<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
<channel>
<title>Engadget</title>
<link>http://www.engadget.com</link>
<description>Engadget</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[FBI reportedly pressing for backdoor access to Facebook, Google]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/05/fbi-wants-social-network-wiretap/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/05/fbi-wants-social-network-wiretap/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/05/fbi-wants-social-network-wiretap/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center;"> <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/05/fbi-wants-social-network-wiretap/"><img alt="Image" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2012/05/this-phone-is-tapped.jpg" style="margin: 4px; width: 600px; height: 433px;" /></a></p><p> Investigators at the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/FBI/">FBI</a> supposedly aren't happy that social networks like Facebook or Google+ don't have the same kind of facility for wiretaps that phones have had for decades. If claimed industry contacts for <em>CNET</em> are right, senior staff at the bureau have floated a proposed amendment to the 1994-era Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) that would require that communication-based websites with large user bases include a backdoor for federal agents to snoop on suspects. It would still include the same requirement for a court order as for phone calls, even if US carriers <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/02/telecoms-win-immunity-in-wiretapping-case-us-court-approves-sep/">currently enjoy immunity</a> for cooperating with any <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/warrantlesswiretapping/">warrantless wiretapping</a>. As might be expected, technology firms and civil liberties advocates like the Electronic Frontier Foundation object to deepening CALEA's reach any further, and Apple is thought to be preemptively lobbying against another definition of the law that might require a government back channel for audiovisual chat services like FaceTime or Skype. The FBI didn't explicitly confirm the proposal when asked, but it did say it was worried it might be "going dark" and couldn't enforce wiretaps.</p><p> [Image credit: David Drexler, <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/87916032@N00/2041709855">Flickr</a>]</p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/05/fbi-wants-social-network-wiretap/">FBI reportedly pressing for backdoor access to Facebook, Google</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Sat, 05 May 2012 14:18:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/05/fbi-wants-social-network-wiretap/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/20231776/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/05/fbi-wants-social-network-wiretap/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Apple</category><category>calea</category><category>Civil Liberties</category><category>civil rights</category><category>CivilLiberties</category><category>CivilRights</category><category>Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act</category><category>CommunicationsAssistanceForLawEnforcementAct</category><category>eff</category><category>Electronic Frontier Foundation</category><category>ElectronicFrontierFoundation</category><category>facebook</category><category>facetime</category><category>fbi</category><category>Federal Bureau of Investigation</category><category>FederalBureauOfInvestigation</category><category>google plus</category><category>google+</category><category>GooglePlus</category><category>lobbying</category><category>lobbyists</category><category>privacy</category><category>privacy issues</category><category>PrivacyIssues</category><category>skype</category><category>wiretap</category><category>wiretapping</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Jon Fingas]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 14:18:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Carpathia wants to delete orphaned Megaupload data, pay the bills]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/23/carpathia-wants-to-delete-orphaned-megaupload-data-pay-the-bill/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/23/carpathia-wants-to-delete-orphaned-megaupload-data-pay-the-bill/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/23/carpathia-wants-to-delete-orphaned-megaupload-data-pay-the-bill/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<div style="text-align: center;"> <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/23/carpathia-wants-to-delete-orphaned-megaupload-data-pay-the-bill/"><img alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2012/01/megaupload-shut-down-1327005694.jpg" /></a></div>The <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/19/federal-prosecutors-shut-down-megaupload-file-sharing-site-foun/">Federal shut down</a> of Megaupload did more than jail its founders, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/23/in-the-wake-of-megaupload-crackdown-fear-forces-similar-sites-t/">scare its competitors</a> and worry its users -- it also left Carpathia Hosting footing a $9,000 a day bill. The outfit <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/31/megaupload-users-data-to-be-kept-another-two-weeks-eff-to-help/">previously agreed </a>to preserve Megaupload's frozen data, but now that the service's unpaid bills are piling up, it's ready to change its tune. In a emergency motion filed with the U.S. Federal Court in Virginia, Carpathia asked the court to either take the data off its hands, pay it for retaining the data or else allow it to delete the data altogether after allowing users to reclaim their files. The hosting service won't take action on its own, it says, as that might "risk a claim by a party with an interest in the data," such as the Motion Picture Association of America. With any luck, the matter will be settled in a court hearing next month. If not? Well, we'll just take it as a lesson: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/22/lacie-2big-thunderbolt-series-external-hdd-review/">back up locally</a>, you never know when your files might get wrapped up in the legal system.<p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/23/carpathia-wants-to-delete-orphaned-megaupload-data-pay-the-bill/">Carpathia wants to delete orphaned Megaupload data, pay the bills</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:11:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/23/carpathia-wants-to-delete-orphaned-megaupload-data-pay-the-bill/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/20199483/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/23/carpathia-wants-to-delete-orphaned-megaupload-data-pay-the-bill/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>carpathia hosting</category><category>CarpathiaHosting</category><category>cloud locker</category><category>cloud storage</category><category>CloudLocker</category><category>CloudStorage</category><category>doj</category><category>eff</category><category>electronic frontier foundation</category><category>ElectronicFrontierFoundation</category><category>file sharing</category><category>filesharing</category><category>legal</category><category>megaupload</category><category>Motion Picture Association of America</category><category>piracy</category><category>Sci/Tech</category><category>United States federal courts</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Sean Buckley]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:11:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Last chance to clear out Google Web History before the great data convergence]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/22/last-chance-to-clear-out-google-web-history/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/22/last-chance-to-clear-out-google-web-history/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/22/last-chance-to-clear-out-google-web-history/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<div style="text-align: center;"> <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/22/last-chance-to-clear-out-google-web-history/"><img alt="Google Privacy Policy" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2012/01/google-privacy-2012-01-24.jpg" style="width: 570px; height: 252px; border-width: 0px; border-style: solid; margin: 4px;" /></a></div>The end is nigh! For about 59 different Google ToS documents at least. <strike>After today,</strike> the new <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/24/google-new-privacy-policy/">consolidated privacy policy</a> will go into effect on March 1st, which will also consolidate much of your data across Google's properties. That means this is a <strike>your </strike><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/03/google-eu-privacy-pause/"><strike>last</strike> chance</a> to clear out El Goog's "you archives" before the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/31/google-clarifies-what-isnt-changing-with-new-privacy-policy/">great convergence</a> of 2012. If you're not keen on Google sharing your information between its various products (though, you seemed to be okay with it being collected in the first place) today is the day to go and delete it all. Of particular concern for some is Web History, which collects your searches and sites visited and has, until now, been walled off from the rest of the Google empire. For complete instructions for how to clear out your Google Web History hit up the source link.<br /><br /><strong>Update</strong>: The EFF has clarified, and we feel it necessary to follow suit, that disabling your web history does not stop Google from collecting data about you. What it does mean is that after 18 months that information is partially anonymized and that certain features, like custom search results, will not be enabled. Just as importantly, we mistakenly said that Wednesday, February 22nd was your last chance to turn off the feature. The new ToS does not go into effect until March 1st.<p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/22/last-chance-to-clear-out-google-web-history/">Last chance to clear out Google Web History before the great data convergence</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Wed, 22 Feb 2012 17:21:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/22/last-chance-to-clear-out-google-web-history/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/20177500/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/22/last-chance-to-clear-out-google-web-history/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>EFF</category><category>Electronic Frontier Foundation</category><category>ElectronicFrontierFoundation</category><category>google</category><category>google web history</category><category>GoogleWebHistory</category><category>privacy</category><category>Privacy Policy</category><category>PrivacyPolicy</category><category>search history</category><category>SearchHistory</category><category>terms of service</category><category>TermsOfService</category><category>tos</category><category>web history</category><category>WebHistory</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Terrence O'Brien]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 17:21:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[The Engadget Interview: the EFF's Mitch Stoltz talks the legality of jailbreaking]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/04/the-engadget-interview-mitch-stoltz/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/04/the-engadget-interview-mitch-stoltz/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/04/the-engadget-interview-mitch-stoltz/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<div style="text-align: center;"> <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/04/the-engadget-interview-mitch-stoltz/"><img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2012/02/mitch-stoltz-eff-1328306104.jpg" style="border-width: 0px; border-style: solid; margin: 4px;" /></a></div><p> The work of a non-profit advocacy group is never done. It seems like just yesterday that the Electronic Frontier Foundation was waging a battle to put <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/26/library-of-congress-adds-dmca-exception-for-jailbreaking-or-root/">jailbreaking rights</a> into the hands of consumers, much to the chagrin of manufacturers intent on maintaining control over their devices after they leave store shelves. With the looming expiration of an exemption to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act that has made such hacks legal, the organization is once again <a href="https://www.eff.org/pages/jailbreaking-not-crime-tell-copyright-office-free-your-devices">taking up the cause</a>. And this time, it's added tablets and gaming consoles to its proposal. We sat down with EFF staff attorney Mitch Stoltz to discuss the state of the law and how users can help in the fight.