Partnership for Advanced Computing in Europe

The Partnership for Advanced Computing in Europe (PRACE) has been researching promising petascaling techniques, as well as related work on optimization techniques and the study of software libraries and programming models suitable for petascale computing. The combined work has laid the foundation for the efficient exploitation of the upcoming Tier-0 systems. The applications studied cover a variety of scientific areas and represent European high-performance computing use, with most of them originating from the European scientific community. The applications were ported, evaluated, and scaled on the PRACE supercomputer prototypes. Each application was ported to an average of three prototype systems. Porting to cluster-based systems encountered the fewest problems, while programs that were ported to Cell-based prototypes required a major time investment. PRACE researchers say it was essential to tune the options and parameters used when compiling and running a program, such as the choice of numerical libraries and compiler options. The project developed a tool for studying optimal compiler options and platform-specific recommendations. PRACE researchers also explored the programming models and software libraries required by petascale applications, and completed a survey and analysis of the new upcoming programming models and languages suitable for such programs.

From "PRACE Is Ready for Implementation: Applications Ported"
Partnership for Advanced Computing in Europe (11/16/09)
View Full Article

Nanyang Technological University

Tai Xue-Cheng, a specialist in numerical analysis and computational mathematics at Nanyang Technological University (NTU), has been named the winner of the 8th Feng Kang Prize in Scientific Computing. Tai, a professor in NTU's School of Physical and Mathematical Sciences, has developed mathematical models for restoring images that have been degraded due to wear and tear to their original look. His models have been used for magnetic resonance imaging medical-image processing and other medical and industrial applications as well. "It is a surprise and also an honor for me to receive this prestigious award for computational mathematics," Tai says. "This encourages me to continue to strive for excellence in my research and to seek solutions for challenging scientific problems." The award is dedicated to the memory of Feng Kang, a Chinese pioneer in computational mathematics. The award seeks to bring attention to Chinese mathematicians who have made significant contributions in numerical linear algebra, computer-aided geometric design, and numerical partial differential equations and scientific computing.

From "Assoc Prof Tai Xue-Cheng Wins 8th Feng Kang Prize in Scientific Computing in China"
Nanyang Technological University (11/19/09) Lu, Sunanthar
View Full Article

EurekAlert

Researchers at Taiwan's National Cheng Kung University (NCKU) say that radio tags, combined with mobile communication devices, could provide seamless smart home multimedia services. The researchers, led by NCKU's Yueh-Min Huang, have proposed an intelligent home network system that integrates radio frequency identification (RFID) technology into the Open Service Gateway Initiative (OSGi) to enable people to access a video monitoring and media system throughout their household, or possibly remotely. The system could enable users to remote check the home's security system or turn off lights. When someone is home, the technology could control entertainment systems as a person moves about the house, allowing a song to follow them from room to room. The researchers note that more than 70 manufacturers have joined OSGi, which means the standard could see widespread adoption. "The open architecture system in this paper can provide rapid, automatic, and convenient services, thereby substantially improving the quality of life for users," the researchers say.

From "Building the Smart Home Wirelessly"
EurekAlert (11/19/09)
View Full Article

Technology Review

Researchers at IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center and IBM Research-Zurich have developed a cloud computing security system that makes elements of the cloud act as a kind of virtual bouncer. The new system is based on the theory that as long as the cloud can see a customer's data and leased computational devices, it should check those elements for malicious code. The system enables the cloud to search virtual machines to see what operating systems they are using, whether they are running correctly, and whether they contain malicious code. The IBM research was one of several papers presented at the recent ACM Cloud Computing Security Workshop, the first event to focus on cloud computing security. "In clouds, the barrier to entry is lower, and the thing customers are most concerned about is their information," says IBM's J.R. Rao. "We want to make sure their information is handled in a manner consistent with their expectation of security and privacy." Cloud computing could become particularly dangerous if hackers learn how to place malicious virtual machines on the same physical servers as legitimate users. Hackers could theoretically steal data from cache memory on multicore systems within the server. Microsoft has proposed a system that would assign hierarchies within cache memory, which would serve as a partition to protect against this kind of attack.

