Megafail: Universal Music Gone Rogue

Megaupload uploaded a $3 million+ viral video attempt in the form of a song, The Mega Song, to YouTube. Containing endorsements from many musicians that have contracts with Universal Music Group, they weren’t the happiest of campers.

Macy Gray sings in the video, which features will.i.am, P. Diddy, Kanye West, Kim Kardashian (who comes running whenever someone utters the word “endorsement”), Lil John, The Game, Floyd Mayweather, Chris Brown, Jamie Foxx, Serena Williams and Ciara on camera. (Side note: It’s accepted that Chris Brown can do endorsements now?)

Using YouTube’s content management system, which Universal has access to as copyright holders, they took the video down. They didn’t own any content in it. They just didn’t like it.

The lawsuit

Now Megaupload aren’t the happiest of campers, and are suing Universal, trying to prevent Universal from interfering with the video, which is now back up, after YouTube appears to have asked Universal as to why exactly they took it down.

The New Zealand connection (read: Universal don’t know what their own artists sound like)

Apart from Kim Schmitz/Kim Dotcom, Chief Innovation Officer at Megaupload having a house here in New Zealand where he also has permanent residency (which he celebrated by giving Auckland a $500,000 USD New Year fireworks display), Universal claimed that they took down the video because it contained content from one of their artists, Gin Wigmore.

Wigmore, of course, doesn’t appear in the video at all, in audio or visual form (but was approached to sing in it), so perhaps Universal have forgotten what their artists actually sound like, and mistook Macy Gray for her.

will.i.am

Two takedown notices were received, the second one from will.i.am (well, his lawyer), who appears in the video, saying “When I’ve got to send files across the globe, I use Megaupload”.

Ira Rothken, lawyer for Megaupload, says that written permission in the form of signed Appearance Consent and Release Agreements were provided by everyone in the video, including will.i.am. will.i.am’s signed form, which you can read here (pdf, will.i.am’s real name is William Adams), is pretty convincing.

The Hollywood Reporter has Ken Hertz, will.i.am’s lawyer, says that he “never consented to the ‘Megaupload Mega Song’”. Because he delivered that line to camera for another reason?

Dotcom says that will.i.am assured him that he “had not authorized the submission of any takedown notice on his behalf”.

Universal’s takedown rights “not limited to copyright infringement”

Universal claim that they can takedown the video under an agreement with YouTube–not the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. In a letter (pdf) to YouTube from Kelly Klaus, a Universal lawyer, says that “As you know, UMG’s [takedown] rights in this regard are not limited to copyright infringement, as set forth more completely in the March 31, 2009 Video License Agreement for UGC Video Service Providers, including without limitation in Paragraphs 1(b) and 1(g) thereof.”

In that case the DMCA’s rules and protections around takedown notices wouldn’t apply. If this is true, YouTube isn’t exactly open about it. They claimed that the video had been taken down by a copyright claim in the message displayed when people tried to watch it:

Mega Song block notice on YouTube

Rothken says “What they are basically arguing, they can go ahead and suppress any speech they want without any consequences. That’s not a workable paradigm”.

 

This is, perhaps, a huge tick in the column against the Stop Online Piracy Act, which is currently being debated.

Streisand effect, here we come.

Image credit: TorrentFreak

The War On Youth: “Random” Pak’nSave Bag Searches

Trolley outside shop

Update: Pak’nSave responds.

An open letter.

Dear People of Pak’nSave Riccarton,

On 15 December I shopped at Riccarton Pak’nSave with a group of other young people.

After purchasing items at a self-checkout directly in front of one of your staff (really, she was right beside me), she requested to search my bag. I had not touched the bag during my visit so this request was not based on any actual evidence that I had attempted to steal something, like from a store detective or a camera.

It was extremely obvious that this was not a random search, as she called it. It was because of my age. Three other people from our group were selected for a “random” search. I wonder how many women with handbags were searched that day? I know my friend that came through the self-checkout after us wasn’t.

I declined the request.

I waited for the rest of our group and left the store. I was followed by a store manager who put his arm touching up against me, and tried to stop me from leaving. I declined again, which I have the right to do, no matter your signage, and walked away.