</p><p><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/04/the-engadget-interview-mitch-stoltz/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>The Engadget Interview: the EFF's Mitch Stoltz talks the legality of jailbreaking</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/04/the-engadget-interview-mitch-stoltz/">The Engadget Interview: the EFF's Mitch Stoltz talks the legality of jailbreaking</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Sat, 04 Feb 2012 12:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/04/the-engadget-interview-mitch-stoltz/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/20164358/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/04/the-engadget-interview-mitch-stoltz/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>console</category><category>eff</category><category>Electronic Frontier Foundation</category><category>ElectronicFrontierFoundation</category><category>handset</category><category>interview</category><category>jailbreaking</category><category>mitch Stoltz</category><category>MitchStoltz</category><category>phone</category><category>tablet</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Brian Heater]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 12:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Megaupload co-founder's bail appeal rejected]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/03/megaupload-co-founders-bail-appeal-rejected/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/03/megaupload-co-founders-bail-appeal-rejected/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/03/megaupload-co-founders-bail-appeal-rejected/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<div style="text-align: center;"> <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/03/megaupload-co-founders-bail-appeal-rejected/"><img alt="Megaupload co-founder's bail appeal rejected" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2012/01/megaupload-shut-down-1327005694.jpg" style="width: 600px; height: 255px; margin: 4px;" /></a></div>While users housing content on the troubled Megaupload site were given a two-week <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/31/megaupload-users-data-to-be-kept-another-two-weeks-eff-to-help/">reprieve</a>, one of its co-founders is having less luck. Kim Dotcom has lost his appeal for bail, with prosecutors fearing that he would flee from New Zealand and return to his native Germany, possibly making him safe from extradition. According to the <em>BBC,</em> the prosecution alleged that Dotcom -- formerly Kim Schmitz -- had multiple passports and bank accounts, and "a history of fleeing criminal charges." His next court appearance his scheduled for February 22nd.<br /><p></p><p></p><p></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/03/megaupload-co-founders-bail-appeal-rejected/">Megaupload co-founder's bail appeal rejected</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Fri, 03 Feb 2012 09:21:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/03/megaupload-co-founders-bail-appeal-rejected/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/20163662/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/03/megaupload-co-founders-bail-appeal-rejected/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>bail</category><category>carpathia hosting</category><category>CarpathiaHosting</category><category>cloud locker</category><category>cloud storage</category><category>CloudLocker</category><category>CloudStorage</category><category>cogent communications</category><category>CogentCommunications</category><category>doj</category><category>eff</category><category>electronic frontier foundation</category><category>ElectronicFrontierFoundation</category><category>filesharing</category><category>kim dotcom</category><category>KimDotcom</category><category>legal</category><category>megaupload</category><category>minipost</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mat Smith]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 09:21:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Megaupload users' data to be kept another two weeks, EFF to help folks retrieve it]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/31/megaupload-users-data-to-be-kept-another-two-weeks-eff-to-help/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/31/megaupload-users-data-to-be-kept-another-two-weeks-eff-to-help/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/31/megaupload-users-data-to-be-kept-another-two-weeks-eff-to-help/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<div style="text-align: center;"> <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/31/megaupload-users-data-to-be-kept-another-two-weeks-eff-to-help/"><img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2012/01/megaupload-eff.jpg" style="border-width: 0px; border-style: solid; margin: 4px;" /></a></div>Megaupload's digital doors may have <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/19/federal-prosecutors-shut-down-megaupload-file-sharing-site-foun/">been closed</a> due to the presence of pirated materials, but there's still the matter of all that legal content residing on its servers. Naturally, folks want their files back, but now that the government's gotten what it needs, the hosting companies no longer need to keep the data around because Megaupload's no longer paying them to do so. Carpathia Hosting and Cogent Communications, however, have decided to preserve the data for another two weeks while a deal is brokered with the DOJ for its release. In the meantime, the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/eff">Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)</a> has teamed up with Carpathia to create a website that puts folks in touch with EFF attorneys so users can try to retrieve their data. No word as to what legal wrangling the EFF can do to make it happen, but those affected can get the wheels of justice started at the source below.<p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/31/megaupload-users-data-to-be-kept-another-two-weeks-eff-to-help/">Megaupload users' data to be kept another two weeks, EFF to help folks retrieve it</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Tue, 31 Jan 2012 21:19:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/31/megaupload-users-data-to-be-kept-another-two-weeks-eff-to-help/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/20161179/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/31/megaupload-users-data-to-be-kept-another-two-weeks-eff-to-help/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>carpathia hosting</category><category>CarpathiaHosting</category><category>cloud locker</category><category>cloud storage</category><category>CloudLocker</category><category>CloudStorage</category><category>cogent communications</category><category>CogentCommunications</category><category>doj</category><category>eff</category><category>electronic frontier foundation</category><category>ElectronicFrontierFoundation</category><category>filesharing</category><category>legal</category><category>megaupload</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Michael Gorman]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 21:19:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Jailbreaking exemption to DMCA is about to expire, EFF would rather it didn't]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/26/jailbreaking-exemption-to-dmca-is-about-to-expire-eff-would-rat/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/26/jailbreaking-exemption-to-dmca-is-about-to-expire-eff-would-rat/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/26/jailbreaking-exemption-to-dmca-is-about-to-expire-eff-would-rat/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<div style="text-align: center; "> <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/26/jailbreaking-exemption-to-dmca-is-about-to-expire-eff-would-rat/"><img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2012/01/rooting.jpg" style="border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-top-style: solid; border-right-style: solid; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: solid; margin-left: 4px; margin-right: 4px; margin-top: 4px; margin-bottom: 4px; " /></a></div><div style="text-align: left; "> Back in 2010, the US Copyright Office added a set of anti-circumvention exemptions to the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/DMCA/">DMCA</a>, effectively <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/26/library-of-congress-adds-dmca-exception-for-jailbreaking-or-root/">making it legal</a> for smartphone users to jailbreak and/or root their devices. These exemptions, however, were never made permanent and now, they're about to expire. The EFF doesn't want this to happen, which is why it's decided to launch a campaign dedicated to the jailbreaking cause. With this initiative, the EFF is hoping to convince the Copyright Office to renew its exemptions and expand them to a wider range of devices, including tablets and videogame consoles. To achieve this, the organization is calling upon programmers and other jailbreaking enthusiasts to contact the Copyright Office directly, explaining why the ability to freely modify software is so vital to their lives or livelihoods. As the EFF argues, "Concrete examples will help show the Copyright Office why they should renew and expand the exemptions for jailbreaking." If you're interested in getting involved, you can contact the Copyright Office at the coverage link below, though all comments are due by February 5th. Hit up the source link for more details on the EFF's involvement.</div><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/26/jailbreaking-exemption-to-dmca-is-about-to-expire-eff-would-rat/">Jailbreaking exemption to DMCA is about to expire, EFF would rather it didn't</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Thu, 26 Jan 2012 11:41:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/26/jailbreaking-exemption-to-dmca-is-about-to-expire-eff-would-rat/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/20157244/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/26/jailbreaking-exemption-to-dmca-is-about-to-expire-eff-would-rat/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>android</category><category>copyright</category><category>custom</category><category>Digital Millennium Copyright Act</category><category>DigitalMillenniumCopyrightAct</category><category>DMCA</category><category>EFF</category><category>Electronic Frontier Foundation</category><category>ElectronicFrontierFoundation</category><category>exemption</category><category>ios</category><category>jailbreak</category><category>law</category><category>legal</category><category>mobilepostcross</category><category>OS</category><category>politics</category><category>ROM</category><category>root</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Amar Toor]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 11:41:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Telecoms win immunity in wiretapping case, US court approves separate suit against the government]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/02/telecoms-win-immunity-in-wiretapping-case-us-court-approves-sep/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/02/telecoms-win-immunity-in-wiretapping-case-us-court-approves-sep/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/02/telecoms-win-immunity-in-wiretapping-case-us-court-approves-sep/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/02/telecoms-win-immunity-in-wiretapping-case-us-court-approves-sep/"><img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2012/01/nsa-controlroom-09-28-2010-1325429867.jpg" style="border-width: 0px; border-style: solid; margin: 16px 4px; float: right;" /></a>Looks like a case of good news-bad news for the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/ElectronicFrontierFoundation/">Electronic Frontier Foundation</a> in its fight against <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/warrantlesswiretapping/">warrantless wiretapping</a>. A US appeals court upheld a 2008 ruling, granting telecoms such as AT&amp;T, Verizon and Sprint immunity for cooperating with the government in its surveillance activities. Still, Judge Margaret McKeown of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals insists that immunity only applies to telecoms, not the government, and that "the federal courts remain a forum to consider the constitutionality of the wiretapping scheme and other claims." Indeed, while the 9th Circuit upheld immunity for telecoms, it also gave the go-ahead for a separate suit against the NSA, former president George W. Bush, senior members of the Bush administration and President Obama for using AT&amp;T's network to conduct "an unprecedented suspicionless general search," according to the filing. The court's decision to allow this suit to proceed marks a reversal of an earlier ruling, in which a lower court said the plaintiffs did not have legal standing to pursue the case.<br />
