Cyber Criminal

In one of the newer developments concerning the adverse ruling the Unites States received from the World Trade Organization in it’s dispute with Antigua and Barbuda over online gaming the United States has decided to withdraw from one of it’s WTO commitments “We did not intend and do not intend to have gambling as part of our services agreement. What we are doing is just clarifying our commitments” said Deputy US trade representative John K Veroneau.

This despite the fact that ten years ago there was extensive debate, proposals and counterproposals from all WTO members concerning what commitments would be made. To make such a statement is the equivalent of saying I thought I was in school, I wasn’t paying attention. More than a dozen countries specifically excluded gambling from their commitments and the Unites States was not one of these countries. As Antigua’s Minister for Finance and the Economy said “It is almost incomprehensible that the United States would take such an action in the face of an adverse ruling. This is going to have severe consequences for the global free trade movement”.

Since the original treaties were negotiated multilaterally the United States will have to renegotiate with the 149 other countries that object to the US position and who now want to renegotiate their commitments with the United States. For the United States to say they made a mistake is a blatant falsehood. The US had competent negotiators at the original treaty negotiations, they knew what they were doing, and to say otherwise damages the credibility of the US in future negotiations of any kind. This kind of decision undermines faith in a carefully negotiated system that depends on the perception that all members, large and small, rich and poor, have rights, obligations and responsibilities to be taken seriously.

This move on the part of the United States could have serious unintended consequences. Both Antigua and Barbuda have proposed suspending enforcement of US intellectual property rights. This could lead to massive bootlegging of movie DVD’s and music CD’s. Both countries have determined that this last ditch measure is the only way to gain the attention of the United States. Just as internet gaming is the second largest industry in both countries, after tourism, the entertainment industry in the US produces hundreds of billions of dollars in revenues and losing even a part of that income is a serious matter.

In the words of John Ashe the Antiguan ambassador to the World Trade Organization, “We believe the time has come for the United States to demonstrate whether the WTO agreements are to work for us all equally, or whether the WTO is indeed a one way street for the large economies to enrich themselves at the expense of lesser ones.” It is time for the US to stop moralizing and live up to the agreements set forth in treaties the government ratifies.

Read more

Big Brother Society

European Union wants to introduce the directive of data storage. What will this mean for you?

The directive of data storage gives the authorities the chance to demand to store information about tele logs, net traffic logs and much more for a minimum period of 6 months, but no longer than 2 years.

As it is today the telecom companies takes care of the information they need for invoicing and in addition some logs for access to the network.

These logs are normally stored for a period of 3-5 months time dependent upon the subscription type. Cash card subscription does not need any invoice information storage and therefore the information stored is not large or not stored at all.

With the new directive of data storage the amount of information that will be stored will be tremendous, to also contain information about where any cell phone is at any given time, and what internet sites visited and more than this.

Normally no individual will notice anything different, however some authorities dealing with te privacy act, does not agree totally with this statement.

Even yourself will not remember who you talked to on the cell phone last week, or where you were at any given time last week. The authorities will now know this better than yourself. They will have information about where you were, who you were with and who you talked to, up to two years time from the moment you interacted with someone, or just werer you were with your cell phone.

The data stored will be used by police in investigations and comes as a result of te terror attacks in London last year. The goal with this directive is to streamline the European security policy. And we will see more of this type of data used in investigative purposes, and we have to wonder if it is enough to weigh against the negative aspects of these kind of directives.

The police authorities needs to investigate criminals and not any law obedient citizen. A complete surveillance of all citizens over a longer period such as up to two years will begin to look like Big Brother Society which Orson Wells in his book wrote about long time ago. Maybe his vision was not so far from the truth to come?

The case surrounding this directive has not been touched much in the media, but strong feelings are risen amongst those engaged in this matter. The privacy act and the danger of misuse of such surveillance data are key words amongst those advocating against this directive.

One of the major concerns is the security of these data stored around on various servers around in Europe. Especially we have seen this lately in the UK where less careful handling of data has led to exposure of highly confidential and private information in to the public. You can ask yourself, what if it comes into criminal hands?

More and more data is stored about people around in the world, and one of the areas have been how secure our medical records have been handled and stored. We have seen several occasions around the world how easy it is to get access to or that data has been exposed to the public.

What about false positive indications during an investigation leading to suspects amongst innocent people? Wireless connections makes misuse of the connection by people an issue. So if someone taps into your wireless connection, suddenly you can become a suspect if some traffic during this illegal tapping was found to fit a pattern during the investigation. Then you are in focus since you own this wireless connection which has been tapped into.

The criminals will find ways to make this a hiding place and will find methods to create innocent victims since the storage of traffic data is to be used more and more in criminal investigations.

Unregistered cash cards becomes more and more obsolete in most countries, however, identity theft is still happening and there are already cases seen were criminals utilize this loop hole to create innocent victims as part of their activities.

