VERY,VERY HOT READS, I Would Read The News In This Thread This Thead Is To post Any Thing Ye Want About The News,,NEWS WAS MOVED,READ MY FIRST POST..CHEERS
By Thomas J. Fitzgerald
The New York Times
Published: February 19, 2006, 6:00 AM PST
Tell us what you think about this storyTalkBack E-mail this story to a friendE-mail View this story formatted for printingPrint
Headphones that come with portable music players like the iPod are usually adequate in delivering an enjoyable experience, but often they are not the best choice for comfort, convenience or sound quality.
Earbud-style headphones that come with iPods, for example, can be uncomfortable after extended use and, if they do not fit properly, can jar loose. Moreover, many headphones are not effective at blocking outside noise, which can degrade sound quality and induce users to ratchet up the volume in loud surroundings.
A number of headphone options are available to improve the listening experience on portable music players. They include wireless headsets that can free you from having to deal with wires, sound-isolating earphones that form an acoustically sealed zone inside your ear canals, and noise-canceling headphones that reduce sounds in your environment. Some of the options can work with cell phones as well, allowing you to toggle between phone calls and music on the fly.
Wireless options
Several wireless headphones are made for use with iPods and other portable music players. These headphones employ the wireless protocol of Bluetooth to deliver stereo sound; a Bluetooth transmitter, included with the headphones, connects to the music player's headphone jack and broadcasts audio to the headset when within range. Bluetooth works at short distances, and these headsets typically enable roaming up to 30 feet from the music source.
For example, the iMuffs, from Wi-Gear, are about $130 and are compatible with many iPod models, including the Mini, Photo and third- and fourth-generation models (but not yet with the newest iPods, like the Nano and video iPod).
Buttons on the right earpiece control the iPod's volume and song selection, even when the iPod's hold feature is enabled, and the headset has a battery life of up to 16 hours of continuous use before it needs recharging. The transmitter, a white plastic enclosure, plugs into the top of the iPod and extends its length by about 1.2 inches.
In my tests using an iPod Mini, the sound quality of the iMuffs was about the same as that of the headphones that came with the iPod. For example, in a song with a moderate range of sounds, "Careless Love" by Madeleine Peyroux, the bass, vocals, keyboards and guitar were clear. The wireless connectivity worked well when the headset remained within a few feet of the iPod; when roaming away from the iPod, the music was occasionally interrupted.
A similar option is available for about $120 from Logitech, the Logitech Wireless Headphones for iPod. As with the iMuffs, the headset wraps around the back of your neck and is a "one size fits all" dimension, though it is slightly heavier than the iMuffs and provides a snugger fit. The Bluetooth transmitter that attaches to the iPod is bulkier--it includes its own battery whereas the iMuffs transmitter draws power from the iPod.
In my tests I found the sound quality to be roughly equivalent to the headphones that came with the iPod. The roaming range was good, and connectivity held up well through walls and windows.
Another wireless option is from Plantronics, the Pulsar 590A Bluetooth Headset. The device, about $250, has an adjustable headband that wraps over your head and a puck-shaped transmitter with a wire that connects to most standard 3.5mm audio jacks, including those on iPods, laptops, computers, portable CD players and minicassette players.
Like some of the other wireless headsets, the 590A comes with a built-in microphone and can simultaneously connect with Bluetooth-enabled cellphones and music players. When calls are answered or initiated, music is automatically switched off and the call takes center stage.
Using buttons on the earpiece, you can initiate calls using voice activation (if the phone allows it), adjust the volume, redial numbers and reject calls. A cable converts the wireless headphones to wired headphones--useful if the battery in the headset or transmitter needs recharging and you want to listen to a laptop or music player.
Enhanced sound
While wireless headphones offer convenience, other options are aimed at delivering higher sound quality. One option, called sound-isolating earphones, works by establishing an acoustically sealed area inside your ears and uses components made for more accurate sound reproduction. Essentially, the phones are like earplugs with a thin tube in the center that pipes music directly into the ear.
Several such options are available from Shure. I tested the company's E4c earphones ($300 at Bestbuy.com). It took a while to get the hang of using them; several types of tips are provided, in various shapes and sizes and made from materials that block sound.
After choosing tips with a comfortable fit and learning how to create an acoustic seal, I found the audio clear and strong. For example, in a song with a mishmash of guitar sounds in the background, "Dance Little Sister" by the Rolling Stones, the guitars were clear and it was easy to follow them.
Other sound-isolating options are available from Etymotic Research, including the $150 6i Isolator Earphones. These earphones include enhanced bass and can reduce outside sounds by an estimated 35 decibels, according to the company. Two types of tips are provided, and I found the ones made of a foamlike material more effective at blocking noise. You squeeze them before putting them in your ears, and they slowly expand to form a seal.
Noise-canceling headphones are another option for reducing sounds in noisy places, but they use a different technique. Instead of simply blocking sound, they include electrical components that actively cancel out noise; the device produces inverted sound waves to offset sounds detected in the environment. They require power sources like batteries, and they filter out sounds mainly in the lower ranges--the drone in airplane cabins or noise on trains and buses.
A model from Bose, the QuietComfort 2 Acoustic Noise-Canceling Headphones, is one such product, available for about $300. They are bulkier than Walkman-style headphones but comfortable, and the fit is snug. The padded headband wraps over your head, and the earphones, also padded, totally enclose your ears.
In my tests, on a cafe patio within earshot of a noisy highway, the overall experience, from the comfortable fit to the noise cancellation to the audio quality, was good. Listening to some brassy swing tunes that featured prominent bass amid an array of horns, the low sounds, as well as the highs, were strong.
Noise-canceling headphones are also available from Sennheiser, based in Wedemark, Germany. The PXC 300 model ($200 at Amazon.com) is one of several portable options. The earpieces do not completely cover your ears and the headband folds up, a bit like a pair of eyeglasses, to fit inside a case. Because of the small headset size, an additional tube-shaped enclosure is provided to store the batteries and components.
In tests at a noisy cafe, the PXC 300 filtered out much of the din, with higher frequency sounds like chatter and laughter occasionally getting through at muffled and tolerable levels. The audio quality was good; in Pink Martini's "Clementine," which begins softly with piano followed by percussion, then vocals and eventually horns, the sound was vibrant and clear, and the world around me slowly dissolved away.
http://news.com.com/On+the+go+with+upgraded+ears+-+page+2/2100-10...
p2p news / p2pnet: As you read this the duelling lawyers in the Kazaa case are back in court.
This time it's the appeal following the September decision. And the stakes are higher than ever. Where the earlier case was heard by a single judge, Judge Murray Wilcox, the appeal is to be heard by the full bench comprising federal court judges Justice Branson, Justice Finkelstein and Justice Lindgren over at least five days.
So what's happened, and what's going to happen?
On September 5, 2005, the record companies lost more than two thirds of their court case against Kazaa when Wilcox handed down a landmark ruling indicating that it wouldn't shut down Kazaa. And true to the court's word, Kazaa has not been shut down.
Despite this result, and despite criticism by Justice Wilcox, thed Big Four record companies sought to make the world believe they'd scored a major win.
Remember their famous words, "In an historic victory, the record industry has won its copyright case against Kazaa"?
The record companies even insisted on the steps of the court that there would be no appeal.
Now the record companies are showing their true colours. They're preparing to spend millions more of artists' money on an appeal against the very judgement they were, until recently, calling a victory.
But that's no surprise. Time after time they put their own interests ahead of the interests of recording artists and customers and it will be no different tomorrow in the Australian Federal Court.
The case promises excellent theatre. In a bizarre turn of events, the record companies come before the three judges having loudly declared, in an exchange between record industry lawyer Tony Bannon and Justice Wilcox, that they don't trust the full bench. (See page 45 of 52, of the transcript from January 30, 2006.)
The record company case has continued to unravel since judgement and now we'll see if this trend continues.
In any event, it's now evident the Australian record companies intend to shut down Kazaa, despite two years of promises not to do so.
In the meanwhile, the quotes have already started coming.
"Sharman Networks is determined to resist the record companies' appeal in this case with its own appeal presenting arguments against the record companies' position. We are confident of the ultimate outcome of this case."
And all of that is before a single word has even been uttered in the appeal.
p2pnet special: We home-school our daughter, Emma, 9, and one our most valuable resources is the Net. When we get stuck, we're just as likely to go online as open a book, and Emma now uses her computer routinely.
We have a lot of reasons for teaching her ourselves, not the least of which is the fact it's becoming increasingly dangerous for kids' mental health to go to school these days. And that's as much because entertainment and software cartel 'educational' programs are increasingly showing up in classrooms around the world, as anything else.
But, thank God, that's not something we, or other home-schooling parents, have to worry about.
We live on Vancouver Island in British Columbia, Canada, and belong to the Cowichan Valley Home Learners Group, a loose-knit organization of mums, dads and kids who meet fairly regularly so the children can play with, and learn from, each other, and to organize events.
Last year one member, Heather Drew, was at a very cool annual contest staged by Camosun, an innovative community college serving Victoria, southern Vancouver Island, the Gulf Islands, and beyond.
It was for sumo wrestlers - robot sumo wrestlers - and Heather thought that somehow getting our kids into the project might be interesting.
Alan Duncan, chair of Camosun's electronics and computer engineering school of trades and technology, agreed it was an interesting idea and last Monday, just about everyone turned up for a special mini-sumo robot construction day at Camosun, with hands on help from the instructors.
The robots (made from kits developed at Camosun, powered by small motors and able to 'see' with electronic sensors sensors) try to shove each other off special circular mats.
The sumos are programmed with downloadable software developed in C by instructor Mel Dundas, and the units can be easiy re-programmed to perform new tasks.
The kids worked from detailed instructions posted on purpose-designed web pages. Above, Emma and her friends Sam (centre) and Amanda Anderson put their creations together.
"We've had school groups before," Duncan told me. "But this was a first time with home-schoolers and we were very impressed." And, "Some of the kids were doing a better job at soldering than our regular students," said Dundas.
The Cowichan Valley Home School Group sumo robots will be 'wrestling' at the next contest in May.
Meanwhile, it'd be interesting to see how many other home-school parents there are out there who use the Net in one way or another.
If you're one such, email me, with pix, preferably, and we'll run another p2pnet Home School special.
Cheers! And all the best ?
Jon
Also See:
'educational' programs - They're brainwashing YOUR child, July 4, 2005
p2p news / p2pnet: We've moved this to the top because we don't want anyone to forget the Organized Music cartel, Vivendi Universal, Warner Music, EMI and Sony BMG, will stoop to anything to turn you into good little cash cows again.
And that includes terrorizing children.
Patti Santangelo is at the front end of the movement to expose the Big Four in full sight of the public eye so they can be seen for what they really are ? savage, venal corporations without soul and without a shred of concern for their customers - the people who keep them fat and obscenely rich.
The Fight Goliath campaign was started to make sure Patti Santangelo and her lawyer, Jordan Glass, are able to keep up with the Big Four with their bottomless pockets and endless streams of high-priced lawyers.
It's us against them ? us, with Patti in the lead.
The Fight Goliath fund is getting close to the $10,000 mark - $9,519.75 as I write this - and that's terrific, but we'll need a constant influx of $ until this is over. So please keep the donations coming.
Show Vivendi Universal, Warner Music, EMI and Sony BMG that they depend on us and not the other way around ...br>
Go here to see how much has been contributed so far.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
It's been a while since our last post on the Patti Santangelo Fight Goliath campaign, but that doesn't mean nothing is happening.
Patti was ill for a time (she's fine now) and Jordan Glass, her new attorney, has been marshalling his resources and, "putting every spare moment he has into our case," says Patti.
"Think of it as a 747 on the runway, powering up," says Glass. "Patti and I started together in the middle of things and there's much to do in terms of getting up to speed."
A New York discovery hearing was held before Judge Mark D. Fox today with another slated for February 17, although that may be moved.
"The importance of the discovery procedure makes it a bit difficult to share what's going on until it's been presented presented to the judge," Patti tells p2pnet. "But I hope that after this hearing, we'll be able to give you a complete breakdown of all that has happened thus far.
"And there will be a lot more to come."
This part of the case is, "primarily procedural and investigative," explains Glass. "The part people see - the trial - is a few months away and is based upon the foundation we lay now. The discovery phase is when cases are 'built' - when they're really' won or lost. The trial is when all the preparatory work is presented. If Patti doesn't build her case now, there will be nothing meaningful to present at trial."
What exactly is discovery? Here's how it works, he says:
Discovery, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, starting primarily with Rule 26: Discovery is a procedural tool for disclosing information, created with a public policy behind it. "Trial by surprise" is frowned upon, so the theory is that by both sides having all the information likely to be presented at trial (and even some information that can not be presented at trial), the obviousness of the result - or the risk to both sides - might persuade the parties to forge a settlement. When a settlement can be made, it saves everyone involved time, money, judicial resources (tax dollars), allows the parties to have certainty in their dealings, enables them to move on with the business of their lives instead of being mired in litigation, etc.
Both sides in civil litigation MUST "show their hands" (documents and other information) to each other prior to trial, with certain exceptions: some material is deemed privileged (such as the communications between attorney and client or the lawyer's strategy of the presentation); some material is deemed irrelevant or outside the scope of the litigation, and the reasons vary from "fishing" for information relevant only to other cases to trying to uncover personal embarrassing information to paint a negative picture of one party or the other; some information is deemed unreliable (such as certain types of hearsay), and so while the material might be "discoverable," it might not be presentable at trial (not everything can be presented at trial for additional reasons not presented here).
Discovery tools include: interrogatories (demands for written answers to questions); demands for the production and inspection of documents and other items (such as computers, audio tapes, video tapes, electronic information, such as e-mails, etc. - "documents" is a very broad term that includes most physical items (from entire buildings to particle samples) as well as electronic communications); demands for admissions (used to narrow the issues to be argued at trial); depositions of the parties -- and of non-parties - to the action; the exchange of expert's reports; and more.
Putting this material together invariably costs a huge amount, which is where the bulk of the money being raised in the Fight Goloiath campaign will go.
Meanwhile, as of tomorrow, Fight Goliath will have an official New York campaign War Room which Patti and Glass will use to carry the battle forward. He's already started contacting other defendants' attorneys about pooling informational resources in a way that's not been done so far - "at least that's what they are reporting to me," says Glass. "It should help in establishing some pressure in the other direction."
Donations have started flowing in to the new snail-mail address (see below) and so far, $125 has come in from supporters in the US and Canada, and PayPal contributions have also arrived from Europe.
The money goes straight into escrow and Patti personally approves all outgoings and expenses.
Although the Fight Goliath battle centres in the US, the Big Four record labels are also attacking their customers around the world and what happens in the Santangelo case will have powerful and lasting international repercussions.
For anyone who's new to this, the Big Four - Warner Music, Vivendi Universal, EMI and Sony BMG - are trying to blame downturns in sales created by bad business practices, out-dated sales and marketing models, inept management and other factors such as unpopular, over-priced, formulaic 'product,' competition from games, and so on, on counterfeiters and p2p file shares, collectively mis-characterized as 'pirates'.
Some 60 million Americans have shared music with each other online, but the labels' RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) has so far only managed to victimize some18,000 - including children - as it attempts to use them as a means of bludgeoning online music lovers en masse into becoming consumers, using the mainstream media as its principal PR agents in a massive PR blitz.
Through their RIAA, the labels accuse file sharers of being thieves, although nothing has been stolen and no money has changed hands. It also says its sue 'em all campaign has significantly reduced the numnber of people using the p2p networks, although the exact opposite is true and in fact, the bizarre campaign is doing far more to publicize the opportunities offered by the networks than to stop people from using them.
Not one of the 18,000 former record label customers pilloried to date has ever been before a judge or a jury, or has been found guilty of anything. A few - some 3,500 - have bought the RIAA off through extortionate out-of-court settlements but Patti, a New York mother with five children, refused to admit to doing something she didn't do and instead became the first to take the labels on in open court.
The Fight Goliath campaign was organized to cover her legal expenses.
Patti started out with a big-name New York law firm, but is now represented by Glass, who runs a one-man practice without huge corporate office expenses to worry about.
As I write this, p2pnet readers have donated a total of USD $7,986.28 and, "The ability to continue the action at all is possible only because of the joint commitment of p2pnet readers and Patti's fortitude," says Glass.
Patti? ""I have to thank all of the p2pnet readers who've contributed to the Fight Goliath Campaign," she says, also pointing out their support buoys her and gives her strength.
But more - a lot more - will be needed. Use the donate button, or the snail-mail address below it, to make a contribution. Help Patti, an ordinary mother with guts and dermination, but no financial resources, take on the greedy multi-billion-dollar Big Four record labels.
And if you're thinking, Why should I bother? - bear this in mind. When Patti wins, you win.
If you'd rather mail your donation in -----
Patti Santangelo
C/O PO Box 274
Hartsdale
New York 10530-0274
Spread the word. Blog, post, use IM, emails, ICR, whatever. Contact your local tv / radio station / newspaper. Can you get something on slashdot? Can you get the Fight Goliath campaign on Digg or anywhere else?
Below is a list of the sites now carrying donation buttons, and under that are background links.
Mother of 5 takes on Big Music - p2pnet Q&A with lawyer Ray Beckerman, August 28, 2005
RIAA victim talks to p2pnet - p2pnet Q&A with Patti Santangelo, September 4, 2005
The 'We're Not Taking Any More' club - Patti isn't the only who's who's had enough, September 17, 2005
Wanted: p2p tech experts - Santangelo's lawyers aren't impressed by RIAA 'evidence,' October 24, 2005
RIAA mass lawsuits 'improper' - Beckerman believes the RIAA oversteps the mark with mass subpoenas, November 21, 2005
1st RIAA trial: victim to defend herself - First news that Santangelo is on her own, December 6, 2005
Teens next RIAA victims - Just before Christmas, the Big Four decide Patti's children might also make targets, December 23, 2005
Santangelo picks up steam - Forced to acknowledge the saga, the mainstream media finally pick it up, December 28, 2005
Tech expert hacks at RIAA evidence - Zi Mei sets out to debunk RIAA 'technical' evidence, December 29, 2005
Patti Santangelo fights Goliath: II - Patti says, 'Thanks for the support,' December 17, 2005
Patti Santangelo campaign launch! - It's the last day of 2005 and the Fight Goliath campaign officially goes up, December 31, 2005
Sceptical about Patti Santangelo? - p2pnet columnist Alex H has a few thoughts for doubters, January 8, 2006
Patti Santangelo's new lawyer - Jordan Glass enters the fray, February 6, 2006
Star Wars: Empire at War Developer: Petroglyph
Publisher: LucasArts
MSRP: $49.99 (shop for this item)
System requirements: Windows 2000/XP
Rating: T for Teen
There are some games that seem to be the holy grail for developers to make their mark on. Games that seem like they would be easy to make great, but for some reason no one does. Take Batman for instance. The guy knows martial arts, has a plane, and a ton of cool gadgets. The back story and rich set of characters to draw from are already there. Batman is tailor-made to have a great game built around him. Yet every Batman game has been terrible. What the hell is it going to take?
The same can be said about the Star Wars Real Time Strategy Game. Lucas made it easy on everyone. Every movie, from the original trilogy to the new films, is chock full of units that could be used in a game. We know what different kinds of Storm Troopers there are, and we know how the Rebels tend to build bases in out-of-the-way areas. Each planet in Star Wars seems to have only one overlying theme, so you can build maps around forests, hostile ice planets, or hellish lava worlds. You don't need to invent much to make a Star Wars RTS, you just need to balance your units, know your Star Wars lore, and have some imagination. It sounds easy, but so many people have tried and failed. Do you remember Force Commander? I hope not. Galactic Battlegrounds was better, but it was also little more than a Total Conversion of Age of Empires 2.
More than what everything looks like, it's important to realize that Star Wars also has a very special feel for most people. The space battles have always been epic, spread across huge distances with ships flying through space along with that music we're all so familiar with. Maybe that's why the games so far have failed; they have no imagination. They just plug in units without understanding what makes the Star Wars universe so compelling.
Petroglyph (this seems to be their first game) seems to think they can do it better. Like Mulder I want to believe, but I've been burnt so many times. Like an idiot though, I keep coming back to bed, hoping this time maybe LucasArts won't hit me. All I want to do is to have X-wings as my units and blow up TIE fighters. Just let me do that, guys, and I'll at least be middlingly happy. Oh yeah, and make the space combat 3D. Okay?
Guys?
Get that Star Destroyer! Right in the butt!
System requirements
Minimum system requirements
Test system
OS
Windows 2000/XP Windows XP Pro SP2
CPU
Pentium III or Athlon 1.0GHz Athlon 64 3000+
RAM
256MB 1GB (PC 3200)
Video
32MB 3D card with Hardware Transform and Lighting (T&L) capability NVIDIA GeForce 6600GT (256MB)
Sound card
100% directX 9.0c compatible sound card Turtle Beach Santa Cruz
Hard drive 2GB Sufficiently large
Input device Keyboard and mouse
Optical drive 8x CD-ROM DVD
Networking 56Kbps or faster
Commentary by Eliot Van Buskirk | Also by this reporter
02:00 AM Feb, 20, 2006
Ever since computers picked up the handy ability to play decent-sounding music, fans have overwhelmingly defaulted to the MP3 format for audio files because it sounds pretty good, doesn't take up much space and (perhaps most importantly) works with more devices than any other digital audio format.
It may seem as if the venerable MP3 standard is here to stay, but it faces attack from a number of angles. First, it doesn't sound as good, byte-for-byte, as files purchased from iTunes Music Store (in the AAC format) or any of the Microsoft-compliant stores.
Listening Post columnist Eliot van Buskirk
Listening Post
Second, the CD rippers/encoders that most people use -- iTunes and Windows Media Player -- have encouraged users to rip to AAC and WMA over the years. Third, only one major online music store, eMusic, proffers songs in the MP3 format, and it lacks most major releases. Fourth, geeks who love MP3 for its wide compatibility can now choose from preferable open-source alternatives such as Ogg Vorbis.
Finally, today's faster connections and more capacious hard drives have audiophiles turning to lossless codecs such as FLAC and those offered by Apple Computer and Microsoft.
Thomson, the entity that licenses the MP3 format to the world (it's not free or open source, as some suspect), tried to update MP3 for the first time in 2001, to the mp3Pro format. That effort failed. Only RCA -- owned by Thomson -- added mp3Pro support to its MP3 players, and consumers mainly ignored it.
In its second attempt to shepherd the MP3 format into the future, Thomson's MP3 Licensing Group unveiled a new format last year, a surround-sound version of the MP3 format imaginatively called MP3 Surround.
MP3 Surround files are essentially ordinary MP3s with an additional layer of information that tells compatible players where to place sounds. New devices designed to support the format deliver rich and accurate surround sound -- whether through a 5.1-channel system or simulated through a pair of stereo headphones. The format adds minimal overhead, consuming just 15 additional bits per second. And it is backward compatible, so MP3 Surround files will play on any device that supports plain-vanilla MP3, sans surround.
During my tests, MP3 Surround performed well enough to warrant serious consideration among device manufacturers and music fans. The songs sounded more expansive and present than their stereo counterparts, and I didn't hear any additions to the sound that marred the experience. I used Shure E3c earbuds for testing, so the surround effect is evidently not dependent on having full-size headphones.
In order for you to hear MP3 Surround today, you'll need a computer with the playback software installed (available on all4mp3.com). But computer playback is no longer enough. If a digital audio format is to succeed these days, it'll need support on a wide array of home and portable devices.
Several promising avenues for MP3 Surround home playback loom on the horizon. According to Rocky Caldwell, general manager of Thomson's MP3 Licensing Group, any DVD player could be upgraded with firmware to decode MP3 Surround files and pass the bits through to a 5.1 amplifier using a digital connection. RCA plans to release a player that comes standard with that capability later this year.
Because home theater-in-a-box units already have six channels of amplification, a manufacturer could include MP3 Surround support right out of the box. Caldwell told me Thomson is leveraging the strong relationships it forged with manufacturers to add MP3 Surround support to next year's devices.
The third possibility could be the most promising: Caldwell said "a major Japanese consumer-electronics manufacturer" will be releasing a device similar to the Xbox that might include MP3 Surround support natively. Needless to say, the integration of MP3 Surround into the Sony PlayStation 3 would be a huge shot in the arm to the new format, especially because so many PS3s will be purchased by tech-savvy types and connected to surround-sound systems.
Story continued on Page 2 »
On the portable front, Thomson would need to add MP3 Surround support to as many devices as possible that have the processing power to decode the files. Caldwell asserted that any portable video player would have the required processing power of 150 mips and could be upgraded to support MP3 Surround through a firmware update. The company will almost certainly have its RCA division create an MP3 player that supports MP3 Surround, but that won't be enough (as it discovered through its RCA-only mp3Pro experience).
Considering the lopsided nature of today's MP3 player market, Thomson would also need to convince Apple to put MP3 Surround on the iPod. Apple has never permitted any company to install third-party software on the iPod, but according to Caldwell, Thomson has a very close relationship with Apple.
MP3 Surround faces some stiff competition in this arena from SRS Labs' Wow plug-in (already found on Samsung MP3 players among others), Dolby Laboratories' Dolby Headphone technology (already found on some Sony Vaios), and Plantronics' Volume Logic (once the subject of a petition to force Apple to add support for it to the iPod, it's now available as an iTunes add-on for $20). None of these offer exactly what MP3 Surround does, but all of them are positioned close enough to capture the market for enhancing sound on portable audio devices.
Thomson has an ace up its sleeve when it comes to device integration: The new licensing fee for MP3 Surround is -- zero! Developers and manufacturers can add MP3 Surround for free (as long as they were already paying for MP3). This gives Thomson a considerable advantage over the other companies Apple might tap for such a project.
Even if MP3 Surround makes it onto enough hardware to succeed, one large question remains: Where is MP3 Surround music going to come from? Piracy-paranoid record labels would never consider selling their music in the MP3 Surround format because it lacks the digital-rights-management protection that prevents users from sharing (or in some cases even playing) their files. Fraunhofer once issued a press release announcing a version of the MP3 format that included DRM capabilities, but that never came to light.
According to Caldwell, MP3 Surround can succeed without the labels' cooperation. "MP3 never had major-label content, and seems to have been relatively successful. On the other hand, Super Audio CD and DVD-Audio both had major label content, and millions, if not tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars, spent promoting it and they haven't succeeded, (among other reasons) because they don't address the convenience issue."
Assuming the labels won't sell you MP3 Surround songs, you could try turning DVD-A or SA-CD recordings currently on the market into MP3 Surround files. That would require considerable technical sophistication, and either illegal software or tedious real-time recording (from a DVD-A/SA-CD player into a 5.1-capable soundcard's input).
Using software available on the all4mp3.com site, you could also choose to batch-process your own files to create backward-compatible 5.1 simulations that consume 15 bps more disk space than untreated stereo MP3s. But that process is quite time-consuming, and doesn't create true MP3 Surround files, since it only starts with two channels of data.
Thomson desperately needs a good source for MP3 Surround files to surface, whether that's a legitimate MP3 Surround store, a renegade application for converting DVD-A and SA-CDs directly into MP3 Surround files, or a file-sharing network where people can download pre-converted MP3 Surround files.
If that happens, MP3 Surround could succeed for the same reason that MP3 did and still does: its overwhelming compatibility. MP3 Surround files play just fine on MP3 players that don't support the "surround" part of the file, and users with MP3 Surround equipment will be able to enjoy the exact same surround-sound file on their headphones and 5.1 systems for enhanced sound.
If people have MP3 Surround files on their hard drives, you can bet manufacturers will fall over themselves to add MP3 Surround support to their 2007 lines of MP3 players.
p2p news / p2pnet: iDefense Labs is challenging hackers to find a worm hole in Microsoft products and if they succeed, they're up for a cool $10,000.
But Bill and the Boyz are somewhat pissed by the project.
"One day after iDefense, of Reston, Va., announced the bounty as part of a newly implemented quarterly hacking challenge, a spokesperson for Microsoft, based in Redmond, Wash., said paying for flaws is not the best way to secure software products," says eWeek.
It's all part of VeriSign-owned iDefense's, "controversial VCP (Vulnerability Contributor Program), which offers financial incentives to anonymous researchers who agree to give up exclusive rights to advance notification of unpublished vulnerabilities or exploit code".
Company director Michael Sutton is, "insisting that it promotes the concept of responsible disclosure and keeps information on critical zero-day flaws away from malicious attackers," says the story.
"We want to use [the quarterly hacking challenge] to inspire our contributors to target their research in specific areas. We have a lot of clients running Microsoft products and they want to be protected from critical vulnerabilities."
The $10K would be paid as a "bonus" on top of fees paid for the initial vulnerability submission, and only for those bugs that result in a "critical" security bulletin from Microsoft, adds eWeek.
Also See:
eWeek - Microsoft Frowns on iDefense Hacking Challenge, February 17, 2006
HD DVD Blu-ray launched with unfinished AACS copy protection Posted by Dan Bell on 20 February 2006 - 18:34 - Source: Heise
Today, Heise Online is reporting that manufacturers of drives for HD DVD and Blu-ray discs still plan on a March launch date. This is even though the AACS copy protection is incomplete (Advanced Access Content System). The first devices will have an interim license according to Blu-ray manufacturers. These licenses will allow the drives to be upgraded with the necessary AACS keys before the specification is finished.
Hollywood movie studios are insisting that AACS be included in all drives. Without AACS, it will not be possible to play high-resolution movies at all. A Mandatory Managed Copy (MMC) can, however, be made. Only if the holder of the copyright gives explicit consent may a limited number of copies of the original disc be created; the movie may also not be streamed via a Media Center or to mobile devices without express consent. An online connection is required to check for rights to make a permitted copy. The holder of the copyright may, however, completely rule out copies or demand a fee. AACS can renew device keys, thereby blocking manipulated drives.
Wow! I can't wait to get in line for one of these puppies! /end sarcasm. The report goes on to confirm once again what we have been hearing, Toshiba plans to ship the first HD DVD players in the US as early as March. The HD-A1 will cost 500 USD; the XD-XA1, 800 USD. Toshiba pointed out that the devices will not initially support all of the interactive features of HD DVD, but they will be added later via firmware update. Both players will have an ethernet connection.
http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/13093
DHS warns that continued rootkit usage may lead to regulation Posted by Seán Byrne on 20 February 2006 - 00:29 - Source: Computer World - Security
Following the recent security issue Sony BMG caused with using rootkit technology, a US Department of Homeland Security official has warned that if software distributors decide to continue selling products with harmful rootkit software, new laws or regulation would come next to stop this activity. In Sony BMG's case, they were forced to recall millions of its affected discs due to the security risk it caused.
More recently, F-Secure revealed that Alpha-DVD used rootkit like technology in a German DVD release, which resulted in DVD writer problems on some PCs, not to mention a potential security risk where malicious software could also use its stealth technology to hide from anti-virus products. As rootkit based software gives the ability to hide software without the user's knowledge (particularly if no uninstaller is offered either), chances are that more companies are going to give it a try in a hope that their version turns out more successful and DHS is worried that further attempts of using rootkit based software may result in more serious consequences.
DHS has already warned copyright holders last November to be careful of how they go about protecting their discs, since these should not introduce other security problems, particularly without the user's knowledge of how their PC's security may be affected. While DHS does not have the ability to implement the regulation of dangerous rootkit software, they are aiming to increase awareness of the rootkit problems to try and help embarrass the labels. Thanks to mrdataNY for letting us know about the following news:
While Sony's software was distributed without malicious intent, the DHS is worried that a similar situation could occur again, this time with more-serious consequences. "It's a potential vulnerability that's of strong concern to the department," Frenkel said.
Though the DHS has no ability to implement the kind of regulation that Frenkel mentioned, the organization is attempting to increase industry awareness of the rootkit problem, he said. "All we can do is, in essence, talk to them and embarrass them a little bit," Frenkel said.
In fact, this is not the first time the department has expressed concerns over the security of copy protection software. In November, the DHS's assistant secretary for policy, Stewart Baker, warned copyright holders to be careful of how they protect their music and DVDs. "In the pursuit of protection of intellectual property, it's important not to defeat or undermine the security measures that people need to adopt in these days," Baker said, according to a video posted to The Washington Post Web site.
Even if rootkit technology is outlawed, chances are that this will not stop the record or movie labels from using other drastic measures to protect their discs. For example, even though Sunncomm?s MediaMax technology does not use rootkits, until recently their software installed without any user warning and could not be uninstalled easily either, since no uninstallation tool was included. On the other hand, any company who continues to use rootkit technology for now will be taking quite a serious gamble as we can see what happened with Sony BMG and Alpha-DVD (although with less consequences).
mrdataNY added: It's about time that the people we elect to look out for us actually starting to do exactly that.
http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/13089
US film makers sue Samsung over glitches on DVD player Posted by Dan Bell on 20 February 2006 - 04:36 - Source: Korea Times
Over the weekend, according to this story at Korea Times, US film makers have caused Samsung to go scrambling, since learning of a lawsuit filed by Walt Disney, Time Warner and three other major film makers in a US court. Apparently, Samsung is guessing it is over a model they have discontinued, the DVD-HD841 that would allow savvy users to circumvent certain copy protections.
In response, Samsung refused to confirm the high-profile suit that involves Paramount Pictures, 20th Century Fox and Universal Studios on top of Disney and Time Warner.
"In fact, we do not exactly know the contents of the lawsuit and the intention of the plaintiffs. We have yet to receive the complaint, a Samsung spokesman said.
He guessed that the film makers take issue with DVD-HD841, which Samsung had sold in the United States between June and October 2004.
"If so, I do not know why the movie studios are complaining about the products, of which production was brought to an end more than 15 months ago, the spokesman said.
"We stopped manufacturing the model after concerns erupted that its copy-protection features can be circumvented by sophisticated users, he said.
In this climate, he said Samsung would react to the lawsuit after the outfit recognizes its real intention.
The DVD-HD841 was an upconverting DVD player for takng a normal DVD and presenting it in 720p or 1080i for HDTV sets. We will have to stay tuned to find out what the lawsuit entails specifically. Issues do crop up though, when people can through a secret code or sequence on the remote, disable region codes locks or HDCP controls. Possibly this suit speaks to one of these type issues. However, it seems odd that the suit is just now being filed.
http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/13090
Sony denies Merrill Lynch report- no delay for PlayStation 3Posted by Dan Bell on 20 February 2006 - 05:15 - Source: Bloomberg
Well, that didn't take long! Sony says that Merrill Lynch is full of bull! We just read yesterday a report from the analyst firm that said Sony would have to delay the gaming platform, but today, Bloomberg is reporting that Sony shot back.
"There is no change in our original plan to release the console in spring 2006'' in Japan, said Kei Sakaguchi, a Sony spokesman in Tokyo. Sony may start selling the PlayStation 3 in Japan in autumn and by late 2006 or early 2007 in the U.S., Merrill Lynch's Joe Osha said in a report dated Feb. 17.
Any delay would give rivals Microsoft Corp. and Nintendo Co. more time to win market share with their new consoles leading up to the Christmas shopping season. Sony, which is adding its Blu- ray high-definition DVD format and the faster Cell chip to the PS3, is facing about $900 in costs to make the device, more than double the retail price of Microsoft's Xbox 360 game console, Merrill said.
Interestingly, we can read in the article that Microsoft is taking a pretty good hit on each Xbox 360 sold, about $153 dollars US. We can only imagine the loss Sony will have to take in order to move the PS3 when it sets next to the Xbox at $299 0r $399, depending on configuration. The PS3 cannot price itself too high against the Microsoft offering and still expect to take market share. Sure, it may play Blu-ray discs, but who has a compliant palyback device? The AACS specs for hardware playback are enough to confuse an electrical engineer! By the way, you have to chuckle at the AACS motto "Share the vision". How can you share something if you can't even see the darn thing to begin with? The report went on to say that Merrill Lynch adjusted Sonys stock from neutral to sell on February 17.
Several months after the discovery that Sony included a dangerous rootkit on some copy-protected music discs, the reverberations are still being felt. Late last week, the US Department of Homeland Security said that if companies fail to clean up their act when it comes to rootkits, the government would take action. Although there is currently no legislation pending, the DHS said that new laws or other regulations "may be warranted" if companies continue to trample on the security of their customers' systems.
Last fall, a security researcher digging around in his system discovered a rootkit installed by a Sony disc and created by a UK company called First 4 Internet. At first, Sony brushed off the problem, but after several days of PR nightmares, the company caved in and announced it would stop using First 4 Internet's software and a few days later, decided to recall all infected discs.
Aside from raising the public awareness of the dangers of DRM?especially when companies are not forthright about its existence and functionality?Sony's monumental blunder led to the inevitable lawsuits and subsequent settlement.
What is not as widely known is that officials from the Department of Homeland Security met with Sony and read them the riot act, according to Jonathan Frenkel, direcdtor of law enforcement policy for the DHS's Border and Transportation Security Directorate. The DHS is concerned that the problem could recur, albeit on a larger scale. "It's a potential vulnerability that's of strong concern to the department," said Frenkel.
Despite the DHS's public warning, the problem of obtrusive DRM isn't likely to disappear anytime soon. MPAA and RIAA member companies are bound and determined to shove DRM down our throats, telling us that we need it in order to resist the temptation to become evil pirates. But DRM is not about piracy, it's about being able to charge multiple times for the same content.
At least Sony's blunder brought the issue of DRM into the public eye, with some results. SunnComm, a DRM software maker, said that future versions of its software would be better behaved. Based on the warnings emanating from the DHS, companies using DRM will have to learn to operate above-board if they want to avoid government intervention in the form of legislation. The threat of action is nice, but outlawing DRM that potentially compromises the safety of a user's system is a better solution. If such legislation was in place last year, tens of thousands of people wouldn't have had their PCs compromised by a rootkit from Sony.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060220-6217.html
p2p news / p2pnet: The Patti Santangelo Fight Goliath campaign is now approaching $11,000, which is pretty impressive. It's by the people, for the people, and to paraphrase Pogo Possum, the people is us, represented by a 42-year-old new York mother who's decided she's not going to be blackmailed by the Big Four record labels, Warner Music, Sony BMG, Vivendi Universal and EMI (all of whom have repeatedly been found guilty of numerous wrongs) for something she didn't do.
But one question apparently hasn't been satisfactorily answered: Is the money going into some already super-rich law firm's coffers?
In a word, No. In my last post, under the italicised quote on 'Discovery,' I wrote, "Putting this material together invariably costs a huge amount, which is where the bulk of the money being raised in the Fight Goloiath campaign will go --- NOT on lawyers' fees". But at least one person - a lawyer, as it happens - read this to mean I was saying none of the money was going to lawyers, which wasn't, the case.
So no one else would make the same mistake, I deleted " NOT on lawyers' fees".
The RIAA's sick sue 'em all campaign.
The entire Big Four legal strategy hinges largely on the fact victims are just ordinary people with ordinary resources who don't have a hope in hell of matching the virtually limitless amounts of cash the labels lash out for high-priced, expert legal teams, and associated costs such as researchers and professional investigators.
If every one of the victims had opted to do what Patti is doing - take it to the max - in all likelihood, none of this would be happening and the labels would have been forced to accept p2p as their future, not their enemy.
They'll have to do that eventually but not, it seems, until they're ruined the lives of thousands of people around the world.
Meanwhile, ironically, you're the one that's paying for the RIAA's sick, and unimaginably expensive, sue 'em all campaign, which relies wholly on victimizing people such as Patti Santangelo and, now, her children.
The multi-billion-dollar Warner Music, Vivendi Universal, EMI and Sony BMG's RIAA have the money to spend because you're still buying their over-priced, cookie-cutter CDs and downloading through the likes of iTunes --------- while they coldly use people like Patti to try to fighten you into buying more.
Meanwhile, as p2pnet's Alex H puts it here:
"Retaining a lawyer is not the extent of the total legal fees that can be racked up fighting a civil lawsuit. Need to file a document with the court? Pay up. Need to subpoena a RIAA "piracy investigator"? Pay up. Need a one-off conversation with an expert in a particular legal or technical field? Pay up. It's not a 'Lawyer costs $100/hour x 35 hours = $3,500 in legal fees' kind of situation."
A one-man business
What I meant by the sentence quoted earlier was: most of the money you're contributing is being spent on the materials and other expenses which are absolutely essential so Jordan Glass, Patti's lawyer, can defend her during the upcoming civil, not criminal, jury trial, slated for May.
And I apologise if I inadvertently misled anyone into thinking none of this would go on lawyers' fees. But I promise you: the donations are being used solely for Patti's legal defense and now she and one lawyer a (note: 'lawyer' - not legal team) are by themselves standing up to the multi-national corporate music industry from a small office they're renting to work from.
Why did Glass, who in effect runs a one-man business, take Santangelo vs Big Music on? "I think that what's happening is a social wrong," he told me. And I believe he means that.
"I told Patti that a proper defense would cost $240,000," he said. "Clearly, that's not going to happen. But if she can at least get past discovery, she has a fighting chance and, as you know, we are fighting, and it's making a difference.
"We need to know if we can pursue discovery by March 5. That's the deadline that was already here when I signed on, and it can't be change.
"And remember, the court has placed this on a fast track, so discovery must be completed by May 5. Whatever we have by that date is all we're allowed to go to trial with, and since everything has a 45 to 60 day turnaround, between the time to respond and the allowable objections, obtaining transcripts and supplying information to opposing counsel, this game is almost over: March 5 is around the corner, and it's just about 60 days from there to May 5th.
"If this doesn't get done now, it doesn't get done in this case. Ever."
'While I can control my own fees, I can't demand the same of others'
Glass and I have come close to trading words, a couple of times, because I've been pressing him on our behalf: after all, I donated money to the campaign just like everyone else; and on top of that, I have more reason than most for harbouring a deep and lasting distrust of lawyers.
But I have no doubts the money is being properly used. It's in an escrow account, controlled by Patti, and it's being spent on genuine expenses which are coming from all directions, expected and not, large and small, including, "a very small petty cash fund to buy lunch and dinner when work continues in the office and so far, that totals $6.00," says Glass.
Alex H referred to lawyer's fees at $100.00 per hour, he goes on, but, "First year associates in New York are billed out at over $200.00 per hour. Paralegals are billed out at between $50.00 and $125.00 per hour.
"While I can control my own fees, I can't demand the same of others. We'll need technical experts (even if I knew enough about that level of the technology, I couldn't testify), who'll be entitled to a disclosed appearance fee, and additional legal help at trial."
"Perhaps it's easiest to write, 'no economic profit'," he says. "Nothing to pay for my own food or home expenses, nothing to go into a retirement fund or cover taxes or social security payments or anything else that might be stretched as meaning 'to make a living,' no vacation, no cars, no back-door ways of claiming money isn't really money."
The bottom line
By far the vast majority of the people accused of sharing music with each other didn't know they were doing it, as the RIAA itself admits. They thought they were simply downloading songs for their own use and NOT for re-sale, as the Big Four keep trying to imply.
And as the EFF's (Electronic Frontier Foundation) Fred von Lohmann recently emphasised, the RIAA itself condones burning CDs for personal use, even though it was 100% responsible for driving 321 Studios, a company which made software to allow CD owners to do exactly that, into ruin.
Don Verrilli said to the Supreme Court last year, "The record companies, my clients, have said, for some time now, and it's been on their website for some time now, that it's perfectly lawful to take a CD that you've purchased, upload it onto your computer, put it onto your iPod."
And while the RIAA is targetting Santangelo and people like her, the RIAA openly admits most p2p users don't even know their files are in a shared folder.
"As an initial matter, P2P software may, upon installation, automatically search a user?s entire hard drive for content," states P2P File-Sharing Workshop ? Comment, P034517 - Comments of The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), November 15, 2004, going on:
"Files that users have no intention of sharing may end up being offered to the entire P2P network. Continued sharing of personal information is hard to avoid and is facilitated by confusing and complicated instructions for designating shared items. A study by Nathaniel S. Good and Aaron Krekelberg at HP Laboratories showed that ?the majority of the users?were unable to tell what files they were sharing, and sometimes incorrectly assumed they were not sharing any files when in fact they were sharing all files on their hard drive."
File sharers are not crooks or criminals. Nothing was stolen and no one was deprived of something he or she formerly owned. At the absolute worst, most of them have innocently and unknowingly infringed someone's copyright.
Not one of the more than 18,000 victims stood to gain a single penny from their file-sharing ventures. No money changed hands and no illicit profits were made.
The Big Four are not, as they claim, being devastated by people who download music. They are, however, falling prey to the reality that they're trying to do 20th century business in the 21st century.
File sharers are not causing unbelievable hardship to artists under contract to the labels.
The victimization of Patti Santangelo and others like her is not driving people away from the p2p networks to the Big Four backed and supported corporate download sites. To the contrary.