<br />
[Image courtesy <a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/military/nsa-police.html">PBS</a>]<p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/02/telecoms-win-immunity-in-wiretapping-case-us-court-approves-sep/">Telecoms win immunity in wiretapping case, US court approves separate suit against the government</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Mon, 02 Jan 2012 07:44:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/02/telecoms-win-immunity-in-wiretapping-case-us-court-approves-sep/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/20138369/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/02/telecoms-win-immunity-in-wiretapping-case-us-court-approves-sep/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>appeal</category><category>appeals</category><category>att</category><category>EFF</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>lawsuits</category><category>national security</category><category>national security agency</category><category>NationalSecurity</category><category>NationalSecurityAgency</category><category>NSA</category><category>privacy</category><category>privacy issues</category><category>Privacy Policy</category><category>privacy rights</category><category>PrivacyIssues</category><category>PrivacyPolicy</category><category>PrivacyRights</category><category>sprint</category><category>Sprint Nextel</category><category>SprintNextel</category><category>surveillance</category><category>telecoms</category><category>Verizon</category><category>warrantless wiretapping</category><category>WarrantlessWiretapping</category><category>wiretapping</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Dana Wollman]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2012 07:44:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[EFF takes the fight to Carrier IQ, requests reinforcements]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2011/12/22/eff-takes-the-fight-to-carrier-iq-requests-reinforcements/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2011/12/22/eff-takes-the-fight-to-carrier-iq-requests-reinforcements/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2011/12/22/eff-takes-the-fight-to-carrier-iq-requests-reinforcements/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<div style="text-align: center;">
	<img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/12/telescreen.jpg" style="border-width: 0px; border-style: solid; margin: 4px;" /></div>
<div>
	If we didn't love the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/eff">EFF</a> already, we'd be proposing marriage now that it's managed to reverse-engineer <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2011/12/01/carrier-iq-what-it-is-what-it-isnt-and-what-you-need-to/">Carrier IQ's</a> pernicious monitoring software. CIQ exists in phones in three parts, the app itself, a configuration file and a database -- where your keystrokes and coded "metrics" are logged before being sent to the company. Volunteer Jared Wierzbicki cracked the configuration profile and produced <em>IQIQ</em>, an Android app that reveals what parts of your activity are being monitored. Now the Foundation is posting an open call for people to share their data using the app in order to decipher what personal data was collected and hopefully decrypt the rest of the software. Hopefully, our thoughts can soon turn to who's gonna play the part of <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/trevor+eckhart/">Trevor Eckhart</a> in the <em>All the Presidents Men</em>-style biopic.</div><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2011/12/22/eff-takes-the-fight-to-carrier-iq-requests-reinforcements/">EFF takes the fight to Carrier IQ, requests reinforcements</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Thu, 22 Dec 2011 10:19:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2011/12/22/eff-takes-the-fight-to-carrier-iq-requests-reinforcements/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/20133619/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2011/12/22/eff-takes-the-fight-to-carrier-iq-requests-reinforcements/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Al Franken</category><category>AlFranken</category><category>Carrier IQ</category><category>CarrierIq</category><category>Civil Liberties</category><category>CivilLiberties</category><category>EFF</category><category>Electronic Frontier Foundation</category><category>ElectronicFrontierFoundation</category><category>mobilepostcross</category><category>Privacy</category><category>Security</category><category>Spy</category><category>Spyware</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Daniel Cooper]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 22 Dec 2011 10:19:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[The Engadget Show is live, here at 6:00PM ET!]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/19/the-engadget-show-is-live-here-at-6-00pm-et/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/19/the-engadget-show-is-live-here-at-6-00pm-et/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/19/the-engadget-show-is-live-here-at-6-00pm-et/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<div style="text-align: center;">
	<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/19/the-engadget-show-is-live-here-at-6-00pm-et/"><img alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/07/engadget-show-logo-1310764107.jpg" style="width: 600px; height: 320px;" /></a></div>
<div>
	The Engadget Show is live again, tonight, starting at <strong>6:00PM ET</strong>! Not only will it be filmed live in New York City, it will be streaming live to you on these very internets. Lock your browser in to this address at that time and you'll receive yourself a visual treat and an information smorgasbord.<br />
	<br />
	We'll be looking at <strong>RIM's latest smartphones</strong> and seeing how they fare, taking a trip to Italy to get a peek at what the <strong>Ferrari of 2030</strong> might look like, chatting with Fusion Garage's <strong>Chandra Rathakrishnan</strong> about the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/16/hands-on-with-fusion-garages-grid-10-tablet-and-grid-4-smartpho/">Grid 10 and Grid 4</a> (and why his company deserves a second chance), taking over<strong> Times Square</strong>, and <strong>chatting with the EFF</strong> to figure out just what the heck Google is going to do with <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/15/google-acquiring-motorola-mobility/">all those patents</a>.<br />
	<br />
	<strike>Again, it'll be <em>live</em> here at 6:00PM ET.</strike><br />
	<br />
	<strong>Update:</strong> Thanks guys. Look for the recording early next week!</div><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/19/the-engadget-show-is-live-here-at-6-00pm-et/">The Engadget Show is live, here at 6:00PM ET!</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Fri, 19 Aug 2011 18:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/19/the-engadget-show-is-live-here-at-6-00pm-et/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/20022293/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2011/08/19/the-engadget-show-is-live-here-at-6-00pm-et/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>blackberry</category><category>eff</category><category>engadget show</category><category>EngadgetShow</category><category>ferrari</category><category>fusion garage</category><category>FusionGarage</category><category>rim</category><category>video</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Brian Heater]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 19 Aug 2011 18:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Compromised account leads to massive Bitcoin sell off, EFF reconsiders use of currency]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/22/compromised-account-leads-to-massive-bitcoin-sell-off-eff-recon/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/22/compromised-account-leads-to-massive-bitcoin-sell-off-eff-recon/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/22/compromised-account-leads-to-massive-bitcoin-sell-off-eff-recon/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<div style="text-align: center;">
	<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/22/compromised-account-leads-to-massive-bitcoin-sell-off-eff-recon/"><img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/06/bitcoin-selloff-06-21-2011.jpg" style="border-width: 0px; border-style: solid; margin: 4px;" /></a></div>
Bitcoin, for those not aware, is a completely digital currency -- one where exchanges between individuals are largely anonymous and secured through cryptography, and one that has seen its hype-meter go off the charts in recent months. That, inevitably, has had some people waiting for a fall, and it took a big one this week. While things have since bounced back, the value of the currency on the so-called Mt. Gox exchange dropped from around $17.50 to just <em>one cent</em> in a matter of moments during the early hours of June 20th -- a drop that's since been attributed to a compromised account. Thanks to a daily withdrawal limit, however, that apparently only resulted in $1,000 actually being stolen, and a claims process has now been set up for those affected.<br />
<br />
While not directly related to the sell off, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (or <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/eff">EFF</a>) also dealt a bit of a blow to the upstart currency this week, when it announced that it would no longer be accepting Bitcoin donations. According to the organization, that's both because it doesn't "fully understand the complex legal issues involved with creating a new currency system," and because it doesn't want its acceptance of Bitcoins misconstrued as an endorsement of Bitcoin. Head on past the break for an account of the aforementioned plunge as it happened.<br />
<br />
[Thanks, Zigmar; image: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bitcoin_crash_2011-06-19.png">Wikipedia</a>]<p><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/22/compromised-account-leads-to-massive-bitcoin-sell-off-eff-recon/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Compromised account leads to massive Bitcoin sell off, EFF reconsiders use of currency</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/22/compromised-account-leads-to-massive-bitcoin-sell-off-eff-recon/">Compromised account leads to massive Bitcoin sell off, EFF reconsiders use of currency</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Wed, 22 Jun 2011 06:56:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/22/compromised-account-leads-to-massive-bitcoin-sell-off-eff-recon/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/19973020/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/22/compromised-account-leads-to-massive-bitcoin-sell-off-eff-recon/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>bitcoin</category><category>bitcoins</category><category>currency</category><category>digital currency</category><category>DigitalCurrency</category><category>eff</category><category>sell off</category><category>SellOff</category><category>video</category><category>virtual currency</category><category>VirtualCurrency</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Donald Melanson]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 06:56:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[PA school district issued order to refrain from webcam spying (video)]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/23/pa-school-district-issued-order-to-refrain-from-webcam-spying-v/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/23/pa-school-district-issued-order-to-refrain-from-webcam-spying-v/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/23/pa-school-district-issued-order-to-refrain-from-webcam-spying-v/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<div style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://blog.laptopmag.com/aclu-and-eff-speak-out-against-school-webcam-spying"><img hspace="4" border="0" vspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/02/100223-webcamspying-01.jpg" alt="" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">Why a school district would ever think it was acceptable to secretly snap pictures of its students -- in their own homes, no less -- is totally beyond us, but with any luck the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/18/school-allegedly-uses-students-laptop-webcam-for-espionage-law?icid=sphere_blogsmith_inpage_engadget">Lower Merion School District webcam caper</a> will soon have its day court. Yesterday, an attorney for plaintiff Blake Robbins' confirmed that an agreement was reportedly finalized to stop the school from spying on its students while preserving evidence for the lawsuit. "What gets me in this situation is that I can't imagine there's a parent anywhere who would support the school district's actions here," said ACLU of Pennsylvania Legal Director (and all around good guy) Vic Walczak. "[W]hat the school allegedly has done here is the equivalent of the principal breaking into the house, hiding in the child's closet, and then watching him or her from there." Yuck! For more info on the technical aspects of this case, peep the video after the break.<br />
<br />
<strong>Update</strong>: Seems that someone dug up some of the school's policies surrounding the webcam surveillance, and suffice it to say, the <a href="http://www.boingboing.net/2010/02/22/school-spying-infect.html">bullet points listed here</a> are downright crazy. How crazy? How's about "possession of a monitored MacBook was required for classes, and possession of an unmonitored personal computer was forbidden and would be confiscated." Oh, and "disabling the camera was impossible." </div>
<div style="text-align: left;"> </div><p><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/23/pa-school-district-issued-order-to-refrain-from-webcam-spying-v/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>PA school district issued order to refrain from webcam spying (video)</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/23/pa-school-district-issued-order-to-refrain-from-webcam-spying-v/">PA school district issued order to refrain from webcam spying (video)</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:27:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/23/pa-school-district-issued-order-to-refrain-from-webcam-spying-v/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/19370244/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/23/pa-school-district-issued-order-to-refrain-from-webcam-spying-v/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>aclu</category><category>camera</category><category>eff</category><category>harriton</category><category>harriton high school</category><category>HarritonHighSchool</category><category>invasion of privacy</category><category>InvasionOfPrivacy</category><category>law</category><category>law suit</category><category>LawSuit</category><category>legal</category><category>lindy mastko</category><category>LindyMastko</category><category>Lower Merion</category><category>Lower Merion school district</category><category>LowerMerion</category><category>LowerMerionSchoolDistrict</category><category>mastko</category><category>Pennsyvlania</category><category>privacy</category><category>suit</category><category>Vic Walczak</category><category>VicWalczak</category><category>web cam</category><category>WebCam</category><category>wow</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Joseph L. Flatley]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:27:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[E-reader privacy policies compared: Big Kindle is watching you]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/27/e-reader-privacy-policies-compared-big-kindle-is-watching-you/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/27/e-reader-privacy-policies-compared-big-kindle-is-watching-you/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/27/e-reader-privacy-policies-compared-big-kindle-is-watching-you/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<div style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/e-book-privacy"><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2009/12/12-27-09kindlepriv1.jpg"  alt="" /><br />
</a></div>
It's definitely shaping up to be the year of e-book readers: the Amazon Kindle is <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/27/kindle-most-gifted-item-in-amazons-history-e-books-outsell-phy/">flying off (virtual) shelves</a>, and we'd expect the Barnes &amp; Noble <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/nook">Nook</a> to start moving at a decent clip once the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/26/nook-fails-to-communicate-download-purchased-ebooks/">kinks get worked out</a>. But any device with an always-on 3G connection to a central server raises some privacy questions, especially when it can broadcast granular, specific data about what you're reading -- data that's subject to a wide spectrum of privacy laws and regulations when it comes to real books and libraries, but much less so in the digital realm. We'd say it's going to take a while for all the privacy implications of e-books to be dealt with by formal policy, but in the meantime the best solution is to be informed -- which is where this handy chart from our friends at the Electronic Frontier Foundation comes in. As you'd expect, the more reading you do online, the more you can be tracked -- and Google Books, the Kindle, and the Nook all log a ton of data that can be shared with law enforcement and various other third parties if required. Of course, we doubt the cops are too interested in your <i>Twilight</i> reading habits, but honestly, we'd rather users weren't tracked at all. Check the full chart and more at the read link.<br />
<br />
[Thanks, Tom]<p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/27/e-reader-privacy-policies-compared-big-kindle-is-watching-you/">E-reader privacy policies compared: Big Kindle is watching you</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Sun, 27 Dec 2009 16:04:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/27/e-reader-privacy-policies-compared-big-kindle-is-watching-you/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/19294823/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/27/e-reader-privacy-policies-compared-big-kindle-is-watching-you/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>amazon</category><category>amazon kindle</category><category>AmazonKindle</category><category>barnes and noble</category><category>barnes and noble nook</category><category>BarnesAndNoble</category><category>BarnesAndNobleNook</category><category>e-book</category><category>e-book reader</category><category>E-bookReader</category><category>e-reader</category><category>ebook</category><category>ebook reader</category><category>EbookReader</category><category>eff</category><category>Electronic Frontier Foundation</category><category>ElectronicFrontierFoundation</category><category>ereader</category><category>google</category><category>google books</category><category>GoogleBooks</category><category>kindle</category><category>law</category><category>laws</category><category>legal</category><category>nook</category><category>privacy</category><category>privacy policy</category><category>PrivacyPolicy</category><category>reader</category><category>sony</category><category>sony reader</category><category>SonyReader</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Nilay Patel]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 27 Dec 2009 16:04:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Sprint handed customer GPS data to law enforcement over 8 million times last year]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/02/sprint-handed-customer-gps-data-to-law-enforcement-over-8-millio/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/02/sprint-handed-customer-gps-data-to-law-enforcement-over-8-millio/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/02/sprint-handed-customer-gps-data-to-law-enforcement-over-8-millio/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<div style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://paranoia.dubfire.net/2009/12/8-million-reasons-for-real-surveillance.html"><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2009/12/091202-sprintgps-02.jpg" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">Privacy advocates and career criminals alike are in a lather over reports that between September 2008 and October 2009, Sprint Nextel ponied up customer location data to various law enforcement agencies more than 8 million times. Speaking at ISS World 2009 (a conference for law enforcement and telecom industry-types responsible for "lawful interception, electronic investigations and network Intelligence gathering"), Sprint Nextel's very own Paul Taylor, Manager of Electronic Surveillance, lamented on the sheer volume of requests the company's received in the past year for precise GPS data for Sprint customers. How did the company meet such high demand? Apparently, his team built a special "web interface" which "has just really caught on fire with law enforcement." We're glad that Sprint's plans to <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/09/29/atandt-sprint-t-mobile-verizon-goaded-into-customer-service-sho/">streamline the customer service experience</a> don't stop short of those who serve and protect, but as the EFF points out, plenty of nagging questions remain, including: How many individual customers have been affected? Is Sprint demanding search warrants? How secure is this web interface? Check out an excerpt from Taylor's speech after the break.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;"> </div><p><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/02/sprint-handed-customer-gps-data-to-law-enforcement-over-8-millio/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Sprint handed customer GPS data to law enforcement over 8 million times last year</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/02/sprint-handed-customer-gps-data-to-law-enforcement-over-8-millio/">Sprint handed customer GPS data to law enforcement over 8 million times last year</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Wed, 02 Dec 2009 15:51:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/02/sprint-handed-customer-gps-data-to-law-enforcement-over-8-millio/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/19262200/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/12/02/sprint-handed-customer-gps-data-to-law-enforcement-over-8-millio/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>big brother</category><category>BigBrother</category><category>cellphone</category><category>Christopher Soghoian</category><category>ChristopherSoghoian</category><category>eff</category><category>gps</category><category>GPS data</category><category>GpsData</category><category>Paul Taylor</category><category>PaulTaylor</category><category>privacy</category><category>security</category><category>sprint</category><category>sprint nextel</category><category>SprintNextel</category><category>surveillance</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Joseph L. Flatley]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 15:51:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Apple: Jailbreaking encourages cell tower terrorism, "catastrophic results"]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/29/apple-jailbreaking-encourages-cell-tower-terrorism-catastroph/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/29/apple-jailbreaking-encourages-cell-tower-terrorism-catastroph/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/29/apple-jailbreaking-encourages-cell-tower-terrorism-catastroph/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<img align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2009/06/phone-3gs-small.jpg" alt="" />If <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/iphone-3-0s-broken-push-messaging-caused-by-unlockers-dirty/">trashing your push messaging</a> wasn't enough to steer you clear of using your iPhone in unauthorized ways, this next bit of news might have you back on the straight and narrow. According to <em>Wired</em>, Apple's latest salvo in the fight over jailbreaking is a claim that pernicious, iPhone wielding techno-hackers at home or abroad could modify the baseband and use it to attack cellphone towers, "rendering the tower entirely inoperable to process calls or transmit data." Of course, the idea that this would become more likely if the legal status of <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/jailbreak/">jailbreaking</a> changes is totally absurd, but why let that stand in the way of a legal argument?