Its amusing / ironic / puzzling whenever someone who aggressively tries to protects its own copyright, trade-marks, or other intellectual property finds itself on the opposite side.   In other words, they engage in the very behaviour that they find offensive in others.

The latest example is Vanoc (aka the Vancouver Olympics).  Seems that there are a couple of instances where Vanoc has been accused of trying to acquire rights from others that crossed the line.

See the details on Excess Copyright or Techdirt.

For the London Free Press – December 21, 2009

Read this on Canoe

This Christmas, give a gift to the planet and use less paper.

Lawyers may be one of the worst offenders when it comes to printing things instead of reading and saving them electronically.

For the most part, we have the technology — it’s primarily a habit and mindset issue. After all, the electronic documents we create on our computers are actually the originals. Paper versions are really just copies.

Here are a few things we all can do:

- Don’t print anything unless it’s really necessary. I’ll say more on this later.

- Ask those who send us documents to send them electronically.

- Stop using fax machines. Indeed, get rid of your fax phone line, recycle your fax machines, and disable the function on multi-purpose machines. Anything that can be faxed can be e-mailed as an attachment. If you absolutely must receive faxes, set up a computer to receive them, so they don’t have to be printed.

- Stop doing paper reports. Lawyers, for example, often send clients binders full of documents after closing a deal. It’s important for clients to have those, but except for signed original documents, there is no reason why most of that can’t be done electronically.

Printing hard copies can be expensive, time-consuming and wasteful. So before you hit print, ask yourself why you’re printing:

- If it is to read the document, read it on the screen.

- If it is to save it, save it electronically. Think of hard drives as a virtual filing cabinet. Electronic storage space, storage and search utilities, and backup solutions are all inexpensive. It takes far less space than paper, and has the added advantage of making it easier to find things later.

- If it is to share it with someone else, e-mail them the document or a link to it.

- If it is a letter to mail, print it as a pdf and e-mail it instead. That preserves the look and formality of a letter for things you don’t want to just send as an e-mail.

- If it is necessary to print something for someone else to have, think about how you can summarize the important parts quickly, and provide web addresses for parts that are common or for background material.

All these things can be done without investing in new technology. Sometimes, such as when reviewing or commenting on a document, writing on it in pen is quicker and more efficient than using electronic comment tools. But even that can be reduced. Tools are available that let you write on an electronic document just as you would on a paper version.

If you use a laptop, consider a tablet version. Tablets have been around for years, but have not sold well, in part due to the premium price. Windows 7 includes good touch-screen and tablet features. And some predict that 2010 will be the year of the tablet computer.

If you use a desktop, USB-connected tablets to write on have become affordable.

That’s the title of my Slaw post for today.  It reads as follows:

I don’t get why people feel the need to know everything immediately.   This has puzzled me for years.  Many years ago, TV stations bragged about breaking news on their station first.   When CNN came along, it was a big deal that we saw it on CNN first.  Now we see tweets commenting on how events are tweeted before they hit CNN.

What we saw on CNN was in essence reporters’ real time collection of information – before they had a chance to understand or edit.  Sometimes literally hours of raw feed that could be summarized in a couple of minutes.  On twitter news takes the form of small snippets of info, often passed along like gossip, with more emphasis on speed than accuracy.

Frankly, unless its something I need to know right now to act upon (the intersection of 1st and Vine is blocked due to a water main break – take an alternate route) I’d rather wait for a brief, accurate summary and some reflective comment, rather than take the time to wade through the firehose of raw data and speculation.

For the London Free Press – December 14, 2009

Read this on Canoe

COMPUTERS: In a hardware-software legal war, the company reaches a partial, $2.7-million US settlement with knock-off computer maker

Apple’s business model is to sell hardware with software on it. It does not intend for its operating systems to be installed on hardware it doesn’t make and its software licences expressly forbid it.

But that hasn’t stopped people installing Apple operating systems on non-Apple machines, dubbed Hackintoshes, from “hacker” and “Macintosh.” The main attractions are lower prices and wider selection of hardware.

Several companies have created bargain-priced, knock-off computers able to run Apple software. The most widely used is the OSx86 project, which runs the Mac OS X operating system on non-Apple computers with x86 architecture-compatible processors.

Apple software licences strictly prohibit use on computers that aren’t “Apple-labelled.” But companies such as Psystar and PearC have released products that let consumers use Apple software on non-Apple computers at considerable savings.

Apple has fought back in several ways.

The latest Apple OS version 10.6.2 added code to prevent it being used with the Atom chip used in most netbooks, a common Hackintosh platform. But within a week, a Russian-based hacker had circumvented the code.

Apple also has taken its Hackintosh battle to the courts.

On July 3, 2008, Apple filed suit against Psystar Corp. for violating the licence and breaching Apple’s copyright-protected technologies.

The end-user agreement for Mac OS X reads: “You agree not to install, use or run the Apple software on any non-Apple-labelled computer, or to enable others to do so.”

Psystar began selling PCs hacked to run Apple software — and priced more than $2,000 lower than an Apple notebook — in April 2008. After the suit was filed, Psystar kept selling systems and even created new ones.

Last month, the U.S. District Court judge trying the case found Psystar had violated Apple’s copyrights and anti-circumvention provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

Two weeks later, Apple filed a motion against Psystar seeking statutory damages of between $500,000 and $4.5 million US, plus attorney’s fees and costs. Apple also wants Psystar permanently enjoined from continuing a business causing “irreparable harm” to Apple’s business, brand and goodwill.

In the most recent development, a partial settlement has been reached. Psystar agreed to stop selling Hackintoshes and pay Apple about $2.7 million in damages in return for dismissal of some Apple claims. But Apple can’t collect until appeals are complete, which may take years.

