Last week, in responding to claims that it would cost ISPs more to police the internet than the music industry claimed it was losing from “piracy,” BPI boss Geoff Taylor made a few funny statements, including the ridiculous claim that ISPs used piracy as a part of their “obsolete business model” without any support at all. It appears that Geoff can’t stop making stuff up. As he continues to hit back at BT for the cost claims last week, he’s now suggesting that BT broke the law in not stopping file sharing:

“It’s shameful for a company like BT to know that a high percentage of the traffic it carries is illegal material but do nothing,” Taylor told The Mirror. “If you operate a commercial service and know it is being used to break the law, taking steps to ensure it is used legally is a cost of doing business.”

Of course, it’s not quite accurate to say that BT knows a high percentage of its traffic is illegal material. BT doesn’t know that, because it has no real way of knowing exactly what much of the traffic is, or what’s authorized and what’s not. Furthermore, Taylor is flat out wrong in saying that if you operate a service that is used to break the law, you must stop it. BT also runs a phone service, but no one’s saying that it has a responsibility to stop phones from being used in the commission of a crime. BT accurately suggests that if BPI finds evidence of a copyright violation, it should prosecute, but that none of that is BT’s issue. I’m reminded of how Australian ISP iiNet responded to similar charges last year:

They send us a list of IP addresses and say ‘this IP address was involved in a breach on this date’. We look at that say ‘well what do you want us to do with this? We can’t release the person’s details to you on the basis of an allegation and we can’t go and kick the customer off on the basis of an allegation from someone else’. So we say ‘you are alleging the person has broken the law; we’re passing it to the police. Let them deal with it’.

Once again, it appears the entertainment industry thinks everyone else has to bend over to make sure their old business model still works. But that’s not the way the world works.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Continue reading →

With so much effort put towards new laws banning mobile phone use while driving, and installing speed cameras and redlight cameras, you would think that places that were quite aggressive in doing so would see a decrease in the number of auto injuries. After all, isn’t that the point of all of this? The UK has been particularly aggressive in such efforts, but as Jeff Nolan alerts us, a new report out in the UK suggests that (despite the gov’t's earlier claims) injury accidents have actually increased over time. The government has now been forced to admit that the stats it had been pumping out (which showed a decrease) were faulty, and that the real number of accidents may be as much as three times as high as what it had been reporting. This only came about after the British Medical Journal looked at hospital admission records of those injured in car crashes, and saw the numbers went up as these new efforts were put in place in the UK. We’re all for safer driving, but the claims that these measures lead to safer driving aren’t supported by the data.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Continue reading →

We’ve mentioned in the past how silly it is that Apple blocks the Palm Pre and other devices from accessing iTunes. Plenty of people responded, pointing out that Apple really makes its money on the hardware, and thus it makes no sense to allow other hardware products to connect to iTunes. While I agree that Apple makes its money off the hardware, I still disagree that Apple should block others out. In doing so, it makes me and many others less likely to purchase an Apple product, because I don’t want to get trapped into Apple hardware. I’d much rather a more open solution.

Over at Slate, Farhad Manjoo has written up a wonderful explanation of why Apple should not just allow the Palm Pre and others to connect to iTunes, but it should encourage it. The whole thing is worth reading, but here’s a snippet:

I hope the company continues to search for ways to sync with iTunes, because the fight–silly as it seems–is important, and Palm is clearly in the right. Apple may have the USB-IF on its side, and it may also be protected by copyright law. But by blocking non-Apple devices from its music app, Apple is violating a more fundamental principle of computing–that unalike devices should be able to connect to one another freely. The principle underlies everything we take for granted in tech today: It’s why the Internet, your home network, and the PC function at all. And it’s why Palm should keep storming the iTunes fortress.

I am not claiming that Palm has the legal right to hack into Apple’s software, nor am I calling on any authorities to compel Apple to let Palm in; if the cat-and-mouse game turns into a courtroom brawl, it’s very likely that Apple would win the fight. Instead, I’m calling on Apple to stand down. Even better: It should create a legal pathway for Palm and every other company to sync with iTunes. Why? The most obvious reason is that it’s good for iTunes users. Nobody other than Apple benefits from locked-down software. Apple frequently extols the wonders of digital music–the convenience, the flexibility, the environmental friendliness. But how flexible can it be if you’re allowed to sync your tunes only with devices made by a single company?

What’s more, the iTunes block is hypocritical. Like every other tech company, Apple has benefited enormously from the spirit of interconnectedness that pervades the tech industry. The iPod would have fizzled if Microsoft had blocked it from hooking up to Windows PCs. Or look at the iPhone–Apple is proud that it can sync with Outlook, Microsoft Exchange, Gmail, Yahoo, and just about everything else. Indeed, you could argue that Apple, once left for dead on the periphery of the tech industry, managed to come back only because it skillfully marketed Macs as the most promiscuous computers you could buy.

