Bits & Pieces

Or should I say Fox News on the repeal:

As the New York Times is reporting, there is currently an international effort underway to negotiate a new treaty primarily aimed at protecting intellectual property.  And it is being done in secret.

Behind a veil of secrecy, the United States, the European Union, Japan and other countries are forging ahead with plans to coordinate an international crackdown on illegally copied music, movies, designer bags and other goods that change hands in sidewalk souks and Internet bazaars.

Negotiators, under intense pressure from media companies, luxury brands and other corporate victims of piracy, are scrambling to complete a so-called Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement by the end of the year.

But the process is running into growing criticism from Internet campaigners, lawmakers and even some people involved in it.

Since when is it good policy to negotiate law in secret and primarily for the benefit of private parties rather than sound policy reasons? One of the possible approaches apparently being considered would mandate some sort of regulations that would require ISPs to disconnect customers who content provider claim have engaged in illegal file sharing. Where is the due process? Why isn’t this just a way for a private industry to get law enforcement for its own protection for free?

More from the EFF, Public Knowledge and James Love.

But by now, we know how the Obama administration deals with those who would destroy it: it goes straight for the capillaries.

- Paul Krugman, describing President Obama’s reaction to GOP obstruction and Senate “holds.”

Sarah Palin has frequently criticized President Obama’s use of a teleprompter. At least with a teleprompter nothing is hidden to those in the room.

But check out Sarah Palin’s low-tech iPad:

Oh yes, she is ready to be President.

More details and a closer shot here.

Trust me, after taxes, a million dollars is not a lot of money.

– RNC Chairman Michael Steele, demonstrating the core argument against allowing Federal income taxes to return to higher rates for those earning over $250,000: to wit, those poor people earning over $250,000 are being taxed to death and that is a threat to the average American.  How many tea-baggers earn a million dollars (I mean other than the promoters, politicians and media personalities that encourage the movement)?

Median household income in the US: %52,000. Percentage who earn over $250,000: 2%

YouTube has a site set up that allows viewers to vote on their favorite Superbowl ads. Right now the site features videos about the Superbowl and entertaining.  The actual commercials will be available after they are televised during the game.

On Thursday night, Charlie Rose interviewed the Wall Street Journal/All Things D’s Walt Mossberg, The New York Times’ David Carr and our Tech Crunch’s Michael Arrington.  These are three smart guys, but they are all, to one degree or another, tend to believe in Apple generally.

Disclosure: I own Apple stock. Nothing on this blog should be construed as investment advice.

Glenn Greenwald, writing in Salon, points out that if a government asserts that someone is a “terrorist” that does not mean that the accused in fact is a terrorist. The idea that if a claim of “terrorist” is made means anything can be done to the accused (torture, indefinite imprisonment, deportation, etc.) is what helps support the use of torture among a large number of Americans. This despite the fact that torture is both illegal and immoral. It is particularly galling that many on the right (but including a growing number on the left), who claim to be against government interference in the private sector because of alleged governmental incompetance, seem to be quite willing to believe that no claim of “terrorist” can ever be wrong.

The whole point of the Bush-era controversies was that — away from an actual battlefield and where the Constitution applies (on U.S. soil and/or towards American citizens wherever they are) — the Government should have to demonstrate someone’s guilt before it’s assumed (e.g., they should have to show probable cause to a court and obtain warrants before eavesdropping; they should have to offer evidence that a person engaged in Terrorism before locking them in a cage, etc.).  But to someone who equates unproven government accusations with proof, those processes are entirely unnecessary.  Even in the absence of those processes, they already know that these persons are Terrorists.  How do they know that?  Because the Government said so.  Even when it comes to their fellow citizens, that’s all the “proof” that is needed.

This despite repeated proof to the contrary.

Your Federal government continues to insist that ISPs should be required to keep records of internet usage by their customers for use in criminal investigations. Think of this a the equivalent of having your geographic location tracked and provided to the government at its request. Compare it to requiring your library to track books you check out, or your local video store being required to provide to the government the videos you rent. (I think that Robert Bork might have something to say about that.)

The FBI claims this merely allows them to continue to do traditional investigation. But that is not the case. It is a blatant invasion of privacy.

Washington was immobilized by snow on Friday. This is highly unusual. Normally, Washington is immobilized by senators.

- Gail Collins, criticizing the increasingly glaring use of Senatorial rules to stop action on several fronts. Richard Shelby has just placed a “hold” on all 70 of President Obama’s pending nominees for various positions.

Official White House photo of staff during YouTube interview of the President. (via MacDailyNews)

Click here.  From Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

So Apple has announced that 3G based VOIP is now allowed on the iPhone. A couple of apps are out already, but the Skype app still does not work on 3G. But the company says that will change, real soon now. I can’t wait. It means you can make calls while connected on 3G without using minutes against your AT&T account.

Compare and contrast these two Republican views on ending “don’t ask, don’t tell.” (via Andrew Sullivan)

The reason why I supported the policy to start with is because General Colin Powell, who was then the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is the one that strongly recommended we adopt this policy in the Clinton administration. I have not heard General Powell or any of the other military leaders reverse their position.

- John McCain, yesterday.

In the almost 17 years since the “don’t ask, don’t tell” legislation was passed, attitudes and circumstances have changed. I fully support the new approach presented to the Senate Armed Services Committee this week by Secretary of Defense Gates and Admiral Mullen.

- Colin Powell, today.

(from Hoggworks Studios)