Monthly Archive for June, 2006

Jihad Generation

Bag o'BombI just heard a journalist on the BBC’s Newshour programme talking about the young Canadian men accused today of planning a bombing campaign. While discussing the implications of the fact that five of the people charged were under 18 he said that people were concerned that there was a “jihad generation” of young people emerging, with more militant views than their parents. What an ugly expression and how attractive it will prove to bad journalists. I am almost tempted to start a Site of Shame charting those hacks who use or avoid using it.

I was also rather alarmed by a picture supplied by the Associated Press captioned “Police seized an array of bomb-making materials”. As far as I could tell the only thing in the bag of bomb-making equipment that I don’t own is what looks like a PMR446 walkie-talkie, and I have been considering buying a couple of those. It’s a good job I garden organically or I might be in real trouble.

BBC NEWS | Americas | Canada charges 17 terror suspects

Come back Pirate Bay

Sharing is CaringI have a friend who has never pirated any software. He’s not an imaginary friend, he genuinely doesn’t have anything on his computers that he didn’t pay for. He regularly tells me about the latest way in which he’s been stiched up by the companies that he so generously supports. The most recent purchase was Kore 1.0 from Native Instruments. It is full of bugs and misfeatures, he paid a fortune for it. I’m sure it will get more reliable and work properly sooner or later, I just hope he doesn’t have to pay again for the ‘upgrade’ to the fully-functional version.

Meanwhile I have been known to occassionally use someone else’s copy of a program, just to make sure that it works properly. And so I have sometimes been a client of the Pirate Bay. This Swedish torrent tracker helps you download things like programs and music for free via bittorrent (I know, it hardly needs explaining these days). At least they did until the Swedish police raided them and took away their servers, despite the fact that what they were doing was apparently legal in Sweden. I hope they come back soon.

One of the great things about their site was that they published all the letters and emails they got from tough-talking software lawyers and companies. They also published their replies, which invariably smacked of dumb insolence.

To: law@iprights.com
Subject: Re: URGENT - FOOTBALL MANAGER TRADE MARK INFRINGEMENT
On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 law@iprights.com wrote:
> Dear Sirs
> Our client: SEGA Europe Limited
> We act on behalf of SEGA Europe Limited in the enforcement of its Intellectual Property Rights in the United Kingdom.
> As you will be aware, Sega is world famous and is recognised as being an industry leader in interactive entertainment. Sega, and its software developer Sports Interactive Limited have recently announced that its new football management PC game FOOTBALL MANAGER 2005 is due to be launched later this month. As a result of the recent publicity our client and Sports Interactive enjoy a substantial reputation and goodwill in the FOOTBALL MANAGER name.
> Further, SEGA developer, Sports Interactive is the owner of a UK trade mark registration for FOOTBALL MANAGER under number 2,169,952. We attach details of the UK registered trade mark for your information.
> thepiratebay.org website / FOOTBALL MANAGER 2005
> It has come to our client’s attention that through the service provided by your thepiratebay.org website, users are able, by clicking on a link on your website featuring the FOOTBALL MANAGER trade mark, to download an unauthorised and illegal version of our client’s new FOOTBALL MANAGER 2005 PC game. In this regard, your website is currently listing FOOTBALL MANAGER 2005 as number 1 in its Top 50 and a substantial number of UK users used your services to download this game in the UK.
> By providing this service to UK users using the FOOTBALL MANAGER name, you are infringing the FOOTBALL MANAGER trade mark in the UK. Further, our client is concerned that due to the volume of illegal copies of our client’s FOOTBALL MANAGER 2005 PC game being provided via your service our client is losing substantial sums of money in lost sales.
> This email is ask that you immediately remove the link complained of, and to confirm that there will be no further misuse of the FOOTBALL MANAGER trade mark in relation to your services.
> In the meantime, our client reserves its rights in respect of any causes of action available to it in this matter and in respect of any claim for costs and/or damages against you. In this regard, your speed in complying with our requests will be taken into account.
> Yours faithfully
> Willoughby & Partners 

Dear Sir(s), Madam(s), and/or Slimemold(s), I have the distinct pleasure of informing you that no Swedish trademark and/or coypyright law is being violated, regardless of how the situation may or may not be under UK law. I would advise you to read up on Swedish trademark law, more specifically Varumarkeslag (1960:644), as this might save you a great deal of future humiliation. I would also advise you to a) not write the subject all in UPPERCASE, as it makes spam filters go nuts b) not attach meaningless data from trademark registrys in PDF format and c) stop lying.

Of course I can see Sega’s point, they’re trying to be reasonable. But there’s something in me which admires the outrageous cheek of the Pirate response. The word, I think, is Chutzpah.

Those theiving b***ards

So, let’s get this straight. Europe’s mobile phone operators were charging extortionate fees for calls made and received while people were abroad. The European Commission asked them to reduce their outrageous prices and they argued that people should be grateful that they had already reduced prices, by 8% last year. Gee, thanks guys. But the EC wasn’t impressed. It threatened to pass a law forcing the operators to charge the same prices whether or not customers were roaming. Surprise, surprise, the operators suddenly found that they could actually make much bigger savings. The boss of T-Mobile even had the cheek to say that this shows “that market forces in the mobile industry function and do not need regulatory intervention”. Somehow I don’t think that’s the conclusion most people will be drawing.