Happy 40th Birthday to the Cell Phone

Posted on by
Reply

Today’s Slaw post

Readwrite mobile says that the very first cell phone call was placed 40 years ago today by Motorola Division Manager Martin Cooper.  It was not until many years later – March 6, 1983, that it went on sale.

phone

We now take our cellphones for granted – but what a difference a few decades make.  The original Motorola DynaTAC sold for $3,995 ($9209 in today’s dollars) was 10 inches high (plus the antenna), and weighed 1 3/4 pounds.  And of course it could only make phone calls.  The smartphones we throw in our pockets today have more computing power than a multi-million dollar, room filling supercomputer did at that time.

http://harrisonpensa.com/lawyers/david-canton

5 traps for lawmakers

Posted on by
Reply

Today’s Slaw post.

I heard Josh Linkner speak yesterday at a TechAlliance event.  He talked about 5 growth traps for business, and as I reflect upon his message, his 5 traps are things that lawmakers fall into constantly.

  1. The over correct.  Going overboard to correct problems.
  2. The money trap. Throwing money at problems rather than creativity.
  3. Religion over science.  Vision is important, but you can’t ignore the data.
  4. Complexity.  Using your own technical language rather than making it simple .
  5. Gorging.  Trying to do too many things and not knowing when to say no.

http://harrisonpensa.com/lawyers/david-canton

3-D printers disruptive tech

Posted on by
Reply

For the London Free Press – March 25, 2013 – read this at lfpress.com

MakerBot_Replicator2X_low_33-D printing is moving from the realm of engineers and architects into the hands of hobbyists. It’s only a matter of time before we have 3-D printers at home, or have access to one the same way we now get photographs printed.

Some challenging legal issues will come along with this.

Unlike traditional manufacturing that takes material and reduces it into a useful shape, 3-D printing builds objects by stacking thin layers of a particular building material. That material can be plastic, metal or even food.

3-D printing has been used to create architectural models, prototypes, machine parts, art, bicycles, guns, children’s toys and shoes. 3-D printers can even print devices with moving parts, such as gears.

The possibilities seem endless. When a part on something breaks, for example, either you or a repair technician might be able to simply print a new part.

3-D printing technology has been around since the mid-1980s. As with many new technologies, it started off being prohibitively expensive. 3-D printers are now becoming increasingly available in the consumer market at steadily decreasing prices. An example is the Replicator2X printer by Makerbot. More detail is on the makerbot.com website, and their thingiverse.com site that has examples of printed objects.

The office supply chain Staples recently announced it will provide 3-D printing services at its stores in Belgium and the Netherlands.

The widespread availability of 3-D printing will result in new and more creative ways of utilizing the technology.

Scanning technology allows exact replicas of existing objects to be copied. Because of that, intellectual property law will likely be one of the main battlegrounds as 3-D printing continues to develop. Making copies of existing objects can lead to violations of patents, copyright, registered industrial designs and trademarks.

Copying objects has always had those issues, but the widespread ability to print objects brings them to the forefront — much like the widespread ability to copy photographs, music and movies has done since the dawn of digital and the internet. It also brings those issues to the average person, not just to manufacturers, much like the ability to copy photographs, music and movies has done.

Criminal laws may come into play, such as a possibly increased ability to make counterfeit goods. Weapons may also be created by simply obtaining a design specification for a particular weapon and uploading it into the printer. These kinds of uses will no doubt lead to suggestions that there should be laws regulating what can be printed.

3-D printing will inevitably lead to legal actions over responsibility for damages or injury caused by failed printed parts. For example, if sports equipment or building materials created by a 3-D printer contain defects that result in injury, is the person who printed it responsible, or the person who designed it?

3-D printers will be a disruptive technology, and as with any disruptive technology, the law will have to react to the issues that come with it.

http://harrisonpensa.com/lawyers/david-canton

Cloud storage, privacy, and Megaupload

Posted on by
Reply

Today’s Slaw post:

The ongoing Megaupload case is a controversial lightning rod case for issues on cloud storage, privacy and copyright.  Megaupload basically ran a file storage and viewing service.  The US Department of justice shut them down, seized assets, and launched criminal prosecutions alleging that it is an organization dedicated to copyright infringement. 

Ben Schorr mentioned the case on Slaw recently, starting with the comment that “One thing has become clear in the last few months: Hollywood has declared war on the Internet.”  

Wikipedia summarizes the situation well, and points out that:

Techdirt argued that while the founder of Megaupload had a significant history of “flouting the law”, evidence had potentially been taken out of context or misrepresented and could “come back to haunt other online services who are providing perfectly legitimate services”.[81] Eric Goldman, a professor of law at Santa Clara University, described the Megaupload case as “a depressing display of abuse of government authority”. He pointed out that criminal copyright infringement requires that willful infringement has taken place, and that taking Megaupload offline had produced the “deeply unconstitutional effect” of denying legitimate users access to their data.[5]

Concerns include the arbitrary way the site was shut down, leaving the files of legitimate users stranded.  Also the possible over-reaching effect on legitimate cloud storage sites and file sharing.

