A suicide car bombing killed 10 people and injured at least 70 more in an attack on a Saudi security forces building in the city of Riyadh. The Saudi security force claims the attack to be the sixth attempted attack in the past week; the previous five attempts were foiled. The attacks are said to be the work of al Qaeda, and stem from growing confrontation between the group and the Saudi government.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair said that he will put the issue of the European Union's constitution to a referendum. The proposed constitution, which requires the approval of all 25 EU member countries in order to pass, would strengthen the EU and make it more "transparen[t] and efficien[t]." Blair's moves came as a surprise to many political observers, who believed that he would simply let Parliament vote on the constitution. Critics of the move believe Blair will simply reintroduce the issue if it should fail, and that opening it to a public vote is an insignificant gesture.

Less than a month after an Israeli airstrike killed Hamas spiritual leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, a second strike killed another Hamas leader, Abdelaziz Rantissi. Two Israeli missiles struck Rantissi's car, killing him, his son, and one of his guards. Rantissi was targeted once for assassination last June, and suffered injuries to his arms, chest and legs when his car was hit in a missile attack. Hamas has promised "swift and strong" retaliation for the attack, which has been condemned by dozens of countries.

Spain's Prime Minister, Jose Zapatero, has promised to recall 1,400 Spanish troops currently stationed in Iraq. Zapatero's move echoes the popular sentiment of Spaniards, who have been opposed to the use of Spanish forces there. The troops are estimated to be returning in a matter of weeks. Following Spain's example, Honduras and the Dominican Republic have announced they will be recalling their troops, totaling around 700 soldiers.

Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden has offered European countries a truce in his latest audiotape. The truce would keep European nations 'safe' from al Qaeda, and in return, the countries must remove their troops from all Islamic nations. The offer was swiftly rejected, with comments ranging from British Prime Minister Tony Blair's "I don't think we need Osama bin Laden to start telling us how to handle our political affairs" to Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini's "It is completely unthinkable that we could start negotiations with bin Laden." The tape, which is believed to be authentic, also promises retaliation against the United States for the Israeli killing of Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin.

An explosion at the Taizhina mine in Siberia claimed the lives of 47 miners on Saturday, April 10. More than 50 miners where in the shaft at the time of the explosion, and only a few were able to escape. The cause of the explosion is believed to have been a buildup of methane gas, and local prosecutors have begun investigating whether negligence contributed to the buildup.

Following the abduction and subsequent return of eight of its citizens, Russia has opted to evacuate more than 800 civilian contractors from Iraq. The contractors, who have primarily been working to repair power stations, will have the choice to remain in Iraq or to return home. Both Japan and France have urged their contractors to leave the country, following the kidnapping of three Japanese citizens and a French reporter. The reporter has since been released, but the three Japanese are still being held and are threatened with death.

The only person convicted in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, Mounir el Motassadeq, has won an appeal in German court and will be released. Convicted of providing 'logistical support' to al Qaeda, Motassadeq was freed pending a retrial on the conditions that he not obtain a passport and that he remain in Hamburg. The appeals court which granted Motassadeq's release says he was not given a fair trial, as the U.S. government did not allow him access to several key witnesses in U.S. custody.

An explosion in the Spanish capital of Madrid on Saturday, April 3, left one police officer and seven suspects in last month's railway bombings dead. Police stormed an apartment believed to be the residence of several of the bombers, where an explosion killed all those inside.

New research suggests that Greenland’s ice sheet could disappear if global warming continues. According to estimates, within 350 years the ice sheet may become unsustainable and melt away even if global warming were halted. If Greenland's ice were to melt away, it could raise the average global sea level by up to 23 feet.

The International Atomic Energy Agency learned on Tuesday, April 6, that Iran was planning to start construction of a heavy water nuclear reactor. Iran says it needs the reactor to produce radioactive isotopes for medical research, but experts claim the spent fuel rods could be used to produce weapons-grade plutonium. Construction is scheduled to begin in the city of Arak in June.

