| |
|
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
|
|
Airline Passenger Profiling for Profit. Bruce Schneier discusses an article (subscription required) about a start-up company called Jetera, who plans to combine people[base ']s flight data with their financial & credit data in order to create in-flight personalization as well as pre- and post-flight mailings and other personalized services:
Jetera would start with an airline[base ']s information on individual passengers on board a given flight, drawing the name, address, credit card number and loyalty club status from reservations data. Through a process, for which it seeks a patent, the company would match the passenger[base ']s identification data with the mountains of information about him or her available at one of the mammoth credit bureaus, which maintain separately managed marketing as well as credit information. Jetera would tap into the marketing side, showing consumer demographics, purchases, interests, attitudes and the like.Jetera[base ']s data manipulation would shape the entertainment made available to each passenger during a flight. The passenger who subscribes to a do-it-yourself magazine might be offered a video on woodworking. Catalog purchase records would boost some offerings and downplay others. Sports fans, known through their subscriptions, credit card ticket-buying or booster club memberships, would get [base "]The Natural[per thou] instead of [base "]Pretty Woman.[per thou]
Privacy is (sort of) dealt with at the end of the article:
Jetera sees two legal issues regarding privacy and resolves both in its favor. Nothing Jetera intends to do would violate federal law or airline privacy policies as expressed on their websites. In terms of customer perceptions, Jetera doesn[base ']t intend to abuse anyone[base ']s privacy and will have an [base "]opt-out[per thou] opportunity at the point where passengers make inflight entertainment choices.If an airline wants an opt-out feature at some other point in the process, Jetera will work to provide one, McChesney says. Privacy and customer service will be an issue for each airline, and Jetera will adapt specifically to each.
Unbelievable.
[michaelzimmer.org]
11:34:43 AM 
|
|
DMCA Subpoenas Should Not Be Abused to Silence Speech. The much maligned Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) allows a copyright holders to unmask an Internet user's identity based on a mere allegation of infringement without filing an actual lawsuit or providing the user any due process. DMCA 512(h) is troubling enough when used in cases of actual infringement, but even more troubling when used to stifle critical speech -- and far worse when the content at issue is about the subpoena-seekers, not by them.
Today, EFF announced that it is fighting back against Landmark Education's attempts to abuse DMCA subpoenas to Google Video, YouTube and the Internet Archive to identify people who posted a video documentary critical of the organization.
The French documentary, entitled Voyage Au Pays Des Nouveaux Gourous (Voyage to the Land of the New Gurus), is not copyrighted by Landmark, but it does contain hidden camera footage from inside the Landmark Forum. To the extent that Landmark has any copyright at all at issue, such limited and transformative use of a copyrighted work for purpose of criticism, commentary, and news reporting is self-evidently fair use. While Landmark may believe that the documentary is unfair (as asserted in its letters), the DMCA is not an appropriate way to identify critics.
Landmark's efforts are being challenged on multiple fronts. The Internet Archive is fighting its subpoena, and EFF filed official objections on its behalf. EFF will also file a motion to quash the subpoena issued to Google Video, on behalf of the anonymous speaker who uploaded the video. Google has advised Landmark that it will not produce the requested information pending a ruling on that motion. YouTube sent notification to the user about its subpoena, and is giving the user a reasonable opportunity to move to quash it.
The video is also available on the French video site, Daily Motion. It is unclear whether Landmark has sought identity information from Daily Motion.
You might recall that EFF helped Verizon successfully limit the scope of DMCA 512(h) when the RIAA attempted to attain the identities of P2P file sharing users. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals held that the provision doesn't apply to content residing on individuals' own computers. But 512(h) still does apply to content on an>even more reasons why substantive reform of this provision is necessary.
More information about the Landmark Forum misuse of the DMCA here [EFF: Deep Links]
11:17:57 AM
|
|
Self-Help Group Bullies Net Critics. Landmark Forum Violates Constitution and Federal Law by Trying to Chill Speech
San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is fighting a controversial self-help group's coordinated, illegal campaign to silence Internet critics.
San Francisco-based Landmark Education, known for its Landmark Forum motivational workshops, is trying to suppress an investigative television news piece critical of its methods. Landmark contends that the documentary infringes its copyright in the Forum course, while citing to copyright registration of the Forum leader's manual. Using the alleged copyright violation as a pretext, Landmark subpoenaed three websites hosting the video -- the Internet Archive, Google Video, and YouTube -- seeking the identities of the anonymous uploaders. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) allows a content owner to issue a subpoena for the identity of an alleged infringer without first filing an actual lawsuit.
"This is a classic example of using a bogus copyright claim to squelch free speech," said EFF Staff Attorney Corynne McSherry. "To the extent that the documentary uses any Landmark material, that use is clearly non-infringing. Landmark is simply trying to use the streamlined DMCA subpoena process to obtain the identities of its critics."
Landmark's efforts are being challenged on multiple fronts. The Internet Archive is fighting its subpoena, and EFF filed official objections on its behalf Friday. Later this week, EFF will also file a motion to quash the subpoena issued to Google Video, on behalf of the anonymous speaker who uploaded the video. Google has advised Landmark that it will not produce the requested information pending a ruling on that motion. YouTube sent notification to the user about its subpoena and is giving the user a reasonable opportunity to move to legally nullify, or "quash," it.
"Sharing videos on the web is the latest example of free speech flowering on the Internet," said Staff Attorney Kurt Opsahl. "Unfortunately, it is being met by a simultaneous rise in the use of baseless legal claims as an excuse to pierce anonymity and chill speech. This kind of intimidation has to stop."
For EFF's objection to the Internet Archive subpoena:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/landmark/eff_letter.pdf
For more on Landmark's subpoena campaign:
http://www.eff.org/legal/cases/landmark/
Contacts:
Corynne McSherry
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
corynne@eff.org
Kurt Opsahl
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
kurt@eff.org [EFF: Breaking News]
10:58:06 AM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2006 Paul Hardwick.
Last update: 11/8/06; 12:18:29 AM.
|
|
|
