32 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
The Telecom Digest for July 1, 2014
====== 32 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ======
Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Bill Horne and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote. By using any name or email address
included herein for any reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to that person, or email address
Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without the explicit written consent of the owner of that address. Chain letters, viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.
We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands against crime. - Geoffrey Welsh
See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details and the name of our lawyer, and other stuff of interest.
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 19:47:56 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Massachusetts high court orders suspect to decrypt his computers Message-ID: <email@example.com> Massachusetts high court orders suspect to decrypt his computers Suspect told cops: "Everything is encrypted and no one is going to get to it." by Cyrus Farivar June 25 2014 Ars Technica Massachusetts' top court ruled, in a 5-2 decision on Wednesday, that a criminal suspect can be ordered to decrypt his seized computer. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (MSJC) ruling only applies to the state. Various other courts at the state and federal level have disagreed as to whether being forced to type in a decryption password is a violation of the Fifth Amendment right to protect against self-incrimination and its state equivalents (such as Article Twelve of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights). For example, more than two years ago, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a defendant was not obliged to decrypt his hard drive, as doing so would violate his Fifth Amendment rights. However, that ruling only took effect in the 11th Circuit, which covers parts of the southeastern United States. Just last year, a federal judge refused to force a Wisconsin child pornography suspect to decrypt his laptop. Overall, cases involving decryption are still relatively new and rare. The first known one only dates back to 2007. ... http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/06/massachusetts-high-court-orders-suspect-to-decrypt-his-computers/
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 19:47:56 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: In Aereo's wake, Fox targets Dish's TV streaming service Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> In Aereo's wake, Fox targets Dish's TV streaming service Broadcaster says Supreme Court ruling killing Aereo also dismantles Dish Hopper. by David Kravets Ars Technica June 27 2014 Having just buried broadcast streaming service Aereo under a Supreme Court victory, Fox is invoking that high court precedent in a bid to shutter another television platform. Fox and others won a high-profile copyright case against upstart Aereo on Wednesday, in which the Supreme Court held in a 6-3 vote that Aereo was offering services akin to a cable company and therefore needed the broadcasters' permission to retransmit their content to online viewers. Armed with that decision, Fox told a federal appeals court that the high court's decision means Dish's Hopper DVR sideloading platform and the Dish Anywhere streaming platform should also be declared illegal. ... http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/06/in-aereos-wake-fox-targets-dishs-tv-streaming-service/
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 19:46:58 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Yup, 1-800-COLLECT is still in business-and charging massive fees Message-ID: <email@example.com> Yup, 1-800-COLLECT is still in business-and charging massive fees $42.55 for a 6-minute collect call? It happened to one Ars reader. by Nate Anderson June 28 2014 Ars Technica http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/06/yup-1-800-collect-is-still-in-business-and-charging-massive-fees/
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 19:47:56 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Unlocking your phone still illegal while carriers meet "voluntary" rules Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Unlocking your phone still illegal while carriers meet "voluntary" rules As lawmakers argue, carriers have until 2015 to unlock all off-contract phones. by Jon Brodkin June 26 2014 Ars Technica A bill slowly working its way through Congress would once again make it legal for consumers to unlock their cellular phones so that they can be used on other carriers' networks. While lawmakers dither, a "voluntary" agreement the carriers signed under pressure from the Federal Communications Commission is paying off for some customers, but not all. The guarantee signed in December should force the carriers to unlock phones, albeit only when a consumer has paid off his or her contract, and in many cases not until early next year. The bill moving through Congress is stronger because it would let consumers unlock their phones at any time, even before they've paid off their contracts. That wouldn't free consumers from having to pay their bills, but there are reasons to want an unlocked phone even while you're paying a monthly fee to your primary provider. For example, a trip overseas could be a good time to swap out a phone's SIM card and connect to a local network in order to avoid a US carrier's international data and voice charges. ... http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/06/unlocking-your-phone-still-illegal-while-carriers-meet-voluntary-rules/
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 19:46:58 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Pornographer gets to see six strikes copyright warnings of accused infringer Message-ID: <email@example.com> Pornographer gets to see six strikes copyright warnings of accused infringer Six strikes was not designed to provide courtroom evidence of infringement. by David Kravets Ars Technica June 27 2014 Comcast must surrender to a porn studio any so-called "six-strikes" copyright infringement notices it may have sent an Indianapolis woman whom the pornographer is accusing of illegally downloading skin flicks, a federal judge ruled. The Wednesday decision marks what is believed to be the first time a court has ordered that the notices be produced in a copyright lawsuit. That's significant because the six strikes program was not designed to provide courtroom evidence of infringement. Instead, the stated goal behind the notices, which are sent to suspected infringers, has been "educational" in a bid to get pirates to knock off their infringing activities. The notices are part of what is known as the Copyright Alert System, which began in February 2013 and includes five participating ISPs: AT&T, Cablevision Systems, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, and Verizon. The US program was strongly backed by the Obama Administration and is run by the newly-created Center for Copyright Information. ... http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/06/pornographer-gets-to-see-six-strikes-copyright-warnings-of-accused-infringer/ Here's what an actual "six strikes" copyright alert looks like Ars asks and Comcast obliges, giving us copies of Alerts 1, 2, 4, and 5. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/02/heres-what-an-actual-six-strikes-copyright-alert-looks-like/
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 18:16:10 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: After Supreme Court Ruling, Aereo's Rivals in TV Streaming Seize Opening Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> After Supreme Court Ruling, Aereo's Rivals in TV Streaming Seize Opening By EMILY STEEL JUNE 29, 2014 Mark Ely saw an opportunity, and he took it. The day after the Supreme Court ruled against Aereo in a copyright case brought by the nation's major broadcasters, Mr. Ely was trying to scoop up Aereo customers by promoting his start-up, Simple.TV, on social media. "Former Aereo customer? Join the Simple.TV Family," the company wrote on Twitter on Thursday. "We're telling Aereo customers: 'Your favorite service is going away. Here's an idea that isn't,' " Mr. Ely, who started his company in 2011, said in an interview. The television establishment still has much to worry about after its Supreme Court victory on Wednesday over Aereo, the digital start-up that had threatened to upend the economics of the media business. ... http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/30/business/media/after-supreme-court-ruling-aereos-rivals-in-tv-streaming-seize-opening.html
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom- munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to Usenet, where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational service offered to the Internet by Bill Horne. All the contents of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work and that of the original author. The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne.
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
bill at horne dot net
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm- unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and published continuously since then. Our archives are available for your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list on the internet in any category! URL information: http://telecom-digest.org Copyright (C) 2014 TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing your name to the mailing list. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization.