From editor@telecom-digest.org Wed Dec 22 02:15:34 2004 Received: (from ptownson@localhost) by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.11.6p3/8.11.6) id iBM7FW915105; Wed, 22 Dec 2004 02:15:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 02:15:34 -0500 (EST) From: editor@telecom-digest.org Message-Id: <200412220715.iBM7FW915105@massis.lcs.mit.edu> X-Authentication-Warning: massis.lcs.mit.edu: ptownson set sender to editor@telecom-digest.org using -f To: ptownson Approved: patsnewlist Subject: TELECOM Digest V23 #613 TELECOM Digest Wed, 22 Dec 2004 02:16:00 EST Volume 23 : Issue 613 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson Cable TV Advertising (Neal McLain) U.S. Judge Refuses to Accept Guilty Plea on Spam (Lisa Minter) Download Site SuprNova Closes Amid Hollywood Crackdown (Lisa Minter) Sex Tape on Internet Roils Indian Public (Lisa Minter) Washington Post Buys Microsoft's Webzine (Lisa Minter) Apple Sues Three for Posting Mac OS X on Net (Lisa Minter) Re: DIrectv Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service (DevilsPGD) Re: DirecTV Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service (William Van Hefner) Re: DirecTV Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service (Barry Margolin) Re: Cromwell vrs. Sprint Settlement (Steven Sobol) Re: Hanging Up on Wireless Spam (Steven Sobol) Re: What Tandem in Telcom Means? (John McHarry) Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson 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 the recipients of the email. =========================== Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without explicit written consent. 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; other stuff of interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 00:48:15 -0600 From: Neal McLain Subject: Cable TV Advertising (was 'Transitional Fair Use') Barry Margolin wrote: > I don't know what people were saying about cable TV in > the 40's and 50's. I'm talking about what happened in > the 70's when cable-only channels like HBO first started > to appear. I believe that prior to that, cable TV was > just a way of providing TV service to communities > that had environmental difficulties receiving broadcast > TV (e.g. mountainous terrain blocking the signals). CATV systems were operating in small-market cities well before 1970, including communities that already supported local broadcast stations. Many of these CATV systems produced extensive schedules of local non-broadcast programming ("origination cablecasting" in FCC-speak), and much of it included commercial advertising. As an example, my former employer, Complete Channel TV in Madison Wisconsin, co-existed in a market with four broadcast stations (ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS). We operated a full-color studio for several years before the first satellite-delivered non-broadcast programming appeared. We used this studio for three types of programming: commercially-sponsored; non-commercial public affairs; and public access. > Since you had to pay extra for these "premium" channels, > there was an expectation that this would obviate the need > for commercials. The CATV industry uses the term "premium" to refer to programming channels funded by subscriber fees *over and above* the charge for basic (or extended basic) service. By this definition, premium channels are, and always have been, commercial free: HBO, Showtime, The Movie Channel, and Cinemax. The CATV industry (and the FCC) use the term "cable programming service" (CPS) to identify channels that: - Are usually carried on the basic or extended basic tier (e.g. CNN, ESPN, Discovery, Family Channel), and - Are not broadcast stations, premium channels, or access channels. The entrepreneurs who funded CPS channels certainly didn't expect that these channels would be commercial-free. With a few exceptions, every CPS channel carried by satellite after 1975 was launched as a commercial venture and carried advertising from day one. There are, of course, exceptions. In a previous post on this subject, I included a list of non-commercial CPS channels: http://tinyurl.com/4kfxq These exceptions aside, CPS channels are, and always have been, commercial ventures. I don't see how anyone who was familiar with the CATV industry could have expected that the basic service charge "would obviate the need for commercials." References: The FCC definitions of "basic service" and "CPS" are at 47 CFR 76.901: http://tinyurl.com/45sj9 An extensive history of the CATV industry, including information about programming, is at The Cable Center's "Cable History" page: http://tinyurl.com/5nukj Neal McLain ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: U.S. Judge Refuses to Accept Guilty Plea on Spam Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:26:04 EST NEW YORK (Reuters) - A federal judge on Tuesday refused to accept a guilty plea from a former America Online employee accused of selling the Internet provider's customer list to a "spammer," saying he was unsure a crime had been committed. U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein stopped a hearing at which Jason Smathers was to plead guilty to conspiracy and interstate trafficking of stolen property, saying he had a "technical question" about the alleged crime. At issue, the judge said, is whether the actions rose to the level required by a new antispam law, which states that spam must be not only annoying but deceptive. Spam is the term widely used for unsolicited commercial e-mails, often hawking products to combat sexual dysfunction or promote weight