Archive for ◊ July, 2009 ◊

Author: admin
• Tuesday, July 21st, 2009

Don’t like what you hear about broadcast flag? Neither does various consumers advocacy organizations, including the American Library Association, The Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Public Knowledge. At press time in April, these groups were fighting the FCC ruling in the Washington, D.C circuit court appeals.

Until the court renders a decision, expect flag plans to go forward as scheduled and flag-aware products to arrive in stores in July.

Disagreement over what the FCC can mandate lies at the heart of the case.

“Our contention is, the FCC can regulate broadcasts, but they can’t regulate consumer electronics without express consent from Congress,” says Art Brodsky, communications director for Public Knowledge. The V-chip, for example, which lets consumers block some TV shows, required U.S congressional approval, he says.

And because of the FCC plan’s legacy clause, the piracy loophole won’t really be closed anyway, says Wendy Seltzer, an EFF attorney who is working on the case. “Anyone determined to pirate HDTV content already has the equipment.”

The EFF further argues that the open-source community could be shut out of future digital TV-related products due to the FCC plan’s Demodulator Robustness Requirements”. The plan states that devices must be”robust” in preventing user modifications that allow access to the full digital TV stream, Seltzer says. This stipulation raises questions of how and whether open-source drivers- which are modifiable to some extent- could be used with flag aware products, she says.

What happens if the advocacy groups win and the FCC plan is killed or stalled? The networks wouldn’t broadcasts the flag code. And the updated devices would simply have an unneeded, un used capability in the demodulator chip.

Category: TV, device, law  | Leave a Comment
Author: admin
• Saturday, July 04th, 2009

In the harshly lit backroom of a storefront in New York City’s Chinatown, there hangs what appears to be millions of dollar’s worth of merchandise. Hundreds of bags bearing the Louis Vuitton logo are crammed onto metal hooks. The purses look nothing like the shoddy knockoffs sold for $10 on street corners. Only a close look inspection reveals that the zippers are just a bit too shiny and the leather is too rough. These fakes aren’t just sold to tourists; undercover bag dealers from around the country order them in bulk from makeshift catalogs.

Thanks in part to this backroom business, New York city was home to an estimated $23 billion counterfeit-goods market in 2003, costing the city more than $1 billion in taxes and vexing luxury-goods companies. The police have been jailing and fining vendors for decades, but the problem seems to be getting worse-the value of U.S. Customs seizures of counterfeits leaped 48% last year. Which is why knockoff favorite Louis Vuitton has stepped up its fight against the Faux. Last year it spent more than ever-15 million euros-to battle counterfeiting, conducting 6,000 raids and 8,200 legal actions worldwide. But instead of just going after counterfeit sellers-who, like cockroaches, tend to spring up elsewhere-LVMH has developed a novel legal strategy: It’s going after landlords.