![IMG_0342[1]](https://i0.wp.com/starvinlarry.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/img_03421.jpg?w=325&h=243&ssl=1 "IMG_0342[1]")
Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category
We Can’t Let John Deere Destroy the Very Idea of Ownership
Posted: April 21, 2015 by gamegetterII in Uncategorized
It’s official: John Deere and General Motors want to eviscerate the notion of ownership. Sure, we pay for their vehicles. But we don’t own them. Not according to their corporate lawyers, anyway.
In a particularly spectacular display of corporate delusion, John Deere—the world’s largest agricultural machinery maker —told the Copyright Office that farmers don’t own their tractors. Because computer code snakes through the DNA of modern tractors, farmers receive “an implied license for the life of the vehicle to operate the vehicle.”
It’s John Deere’s tractor, folks. You’re just driving it.
Several manufacturers recently submitted similar comments to the Copyright Office under an inquiry into the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. DMCA is a vast 1998 copyright law that (among other things) governs the blurry line between software and hardware. The Copyright Office, after reading the comments and holding a hearing, will decide in July which high-tech devices we can modify, hack, and repair—and decide whether John Deere’s twisted vision of ownership will become a reality.
Over the last two decades, manufacturers have used the DMCA to argue that consumers do not own the software underpinning the products they buy—things like smartphones, computers, coffeemakers, cars, and, yes, even tractors. So, Old MacDonald has a tractor, but he owns a massive barn ornament, because the manufacturer holds the rights to the programming that makes it run.
(This is an important issue for farmers: a neighbor, Kerry Adams, hasn’t been able to fix an expensive transplanter because he doesn’t have access to the diagnostic software he needs. He’s not alone: many farmers are opting for older, computer-free equipment.)
Over the last two decades, manufacturers have used the DMCA to argue that consumers do not own the software that powers the products they buy.
In recent years, some companies have even leveraged the DMCA to stop owners from modifying the programming on those products. This means you can’t strip DRM off smart kitty litter boxes, install custom software on your iPad, or alter the calibration on a tractor’s engine. Not without potentially running afoul of the DMCA.
What does any of that have to do with copyright? Owners, tinkerers, and homebrew “hackers” must copy programming so they can modify it. Product makers don’t like people messing with their stuff, so some manufacturers place digital locks over software. Breaking the lock, making the copy, and changing something could be construed as a violation of copyright law.
And that’s how manufacturers turn tinkerers into “pirates”—even if said “pirates” aren’t circulating illegal copies of anything. Makes sense, right? Yeah, not to me either.
It makes sense to John Deere: The company argues that allowing people to alter the software—even for the purpose of repair—would “make it possible for pirates, third-party developers, and less innovative competitors to free-ride off the creativity, unique expression and ingenuity of vehicle software.” The pièce de résistance in John Deere’s argument: permitting owners to root around in a tractor’s programming might lead to pirating music through a vehicle’s entertainment system. Because copyright-marauding farmers are very busy and need to multitask by simultaneously copying Taylor Swift’s 1989 and harvesting corn? (I’m guessing, because John Deere’s lawyers never explained why anyone would pirate music on a tractor, only that it could happen.)
Read the rest @ http://www.wired.com/2015/04/dmca-ownership-john-deere/
Fran points out the indictment with a zillion charges to get people to accept a plea bargain scam-
There is a way to stop that,and it would stop tomorrow if every person charged with some ridiculous list of crimes that don’t even resemble whatever the original “crime” was would just say screw you-seat a jury,I’ll take my chances.
Our “justice” system would grind to a halt .
Yesterday,and this am,I was reading all the stories about Dr Oz,La Times,Ny Times,WaPo,and probably every small town newspaper had a version of the story.