Indeed. While it’s unlikely that Apple will actually do this, it would be a smart move. No one’s buying Apple hardware because it syncs with iTunes. They’re buying it for many other reasons, and Apple can continue to compete on those. Blocking the Pre and other devices from accessing iTunes is petty and unnecessary.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Continue reading →

A recent ruling by the Copyright Board of Canada has changed how much schools had to pay for copying educational materials, such as textbooks, newspapers and magazines. Michael Geist lets us know that collections group Access Copyright, apparently wasted little time before sending bills that reached hundreds of thousands of dollars to various school districts. Apparently, you can’t educate kids unless you pay up.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Continue reading →

SANTA MONICA, Calif.–Yahoo’s Media group is kicking around ideas for expanding its lineup of original video content to include slightly longer scripted and unscripted shows, according to the head of the group.

Frank Nicotero hosts Yahoo's "Prime Time in No Time," a successful short original program that could serve as a launching pad for longer original content shows.

(Credit: Screenshot by Tom Krazit/CNET)

Jimmy Pitaro, vice president of media for Yahoo, said the company is soliciting and reviewing ideas for new shows that are a little longer than the 3- to 5-minute news and entertainment programs that Yahoo currently produces. Sitcom writers need not apply, however; the shows will not stretch to the traditional 22-minute television programming slot and will fit into one of the group’s current properties: news, sports, entertainment, or finance.

Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz has tipped the corporate scales back in favor of the Media group during her first eight months on the job, promising to invest in the group with the savings wrung from cuts in other areas. And if the company’s search deal with Microsoft goes through, the Media group could be the primary area for new investment at the company.

Yahoo has had a bit of a love-hate relationship with original content over the last decade. The much-hyped arrival of former ABC executive Lloyd Braun as head of the Santa Monica-based group never panned out the way it was originally pitched back in 2005. Braun had once hoped to create TV-style programming for the Internet, but it didn’t work then, and it still doesn’t work now.

But instead, Yahoo has built a large audience around short, original easy-to-produce programs that essentially summarize the events of the previous night, such as the daily “Prime Time in No Time,” or preview an upcoming event, such as Sunday morning’s “Fantasy Football Live.” “Prime Time in No Time” counts several million viewers a day, peaking at 7.3 million viewers the day after Kanye West made a lifelong enemy of Taylor Swift at the MTV Video Music Awards.

Yahoo believes there’s room to expand beyond those so-called “video snacks,” but hasn’t nailed down a specific concept just yet. Instead, Pitaro said the company is considering a wide variety of ideas that include scripted and unscripted shows and that will somehow take advantage of the medium, linking out to social-networking sites or encouraging viewer participation.

Expect to see these shows popping up by the first quarter of next year, Pitaro said.

Originally posted at Relevant Results

Continue reading →

At one time or another, most of us have recommended an iPhone/iPod Touch app to friends or family members–usually by tweeting, e-mailing, or Facebooking about it.

Yappler Sync takes that concept to the next level, allowing you to build a custom list of the apps you like and then share that list via the social solution of your choice.

At the same time, Yappler Sync helps you discover more cool apps by perusing the lists built by others.

All you do is install the eponymous utility, which is available for Windows and Mac, then build your list and decide how to share it.

Unfortunately, I discovered a few irksome aspects of the service, starting with this: Yappler builds your list based on every app in your iTunes library, not just those currently in residence on your iPhone. Thus I ended up with some 270 apps to cull–and they weren’t even listed alphabetically.

Meanwhile, it’s not immediately clear how you’re supposed to “discover” other users’ lists (unless they’re shared with you directly). The Yappler site catalogs all the apps in the App Store (84,000 and counting, in case you’re wondering), with a handy advanced-search option that lets you specify criteria like price and rating.

But the only way to find other users and their lists is by perusing the reviews for any given app, then looking for clickable usernames. And once you do find another user’s list, all you really get is a batch of icons. So JoeAppUser has Buzzingo on his iPhone–how does that really enlighten me?

Of course, Yappler Sync is more about the social aspect of app-sharing, hence the ties to Facebook, Twitter, and the like. And it’s nice how it can automatically update your list when you install new apps. Plus, it’s free, so I can complain only so much.

On the other hand, this isn’t much different from posting, say, a list of books you’ve read. Without knowing more about each book and, more importantly, why you liked it, where’s the value?

Originally posted at iPhone Atlas

Continue reading →

If you’re a music lover and you want to share your favorite tracks with your Twitter followers, you’ve come to the right place. Below, you will find several cool apps that allow you to syndicate all your music tastes to your Twitter accounts in just a few simple steps.