It’s disgusting to treat your paying customers like this.

Do you consider that bags contain personal possessions? That most people wouldn’t decline your request to search, because it makes them look and feel like a criminal? That searching personal possessions could reveal, say, a private medical condition?

I wonder what the purpose of these “random” searches are. Say I did consent to the search, I had items in my bag that I didn’t buy or steal from Pak’nSave, but that you sell. I didn’t have the receipt. What would happen then? Would you accuse me of stealing those items? Would you call the police on me? If not, why are you searching young people? Scare tactics? That isn’t the definition of a reasonable search.

If it is your policy to target young people or people with backpacks (read: young people), it needs to change. It is discriminatory and wrong.

If you weren’t the only supermarket at Westfield Riccarton, I wouldn’t shop with you again.

Kind regards

Matt Taylor

Image credit: bfick

Update: Here’s Aliza Eveleigh on bag searches (click for larger version): The Star Aliza Eveleigh bag search

The Golden Gate Suicide Bridge Documentary

Need help? In New Zealand, you can call Lifeline on 0800 543 354 or Youthline on 0800 37 66 33.

Golden Gate Bridge fog

The Bridge Documentary

“Inspired by a New Yorker story, Jumpers, written by Tad Friend, director Eric Steel decided to train cameras on the Golden Gate Bridge over the course of 2004 to capture the people who attempted to leap off the famed structure, the site of more suicides than anywhere else in the world.

He also tracked down and interviewed the friends, family members, and eyewitnesses to further recreate the events leading up to the incident and to try to explain what led these people to want to kill themselves, especially at this specific site.

The documentary’s primary subjects all struggled with mental illness, including severe depression, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorders, and the documentary struggles to understand their illness while illuminating the anger and hurt of their loved ones.”

Eric Steel and his crew filmed the Golden Gate Bridge, which has become a suicide magnet, but has no suicide barrier, for 365 days during daylight hours. They captured 23 of the 24 suicides that took place that year (when I first watched this I didn’t realize that the 23 suicides shown weren’t reenactments).

Cue ethical dilemma of if you’re filming the bridge, and think someone who is hanging around the bridge is going to jump, should you intervene?

There’s some interesting interviews with family members, including one family who provide charming quotes like:

  • “We didn’t get a mental illness.”
  • “She wanted more and more support, do you think that was because of a medication change?” “No I think it was because she was ill.” “Oh ’cause she wasn’t feeling well.”
  • “I’ve always thought of myself as a stronger person than her.”

If you don’t want to watch the whole documentary, consider just watching Kevin Hines’ interview. He jumped, and in what could have been the last few seconds of his life, realized that he didn’t want to die. He survived.

Watch

Buy

Image credits: Chris Willis and Kevin Cole

CERA Earthquake Recovery Strategy Youth Jam

About a month ago Social Innovation held the CERA Recovery Strategy Youth Jam at Hagley Community College because the submissions received so far on the draft Recovery Strategy were missing young people’s opinions. About 20 of us went over CERA’s Recovery Strategy for Christchurch, and as a group submitted responses to the questions posed by CERA about the strategy (we’re in the organisation spreadsheet under ‘Emerging Leaders Forum’). Excellent food was provided by The Sauce Kitchen.

These are the questions and some of our responses to them, from my notes and the spreadsheet. Longer versions of our answers are in the spreadsheet, typed up by some poor people at CERA from 49 A2 sheets.

On with the show.

Social innovation
Not us.

We’ve highlighted the most important lessons we’ve learnt since the earthquakes began – but are there others?

