DOJ Had 400% More Emergencies That Required Immediate Warrantless Info From ISPs

[blizz]

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110805/03270515402/doj-had-400-more-emergencies-that-required-immediate-warrantless-info-isps.shtml

Well this seems questionable. Chris Soghoian has received info from a Freedom of Information Act request (which only took 11 months) that shows that the Justice Department made use of a special "emergency" claim to get ISPs to turn over info without a warrant 400% more times in 2009 than in 2008. Of course, in 2009 there was a new administration in town (one which campaigned on greater transparency and being against things like warrantless wiretaps). In this case, 91 such requests were made to ISPs in 2009. In 2008 the number was just 17. In 2007, it was just 9. In 2006, it was again 17.

(cont at link)

[populistdriven]

1. Rich Democrats LOVE Moooovies and Muuuuusic doncha kno?

http://www.osnews.com/story/23002/Obama_Sides_with_RIAA_MPAA_Backs_ACTA

And thus, our true colours reveal. Since Obama was the young newcomer, technically savvy, many of us were hoping that he might support patent and/or copyright reform. In case our story earlier on this subject didn't already tip you off, this certainly will: Obama has sided squarely with the RIAA/MPAA lobby, and backs ACTA. No copyright and/or patent reform for you, American citizens!
Obama made the remarks in a speech at the Export-Import Bank's annual conference in Washington.

"We're going to aggressively protect our intellectual property," Obama said in his speech, "Our single greatest asset is the innovation and the ingenuity and creativity of the American people <...> It is essential to our prosperity and it will only become more so in this century. But it's only a competitive advantage if our companies know that someone else can't just steal that idea and duplicate it with cheaper inputs and labor."

...

It seems that the RIAA, MPAA, and similar organisations have been successful in lobbying the US administration into supporting their cause. This means that the US government will continue to (financially) support an industry that is simply outdated, and has failed to adapt to the changing market - which seems remarkably anti-capitalistic and anti-free market, even for a Democratic president.

...

Sadly, all this also means that American consumers will continue to see their rights eroded, as corporations and content providers further gain influence within the government. This means that devices you buy will not actually be yours, that uploading a video of your daughter dancing to a song on the radio could cost you thousands of dollars in damages, and it will also most likely mean that three strikes laws will be enacted.



Good Times.




Computer & Communications Industry Association chief Ed Black tapped his inner prophet to roll out a barnburner of a response to the White House. Over the top? Decide for yourself:

"Some in Congress and the White House have apparently decided that no price is too high to pay to kowtow to Big Content’s every desire, including curtailing civil liberties by expanding wiretapping of electronic communications. Even the controversial USA PATRIOT Act exists because of extraordinary national security circumstances involving an attack on our country. Does Hollywood deserve its own PATRIOT Act?

This new punitive IP agenda follows just weeks after dictators spying on citizens online was the lead story in every major newspaper. Perhaps the obvious hypocrisy caused someone to decide to wait to announce the US goal of expanding our government’s powers to spy online. A screenwriter could almost market this plot as a comedy—if it weren’t so serious.

Maybe we should be grateful our government only wants to make streaming a song or movie a felony with potential prison time as punishment. What’s next, corporal punishment?

This is the latest indication of the extent to which the content industry has infiltrated this administration and managed to turn the Administration’s IP agenda into a policy which protects old business models at the expense of consumers, citizens’ rights, and our most innovative job creating industries."

http://jasonjeffrey.wordpress.com/category/riaa/

sellouts



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-PCTz8LuAw

Kiss frontman Gene Simmons: many have forgotten that music is a business and that artists have a “fiduciary duty” to “maximise any potential and minimise any exposure.” To him this means protecting your brand and “be litigious, sue anybody – take their homes, their cars, don’t let anybody cross that line.”

“The music industry was asleep at the wheel and didn’t have the balls to go and sue every fresh-faced, freckle-faced college kid who downloaded a clip,” and that because of that “we’re left with hundreds of people without jobs.”