[Quote:]

Yesterday’s post about Digital Rights Management prompted an email conversation with Paul Birch, who is a member of the exec committee and main board of the International Federation of Phonographic Institutes (IFPI) as well as the BPI Council and Chairs International.

According to Birch, the major labels have decided to abandon Digital Rights Management. They haven’t announced it yet — but it’s coming soon. In the wake of the Sony BMG Rootkit debacle, and in the light of the competitive advantage logic, it makes perfect sense.

Birch writes:

DRM as we know it is over. There may be Son of DRM but that’s another matter. Right now its dead, the majors are moving towards the new model. The one thing you can be sure of is they will still be at the centre of the world music industry whatever happens. The independents are another matter. As our sector’s share has fallen by almost half in just over twelve months, the new model for us is partnership. It always was, I’m just not sure we got it.

“Son of DRM”?

And what the fuck does “partnership” mean? I’m probably just being a cynical bastard again, but excuse me for not believing any of this, and even if it’s true, I’ll be waiting a few years at the least before I’ll consider being a customer again.

[Quote:]

The European Commission is set to call for an immediate halt on the illegal transfer of financial information to the United States Treasury.

A draft final opinion obtained by The Register concludes that central banks and local financial institutions that used the SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) financial network had acted illegally in allowing data about their clients’ financial transacions to be transfered to the Treasury. The US started issuing subpoenas in the course of anti-terrorist investigations within weeks of the September 11 attacks of 2001 – the financial institutions and their messaging network hid the disclosures from citizens.

“The hidden, systematic, massive and long-term transfer of personal data by SWIFT to the UST in a confidential, non-transparent and systematic manner for years without effective legal grounds and without the possibility of independent control by public data protection supervisory authorities constitutes a violation of the fundamental European principles as regards data protection and is not in accordance with Belgian and European law,” says the EC opinion.

The EC found that Europe’s central banks, which oversee SWIFT’s activities, may lose the trust of the markets after failing to inform them that the subpoenas were being made.

“The lack of compliance with data protection legislation may actually hamper consumers’ trust in their banks and thus might also effect the financial stability of the payment system.”

Tuurlijk.

Nu nog zo’n enquete bij de televaag….

[Quote:]

[Quote:]

David Cameron, the straight-talking public relations executive who runs the Conservative party, gave the reasons why he opposes ID Cards yesterday.

In a speech at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, the self-confessed “liberal Conservative” said the government was wasting its time with ID Cards because they would not protect our security.

He said they wouldn’t stop terrorists, benefits cheats, illegal immigrants, or identity thieves. Further, the implementation of the computer system to run them was likely to be bodged, if the government’s track record was anything to go by.

[..]

“We must tolerate some violation of our privacy – for example, through the use of video surveillance cameras – in order to protect our security,” his speech read.

But he criticised the “hasty and hysterical” reaction to security threats and the “tough guy posturing” that played into the hands of terrorists by belying Britain’s “character, values and traditions”.

“We must never allow ourselves to become such a regimented society that we hand the terrorists a victory,” said Cameron.

“We must combine prudent precautions with a sturdy defence of people’s right to live with a minimum of intrusion into their private life.”

[..]

But they have not been able to bring themselves to be anything quite as principled about police policy on the collection of DNA, a subject that is of greater concern to civil libertarians. The police decided in April, without any debate on the matter, that they would start collecting DNA samples from anyone they came across in their everyday business, criminal or not.

The Conservatives, said a spokesman, could not yet state that the police shouldn’t keep DNA samples of people who have not committed a crime because there hasn’t yet been a debate on the matter. How can they know if it’s wrong to do so if they haven’t had a proper think about it first?

Achteraf had ik misschien beter m’n piano kunnen laten stemmen…

The men the American public admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth.

H. L. Mencken (1880 – 1956)

[Quote:]

Comedy Central has made a good living out of skewering the political right.

Now Fox News Channel, a primary source of material for Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, is teaming with the exec producer of “24″ to try its hand at a news satire show for conservatives to love.

Joel Surnow, co-creator of “24,” is shooting two half-hour pilots of a skein he described as ” ‘The Daily Show’ for conservatives,” due to air in primetime on Saturdays in January.

If successful, the show could take its place on the regular schedule, adding satire to FNC’s formula of news and opinion.

“The way I look at it, almost every comedy show or satire show I see uses the same talking points against George W. Bush and Dick Cheney,” Surnow said. “The other side hasn’t been skewered in a fair and balanced way.”

I can’t wait to see some rich white guy making jokes about unemployed single mothers…