From "Self-Policing Cloud Computing"
Technology Review (11/20/09) Talbot, David
View Full Article

University of Southampton (ECS)

The University of Southampton's new supercomputer was ranked 74th on the Top500 supercomputer list and is the fastest university-owned supercomputer in England. It also is the fastest Microsoft Windows-powered computer in Europe. "We are interested in making this advanced capability available to every researcher from their desktop, without the need for specialist IT skills," says professor Simon Cox, the director of the Microsoft Institute for High Performance Computing at Southampton. "Using the familiar Windows desktop environment, they are able to carry out extremely large calculations that were previously inaccessible, due to the complexity of more traditional [high-performance computing (HPC)] systems." Southampton's Oz Parchment says the objective of using Windows as the operating system is to make supercomputing available to everyone on campus, which requires making it easier to use. "We look forward to bringing even more new research domains into the world of HPC to solve problems that they have previously been unable to tackle," Parchment says. "The system is helping existing users focus more on their research, without having to worry about the underlying IT."

From "Southampton's World-Class Supercomputer Opens Windows"
University of Southampton (ECS) (11/18/09)
View Full Article

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and other research partners are building DataONE, a new network that will be able to store massive amounts of information. DataONE, backed by $20 million in funding from the National Science Foundation's DataNet program, is uniting universities and government agencies in an effort to meet the growing demand for organizing and providing large amounts of highly diverse and interrelated but often incompatible scientific data, says ORNL's Robert Cook. "The network will drive advanced research and data acquisition, storage, mining, integration, and visualization for citizen scientists, researchers, and decision makers," Cook says. DataONE is led by the University of New Mexico, and includes partners from across the United States, Europe, South America, Africa, Asia, and Australia. Cook says DataONE will give scientists from numerous disciplines a way to collaborate on extremely important environmental scientific challenges. "Scientists have collected an enormous amount of environmental data useful in climate change research--rainfall, temperature, forest and agricultural properties, bird species and their migration patterns," he says. "The challenge is to discover those data sets, understand how they were collected, and use them to address the important climate change questions for science and society."

From "ORNL, Partners Helping Scientists Deal With Data Deluge"
Oak Ridge National Laboratory (11/18/09) Walli, Ron
View Full Article

ICT Results

European Sensors Anywhere (SANY) project researchers have developed a system for accessing and reusing environmental data from a variety of sources. The system enables the free exchange and use of environmental monitoring data regardless of its source. Numerous sensors around the world, and even in space, observe and report the condition of land, atmosphere, and oceans for a variety of purposes. The researchers say the creation of a single system to provide access to this data could assist in important decisions, such as how to adapt better to climate change. SANY uses a service-oriented architecture that enables applications to be built from modular components accessed over the Internet. For example, one service may obtain data while another plots a map, and another could process the data in a specific way. "The SANY Sensor Service Architecture allows everybody who makes environmental observations to advertise them over standardized service interfaces," says SANY coordinator Denis Havik. "Anybody who needs environmental data can go and search for it--or look in a catalog--and retrieve it using standardized methods." The SANY system converts all data, regardless of its source or format, into a standard format established by the Open Geospatial Consortium, and can work with both raw and processed sensor data. The researchers have been running pilot programs to demonstrate the potential of the SANY approach, including an air quality program to demonstrate the feasibility of seamless presentation of data from independent monitoring networks.

From "Open Shop for Environmental Data "
ICT Results (11/16/09)
View Full Article

University of Auckland (NZ)

Professor Peter Hunter, director of the University of Auckland's Bioengineering Institute, has been awarded the Rutherford Medal, New Zealand's highest science honor. Hunter was chosen due to his leading role in the Physiome Project, a major international effort to build sophisticated computer models of all human organs. Hunter started working on the Physiome Project in 1996, following many years of work in developing the world's first anatomically based computer model of the human heart, which included developing new ways of modeling the structure and function of heart tissue. "The Physiome Project started off by looking at the heart, but it soon spread to the lungs, then the musculoskeletal system, and now all 12 organs in the human body," Hunter says. "The idea is to create mathematical models that link gene, protein, cell, tissue, organ and the whole body into one cohesive framework that will eventually become a Web resource for diagnosing and treating patients, surgical planning, education, and the design of medical devices." Hunter says the Physiome Project is still in the early stages, but there have already been some exciting applications created by the project, such as heart models used to diagnose cardiac disease. The United States has invested about $100 million in the Physiome Project so far, and the European Commission has invested about $400 million.