But before you get started, it’s important for us all to remember to be responsible Twitter users. While it’s nice to tell friends about our music tastes, we shouldn’t do it all day, every day. That’s a surefire way to guarantee that I (and probably others) stop following you.

With that out of the way, let’s take a look at some of the better Twitter music services.

Tweet your music

Blip.fm Blip.fm provides a Twitter-like service for music lovers.

Blip.fm features an input box to update other users about the many songs you enjoy. To do so, you’ll need to search the site for a track. From there, it’s automatically populated in the box, giving you the option to send a favorite song to friends. When you “blip” the song, it accesses it from Imeem, giving you the ability to listen to it on the site.

To share your content with Twitter, you’ll need to link your Blip.fm account with the microblog. From there, your Blip.fm updates can be syndicated to your Twitter profile, providing users a link to your blip and the option to stream the respective song. It’s a nice service, but I think it’s a little too much work if you only want to share songs on Twitter.

Blip.fm does some unique things with music sharing.

(Credit: Screenshot by Don Reisinger/CNET)

Imeem Imeem also provides a way for users to share their favorite tracks with Twitter friends.

In order to use Imeem, you’ll need to register for the site. It adds time initially, but once you get over that, you can quickly search for songs. You can simply listen to tracks. But if you’re in the sharing mood, click the “tweet this” button. Upon doing so, your Twitter tweet-input box is populated with the name of the song, the artist, and a link to the song’s Imeem page, allowing your followers to listen to the track. Imeem doesn’t automatically update your Twitter stream, so you can modify the tweet as you see fit.

Imeem populates your Twitter page with a tweet.

(Credit: Screenshot by Don Reisinger/CNET)

Serenade Serenade is a simple iPhone app that allows you to share what you’re listening to with friends.

After you fire up the app, it automatically finds the song you’re playing. From there, you can click the “Share with Twitter” option. The service will then update your status with the title of the song followed by an iTunes preview link, giving followers the option to test the song and see if it’s worth buying. The app populates the Twitter field with a basic tweet, but you can modify that as you wish to tailor it to your followers. And since the app is free, it’s worth checking out.

Serenade lets you modify your tweets.

(Credit: Serenade)

Songly Song.ly, found at www.song.ly, is yet another online service that helps you share music via Twitter.

Songly couldn’t be much simpler. Simply input the name of the song you’re listening to into the site’s search box. Songly then searches the Web to find streams of the song you input. When you find the song you want to tweet, you can click the “tweet” button next to the track. The service automatically populates your Twitter profile with the name of the artist, the song, and a link back to Songly so the user can listen to the full track.

I liked Songly. It had every song that I searched for (both new and old). And since it’s free to use, it made it all the more appealing.

Search for songs you like on Song.ly.

(Credit: Screenshot by Don Reisinger/CNET)

TweetMusic TweetMusic is another iPhone app that gives you the option of communicating your favorite songs with your Twitter followers.

TweetMusic automatically determines the songs you’re listening to. From there, you can open the app, choose to tweet your track to the service, and it takes care of the rest. It automatically populates your status-update box with the name of the artist, their song, and a direct link to that song in the iTunes library. To differentiate the app, it also features the option to automatically send a tweet to the artist when you’re listening to one of their songs (presuming, of course, that they are on Twitter). It’s a really nice feature that adds a little more flavor to the app.

TweetMusic, which recently launched, costs 99 cents. But its extras and a great design make it worth the price.

TweetMusic features the option to tweet your favorite artists.

(Credit: Screenshot by Don Reisinger/CNET)

TwittyTunes (Windows link) If you’re looking for a Firefox extension to help you syndicate your favorite tracks to your Twitter profile, TwittyTunes is a great place to start.

TwittyTunes is an extension for FoxyTunes, which is an add-on for Firefox. In other words, you’ll need to download FoxyTunes, a Firefox add-on that allows you to control tracks you’re playing in your browser, before you can use TwittyTunes. Once you do so, I think you’ll like what you find with TwittyTunes.

Unlike so many other tools that automatically send what songs you’re listening to on your computer to Twitter, TwittyTunes gives you the option of picking which songs to send to your followers. Simply click the TwittyTunes option in your status bar, tell your followers what you’re listening to (TwittyTunes automatically populates the Tweet box for you), and you’re all set. TwittyTunes will also let you update your followers with sites you’re visiting or videos you’re watching. It’s a really neat app. Check it out.

TwittyTunes lets you post songs to Twitter.

(Credit: FoxyTunes)

Twt.fm Twt.fm is one of my favorite services in this roundup. Instead of making you do all the work of sharing cool songs with friends, Twt.fm does (almost) everything for you.