The fight has come to Canada as well.  US prosecutors asked the Canadian AG to obtain a court order to send mirror imaged copies of 32 servers in Canada to US prosecutors.  The Ontario Superior Court of Justice refused to give the order based on the notion that the request was overly broad, and encouraged counsel to try to agree on the scope of material that would be relevant.

I find it interesting that the same Department of Justice that has been unrelenting and perhaps over reaching in the Megaupload case, is, according the the CIO blog:

giving a qualified endorsement of an update to a 1986 privacy law that leading cloud-service providers, public-interest groups and others argue is woefully out of step with the current methods of sending and storing communications.

In testimony before a House subcommittee on Tuesday, Elana Tyrangiel, acting assistant attorney general at the DoJ’s Office of Legal Policy, affirmed the Obama administration’s support for an overhaul of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) to provide stronger privacy protections for Webmail, documents stored online and other cloud services.

Cloud storage can be a useful tool – but be careful what you put there, use services with a good reputation, and keep duplicates elsewhere.  If your data is sensitive, consider your own encryption so no one else can see the contents.

Google Glass – The Creepy Intrusive Privacy Perspective

Posted on by
Reply

Today’s Slaw post

Google Glass is a cool concept.  The thought of having a real-time augmented reality display brings interesting possibilities.  In addition to possible courtroom use, take a look at 10 Compelling Ways People Plan To Use Google Glass, and 11 Kickass Ways Normal People Will Use Google Glass.   Possibilities include surgery, education, gaming, and navigation.

One of the hurdles to adoption is the practical aspect of whether people will want to wear them.  Especially those who have gone to great length and expense to not to have to wear glasses in the first place.  And when having a conversation when using them, is your interaction with the glasses going to be unsettling to the person you are talking to? How long will it take before people who walk around with them won’t be looked on as being weird?

One aspect to ponder is the creepy intrusive privacy perspective, which is discussed in this article entitled Google Glass: Our Lives Are Not Reality TV which refers to this article entitled The Google Glass feature no one is talking about.   The issue is that the more of these there are around, the more likely each one of us is going to be captured on the video they take whether we like it or not.  We will have no idea when we are being recorded.  And unlike security video which is kept locally for only short periods of time (at least that’s what is supposed to happen), that video could end up anywhere. What happens to all that video, especially if much of it gets stored back in a mothership somewhere?  Who can get access to it? It conjures thoughts of surveillance states and surveillance societies where privacy is eroded even further.

So what do readers think?  Is this issue being overstated?  Is there something we can do about it? Are we headed to a place where we have and are incrementally losing every last bit of privacy?

We’re looking for a better way to do 911

Posted on by
Reply

For the London Free Press – March 11, 2013 – read this at lfpress.com

The CRTC (Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission) has started a consultation on 911 services in Canada, including digital Next Generation 911 (NG911) services.

Digital adds new capabilities but also requires careful thought. The very essence of 911 services is public safety, routinely dealing with life and death situations. So the common commercial refrain of just ship it, it’s good enough, isn’t an option.

This consultation is part of a national approach to gather information from many sources to decide on future directions. Many entities will respond — public safety organizations, first-responder organizations and different levels of government have shown interest. The Canadian Interoperability Technology Interest Group is co-ordinating a response on behalf of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs and Paramedic Chiefs of Canada.

Today, 911 services are strictly voice based. In an emergency, we call 911 and describe the problem to an operator who gathers the necessary information and dispatches the appropriate responders.

The 911 system is designed to know where we’re calling from, which helps speed responses and locate the caller when the caller may be unsure of, or not be able to, describe their location. Knowing the caller’s location has been a challenge in recent years, as that is not as easily done for cellphones or VoIP calls.

One issue being looked at is how NG911 services can address the location issue.

New issues to consider include text-based 911. Should NG911 accept text messaging (other than from the planned hearing impaired service)? More and more people are relying on texting as a communication method. But voice communication can be quicker and clearer, and it helps that 911 operators can sense the tone of the caller.

Should 911 accept photos and video from callers? Having a photo, for instance,of a fire or a car crash might be valuable information for both the operator and first responders.

But how would 911 operators cope with a deluge of photos or videos if many people submit them at once for the same incident? Valuable time could be wasted looking at them all. And consider the liability concerns if out of the images and video submitted there was one that if viewed could have made a difference to somebody’s life, but was not reviewed because of the quantity?

NG911 might be able to solve some existing issues such as pocket dialing. The 911 centres handle far too many accidental 911 calls, which cause a significant workload. For most people, getting a pocket-dialed call where there is no one on the line is a brief annoyance. But a 911 operator can’t just ignore such a call. It could be from someone in an emergency situation who is unable to speak or continue with the call, so each call must be investigated.

In the end, the conversion of 911 to NG911 has the potential to provide better and more efficient 911 service.