I was reading the comments in this…http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2015/04/20/the-dr-oz-truthers-who-think-hes-saving-them-from-monsantos-gmos/
The level of scientific illiteracy was astounding-as was the amount of misinformation,disinformation,lies,half-truths,and obfuscation-please educate yourselves about GMO’s
An unbiased,searchable database of published,peer reviewed studies/papers…
More…
In case the United States and Russia engage in nuclear confrontation, the US will be completely wiped off the face of the Earth, editor of Europesolidaire Jean-Paul Baquiast wrote.
Russia and China stand better chances in a possible nuclear war against the US, which would mean complete destruction of the United States’ territory, the French journalist said.
His comments come as the Russian President Vladimir Putin threatens to use his nuclear force against the United States and its allies if NATO moves more forces into the Baltic states or if attempts are made to return Crimea to Ukraine.
That information as well as the Washington’s potential intent to perform a preemptive nuclear attack on Russia’s territory led to a wide Internet discussion whether it is something that might happen or not.
What also fueled these speculations was General Robin Rand’s appointment as head of the US Air Force Global Strike Command.
Knowing the nature of this General, it is possible that he might follow the steps of US General Curtis LeMay, who was meticulously preparing a large nuclear attack on the Soviet Union.
And let’s not forget that Russia currently poses a bigger threat than USSR did, and that it is far more dangerous than the union, which collapsed in 1991. According to NATO’s former secretary general Anders Fogh Rasmussen, “Russia of today is more dangerous than the Soviet Union. The USSR was more predictable than the current leadership.”
The US will be completely destroyed
And so according to Jean-Paul Baquiast, when the US realizes it can’t counter Russian aggression by conventional and non-military means, it will try to destroy it with its armed forces. And in case an armed confrontation indeed happens, the US will no doubt perform a series of preemptive nuclear attacks against Russia.
“Chances of the United States to destroy Russia without consequences for itself are small,” the editor of Europesolidaire said.
And he’s got a point. What do you think Russia will do? Sit, wait and watch? Pretend that the attack didn’t happen?
Read the rest @ http://www.valuewalk.com/2015/04/russia-vs-us-the-world-war-3/
Automakers to gearheads: Stop repairing cars
Posted: April 21, 2015 by gamegetterII in UncategorizedCar Companies Say Home Repairs Are ‘Legally Problematic,’ Seek Copyright Restrictions
In comments filed with a federal agency that will determine whether tinkering with a car constitutes a copyright violation, OEMs and their main lobbying organization say cars have become too complex and dangerous for consumers and third parties to handle.
Allowing them to continue to fix their cars has become “legally problematic,” according to a written statement from the Auto Alliance, the main lobbying arm of automakers.
The dispute arises from a section of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act that no one thought could apply to vehicles when it was signed into law in 1998. But now, in an era where cars are rolling computing platforms, the U.S. Copyright Office is examining whether provisions of the law that protect intellectual property should prohibit people from modifying and tuning their cars.
Every three years, the office holds hearings on whether certain activities should be exempt from the DMCA’s section 1201, which governs technological measures that protect copyrighted work. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit organization that advocates for individual rights in the digital world, has asked the office to ensure that enthusiasts can continue working on cars by providing exemptions that would give them the right to access necessary car components.
Interested parties have until the end of the month to file comments on the proposed rule making, and a final decision is expected by mid-year.
Complex Software, Increased Risk
Industry concerns are mounting that modifying these ECUs and the software coding that runs them could lead to vulnerabilities in vehicle safety and cyber security. Imagine an amateur makes a coding mistake that causes brakes to fail and a car crash ensues. Furthermore, automakers say these modifications could render cars non-compliant with environmental laws that regulate emissions.
But exemptions from the DMCA don’t give third parties the right to infringe upon existing copyrights. Nor does an exemption mean consumers don’t have to abide by other laws and rules that govern vehicles passed by the National Highway Traffic Administration, Environmental Protection Agency or U.S. Patent and Trade Office.
“It’s not a new thing to be able to repair and modify cars,” said Kit Walsh, a staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “It’s actually a new thing to keep people from doing it. There are these specialized agencies that govern what vehicles can lawfully be used for on the road, and they have not seen fit to stop them from repairing cars.”