  • How useful technology was – http://eq.org.nz, Twitter. Use existing technology more effectively. We all have cellphones, can we take advantage of them better? The Civil Defence website was a train wreck, just a big list of updates. Radio – are we meant to listen to a specific station?
  • The definition of “essential services” is different between people. For some people public transport is essential as it is the only way they have to get around.
  • There’s a reliance on volunteers – Student Volunteer Army, the EQ map etc.
  • Neighbourhoods could be trained – have their own Search & Rescue team, they are willing
  • Only a few schools were used as Civil Defence “bases” for shelter etc. – why not use more?
  • Businesses need backup plans, be able to work away from the office. Not just technology backup.
  • Need to be careful what is used as a memorial eg. the opposite of the CTV lift shaft idea
  • Grassroot movements
  • Communities formed and came together after the earthquakes – how do we glue them together so they stick once we have rebuilt?
  • Need to record down what has happened, capture stories – library is doing this, audio recording booth at The Show
  • Emergency kit – being prepared
  • Global connectedness
  • Our ability to adapt to change

Together, do these goals describe the recovered greater Christchurch that you want? Are there other key goals we should seek to achieve?

  • Communication throughout the process
  • High speed broadband
  • Cycleways
  • Heritage buildings
  • Community
  • Sustainably manage resources
  • Environmental need takes into account
  • Better air quality
  • Better ways to get around
  • Easy to commute to city
  • Modern tram system, not heritage – light rail
  • Precincts mean you know where to go, but variety is important
  • Psychological health
  • Attracting new people
  • Living in town
  • Walking
  • Death to malls
  • Democracy, voices heard, CCC open, transparent
  • Educated community, free seminars in first aid
  • Diversity – ages, backgrounds, ethnicity
  • Unique businesses
  • Do not return to the way it was, new ideas, opportunities
  • Building community resilience
  • Disaster planning
  • Engagement between locals and tourists -> interaction, not segregated
  • Positive spontaneous stuff
  • Vibrancy
  • Sense of ownership of public space

Given demands on resources, do you support the priorities identified? [What priorities did we miss?]

  • Enabling people is important. Getting businesses back into their red zone properties
  • Youth involvement
  • Hosting major events
  • Engaged and informed public
  • Schools and education
  • Building standards
  • Innovation precinct
  • Safety and well-being
  • Economy, businesses, creation of jobs
  • Big infrastructure – stadiums
  • Focus on the word affected areas
  • Open spaces near buildings – somewhere to go if we have another quake
  • Getting people sorted, but fixing for the future
  • Safe place for youth day and night
  • Giving opportunity to voice ideas
  • Connecting the city with transport
  • Environment and sustainability
  • Acceleration as a priority is concerning – do it well
  • Decreasing reliance on infrastructure through design
  • Re-design, don’t just re-establish
  • Community
  • Being the garden city
  • Get back the old before we build new things
  • Business connection hub
  • Tourism
  • Youth input and consultation
  • Preserve heritage buildings
  • Significance of people losing their lives
  • Recreation centres/areas in residential red zones

There’s no perfect number of Recovery Plans, so if you think we need other plans tell us what and why?

  • Community – maintaining strength, each neighbourhood is unique and knows its own needs
  • Environmental, sustainability
  • Too much weight towards economic plans
  • Flooding
  • Attracting tourists
  • Emotional recovery
  • Communication. Transparency and accountability for public spending
  • Technology
  • Urban design
  • Energy, power generation, efficiency, localised, smaller scale
  • Community Education

Recovery requires confidence – of insurers, banks, developers, investors, business-owners, residents and visitors. Will the proposed Plans provide sufficient confidence for people to progress recovery?

  • If youth involved, they will build where they want to live
  • Being involved at all stages. Accountability, communication, collaboration -> confidence
  • Investors can be part of something new
  • Insurers – will they insure, pay out, how much for?
  • Community involvement gives confidence, there’s safety in numbers.
  • Red zone people lack of confidence

What will ensure decision makers deliver the recovery we want, as soon as we need it, at a cost we can afford?

  • Accountability, transparency, communication, ongoing consultation
  • Try not to displace communities
  • Use different methods to get input. Engage the city – go to the public, schools, use social media – Facebook

What else needs to be assessed when monitoring the Recovery Strategy? Are there other circumstances in which a review of the Recovery Strategy may be required?