None of the 18,000 and more men, women and children being pilloried have been found guilty of file sharing not only because no such offense exists, but also because none of them have yet appeared in a civil court before a judge and jury.
Patti Santengelo will be the first.
Stay tuned and while you do, add to the Fight Goliath fund through the button below, or via the snail-mail address under it.
Patti Santangelo
C/O PO Box 274
Hartsdale
New York 10530-0274
LA cracks down on CD/DVD pirates on trains & warns buyersPosted by Seán Byrne on 21 February 2006 - 00:15 - Source: TMCnet News
With physical CD and DVD piracy moving away from the streets, the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department ran a sting on piracy carried out on the trains running between Long Beach and Universal Studios. Their sting operation resulted in the arrests of nine people caught illegally selling pirate DVDs, all operating independently (not of the same ring). These discs included all top 20 movies still in the cinema. According to the MPAA, they say that more work must be carried out on their part to target piracy in more closed environments, however they are happy that pirates are being forced further underground.
In an aim to catch further pirates, Metro employees took part in a training program to help identify and stop people from selling pirate goods on the trains. This operation resulted in a further 12 arrests including pirates selling counterfeit music CDs and cigarettes. Raids resulted in a seizure of an estimated 1,841 DVDs, 5,904 CDs, two CD/DVD writers, a portable DVD player and various other items related to the piracy. The LA Sheriff's Department Transit Services Bureau, MPAA and RIAA all jointly conducted the investigation.
The MPAA's director of US anti-piracy operations, Mike Robinson warned that while no customers have been arrested as a result of these recent operations, they warn that it is a crime to buy pirated goods and that consumers should think twice of buying counterfeit goods. He compares buying a pirate disc no different to one lifting a disc off a retail store's shelf and putting it in their pocket.
The Motion Picture Association of America announced Wednesday that a Los Angeles Sheriff's Department sting last week resulted in the arrests of nine people involved in the illegal sale of the DVDs on the trains, which run from Long Beach to Universal Studios.
"This was a shift from a person selling on the street on a blanket to being in a more closed environment," said Mike Robinson, the MPAA's director of U.S. anti-piracy operations. "It suggests that it requires a little more work on their part. It's good that we are forcing them further underground."
Robinson said those arrested Friday were independent operators and not part of the same ring. A few were even caught selling movies from a couple of train platforms.
It is interesting to see that it is not until now that the MPAA started helping to target piracy on trains, particularly with how strong they are targeting online piracy. Then again, the MPAA should put more resources in to fighting off pirates who gain financially from their piracy rather than put so many resources in to just fighting online piracy.
http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/13096
Logitec Japan to launch first 12x DVD-RAM Burner
Posted by Quakester2000 on 21 February 2006 - 00:35 - Source: Nforcershq
D4rk0n3 used our news submit to tell us that Logitec Japan looks like it will be the first to launch a DVD burner capable of burning the new 12x DVD-RAM format. The external drive from Logitec will write +/- R Dual layer media at 8x and DVD+R/-R at 16x. The external drive is powered by Panasonic technology.
Logitec is planning to release two versions of the drive one with both firewire and USB 2.0 compatibility and one with just USB 2.0 compatibility. The drives will be compatible with both Windows XP and Apple?s Mac OS X. Both drives will hit the market at the same time which looks like the end of March, with the drives costing $139 for dual Firewire/USB connectivity and $121 for USB 2.0 version.
LogitecLogitec Japan announced its first external optical drive in Japan that burns DVD-RAM at 12x, DVD+ or -DL at 8x and DVD+R/-R at 16x. The external DVD-RAM is powered by the Panasonic technology.
RAM driveLogitec plans to release two versions of the drive. The LDR-MA16FU2/WM will come with a dual USB 2.0 and FireWire interface, offering compatibility with both Windows and Mac OS X users. The USB 2.0 version of the drive, called LDR-MA16U2, will be also available in the Japanese market at the same time, by the end of March. The drives will cost 16,380 Yen ($139) and 14,175 yen ($121) respectively, according to Logitec.
Are player-driven games the future of digital gaming?
By Ryan Paul
Monday, February 20, 2006
Introduction
Gaming is arguably one of the most interactive and Progressive electronic entertainment mediums in existence today. As innovative new gaming concepts stretch the limitations of current technology, developers are looking for unique ways to make games more immersive and engaging. As the cost of producing content increases, and player demand for a broader selection of content continues to escalate, developers are searching for new ways to allow gamers to participate in the creative process, by facilitating player-driven construction and distribution of new content.
A brief glance at the history of player-driven construction
Player participation in game content development has existed since the development of table-top role-playing games. Dungeon masters frequently construct and share game content with their fellow DMs and collaborate in order to create a gaming experience that is more innovative and unique. This principle of distributed development carried over into the first network game development communities. In the early days of multiplayer network gaming, individual developers used open source code bases to create specialized digital worlds of their own, sometimes called Multi-User Dungeons (MUDs). Integrated world construction commands eventually allowed administrators to extend these networked, text-based virtual worlds in real time, and administrators subsequently began configuring their games to allow players to participate in the creation process. Many MUD developers shared components of their virtual worlds, distributing elaborate code base feature enhancements and game regions in Internet forums and mailing lists.
When commercial games hit the scene, some developers designed specialized tools to enable users to make their own custom levels and characters. Even in cases where no such tools were made available by the developers, the gaming community reverse engineered their favorite games and constructed the tools on their own. Doom WAD editors largely contributed to the popularization of this process, and developers began to see the widespread demand for extensible gaming frameworks.
Another major step was taken in 2002, when Bioware released Neverwinter Nights with a powerful level editor that enabled players to create vast worlds and stories that can be distributed for use by other players on the Internet. These days, many mainstream games are shipped with construction and extension tools. Blizzard's sophisticated map builders for Warcraft III and Starcraft allowed users to produce new multiplayer maps and eventually entire single-player campaigns that vastly increased the replay value and lifespan of the Blizzard products. Blizzards map editors are extremely easy to use, and although they provide some relatively sophisticated scripting functionality for advanced users, they feature a simple drag and drop interface that enables any user to get into the content-creation scene.
Some developers also build new games as mods on existing engines. The Alien Swarm mod for Unreal Tournment features a top-down view and a lot of very unique content. Available for free download, such mods often have sophisticated plots, lots of custom objects and weapons, and task-driven campaigns designed by players for players. In addition to being a platform for new games, Unreal Tournament is also the foundation of some very intruiging specialized interactive applications designed for a variety of purposes. The United States Military recently funded the development of a computer game designed to teach soldiers how to interpret Iraqi gestures and body language. The program, which will help the troops learn how to positively interact with Arab citizens, was built on top of the Unreal Tournament game engine.
In some cases, players have improved other aspects of the game besides content. Many player-created World of Warcraft modifications improve the interface, provide access to additional information, or simplify management of particular game elements. In these cases, the modifications provide tangible game improvements that increase the efficiency of gameplay and resolve issues unanticipated by developers. Some of these alterations are designed to meet the needs of players in specific contexts, or players with specific habits, needs, and techniques.
The ability to alter gameplay attributes and generate new content enables players to create new kinds of games without the overhead incurred by building a new game from scratch. In many cases, players have used games in unique ways that the initial developers never even imagined.
The relevance of player-driven construction in contemporary gaming
The vast majority of conventional games allow players to participate in preconstructed stories. An elaborate series of objectives are provided, and the story unfolds as those objectives are completed. What if players could create their own objectives for themselves and for each other? What if player communities could be leveraged in the content-production process to reduce the cost of developing new material? These are the questions that game developers are beginning to ask as a whole new generation of advanced gaming technology emerges.
Spore
The philosophy of player participation is now beginning to expand beyond the limited confines of specific characters and plots, and it is scaling up to a level of much greater flexibility. Sims inventor Will Wright is currently engaged in developing an ambitious new game called Spore (warning, evil Flash content), which establishes an extraordinarily sophisticated, tiered-gameplay model in which players manage and direct gameplay activity on a virtually infinite scale. From controlling the activities and genetic properties of a specific creature to the manipulation of whole galaxies, Spore gives the player the ability to invent entire civilizations. Spore also takes interactivity and content distribution to the next level by allowing the diverse civilizations instantiated by various players to interact with each other asynchronously over the Internet. Players can populate their universes with galaxies constructed by other players, as well as introducing other player-created elements into their own worlds and civilizations.
Extraordinarily elegant integrated-modeling tools allow players to imbue their worlds with highly unique appearance and functionality. Player modifications dictate the natural development of the virtual characters and civilizations, so players can choose to model a highly diverse assortment of concepts, ideas, and themes. In demonstrations at various gaming conventions, Wright shows users how easy it is to create whatever they can imagine, from vicious, flesh-eating carebears to assorted alien oddities. The real magic of Spore is its versatility. It shatters conventional assumptions by providing an environment in which the user can dictate the functions and constraints of gameplay.
You can play the game at practically any level you want within the massive scope that it encapsulates. Are you interested in creating a massive intergalactic confederacy so that you can see how positive interaction influences the various member societies? Do you want to construct opposing imperial forces and watch the outcome of their assorted attempts at conquest? Do you want to play at a lower level, orchestrating tribal raids and resource accumulation of primitive warring factions on single continent? Do you want go even lower, and see how the genetic alteration of specific species influences the way that they interact? Spore makes all of it possible, and quite a bit more, and it does so by providing a framework and a platform in which the player chooses her own objectives. Wright describes the goal of player-driven gaming with an analogy:
"Instead of putting players in the role of Luke Skywalker, or Frodo Baggins, I'd rather put them in the role of George Lucas."
Spore will provide its players with a constant stream of new content and material without requiring additional investment or developer resources. The production process is distributed across the entire player base, leveraging the creativity and unique perspectives of individual users across the globe. It meets the user demand for content while making the game experience more immersive.
Xbox Live
Will Wright isn't the only game developer that understands the value of player participation. Microsoft Xbox team leader J. Allard is convinced that player participation in the content construction process is applicable to console games as well as computer games. With Xbox Live, Microsoft already has all the infrastructure it needs to distribute content over the Internet and allow players to contribute content of their own. Allard points out that the player participation model resembles the community oriented development approach that has contributed to the success of open source software:
"(Gaming) is the only medium where we yield control of the protagonist. Let's yield control of the director--and the producer," said Allard, a vice president at Microsoft. "We're going to take on the Wikipedia model. We're going to take on... the open-source model, if you will, for gaming."
Although I doubt that Microsoft plans to release the source code of their gaming technology, Allard's analogy is incredibly astute. The collaborative, open development model dramatically expands the pool of available human resources and it promotes ideological interchange that can illuminate new possibilities. By taking advantage of the Xbox user base, Microsoft can ensure that its games never become stale while also procuring valuable insights into the way that the players perceive and overcome the challenges of content development. Allard comments on the implications of player participation:
"If only 1 percent of our audience that plays Halo helped construct the world around Halo, it would be more human beings than work at Microsoft corporation," Allard said. "That's how much human energy we could harness in this medium."
Multiverse
A relatively new gaming company called Multiverse is also cashing in on community development, albeit with a very different approach. Multiverse has developed a complete platform for rapid development of MMORPGs. Multiverse eliminates the barriers to entry by providing a comprehensive client-server architecture that is highly extensible and comes with a wide variety of specialized plug-ins that provide support for gaming components like movement, combat, artificial intelligence, and game economy. Developers can extend the framework with their own specialized plug-ins and content.
Multiverse also supports a developer marketplace that will allow individual developers to sell and trade components with other developers. On top of all that, Multiverse also makes it easy for developers to capitalize on their productions, by providing a complete framework for subscription services. Scheduled for release later this year, Multiverse will make their tools and development framework components available for free, and take a portion of the revenue from individual developers that profit from their own worlds. Multiverse will also provide commercial hosting services for those that do not wish to host their own games. Multiverse cofounder Corey Bridges comments on the ease with which a Multiverse-based game can be altered:
"Say you don't like the combat system," said Bridges, "or say you want to extend it, you can just extend it or swap it out. What this does is it gives game developers of all stripes and strata a niche to do what they do best."
The technologies developed by Multiverse will effectively give rise to a new kind of independent game development industry, one in which the developers can easily pool their resources and media assets to reduce overhead costs and jumpstart development. Much like the MUD communities of old, developers will start with an existing code base that can be customized for the particular needs of their game, and they can swap snippets with other developers in order to augment the functionality and appeal of their respective games.
Game content construction as a collaborative art form
Even though some nay-sayers like Roger Ebert argue that the gaming experience represents a kind of cultural self deprecation, the increasing complexity and sophistication of modern gaming is impossible to ignore. With enormous budgets and massive development teams, the magnitude of game production is rapidly becoming comparable to that of movie production, and movie industry icons like Steven Spielberg are getting into the gaming business. Ebert says that many games make us less "cultured, civilized and empathetic," but any gamer with an appreciation for intellectual stimulation will tell you that he is simply wrong. Consider Final Fantasy VII, which dealt with controversial themes like poverty and unsustainable abuse of the environment. Not only did Final Fantasy VII immerse the player in an experience that elevates thought provoking themes, but it did so in a way that is compelling, artistic, engaging, and emotionally redeeming.
Character development is one of the most important parts of any story, and a medium that actually places the player inside of the character can create a bond or relationship that just isn't possible within a medium that is not interactive. What better way is there to stimulate empathy? Becoming Illidan, for instance, can provide us with a very unique perspective and powerful insight into the internal struggle that motivates his decisions. Suddenly we are given an opportunity to empathize with Illidan on a whole new level. His desire for power, his dark sense of abandonment, his feelings for Tyrande, and his hunger for revenge are all painted with immense clarity when the player takes on the responsibility of acting as Illidan. Games in which the player becomes the character are only one example. The diversity of the interactive gaming medium can facilitate immersion in all sorts of different ways. The digital, interactive medium enables game developers to transcend the limitations imposed upon movie producers, to create an experience that has unique and extraordinary potential.
With the ability to construct game content, players also gain the ability to create highly sophisticated, collaborative, and immersive art pieces with unprecedented capacity to inspire others. As players around the world contribute to the development of a single game, the cultural and ideological interchange promoted by the process will lead to the betterment of all participants. It will provide a new medium through which players can learn about each other: the way that other people think, feel and perceive their own worlds and fantasies. A collaboratively constructed game will become an articulation of universal imagination focused into something tangible, cohesive, and interactive. Although the Xbox Live user base has its share of crass and intellectually defective players for whom f-bombs and racial slurs probably represent the extent of their willingness to engage in cultural interchange, a well-designed framework for collaborative development would make it easy for like-minded players to come together and establish their own groups within the larger organizational hierarchy.
Looking to the future: interoperability and open standards
As many open source developers know, community-driven development generates a number of challenging problems. As more players contribute to the game development process, many new needs will have to be filled. By looking at analogous aspects of open source software development, it is possible to predict some of the future problems, solutions, and paradigm shifts that will emerge from player driven development.
When players invest a lot of time and effort into building elements for a game, they will not want to have to start over again from scratch with a different game. Consider, for instance, a peculiar ground vehicle that a player designs in Spore. Why shouldn't that player be able to use his vehicle in Project Gotham Racing? At the very least, the players will want to migrate the designs and appearance of elements from one game and bring them over to another. Some early examples of content interchange across games can be found in the Maxis repertoire. Sim Copter players could fly through cities that they had constructed themselves with Sim City. That kind of interoperability can be made possible on a much larger scale with open standards. If game developers create common interchange formats, custom content will be portable between games and platforms. That kind of interoperability is already apparent in the tabletop roleplaying community, where Dungeon Masters regularly create rules for using content across games. Dungeon master SrKingDavy comments:
A lot of what you're saying is the future of computer gaming, I've been doing for years on [the] tabletop. [For instance] having players design a car in a role-playing game, given character resources and knowledge, and then using that car design in a racing auto-duel game. I think more video game developers need to look to their roots. I don't know a single tabletop gamer who hasn't created his own house rules or drastically changed the rules of a game to practically create a new one, and in tabletop [gaming], it's all realtime.
The intrepid dungeon master is getting at a very important point. The ability to customize aspects of the game as it is being played is part of what makes tabletop roleplaying games so fun. The mutability and limitless flexibility of a good tabletop roleplaying game has yet to be matched on the desktop computer or gaming console. A stronger emphasis on player-driven development and interoperability has the potential to transform the electronic gaming medium and make it as engaging as traditional tabletop roleplaying games but without the frustrating latency of dice rolling.
The marriage of open standards and player-driven gaming
The open source community has created standardization initiatives like the FreeDesktop project to promote interoperability between popular technologies. Independent gaming standards organizations can create their own open formats to facilitate sharing of user constructed game content the way that the FreeDesktop project facilitates sharing of user constructed icons across Linux desktop environments, for instance.
If game interchange formats are publicly documented open standards, individual players and independent third-party developers will even be able to create new games that leverage content created for other games. Say that you create a really sophisticated alien creature in Spore. Wouldn't it be cool if you could upload that critter to your handheld computer and use it in a virtual pet game created by an independent developer? You could take an electronic facsimile of your digital critter to work with you on your handheld computer and face it off against your coworker's critter via IR handheld link combat! That kind of interoperability and the new applications that will extend from it will add a whole new kind of value to popular games, and it will give players more reasons to keep playing. To a certain extent, interoperability may also compel players to buy additional games that they might not have considered purchasing before.
Use of open standards will also promote development of third-party tools that can interact with particular games. If a game server uses RSS feeds to emit notification of specific activities transpiring within the game, for instance, players and independent developers could interface with that data using many common existing tools or by developing their own specialized tools. Getting RSS notifications that tell you what is going on in your virtual world could be a powerful tool. You could be informed when your intelligence operatives discover that the enemy is mobilizing an attack force, or when your scientists invent space travel technology. While you are waiting for those notifications, you might be playing as one of your civilization's primordial ancestors in a Smash Brothers style melee match within a totally different networked game.
As player-constructed content becomes more popular, intellectual property issues may become a problem. In the open source community, there are standard licenses like the GPL and BSD licenses that dictate the terms under which source code can be used and shared. Game players will also need to have clearly defined mechanisms for content distribution under terms that they can dictate themselves. Although those terms need not necessarily conform to the ideals of software freedom embodied by many popular open source licenses, content distributed under free licenses will certainly stimulate productive sharing and innovation. In the context of Spore and Xbox live, Maxis and Microsoft will probably establish mandatory licensing schemes of some kind that will protect their right to use player-contributed content. Hopefully those companies will have the foresight to construct those licenses in a way that will promote further sharing, modification, and open redistribution. The Creative Commons organization has designed a standard assortment of content distribution licenses that are very easy to use and understand. By selecting from an assortment of simple license features, players can easily choose specific licenses that meet their needs, and they can protect themselves and their content by distributing material they have created for use by others under such licenses.
Developers that leverage Multiverse technologies may soon discover a very challenging limitation that can significantly impede sharing and distribution of self-made content. In some cases, particular models or plug-ins may depend on other assets and plug-ins. Developers will need easy ways to automate resolution of content dependencies. Open source developers have created powerful package management platforms that simplify dependency handling. On my Ubuntu Linux system, I can use Debian's APT package management tool to install software and automatically install all the components on which that software depends. The Multiverse Marketplace will have to support something similar so that players can easily tell what plug-ins they will need in order to use certain player-created components within their own game.
As the body of player-created content grows and players begin to expand upon the work of their peers, the need will emerge for useful search mechanisms. Externally accessible metadata in a consistent, open format would make it possible for developers to construct search engines designed specifically for indexing and retrieving information about various player-contributed game elements from a wide variety of different kinds of games. A player that wants to construct a new object would be able to use these search engines to find similar existing game elements that can be altered to meet their own needs.
At present, Multiverse isn't far from providing such functionality internally. The Multiverse client application is already designed to facilitate searches that will help players find games and worlds that match specific criteria, and the Multiverse Marketplace is designed specifically to provide quick and easy access to content created by other developers. With more sophisticated systems and some open standards, a search engine could potentially index content from a variety of different kinds of games on a variety of different platforms in order to simplify the sharing of content between them, much the way that the Koders search engine facilitates rapid discovery of publicly available source code.
Conclusion
Players clearly want to take part in the development process, and enabling player participation will vastly increase the volume of available content for particular games. Prominent game developers are already actively leveraging innovative new technologies to develop games that emphasize player-driven creation and distribution of content. In the long term, this new approach to game development could reduce the barriers that prevent creative independent developers from building great games and it could also stimulate greater artistic awareness in players, and eventually necessitate a higher level of interoperability between disparate games and gaming platforms.
With innovators like Maxis, Microsoft, and Multiverse leading the way, greater emphasis on player involvement will have tremendous impact on the way that people perceive gaming, the way that games are made, and the way that players interact with software and with each other. As the next generation of gaming technologies emerge, users and developers should look to the future and think about the potential benefits of open standards, collaborative game production, and licensing solutions that will not stifle creativity.
Movie studios may be moving against region encoding hacks, other exploits
2/20/2006 1:51:39 PM, by Ken "Caesar" Fisher
Five major US studios are suing Samsung for developing and briefly selling at least one DVD player which they allege was not properly secured to protect the contents of encrypted DVDs, according to reports. A brief investigation into the matter suggests that Disney, Paramount, Twentieth Century Fox, Time Warner and and Universal Studios are pursuing the company for being "hacker-friendly," inasmuch as the company has developed products that allow savvy users to bypass the limitations imposed by content owners. While neither the studios nor Samsung have revealed the contents of the suit, Samsung has admitted that they believe that their DVD-HD841 DVD player is at the center of all of this.
"In fact, we do not exactly know the contents of the lawsuit and the intention of the plaintiffs. We have yet to receive the complaint,?? a Samsung spokesman said, guessing that the DVD-HD841 player is at the center of the lawsuit. "If so, I do not know why the movie studios are complaining about the products, of which production was brought to an end more than 15 months ago.... We stopped manufacturing the model after concerns erupted that its copy-protection features can be circumvented by sophisticated users,?? he said.
The fact that Samsung is so willing to speculate on the cause of the lawsuit publicly piqued my interest, so I began looking into the situation over the last couple of days. Here's what my digging has turned up.
The DVD-HD841 player was sold for only a few months in 2004, and the unit was not well received by consumers. Aimed at budget-conscious consumers looking for an upscaling DVD player, the DVD-HD841 failed to deliver, and Samsung pulled it from the market. The units can still be purchased on many sites catering to used electronics, but new units have been missing from retail shelves for about a year.