loss. "Everybody has spamsters, but mine is a technical question," the judge said. "I don't think it's deceptive or misleading to the recipient." The judge, who said he once used AOL but quit the provider because of the amount of spam he received, asked prosecutors to submit a legal brief by Jan. 12 with more information. The judge also set a hearing for Jan. 28 at which time he could decide to accept the plea. "I need to be independently satisfied that a crime has been committed," he said. The case by federal prosecutors charges that Smathers, of Harpers Ferry, West Virginia, stole a list of 92 million customer screen names from AOL, a Time Warner Inc. unit, and sold it to an Internet marketer. The marketer then allegedly used the list to promote his online gambling operation and sold the names to other spammers, according to prosecutors. Smathers, 24, faces up to 15 years in prison on charges of conspiracy and interstate trafficking of stolen property, but was expected to receive a sentence closer to 18 to 24 months. After the hearing was unexpectedly cut short, an attorney for Smathers said "everything has been thrown open now" by the judge's refusal to accept his client's plea. "This is a new statute," the attorney, Jay Goldberg, said. "He is questioning whether the conduct here met the standard of deception." NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Download Site SuprNova Closes Amid Hollywood Crackdown Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:33:14 EST By Adam Pasick LONDON (Reuters) - SuprNova.org, one of the Internet's most popular sites for finding links to download pirated movies, has been taken offline by its creator amid a legal crackdown by Hollywood's copyright cops. Slovenia-based SuprNova offered thousands of special files that enabled users to download movies, TV shows, music and other content using the BitTorrent file-transfer network. Earlier this month, the Motion Picture Association of America launched a barrage of lawsuits against people that operate the so-called "torrent" files, as well as servers on the eDonkey and Direct Connect networks. SuprNova's creator, who goes by the name Sloncek, took the site down over the weekend, citing the increased legal pressure on those hosting torrent files. In addition to MPAA's civil lawsuits in the United States and Britain, criminal charges were filed in France, the Netherlands and Finland. "SuprNova.org was more like a hobby that took most of my free time away. And now with current situation, there's too much pressure and I don't have the time for it," Sloncek told the file-sharing Web site Slyck (http://www.slyck.com). He did not respond to an emailed interview request from Reuters. In a message on SuprNova, Sloncek said: "We are sorry to inform you all, that SuprNova is closing down for good in the way that we all know it. We do not know if SuprNova is going to return, but it is certainly not going to be hosting any more torrent links." BitTorrent has quietly grown into a file-sharing behemoth, devouring up to one-third of the Internet's bandwidth by one research firm's account. Bram Cohen, the programer that created BitTorrent, has warned against using the software for illicit purposes. BitTorrent's "file-swarming" software breaks a digital file into many pieces, shares the pieces among all users who have downloaded the torrent file, then stitches them back together. It is also used for many non-illicit purposes, such as sharing non-copyrighted music and distributing video game demos. The shutdown of the premier source for movies and TV downloads through BitTorrent was welcomed by MPAA anti-piracy chief John Malcolm, who has railed against "parasites leeching off the creative activity of others." "I'm pleased. It was the most popular torrent site," he said. "They took that action voluntarily, so obviously they were concerned about their conduct. It was something we were studying, so I can understand why they were concerned." Hollywood is desperate to avoid the fate of its corporate cousins in the music industry, who have yet to recover from the illicit MP3 downloading boom that began with Napster. The large size of video content has prevented movie and TV downloads from catching on as quickly, but higher bandwidth and improving compression technology means that it may not be safe for long. "We are a little bit ahead of the curve in the sense that the movie industry is still making money. Downloading and uploading video has not become, thankfully, mainstream activity the way that downloading and uploading music became," Malcolm said. "We've also gotten out ahead because our industry has not been decimated -- yet." NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Sex Tape on Internet Roils Indian Public Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:39:14 EST By VIJAY JOSHI, Associated Press Writer NEW DELHI - It was a private act of two hormone-charged teenagers that lasted 2 minutes and 37 seconds on digital video. But offered for sale on the Internet, the fuzzy images of the 17-year-old girl having oral sex with her high school sweetheart has sent shock waves through urban India, exposing the growing friction between the conservative middle class, its increasingly Westernized progeny and modern technology. "It came to me as a surprise that kids are having sex so soon," Barkha Dutt, who hosts the country's most popular television talk show on social issues, said in an interview. "Even we are not aware of how much things have changed." India may be the birthplace of Kama Sutra, the 6th century sex manual, but sex today is a generally taboo