Find a show you like and click the 
button. The show will be added to your My Playlist page and updated 24/7 with new videos.
Search Results
10 Views
22:00:00 11/17/11
Act Today To Save The Internet - Oppose SOPA
[LESS INFO] 10 VIEWS | ADDED 22:00:00 11/17/11
The House Judiciary Committee held a hearing today on the "Stop Internet Piracy Act" (aka SOPA). In typical Republican fashion, it was not broadcast on CSPAN and many interested parties were excluded from the proceedings. In fact, the only technology company allowed to testify was Google , who opposes the proposed law along with a coalition of companies which includes Facebook, eBay and Zynga , along with others.
If ever there were a law designed to fatten the pockets of intellectual property attorneys, it is this proposed law. It has the potential to change the Internet, and not for the better. Written by and for large media companies like Comcast, it places full responsibility for intellectual property piracy on the shoulders of site owners rather than users.
As currently written, any website that quoted another site's content, or linked to a site that quoted another site's content could be declared a rogue site by the content owner, whether or not that content is subject to fair use rules. Once declared "rogue", companies like Paypal and Visa could then cut off payments immediately without the benefit of a hearing or due process of law. Fair use? Free speech? Forget about it. Here is the official summary from the House Judiciary Committee site. >
This bill focuses not on technology but on preventing those who engage in criminal behavior from reaching directly into the U.S. market to harm American consumers.
We cannot continue a system that allows criminals to disregard our laws and import counterfeit and pirated goods across our physical borders.
Nor can we fail to take effective and meaningful action when criminals misuse the Internet.
The problem of rogue websites is real, immediate and wide-spread. It harms all sectors of the economy.
And its scope is staggering. One recent survey found that nearly one quarter of global Internet traffic infringes on copyrights.
A second study found that 43 sites classified as ‘digital piracy’ generated 53 billion visits per year and that 26 sites selling just counterfeit prescription drugs generated 51 million hits annually.
Since the United States produces the most intellectual property, our country has the most to lose if we fail to address the problem of these rogue websites.
Responsible companies and public officials have taken note of the corrosive and damaging effects of rogue sites.
That last line is dripping with finger-pointing, as the announcement goes on to extol the virtuous Mastercard company while excoriating Google. Mastercard, of course, supports this wholeheartedly, while Google opposes it, along with Facebook and other websites. The Electronic Frontier Foundation points out that s ites like Vimeo, Flickr and Etsy would likely die as a result of this legislation.
Rebecca MacKinnon, former CNN reporter and senior fellow at the New America Foundation, had this to say : >
The bills would empower the attorney general to create a blacklist of sites to be blocked by Internet service providers, search engines, payment providers and advertising networks, all without a court hearing or a trial. The House version goes further, allowing private companies to sue service providers for even briefly and unknowingly hosting content that infringes on copyright — a sharp change from current law, which protects the service providers from civil liability if they remove the problematic content immediately upon notification. The intention is not the same as China’s Great Firewall, a nationwide system of Web censorship, but the practical effect could be similar.
Abuses under existing American law serve as troubling predictors for the kinds of abuse by private actors that the House bill would make possible. Take, for example, the cease-and-desist letters that Diebold, a maker of voting machines, sent in 2003, demanding that Internet service providers shut down Web sites that had published internal company e-mails about problems with the company’s voting machines. The letter cited copyright violations, and most of the service providers took down the content without question, despite the strong case to be made that the material was speech protected under the First Amendment.
Indeed. MacKinnon goes on to point out that this bill goes far beyond intellectual property protection. In particular, the House bill is set up to hold companies liable for users' actions. That would kill YouTube forever, but more importantly, it sets up an environment where power is freely wielded by those with the resources to shut down those without resources. Imagine Fox News declaring this site "rogue", for example. Search engines would block all traffic and results, and our right to speak freely (and criticize them freely) would be infringed upon. The same is true of Media Matters. Those with the lawyers and the money would win by default.
The Occupy movement? Dead. They'd shut down the Facebook and Twitter accounts along with the live stream without cause. Simply call it "rogue" and be done. That's how totalitarian societies operate and it's anathema to anyone who understands the Internet.
