and other ways to bypass blocks extremely quickly. When a website as big as The Pirate Bay is blocked, news stories spring up and alert users to the block and ways of getting around it. The block may actually increase traffic going to the blocked website as a result of the increased media attention and exposure.
  This phenomena is known as the Streisand effect — named after Barbara Streisand, who, in 2003, attempted to remove photos of her house from the Internet. In response, news coverage about the incident resulted in a larger number of people seeing the photos. Similarly, people reading news stories about blocks of a website like The Pirate Bay may wonder what all the fuss is about and check the website out for themselves. News of the block actually increased traffic to The Pirate Bay.
  Have you ever had to get around a block to access a blocked website? Do you have any other questions about how websites are blocked? Let us know in the comments!

4996

General Software Discussion / Re: Used Software Can Be Sold, Says EU Court of Justice

« Last post by IainB on July 05, 2012, 09:00 AM »

I've just cross-linked this discussion to Re: Reader's Corner - The Library of Utopia, because it potentially could embrace "used" ebooks.
That is, if used software can be sold as such, then digital material generally could potentially be regarded in the same light - e.g., including ebook files, mp3 files, etc.
Not holding my breath, mind you.    

4997

Living Room / Re: Reader's Corner - The Library of Utopia

« Last post by IainB on July 05, 2012, 08:54 AM »

This took me by surprise:
Used Software Can Be Sold, Says EU Court of Justice

Posted by timothy on Tuesday July 03, @08:46AM
from the over-and-over-and-over dept.

Sique writes:
"An author of software cannot oppose the resale of his 'used' licenses allowing the
use of his programs downloaded from the internet. The exclusive right of distribution of a copy of a computer program covered by such a license is exhausted on its first sale. This was decided [Tuesday] (PDF) by the Court of Justice of the European Union in a case of Used Soft GmbH v. Oracle International Corp.."

-IainB (July 03, 2012, 10:13 AM)

At the time I posted the above, I wondered if the concept might extended to ebooks at some stage.
Interesting and thoughtful take on that idea at the blog on goodereader.com: Used eBooks may be a Reality Soon

Jul. 05 2012
By Michael Kozlowski

North America and Europe are rife with used bookstores that provide a significant amount of people deeply discounted books. In the digital realm, publishers have been against the very notion of used eBooks. They have taken extreme measures in encrypting their digital products so only the original purchaser can ever use them. If you try and give your eBook to a friend they won’t be able to read it because it normally asks for the credit card used on the original purchase.  The notion of used eBooks may be a reality soon as a new ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union. They announced today that a license agreement for a digital product can be resold between customers.

The court case in Europe stemmed from a dispute between Oracle and UsedSoft. The essence of the deal was that Usedsoft acquired a ton of Oracle licenses for their various products and resold them to customers. Oracle, obviously was not pleased with them doing this and petitioned the court to side in their favor.  The German courts served their ruling today and it could open up the floodgates for the ability to sell used ebooks.

The High Court press release stated that “Where the copyright holder makes available to his customer a copy – tangible or intangible – and at the same time concludes, in return form payment of a fee, a license agreement granting the customer the right to use that copy for an unlimited period, that right-holder sells the copy to the customer and thus exhausts his exclusive distribution right. Such a transaction involves a transfer of the right of ownership of the copy. Therefore, even if the license agreement prohibits a further transfer, the right-holder can no longer oppose the resale of that copy. He can therefore download onto his computer the copy sold to him by the first acquirer. Such a download must be regarded as a reproduction of digital product that is necessary to enable the new acquirer to use the program in accordance with its intended purpose.”

This case has broadening repercussions to the used video game and eBook industry. It shows that digital content can be sold to a 3rd party, as long as the seller does not use the product anymore, which would violate the original licensing agreement. It really sets a precedent, that the transfer of ownership can be directly applied to digital products.

That last phrase - exactly. I hope it's not wishful thinking.

4998

Living Room / Re: Google's "Take action" - Celebrate freedom. Support a free and open Internet.

« Last post by IainB on July 05, 2012, 08:17 AM »

And why would anyone give these losers a job!

-zridling (July 04, 2012, 11:28 AM)

Maybe their names are on someone else's "preferred candidates" list that Google were obliged to pick from...

4999

Living Room / Re: Petition - This Week We Kill ACTA - Or Get Locked Down In Monopolies For Decades

« Last post by IainB on July 04, 2012, 08:51 AM »

Good outcome: the European Parliament has rejected the ACTA (Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement).

Strasbourg 04/07/2012
ACTA defeat a triumph for campaigners, battle must go on
Voting by 478 votes to 39, the European Parliament has listened to citizens and shot down the Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement despite last-ditch EPP trickery.

"This is a great day for participatory democracy and the power of campaigning" said GUE/NGL President Gabi Zimmer, saluting and congratulating the millions of people around the world who helped bring the necessary pressure to bear to defeat ACTA.
"Citizens put their hopes in MEPs to defend their interests against the Commission and big business interests - we have stood up for them in this vote" said GUE/NGL MEP Helmut Scholz.
"Commissioner De Gucht has suffered a defeat with his misguided attempt to extend corporate control on the internet" Scholz said. "Never has it been so clear that the internet is a vital element in the functioning of European democracy. The whole concept of dealing with information and knowledge is changing and legislation should reflect that or be binned. We urged the Commission years ago to establish transparency in the talks. They refused and continued to defend this awful deal, now they must face the consequences."
The GUE/NGL will continue to support the free exchange of information in the public interest and a model of knowledge-sharing that offers artists a reasonable and adequate income.
See www.guengl.eu/acta for more information.

Full vote result:

• Against ACTA: 478
• For: 39
• Abstentions: 169

GUE/NGL Press Contacts:
David Lundy +32 485 50 58 12

Gay Kavanagh +32 473 84 23 20
[email protected]
[email protected]
European United Left / Nordic Green Left
European Parliamentary Group
www.guengl.eu      

5000

Living Room / Re: Google's "Take action" - Celebrate freedom. Support a free and open Internet.

« Last post by IainB on July 04, 2012, 02:35 AM »

@zridling: Really? Susan Molinari? I guess you probably don't have a very hight opinion of her then, eh?
At least her name doesn't seem to be in this revolving door list: