Archive for the ‘Miscellaneous’ Category

American guy should reimburse $ 675,000 damage for free music downloads

Wednesday, August 29th, 2012
Share

First defendant were charged with illegally downloading music in the age of 16.

As reported by BBC News American guy Joel Tenenbaum lost a lawsuit because of illegal downloads of music, and he must pay $ 675,000 compensation to record companies after he was denied a retrial.

Thus, in 2009, a court in Massachusetts found Tenenbaum guilty of illegally downloading and distributing 31 musical composition.

According to the publication, first Tenenbaum accused of illegally downloading music, when he was 16 years old. Then he ordered to pay $ 5,250 for illegally downloading 7 songs. According to the defendant at the time he could pay no more than $ 500, as reported by law enforcement agencies, but his proposal was rejected.

In court, the case was transferred for the first time in 2007. Tenenbaum then filed a counterclaim Abuse government agencies of the federal government.

Tenenbaum refused to cooperate with prosecutors and the trial was scheduled for 2009.As a result of the trial, the court found the defendant guilty of damaging the major record companies in the USA.

Note that in the U.S. the jury can set a fine of not more than $ 150 thousand for each violation of copyright.Thus, the penalty Tenenbaum much lower than the maximum amount that the court could award for granted due download 31 songs.The defendant admitted at the meeting in the spread of almost 800 pieces of music.

Share

What is the Main Reason of Making Things Private and How to Understand The Value of Particular Things? Part 1

Thursday, June 28th, 2012
Share

I have found one old article posted on May 15, 2011. Many people said that it is difficult to read and moreover, to understand the main point of it. I tried to make it easier to read and understand it for people who have no deep understanding of the topic.

Summary of this article

The author of the article tried to describe the problem of “Nothing-To-Hide” Argument

“Nothing-To-Hide” Argument. What is This?

When the government gathers or analyzes personal information, many people say they’re not worried. “I’ve got nothing to hide,” they declare. “Only if you’re doing something wrong should you worry, and then you don’t deserve to keep it private.”

The nothing-to-hide argument pervades discussions about privacy. The data-security expert Bruce Schneier calls it the “most common retort against privacy advocates.” The legal scholar Geoffrey Stone refers to it as an “all-too-common refrain.” In its most compelling form, it is an argument that the privacy interest is generally minimal, thus making the contest with security concerns a foreordained victory for security.

Examples of “Nothing-To-Hide” argument in different countries

The nothing-to-hide argument is everywhere. In Britain, for example, the government has installed millions of public-surveillance cameras in cities and towns, which are watched by officials via closed-circuit television. In a campaign slogan for the program, the government declares: “If you’ve got nothing to hide, you’ve got nothing to fear.” Variations of nothing-to-hide arguments frequently appear in blogs, letters to the editor, television news interviews, and other forums.

One blogger in the United States, in reference to profiling people for national-security purposes, declares: “I don’t mind people wanting to find out things about me, I’ve got nothing to hide! Which is why I support [the government's] efforts to find terrorists by monitoring our phone calls!”

The argument is not of recent vintage. One of the characters in Henry James’s 1888 novel, The Reverberator, muses: “If these people had done bad things they ought to be ashamed of themselves and he couldn’t pity them, and if they hadn’t done them there was no need of making such a rumpus about other people knowing.”

Experiment Showed That People Have Things to Hide

I encountered the nothing-to-hide argument so frequently in news interviews, discussions, and the like that I decided to probe the issue. I asked the readers of my blog, Concurring Opinions, whether there are good responses to the nothing-to-hide argument. I received a torrent of comments:

  • My response is “So do you have curtains?” or “Can I see your credit-card bills for the last year?”
  • So my response to the “If you have nothing to hide … ” argument is simply, “I don’t need to justify my position. You need to justify yours. Come back with a warrant.”
  • I don’t have anything to hide. But I don’t have anything I feel like showing you, either.
  • If you have nothing to hide, then you don’t have a life.
  • Show me yours and I’ll show you mine.
  • It’s not about having anything to hide, it’s about things not being anyone else’s business.
  • Bottom line, Joe Stalin would [have] loved it. Why should anyone have to say more?

On the surface, it seems easy to dismiss the nothing-to-hide argument. Everybody probably has something to hide from somebody. As Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn declared, “Everyone is guilty of something or has something to conceal. All one has to do is look hard enough to find what it is.” Likewise, in Friedrich Durrenmatt’s novella “Traps,” which involves a seemingly innocent man put on trial by a group of retired lawyers in a mock-trial game, the man inquires what his crime shall be. “An altogether minor matter,” replies the prosecutor. “A crime can always be found.”

One can usually think of something that even the most open person would want to hide. As a commenter to my blog post noted, “If you have nothing to hide, then that quite literally means you are willing to let me photograph you naked? And I get full rights to that photograph—so I can show it to your neighbors?” The Canadian privacy expert David Flaherty expresses a similar idea when he argues: “There is no sentient human being in the Western world who has little or no regard for his or her personal privacy; those who would attempt such claims cannot withstand even a few minutes’ questioning about intimate aspects of their lives without capitulating to the intrusiveness of certain subject matters.”

