BOL 1099: Secret ACTA treaty could break the Internet

Leaks from the secret negotiations of the ACTA treaty allege that ISPs worldwide would be required to lose safe harbor protections, implement three-strike antipiracy policies and worse. We think this is outrageous.

Tom Merritt Former CNET executive editor
5 min read

Leaks from the secret negotiations of the ACTA treaty allege that ISPs worldwide would be required to lose safe-harbor protections, implement three-strike antipiracy policies, and worse. We think this is outrageous. AT&T thinks Verizon is outrageous because of its commercials and so is taking Verizon to court. Also, EMI finally got around to suing BlueBeat.com for selling Beatles tracks online. But you can buy a Beatles USB stick for $280. So, you've got that going for you.

Watch this: Ep. 1099: Secret ACTA treaty could break the Internet


Subscribe with iTunes (audio)
Subscribe with iTunes (video)
Subscribe with RSS (audio)
Subscribe with RSS (video)


AT&T vs. Verizon: There’s a lawyer for that

AT&T sues Verizon over ‘there’s a map for that’ ads

T-Mobile USA says it has fixed voice, data outages

Leaked ACTA Internet provisions: Three strikes and a global DMCA

EMI sues Beatles-download Web site

The Beatles catalog being released on limited-edition USB stick

Nvidia confirms Intel chipsets won’t support USB 3.0 until 2011

…So, will Nvidia go rogue with its own x86 chipset?

UPDATE: Personal Droid data will cost $30

Verizon looking to bump early termination fee to $350 on ‘advanced’ devices

Another Verizon Droid commercial, Stealth, and it's awesome

PayPal unveils plans to open payment service

In test, Windows 7 vulnerable to 8 out of 10 viruses

Hi BOL crew!
I love the show but it can be hard to sit and listen to somebody for 5 minutes going on about a software licensing system that should be put into place, when it’s been around for 15 years or so.
It’s called Microsoft Open Licensing with Software Assurance. http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/software-assurance/default.aspx
Small and large corporations can purchase from this programme to license their applications and OS from Microsoft. They can opt in for Software Assurance which means they get any and all paid upgrades at no extra charge during the license period (Usually 3 years)
They also get support and other benefits. Media is sent out when required.
Some versions of the MS OLP allow companies to pay annually over the 3 years rather than up front if that helps their books. It does give you predictable IT expenditures.

When it comes to home users, most IT experts will agree that it’s usually best to use the OS that came with your computer and ignore major OS updates. Wait until you buy a new computer that comes with the new OS. Small updates like Snow Leopard on new computers like my March 2009 iMac make sense, especially at $30!
However, I like Tom, do not want to pay monthly or annually for my software. If it was an option it might be ok, but not the only one I hope.

I repeat, LTS!

Jay Rymal
Toronto, Ontario, Canada


Re: Nook v. Alex. I am not sure what trade secrets were taken from
Spring Design. Judging from the documents filed, Spring Design didn’t
even have a working prototype in the Feb 09 meeting, so the only thing
they exchanged were probably concepts. If B&N did not have a dual
screen e-book reader in the final development phase already, i.e., they
came up with it only after seeing the drawings in Feb 2009, B&N must
have one crack hardware engineering team (or ODM)/Android programmers to
get to a final product in 9 months.

Also, what’s the big deal about dual screens–Nintendo DS (hence the
name) has been around for a long time with split screen functionality.
Expanding it to a tablet size seems like an obvious expansion. Nintendo
lawyers: start your engines.



Hey Buzz crew! Bryan the Insurance IT guy here in Springfield, Missouri. I've been listening to the show for several years without writing or calling in, but I was listening to the Verizon/Exchange discussion in episode 1098 on the way to work this morning and thought I'd finally chime in with a couple of tidbits!

First, I administer Exchange and mobile devices for my office, and I can tell you there's no simple way for Verizon or any other carrier to detect and block Exchange ActiveSync traffic. ActiveSync encapsulates all device-server communications in HTTPS packets for security, so the only port that needs to be allowed for ActiveSync to work is port 443 - and you can bet all hell would break loose if any carrier tried to block port 443, as that's the port used for ALL SECURE WEBSITES! One thing they might try is to profile traffic patterns for ActiveSync and block based on that, but I'm guessing that's harder than it sounds and would get very messy, very quickly. Good luck to any carrier trying to pull THAT one off.

Second, I've now been involved in setting up half a dozen users with iPhones in my office, some on personal plans, and some on our recently-established corporate account. NONE OF US is paying the 45 bucks for "Enterprise" data service on the iPhone. For the users who set it up on their personal accounts, that didn't surprise me. I DID expect to get some pushback on the iPhone data plans for the corporate accounts, but in every case, we looked the AT&T rep in the eye and said, "Yes, it's a corporate account, but I'm only going to check personal email", and in every case, they didn't even blink. Maybe this attitude varies by region, but here in Southwest Missouri, at least, I've never heard of a case of AT&T forcing the $15 premium on iPhone users, even on business accounts. Incidentally, there's only one time we've been required to pony up the $45 for the enterprise data plan - AND IT WAS TO SUPPORT OUR LONE BLACKBERRY USER.

Maybe next time I'll call in, but I like to take serious relationships slowly. For now I'm still listening to other shows, but BOL holds a special place in my heart, and maybe one day I'll be able to commit.

Watch this: Ep. 1109: Web Exclusive - Leaked ACTA Internet provisions