I've added a new section to the site where I've posted (and will continue to post) things I have written for The Stute, the student newspaper at Stevens. The new section can be found at http://phil.codeallday.com/stute/ or via a link to the right.

Senator Jon Corzine (D, NJ) recently received the "Friend of Students Award" from the U.S. Students Association. The award is due in large part to Sen. Corzine's work to block changes to financial aid calculations.
Sen. Corzine was honored by the award, saying "It means a lot to be honored by the students who put a human face on the cuts proposed by the administration. Access to higher education is really access to the American dream."

An effort to block the changes, led by Sen. Corzine, succeeded and the changes will be postponed for one year. The block will expire in September.
"At a time when tuition is rising at public and private universities around the nation, we need to be expanding financial aid, not taking it away from talented, hardworking kids," said Corzine of the changes.

The changes, proposed last year by the Department of Education, would change the formula for calculating the expected family contribution, or EFC. In most cases, the changes would negatively affect a student's EFC, leaving him or her with less financial aid and support. According to DOE estimates, 84,000 students would have lost their Pell Grants with the revised formula.

At a recent speech given at Rider University, Sen. Corzine urged students to become more involved in the political process. In reference to the upcoming presidential election, he told students that "this is as important an election as there has been in your lifetime," and emphasized the need for student involvement in a "national debate" about the important issues facing the nation.

Senators Orrin Hatch (R, Utah) and Patrick Leahy (D, VT) recently introduced the "Protecting Intellectual Rights Against Theft and Expropriation," or PIRATE, Act into the U.S. Senate. This act would allow the Attorney General to file civil lawsuits against suspected copyright infringers. This allowance is in addition to the ability of the rights holder to file civil suits and the government's ability to pursue criminal action in cases where damages exceed $1,500. So, if you are accused of copyright infringement, guilty or not, you could face three separate legal battles that you would need to fight.

Even if you were eventually going to be found 'not guilty' of copyright infringement, the costs associated with trying to fight three legal battles could end up being so high that you would be forced to settle. The average American does not have enough finances to keep three fights going. Copyright owners could force people into not taking advantage of fair uses for a work, because claiming fair use does not prevent you from being sued or prosecuted; it is only a defense you can make once in court. A copyright holder with the effective power to bankrupt you basically has the power to dictate what uses it will and will not tolerate as "acceptable uses" of their work. It would take a well-organized and well-funded legal challenge to prevent that specific rights holder from dictating use to users.

Doing such simple things as making a backup copy of a CD or DVD you buy, or making a mix CD from tracks on disks you bought, are uses that many would agree should be considered "fair uses." Those in the music and movie industries, however, have a different view. Jack Valenti, head of the Motion Picture Association of America, has said that "If you buy a DVD you have a copy. If you want a backup copy you buy another one." If that 'limited edition' DVD box set you bought a few years ago gets a scratch, or if the DVD physically begins to degrade (delamination), Valenti's view would leave you out of luck. You would not be able to find another copy, since it was 'limited edition,' and since you were not allowed to make a backup copy, you no longer have access to that media. Or, you make a backup copy onto recordable discs when you purchase the movie for just a few dollars, and then watch the copy, keeping the original in a safe place. If the recorded disc goes bad, you pull out the original DVD, burn a new copy, and put the original back. You have then extended the lifetime of that DVD, and made it more useful for you - but is that worth the possible legal trouble?

The assault on our fair use rights is continually under assault from the content industries. Do not let them dictate how we can use the movies and music we purchase and own.

French president Jacques Chirac accepted the resignation of Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin, thereby dissolving his cabinet. Chirac then rehired Raffarin as prime minister, and made a number of other changes. The move comes on the heels of France's regional elections, which saw a drastic drop in support for Chirac and his political party. Russian president Vladimir Putin performed a similar reorganization of his cabinet in February.

The International Court of Justice at The Hague has ruled that the United States did not give fair trials to 51 Mexicans currently awaiting execution. The ruling, issued on Wednesday, March 31, states that the convictions should be reviewed because the accused were not advised of their right to consular help. The decision, which is legally binding, is being protested by the U.S. government, which claims the men have already had fair trials.

The central Asian country of Uzbekistan has been in turmoil recently as four straight days of violence have left at least 42 people dead. The fighting, which began on Sunday, March 28, is believed to be orchestrated by members of Wahhabis, a strict Islamic group originating in Saudi Arabia. Explosions and gunfire have been common in the streets of the Uzbek capital of Tashkent and the city of Bukhara, where nearly all of the violence has been concentrated.

The United States announced it would be suspending its aid to Serbia, citing a lack of cooperation with a United Nations war crimes tribunal in The Hague. As part of a plan to reform Serbia's economy, the U.S. promised $100 million in aid, contingent on Serbian cooperation with the tribunal. The remaining $25 million from this plan is being withheld. The suspension is likely tied to Serbia's reluctance to turn over certain accused war criminals, such as former Bosnian Serb commander Ratko Mladic. Analysts believe the move is not likely to have any short-term effects on the Serbian economy, but may have long-term effects.

Oil ministers from the 11 members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries agreed to a 4% cut in oil output on Wednesday, March 31. The cut, which amounts to 2.5 million barrels of oil per day, is claimed to be a preventive measure, "avoiding a price-deflating buildup of oil supplies in world markets." Economists say that such a measure is unnecessary, and that 'cheating' by the member nations of OPEC is likely to ensure that oil prices will not rise as a result of the announcement.

An airstrike by Israeli helicopters killed Sheik Ahmed Yassin, founder and spiritual leader of the militant group Hamas, as he left a mosque on Monday, March 22. Three missiles were fired as Yassin and his bodyguards, who along with another person in the area were killed. Other Hamas leaders denounced the attack and are calling for revenge against Israel. Yassin was targeted by Israel in a failed assassination attempt last September.

While campaigning for re-election, Taiwanese president Chen Shui-bian and Vice President Annette Lu were shot, Shui-bian in the stomach and Lu in the leg. The shooting came a day before the presidential election, which resulted in Shui-bian and Lu being reelected by a margin of less than one percent of the vote. There have been a number of protests in Taiwan demanding a recount of the election. A recount is supported by both candidates, Shui-bian and his opponent, Lien Chen.

The French rail company SNCF reported a device suspected to be a bomb has been recovered from a rail line between Paris and Basel, Switzerland. The discovery comes two weeks after a thorough investigation of all 19,800 miles of track in France, which turned up no traces of explosive. That search was in response to threats from a group claiming a bomb had been placed along one or more of the rail lines. France's Interior Ministry believes this bomb is not the work of that group, based on descriptions of the bomb. No one has claimed responsibility for planting this device.

Four U.S. embassies were closed on Wednesday, March 24, due to threats and demonstrations against U.S. interests. The embassies in the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Mauritius were closed following "specific and credible threat information directed at the embassy," according to a State Department spokesman. The closings come one day after the State Department issued a caution to U.S. citizens abroad, citing a "heightened threat of terrorist attacks" on the heels of the Israeli assassination of Hamas leader Sheik Ahmed Yassin.

"The Congress shall have power ... to promote the progress of ... useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors ... the exclusive right to their respective writings." This, taken from Article II Section 8 of the Constitution, which is the section granting Congress its power. This particular clause, known as the "progress clause," is the basis for copyrights and patents in the United States. The "limited times" part of the clause was tested in the case of Eldred v Ashcroft, and the Supreme Court decided that since the copyright term did have a definite limit, the 1998 Copyright Term Extension Act (or CTEA, which extended all copyrights by an additional 20 years) did not violate the "limited times" provision of the clause.

A new case is challenging the CTEA and the Berne Convention Implementation Act (BCIA) on the grounds that the CTEA and BCIA are unconstitutional in that they do not promote progress and that they form an effectively perpetual term for works created between January 1, 1964 and January 1, 1978.