<br /><br />In a related note, one of our editors (whose jailbroken iPhone shall remain nameless) got a strange baseband pop-up error this morning -- the very same morning that AT&amp;T is suffering a "massive connectivity outage" throughout the northeast and midwest. Coincidence? Yeah, probably.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/jailbreak/">Read</a> - iPhone Jailbreaking Could Crash Cellphone Towers, Apple Claims<br /><a href="http://www.gottabemobile.com/2009/07/29/anyone-experience-the-att-outage/">Read</a> - Anyone Experience the AT&amp;T Outage?<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/handsets/" rel="tag">Handsets</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/atandt/" rel="tag">ATT</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/apple/" rel="tag">Apple</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/os-x/" rel="tag">iPhone OS</a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/29/apple-jailbreaking-encourages-cell-tower-terrorism-catastroph/">Apple: Jailbreaking encourages cell tower terrorism, "catastrophic results"</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:37:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/29/apple-jailbreaking-encourages-cell-tower-terrorism-catastroph/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/19113151/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/29/apple-jailbreaking-encourages-cell-tower-terrorism-catastroph/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>apple</category><category>apple iphone</category><category>AppleIphone</category><category>atandt</category><category>att</category><category>baseband</category><category>dmca</category><category>eff</category><category>electronic frontier foundation</category><category>ElectronicFrontierFoundation</category><category>iphone</category><category>iphone os</category><category>iphoneos</category><category>jailbreak</category><category>mobile</category><category>national security</category><category>NationalSecurity</category><category>outage</category><category>terror</category><category>terrorism</category><category>unlock</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Joseph L. Flatley]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:37:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Apple: Jailbreaking encourages cell tower terrorism, "catastrophic results"]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/29/apple-jailbreaking-encourages-cell-tower-terrorism-catastroph/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/29/apple-jailbreaking-encourages-cell-tower-terrorism-catastroph/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/29/apple-jailbreaking-encourages-cell-tower-terrorism-catastroph/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<img align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2009/06/phone-3gs-small.jpg" alt="" />If <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/iphone-3-0s-broken-push-messaging-caused-by-unlockers-dirty/">trashing your push messaging</a> wasn't enough to steer you clear of using your iPhone in unauthorized ways, this next bit of news might have you back on the straight and narrow. According to <em>Wired</em>, Apple's latest salvo in the fight over jailbreaking is a claim that pernicious, iPhone wielding techno-hackers at home or abroad could modify the baseband and use it to attack cellphone towers, "rendering the tower entirely inoperable to process calls or transmit data." Of course, the idea that this would become more likely if the legal status of <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/jailbreak/">jailbreaking</a> changes is totally absurd, but why let that stand in the way of a legal argument?<br /><br />In a related note, one of our editors (whose jailbroken iPhone shall remain nameless) got a strange baseband pop-up error this morning -- the very same morning that AT&amp;T is suffering a "massive connectivity outage" throughout the northeast and midwest. Coincidence? Yeah, probably.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/jailbreak/">Read</a> - iPhone Jailbreaking Could Crash Cellphone Towers, Apple Claims<br /><a href="http://www.gottabemobile.com/2009/07/29/anyone-experience-the-att-outage/">Read</a> - Anyone Experience the AT&amp;T Outage?<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/cellphones/" rel="tag">Cellphones</a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/29/apple-jailbreaking-encourages-cell-tower-terrorism-catastroph/">Apple: Jailbreaking encourages cell tower terrorism, "catastrophic results"</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:37:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/29/apple-jailbreaking-encourages-cell-tower-terrorism-catastroph/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/19113101/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/29/apple-jailbreaking-encourages-cell-tower-terrorism-catastroph/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>apple</category><category>apple iphone</category><category>AppleIphone</category><category>att</category><category>baseband</category><category>dmca</category><category>eff</category><category>electronic frontier foundation</category><category>ElectronicFrontierFoundation</category><category>iphone</category><category>jailbreak</category><category>national security</category><category>NationalSecurity</category><category>outage</category><category>terror</category><category>terrorism</category><category>unlock</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Joseph L. Flatley]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2009 12:37:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Apple and EFF spar over iPhone jailbreaking and the DMCA]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/13/apple-and-eff-spar-over-iphone-jailbreaking-and-the-dmca/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/13/apple-and-eff-spar-over-iphone-jailbreaking-and-the-dmca/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/13/apple-and-eff-spar-over-iphone-jailbreaking-and-the-dmca/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<div align="center"><a href="http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/02/apple-says-jailbreaking-illegal"><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2009/02/2-13-09applejb.jpg" alt="" /></a><br /></div>
Uh oh, Ashton, it looks like Apple might have a thing or two to say about that <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/13/celebrity-nerds-ashton-kutcher-jailbreaks-his-iphone-fends-off/">jailbroken iPhone of yours</a>. Every three years the Copyright Office asks for proposed exemptions to the Digital Millenium Copyright Act's rules against breaking access protections, and this time around the lovable scamps at the Electronic Frontier Foundation have asked that jailbreaking phones -- like, yes, the iPhone -- be classified as one of those exceptions. As you might have guessed, Apple's response to the EFF isn't exactly supportive of the idea: it says the proposed rule will "destroy the technological protection of Apple's key copyrighted computer programs in the iPhone device itself and of copyrighted content owned by Apple that plays on the iPhone." Both sides have filed long briefs supporting their positions with extremely detailed legal arguments, but the main takeaways are that the EFF thinks that allowing jailbreaking will result in more apps and innovation, and Apple points out that the App Store is already hugely successful and that jailbroken phones are technically running unauthorized modifications of Apple's copyrighted iPhone code that allows them to run <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/02/crackulous-released-promises-to-bust-iphone-app-protection-sche/">pirated applications</a>. Interestingly, Apple's <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/09/25/engadget-cares-save-us-from-apples-groundbreaking-developer-s/">convoluted App Store approval process </a>is the center of a lot of discussion, and Apple is totally disengeniuous about it, saying there's no "duplication of functionality" rule and as proof claims to have allowed "<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/14/apple-suddenly-approves-a-bunch-of-browsers-for-app-store-major/">multiple general web browsers</a>... and multiple <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/22/apple-approves-third-party-email-client-for-the-app-store-viola/">mail programs</a>." Note to the Copyright Office: if you believe this we have a very nice bridge to sell you.<br /> <br /> Now, let's be clear: while we're definitely hoping the EFF pulls this one out, the worst thing that can result of all this is the status quo -- Apple isn't asking for jailbreaking to specifically be ruled illegal, it's just asking that it <em>not</em> be specifically ruled <em>legal</em>. If that sounds like a fuzzy distinction, well, it is, but that's the sort of gray area that keeps everyone else out of court for the time being. We'll find out more in the spring, when the Copyright Office holds hearings -- final rulings are due in October.<br /> <br /> <a href="http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/02/apple-says-jailbreaking-illegal">Read</a> - EFF page on the jailbreaking debate<br /> <a href="http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/dmca_2009/EFF%2BRM%2Bproposals.pdf">Read</a> - EFF's brief (PDF)<br /> <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/1201/2008/responses/apple-inc-31.pdf">Read</a> - Apple's reply (PDF)<br /> <a href="http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/dmca_2009/EFF2009replycomment_0.pdf">Read</a> - EFF's second brief (PDF)<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/apple/" rel="tag">Apple</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/os-x/" rel="tag">iPhone OS</a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/13/apple-and-eff-spar-over-iphone-jailbreaking-and-the-dmca/">Apple and EFF spar over iPhone jailbreaking and the DMCA</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Fri, 13 Feb 2009 12:52:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/13/apple-and-eff-spar-over-iphone-jailbreaking-and-the-dmca/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/1459735/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/13/apple-and-eff-spar-over-iphone-jailbreaking-and-the-dmca/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>apple</category><category>copyright</category><category>dmca</category><category>eff</category><category>iphone</category><category>iphone os</category><category>iphoneos</category><category>jailbreak</category><category>jailbreaking</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>legal</category><category>mobile</category><category>pwn</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Nilay Patel]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2009 12:52:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Apple and EFF spar over iPhone jailbreaking and the DMCA]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/13/apple-and-eff-spar-over-iphone-jailbreaking-and-the-dmca/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/13/apple-and-eff-spar-over-iphone-jailbreaking-and-the-dmca/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/13/apple-and-eff-spar-over-iphone-jailbreaking-and-the-dmca/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<div align="center"><a href="http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/02/apple-says-jailbreaking-illegal"><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2009/02/2-13-09applejb.jpg" alt="" /></a><br /></div>