Aftermarket suppliers and home enthusiasts have been modifying ECUs for years without dire consequences. By tweaking the ECU codes, a process sometimes known as “chipping,” they’ve boosted horsepower, improved fuel efficiency, established performance limits for teen drivers and enhanced countless other features. These innovations have contributed to a “decades-old tradition of mechanical curiosity and self-reliance,” according to the EFF.
Via Buckeye Firearms Assoc.
As I was graduating from high school in Prescott, Arizona, My father, Neal Knox, was in Washington, D.C. making war plans as the head of NRA’s lobbying arm, the Institute for Legislative Action. By the following year, Dad had publicly declared war on the BATF and the Gun Control of 1968. From Dad’s perspective, BATF had been actively waging war on gun owners for years, and he had left his dream job as editor and publisher of Rifle and Handloader magazines, with the specific objective of destroying the BATF and reforming GCA’68.
By the mid-1970s, the BATF had earned a reputation for being excessively aggressive, nit-picky, vindictive, and often unscrupulous. Dozens of stories emerged of ATF abuses, and analysis of their arrest and prosecution records showed that a majority of their cases didn’t involve malevolent criminal activity, but instead targeted ordinary gun owners who were tripped up by confusing regulations and federal red tape.
When Dad began waging the war on BATF, he exposed the horror stories, published the records, and showed the ruined lives of regular citizens that littered BATF’s wake. In 1979, Dad convinced Senators Jim McClure (R-ID) and Dennis DeConcini (D-AZ) to hold hearings on the BATF’s enforcement practices and abuses. In the hearings, Dad made it clear that, while the BATF’s actions were atrocious, the real culprit in the sad saga was the GCA. As Dad said in his Senate testimony, any agency tasked with enforcing such poorly written laws would be hard pressed not to fall into a similar pattern of abuse.
As a direct result of this process of sanitation through sunlight, the ATF received harsh rebukes from Congress, and had millions of dollars pulled from their annual budget. President Reagan was actually on the verge of dissolving the agency entirely, and turning their enforcement responsibilities over to the FBI. Dad opposed that move on the grounds that a crippled and closely scrutinized BATF would be easier to keep in check than the more powerful and respected FBI enforcing the same bad laws.
There has been a lot of second-guessing and criticism over that call, but by keeping the focus on BATF as a symptom resulting from bad laws, rather than allowing the agency to be used as a scapegoat, Dad was able to more effectively treat the symptoms, while still going after the underlying disease – the GCA.
Dad’s primary objective in accepting the leadership position at NRA-ILA was to reform the GCA, removing from the law as many booby-traps and nonsensical restrictions as he could. With this in mind, he and the ILA staff worked closely with the staffs of Senator McClure and Representative Harold Volkmer (D-MO) on a sweeping “gun de-control” bill. The bill became known as the Firearm Owner Protection Act, and a somewhat watered-down version of it was finally passed in 1986.
Almost 30 years after passage of the McClure-Volkmer Bill, the BATF remains plagued with scandals and accusations of abuse of authority. In 2002, as part of the 9-11 restructuring, BATF’s enforcement branch was placed under the Department of Justice alongside the FBI and DEA. The move, which was supposed to help restore the BATF’s sullied reputation, did nothing to slow the chronic mismanagement and abuse. What it has done however, is highlight the role of DOJ prosecutors in BATF’s misdeeds.
Like any law enforcement agency, BATF relies on fear and results to justify its budget requests. While it’s easy to paint pictures of all sorts of potential threats with which to scare Congress into throwing more money at them, BATF must rely on DOJ prosecutors to garner actual results. Elaborate operations and large arrest numbers fall flat when accompanied by very low conviction rates, and that’s exactly what BATF has been producing for decades. But it’s often the prosecutors who drive these cases, telling enforcers what types of cases they want pursued, and what types of evidence they need for convictions.