The scope of copyright first changed dramatically in 1976, when the Copyright Act removed the requirement of registering a work with the Library of Congress, depositing a copy of the work with the Library and renewal for a full term, for works created on or after January 1, 1978. The BCIA was passed in 1992, and it automatically renewed all copyrights on works created between January 1, 1964 and December 31, 1977. Finally, in 1998, the CTEA extended all copyrights, including those extended by the BCIA, by an additional 20 years.

When there was still a requirement for copyright protection to be renewed, less than a one-fourth all copyrighted works had their protection renewed. The annual renewal rate averaged between 8% and 15%. It is on these grounds that Brewster Kahle and Richard Prelinger have filed suit to have the BCIA and CTEA ruled unconstitutional as they apply to such works. The case, Kahle v Ashcroft, also seeks to prevent criminal enforcement of the No Electronic Theft Act from being applied to those works.

Kahle and Premlinger each run archives, with Kahle being the founder of Internet Archive (http://www.archive.org) and Premlinger being the founder of Premlinger Associates Inc. (known as Premlinger Archives). These collections seek to keep copies of old public domain images, books and videos, among other works. Kahle and Premlinger allege that a majority of the works between 1964 and 1977 would not have been renewed, and therefore would have fallen in to the public domain, were it not for an automatic renewal and an across-the-board copyright term extension. It is these 'abandoned works,' books, movies, songs and pictures whose authors no longer have any interest in them, works that are no longer available and for which there's no compelling reason to rerelease, that the lawsuit seeks to let into the public domain.

To some, the case may appear to be very similar to Eldred v Ashcroft. In some respects, this is true; both cases deal with the effect of copyright term extension, but they do so in different manners. In rejecting the arguments put forth by the plaintiffs in Eldred, the Supreme Court stated "when, as in this case, Congress has not altered the traditional contours of copyright protection, further First Amendment scrutiny is unnecessary." The argument being advanced in Kahle is that in changing from a registration and renewal copyright system (a 'conditional' copyright regime) to one where simple publication of a work grants copyright protection (an 'unconditional' copyright regime), Congress did indeed alter the traditional contours of copyright.

As with the Eldred case, and the ongoing Golan v Ashcroft case (challenging Congress' ability to reclassify public domain works as copyrighted), the legal challenges to Congress' ability to dramatically alter the copyright landscape are adding up, and it may be the case that we can once again have a 'free culture,' where those works whose owners are no longer making money off them are available to the public, for archiving and for the betterment of culture.

Every day, millions of people use the Internet in some way. For some, it is just to check their email or chat with friends via an instant messenger. For others, the World Wide Web is their playground, a place where all sorts of information, games, and entertainment can be found. Still others are the ones who create and maintain all the content that people enjoy and use.

But there is a darker side to the Internet. Spammers and virus writers are the most well known and widely reviled, but there are people who write automated tools (bots) to undermine the freedom provided by the Internet. As soon a domain name expires, bots are waiting to quickly snatch it up and replace it with a search engine page. Across the Web, sites are finding themselves increasingly victim of bots that can ruin the experience for regular users. There is software that will continually check Ebay auctions and then undercut the leading bidder with less than 30 seconds remaining. More and more sites are requiring users to enter back text displayed inside an image, so that bots cannot go any further. Discussion sites are being inundated with trolls and crapflooders (those who post large numbers of messages with no actual content or purpose).

A number of solutions are being passed around for the problem of spam. Some of these suggestions are requiring domains to publish a list of what addresses are allowed to send from them (known as sender permitted from, or SPF), recipient-side whitelisting (only messages from people the recipient has chosen to allow get through), and go so far as to propose that there be a small fee for sending email. Each of these changes would fundamentally alter the way email is used, and there is opposition to each, in varying levels.

Email, as with the other protocols that make up the Internet (like FTP, HTTP, SSH, and so on) was developed in a time when the Internet was orders of magnitude smaller than today. Computers were not as powerful, and bandwidth was more limited, so simple protocols were favorable at the time. Email is almost as simple as they come, providing plain-text headers followed by the message content. No concept of authentication was built-in, because at the time, none was needed.

Through no fault of its own, email has become the carrier of most viruses and worms being spread around the Internet. As the Internet has grown, so has its userbase, and with that growth come those who are unable or unwilling to invest time in learning some of what we might consider basics of computers and the Internet. With each new email worm that makes the rounds, the more tech-savvy repeat a simple instruction to users: "Do not open attachments that you are not expecting and do no come from someone you trust." Yet we continue to hear warnings about the newest virus and its expected damage (in terms of both the damage it causes to a target and the costs to remove it from the infected machine). Some of the steps being taken for solving this problem are filtering messages on email servers based on their attachments (which can help with worms like Beagle/Bagle), and moving computers to behind firewalls (which helps with viruses like CodeRed).

While spam and viruses may be the two largest and most visible problems with the Internet today, nearly every commonly-used protocol is being exploited in some way. Usenet, which was designed to provide a worldwide message board, where anyone could post messages and anyone could read them, has been all but abandoned to crapflooding. It is virtually impossible to read a discussion group without seeing a fair number of spam message posted. Usenet, like email, does not provide any means of authentication and so to allows messages to be posted by anyone, using any name and email address, valid or otherwise.

Web sites that allow users to post and submit are also being hit by the 'dark side' of the Internet. I have already mentioned Ebay, where automated scripts are undercutting human bidders. Discussion sites are probably the single greatest example of how the Web is being abused. Let us take Slashdot as an example. Slashdot allows comments to be posted to the stories it lists, and it allows people to post anonymously, with or without a registered account. This has led to a great deal of trolls, or posters who simply post to annoy users, whether the posts are simply obvious spam or replies to a comment that are designed solely to inflame or annoy the poster. Another site, Kuro5hin, has recently been dealing with similar problems.

Most site administrators have come to the realization that unfettered anonymous commenting can be harmful. The most common approach for large sites is to allow users to moderate other users' comments, so that the community can establish what is and is not worth viewing. It usually works well, which reveals just how extensive the problem is. In a recent Slashdot discussion, 1043 comments were made in total. Of these, only 747 are rated between 1 and 5, which is the range at which most people read. Nearly 300 comments were trolls or otherwise not at all constructive or useful. Unfortunately, even a moderation system can be, and is, abused. There are bots which register multiple accounts and then use some of these accounts to moderate up posts by the other accounts. It has become enough of a problem with Kuro5hin that new member registrations have been disabled.

The Internet was build to be open and free, and it is this fact that has allowed it to evolve to its current state. The ability to remain anonymous (or at least pseudonymous) has led to a great deal of controversial material to come out in situations it otherwise would not have. But it is this same freedom and anonymity that are causing many of the problems I have just described.

What sort of solutions are there to these problems? Simply solving the problems is a simple enough task, in theory. There are proposals for systems to replace email, and eliminating anonymous posting can help with Usenet and Web discussion forums. This opens up two others problems, though - implementing them, and the loss of openness the Internet has enjoyed thus far. On more than one occasion, bills have been proposed in Congress to help solve some of the problems, and some have passed. The recent CAN SPAM Act is designed to lessen the amount of spam email being sent. The problems with approaches like this? It introduces legislative control where none existed before, and also attempts to change the way the world works from the U.S. Congress.

Is the Internet in danger? Perhaps. Some people are beginning to lose faith in email, and some long-timers are moving away from the larger discussion sites. Perhaps the largest problem is the solution to the problems. Is the best way to save the Internet to change its nature? Is it a case of "in order to save the village, we had to destroy the village?" I think the biggest danger to the Internet is those who seek to change it, and in that, the future of the Internet is in danger.

For a wide variety of reasons, the site has fallen into a state of disrepair and general neglect. This isn't entirely true, at some point between the last update and now I made some changes to the user-facing side of the code and didn't update the admin backend, so I had to spend about a half our applying changes I don't remember making to code, just to get posting to work again.

But that's not the point. What is the point is that I'm going to once again try and maintain the site like I used to, back when updates were frequent, the links flowed like water, and I actually had something to say. I moved the last two updates to the newly-named weblog section, and just as I intend to keep the main part of the site looking well, I should toss some 'content' (I use the term lightly) into there too, if you're in to that sort of thing.

I intend to toss up a small archive of stuff I've written for The Stute lately, and when I do I'll post something about it. I'd add the stuff as regular site content, but writing for a print newspaper and writing for the web are different enough that I think the two shouldn't be mixed freely.

Look for the first of the 'new updates' sometime tomorrow.

Russian president Vladimir Putin, after the surprise firing of his cabinet three weeks ago, eliminated several cabinet-level positions and named his new advisors. The number of ministers in the cabinet was reduced from 30 to 17, and Mikhail Fradkov was appointed new prime minister. Putin's critics say the new appointees are only friends and associates of Putin, and the move will lead to "administrative chaos" and result in a decrease in government efficiency.

The interim governing body in Iraq approved a temporary constitution on Monday, March 8. The constitution will take effect on June 30, when the United States transfers sovereignty back to the Iraqis. The constitution was ratified over the objections of several Shiite leaders, most notably Grand Ayatollah Ali Hussein al-Sistani, who have expressed a desire to introduce changes prior to the constitution taking effect. US officials believe the constitution is a large step forward, and that it will "take Iraq closer to a democratic and sovereign government," with President Bush calling the signing a "historic milestone."

Iran's foreign minister, Kamal Kharrazi, warned that Iran might cease cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency if European countries did not begin to resist the US. The Iranian government has accused the US of "bullying" the agency into drafting a resolution censuring Iran for its nuclear program.

The fractured Haitian government began to take a new shape on Monday, March 8, as Boniface Alexandre was sworn in as interim president of the country. On Tuesday, March 9, the Council of Sages appointed Gerard Latorue to the position of prime minister. Exiled leader Jean-Bertrand Aristide called for peace in the country, but also claimed he remains the president and that he was "politically abducted" from Haiti.

Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra replaced the interior, defense, and foreign ministers on Wednesday, March 10. The move is a result of public criticism of the government's handling of a bird flu outbreak, ethnic violence in the southern region, and proposed privatization of government-owned companies.

Back in November 2003, the Federal Communications Commission approved a new mandate for high-definition digital TV. This mandate - a 'broadcast flag,' would require HDTV receivers to check for the presence of the flag, and if it's set, encrypt the signal for sending to "compliant devices." There is no word yet on what constitutes an authorized device, but presumably any Digital Video Receiver would have to be cleared by the TV stations.

What drives TV stations? Money. Where does this money come from? Commercials. One of the major reasons people buy personal video recorders like TiVo is because it allows them to skip commercials. If a TV station sends an HD signal, and they choose to set the broadcast flag, they can control which devices can record it. If they have the power to decide which devices can record the signal, why wouldn't they only allow devices that don't allow users to skip commercials? Stations can charge more for ad time when they can guarantee that viewers won't skip the ads.

That doesn't even take in to account the fact that stations would have unprecedented control over the content they air. Presently, anyone with an antenna, cable, or satellite receiver and a VCR can make a copy of any show, and then they can watch it again any time they want. With a receiver that recognizes the broadcast flag, though, stations could flag any or all of their programs/events, and then only authorize receivers that only allow a single playback, or a playback only at certain times, or impose any number of other restrictions. They may have made it harder for people to rip the recorded shows from the DVR and put them on the Internet, but people who want to get around the flag will. The people that really get hurt in this issue are people who just want to timeshift a show (record it when it airs and watch it at a more convenient time).

The restrictions are scheduled to take effect beginning July 1, 2005, but there are a number of groups opposed to the flag. The American Library Association launched a lawsuit against the FCC to prevent the mandate from taking effect. The ALA has been joined in the suit by a number of groups, including Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union, Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Public Knowledge.

The lawsuit alleges that the FCC overstepped their authority in implementing such a rule and that there is no need for such a rule to have even been considered. Timeshifting was one of the issues the Supreme Court ruled was fair use in the "Betamax" case back in the eighties. Let us not let the FCC give TV stations the power to take away our fair use rights.

It is rare for the student newspapers of New Jersey colleges to get together for an event, but this is what happened on February 20, when US Senator Jon Corzine held a press conference for student reporters. Held at the College Ave. campus of Rutgers University in New Brunswick, the event brought together reporters from 15 college newspapers and one college television station.

Senator Corzine is one of the two Democratic senators from New Jersey, first elected to the Senate in 2000. He is a strong supporter of federal and state financial aid programs for college students, having graduating from a public university. In recent months, he has backed legislation that would prevent financial aid changes which would result in less financial aid for most students. When not in Washington, DC, Sen. Corzine lives here in Hoboken.

The press conference began with some remarks by the Senator. He spoke about his experience going through college, saying that helped him get "on the ladder of opportunity," leading to his stint as co-chairman and co-CEO of Goldman Sachs and ultimately his election as a senator. He also commented on the upcoming presidential election and its importance to the nation, with the nomination of several Supreme Court justices possibly being decided by the winner of the election.

One of the most important issues raised by the Senator during his remarks was that of student participation in the election process, and political awareness among college students. He cited figures which show the 18-24 age group (the group most college students fall in to) as voting significantly less than all other groups. Referring to the reason politicians so often address issues like social security, Senator Corzine said "If I want to win, I've got to talk the people who vote."

At this point, the floor was opened to questions. The first questions related to a measure blocking financial aid changes, which would in many cases lower students' financial aid. Sen. Corzine backed an act that would prevent the new changes from taking effect for a year, pending a review of the impact of the changes by the Department of Education

The topic was then changed to the job market, and specifically what could be done to improve the situation in the United States. Senator Corzine recommended fixing the budget deficit to put more capital in the hands of investors, solving problems with the trade deficit by using the World Trade Organization rules to help level the playing field, and finally by creating making "tax credits for job creation the moral equivalent of depreciation." He believes we are "underweighting the value of labor" and need to increase the value of labor in the US.

Discussion moved to the issue of student participation in the political process, chiefly regarding how to get and keep students motivated, the way Howard Dean managed to do so during his campaign. Sen. Corzine believes that Dean's success with college students was due to two things, first, his views on some of the issues, and second, his use of technology familiar to students to attract them to the campaign. Corzine said that "we damn well better start taking the students in our country seriously" and "I personally take it [college student participation] very seriously, because I think, frankly, it's your future."

The subject of the USA PATRIOT Act was raised, in the context of the reported abuses of some of the provisions of the act. Sen. Corzine, who voted in favor of the Act, said that "you could vote for the Patriot Act ... and still not believe all of the elements of the Patriot Act are something that you are supportive of." He believes that the Act was well-intentioned, but the implementation and uses of it are not keeping with its spirit, saying that "there were elements of that bill that were good, and there were elements that were maybe not as attractive, but how it got implemented was completely unattractive."

After touching on the issues of the 9/11 commission, data mining, the Israel/Palestine situation, and the upcoming election, Senator Corzine wrapped up the press conference, thanking those in attendance for coming.

The United States ended 23 years of restriction on travel to the North African nation of Libya. This was followed the Libyan government’s announcement that it would begin destroying its arsenal of chemical warhead-capable bombs, and a reaffirmation of responsibility for the bombing of Pan American Airways flight 103 in 1988. The travel ban was enacted when the United States began to consider Libya as a state sponsoring terrorism. The US hopes companies will begin returning to Libya, and that Libya will begin to expand its diplomatic presence in the United States.

An explosion in the Jinshanpo coal mine in northern China killed 28 of the 32 workers inside on Monday, March 1. The mine, which was unlicensed, did not have the ventilation equipment necessary to prevent a buildup of flammable gasses. The gasses eventually ignited and caused the explosion.

Shiite Muslims celebrating the Ashura festival in Iraq were disrupted by explosions and mortar shells attacks ripped through Karbala on Tuesday, March 2. The festival is viewed by Shiite Muslims as a sign of their devotion, and was barred for 30 years under the rule of Saddam Hussein for fears it might incite rebellion. The festival was carried out under increased security amid fear of attacks by some militant Sunni Muslims, who dislike the growing dominance of the Shiites in Iraq. Nearly 200 people are believed to have been killed in the attacks.