Uh oh, Ashton, it looks like Apple might have a thing or two to say about that <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/13/celebrity-nerds-ashton-kutcher-jailbreaks-his-iphone-fends-off/">jailbroken iPhone of yours</a>. Every three years the Copyright Office asks for proposed exemptions to the Digital Millenium Copyright Act's rules against breaking access protections, and this time around the lovable scamps at the Electronic Frontier Foundation have asked that jailbreaking phones -- like, yes, the iPhone -- be classified as one of those exceptions. As you might have guessed, Apple's response to the EFF isn't exactly supportive of the idea: it says the proposed rule will "destroy the technological protection of Apple's key copyrighted computer programs in the iPhone device itself and of copyrighted content owned by Apple that plays on the iPhone." Both sides have filed long briefs supporting their positions with extremely detailed legal arguments, but the main takeaways are that the EFF thinks that allowing jailbreaking will result in more apps and innovation, and Apple points out that the App Store is already hugely successful and that jailbroken phones are technically running unauthorized modifications of Apple's copyrighted iPhone code that allows them to run <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/02/crackulous-released-promises-to-bust-iphone-app-protection-sche/">pirated applications</a>. Interestingly, Apple's <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/09/25/engadget-cares-save-us-from-apples-groundbreaking-developer-s/">convoluted App Store approval process </a>is the center of a lot of discussion, and Apple is totally disengeniuous about it, saying there's no "duplication of functionality" rule and as proof claims to have allowed "<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/14/apple-suddenly-approves-a-bunch-of-browsers-for-app-store-major/">multiple general web browsers</a>... and multiple <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/22/apple-approves-third-party-email-client-for-the-app-store-viola/">mail programs</a>." Note to the Copyright Office: if you believe this we have a very nice bridge to sell you.<br /> <br /> Now, let's be clear: while we're definitely hoping the EFF pulls this one out, the worst thing that can result of all this is the status quo -- Apple isn't asking for jailbreaking to specifically be ruled illegal, it's just asking that it <em>not</em> be specifically ruled <em>legal</em>. If that sounds like a fuzzy distinction, well, it is, but that's the sort of gray area that keeps everyone else out of court for the time being. We'll find out more in the spring, when the Copyright Office holds hearings -- final rulings are due in October.<br /> <br /> <a href="http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/02/apple-says-jailbreaking-illegal">Read</a> - EFF page on the jailbreaking debate<br /> <a href="http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/dmca_2009/EFF%2BRM%2Bproposals.pdf">Read</a> - EFF's brief (PDF)<br /> <a href="http://www.copyright.gov/1201/2008/responses/apple-inc-31.pdf">Read</a> - Apple's reply (PDF)<br /> <a href="http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/dmca_2009/EFF2009replycomment_0.pdf">Read</a> - EFF's second brief (PDF)<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/cellphones/" rel="tag">Cellphones</a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/13/apple-and-eff-spar-over-iphone-jailbreaking-and-the-dmca/">Apple and EFF spar over iPhone jailbreaking and the DMCA</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Fri, 13 Feb 2009 12:52:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/13/apple-and-eff-spar-over-iphone-jailbreaking-and-the-dmca/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/1459714/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/13/apple-and-eff-spar-over-iphone-jailbreaking-and-the-dmca/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>apple</category><category>copyright</category><category>dmca</category><category>eff</category><category>iphone</category><category>jailbreak</category><category>jailbreaking</category><category>lawsuit</category><category>legal</category><category>pwn</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Nilay Patel]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2009 12:52:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[NBC admits "inadvertent" broadcast flag use, still doesn't explain why it actually worked]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/20/nbc-admits-inadvertent-broadcast-flag-use-still-doesnt-expla/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/20/nbc-admits-inadvertent-broadcast-flag-use-still-doesnt-expla/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/20/nbc-admits-inadvertent-broadcast-flag-use-still-doesnt-expla/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9947631-7.html?part=rss&amp;subj=news&amp;tag=2547-1_3-0-20"><img vspace="4" hspace="16" border="1" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.engadgethd.com/media/2008/05/moreyouknow_052008.jpg" /></a>Just an update on the broadcast flag <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/18/broadcast-flag-rides-again-courtesy-of-nbc-and-microsoft/">controversy</a>: NBC has copped to an "inadvertent mistake" in flagging the broadcast of <em>American Gladiators</em> as content prohibited from recording, while Microsoft stated it is only following the FCC's rules, and "fully adheres to flags used by broadcasters". This conveniently ignores the fact that there is <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/23/broadcast-flag-stalled-once-again/">no legal requirement</a> for Windows Vista Media Center to recognize the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/broadcastflag">broadcast flag</a> and disable recording, but it does. Errant metadata can and does happen, but for such a "feature" to be buried within one's software unknowingly is troubling. Expect to hear more from the EFF and others questioning why Media Center unnecessarily turns parts of itself off at a broadcaster's command, and rightly so. What's most disturbing, and likely to go sadly without protest is that someone out there is actually watching, and trying to record for later, <em>American Gladiators</em>. The more you know indeed.<br /><br />[Via <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20080519/0243341165.shtml">Techdirt</a>]<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/homeentertainment/" rel="tag">Home Entertainment</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/mediapcs/" rel="tag">Media PCs</a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/20/nbc-admits-inadvertent-broadcast-flag-use-still-doesnt-expla/">NBC admits "inadvertent" broadcast flag use, still doesn't explain why it actually worked</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Tue, 20 May 2008 11:23:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9947631-7.html?part=rss&amp;subj=news&amp;tag=2547-1_3-0-20>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/20/nbc-admits-inadvertent-broadcast-flag-use-still-doesnt-expla/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/1200663/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/20/nbc-admits-inadvertent-broadcast-flag-use-still-doesnt-expla/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>american gladiators</category><category>AmericanGladiators</category><category>broadcast flag</category><category>BroadcastFlag</category><category>drm</category><category>eff</category><category>fcc</category><category>media center</category><category>media pc</category><category>media pcs</category><category>MediaCenter</category><category>mediapc</category><category>mediapcs</category><category>microsoft</category><category>vista</category><category>windows vista</category><category>WindowsVista</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard Lawler]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 11:23:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[NBC admits "inadvertent" broadcast flag use, still doesn't explain why it actually worked]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/20/nbc-admits-inadvertent-broadcast-flag-use-still-doesnt-expla/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/20/nbc-admits-inadvertent-broadcast-flag-use-still-doesnt-expla/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/20/nbc-admits-inadvertent-broadcast-flag-use-still-doesnt-expla/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9947631-7.html?part=rss&amp;subj=news&amp;tag=2547-1_3-0-20"><img vspace="4" hspace="16" border="1" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2008/05/moreyouknow_052008.jpg" alt="" /></a>Just an update on the broadcast flag <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/18/broadcast-flag-rides-again-courtesy-of-nbc-and-microsoft/">controversy</a>: NBC has copped to an "inadvertent mistake" in flagging the broadcast of <em>American Gladiators</em> as content prohibited from recording, while Microsoft stated it is only following the FCC's rules, and "fully adheres to flags used by broadcasters". This conveniently ignores the fact that there is <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/23/broadcast-flag-stalled-once-again/">no legal requirement</a> for Windows Vista Media Center to recognize the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/broadcastflag">broadcast flag</a> and disable recording, but it does. Errant metadata can and does happen, but for such a "feature" to be buried within one's software unknowingly is troubling. Expect to hear more from the EFF and others questioning why Media Center unnecessarily turns parts of itself off at a broadcaster's command, and rightly so. What's most disturbing, and likely to go sadly without protest is that someone out there is actually watching, and trying to record for later, <em>American Gladiators</em>. The more you know indeed.<br /><br />[Via <a href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20080519/0243341165.shtml">Techdirt</a>]<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/media-pcs/" rel="tag">Media PCs</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/nbc/" rel="tag">NBC</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/ota/" rel="tag">OTA</a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/20/nbc-admits-inadvertent-broadcast-flag-use-still-doesnt-expla/">NBC admits "inadvertent" broadcast flag use, still doesn't explain why it actually worked</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Tue, 20 May 2008 11:23:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9947631-7.html?part=rss&amp;subj=news&amp;tag=2547-1_3-0-20>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/20/nbc-admits-inadvertent-broadcast-flag-use-still-doesnt-expla/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/1200659/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/20/nbc-admits-inadvertent-broadcast-flag-use-still-doesnt-expla/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>american gladiators</category><category>AmericanGladiators</category><category>broadcast flag</category><category>BroadcastFlag</category><category>drm</category><category>eff</category><category>fcc</category><category>hd</category><category>media center</category><category>MediaCenter</category><category>nbc</category><category>ota</category><category>windows vista</category><category>WindowsVista</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard Lawler]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 11:23:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Broadcast Flag rides again, courtesy of NBC &amp; Microsoft?]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/18/broadcast-flag-rides-again-courtesy-of-nbc-and-microsoft/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/18/broadcast-flag-rides-again-courtesy-of-nbc-and-microsoft/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/18/broadcast-flag-rides-again-courtesy-of-nbc-and-microsoft/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<div align="center"><a href="http://justinjas.com/post/34602210"><img alt="" hspace="4" src="http://www.engadgethd.com/media/2008/05/broadcastflag_justinjas_051808.jpg" vspace="4" border="1" /></a><br /></div>