BusinessWeek : >
As Brad Burnham of Union Square Ventures says in a blog post, what these bills do is expose a fundamental disconnect between proponents of an open Internet and companies and legislators who would rather create their own kind of Internet: a version of the Web that’s less chaotic, more respectful, and most importantly, a lot easier to control. As Burnham notes, that kind of Internet would make things a lot easier for content producers and entertainment conglomerates, but it would remove or imperil a lot of the things that make the Internet so valuable:
“The Internet is not just a series of pipes. Its core architecture embeds an assumption about human nature.
> The Internet is designed to empower individuals, not control them. It assumes that the if individuals are empowered, they will do the right thing the vast majority of the time.
”
Over the past few days, I've seen reports that this bill is dead and other reports that it's alive and kicking. There are many who are raising their voices against it, including Oregon Senator Wyden, who has placed a hold on it. Unfortunately, it's a bipartisan bill. It shouldn't be. No Democrat should support this kind of suppression online. None. No conservative with true respect for the Constitution should support this kind of suppression, and indeed, one of those who oppose it is Ron Paul, to his credit.
As much as it pains me to admit this, I find myself on the same side as Darrell Issa. Via The Hill : >
Issa said the rush to hold the hearing was based on the flawed assumption that the bipartisan bill would quickly become law and said the sponsors didn’t want to hear from opponents, but must now accept that there is real opposition to their bill.
“What they’re realizing is there are so many unintended consequences that they can’t just use Google as a piñata and bash on it here,” he said, citing the broad coalition of opposition encompassing the tech industry, the left and the right.
“I don’t believe this bill has any chance on the House floor,” Issa added when asked about the odds of the bill moving forward after passing the Judiciary Committee. “I think it’s way too extreme, it infringes on too many areas that our leadership will know is simply too dangerous to do in its current form.”
The bottom line here? Many of these lawmakers don't know enough about the Internet to understand the issues at stake. Further, as companies like Amazon, Apple, Spotify, Hulu and others develop ways to stream their content at affordable prices to users, piracy will likely decline. Dropping a nuclear bomb on the Internet is unnecessary to prevent piracy. This is really about control. Comcast wants control of what users can see and stream on their pipes, something I predicted back when they first proposed merging with NBC-Universal.
This attempt by mega-corporations to take control of the Internet needs to be stopped cold. There has been a huge online response expressing opposition, but it needs to continue. Please sign the EFF petition here , or call your representatives to register your opposition to a law which is unnecessarily draconian and serves only the interests of corporations who do not serve yours.
22 Views
22:00:00 11/17/11
Act Today To Save The Internet - Oppose SOPA
[LESS INFO] 22 VIEWS | ADDED 22:00:00 11/17/11
The House Judiciary Committee held a hearing today on the "Stop Internet Piracy Act" (aka SOPA). In typical Republican fashion, it was not broadcast on CSPAN and many interested parties were excluded from the proceedings. In fact, the only technology company allowed to testify was Google , who opposes the proposed law along with a coalition of companies which includes Facebook, eBay and Zynga , along with others.
If ever there were a law designed to fatten the pockets of intellectual property attorneys, it is this proposed law. It has the potential to change the Internet, and not for the better. Written by and for large media companies like Comcast, it places full responsibility for intellectual property piracy on the shoulders of site owners rather than users.
As currently written, any website that quoted another site's content, or linked to a site that quoted another site's content could be declared a rogue site by the content owner, whether or not that content is subject to fair use rules. Once declared "rogue", companies like Paypal and Visa could then cut off payments immediately without the benefit of a hearing or due process of law. Fair use? Free speech? Forget about it. Here is the official summary from the House Judiciary Committee site. >
This bill focuses not on technology but on preventing those who engage in criminal behavior from reaching directly into the U.S. market to harm American consumers.
We cannot continue a system that allows criminals to disregard our laws and import counterfeit and pirated goods across our physical borders.
Nor can we fail to take effective and meaningful action when criminals misuse the Internet.
The problem of rogue websites is real, immediate and wide-spread. It harms all sectors of the economy.