subject. Premarital sex is not widely condoned, and public displays of affection draw frowns. Caught in the scandal's stinging sweep is Avnish Bajaj, the Indian-born American who heads eBay's Indian subsidiary Baazee.com, where the video clip shot by the schoolboy himself using his cell phone camera was put up for sale. Arrested last week under an ambiguous Indian law on cyber porn, Bajaj was freed after posting bail Tuesday, but his U.S. passport remained confiscated. Bajaj's arrest triggered a diplomatic spat between the United States and India and a threat by eBay executives to reconsider doing business in a country that would toss one of their top managers in jail as a scapegoat. "This incident has certainly given us pause and raises concerns about the safeguards that are in place for businesses operating in India," said Henry Gomez, an eBay vice president in the United States. "This situation is one of concern at highest levels of the U.S. government," State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said in Washington. Bajaj set up Baazee.com in 2000 and sold it to San Jose, Calif.-based eBay, the Internet's leading auction company, for about $50 million in June. The Harvard-educated executive has since headed the Bombay-based subsidiary. The sex clip was recorded weeks ago and passed on by the bragging schoolboy to three of his friends and eventually made its way to video disc sellers in New Delhi. It did not draw much attention until an engineering student at a prestigious Indian college listed it for sale on Baazee.com. Now the girl's parents have sent her off to Canada. The 17-year-old boy, the son of an affluent businessman, is now in a juvenile detention center. He went to Nepal to escape the media glare and was arrested at the airport when he returned to the capital on Sunday. A judge on Tuesday ordered him held until Jan. 4 for questioning to try to determine how the video clip reached the man who tried to sell it. The controversy over the clip; it's the talk of urban India, an obsession of newspapers and talk shows; is typical of a society in transition, said Dr. Ranjana Kumari, the director of the think tank Center for Social Research. India's recent economic boom has created unimaginable wealth among the tech-savvy urban population, who live in a globalized world dominated by the Internet, international brands and Western lifestyle with its relatively liberal sexual values. Kumari says urban India is being pulled apart by these new values and its own centuries-old social conservatism. "It is this transition which is resulting in a lot of confusion," Kumari said. Observers like Kumari think a variety of people share the blame for grossly amplifying this sex scandal including the authorities who arrested Bajaj and the boy, who remains unidentified because of his age; the teenagers' parents, who weren't aware of their children's activities; and teachers, for sidestepping sex education in schools. Many are outraged by the arrest of the schoolboy, who along with the girl attended one of the capital's best known private schools, The Delhi Public School. "What are we trying to say here?" asked Dutt. "What do we believe is wrong? Was it that he had sex? Was it that he sent out the clip? Which part is the disturbing part?" Of greater concern to many in the business community is Bajaj's arrest under the Information Technology Act of 2000. The law makes a criminal offense of "publishing, transmitting, or causing to publish any information in electronic form, which is obscene." But it also says an Internet provider or Web site manager can't be held responsible if he acted diligently to remedy an electronic offense after learning of it. Baazee.com maintains it yanked the sex video listing as soon as customer service managers noticed it, and Bajaj had traveled to New Delhi to cooperate with authorities. Pawan Duggal, a cyberlaw expert, said Bajaj's arrest has serious implications, especially when Internet usage in the country is rapidly growing and foreign investors are increasingly looking to India for e-commerce opportunities. "Ultimately we have to see bigger picture. We want to increase Internet penetration. All this will only happen if you allow service providers the freedom," he said. "The law needs to be more industry friendly and more pragmatic." AP Technology Writer Rachel Konrad contributed to this report from San Jose, Calif. For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance, Associated Press. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Vijay Joshi, the writer of this article for the Associated Press noted that this incident caused a diplomatic squabble between India and the USA. I am reminded of the similarity between this incident (minors and consensual sex) and an incident on September 25 in Iraq: one of Bush's Onward Christian Soldiers raped a seventeen year old boy, an Iraqi soldier. It is discussed in detail in Yahoo News Tuesday evening (let's see if I can get this URL correct): http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=101&e=4&u=/po/20041222/co_po/americansoldiershootsiraqiaftersex You may need to use a Yahoo login to deep link into that page, and if the link does not work for some reason, go to Yahoo News (my.news.yahoo.com) and read the 'Planet Out' news section, for the story 'American Soldier Shoots Iraqi After Sex'. It seems that National Guardsman Private Federico Merida, age 21 shot and killed a 17-year old Iraqi boy following a sex act between them. At his court martial, held in Iraq about a month ago, Merida shot the boy eleven times with his carbine following the sex act. At first, he tried to blame it on the boy, saying the boy had demanded money following sex. Then he changed his story and said the boy had *forced him* to do the sex act. Later he admitted to 'getting agressive with the boy' and when the kid threatened to tattle on him, he decided to shoot the kid. Merida was found guilty in the court martial, sentenced to 25 years in prison in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, in what the Army euphemistically refers to as the Fort Leavenworth Disciplinary Barracks. The parents of the Iraqi boy are understandably livid about it; and according to Yahoo, the Army has been covering up the court martial records. Tsk, tsk. Like the two children in India and the E-Bay video, we may hear more about this problem in Iraq. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Washington Post Buys Microsoft's Webzine Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:42:14 EST By Howard Kurtz, Washington Post Staff Writer The Washington Post Co. said yesterday it is buying Slate in an effort to boost the media company's online traffic but does not plan any editorial changes at the eight-year-old Web magazine. In announcing a deal to acquire Slate from Microsoft Corp. for an undisclosed sum, said to be in the millions of dollars, Post executives said they would keep Jacob Weisberg as editor and most of the 30-person staff. Asked for reaction, Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates said by e-mail: "Mostly I'm really proud of Slate's pioneering role in online journalism, and confident it will continue to lead the way. As one of the early -- albeit minor -- participants in Slate's diary section, I'll always feel incredibly close to it -- and will definitely remain an avid fan and reader." He added: "Graduating to media ownership seemed the obvious next step for Slate, and I'm confident it will thrive wonderfully under The Post." Weisberg pronounced himself "delighted" with the move. "Microsoft has been a great place for us for the last 8 1/2 years," he said, but "it was a tough place to develop our business because it wasn't a media company and doesn't want to be a media company. They're really big and we're really small. The joke was always that we're almost a rounding error, but a rounding error probably exaggerated our status." Ann McDaniel, a Post Co. vice president, said: "Our goal is not to in any way change Slate. We think it's important that it keep its personality. Over time, we hope to find a business model that will make money. You're not suddenly going to see a different kind of Slate." Jeff Jarvis, who writes a blog called BuzzMachine.com and is president of Advance Publications' Internet arm, called the sale "a smart move" because "The Washington Post has been in many ways clever and smart about online. It will support Slate in a good environment that understands media in a way that Microsoft, God bless them, which tried many times, didn't." Had the sale fallen through, Jarvis said, Microsoft "wouldn't necessarily have been a happy home" for Slate once "they already tried to give you up for adoption and failed. As if to underscore Slate's independence, the magazine ran a piece yesterday by media columnist Jack Shafer that criticized a front-page Washington Post series on the murders of new and expectant mothers. "I was glad to whack the new master one more time," Shafer said yesterday, adding that he plans to continue doing so and has found that the newspaper "has a remarkably thick skin" about criticism. The Post reported in July that Microsoft was looking for a buyer and that the leading contenders were The Post Co. and the New York Times Co. The Times did pursue a possible deal, according to people familiar with the matter. The Post's Web site already has an alliance with MSNBC.com, which is partly owned by Microsoft, and former Microsoft executive Melinda Gates, the wife of the company's founder, was named to the Post Co. board in September.

Cliff Sloan, general counsel of Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, will become publisher of the money-losing magazine when the deal takes effect next month. Scott Moore, general manager of MSN Network Experience, called the sale "bittersweet," saying: "It's a little like seeing your kid go off to college." But Microsoft now has "a mass-market publishing strategy," he said, and "Slate is more of a niche publication. Slate wasn't going to get as much attention as it really deserved." According to Nielsen Net Ratings, washingtonpost.com drew 7 million unique visitors last month, compared with 6 million for Slate. Another service, ComScore Media Metrix, says washingtonpost.com drew 4.5 million unique visitors last month and Slate 4.8 million, but that people spend more time on the Post site: 120 million page views, compared with 25 million for Slate. Much of Slate's traffic is driven by being part of the Microsoft Network, whose home page will continue to feature Slate headlines. Post executives say that Slate's home page will include some reference to the newspaper's Web site and that washingtonpost.com will also promote certain Slate stories. Sloan called the acquisition, which will become part of Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, "a great fit" in part because advertisers could be offered a package that would include The Post and Newsweek sites as well as Slate. Post stock closed up $26.95 yesterday to finish at $60.01. Slate was founded in suburban Seattle, where Microsoft is based, in 1996 when former New Republic editor and CNN commentator Michael Kinsley launched what was then an unusual experiment in online daily journalism. But the software giant and the liberal magazine proved to be an odd combination. Weisberg said it was difficult, for example, to pay freelance writers on a timely basis because "a company like Microsoft isn't geared to write a check for $400." In editorial terms, Slate will be losing its Seattle flavor while keeping its offices in New York, where Weisberg works, and on Washington's M Street. While a few copy editors now based in Redmond, Wash., will work from home, several other Slate staffers, including publisher Cyrus Krohn, have decided not to move east. Slate, which has competed with another liberal online journal, San Francisco-based Salon, has made a mark not just with feature articles but also with columns and digests such as "Pressbox," "Chatterbox," "Moneybox," "Kausfiles," and the "Dear Prudence" advice column. Slate also co-produces the National Public Radio show "Day to Day." Given its Web-based DNA, Slate does some things differently than The Post. A week before the election, nearly all its editorial staffers, including Weisberg, disclosed that they were voting for John Kerry over President Bush. On Election Day, Slate posted leaked numbers from the early wave of exit polls made available to the networks, the Associated Press and such clients as The Post, something the newspaper would never do. Asked if he was worried about editorial interference from the new owner, Weisberg invoked the name of The Post Co.'s chief executive. "Don Graham and everyone else we've dealt with at The Post Co. made very clear they wanted to buy Slate because they like the magazine the way it is," he said. "I don't think readers are going to notice much difference." NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Washington Post.. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: Lisa Minter Subject: Apple Sues Three for Posting Mac OS X on Net Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 23:44:41 EST By Duncan Martell SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Apple Computer Inc. has sued three men for illegally distributing test copies of the next version of its Mac OS X operating system on a file-sharing Web site, court records showed on Tuesday. The lawsuit is the second in as many weeks by the maker of the popular iPod digital music players and iconic Macintosh personal computers to thwart the release of its software and details of its unannounced products. Apple claims in its suit that two different versions of Mac OS X, code-named Tiger, were made available on the Web on or about Oct. 30 and Dec. 8 of this year. The company has said it will ship Mac OS X "Tiger" in the first half of 2005, after previewing it to the Mac community at a trade show last June. Apple makes test versions available to certain software developers under strict confidentiality conditions and lets them test the prerelease software and develop or change their own programs to work with the software. The company said in its lawsuit that the two different versions were made publicly available by the men, who were members of the Apple Developer Connection. "Members of Apple Developer Connection receive advance copies of Apple software under strict confidentiality agreements, which we take very seriously to protect our intellectual property," the company said in a statement. According to the suit, the men released the software on a Web site that employs BitTorrent file-sharing technology, which is used to rapidly distribute large files of electronic data, and is also widely used to distribute pirated copies of motion pictures via the Internet. "Apple's future operating results and financial condition are substantially dependent on its ability to continue to develop improvements to the Mac OS and related software applications in order to maintain perceived design and functional advantages over competing platforms," the company said in its civil complaint, filed on Monday in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, San Jose. Apple's Macintosh computers and Mac operating system compete principally with personal computers using Microsoft Corp.'s dominant Windows operating system. Apple currently has a less than 5 percent share of the overall PC market. On Dec. 13 Apple, based in Cupertino, California, filed a lawsuit against unnamed individuals who leaked details about new products by posting information on the Internet. The lawsuits come weeks ahead of the Macworld conference in San Francisco, the annual show where Chief Executive Steve Jobs typically unveils the latest Apple products in front of thousands of the Mac faithful. NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra . New articles daily. *** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright owner, in this instance Reuters News Service. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ------------------------------ From: DevilsPGD Subject: Re: DIrectv Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 21:56:17 -0700 Organization: Octanews In message Joseph wrote: > Well, buying anything "lifetime" should always be considered a risk. > What lifetime are they referring to? Yours, the satellite receiver, > the company? What applies to gym memberships probably applies to all > things that you buy. Buying a "lifetime" anything is always a gamble. > Unless in the original agreement they vowed to continue your service > on the "lifetime" basis no matter who the company became I'm afraid > you're probably sunk. Lifetime typically means "lifetime" of the hardware, but obviously if the company goes under there is nobody to sue anyway. However, it really depends on the contract -- As with all things in life, read the contract for the answers. ------------------------------ Reply-To: From: William Van Hefner Subject: Re: DirecTV Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 17:34:15 -0800 Organization: Vantek Communications, Inc. > If Pegasus was purchased by DirecTV, then the legal complaint > is with DirecTV -- If DirecTV purchased Pegasus without being > aware of Pegasus' liabilities, that's their fault, and maybe > next time they'll perform due diligence before making a > corporate acquisition. The whole affair between Pegasus, DirecTV and TiVo is actually a quite messy situation. In a nutshell, Pegasus had a contract at one time to be a distributor of DirecTV programming. Pegasus signed-up customers in rural areas and was paid a regular commission each month by DirecTV for doing so. At some point, DirecTV decided that it wanted to terminate the Pegasus contract. Since these commissions constituted Pegasus' chief form of income, they fought the issue in court. The decision was a complicated one, but what DirecTV ended up doing was basically taking over Pegasus' entire customer base and keep the monthly commissions for themselves. Pegasus is now in deep doo-doo and I believe that they will now very likely go out of business. I am not sure whether DirecTV did direct billing of "Pegasus customers" from the beginning, or whether Pegasus itself acted as a rebiller, but as DirecTV sees it, these customers paid Pegasus the lifetime subscription money for the TiVo service, and not them. Exactly how much of this "lifetime subscription" was passed through to DirecTV from Pegasus is unknown, but it certainly was not 100%, as DirecTV would have liked it. DirecTV -USED- to offer TiVo service, which was completely driven by TiVo's software and proprietary programming. Now when you buy a DirecTV receiver with DVR capabilities, you get "DirecTV DVR service powered by TiVo". This is basically DirecTV's way of severing their exclusive deal with TiVo, and will allow them in the future to do away with TiVo as a middleman altogether. Therefore, DirecTV viewers are not really getting TiVo service directly anymore. They are just getting a repackaged form of the service, and DirecTV may do-away with TiVo's service at any time. DVR technology is now so standard that companies like DirecTV no longer need companies like TiVo. They can do everything themselves. This begs the question, exactly how much of this "lifetime" subscription was passed on from Pegasus to DirecTV, and in turn, how much of the subscription was passed on from DirecTV to TiVo? Nobody really knows, as these were all private agreements. For its part, Pegasus has (VERY unwillingly) been cut out of the loop. It can't do a thing, even if it actually has the money to give back (it doesn't). DirecTV will likely claim that it was not the one paid for the lifetime subscription, and has no obligation to fulfill Pegasus' promises. It did NOT buy Pegasus. It only cannibalized its customer base. And TiVo? Well, they would be happy to provide the lifetime service, I'm sure. Only thing is, the subscription is tied to the receiver (NOT the owner) and DirecTV no longer offers TiVo service. This whole fiasco reminds me of the Abbott & Costello "Who's On First" sketch. Everyone is denying responsibility. IMHO, DirecTV made a killing from taking over the Pegasus customer base, and should honor the deal. Whether or not they are legally obligated to do so though is another question. William Van Hefner Editor - TheDigest.Com ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: DIrectv Not Honoring Tivo Lifetime Service Organization: Symantec Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 01:03:28 -0500 In article , googlenospam@netcrafting.com wrote: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Someone committed fraud on you. When > you purchase (or otherwise take over) an existing business, then > you take over not only the assets of the existing business, but the > *liabilities* as well, unless the people going *out* of business > specifically publish a notice to the effect otherwise, which is to > afford *you* - the holder of that asset (by virtue of your lifetime > subscription in this case) -- the opportunity to collect on it from > the original owner of the business. I think an exception to this is if the company taken over was in bankruptcy. This seems to allow some freedom for the new owner in cancelling or renegotiating contracts. When I was working for Genuity and Level(3) acquired us, they started cancelling many of our customers' contracts because they weren't profitable (I assume we'd been giving lots of discounts in order to build up the business, but Level(3) was big enough that they didn't need loss leaders like these). -- Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu Arlington, MA *** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me *** ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Cromwell vrs. Sprint Settlement Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:29:28 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com TELECOM Digest Editor wrote: > I dunno, somewhere I read that Sprint was supposed to be so much > cheaper than AT&T ... of course I know this card was *free*, but > still, is the above their 'typical' rates? MCI is supposed to be cheaper than AT&T too, but their calling card rates still suck. Around here I can buy Sprint and MCI prepaid cards at the local grocery store chains, and they're cheap. But so are AT&T cards from Wal*Mart. Why? The SMALLEST such chain here is locally-owned