Though this is a success for Apple, it remains to be seen what effect it will have on the Hackintosh phenomenon as a whole.

3 completely different privacy articles taken together illustrate how privacy is really about informed choices.

First, a Techdirt post by Mike Masnick about a musician from Saskatoon that sought out the Google street view car to get his photo taken to promote his band.   The point is that he wanted the publicity and sought it out.   It was his choice.  That’s unlike the pervasive surveillance culture such as in the UK where one does not have a choice.

Second, Boing Boing’s Cory Doctorow refers to Google CEO Eric Schmidt’s comment that  privacy isn’t important, and Bruce Schneier’s brilliant response to that as follows:

Google CEO Eric Schmidt says privacy isn’t important, and if you want to keep something private, “maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place” (in other words, “innocent people have nothing to hide.”)

Bruce Schneier calls bullshit with eloquence: “For if we are observed in all matters, we are constantly under threat of correction, judgment, criticism, even plagiarism of our own uniqueness. We become children, fettered under watchful eyes, constantly fearful that — either now or in the uncertain future — patterns we leave behind will be brought back to implicate us, by whatever authority has now become focused upon our once-private and innocent acts. We lose our individuality, because everything we do is observable and recordable.”

(There is a T-shirt or poster waiting for a condensed version of that)

Third, the  EFF posts about the good, the bad, and the ugly about Facebook’s new privacy changes.  I know its a pain to have to take the time to deal with it – but we all need to go to our Facebook accounts and change whatever we need to.   Keep in mind that its our choice how much we want others to see, both by our privacy settings, and what we choose to post in the first place.

That’s the title of my Slaw post for today.   It reads as follows:

2010 will see some interesting and useful developments in the tablet / e-book reader space.  The concept of a thin, light, portable device with a decent screen size (i.e. a letter sized piece of paper) and long battery life to read things on – such as newspapers, magazines, books, the web – is quite compelling.

There are a few products on the market already – such as the Kindle.  In my view the tipping point to widespread adoption will be colour screens that can render glossy magazine resolution, the ability to get web content via wifi rather than just over a cell network, and a low enough price point.  At least that’s what I’m holding out for.

To some extent this is vapourware -  but there is a lot of activity and potential competition in this space.  Consider:

Several Slaw articles have mentioned the Kindle and e-book readers like the Sony reader.

Another entrant announced within the last few days is the  JooJoo, formerly known as the  Crunchpad.  This one is rather controversial.   The  story behind it (feuding developers) is as interesting as the product itself.

Of course there is the much anticipated Apple tablet - which many predict will appear some time in 2010.

Microsoft has shown a concept called the Courier.

And top that off with a publishers consortium that is working on digital publishing standards.

Yesterday was the official reveal of Spaceship Two, the first commercial venture to take paying customers to space.   It will only give a few minutes of suborbital space time – but over 300 people have already put down deposits for the $200,000 flight.

Given the combination of a Burt Rutan design, and Richard Branson ownership, the nightime reveal lead to some rather dramatic photos.

Take a look on Boing Boing and CNet.

For the London Free Press – December 7, 2009

Read this on Canoe

NETWORKING: Companies should be proactive in securing their Twitter handle

Twitter has emerged as a powerful and inexpensive advertising alternative for many companies.

Some businesses have found to their chagrin, however, that others have already taken their name for a Twitter or other social networking account.

There are a plethora of sites on the web, such as flickr and YouTube, that allow users to obtain accounts and publish various things.

Companies that use these tools include Ford, for example, which has more than 19,000 Twitter followers. This free method of advertising can prove extremely effective. When users opt in to receive these messages, advertisers have a captive audience.

Coca-Cola has experienced similar success. It has accumulated almost 12,000 Twitter followers who receive messages on a wide variety of Coke-related topics ranging from efforts to increase recycling to a link to a Coca-Cola themed wedding. This advertising increases brand awareness and loyalty.

A recent article in Advertising Age magazine pointed out that some companies have not been as proactive in securing their Twitter domain name.

For instance, Wendy’s, the fast-food restaurant chain, had their name registered by another user. They were forced to use “TheRealWendys” as their Twitter name. This makes it more difficult for users to find their Twitter page and has resulted in their having fewer than 1,000 followers.

Another concern for businesses is imposters impersonating the company and sending out undesirable messages.

Hyundai, the Korean based car-maker, fell victim to a “Twitter squatter” recently who posted links to woman posed in a provocative manner under the Hyundai handle.

This can cause considerable embarrassment for a company being linked to messages it is not responsible for.

Twitter executives have recognized this problem and are taking steps to remedy the problem.

Twitter has, for example, awarded “verified status” to certain high-profile users, such as celebrities and athletes.

So when a user logs on to Ashton Kutcher’s Twitter account, they find a verified account check mark that indicates the user is who they purport to be.

This confirmation is possible through a conversation with the individual confirming their identity and that they in fact are the owner of the Twitter account.

Businesses have been pushing for a similar system to be implemented for corporations.

As the popularity of Twitter continues to increase, brands will feel increasing pressure to have a Twitter presence. The message for businesses is to try to obtain their names as user names in as many online social media or publishing sites as they can that might possibly be relevant to their business — or that someone else might obtain their name just to wreak havoc.

For companies that have failed to secure their Twitter handle, it may be too late. Many names have already been registered and could be occupied by squatters.

The challenge is to recognize what may be the next popular social networking site and to register that name as quickly as possible.

To make it easier, websites are available to search hundreds of sites in different categories all at once, such as knowem (www.knowem.com ) and namechk ( www.namechk.com).