From "Distinguished Professor Peter Hunter Wins the Rutherford Medal"
University of Auckland (NZ) (11/19/09)
View Full Article

Network World

Countries that want to disrupt other nations' government, banking, and media resources can simply hire cybercriminals to launch botnet attacks, according to new report by McAfee that interviews 20 cybersecurity experts. McAfee's Dmitri Alperovitch says botnet attacks are hard to trace because of the anonymous nature of how they are requested and paid for. William Crowell, former deputy director of the U.S. National Security Agency, says that "anyone can go to a criminal group and rent a botnet. We've reached a point where you only need money to cause disruption, not know-how, and this is something that needs to be addressed." The July 4th, 2009, cyberattacks launched against South Korea and the United States prompted Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.) to urge the United States to "conduct 'a show of force or strength' against North Korea for its alleged role in the attacks," the report says. Alperovitch says there is no concrete evidence that North Korea was behind the cyberattacks, but points out that it was unusual that the botnet was concentrated entirely in South Korea. Alperovitch also notes that North Korea gets its Internet link from China because North Korea never took ownership of the top-level domains it was assigned by ICANN. Countries that are known to be expanding their cyberwarfare capabilities include the United States, France, Israel, Russia, and China, according to the report. Major cyberconflicts have the potential to hurt businesses and individuals, indicating a need for greater public discussion about such issues.

From "Are Nations Paying Criminals for Botnet Attacks?"
Network World (11/17/09) Messmer, Ellen
View Full Article

Agence France Presse

Delegates at the recent Internet Governance Forum have raised concerns that ICANN is still primarily under U.S. control. The new agreement between ICANN and the U.S. Commerce Department was intended to assuage these concerns by creating global panels to review ICANN's work in key areas. However, some delegates still called for the body to be replaced by an international one. "The U.S. still has a key to the back door" when it comes to Internet administration, said Keisuke Kamimura, a researcher at the Center for Global Communication at the International University of Japan. "Regarding accountability and transparency, they have identified it as an issue to be reviewed, but more needs to be done." Chencqing Huang, head of the Internet Society of China, said ICANN should be replaced. "We want to have an international organization under the framework of the United Nations to replace ICANN," Huang said. Others at the forum said the developing world still lacks adequate representation in ICANN. "We, the people of the developing world, are there," said Fuad Bajwa, a member of the United Nations IGF Multistakeholder Advisory Group and an ICANN member. "From my experience in ICANN, I saw less staff members from my part of the world." Despite these objections, ICANN said that it is a multi-stakeholder body and noted that no country has ever been refused domain registration.

From "Internet Still Under U.S. Grip: Forum Delegates"
Agence France Presse (11/18/09) Zayan, Jailan
View Full Article

ScienceDaily

Researchers at Germany's Karlsruhe Institute of Technology have developed a new visualization tool that will enable users to see what a cloaked object looks like in real life. Designed to handle complex media, such as metamaterial optical cloaks, the software is able to show the visual effects of a cloaking mechanism and its imperfections. The latest issue of the Optical Society's Optics Express features full-color images in which a virtual museum nave is rendered with three walls, a ceiling, and a floor. A large bump appears in the reflecting floor covered by an invisibility device. The carpet cloak in the middle of the room hides the effect of the bump and any object hidden underneath it, as the observers see a flat reflecting floor. However, the observers still see the invisibility cloak due to surface reflections and imperfections. "It's important to visualize how an optical device works," notes the software's developer Jad C. Halimeh.

From "Invisibility Visualized: New Software for Rendering Cloaked Objects"
ScienceDaily (11/13/09)
View Full Article

New Scientist

Daniel White has created an image, the Mandelbulb, that he says is the most accurate three-dimensional (3D) representation to date of the Mandelbrot set, a fractal equation named after Yale University mathematician Benoit Mandelbrot, who coined the term "fractal." Previous attempts at a 3D Mandelbrot image do not display real fractal behavior, White says. "I was trying to see how the original [two-dimensional] Mandelbrot worked and translate that to the third dimension," he says. "You can use complex maths but you can also look at things geometrically." White's approach works due to the properties of the "complex plane," a mathematical landscape in which ordinary numbers run from east to west while imaginary numbers run from south to north. Multiplying numbers on the complex plane is the same as rotating it, while addition is like shifting the plane in a particular direction. Creating the Mandelbrot set requires repeating these geometrical actions for every point in the plane. In 2007, White published a formula for a shape that was close to a 3D Mandelbrot, but still lacked true fractal detail. White then began a collaboration with Paul Nylander, who realized that raising White's formula to a higher power would create the desired effect. White acknowledges that the Mandelbulb is still not quite a "real" 3D Mandelbrot, as there are still areas without enough detail. "If the real thing does exist--and I'm not saying 100 percent that it does--one would expect even more variety than we are currently seeing," he says.

From "The Mandelbulb: First 'True' 3D Image of Famous Fractal "
New Scientist (11/18/09) Aron, Jacob
View Full Article

National Institute of Standards and Technology

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) physicists have demonstrated the first "universal" programmable quantum information processor capable of running any program allowed by quantum mechanics that uses two quantum bits (qubits) of information. The processor could be used in a future quantum computer and represents the first time any research group has advanced beyond demonstrating individual tasks on a quantum processor. The NIST researchers analyzed the quantum processor using methods common in traditional computer science by creating a diagram of the processing circuit and mathematically determining the 15 different starting values and sequences of processing operations required to run a given program. "This is the first time anyone has demonstrated a programmable quantum processor for more than one qubit," says NIST postdoctoral researcher David Hanneke. "It's a step toward the big goal of doing calculations with lots and lots of qubits." NIST researchers performed 160 different processing routines on two qubits, which Hanneke says is a large and diverse enough sample to fairly represent two-qubit programs.

From "NIST Demonstrates ‘Universal’ Programmable Quantum Processor for Quantum Computers"
National Institute of Standards and Technology (11/16/09) Ost, Laura
View Full Article

A number of movie studios, record labels, and other copyright-holding companies (and their related trade associations) have also written a pro-ACTA letter to Congress, which I first saw posted on Ben Sheffner’s blog. Minus the bizarre “distraction” claim, it follows the same basic pattern—that ACTA will benefit IP businesses and do nothing harmful.

The evidence for this? Still absent. Instead, the letter reiterates that changes in technology require online copyright enforcement, and thus a section of ACTA covering the Internet.

This probably shouldn’t require repeating, but I’ll say it again. A solution has to be tailored to solve the problem. Is ACTA properly tailored to solve copyright infringement? No one can tell.

read more

If you haven’t been to www.cdt.org lately, you’ve been missing a lot, as we’ve launched a whole new website! Policy Beta is now integrated with all the work we do at the Center for Democracy & Technology in an effort to help you find more information on the subjects that matter to you.

Just head to the new Policy Beta and see for yourself! This version of Policy Beta will no longer be updated and will soon disappear, so for all the latest news and commentary, head on over.

It’s not a surprise that the Motion Picture Association of America is a supporter of the so-called Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, a proposed international copyright and trademark agreement that the public isn’t allowed to see. What is surprising is how willing the MPAA is to dismiss calls for an open and democratic process as a “distraction.”

In a letter addressed yesterday to Senator Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the MPAA endorsed ACTA and then went on to say this:

Outcries on the lack of transparency in the ACTA negotiations are a distraction. They distract from the substance and the ambition of the ACTA

This is a pathetic excuse for logic.

read more

This is the third in a series of posts about the proposed Google Book Search settlement.

Now that we've described the proposed settlement agreement's biggest potential upside for the public—expanded online access to books, particularly out-of-print books—that benefit must be weighed against the potential down-sides. On that score, the settlement's potential impact on competition in the online book market has loomed large. Critics of the settlement have emphasized two principal dangers:

1. The potential for a Google monopoly over orphan and unclaimed books.
2. The potential for monopolistic pricing of the Institutional Subscription Database, particularly for higher education.

The revised Settlement 2.0 made little or no effort to address these concerns, leaving it to Congress or antitrust authorities to fix later.

A Google Monopoly on Orphan & Unclaimed Books?

At the heart of the proposed settlement is a bargain that lets Google (and only Google) leapfrog the problem of "unclaimed works"—books whose copyright owners cannot be found or whose owners can't be bothered to fill out paperwork for a small payment disbursed by the Registry (consider how many "class action" notices you've tossed in the trash unread). Thanks to the magic of the class action process, the settlement solves this problem by resolving the copyright claims of these otherwise unreachable copyright owners and designating all of their works by default as available for "Display Uses" by Google. In other words, so long as no one steps forward to claim these books, Google (and only Google) has a license to make them available in all the ways the settlement allows.

Many who filed objections to the proposed settlement, including the Department of Justice, Microsoft, Amazon.com, the Internet Archive, and Public Knowledge, among others, argued that this could create a de facto Google monopoly over online use of these unclaimed works. And while the revised Settlement 2.0 creates an "Unclaimed Works Fiduciary" (UWF) to act as a guardian on behalf of owners of unclaimed works, neither the UWF nor the Registry has the power to grant a similar license to any other entity that might want to make the same kinds of uses that Google will be entitled to make under the settlement.

Nobody likes this "only-for-Google" aspect of the settlement—in fact, Google has said that it would support orphan works legislation that would empower the Registry to make the same deal (or even a better deal) with others who want to use these unclaimed works. (Where the claimed books are concerned, in contrast, the Registry will likely ask the rightsholders to appoint it to license companies other than Google. But that still leaves all the unclaimed books out.) The settlement agreement even has a provision that makes it clear that the UWF can license others "to the extent permitted by applicable law"—what amounts to an "insert orphan works legislation here" invitation.

But absent some legislative supplement to the revised Settlement 2.0, it still seems that any other company would have to scan these books, get sued, and hope for a class action settlement. That, of course, is the kind of barrier to entry that any monopolist would envy.

This raises a worthy question: if legislation is necessary to fix the competition problem posed by the settlement, then why do we need a class action settlement in the first place? Why not solve what seems like a quintessentially legislative problem with legislation, instead? (As Amazon points out, that's exactly what was done when music publishers brought a class action against the first digital audio tape (DAT) recorders).

Here's where realpolitik enters the equation. Google correctly points out that Congress has been working on orphan works legislation for years, to no avail. And none of the legislative proposals came close to the comprehensive solution embodied in the proposed settlement. So the question boils down to a political one: do you believe that approval of Settlement 2.0 will make orphan works legislation more likely, or less likely? Without a crystal ball, it's hard to know.

Monopoly Pricing of the Institutional Subscription Database?

One of the commercial services that Google is authorized to provide under the proposed settlement is the "Institutional Subscription Database" (aka "ISD"), which will provide "all-you-can-eat" access to the corpus of scanned books. The chief customers for the ISD are likely to be universities (the same folks who are providing Google with the books to be scanned), for whom instant digital access to every word in every book in Google's collection is likely to be very compelling.

The big question is whether, over time, the ISD will become the one database that no university can do without, and the one database with no market substitute (again, because Google will be the only company who can provide a comprehensive corpus without fear of copyright liability, for the reasons explained above). This, of course, is a recipe for monopolistic price gouging, as a group of academic authors led by Prof. Pam Samuelson have pointed out. Over time, universities could face spiraling prices as Google and the Registry conspire to maximize their revenues on the ISD product.

Google and its supporters respond by pointing out that the settlement requires that pricing for the ISD be set with regard to "two objectives: (1) the realization of revenue at market rates for each Book and license on behalf of Rightsholders and (2) the realization of broad access to the Books by the public, including institutions of higher education." The settlement goes on to promise that Google and the BRR "will use the following parameters to determine the price of Institutional Subscriptions: pricing of similar products and services available from third parties, the scope of Books available, the quality of the scan and the features offered as part of the Institutional Subscription."