With nine wins in ten states holding primaries on Super Tuesday, John Kerry effectively secured the Democratic presidential nomination. Kerry’s main opponent, Senator John Edwards, announced he would be dropping out of the race after failing to win more support. Howard Dean, who stopped actively seeking the nomination two weeks ago, kept Kerry from a clean sweep by winning his home state of Vermont. Kerry’s nomination is all but assured, as no other serious contender remains. This is despite 21 states still holding primaries in the months leading up to the Democratic National Conference in June.

The Caribbean nation of Haiti is in a state of turmoil following the departure of President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. The circumstances of his departure are unclear; Aristide reportedly claims to have been either kidnapped or forced out of the country, while other sources say he willingly left. With Aristide out of power, US forces have been dispatched to Haiti to help keep peace and order in the country, which has been embroiled in conflict between a group of rebels and the president, and now faces fighting between the police and pro-Aristide loyalists.

You have a right to fair uses of a DVD, but there's no legal way to get that access. This is a surprisingly accurate paraphrase of the decision of the US District Court for the Northern District of California in the case of 321 Studios v. MGM Studios.

The case involves the infamous "anticircumvention" provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), chiefly 17 USC §1201(a)(2), which states in part that "No person shall manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic any technology, product, service, device, component, or part thereof that is primarily designed for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work." In short, if something is encrypted and its contents copyrighted, it’s illegal to make or sell anything that provides access to the underlying content. 321 Studios sells software that allows DVD owners to make a backup copy of discs they own, onto either a CD-R or DVD-R disc, without the CSS (Content Scrambling System) encryption present on nearly all DVD releases from the major studios. Back in 2002, 321 Studios asked a court to rule that their software did not violate 17 USC §1201(a)(2) and §1201(b)(1) (which is worded very similarly to §1201(a)(2)) and that such provisions were beyond Congress' authority to enact.

The District Court ruled "the purchase pf a DVD does not give the purchaser the authority of the copyright holder to decrypt CSS" The decision goes on to state "a simple reading of the statute makes it clear that is prohibition applies to the manufacturing, trafficking in and making of devices that would circumvent encryption technology, not to the uses of such technology."

This is effectively saying that while DVD purchasers have the fair use right to make a single backup copy of the disc, but cannot make anything that would bypass the encryption, and would not be able to purchase a legal application or device to decrypt it, since selling or trafficking in such software or devices is a violation of the DMCA. You have a right to fair use, but no right to gain access to the content you need for any fair use.

In May of last year, I served on a panel testifying before the Library of Congress (LOC) in regards to these very same issues (the LOC has the authority to grant exemptions to parts of §1201 for specific classes of work). Supporting an exemption for DVD backup copies was Stevan Mitchell of 321 Studios; on the opposing side were representatives from the DVD Copy Control Association (DVD CCA), Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), and Time Warner, all of whom addressed the issue in one form or another. The DVD CCA, MPAA and Time Warner reps all paid lip service to fair use, claiming that no matter what sort of restrictions were in place, one could always make fair use of the content on that disc.

On the surface, that seems reasonable; the most common fair usage of movies include showing small bits of it for criticism and reference. These are not the only fair uses, though, especially considering that there is nothing that defines what constitutes a fair use. The courts are supposed to decide on a case-by-case basis whether a given use of a work is fair use. This means that entirely new uses for things can be found, and be found to be fair uses. But with the DMCA's prohibitions on gaining access to a copyrighted work, it becomes virtually impossible for anyone to find a new and creative fair use for a work and not be in violation of one or more of the circumvention prohibition provisions of the DMCA.

The court's decision in this case is a major blow for fair use; the ruling says that fair uses are legal, but the methods of gaining access to perform these fair uses are not. I must ask: what good is a billion dollars in a chest if you can’t get the chest open? What good is the ability to have fair uses if there’s no legal way to get to the content?