Maybe there is a need for more tools in a modern technology world in order to catch the criminal, however the act of privacy has to be ensured, and loopholes to be tightened before any directive gives a chance for criminals to create innocent victims and lead the investigators down the wrong path during its pursuit of criminals.

Read more

A trademark or domain name threat letter is basically what it sounds like. It’s a letter or a sometimes an email from an alleged trademark owner with a threat to take legal action if you do not stop using their trademark registration, domain name, etc.. A trademark is a word, symbol or phrase used to identify a particular manufacturer or sellers product and allow them to distinguish themselves from the product or services of another. So what happens, usually, is you get a letter from the trademark owner providing notice of trademark rights and demanding that you cease and desist use of the mark or domain name. Threat letter lawyers typically cite the federal Lanham Act and/or Anti-Cybersquatting Protection Act in support of the claim of a trade mark or service mark right violation.

Don’t be confused by the legal jargon. A ‘cease and desit’ letter is essentially telling you that someone believes they have legal rights against you and that if you continue your infringing activity they will file a lawsuit against you. The attorney will often include a trademark assignment or domain transfer agreement with the threat letter for you to sign. Often times the trademark threat letter is nothing more than a standard letter that the signing attorney has sent out many times before.

The first thing you should do if you receive a threat letter, notice letter or cease and desist letter is to contact a domain name dispute or trademark attorney; one who has experience in trademark matters and cybersquatting matters. If you receive a threat letter, try to relax and don’t panic. Some of these cease and desist letters are bogus, fraudulent or simply misstate the law or facts. A good trademark attorney can analyze the merits of the letter and provide recommendations.There are any number of legal defenses which might allow you to fight back.

Enrico Schaefer is the founding attorney of Traverse Legal, PLC, a law firm specializing in internet and web law http://www.traverselegal.com . You can find out more about trademarks, domain disputes and cease and desist letters at Traverse Legal’s blogs found at http://tcattorney.typepad.com/domainnamedispute/ & http://tcattorney.typepad.com/ip/ . Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Enrico_Schaefer

Read more

How many of you remember the famous movie Casablanca? There is a scene in which Louis (the police chief) has just told Rick (Humphrey Bogart that he is shutting down his cafe. When Rick inquires why, the police chief, as he is being handed gambling winnings from the cafe’s cashier, says I am shocked, shocked to find out that gambling is going on here. Hypocrisy right? But that’s the same kind of logic used in the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act passed in 2006.

A brief inquiry into the history of this bill and the means by which it was passed reveals the hypocrisy of so many that it is truly shocking. The bill was tacked on to the Port Security Act by Republican Bill Frist (R-Tennessee) shortly before the bill was presented in the middle of the night with no time for debate. In fact many in congress were totally unaware of this ridiculous addition to a much needed bill to ensure port safety and security.

As it turns out Senator Frist has some serious ethical problems of his own including, campaign finance law violations, and insider trading. Frist said that he was concerned about minors gambling online which would be a good point if it were true. A recent 60 Minutes episode had a minor trying to access various gaming sites without success. Another argument given was to protect public safety and morals. Given the wide variety of pornography, bomb making, hate groups, and drug manufacturing information available on the internet to users of any age the argument seems absurd.

Another argument frequently used by conservatives is that gambling possibly could support terrorism. Terrorism seems to be invoked whenever the current administration needs to find a justification for bills that would restrict or limit rights enumerated in the US constitution. To date there has not been one documented event or incident linking online gambling to terrorism or money laundering. Terrorism is a serious business but when it is used as a smokescreen to justify the current administration’s agenda the public may tend to ignore credible threats.

When gaming industry tried to reach Frist there was no response but a referral to a statement issued to a special interest religious group. Essentially Frist said that brick and mortar casinos were ok but somehow online gaming is somehow more objectionable. With new software that blocks minors from playing on online sites Mr. Frist’s arguments become moot. Essentially Mr. Frist is pandering to a tiny minority that welcomes government intrusion into their lives.

A vast majority of Americans resent government intrusion into their private lives but somehow government never seems to get the message. Most reasonable people would agree that what a person does in the privacy of their own home or how they choose to dispose of their money is their own business and those adults are fully capable of making informed decisions about the way they choose to conduct their lives.

Take the example of online bingo, a traditionally socially acceptable form of gambling. Charitable organizations and churches have been using bingo as a fundraising tool for decades. Not everyone, especially those in remote and rural areas has access to these games but still desire to play bingo. The internet is the obvious solution for these citizens and to deny them access to online bingo would essentially make them unequal merely because of their location. These players are making a choice to play from the privacy of their own homes and spending their own hard earned dollars and what government entity has the right to say they can’t?

A new bill submitted for consideration in congress by Barney Frank (D-Mass) would essentially repeal the bad piece of legislation that is the Uniform Internet Gambling Enforcement Act. It would regulate and possibly tax internet gaming and the revenues generated would help several government programs. Frank is joined by Ron Paul (R-Texas) a Republican who believes that citizens are capable of making their own decisions making him one of the few to adhere to the founding principles of his party. A companion bill to Frank’s was introduced by Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) which essentially allow gaming revenues to be taxed.