But Google's own people have reportedly admitted that there might not be any "similar products and services" to the ISD. And the settlement does not give ISD subscribers the right to go to court to enforce these "objectives" and "parameters." Instead, Google has entered into "side agreements" with some of its major library partners (U. of Michigan, U. of Wisconsin—both of which will be receiving subsidies from Google for their ISD fees) that allow only those institutions to challenge pricing, and only under certain circumstances. So what we are left with is a "trust us" from Google, the Registry, and their biggest library partners.

Of course, the chances of this coming to pass are hard to know in advance. As we have pointed out, if many large publishers pull their books out of the ISD database, then perhaps the ISD service won't become indispensable to universities after all. So, ironically, the more successful the ISD proves to be, the more of a danger its pricing mechanism might prove to be for higher education.

Fixing the Competition Problem

Just because the proposed Book Search settlement isn't good for competition doesn't mean it's illegal. There is a robust debate going on (see, e.g., articles by Picker, Elhauge, Fraser, Lemley, and Picker again) about whether the proposed settlement might violate antitrust laws, and the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice will doubtless continue its investigation.

But we shouldn't be satisfied with antitrust law here. This is not just a simple market transaction between commercial entities. Google is building an enormously important public resource, a task it can only undertake with the blessing of a federal court. The public deserves a solution that is not "barely legal," but that instead encourages real, robust competition. As written, without some modification or legislative adjunct, Settlement 2.0 does not do that.

In the UK, the Labour administration's impatience to pass its "Digital Economy" agenda risks throwing balanced, deliberate reform of copyright law utterly out of the window. With no warning or consultation, the draft Digital Economy bill now includes a provision granting the Secretary of State — currently Lord Peter Mandelson — the power to make statutory instruments that can re-write Britain's Copyright, Design and Patents Act with almost no Parliamentary debate.

Once the Digital Economy Bill is passed by Parliament, the Secretary of State could use sweeping powers to effect wide-ranging changes to the copyright system to swiftly meet the needs of one set of interest holders:

The Secretary of State may by order amend Part 1 [of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act] or this Part for the purpose of preventing or reducing the infringement of copyright by means of the internet, if it appears to the Secretary of State appropriate to do so having regard to technological developments that have occurred or are likely to occur.

This would grant those who lobby for more draconian copyright enforcement to bypass the normal democratic process, and fast-track any veto on new Internet technologies that concerns them.

The only way to stop constant ratcheting up of punishments and restrictions on innovation is to ensure that such broad powers are never granted. Call your MP now, and tell him or her that no Secretary of State should be able to rewrite copyright law on a whim.

Suggested message to your MP

All MPs can be contacted via the House of Commons switchboard at:
+44 (0)20 7219 3000

"I'm calling to state my opposition to Lord Mandelson's proposals to change our copyright law to benefit a few industries, and his attempts to make wide-ranging changes through secondary legislation. Please make it clear to the government that in its current form, its Digital Economy bill and any related statutory instruments affecting copyright law will damage the digital economy, not build it." (Add your own comments.)

After your call, let the UK's Open Rights Group know what your MP said here.

For more information:

EFF Deeplinks: A Pirate Finder General for the UK?

Copyright law involves a delicate balance, made all the more fragile by the number of people who now find their every day actions affected by it. Some people benefit, others find ordinary behaviors made illegal. Reforming copyright in the face of new technology is a vital process, but it needs to be performed carefully, with all affected parties considered in the debate.

In the UK, the Labour administration's impatience to pass its "Digital Economy" agenda, risks throwing that balance utterly out the window.

In less than 12 hours' time, the draft Digital Economy Bill will be released. It will apparently include a provision granting the Secretary of State &mdash currently Lord Peter Mandelson &mdash the power to make statutory instruments that can re-write Britain's Copyright, Designs and Patents Act with the minimum of Parliamentary debate,.

Secondary legislation has been used in a sweeping manner before in the UK. After the UK's RIPA surveillance act was passed with promises that it would only be used for serious crime, secondary legislation was subsequently proposed that expanded its snooping powers to dozens of government bodies, including the Post Office and the Food Standards Agency.