  • If we have another disaster
  • If the community doesn’t feel involved
  • How are the strategies going to be monitored? How can people have their say?
  • Monitor prioritization
  • Adapt communications to suit different demographic.
  • Survey/monitor how well people understand and care about the strategy.
  • Opinions about the design, feel, location of buildings
  • Environmental monitoring
  • Economic monitoring
  • Ability for citizens to review the implementation of strategy. Reports that come from monitoring need to be appropriate to the audience – us
  • Can agencies/established community networks be appropriated to carry out monitoring initiatives within respective demographic eg. Otautahi Youth Council, this in turn invests in future leaders
  • If monitoring is to encourage accountability then monitor transparently
  • Reporting – ticking boxes – doing something that doesn’t actually change anything
  • Make results of monitoring easily accessible and engaging.
  • If there is another significant quake
  • If there is a change in Government there needs to be a review of their perspective on the strategy
  • If monitoring reveals dissatisfaction then time for review and change of direction
  • In the instance of a natural disaster have lessons been learnt and how can we adapt approach
  • Ongoing failure of basic utilities
  • Reluctance of private investors to participate in reconstruction‚
  • Dubious public private partnerships for recovery
  • If people do not reinvest in CBD and public does not rejuvenate city
  • Climate change is not considered
  • Young people’s educational futures

Image credit: PopTech

Clear Webmail Security: A Series Of Unfortunate Events

When you visit this website, like most others, analytics software on this end records some information about you, including what website brought you here.

Following a link from an email isn’t usually a problem. However, when your provider is Clear/TelstraClear’s and you’re using webmail it is. Or was.

The Clear referring URL lets someone access a customer’s emails by simply clicking on the link (until, I assume, the session is logged out, timed out or the customer’s password is changed).

This applies to virtually any site visited through TelstraClear’s webmail.

Authenticity required

What’s in your emails?

This becomes a very big problem when you think about what someone keeps around in their emails. Google wants to encourage its users to archive everything. Perhaps this post contains a very convincing argument as to why you shouldn’t archive everything, and instead make liberal use of the delete button (or move the emails to your computer).

Here’s some examples of information routinely sent to and stored in email accounts that would be very useful to someone with bad intentions:

  • Unencrypted payslips, with IRD and bank account numbers
  • Shipping notifications, with addresses, phone numbers and courier tracking codes
  • Work emails that have made it into a personal email account
  • Information on utilities and addresses supplied from power company e-bills
  • Broadband or other service activation email, containing usernames and passwords to webmail and/or internet access

Response

A power company told me that the information contained in their e-bills isn’t all that private. They said that their customers like the convenience of not having to log in to access their bill and that they consider all feedback on their services.

TelsraClear said that the issue has been fixed, that “this was the first time the issue has been raised” and that they “take security very seriously”.

Understandably TelstraClear were “not too keen” on this post going ahead as “it might encourage attempts to hack the webmail application” which “might still cause service problems for legitimate users if such an attack was to take place”.

However, maybe a real life example will hit home with people, even if they’re not with TelstraClear.

Because how secure is your personal information?

Update: Christchurch City Libraries responds with why they include addresses in the emails they automatically send out.

Image credit: Dev.Arka

Doing The Government’s Work For Them

Internet surveillance, censorship, and avenues of resistance with anonymity with Jacob Appelbaum, Researcher and Hacker, The Tor Project.

Go watch Jacob’s talk here.
Jacob Appelbaum talkPoints I found interesting:

  • The concept of lawful surveillance. We make it compulsory for telecom providers to make their networks buggable. Would there be outrage if a law was passed that every road must have a camera and microphone on it?
  • If you’re not paying for something, you’re the product.
  • Visualize your cellphone as a tracking device that can also make calls, go on the internet and text people. If the government forced you to carry it everywhere, you’d riot in the streets. They don’t need to; you do their work for them. You carry it with you, willingly.

Election Roundup

Colin Craig’s Conservative Party of stock photos

Here’s a selection of where stock photos used in mailer six (pdf) are used elsewhere on the internet. Part one of our stock photo adventure is here.

Conservative Party seniors 1

Conservative Party image

Fidenza Asset Management

Fidenza Asset Management

Conservative Party you want safetyConservative Party image

Wallaby Motorhomes

Wallaby Motorhomes

Conservative Party futureConservative Party image

Life Health Solutions

Quote Alabama Insurance

Medical Center AssociatesMedical Center Associates

The Conservative Party is a bad influence

The ACT Party are using stock images on their Facebook pages. Here’s some from their small business section.