In a number of cases, it’s clear that prosecutors encouraged ATF to “bend” evidence, intentionally misrepresented laws and regulations, and conspired with BATF to suppress evidence that could be harmful to the prosecution. They did it to Albert Kwan, David Olofson, the Reese family, and others we’ve reported on over the years. They were active coconspirators in Operation Fast & Furious. And recently, in a lawsuit from former agent, Jay Dobyns, accusing BATF of defamation of character and breach of contract, the judge was so incensed by the actions of government lawyers that he barred 17 DOJ lawyers from his court and suggested that, along with BATF acting in a vindictive and “Kafkaesque” manner toward their own agent, prosecutors and BATF might have engaged in perjury and fraud upon the court.
The pattern is symptomatic of government spiraling out of control with bad laws being enforced and prosecuted by rogue agencies operating without adequate supervision or accountability. If we don’t fix the laws and hold the enforcers and prosecutors accountable, this problem is just going to keep getting worse.
©2015 The Firearms Coalition, all rights reserved. Reprinting, posting, and distributing permitted with inclusion of this copyright statement. www.FirearmsCoalition.org
For anyone interested,there’s a “Counter Jade Helm Group on Farcebook
Posted: April 21, 2015 by gamegetterII in Uncategorized
Could a U.S. response to Russia’s actions in Ukraine provoke a confrontation that leads to a U.S.-Russian war?
AFTER THE Soviet Union collapsed, Richard Nixon observed that the United States had won the Cold War, but had not yet won the peace. Since then, three American presidents—representing both political parties—have not yet accomplished that task. On the contrary, peace seems increasingly out of reach as threats to U.S. security and prosperity multiply both at the systemic level, where dissatisfied major powers are increasingly challenging the international order, and at the state and substate level, where dissatisfied ethnic, tribal, religious and other groups are destabilizing key countries and even entire regions.
Most dangerous are disagreements over the international system and the prerogatives of major powers in their immediate neighborhoods—disputes of the sort that have historically produced the greatest conflicts. And these are at the core of U.S. and Western tensions with Russia and, even more ominously, with China. At present, the most urgent challenge is the ongoing crisis in Ukraine. There, one can hear eerie echoes of the events a century ago that produced the catastrophe known as World War I. For the moment, the ambiguous, narrow and inconsistently interpreted Minsk II agreement is holding, and we can hope that it will lead to further agreements that prevent the return of a hot war. But the war that has already occurred and may continue reflected deep contradictions that America cannot resolve if it does not address them honestly and directly.
Read the rest @ http://nationalinterest.org/feature/russia-america-stumbling-war-12662
Prosecutors drop robbery case to preserve stingray secrecy in St. Louis
Posted: April 20, 2015 by gamegetterII in UncategorizedA pistol-whipped victim, who required 18 stitches, is "shocked" at the outcome
The St. Louis case provides yet another real-world example where prosecutors have preferred to drop charges instead of fully disclose how the devices, also known as cell-site simulators, work in the real world. Last year, prosecutors in Baltimore did the same thing during a robbery trial.
According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the dismissal this month came just one day before a St. Louis police officer was set to be deposed in the robbery case where three men and a woman were accused of stealing from seven people in September 2013.
Neither the office of Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce nor the office of Megan Beesley, a public defender involved in the case, immediately responded to Ars’ request for comment over the weekend. The St. Louis Police Department also did not respond to Ars’ request for comment.
While the St. Louis newspaper did not name the suspects, it reported that an unnamed Circuit Attorney spokesman denied any connection between the dismissal and the forthcoming deposition.
According to court records, detective John Anderson told defense attorneys that the cops had used a “proven law enforcement technique” in order to locate one of the stolen phones and eventually the suspects. Anderson refused to elaborate, citing a non-disclosure agreement that he and his agency were bound by.
Read the rest @ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/04/prosecutors-drop-robbery-case-to-preserve-stingray-secrecy-in-st-louis/