But such responses attack the nothing-to-hide argument only in its most extreme form, which isn’t particularly strong. In a less extreme form, the nothing-to-hide argument refers not to all personal information but only to the type of data the government is likely to collect. Retorts to the nothing-to-hide argument about exposing people’s naked bodies or their deepest secrets are relevant only if the government is likely to gather this kind of information. In many instances, hardly anyone will see the information, and it won’t be disclosed to the public. Thus, some might argue, the privacy interest is minimal, and the security interest in preventing terrorism is much more important. In this less extreme form, the nothing-to-hide argument is a formidable one. However, it stems from certain faulty assumptions about privacy and its value.

How To Understand What Is Really Important?

To evaluate the nothing-to-hide argument, we should begin by looking at how its adherents understand privacy. Nearly every law or policy involving privacy depends upon a particular understanding of what privacy is. The way problems are conceived has a tremendous impact on the legal and policy solutions used to solve them. As the philosopher John Dewey observed, “A problem well put is half-solved.”

Most attempts to understand privacy do so by attempting to locate its essence—its core characteristics or the common denominator that links together the various things we classify under the rubric of “privacy.” Privacy, however, is too complex a concept to be reduced to a singular essence. It is a plurality of different things that do not share any one element but nevertheless bear a resemblance to one another. For example, privacy can be invaded by the disclosure of your deepest secrets. It might also be invaded if you’re watched by a peeping Tom, even if no secrets are ever revealed. With the disclosure of secrets, the harm is that your concealed information is spread to others. With the peeping Tom, the harm is that you’re being watched.

You’d probably find that creepy regardless of whether the peeper finds out anything sensitive or discloses any information to others. There are many other forms of invasion of privacy, such as blackmail and the improper use of your personal data. Your privacy can also be invaded if the government compiles an extensive dossier about you.

What is it – Privacy?

Privacy, in other words, involves so many things that it is impossible to reduce them all to one simple idea. And we need not do so.

In many cases, privacy issues never get balanced against conflicting interests, because courts, legislators, and others fail to recognize that privacy is implicated. People don’t acknowledge certain problems, because those problems don’t fit into a particular one-size-fits-all conception of privacy. Regardless of whether we call something a “privacy” problem, it still remains a problem, and problems shouldn’t be ignored. We should pay attention to all of the different problems that spark our desire to protect privacy.

It is Difficult To Describe Issues About Personal Data Collection and Usage In Two Words

To describe the problems created by the collection and use of personal data, many commentators use a metaphor based on George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. Orwell depicted a harrowing totalitarian society ruled by a government called Big Brother that watches its citizens obsessively and demands strict discipline.

The Orwell metaphor, which focuses on the harms of surveillance (such as inhibition and social control), might be apt to describe government monitoring of citizens. But much of the data gathered in computer databases, such as one’s race, birth date, gender, address, or marital status, isn’t particularly sensitive. Many people don’t care about concealing the hotels they stay at, the cars they own, or the kind of beverages they drink. Frequently, though not always, people wouldn’t be inhibited or embarrassed if others knew this information.

Another metaphor better captures the problems: Franz Kafka’s The Trial. Kafka’s novel centers around a man who is arrested but not informed why.

He desperately tries to find out what triggered his arrest and what’s in store for him. He finds out that a mysterious court system has a dossier on him and is investigating him, but he’s unable to learn much more. The Trial depicts a bureaucracy with inscrutable purposes that uses people’s information to make important decisions about them, yet denies the people the ability to participate in how their information is used.

The problems portrayed by the Kafkaesque metaphor are of a different sort than the problems caused by surveillance. They often do not result in inhibition. Instead they are problems of information processing—the storage, use, or analysis of data—rather than of information collection. They affect the power relationships between people and the institutions of the modern state. They not only frustrate the individual by creating a sense of helplessness and powerlessness, but also affect social structure by altering the kind of relationships people have with the institutions that make important decisions about their lives.

Legal and policy solutions focus too much on the problems under the Orwellian metaphor—those of surveillance—and aren’t adequately addressing the Kafkaesque problems—those of information processing. The difficulty is that commentators are trying to conceive of the problems caused by databases in terms of surveillance when, in fact, those problems are different.

The second part of the article will be here very soon….

Source: http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127461/

Share

Merry Christmas from SmartHide! 30% Christmas Discounts at SmartHide

Sunday, December 18th, 2011
Share
30% Christmas Discounts at SmartHide

30% Christmas Discounts at SmartHide

We all feel that Christmas is coming to our homes. SmartHide team feels the same, that is why we want to give a special gift for all Internet users. We offer all of you a 30% lifetime discount on any SmartHide Subscription from 18 till 25 of December, 2011.

A Couple of Words About 30% Discount Offer:

  1. Use coupon code “christmas” while registering any SmartHide Subscription on the page http://www.smarthide.com/register in order to get 30% discount.
  2. The amount of discount coupons is unlimited. Using christmas discount coupon, you can register as many subscriptions as you wish;
  3. The 30% discount is available for any SmartHide Subscription (prices on the site do not include 30% discount);
  4. For how long you will get 30% discount? As we said above this 30% discount is lifetime. It means that once you register any SmartHide Subscription or several Subscriptions, you get 30% discount on every recurring charge for that subscription forever;
  5. What is the period of this SmartHide Christmas special offer? From December 18 until December 25, 2011.

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year from SmartHide!
Enjoy SmartHide and stay protected while surfing the Web.

If you have any questions, contact us anytime and we will help you immediately.
www.smarthide.com/help/

Share