Using secondary legislation as part of the Digital Economy Bill is far more dangerous. This bill would grant the Secretary of State sweeping powers to mess with the very fundamentals of the UK copyright system law, ignoring the voices of UK citizens to meet the needs of one set of interest holders:

In a letter to Harriet Harman, the committee leader who would be responsible for granting such powers, Mandelson says he is "writing to seek your urgent agreement" to changes to the 1988 Copyright, Designs and Patents Act "for the purposes of facilitating prevention or reduction of online copyright infringement".

Once the Digital Economy Bill is passed by Parliament, the Secretary of State could effect wide-ranging changes to the copyright system very swiftly. To give an example of why Mandelson feels it necessary to arbitrarily transform the law, in this same letter, he expressed his concern over the recent emergence of "cyberlockers" as a threat to the media industries.

"Cyberlocker" is the entertainment industry's name for services like Amazon's S3, Dropbox, Apple's MobileMe iDisk, Ubuntu One, or YouSendIt that allow you to easily upload, synchronise and share files with friends. Businesses and individuals use these services every day to collaborate with colleagues and pass on files like family photos or large work documents. In Britain, this entire large, useful Net market innovation could be regulated out of existence without even a vote. And if you think that is not likely to happen, consider that the entertainment industry successfully lobbied the US Trade Representative to include an obligation on the South Korean government to target the same sector (“webhard services”) in the US-Korea Free Trade Agreement (see the third side letter).

If Mandelson is specifically seeking the power to capriciously wipe out entire fledgling industries that depend on our current copyright law, imagine what other instruments from the grab-bag of recent rightsholder demands might also be candidates for statutory instrument action. Throttling or blocking P2P? Creating joint investigation teams of police and IP owners? Filtering all Net traffic through music-infringement-filters? All of these are entertainment industry promoted proposals which judges or politicians have previously considered.

Once granted this power for these reasons the meddling would never stop. After all, this is the government that said:

If [illegal filesharing] is a massive problem we could turn on a fast, powerful response... If there is a little problem we can be more proportionate. How draconian we are will be a matter for the secretary of state to decide at the time."

The only way to stop constant ratcheting up of punishments and restrictions on innovation is to ensure that such broad powers are never granted. If you're in the UK, call your MP now and tell him or her that no Secretary of State should be able to rewrite copyright law on a whim.

Patenting podcasting? You've got to be kidding. Yet a company called Volomedia just got the Patent Office to grant them such exclusive rights.

EFF and the law firm of Howrey, LLP aren’t willing to just sit by and watch. This patent could threaten the vibrant community of podcasters and millions of podcast listeners. We want to put a stop to it, but we need your help.

The Volomedia patent covers "a method for providing episodic media." It's a ridiculously broad patent, covering something that many folks have been doing for many years. Worse, it could create a whole new layer of ongoing costs for podcasters and their listeners. Right now, just about anyone can create their own on-demand talk radio program, earning an audience on the strength of their ideas. But more costs and hassle means that podcasting could go the way of mainstream radio -- with only the big guys able to afford an audience. And we'd have a bogus patent to blame.

In order to bust this patent, we are looking for additional "prior art" -- or evidence that the podcasting methods described in the patent were already in use before November 19, 2003. In particular, we're looking for written descriptions of methods that allow a user to download pre-programmed episodic media like audio files or video files from a remote publisher, with the download occurring after the user subscribes to the episodes, and with the user continuing to automatically receive new episodes. You can read the entire prior art request here, and if you have something that could help, please send it to podcasting_priorart@eff.org or fill out the form on our Volomedia page.

EFF's Patent-Busting Project has taken on ten of the worst free-speech and innovation crushing software patents approved by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Eight of the ten have had a bite taken out of them so far, with two busted entirely, one narrowed, four reexams granted by the Patent office, and another one invalidated by the courts. We weren't looking to add to our list of the "worst of the worst," but this one was so bad we had to add it as a special bonus offender, and we can't wait to shoot it down. As Renee DuBord Brown of Howrey said, "Overbroad patents deter innovation. Congress specifically authorized the reexamination process to correct such errors, and we are looking forward to working with EFF on this reexam."