And its scope is staggering. One recent survey found that nearly one quarter of global Internet traffic infringes on copyrights.
A second study found that 43 sites classified as ‘digital piracy’ generated 53 billion visits per year and that 26 sites selling just counterfeit prescription drugs generated 51 million hits annually.
Since the United States produces the most intellectual property, our country has the most to lose if we fail to address the problem of these rogue websites.
Responsible companies and public officials have taken note of the corrosive and damaging effects of rogue sites.
That last line is dripping with finger-pointing, as the announcement goes on to extol the virtuous Mastercard company while excoriating Google. Mastercard, of course, supports this wholeheartedly, while Google opposes it, along with Facebook and other websites. The Electronic Frontier Foundation points out that s ites like Vimeo, Flickr and Etsy would likely die as a result of this legislation.
Rebecca MacKinnon, former CNN reporter and senior fellow at the New America Foundation, had this to say : >
The bills would empower the attorney general to create a blacklist of sites to be blocked by Internet service providers, search engines, payment providers and advertising networks, all without a court hearing or a trial. The House version goes further, allowing private companies to sue service providers for even briefly and unknowingly hosting content that infringes on copyright — a sharp change from current law, which protects the service providers from civil liability if they remove the problematic content immediately upon notification. The intention is not the same as China’s Great Firewall, a nationwide system of Web censorship, but the practical effect could be similar.
Abuses under existing American law serve as troubling predictors for the kinds of abuse by private actors that the House bill would make possible. Take, for example, the cease-and-desist letters that Diebold, a maker of voting machines, sent in 2003, demanding that Internet service providers shut down Web sites that had published internal company e-mails about problems with the company’s voting machines. The letter cited copyright violations, and most of the service providers took down the content without question, despite the strong case to be made that the material was speech protected under the First Amendment.
Indeed. MacKinnon goes on to point out that this bill goes far beyond intellectual property protection. In particular, the House bill is set up to hold companies liable for users' actions. That would kill YouTube forever, but more importantly, it sets up an environment where power is freely wielded by those with the resources to shut down those without resources. Imagine Fox News declaring this site "rogue", for example. Search engines would block all traffic and results, and our right to speak freely (and criticize them freely) would be infringed upon. The same is true of Media Matters. Those with the lawyers and the money would win by default.
The Occupy movement? Dead. They'd shut down the Facebook and Twitter accounts along with the live stream without cause. Simply call it "rogue" and be done. That's how totalitarian societies operate and it's anathema to anyone who understands the Internet.
BusinessWeek : >
As Brad Burnham of Union Square Ventures says in a blog post, what these bills do is expose a fundamental disconnect between proponents of an open Internet and companies and legislators who would rather create their own kind of Internet: a version of the Web that’s less chaotic, more respectful, and most importantly, a lot easier to control. As Burnham notes, that kind of Internet would make things a lot easier for content producers and entertainment conglomerates, but it would remove or imperil a lot of the things that make the Internet so valuable:
“The Internet is not just a series of pipes. Its core architecture embeds an assumption about human nature.
> The Internet is designed to empower individuals, not control them. It assumes that the if individuals are empowered, they will do the right thing the vast majority of the time.
”
Over the past few days, I've seen reports that this bill is dead and other reports that it's alive and kicking. There are many who are raising their voices against it, including Oregon Senator Wyden, who has placed a hold on it. Unfortunately, it's a bipartisan bill. It shouldn't be. No Democrat should support this kind of suppression online. None. No conservative with true respect for the Constitution should support this kind of suppression, and indeed, one of those who oppose it is Ron Paul, to his credit.
As much as it pains me to admit this, I find myself on the same side as Darrell Issa. Via The Hill : >
Issa said the rush to hold the hearing was based on the flawed assumption that the bipartisan bill would quickly become law and said the sponsors didn’t want to hear from opponents, but must now accept that there is real opposition to their bill.
“What they’re realizing is there are so many unintended consequences that they can’t just use Google as a piñata and bash on it here,” he said, citing the broad coalition of opposition encompassing the tech industry, the left and the right.