ACT Party 90 day trialACT Party image

Terrace 139 CreativeTerrace 139 Creative

ACT Party economic policiesACT Party image

The Small BusinessThe Small Business

And from the Gen Y section.

ACT Party New ZealanderACT Party image (you’d think they’d actually use a New Zealander)

Indiana Library Federation

Indiana Library Federation

Six reasons not to vote Conservative tomorrow

From their handy ‘How Conservative Are You?’ quiz.

  1. Welfare reform so that there is no pay without work and incentives are toward working and couples staying together. No benefits (“no pay without work”). Concerning that they want to incentivize couples to stay together. Creates a, I assume, financial, incentive to stay in a domestic violence situation. Not everyone wants to have a partner and they shouldn’t be penalized for that.
  2. That the legal drinking age be raised to 21 years of age. War on youth.
  3. That the ban on smacking be removed with a return to parents being able to use reasonable force in correcting their children. The law already has an exception “if the force used is reasonable in the circumstances”. Force shouldn’t be used instead of proper parenting.
  4. Tougher sentences for violent criminals along with a requirement that they work and learn while imprisoned. “Requirement that they work” seems like it would be slavery. Locking people up longer isn’t the magic answer to crime.
  5. In sentencing ‘life’ imprisonment shall actually mean life imprisonment. As above, this isn’t the magic bullet.
  6. That Citizens Initiated referendum should be binding if 67% or more of votes cast favour the proposal. (and apparently we’re having a referendum in 2014 – “That the 2014 election referendum should include the following questions …”) – Referenda are stupid in that questions are often worded in a way that solicits the response desired by the people behind the referendum. Binding referenda could unfairly affect minority groups. Here are some examples of ridiculous referenda we have had:
  • Should the number of professional firefighters employed full time in the New Zealand Fire Service be reduced below the number employed on 1 January 1995? (12.2% yes, 87.8% no – 1995 – 27% turnout)
  • Should there be a reform of our justice system placing greater emphasis on the needs of victims, providing restitution and compensation for them and imposing minimum sentences and hard labour for all serious violent offences? (91.8% yes, 8.2% no – 1999 – 84.8% turnout, held on day of general election) [emphasis mine, did 91% of New Zealanders who voted really support hard labour? Unlikely. Were they voting for better treatment of victims? Probably.]
  • I vote for compulsory military training. I vote against compulsory military training. (77.9% in favour, 22.1% against – 1949 – 63.5% turnout)

If I have crushed your Conservative Party dreams, and/or you’re not sure who to vote for tomorrow, check this website out.

John Key, John Banks, the Black Bag, and the Tea Tapes

Update: Teapot tapes have been released, here’s the recording.

There’s a little black box bag, yeah,
somewhere in the ocean on the table,
holding all the truth about us.
It’s a little black box bag,
a record of emotion,
everything that ever was.

You may deny it, deny it,
but when I find it, find it,
I’m gonna play it aloud to the world.

–Stan Walker

Two Johns and a black bag

 Oopsie

Invite media to a bit of political theater starring you and Other John, public figures, in a public Newmarket café.

Kick media out of said event. But leave some media close enough they could have “leaned over and touched the prime minister on the shoulder”.

Forget what is normally on a table in a café. Ignore the large black thing that could contain anything.

Have a wee chat. Maybe about Don Brash and how he might be rolled after the election.

Find out the black bag actually contained a radio microphone and the conversation was recorded. Oh no.

How to turn a little oopsie into a big oopsie

Call contents of recording “bland”.

Don’t give permission for the “bland” recording to be released.

Call the police on cameraman Bradley Ambrose, who allegedly accidentally recorded the conversation (which generally wouldn’t be illegal). Even though you’ve said before, regarding privacy, that “anyone who is innocent has nothing to fear”. Police get search warrants to search multiple media outlets.

Storm out of press conference after media ask questions about recording.