When you first get to Twt.fm, you’ll need to authorize the service to access your Twitter account through the social network’s OAuth authorization. From there, you need only to input the name of the artist and the song. Twt.fm then searches around the Web to find the song on services like Imeem and provides a direct link to the stream.

When you send that tweet to your followers, they will see the name of the artist, their song, and a Twt.fm link to the song’s stream. It’s a really neat service. And since it’s free, you should have some fun using it.

Twt.fm lets users listen to songs with you.

(Credit: Screenshot by Don Reisinger/CNET)

My top 3

1. Twt.fm: With such a quick response time and nice design, Twt.fm easily tops the list.

2. TwittyTunes: If you’re a Firefox user, TwittyTunes is for you.

3. Songly: You shouldn’t have any trouble finding songs you care about on Songly.

Related story: 5 apps get you tweeting from the desktop

Continue reading →

I’ve pointed out in the past, that any time you hear a company talk about their business model in terms of “if we only get 1% of that market… we’ll still be huge,” you should run away (and, it’s even more ridiculous when you hear some talk about 10% or 15% of a market). This is top down thinking, but it’s not how businesses work. There’s no guarantee of any percent. Instead, any business needs to focus on bottom up reasoning — explaining why the very first person will buy. Then the second. Then the third, and so on. Taking the top down approach is wishful thinking. It’s making a huge assumption that people will just buy. Taking the bottom up approach is actually building a business. It’s recognizing who the customer is, what they want and how to best get it to them. It’s tempting to do the top down approach, because it looks so tantalizing and easy. But business isn’t easy. It’s hard work.

I’m reminded of this, with a submission from JohnForDummies about a Derek Sivers blog post, discussing a musician friend who took out an ad in a magazine with 1 million subscribers, repeatedly saying:

“If only one percent of the people reading this magazine buy my CD… that’ll be 10,000 copies! And that’s only one percent!”

But, as the musician learned there are numbers much smaller than 1%, as he ended up selling just 4 copies of the CD.

This is, in some ways, similar to the give it away and pray business models that we sometimes see people trying. Giving stuff away for free is a good part of a business model, but it’s not an entire business model by a longshot. Anyone looking to use free as a part of a business model also needs to go further and do the hard part, the bottom up part, where they figure out how they’re going to get anyone (not a percentage, but specific people) to actually find something worth paying for on its own. Because $0 from a million people is still $0. But, reaching 1,000 people with something of value that they want and can’t get any other way… that’s the start of a business model.

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Continue reading →

One of our readers, Jay Anderson, writes in to let us know that he was working on a useful little app to let people put in their zip code, find local movies, and click through to buy tickets. In doing so, he found an undocumented API on a major site that provided all the relevant info, and linked back to MovieShowtimes.com, a site owned by West World Media. Anderson contacted the site to find out if it had some sort of affiliate program since it was reasonable to assume the site would be happy to gain some free traffic. No such luck. Instead, he got back a threatening letter, warning him that he was opening himself up to copyright infringement damages that could be upwards of $600,000 per month.

You need to know it is unlawful and a violation of our copyright and intellectual property rights for you to build a system that obtains our content from any source other than to obtain an expressed license from West World Media for legal usage of our content. Each violation of our Intellectual property rights allows us to collect damages of up to $150,000 per infringement. This would equate in liquid damages of over $600,000 per month if you violate our rights.

Anderson responded, asking the company how factual information (such as movie times) could be covered by copyright, and the company responded:

“It is not our responsibility or duty to explain complex US Intellectual Property rights law, we however enjoy many protections from them. I suggest you hire an IP attorney to explain it to you. From your response, it seems to me you have no intentions of moving forward in a legal manner. We closely monitor any and all usage of our content and if we discover your unlawful usage of it, we will exercise our rights to their fullest extent of the law.”

Now, obviously, the company makes its money by licensing its database of showtimes to certain websites, but that information is factual, and it’s difficult to see how the company could hold a copyright on it (at least in the US, where there’s no real “database right” — elsewhere… perhaps a different story). There’s also no creative element in merely listing showtimes, and it’s hard to see how they would possibly be covered by copyright. If the problem is that the company is upset that its business model can’t handle other people sending it traffic, that’s a business model problem, not a copyright problem. Time to redesign the business model to take a cut of sales, rather than to rely on artificial copyrights. Unfortunately, though, it doesn’t stop a company from making such threats…

Separately, this reminds me of the fact that, just a few months ago, we were talking about how the movie times in newspapers were apparently paid advertisements by the theaters themselves. So, this seems like an odd switch as well: newspapers get paid for movie listings, but websites have to pay for them? How does that work?

Permalink | Comments | Email This Story

Continue reading →