“I don’t believe this bill has any chance on the House floor,” Issa added when asked about the odds of the bill moving forward after passing the Judiciary Committee. “I think it’s way too extreme, it infringes on too many areas that our leadership will know is simply too dangerous to do in its current form.”
The bottom line here? Many of these lawmakers don't know enough about the Internet to understand the issues at stake. Further, as companies like Amazon, Apple, Spotify, Hulu and others develop ways to stream their content at affordable prices to users, piracy will likely decline. Dropping a nuclear bomb on the Internet is unnecessary to prevent piracy. This is really about control. Comcast wants control of what users can see and stream on their pipes, something I predicted back when they first proposed merging with NBC-Universal.
This attempt by mega-corporations to take control of the Internet needs to be stopped cold. There has been a huge online response expressing opposition, but it needs to continue. Please sign the EFF petition here , or call your representatives to register your opposition to a law which is unnecessarily draconian and serves only the interests of corporations who do not serve yours.
42 Views
22:30:00 06/08/10
Studio Guest: Jürgen Wöhler
[LESS INFO] 42 VIEWS | ADDED 22:30:00 06/08/10
This week's studio guest: Jürgen Wöhler, Secretary-General, Korean-German Chamber of Commerce and IndustryDW-TV: Let's pull in Jürgen Wöhler. He is head of the Korean-German Chamber of Commerce. We're going to talk about Asia in this era of budget cutting in a just a minute, Mr. Wöhler. But first, let's talk about Germany. 80 billion euros in cuts here. Your opinion. A necessary evil? Jürgen Wöhler: Yes, certainly, if you look at the indebtness of Germany and the budget situation, certainly Germany should also give a good example to its European neighbours. DW-TV: You are very sensitive to what consumers want. Obviously you talk to business people all the time, particularly in the exporting industry. Attached to these budget cuts here in Germany we've got new taxes on nuclear power plants, new taxes on the airlines. A lot of people are saying this is a hidden tax that will then be forwarded on to the consumer. Are you worried about consumer spending right here in your home market? Jürgen Wöhler: I do not really care that much on the German market because I live in Korea and, obviously, in Korea things would go much different. DW-TV: Yes, but it's important what happens in this market for businesses in Korea. They want to sell their goods to Germany. Jürgen Wöhler: Yes, but I think it's consumer goods which Korea delivers to Germany while Germany delivers to Korea more investment goods. And I think the consumption will remain stable in Germany. DW-TV: What do business people abroad, particularly in South Korea where you are, what do they tell you, what are their impressions about the health of the European economy right now? Jürgen Wöhler: We hear not very encouraging news but I'm rather confident. If you see how Germany went along over the last years and especially through the crisis 2008, 2009, we are quite confident that Germany will be the first country to really recover. DW-TV: Do you hear people saying that perhaps the Europeans could learn from the Asians who had their own crisis in the late 90s? Jürgen Wöhler: Yes, Asians are getting more and more self confident and giving good advice to the Europeans and the stimulus packages which you have seen in Asia during the last crisis 2008, 2009, have been very impressive and positive. DW-TV: Is it all that simple, Mr. Wöhler? German companies are enjoying endless demand for their products in Asia right now? Jürgen Wöhler: Yes, we have the right products, especially industrial products, which are needed for the enormous investment boom in Asia, and with the rising quality of Asian products for the world market, they need more and more components from Germany. And especially with Korea, with the upcoming free trade agreement from beginning next year, exports will grow over proportionally. DW-TV: Let's talk a little bit about South Korea. That is your area of expertise. We've got a graphic here we want to show people. Last year, Germany exported almost 8 billion euros of goods to South Korea and we can talk about a healthy trade balance here. South Korea sold 7 and a half billion euros of goods to Germany in 2009. Which sectors, Mr. Wöhler, are enjoying the strongest trade? Jürgen Wöhler: Well, number one is machinery, second is chemicals and third is cars and car components. And all three sectors will certainly gain in the years to come. DW-TV: There are a lot of people here in Germany, here in Europe, who criticise Asia, China in particular, by saying that a lot of companies