Compare what happened to the systemic hacking of murder and suicide victims’ phones in order to sell newspapers, ie. The News of the World.

Set the recording free

Chief High Court judge Justice Helen Winkelmann declined to make a judgement on whether the recording was public or private because it would be a “mini-trial” which would interfere with an ongoing police investigation.

So no tea tapes before election day on Saturday, unless some devious media outlet releases the recording even though they could face legal action(oh noes!!!@@).

The Ant and the Grasshopper, Act II (ft. the Wasp)

This is stupid, slightly racist and reads as “welfare recipients are lazy”, but I’ll play along.

Old Version

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.

The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.

Ants eating grasshopper

Modern Version

The ant works hard in the withering heat and the rain all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper admires the ant’s work ethic and would like to be like a hard-working ant, but unemployment is at 6.6% and at least three out of 50 people, including himself, can’t find jobs. If unemployment gets below 5%, the wasps who own the factories start to panic. If the wasps had to compete for employees, instead of the employees competing for jobs, the wasps would have to either raise their prices or keep less of the profits they earn from the labor.

There are more ants than grasshoppers, and ants are usually better qualified, because their parents got them access to better schools and healthcare. Some ants went to private schools and when they got sick outside of business hours, there was no hesitation in taking them to an after-hours surgery. Because their parents valued their education, they were encouraged to work hard at school and many ended up going to university. Because the ants have better qualifications, the grasshoppers are the last to get hired and the first to be fired.

Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving.

One News, 3 News, PRIME News, and Campbell Live show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food.

The country is stunned by the sharp contrast!

How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

Sue Bradford appears on Campbell Live with the grasshopper–and everybody cries. The Green Party stages a demonstration in front of the ant’s house where the news stations film the group singing, “We Shall Overcome”. The Green Party leader Metiria Turei condemns the ant and blames John Key, Rob Muldoon, Roger Douglas, capitalism and global warming for the grasshopper’s plight.

Many people on radio, TV, in newspapers and on the internet complain that grasshoppers are lazy and should just get jobs. Michael Laws says something about sterilizing all of them so they can’t have kids. He also says something about taking a shotgun to Sue Bradford and members of the Green Party.

John Minto exclaims in an interview with TV News that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.

John further explains that the wasps are avoiding taxes by moving their money offshore, exploiting tax loopholes, and ensuring that the bureaucrats appointed to regulate their industries are their friends. He claims that last year the government found $1.7 billion to bail out the well-off shareholders of South Canterbury Finance, but didn’t want to spend $500 million to pay the minimum wage to caregivers staying the night looking after disabled people. He says that a social safety net pays dividends in the form of lower law enforcement and penal system expenses. He is immediately attacked as engaging in “class warfare”.

Finally, to gain votes to win the election, the government drafts the “Economic Equity and Anti-Ant Act”, retroactive to the beginning of the summer. The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the government.

Eventually, the grasshopper does in fact manage to find a job, working in the same factory as the ant now does. In fact, the factory started to hire lots of grasshoppers, since they would work more cheaply than the ants, the low wage still being a huge improvement over the welfare cheque that had previously enabled his “carefree” life.

This had unexpected consequences for the ant. One day, the factory foreman came up to him. “I’m sorry, Mr. Ant,” he said, trying to avoid eye contact. “I’m going to have to let you go.” Not long after losing his job, the ant became ill, he’d contracted cancer through exposure at his job. Because of deregulation and tort reform, the ant had no legal recourse.

Unfortunately, his health insurance had lapsed after he lost his job. While on a waiting list, he was last seen hanging out in an alley, filthy and wearing a “will work for food” sign.

This was eventually the fate of the grasshopper as well. One day the wasp who owned the factory decided that he could make even more money by closing the factory and opening a new one overseas, in a developing country, where the grasshoppers will work for even less money and the government environmental and safety regulations are even less “burdensome”. And the wasp lived happily ever after.

The moral of this story? Not everything is as simple as it seems. Also, that analogies with ants and grasshoppers end up being a bit batshit.

Brought to you with the help of Bushknew.

Also, vote smarter this election.

Image credit: Jun-Dai Bates-Kobashigawa