The conversion does, however, require careful thought, testing and incremental feature adoption to ensure that it remains reliable.

www.harrisonpensa.com/lawyers/david-canton

Social Media & Public Opinion

Posted on by
Reply

Today’s Slaw post:

Social media is often touted as an important influencer on public opinion and political causes.  The Pew Research Centre just released an interesting survey called  Twitter Reaction to Events Often at Odds with Overall Public Opinion.

From the report:

At times the Twitter conversation is more liberal than survey responses, while at other times it is more conservative. Often it is the overall negativity that stands out. Much of the difference may have to do with both the narrow sliver of the public represented on Twitter as well as who among that slice chose to take part in any one conversation.

So why is the twitter conversation often inconsistent?  The report cites a number of reasons.

  • Those who get news on twitter – and particularly those who tweet news – are very different demographically from the public
  • The overall reach of twitter is modest – just 13% of adults said they ever use Twitter
  • Twitter users are considerably younger than the general public
  • The twitter audience is broader than the sample of a traditional national survey. People under 18 participate in twitter, while national surveys are limited to adults 18 and older. Similarly, twitter conversations also may include those living anywhere in the world.
  • Twitter users who choose to share their views on events vary with the topics in the news. Those who tweeted about the California same-sex marriage ruling were likely not the same group as those who tweeted about Obama’s inaugural or Romney’s selection of Paul Ryan.

Social media in general, and twitter in particular definitely influence public opinion and decision makers.  But on any given topic it can’t be relied upon as a reflection of public opinion.

http://harrisonpensa.com/lawyers/david-canton/

 

Mobile World Congress under way – phablet anyone?

Posted on by
Reply

Today’s Slaw post:

The wireless industry has a trade show this time each year in Barcelona.  Cellphone manufacturers announce their newest tech at the show. 

Phablets are a big trend.  Several are included in this CNET slideshow of phones that were introduced.  Phablets are smartphones with screens between 5 and 7 inches that are half way between a phone and tablet.  So think of them as either smartphones with huge screens – or small tablets that can make phone calls.

Many people ridicule phablets by saying that you would look stupid holding it up to your ear to make a phone call.  But the reality is that (a) a significant number of smartphone users don’t use them for voice much, and (b) it is easy to use them as a speaker phone or a Bluetooth or wired headset if you want to make a call.  There may indeed be a significant market for phablets for those who don’t want to carry around both a full size tablet and a smartphone.

This year included the announcement of new  operating systems.  With the hold that Apple, Android, Blackberry and Microsoft have on phone OS’s, that may be a tough sell.

 http://harrisonpensa.com/lawyers/david-canton/

Digital shift puts analogue in museums

Posted on by
Reply

For the London Free Press – February 25, 2013 – Read this at lfpress.com

Over the last decade, we have been in the midst of an extraordinary technological revolution: the switch from analogue to digital.

Though this shift has been rapid, we’ve only seen the tip of the iceberg when it comes to technology and devices that are bound to change our lives.

A few short years ago, it was unthinkable that every household would not have a landline telephone. Now, the landline represents one of the final staples of the analogue world. It’s likely that no one under the age of 25 will ever have one.

In the corporate world, desktop phones are facing the same doomed fate as companies try to become more efficient and productive. The use of programs such as Skype for long distance telephony is one example.

Traditional business phone technology suppliers are being replaced in the digital world by companies such as Microsoft, whose Lync product offers integration of traditional phone use with other platforms such as e-mail and document management systems.

The shift from analogue to digital television appears to be almost complete. Big box tube TV’s and rabbit ears have been replaced by sleek and thin HDTVs and PVRs, giving the consumer access to hundreds of channels and endless content on demand.

With the possibilities offered on the Internet, these changes have forced traditional telephone and TV providers to increase their investment from not only controlling the distribution of content but to owning and controlling the content itself. For example, two of Canada’s biggest corporate rivals, Bell and Rogers, did the once unthinkable and became partners in the ownership of the parent company of the Toronto Maple Leafs.

The move to digital has led to possibilities such as unified communications where different communication modes can be consolidated on almost any platform in almost any location using a myriad of different devices.

Consumers are starting to expect that if they purchase certain content it be freely available on all of their devices. For example, movie fans who subscribe to Netflix or hockey fans that subscribe to the NHL’s Gamecentre Live expect to be able to access these services at anytime and anywhere whether it’s on their televisions, computers, tablets, cellphones, or gaming devices (such as PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, Wii).

The Internet of things will mean more devices will talk to us and with each other. And wearable computing is here — such as the Pebble watch, and Google’s project glass.

The Pebble Watch is a ground-breaking device that uses interface of a wristwatch as a control and display device for a smart phone. Google’s Project Glass will integrate smartphone technology into eye wear and operate through voice commands.

The digital revolution is still in its infancy. More interoperability and uses will develop The direction communication and the consumption of information and entertainment will take is clear — but details are not.

www.harrisonpensa.com/lawyers/david-canton