there are buying up the technological know how and then producing goods at home, which they're afraid is going to hurt demand for exports coming from Europe. How do you see that? Jürgen Wöhler: That might be true for China. For Korea certainly not, because the technical quality and the technology in Korean products is so advanced that you cannot just copy, you have to co-operate also in research and develpment with German suppliers. DW-TV: Let's talk money for a second. The euro, of-course, at a four-year low against the greeback. Are you glad to see that? Are companies in South Korea now lining up to buy more goods because they're cheaper? Jürgen Wöhler: I think there is no reason for any panic because we are still below purchasing power parity and for the German export industry, which suffered a lot in 2007, 2008, that's just a wonderful gift. DW-TV: Yeah, a gift. I have to ask you before we let you go: France has been saying, to help in this economic crisis, Germany should reduce its exports. It says the trading position is unfair for other European economies. What do you say to that? Jürgen Wöhler: I see just the opposite. So, if everybody would work like we do, then everybody would be much better off and Germany, unlike the Asian countries, we are spending our excess income from export as tourists. Germany is tourist world champion and the French, Italian, Spanish are rather not travelling to Germany. DW-TV: They don't need to. Jürgen Wöhler: We go there, so far, no reason. DW-TV: All right, Mr. Wöhler, as always, thanks for taking the time to come in and talk with us. Interview: Brent Geoff
30 Views
22:30:00 06/08/10
Studio Guest: Jürgen Wöhler
[LESS INFO] 30 VIEWS | ADDED 22:30:00 06/08/10
This week's studio guest: Jürgen Wöhler, Secretary-General, Korean-German Chamber of Commerce and IndustryDW-TV: Let's pull in Jürgen Wöhler. He is head of the Korean-German Chamber of Commerce. We're going to talk about Asia in this era of budget cutting in a just a minute, Mr. Wöhler. But first, let's talk about Germany. 80 billion euros in cuts here. Your opinion. A necessary evil? Jürgen Wöhler: Yes, certainly, if you look at the indebtness of Germany and the budget situation, certainly Germany should also give a good example to its European neighbours. DW-TV: You are very sensitive to what consumers want. Obviously you talk to business people all the time, particularly in the exporting industry. Attached to these budget cuts here in Germany we've got new taxes on nuclear power plants, new taxes on the airlines. A lot of people are saying this is a hidden tax that will then be forwarded on to the consumer. Are you worried about consumer spending right here in your home market? Jürgen Wöhler: I do not really care that much on the German market because I live in Korea and, obviously, in Korea things would go much different. DW-TV: Yes, but it's important what happens in this market for businesses in Korea. They want to sell their goods to Germany. Jürgen Wöhler: Yes, but I think it's consumer goods which Korea delivers to Germany while Germany delivers to Korea more investment goods. And I think the consumption will remain stable in Germany. DW-TV: What do business people abroad, particularly in South Korea where you are, what do they tell you, what are their impressions about the health of the European economy right now? Jürgen Wöhler: We hear not very encouraging news but I'm rather confident. If you see how Germany went along over the last years and especially through the crisis 2008, 2009, we are quite confident that Germany will be the first country to really recover. DW-TV: Do you hear people saying that perhaps the Europeans could learn from the Asians who had their own crisis in the late 90s? Jürgen Wöhler: Yes, Asians are getting more and more self confident and giving good advice to the Europeans and the stimulus packages which you have seen in Asia during the last crisis 2008, 2009, have been very impressive and positive. DW-TV: Is it all that simple, Mr. Wöhler? German companies are enjoying endless demand for their products in Asia right now? Jürgen Wöhler: Yes, we have the right products, especially industrial products, which are needed for the enormous investment boom in Asia, and with the rising quality of Asian products for the world market, they need more and more components from Germany. And especially with Korea, with the upcoming free trade agreement from beginning next year, exports will grow over proportionally. DW-TV: Let's talk a little bit about South Korea. That is your area of expertise. We've got a graphic here we want to show people. Last year, Germany exported almost 8 billion euros of goods to South Korea and we can talk about a healthy trade balance here. South Korea sold 7 and a half billion