Another ray of hope is a lawsuit filed by the Interactive Media Entertainment & Gaming Association against Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, the Federal Trade Commission, and the Federal Reserve. The lawsuit seeks to halt enforcement of the UIGEA on the grounds that it is an infringement on the rights of free speech, freedom of association, and equal protection under the law. The lawsuit has asked the court for a temporary restraining order. Unfortunately as it is, occasionally a lawsuit is the only way to void a bad piece of legislation.

Our constitution allows citizens to petition the government for redress of grievances and time and time again this has been the most effective way for citizens to make their views and feelings known to their representatives. There have been several cases in which a few letters, e mails, and phone calls have influenced the way a legislator may vote on a particular issue. Obviously bingo players and other gamers are not criminals, capable of making their own decisions, and should start to stand up for their rights. Believe it or not, contacting your respective representatives can actually have an effect. A civil, well reasoned letter, phone call, or e mail is one sure way for a legislator to know how their constituents feel about an issue or piece of legislation.

Two quotes, the first by Abraham Lincoln, and the second by the renowned author Ayn Rand are extremely applicable when discussing the topic of individual freedom;

Prohibition goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man’s appetite by legislation and makes crimes out of things that are not crimes. A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded.

Abraham Lincoln

The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What’s there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted and you create a nation of law-breakers and then you cash in on guilt.

Ayn Rand, (Atlas Shrugged) 1957

Read more

45 Gb of data stored about you on the internet

In 2007 IDC, the analytical company, illustrate that around 45 Gb of data is stored about you in 2007 on the internet.

However, only half of this is produced by yourself, rest is made in the digital shadow beyond your control.

This is systems catching up and storing information about yourself, without you knowing it in most cases. It could be software blogs, email lists, surveillance cameras and so on.

The contrast on the digital shadow gets stronger and stronger, and research illustrate that we live more and more of our lives in the cyber space.

Lack of regulations about storage and erasure of data information is the biggest challenge. Mostly it is anarchy in both the public and the private sector on how the technology is utilized. The regulators are fragmented and segmented, which enables loopholes and lack of regulations in some areas.

Research shows that the amount of data around our persons increase with around 60 percent per year, and is driven by third generation internet like social network spaces and the increasing amount of surveillance cameras around the world, internet telephone and various access mechanisms produced.

The big increase may surprise you, but it leads us into the core of the challenge. The cost of storage is low so one does not bother to erase data, in case you will need it for something else later. It may not be legal, and the information becomes available outside your country borders, and there is very little you can do now.

He opening for EU directive of data storage of individuals, creates a debate which focus on this aspect as well. The cost of storing so much data which increases with over 60 percent per year, creates a wake up call for most of us.

Sadly enough, we may have to have a disaster in this area of data storage to make people open up their eyes and create a debate around this area of private data stored on the internet, its amount, its security and how open it is to the consumer that data is collected and stored about them.

We should care more about this aspect, and begin to ask regulators about where our privacy is protected and what is done to ensure that data collectors are regulated and that the security it taken care of for the citizens.

Read more

A trademark or domain name threat letter is basically what it sounds like. It’s a letter or a sometimes an email from an alleged trademark owner with a threat to take legal action if you do not stop using their trademark registration, domain name, etc.. A trademark is a word, symbol or phrase used to identify a particular manufacturer or sellers product and allow them to distinguish themselves from the product or services of another. So what happens, usually, is you get a letter from the trademark owner providing notice of trademark rights and demanding that you cease and desist use of the mark or domain name. Threat letter lawyers typically cite the federal Lanham Act and/or Anti-Cybersquatting Protection Act in support of the claim of a trade mark or service mark right violation.

Don’t be confused by the legal jargon. A ‘cease and desit’ letter is essentially telling you that someone believes they have legal rights against you and that if you continue your infringing activity they will file a lawsuit against you. The attorney will often include a trademark assignment or domain transfer agreement with the threat letter for you to sign. Often times the trademark threat letter is nothing more than a standard letter that the signing attorney has sent out many times before.

The first thing you should do if you receive a threat letter, notice letter or cease and desist letter is to contact a domain name dispute or trademark attorney; one who has experience in trademark matters and cybersquatting matters. If you receive a threat letter, try to relax and don’t panic. Some of these cease and desist letters are bogus, fraudulent or simply misstate the law or facts. A good trademark attorney can analyze the merits of the letter and provide recommendations.There are any number of legal defenses which might allow you to fight back.

Enrico Schaefer is the founding attorney of Traverse Legal, PLC, a law firm specializing in internet and web law http://www.traverselegal.com . You can find out more about trademarks, domain disputes and cease and desist letters at Traverse Legal’s blogs found at http://tcattorney.typepad.com/domainnamedispute/ & http://tcattorney.typepad.com/ip/ . Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Enrico_Schaefer

Read more