Why would such an unremarkable player be at the center of a lawsuit? As it turns out, the DVD-HD841 player allows users to circumvent both region encoding and HDCP. It has been known for some time that the major studios are unhappy with the number of DVD players that allow users to circumvent region encoding practices, either by allowing too many "resets" of a unit's geographic location, or allowing users to turn off compliance altogether.
Samsung's player allows users to completely disable region encoding compliance, meaning that the player can handle any DVD without the need for resetting geographical locations, or other such inconveniences. While Samsung does not provide a menu option or instructions on how to do this, news quickly spread that a code entered by remote control under the right settings would rid users of this annoyance.
But Samsung's offenses did not stop there. Similar codes could also be used to turn off HDCP compliance, making it possible to use DVI-D interfaces with non-HDCP compliant sources. In short, users could output high-quality digital HD content (including upscaled DVD content, no less) to any interface they wanted, completely stripped of encryption. The upshot of this is that Samsung released a player that would be ideal for pirates (although pirates already have myriad ways around these protections, anyway).
Additional investigation has revealed that while the DVD-HD841 player did not last long on the market, the design was partially used in other DVD players, including the DVD-HD747 and the DVD-HD941. I was also able to determine that similar hacks work on other Samsung players, although I was not able to verify in all instances whether or not a player was based on the DVD-HD841 main board. I did locate a number of resellers who were hacking various Samsung players and reselling them. Without a doubt, Samsung appears to have produced a bevy of products that can be exploited in this way.
Consumer electronics, bow down!
Still, Samsung is not the only company that has manufactured players that consumers have subsequently been able to reprogram in some form or another for the purposes of bypassing content protections, although exploits for circumventing HDCP are rather rare. The question is, why this lawsuit, now?
The answer lies in the next-generation of optical formats. While DeCCS essentially destroyed the content protections designed for DVDs, the next-generation is supposedly protected with far greater technical acuity. Blu-ray discs, for instance, will feature protections designed to either dynamically obtain new keys or even revoke existing keys from devices that are compromised. In this respect, I believe that this lawsuit is about sending a message. As the studios hope to see a flawless introduction of their new digital rights management schemes, they want to make it clear to all consumer electronics companies that they do not want to see their plans foiled by companies catering to those of us who want to bypass the content industry's protections.
Are we all dirty pirates? Not in the slightest.
The reason for this lawsuit happening right now is simple. The studios know that there is going to be a significant spike in demand for next-generation players that can bypass HDCP over the next few years. When Joe Consumer discovers the delicious little treat known as "HDCP"?a treat that will likely make it impossible to play HD content on displays and TVs without HDCP support?he's not going to like it. While there are no official numbers, we believe that there are millions of HDTV sets in the United States that were purchased before HDCP and HDMI (a DVI-like interface with HDCP) were made available. As things currently stand, those TVs will never display HD content according to their true abilities. Those nice, expensive HDTVs will be trapped in 480p purgatory.
A next-gen player that can deliver HD content to such televisions would be a big, big seller. People who buy TVs that support 1080i expect them to display HD content in 1080i, not 480p. One way around that would be to disable HDCP. Hollywood wants to make it clear that this is simply not acceptable. It shouldn't have been done in the past, and the stakes are higher going forward.
If only I could've been there to stand up and clap:
"Why are you such a bunch of big girls?" asked Birch. "Why don't you tell the content owners to just get stuffed?" He continued unabated: "You're too seduced by the content industry, Hollywood is not even a $10 billion industry. Hollywood is small compared to the telecom industry. Why don't you take a stronger line? Consumers don't want DRM at all. You can't sell DRM."
Thus the EET reports the outburst of audience member David Birch, who stood up during the Q&A part of a panel on DRM at the 3GSM conference in Barcelona and let rip at the telecom industry panelists. David Benjamin, who filed the story for the EET, reports that Birch also told the panelists that telecommunications industry is 15 times the size of the content industry.
In a later column at the EET, Spencer Chin approvingly cites the story of Birch's outburst, and manfully (though not entirely successfully) attempts to laud Birch for "stirring the pot" while simultaneously censuring name-calling at professional conferences.
I say bring on the name-calling. In fact, if Mr. Birch happens to read this post, we'd like to formally offer to let him have the mike for a moment so that he can preach, heckle, and harangue a bit more in a guest editorial on content vs. the carriers. Just drop us an email.
For my part, the coverage of Birch's rant definitely got me thinking. The total cost of Peter Jackson's King Kong was somewhere north of US$200 million. That's quite a bit, but such big-budget blockbusters are rare, and you can make and market a Hollywood movie for well under half that figure. Indeed, Brokeback Mountain had a production budget of only US$14 million.
In the tech industry, the price of a new fab is currently around US$5 billion, a price that puts such facilities out of reach for all but the biggest players like Intel and IBM. Still, that's 25 King Kongs, or over 350 Brokeback Mountains, or 1,000 five million dollar episodes of a big-budget HBO series like Rome or The Sopranos. My point is that, for even just half the price of a single 65nm fab, the tech industry could buy a few small studios and just start throwing tons of free content at the world. Or, for the full price of a fab, they could fund almost a decade worth of low- and medium-budget content to give away as an inducement for people to buy hardware.
Intel, IBM, and other tech companies with large investments in Linux know full well that you can sell a lot of hardware by giving away the software. Why not give away the content too? How many dollars worth of media center, home networking, and home network attached storage hardware could you sell if consumers knew that there were terabytes of free, unencumbered, high-definition, processor-intensive, storage-hungry, bandwidth burning, digital content awaiting them on the Internet?content that they could copy, share, and shuffle around among as many newly purchased media devices as they like?
I'll freely admit that 90% of what I know about the cost of Hollywood movies and TV shows I learned from Google over the past two hours. I'll also admit that drawing big-picture conclusions about how the tech industry could crush the movie industry based on a comparison of the cost of a fab to the cost of some movies and TV shows has a certain "late night dorm room bull session" quality to it. Nonetheless, I stand by my general claim that, for the price of what a single tech company invests in a single new fab, the hardware and telecommunications industries as a whole could dump enough free digital content on the world to fuel a very profitable explosion in consumer hardware purchasing.
So c'mon, tech industry. Why let Hollywood push you around and, even worse, hold hostage tens or even hundreds of billions of dollars in potential sales? If investments in open source can pay off in server hardware sales, why couldn't investments in free movies and music pay off in home entertainment, networking, and storage hardware sales?
Think I'm smokin' crack with this idea? Skeptical that low- to moderate-budget, freely available alternatives to Hollywood-produced content would magically translate into increased consumer and infrastructure hardware sales? Find it unlikely that tech companies, who can't even seem to produce advertising that's entertaining and attractive, could ever fund a TV show or movie that you'd actually want to watch? Drop into the discussion thread and tell me why.
World Series of Video Games coming to a city near you... maybe
2/20/2006 3:12:19 PM, by Peter Pollack
Gamers, rev up your thumbs. Games Media Properties, the company behind the touring GameRiot festivals, has announced their latest endeavor: a series of six gaming tournaments to be held at various locations around the country during 2006. Entitled the World Series of Video Games (WSVG), the tour is scheduled to kick off in Louisville, Kentucky over the weekend of June 15-18, travel to four more cities for additional "circuit events," then culminate in a December finale that will attempt to match the best players from each local tour stop.
"To date, video game competitions worldwide have been narrowly focused on one platform or another," said Scott Valencia, Executive Vice President, Games Media Properties. "The professional gaming movement requires a structure and an inclusive platform in order to grow.
That may be true, but Sony and Nintendo die-hards are invited to stay home anyway. Although described in its own press release as "definitive," the WSVG is a PC- and Xbox-oriented affair. That news should come as little surprise, as the primary corporate sponsors are Intel and Microsoft. The GameRiot festivals also focused on the same platforms.
In fact, aside from size and a focus on selecting national champions, it's hard to figure out exactly what the substantive difference is between the WSVG and the GameRiot tour. The GameRiot tour stops were much smaller deals, held in 20 or 30 cities over the course of the year, and the WSVG seems to be an attempt to reposition the GameRiot tour as a national event with a focus on regional, rather than local, participation.
That's not to say that the WSVG doesn't have potential, however. It looks to be BIG, with about 150,000 square feet of space available for gaming and exhibitions. In addition, gamers will be encouraged to bring their own gear for a giant LAN party.
Events will include PC and console tournaments, a 3000-user "Bring Your Own Computer" ("BYOC") and first ever "Bring Your Own Xbox" event, concerts, consumer electronics exhibitions and more. This event is timed to coincide with DreamHack, the world's largest LAN (Local Area Network) party, to be held in Jonkoping, Sweden during the FIFA World Cup. American and European teams will have the ability to compete against each other from these two events, and the events will vie to set a world record for the largest LAN party ever held.
No word is yet available on what other cities will be host to the World Series of Gaming, or where the finale will be held. Games Media Properties is promising 1 meeeelion dollars in cash prizes?a magic number that looks good on press releases and promises to make a trip to the regional stops worthwhile for a least a few skilled participants. Perhaps in future years, those participants will include gamers from all the major platforms, and the results will truly be "definitive."
More than a handful of news sites are reporting that Microsoft has revealed the final shipping versions of Windows Vista. Those sites are incorrect. Microsoft has not announced the final shipping editions, or "SKUs," for the much-anticipated operating system. Upon seeing the reports, I decided to confirm my skepticism with my contacts.
"Microsoft recently posted a web page designed to test the Windows Vista help system that included incomplete information about the Windows Vista product line up. This page has since been removed as it was posted prematurely and was for testing purposes only. We will share more information about the Windows Vista line up in the coming weeks," a Microsoft spokesperson told Ars Technica.
While it is inaccurate (and not to mention sloppy) to report that the official list has been published or released, questions still remain regarding whether or not this list bears any strong resemblance to what we expect to see once an announcement is made. In short, my answer is yes.
In September of 2005 I reported that Microsoft was internally planning seven separate editions of Windows Vista. For the most part it appears that Microsoft is continuing on with this approach. The following is the list derived from Microsoft's temporary documentation:
* Windows Starter 2007
* Windows Vista Home Basic (including "N")
* Windows Vista Home Premium
* Windows Vista Business (including "N")
* Windows Vista Ultimate
* Windows Vista Enterprise
As you can see, there are six core versions, two of which have permutations meant for the European market ("N" editions lack the Windows Media Player). There is essentially nothing new here, but since I reported on all of this months ago, perhaps I will run down these versions in order to paint a picture of where things are likely headed. Consider it a refresher of sorts.
Starter is a crippled OS aimed at the two-thirds world. It will limit users to three concurrent applications, and provide only basic TCP/IP networking, and won't be suitable for most games. You should not expect this edition to be available at retail. Home Basic Edition is really the sibling to today's Windows XP Home. It's basic, simple, but not crippled to the extent that Starter is. Most enthusiasts are likely to saddle up to Home Premium Edition, however. This version will build on the Basic Edition by adding, most notably, the next-generation of Media Center. It's similar to XP Pro in power, but with all of the added bells and whistles for entertainment. At the same time, you shouldn't expect Microsoft to support Active Directory or Domain use with either of these editions. The company really hopes to keep home editions out of the workplace. This brings us to the suits!
Windows Vista Business Edition is situated to take over where Windows XP Professional currently fits in the business work. It won't feature the MCE functionality that Home Premium Edition has, but it begins to provide the kind of functionality you'd expect in a business environment, such as support for non-Microsoft networking protocols and Domain support. Enterprise Edition will likely include added features such as like Virtual PC integration and the ability to encrypt an entire volume of information, although with regards to the latter it remains a distinct possibility that encryption will be made possible for the BE, as well. The EE edition will also only be available to volume licensing customers.
Last but not least, there's the Ultimate Edition. Very little is known about this edition except that it will be aimed at high-end enthusiasts, and will build upon Home Premium Edition. Microsoft may marry some of the Business features with Premium's entertainment-centric line-up, but we suspect that the major differences will be in support and application add-ons.
So what is missing in this newer list that was present in my list stemming from five months ago? Small Business Edition. It may still be coming, or Microsoft may have nixed it in favor of a single Business release. Time will tell.
Why so many?
It seems as though there is quite a bit of confusion as to why there are so many different releases. Thankfully, I can clear that up. In short, Microsoft is seeking to do two things. First, they want to make as much money as possible. Second, they want to make as much money as possible. Trust me, it will make sense in a minute.
The one-size-fits-all approach has its merits, but for Microsoft, it creates no shortage of problems. On the marketing side of the fence, Microsoft is trying to roll out operating systems at different price levels to meet different needs. The company clearly hopes to entice enthusiasts into paying a little more for Home Premium or Ultimate Edition. At the same time, the company hopes to see similar results with its business offerings. With more choices, the company knows it can play with feature sets and optimize profit margins. This is how they intend to make more money off of the directions that the OS was previously heading (Core, Tablet, Media Center, etc).
I think the more crucial point has to do with piracy, however. Consider: one version of Windows is a "bad thing." One activation key gets out, and whammy, piracy galore. With six editions, with six separate key algorithms, this becomes more complex. Now, consider what happened with Windows XP's "corporate" edition. Corporate licensing keys leaked out, and Microsoft was in trouble. A leaked corporate XP key meant that anyone who could find the key could install Windows XP. Piracy was rampant. This time around it will be different. The "cool stuff" in the Home Premium and Ultimate editions won't be accessible to pirates with a corporate key for the Business edition. Volume licensing will only be available for the two business-oriented versions, and I suspect that this was done precisely in order to reduce the attractiveness of pirating Windows for a specific type of pirate (namely, the casual, enthusiast pirate).
p2p news / p2pnet: The Big Four record labels are cold. Cold and ruthless.
"After a girl?s brother was killed in gang violence, she inherited his laptop," says the Tartan Online, Carnegie Mellon's student newspaper, quoting lawyer Charles Mudd.
Before she'd ever used the computer, her brother had downloaded songs with the usual suspect, Kazaa, and the girl, Mudd's client, "took the computer to college with her, where she was then subpoenaed for the songs that had been previously downloaded.
"Even with a death certificate, the RIAA would not drop the suit."
Mudd was one of the panelists in a public debate on Electronic File Sharing hosted by the University of Pittsburgh last Friday, says the story.
For its Computer Science Day, the university invited two experts to work with two undergraduate debate all-stars and, "The event was legitimized by the participation of Geoffrey L. Beauchamp, an attorney for the RIAA?s own law counseling firm, Conrad O?Brien Gellman & Rohn, and Charles Lee Mudd, president of the Charles Mudd Law Offices, which has represented several defendants in file-sharing lawsuits."
(Thanks, Alex H)
Also See:
Tartan Online - Panel discusses RIAA, February 20, 2006
News | Michael R. Fitzgerald
Story Image
Stacey Chu
Charles Lee Mudd, Esq., one of the debating attorneys, discussed RIAA lawsuits last Friday at Pitt.
* Print
* Email
* Discuss
Suggest this article to a friend:
From:
(name)
(email)
To:
(email)
More News Stories
* Panel discusses RIAA
* American math and sciences slipping
* Campus stores annually lose money to theft
* Standardized tests may come to college
* Statistically speaking
More »
Analogies flew fast and furious at the Public Debate on Electronic File Sharing hosted by the University of Pittsburgh last Friday.
In an October article, The Tartan reported that an undisclosed amount of students were facing subpoenas from the Recording Industry Association of America (?RIAA returns to campus,? Oct. 10, 2005). Now, four months later, the University of Pittsburgh invited two involved attorneys to discuss the issue in a public forum.
For their annual ?Computer Science Day,? the University of Pittsburgh invited two experts to work with two undergraduate debate all-stars in an event that moderator Gordon Mitchell, an associate professor of communication at the University of Pittsburgh, hoped would ?move past the battle-royale pyrotechnics that you see on Hardball with Chris Matthews or Crossfire.?
The event was legitimized by the participation of Geoffrey L. Beauchamp, an attorney for the RIAA?s own law counseling firm, Conrad O?Brien Gellman & Rohn, and Charles Lee Mudd, president of the Charles Mudd Law Offices, which has represented several defendants in file-sharing lawsuits.
Two distinguished University of Pittsburgh debaters, junior political science major Tony DiMattio and junior history and philosophy major Melina Forte, were paired with the attorneys.
DiMattio worked with Mudd in support of the proposal under debate: ?Lawsuits against individual P2P users should be sharply curtailed.? Forte and Beauchamp worked against this idea together.
?In March 2004, the RIAA shifted tactics from a focus on sites such as Napster to a focus on the individuals downloading,? Mudd said in his opening speech.
He detailed one client?s involvement with the issue: After a girl?s brother was killed in gang violence, she inherited his laptop. Before she ever used the computer, her brother had used Kazaa to download songs. The client took the computer to college with her, where she was then subpoenaed for the songs that had been previously downloaded.
?Even with a death certificate, the RIAA would not drop the suit. They are ruthless,? Mudd said. Mudd suggested that, at the very least, a warning should be sent to perpetrators, giving them a chance to cease and desist before the courts should become involved.
?I hope that from this debate, people walk away with the sense that there are a lot of players there,? said Mudd, referring to the collective actions of file-sharing programs, file-sharers, program developers, and the recording industry itself.
?I must be popular,? quipped Beauchamp to begin his opening statement, referring to his association with the RIAA. The crowd applauded his statements, regardless of any resentful undercurrents.
?It is wrong,? he said, referring to the indisputable fact that downloading copyrighted material, in any form or medium, is illegal. His arguments centered around this concept.
Beauchamp repeatedly compared the music industry on the Internet to a shopkeeper in a bad neighborhood.
?Smith & Barney reports that $5.4 billion has been lost to downloading,? Forte informed the crowd. She also pointed out that statistics could not accurately tell how much downloading would occur without the lawsuits.
?These lawsuits fail to account for individual circumstances,? DiMattio said.
At the end of the debate, the crowd was invited to ask questions to the debate panel. One audience member compared laws in some countries that will chop off shoplifters? arms to lawsuits in the U.S. that cost individuals thousands of dollars for downloading a few songs.
When asked afterwards, three of the four participants said they support the side for which they debated. Forte was the only exception.
News | Sci/Tech | Forum | Sports | Pillbox
http://thetartan.org/2006/2/20/news/riaa
p2p news / p2pnet: With more than a million users, the biggest eDonkey/eMule server in the world, Razorback, was taken down this morning by the Belgian federal police. One administrator is reportedly under custody at the time of writing, as reported by Ratiatum.com.
We have very little information. The whole batch of Razorback servers were seized around 10am, French time, Belgian federal police.
Although the Razorback association has its headquarters in Switzerland, the core system was set up in Belgium. Razorback did not host any illicit content and was even participating very actively in the distribution of legal content such as Ratiatum's download network (1 million+ P2P distributed freeware and shareware so far) and Jamendo's free music.
The server used for eMule and eDonkey was, however, indexing millions of files swapped on P2P networks, and a large part of it was illicit. The main Razorback administrator said in the past he was willing to blacklist files reported to him by copyright holders, but no one replied the offer.
Razorback was participating in numerous legal projects, providing marketers with precious network usage statistics, and even by distributing DRM protected files for content providers.
But the disappearance of Razorback will change absolutely nothing to the millions of eMule users, who already benefit from an entirely decentralized network called "Kad".
p2p news / p2pnet: Laura Song, Google's representative in China, has denied that Google.cn is operating without a license because of trouble with regulators
"Domestic newspaper Beijing News reported Google had not obtained the ICP license needed to operate Internet content services in China, and that the government was concerned and has begun to investigate into the problem," says Interfax China.
But, "Google's business operation always complies to the regulations and laws of the Chinese authorities," Song is quoted as saying.
Google launched its Chinese language platform under license from domestic web site Ganji, Song (http://www.ganji.com told Interfax, it states.
"The company would not be able to share the license with Ganji.com if it had not been approved by the local government," it has her saying.
Foreign investors, "have usually become minority shareholders in joint ventures with local Internet companies, or signed deals so the foreign investor receives payment for technical support to a Chinese client," says Reuters, going on:
"But the China Business Times, a business paper with a sometimes nationalist slant, blasted Google for even telling users that links are censored, likening the company to "an uninvited guest" telling a dinner host 'the dishes don't suit his taste, but he's willing to eat them as a show of respect to the host'."
Yahoo! used the license of its wholly-owned subsidiary 3721 Technologies to operate its business in China while eBay was also licensed to operate as an ICP after it acquired EachNet, says Interfax, adding:
"As a direct foreign investment from Google, Google.cn cannot receive a Chinese ICP license. Consequently, the company will need to launch some form of joint venture or make an acquisition in China to officially get a license.
"Song would not comment on this issue saying that the company is confident it will expand its business and improve its services in China step by step, abiding with Chinese laws."
Also See:
Interfax China - Google.cn sharing license with Chinese website Ganji.com, February 21, 2006
Reuters - Google rejects reports over its China licence, February 21, 2006
p2p news / p2pnet: Laura Song, Google's representative in China, has denied that Google.cn is operating without a license because of trouble with regulators
"Domestic newspaper Beijing News reported Google had not obtained the ICP license needed to operate Internet content services in China, and that the government was concerned and has begun to investigate into the problem," says Interfax China.
But, "Google's business operation always complies to the regulations and laws of the Chinese authorities," Song is quoted as saying.
Google launched its Chinese language platform under license from domestic web site Ganji, Song told Interfax, it states.
"The company would not be able to share the license with Ganji.com if it had not been approved by the local government," it has her saying.
Foreign investors, "have usually become minority shareholders in joint ventures with local Internet companies, or signed deals so the foreign investor receives payment for technical support to a Chinese client," says Reuters, going on:
"But the China Business Times, a business paper with a sometimes nationalist slant, blasted Google for even telling users that links are censored, likening the company to "an uninvited guest" telling a dinner host 'the dishes don't suit his taste, but he's willing to eat them as a show of respect to the host'."
Yahoo! used the license of its wholly-owned subsidiary 3721 Technologies to operate its business in China while eBay was also licensed to operate as an ICP after it acquired EachNet, says Interfax, adding:
"As a direct foreign investment from Google, Google.cn cannot receive a Chinese ICP license. Consequently, the company will need to launch some form of joint venture or make an acquisition in China to officially get a license.
"Song would not comment on this issue saying that the company is confident it will expand its business and improve its services in China step by step, abiding with Chinese laws."
Also See:
Interfax China - Google.cn sharing license with Chinese website Ganji.com, February 21, 2006
Reuters - Google rejects reports over its China licence, February 21, 2006