Stater Brothers Market, which is headquartered about an hour from here in Colton, CA. And I'm sure they buy thousands of the cards at once. The other chains are Von's (Safeway Stores, Inc.), Ralphs and Food4Less (Kroger Company) and Albertsons (Federated Inc). Safeway, Kroger and Federated are all huge companies with lots of buying power -- Kroger, in particular, is by far the largest grocery company in the country, if not in the world. And we all know how big Wal*Mart is. (a) I'd question how many plaintiffs got cards -- I'm sure it's small compared to the number of cards a typical large retail chain buys in a year. (b) I wouldn't expect any special deals on cards given out as a settlement lawsuit -- I'm sure Sprint wants to minimize its losses from the suit. JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. ------------------------------ From: Steve Sobol Subject: Re: Hanging Up On Wireless Spam Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 22:31:09 -0800 Organization: Glorb Internet Services, http://www.glorb.com T. Sean Weintz wrote: >> what's next; SPAM deliveried to your TV via your cable box? > Um, isn't that what commercials are? This comment demonstrates a basic misunderstanding of what spam is. Spam is not 'advertising I don't like'. The defining characteristic of spam is that it is an attempt by the advertiser to shift advertising costs onto the recipient, and when was the last time you were forced to pay for someone's television or radio ad? JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/ Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED) Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That is sort of what happens now on cable channels. Although the advertiser does not 'force me to pay for it', they do prevent me from getting a full 24/7 of the shows I might want to see (if I were a televison watcher.)Presumably, what I pay for cable is intended to pay the cable operator's costs and make a profit for him as well. But he wants to double dip by charging the advertiser to give his messages, and charge *me* for watching them. If that were not the case, why wouldn't the cable operator program the DVR boxes they now use to fast-forward past commercials if that is what I wanted to do? PAT] ------------------------------ From: John McHarry Subject: Re: What Tandem in Telcom Means? Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 03:49:19 GMT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 18:31:01 -0500, Jack wrote: > I am new to telcom. I came across the term Tandem many times (eg. LEC > Access Tandem). > What exactly does Tandem mean? PAT's reference is correct, but, in the meantime, a tandem office is a telephone switching machine that stands between two end offices, the latter serving subscriber lines. In the olden days, a couple decades ago or less, end offices couldn't handle long distance accounting and were connected with toll tandems that could. In very large cities there were also, as I recall, some inter local tandems that allowed hub and spoke arrangements of local switching. With computer driven switches (central offices) this has pretty much gone the way of the horse and buggy. Any office can perform most any function required, given the appropriate software. One switch can serve several NXX exchanges and also interface to toll carriers, or act as part of one itself. This has also allowed routing to become much more dynamic, adapting to changing traffic patterns. ------------------------------ TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and other forums. It is also gatewayed 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 Patrick Townson. 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. Contact information: Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest Post Office Box 50 Independence, KS 67301 Phone: 620-402-0134 Fax 1: 775-255-9970 Fax 2: 530-309-7234 Fax 3: 208-692-5145 Email: editor@telecom-digest.org Subscribe: telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org 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 Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/ (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives) Email <==> FTP: telecom-archives@telecom-digest.org Send a simple, one line note to that automated address for a help file on how to use the automatic retrieval system for archives files. You can get desired files in email. ************************************************************************* * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from * * Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate * * 800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting. * * http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com * * Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing * * views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc. * ************************************************************************* ICB Toll Free News. Contact information is not sold, rented or leased. One click a day feeds a person a meal. Go to http://www.thehungersite.com Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved. Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA. ************************ DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO YOUR CREDIT CARD! REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST AND EASY411.COM SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest ! ************************ --------------------------------------------------------------- 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. End of TELECOM Digest V23 #613 ******************************