Home / techdirt.com rss archive / September-07-2007


City Sends Spy Planes Out To Determine If Your Home Is Wasting Energy
It's no secret that not everyone realizes how wasteful they are of energy resources. However, apparently one city in the UK went to rather extreme measures to make that point clear to residents in the city. It hired a spy plane to fly over the city and take heat loss photos across the entire city. The photos were then matched to a city map, displaying which houses were leaking the most heat at the time the spy plane passed over. Eventually, the entire map was put online so everyone could see which buildings were wasting the most energy. What's unclear is whether or not these heat maps convinced anyone to actually do anything (or if it just freaked people out).

40,000 Explanations For Why The Recording Industry Is Wrong About Business Models
Among Apple's new iPod announcements was the inclusion of a 160Gb iPod Classic. As Steve Jobs noted, that means you could carry around 40,000 songs in your pocket. Forty thousand songs. Leave it to Bob Lefsetz to use this fact to point out how wrong the recording industry has been about music business models. He points out that this highlights how people want music -- in fact, they want lots of music -- and they want it conveniently and reasonably priced. That means at much cheaper prices (are you going to carry around $40,000 worth of music purchases in your pocket?) and without DRM. He also highlights how the idiotic focus on getting more per song just as everything else about music and technology gets cheaper is hurting the record labels much more than it helps them. He compares the situation to how expensive it was to use mobile phones a dozen years ago. People were scared to use mobile phones because the charges were ridiculously high. You only used it in special...

Why Is P2P Software The Focus In Latest Identity Theft Arrest?
The press has been buzzing about the fact that a Seattle man was arrested for identity theft earlier this week -- with most of the focus being on the fact that he used P2P file sharing software to find personal info about people which he then used in his identity theft scam to get credit cards under his victims' names, order products and then sell them online at half-price. Clearly, if he's found guilty of doing this, the guy was involved in a pretty massive fraud and deserves to go to jail. However, the P2P angle is an odd one, as one of the charges is "accessing a protected computer without authorization." The thing is, it wasn't without authorization. It was just that the individuals incorrectly configured their own file sharing software to expose private details. Just as some politicians want to blame P2P software for gov't employees misconfiguring it, it seems wrong to blame this guy for accessing documents that people stupidly made available. It sounds like the guy...

Copyright Lobby Continues To Pretend Fair Use Is Not A Right
Recently, we had a post about yet another overreaching copyright statement on a website that made claims to rights that copyright simply does not grant. In the comments, someone responded with the silly line that fair use is not a right, it's just a "defense." This is both wrong and misleading. It is true that fair use is a defense that can be used in court -- but the reason it can be used as a defense is because it's a right provided to people who are making use of copyrighted works without permission. This was explained quite clearly by Adam Wasserman in our comments. Apparently, the whole "fair use isn't a right" line is a part of the copyright lobby's talking points this week, as Patrick Ross (who is paid to promote stronger copyright laws) has written up an entire editorial at News.com stating that fair use is not a right. He's flat out wrong. The entire reason that a fair use defense is allowed is because it is a right. The rest of Ross's argument is typically...

Are Moody's And S&P The New Blodget and Quattrone?
It's been said by many that bond ratings agencies are to the credit bubble what the tech analysts were during the dot com bubble. Whereas guys like Henry Blodget got dinged for touting IPOs for no other purpose than to move stock, many are wondering whether firms like S&P and Moody's inflated debt ratings so as to help move more business. It certainly seems plausible, and now it looks like regulators are going to delve deeper into this question, as they look at whether repeat customers tended to receive better ratings for the securities they were floating. Regardless of what regulators determine, it seems likely that the reputation of these firms will be permanently tarnished. Nevertheless, there would still seem to be a need for third parties to rate debt, so that the market can determine the appropriate interest rate. Of course, it's not like nobody saw this coming. For years now, people have been warning about the oligopoly in bond rating, and the potential for...

Japan Follows France In Thinking That Gov't Bureaucracy Can Beat Google
We've written in the past about the French boondoggle of a plan to create a government-subsidized search engine to compete with Google. Marc Andreessen points out that Japan is the latest country to try to compete with Google using government subsidies. Apparently, a consortium of large Japanese companies will divide up the task of developing a Google-killer, with the whole project overseen by government bureaucrats. Somehow, it's unlikely that Google is worried. One thing that did catch our eye, though, is that as we've discussed before, Japan's overly-restrictive copyright laws seem to be holding back innovation. According to the Financial Times, copyright law doesn't permit companies to hold copies of others' websites on their servers. That makes it awfully hard to build a functional search engine. Perhaps instead of spending money building a government-subsidized search engine, the Japanese government should focus on making its copyright policies more hospitable to high-tech...

Why Is The Justice Department Commenting On Net Neutrality?
There's been a fair amount of chatter over the Justice Department's decision to comment to the FCC about network neutrality, but there's been almost no discussion as to why the Justice Department should be involved at all. It's true that the DOJ covers anti-trust issues, but this isn't about a merger or the potential to create a monopoly. While I'm not in favor of regulating network neutrality, there are a bunch of really questionable statements in the DOJ's filing that simply don't make much sense. Take, for example, the following statement: "Regulators should be careful not to impose regulations that could limit consumer choice and investment in broadband facilities." If the DOJ really feels that way, then shouldn't it have also come out against the FCC's decision to do-away with line sharing rules that actually did allow for competition? Does the DOJ not realize that the market for broadband is already heavily regulated, which is why most consumers here only have one...

Why Does Congress Want Smart, Highly Educated Workers To Stay Out Of The US?
Whenever we write about H1-B visas, we seem to get attacked by people who confuse the fact that there are some companies who abuse the program with the overall benefit of getting smart, highly educated workers working for American companies -- rather than against them. It certainly fits with economist's Bryan Caplan's theory that many people have specific biases that blind them to the bigger picture. All four of those biases actually come into play on this issue. The anti-market bias that doesn't recognize the benefits of competition and assumes that protectionism helps an industry, when it actually hurts. The anti-foreign bias that obviously comes into play when people seem to be against immigrants because they're "not American" even if they help the American economy. The make-work bias that falsely assumes that it's better to have people employed right now than creating an economy that will produce more, better paying jobs in the future. And, finally, the pessimistic...

Another Verizon FiOS Install, Another Home Violated
Last month, Verizon's PR folks went back and forth with a writer over whether or not one of their technicians actually started a fire at a customer's house when installing its FiOS service. The fire department says there was a fire, but Verizon denies that. In any case, the damage the installation caused was certainly significant, even if Verizon so generously paid for repairs. A month later, and look what's happened (again): a Verizon FiOS installer once again clipped an electrical wire, resulting in $2,650 worth of damage and a smoking house. Verizon's PR people are more than welcome to (again) argue about whether or not the smoke means there was fire, but regardless of their definition, these sorts of stories continue to pile up.

Configuring A Product Online? Patented! Lots Of Companies Sued
Would you believe that the concept of allowing people to configure a product online before ordering it has been patented? Indeed, just such a patent is at the center of a new lawsuit filed by some unknown patent hoarding company (amazingly not filed in Marshall, Texas!) against Hyundai, Michelin, Reebok, Puma and Polo Ralph Lauren for daring to offer a feature on their websites that let people configure products before ordering. This was hardly a unique or new idea at the time the patent was filed and it's difficult to see why it ever was issued -- yet here we are. And people still think the patent system doesn't need reform?