Just like efforts to close the <a href="http://www.engadgethd.com/2008/05/16/mpaa-dangles-early-hd-vod-releases-in-exchange-for-closing-that/">analog hole</a>, our old friend the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/search/?q=broadcast+flag&amp;searchsubmit=">broadcast flag</a> (don't remember what that is and how it was <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/23/broadcast-flag-stalled-once-again/">defeated</a>? Take a quick trip <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2005/02/17/the-clicker-demystifying-the-broadcast-flag/">back to 2005</a> with us) has reared its ugly head again. Displaying the kind of tenacity rarely seen outside of horror movie villains and potential presidential candidates, some Vista Media Center users have apparently gotten the above popup while trying to record broadcast TV from NBC. Since the FCC regulation giving the broadcast flag its power to remotely disable your recording ability was overturned, not only should it not be enabled, there's no reason the system should respond if it were. The EFF's working with the makers of the <a href="http://www.engadgethd.com/tag/hdhomerun">HDHomeRun</a> to find out why this happened at all (although it's not the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/01/canadian-cable-providers-locking-out-vista-media-centers/">first time</a>); whether it's an honest mistake somewhere or if Microsoft slipped a bit of extra DRM into its latest OS.<br /><br />[Via <a href="http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/05/update-nbc-and-microsoft">EFF</a>]<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/homeentertainment/" rel="tag">Home Entertainment</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/mediapcs/" rel="tag">Media PCs</a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/18/broadcast-flag-rides-again-courtesy-of-nbc-and-microsoft/">Broadcast Flag rides again, courtesy of NBC &amp; Microsoft?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Sun, 18 May 2008 16:28:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://justinjas.com/post/34602210>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/18/broadcast-flag-rides-again-courtesy-of-nbc-and-microsoft/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/1198898/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/18/broadcast-flag-rides-again-courtesy-of-nbc-and-microsoft/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>broadcast flag</category><category>BroadcastFlag</category><category>copy protection</category><category>CopyProtection</category><category>drm</category><category>eff</category><category>fcc</category><category>hdhomerun</category><category>media center</category><category>media pc</category><category>media pcs</category><category>MediaCenter</category><category>mediapc</category><category>mediapcs</category><category>micosoft</category><category>nbc</category><category>vista</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard Lawler]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 18 May 2008 16:28:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Broadcast Flag rides again, courtesy of NBC &amp; Microsoft?]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/18/broadcast-flag-rides-again-courtesy-of-nbc-and-microsoft/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/18/broadcast-flag-rides-again-courtesy-of-nbc-and-microsoft/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/18/broadcast-flag-rides-again-courtesy-of-nbc-and-microsoft/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<div align="center"><a href="http://justinjas.com/post/34602210"><img alt="" hspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2008/05/broadcastflag_justinjas_051808.jpg" vspace="4" border="1" /></a><br /></div>
Just like efforts to close the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/16/mpaa-dangles-early-hd-vod-releases-in-exchange-for-closing-that/">analog hole</a>, our old friend the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/search/?q=broadcast+flag&amp;searchsubmit=">broadcast flag</a> (don't remember what that is and how it was <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2005/06/23/broadcast-flag-stalled-once-again/">defeated</a>? Take a quick trip <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2005/02/17/the-clicker-demystifying-the-broadcast-flag/">back to 2005</a> with us) has reared its ugly head again. Displaying the kind of tenacity rarely seen outside of horror movie villains and potential presidential candidates, some Vista Media Center users have apparently gotten the above popup while trying to record broadcast TV from NBC. Since the FCC regulation giving the broadcast flag its power to remotely disable your recording ability was overturned, not only should it not be enabled, there's no reason the system should respond if it were. The EFF's working with the makers of the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/hdhomerun">HDHomeRun</a> to find out why this happened at all (although it's not the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/01/canadian-cable-providers-locking-out-vista-media-centers/">first time</a>); whether it's an honest mistake somewhere or if Microsoft slipped a bit of extra DRM into its latest OS.<br /><br />[Via <a href="http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/05/update-nbc-and-microsoft">EFF</a>]<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/regulatory/" rel="tag">Regulatory</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/media-pcs/" rel="tag">Media PCs</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/nbc/" rel="tag">NBC</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/ota/" rel="tag">OTA</a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/18/broadcast-flag-rides-again-courtesy-of-nbc-and-microsoft/">Broadcast Flag rides again, courtesy of NBC &amp; Microsoft?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Sun, 18 May 2008 16:28:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://justinjas.com/post/34602210>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/18/broadcast-flag-rides-again-courtesy-of-nbc-and-microsoft/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/1198896/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/18/broadcast-flag-rides-again-courtesy-of-nbc-and-microsoft/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>broadcast flag</category><category>BroadcastFlag</category><category>copy protection</category><category>CopyProtection</category><category>drm</category><category>eff</category><category>fcc</category><category>hd</category><category>hdhomerun</category><category>media center</category><category>MediaCenter</category><category>microsoft</category><category>nbc</category><category>ota</category><category>vista</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard Lawler]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 18 May 2008 16:28:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comcast backs off BitTorrent, will continue to manage internet traffic]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/27/comcast-lays-off-bittorrent-will-continue-to-manage-internet-tr/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/27/comcast-lays-off-bittorrent-will-continue-to-manage-internet-tr/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/27/comcast-lays-off-bittorrent-will-continue-to-manage-internet-tr/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<div align="center"><a href="http://www.philly.com/philly/business/homepage/20080327_Comcast_agreement_in_dispute_with_BitTorrent.html"><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="0" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2008/03/3-27-08-comcast_hearts_bt.jpg" /></a><br /></div>
Although Comcast has been <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/19/comcast-engaging-in-data-discrimination/">beating around</a> the proverbial bush about its <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/24/comcast-fesses-up-to-traffic-delays/">data-meddling ways</a>, it seems the pressure from the recent <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/09/fcc-to-investigate-comcast-bittorrent-filtering/">FCC investigation efforts</a> have forced it to play nice. Reportedly, the firm is getting set to (<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/02/eff-claims-that-comcast-is-still-meddling-with-data/">begrudgingly</a>, we presume) announce that it will "stop targeting BitTorrent on the internet." More specifically, the cable company will purportedly "boost broadband capacity" in order to make things speedier all around, but details on this tidbit were unsurprisingly absent. Nevertheless, BitTorrent has also agreed to make its software "more efficient," but those hoping that Comcast would leave well enough alone are in for even more disappointment. The outfit still plans on managing traffic on the 'net (standard practice, we know), but Tony Werner, executive VP and CTO, noted that it was "working hard on a different approach that is protocol-agnostic during peak periods."<br /><br />[Thanks, Mike and <a href="http://www.virtica.net/">Kenneth</a>]<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/networking/" rel="tag">Networking</a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/27/comcast-lays-off-bittorrent-will-continue-to-manage-internet-tr/">Comcast backs off BitTorrent, will continue to manage internet traffic</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Thu, 27 Mar 2008 10:06:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.philly.com/philly/business/homepage/20080327_Comcast_agreement_in_dispute_with_BitTorrent.html>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/27/comcast-lays-off-bittorrent-will-continue-to-manage-internet-tr/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/1150526/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/27/comcast-lays-off-bittorrent-will-continue-to-manage-internet-tr/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>BitTorrent</category><category>blocking</category><category>comcast</category><category>data discrimination</category><category>DataDiscrimination</category><category>EFF</category><category>Electronic Frontier Foundation</category><category>ElectronicFrontierFoundation</category><category>fcc</category><category>internet</category><category>net neutrality</category><category>NetNeutrality</category><category>p2p</category><category>packet forgery</category><category>piracy</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Darren Murph]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 10:06:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[EFF, ALC sue Homeland Security over laptop, gadget searches]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/08/eff-alc-sue-homeland-security-over-laptop-gadget-searches/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/08/eff-alc-sue-homeland-security-over-laptop-gadget-searches/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/08/eff-alc-sue-homeland-security-over-laptop-gadget-searches/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<div align="center"><a href="http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2008/02/07"><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2008/02/eff-alc-dhs-lawsuit.jpg"  alt="" /></a>
<div align="left">The <a href="http://www.engadget.com/search/?q=EFF">EFF</a> sure has set it sights high with its latest lawsuit, with it now teaming up with the Asian Law Caucus (ALC) to sue the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/dhs">Department of Homeland Security</a> over laptop and gadget searches and other alleged infringements of civil liberties at U.S. borders. Specifically, the two groups are asking for the DHS to disclose its policies on questioning travelers on First Amendment-protected activities, including the photocopying of individuals' papers, and the searching of laptops and other electronic devices. According to the EFF, that rather drastic move was prompted by the DHS's failure to meet a 20-day time limit Congress had set for responding to public information requests. Needless to say, the DHS itself doesn't seem to have a whole lot to say on the matter at the moment, and we're guessing that situation won't be changing anytime soon.<br /><br />[Via <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/08/eff_alc_sues_homeland_security/">The Register</a>, image courtesy of <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2004/homeland.html">WhiteHouse.gov</a>]</div>