euros of goods to Germany in 2009. Which sectors, Mr. Wöhler, are enjoying the strongest trade? Jürgen Wöhler: Well, number one is machinery, second is chemicals and third is cars and car components. And all three sectors will certainly gain in the years to come. DW-TV: There are a lot of people here in Germany, here in Europe, who criticise Asia, China in particular, by saying that a lot of companies there are buying up the technological know how and then producing goods at home, which they're afraid is going to hurt demand for exports coming from Europe. How do you see that? Jürgen Wöhler: That might be true for China. For Korea certainly not, because the technical quality and the technology in Korean products is so advanced that you cannot just copy, you have to co-operate also in research and develpment with German suppliers. DW-TV: Let's talk money for a second. The euro, of-course, at a four-year low against the greeback. Are you glad to see that? Are companies in South Korea now lining up to buy more goods because they're cheaper? Jürgen Wöhler: I think there is no reason for any panic because we are still below purchasing power parity and for the German export industry, which suffered a lot in 2007, 2008, that's just a wonderful gift. DW-TV: Yeah, a gift. I have to ask you before we let you go: France has been saying, to help in this economic crisis, Germany should reduce its exports. It says the trading position is unfair for other European economies. What do you say to that? Jürgen Wöhler: I see just the opposite. So, if everybody would work like we do, then everybody would be much better off and Germany, unlike the Asian countries, we are spending our excess income from export as tourists. Germany is tourist world champion and the French, Italian, Spanish are rather not travelling to Germany. DW-TV: They don't need to. Jürgen Wöhler: We go there, so far, no reason. DW-TV: All right, Mr. Wöhler, as always, thanks for taking the time to come in and talk with us. Interview: Brent Geoff
4 Views
19:48:29 08/27/09
Climate Camp on Irish Radio + Shannonbridge local news blog - climate camp mentions
[LESS INFO] 4 VIEWS | ADDED 19:48:29 08/27/09
Climate Camp Irish radio interviews RTE - Pat Kenny (wednesday, not sure) http://www.rte.ie/radio1/player_av.html?0,null,200,http://dynamic.rte.ie/quickaxs/209-rte-todaywithpatkenny-Wednesday.smil (or maybe tuesday) javascript:showPlayer('/radio1/player_av.html?0,null,200,http://dynamic.rte.ie/quickaxs/209-rte-todaywithpatkenny-Tuesday.smil') Today FM - The Last Word 6pm hour Wednesday: 26/8/2009 http://www.radioireland.ie/lastword/2682009-18.wmv Climate Camp in Shannonbridge We have been contacted by Ian Clotworty about an upcoming 'Climate Camp' event in the area - You are probably already aware of the Climate Camp taking place in the coming weeks near Shannonbridge. I, one of the organisers, am writing to let you know about an information evening for the residents of the area taking place in the old school across the road from the church. The day is this friday, 7th August and the time is 8pm. We would like to get plenty of people at it so they know what is going to happen before it does, who we are, what the camp would be like, and also to take the opportunity to make a personal invitation to visit, learn, teach, participate or help out at the camp. We have put up posters that you might notice. http://shannonbridge.blogspot.com/2009/08/climate-camp-in-shannonbridge.html Earlier mentions: Sunday, August 23, 2009 All the week the Climate Change group have been encamped in a field near the power plant. Yesterday they held another march through Shannonbridge shouting slogans.The one I heard them chanting was "We Have A Protest". They appeared to cause no trouble but there were a big turn out of Gardai and police cars. At one stage some of the protesters climbed on top of some parked wagons of Milled Peat. A Garda asked one of the Shannonbridge people what he thought should be done. He said that the power plant should be knocked and a nuclear power plant be built in its place. One of the protesters said that there was a shortage of uranium and he would not agree with a nuclear plant.The Shannonbridge man said there was plenty of uranium, it was all hidden beneath the bogs. When the bogs were all used up the uranium would be found. The good breeze was blowing from the east on Saturday. 20th August 2009 The Climate Change week focused all this week on Shannonbridge by the eco friendly group is picking up the attention of TV, Radio and Press that they desire. This week the Midland Tribune gives them front page coverage and they got mention on Pat Kenny's Show on radio and got a slot on Wednesday TV news. The Swedish couple that arrived yesterday have pitched their tent with Climate Change.