</div><p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/cellphones/" rel="tag">Cellphones</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/handhelds/" rel="tag">Handhelds</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/laptops/" rel="tag">Laptops</a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/08/eff-alc-sue-homeland-security-over-laptop-gadget-searches/">EFF, ALC sue Homeland Security over laptop, gadget searches</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Fri, 08 Feb 2008 15:44:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2008/02/07>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/08/eff-alc-sue-homeland-security-over-laptop-gadget-searches/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/1110395/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/08/eff-alc-sue-homeland-security-over-laptop-gadget-searches/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>border</category><category>border searches</category><category>BorderSearches</category><category>department of homeland security</category><category>DepartmentOfHomelandSecurity</category><category>dhs</category><category>eff</category><category>searches</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Donald Melanson]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2008 15:44:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[EFF claims that Comcast is still meddling with data]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/02/eff-claims-that-comcast-is-still-meddling-with-data/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/02/eff-claims-that-comcast-is-still-meddling-with-data/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/02/eff-claims-that-comcast-is-still-meddling-with-data/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/20071130/tc_pcworld/140168"><img vspace="16" hspace="4" border="0" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2007/11/10-19-07-comcast.jpg"  alt="" /></a>According to a report released by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), Comcast has yet to relinquish its <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/24/comcast-fesses-up-to-traffic-delays/">data discriminating habits</a>, and users attempting to share content via P2P could still face slowdowns and unexpected delays. Of course, Comcast's Charlie Douglas proclaimed that the firm "does not, has not, and will not block any web site or online application, including peer-to-peer services," but followed up by stating that it did engage in "reasonable network management to serve all of its customers with a good internet experience." The EFF, however, saw things differently. During its own tests, it was reportedly able to confirm <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/19/comcast-engaging-in-data-discrimination/">conclusions drawn</a> earlier this year by the AP, and it also exclaimed that Comcast was "essentially deploying against its own customers techniques more typically used by malicious hackers." Pretty strong words, to say the least, but we're curious to know if the continued Comcast bashing is indeed legitimate. So, dear readers / Comcast users, are you still (or have you ever, for that matter) experiencing sketchy P2P performance, or is this all just one overblown mess?<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/networking/" rel="tag">Networking</a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/02/eff-claims-that-comcast-is-still-meddling-with-data/">EFF claims that Comcast is still meddling with data</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Sun, 02 Dec 2007 01:36:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/20071130/tc_pcworld/140168>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/02/eff-claims-that-comcast-is-still-meddling-with-data/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/1052205/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/02/eff-claims-that-comcast-is-still-meddling-with-data/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>bittorrent</category><category>blocking</category><category>comcast</category><category>data discrimination</category><category>DataDiscrimination</category><category>EFF</category><category>Electronic Frontier Foundation</category><category>ElectronicFrontierFoundation</category><category>internet</category><category>net neutrality</category><category>NetNeutrality</category><category>p2p</category><category>packet forgery</category><category>PacketForgery</category><category>piracy</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Darren Murph]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 02 Dec 2007 01:36:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Who Killed TiVoToGo?]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/14/who-killed-tivotogo/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/14/who-killed-tivotogo/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/14/who-killed-tivotogo/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<img vspace="4" hspace="16" border="0" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2007/01/eff.jpg" />It is nearly impossible to be a HDTV fan and to <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2006/02/27/mike-evangelist-changes-hd-boycott-to-aacs-drm-only/">boycott DRM</a>, because DRM is embedded in almost every type of HD programming. As with all DRM it is very complicated and almost impossible to keep track of all the limitations and restrictions. Every time we turn around we learn of another form and the only HDTV without restrictions is <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2006/01/30/ota-hd-demystified/">OTA HD</a>, which was <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2006/06/28/broadcast-flag-one-step-closer-to-reality/">almost locked down via the <em>Broadcast Flag</em></a>. The latest feature to fall victim to DRM is <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/06/whats-so-great-about-the-series-3-tivo/">TiVoToGo on the Series3</a> and right around the corner are some of our <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/12/microsofts-cablecard-drm/">favorite Vista Media Center features</a>, like rolling your own HD DVR. While none of this is a surprise to most of us you may not know the whole story and the Electric Frontier Foundation has done a great job of laying it all out and even providing everyone with a list of things that you can do to make a difference.<br /><br /><br />[Via <a href="http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=335807">TiVoCommunity.com</a>]<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/industry/" rel="tag">Industry</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/regulatory/" rel="tag">Regulatory</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/set-top-boxes/" rel="tag">Set-top boxes</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/cable/" rel="tag">Cable</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/fiber/" rel="tag">Fiber</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/satellite/" rel="tag">Satellite</a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/14/who-killed-tivotogo/">Who Killed TiVoToGo?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Sun, 14 Jan 2007 08:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.eff.org/IP/pnp/cablewp.php>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/14/who-killed-tivotogo/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/735596/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/14/who-killed-tivotogo/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>cable</category><category>CableCARD</category><category>DRM</category><category>EFF</category><category>fiber</category><category>hd</category><category>satellite</category><category>TiVoToGo</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Ben Drawbaugh]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 14 Jan 2007 08:30:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[How to get HDTV on your Linux PC]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2005/12/27/how-to-get-hdtv-on-your-linux-pc/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2005/12/27/how-to-get-hdtv-on-your-linux-pc/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2005/12/27/how-to-get-hdtv-on-your-linux-pc/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<br /><img vspace="4" hspace="8" border="1" align="middle" src="http://www.hdbeat.com/media/2005/12/guide.png"alt="Linux program guide" /><br /><br />Because Windows Media Center owners shouldn't have all the fun. Theinstructions are a little complicated but dude, if you're running Linux that should be par for the course.&nbsp; TheEFF recommends you build your own HD PVR while you still can, since for the moment at least the "<ahref="http://www.eff.org/broadcastflag/">Broadcast flag</a>" legislation is DOA.<br /><br />Any HDBeatreaders&nbsp; currently getting HDTV on their non-Windows/Mac box?<br /><br />[Via <ahref="http://digg.com/linux_unix/HDTV_in_your_Linux_Box">digg</a>]<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/diy/" rel="tag">DIY</a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2005/12/27/how-to-get-hdtv-on-your-linux-pc/">How to get HDTV on your Linux PC</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Tue, 27 Dec 2005 15:48:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://linuxgazette.net//118/knaggs.html>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2005/12/27/how-to-get-hdtv-on-your-linux-pc/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/574717/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2005/12/27/how-to-get-hdtv-on-your-linux-pc/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>eff</category><category>hd</category><category>hdtv</category><category>high definition</category><category>HighDefinition</category><category>linux</category><category>media center</category><category>MediaCenter</category><category>pvr</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Richard Lawler]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 27 Dec 2005 15:48:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[EFF says buy a DTV tuner card NOW!]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2005/12/27/eff-says-buy-a-dtv-tuner-card-now/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2005/12/27/eff-says-buy-a-dtv-tuner-card-now/</guid><comments>http://www.engadget.com/2005/12/27/eff-says-buy-a-dtv-tuner-card-now/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<br /><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" alt="Flux capacitor"src="http://www.hdbeat.com/media/2005/12/flux.jpg" />Fred von Lohmann from the <a href="http://eff.org/">ElectronicFrontier Foundation</a> suggests a proactive approach to counteract the digital lockdown of devices in the future: <ahref="http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,69917-0.html?tw=wn_tophead_3">buy a DTV tuner card now</a>. Fred wants youto spend your money now, just in case the dreaded HDTV broadcast flag is raised up on the ugly flagpole again.<br /><br/>We're all for snapping up a DTV tuner card; heck, we <ahref="http://www.hdbeat.com/2005/11/27/sub-grand-wmce-3-hdtv-tuner/">just did that last month</a> for our WMCE machine.Is a proactive purchase really going to help us if the copyright standards are reviewed and implemented? Fred, we're notsure if you're a grandfather or not, but we don't think an early purchase will grandfather us under a broadcast flagruling. If you're in the market for a DTV tuner, go for it, but trying to purchase technology to circumvent the futureusually don't work. That's why we recently passed on <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088763/">a flux-capacitorpurchase</a>; it doesn't matter, we didn't have <a href="http://www.delorean.com/">the DeLorean</a> to go with it.<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/industry/" rel="tag">Industry</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/media-pcs/" rel="tag">Media PCs</a>, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/ota/" rel="tag">OTA</a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2005/12/27/eff-says-buy-a-dtv-tuner-card-now/">EFF says buy a DTV tuner card NOW!</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.engadget.com">Engadget</a> on Tue, 27 Dec 2005 10:36:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,69917-0.html?tw=wn_tophead_3>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2005/12/27/eff-says-buy-a-dtv-tuner-card-now/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/574924/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2005/12/27/eff-says-buy-a-dtv-tuner-card-now/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>DTV</category><category>EFF</category><category>hd</category><category>HD Beat</category><category>HdBeat</category><category>HDTV</category><category>ota</category><category>TV</category><category>WMCE</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Kevin C. Tofel]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 27 Dec 2005 10:36:00 EST</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
