Monthly Archives: December 2004

UK’s House of Lords Holds that Indefinite Detention Violates European Convention on Human Rights!

You know you are in trouble when the House of Lords is more protective of civil rights than the US court system: Law lords back terror detainees

Detaining foreigners without trial under emergency anti-terror legislation breaks European human rights powers, law lords ruled today.

The decision from the law lords, Britain's highest court, throws the government's security policies into chaos.

A specially-convened committee of nine law lords upheld an appeal by nine foreigners who have been detained without charge or trial, most of them in Belmarsh prison, south-east London, for around three years.

Experts said today's decision would probably force the government to repeal the section of the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 which has permitted the indefinite detention of foreigners.

The law lords, making the ruling in the chamber of the House of Lords, described the legislation as “draconian” and “anathema” to the rule of law.

OK, OK, my slur on our Supreme Court is ever so slightly unfair, as the US case with the most closely related fact pattern, the Padilla case, was turned down on procedural grounds. (Both cases involve domestic detention of a suspect arrested domestically; the cases differ slightly, however, in that Padilla was a US citizen while the persons in the UK case are foreign nationals, albeit presumably legally admitted to the UK.) Read between the lines of Padilla and the other detention cases and you could get to a point where we end up a bit like the UK….but my point is that this requires some squinting and meanwhile Padilla is still in jail without charges or prospect of trial or indeed any idea of when he might get out.

Note also that in the US the Bush administration has implemented indefinite no-trial detention without a shred of statutory justification. Conversely, in the UK the detentions were not by executive fiat, but pursuant to an act of Parliament. Nevertheless, the Law Lords — who once proclaimed Parliamentary supremacy, but now have new powers under the European Convention and the UK's Human Rights Act, —have struck down indefinite detention in no uncertain terms, and by an 8-1 vote, as barbaric and uncivilized.

History will be cruel to this administration, which is indeed barbaric and uncivilized. Squandering the US's moral capital while looting the Treasury for the rich and debasing our currency is an historic achievement, but not one that one wishes to live through; it seems likely that the aftermath will be substantially worse.

Posted in Civil Liberties, UK | 3 Comments

Good Defense Is Not A Victory. It Just Means You Haven’t Lost Yet.

Back in the day — going on ten years ago — we thought the 'net would change the world. We were right about that, but not in the ways we thought — we thought PGP and onion routing and an explosion of free speech meant an end to content control.

We vastly overestimated the speed with which non-techies would take up the toys; the growing and enduring dominance of one software platform that didn't take up the toys; and especially the ability of the empire to strike back via both tech (trusted user) and law (DMCA and worse).

Some time about four or five years ago, somewhere around the Article 2B/UCITA fight, of necessity we switched to fighting defense instead of offense. And don't get me wrong, that defense is important. But it's still defense.

But it's still disheartening to read real smart people writing that it's been a good year for those of us concerned about free speech, democracy, and creativity because we beat back the baddies.

I guess I think it wasn't a bad year, and yes there were some decent court decisions, but I call it not bad only because the hardware tech and the open source is still slowly spreading, and so far at least just keeping ahead of the Empire. And especially because of the growth of 'offense' movements such as the free culture movement.

[Sorry for the obscurity of some this post and the absence of links. I'm still digging out from under our move…and I have a ton of work.]

Posted in Law: Copyright and DMCA | 7 Comments

The (Alleged) Dark Side of Google

Speaking of Google, here's an interesting if (so far) overwrought item on The Dark Side of Google: as it puts books online it will not only know what you search for but what you read…one search history to rule them all and in the DB bind them…

Posted in ID Cards and Identification | 4 Comments

Battelle Argues that Google Is Mutating

Search guru John Battelle thinks Google has just undergone a major mutation, but I'm not so sure I agree. Here's his case:

John Battelle's Searchblog: Print Implications: Google As Builder— Google was born of, by, and in the web, as an extremely clever algorithm which noticed the relationships between links, and exploited those relationships to create a ranking system which brought order and relevance to the web. Google's job was not to build the web, its job was to organize it and make it accessible to us.

But all this new Print material, well, it's never been on the web before. It's Google who is actively bringing it to us. How, therefore, does Google rank it, make it visible, surface it, and..importantly…monetize it? If a philanthropist were to drop the entire contents of the Library of Congress onto the web, Google would ultimately index it, and as folks linked to the content, that content would rise and fall as a natural extension of everything else on the web. But in this case, Google itself is adding content to the web, and is itself surfacing the content based on keywords we enter. This is a new role – one of active creator, rather than passive indexer.

This means, in short, that Google is making editorial decisions about how to surface this new content, decisions it can't claim are based on the founding principle of its mission – PageRank.

I dunno. Seems to me that the essence of Google was indeed delegating the ranking of importance to others, and free riding on the decisions made by others to put stuff on line. PageRank was just a tool to achieve those ends.

Now Google has in effect become a subcontractor to libraries who will be deciding what to put on line from their collections. It's still the library's decision, Google is just providing technical help (and getting paid for it, I'd imagine?).

As Battelle notes “Google has announced that the results will be included in the index, not separated out in a vertical book search engine.” There is an issue as to how the stuff is ranked at first, although Google Scholar gives us some hints. Over time, it gets linked to like everything else and it seems to me the problem shrinks, no?

Posted in Internet | 1 Comment

Followup to Vote-Rigging Program Item

Looks as if it's time to promote Wayne Masden's story about a Republican-commissioned program that changes votes out of the tinfoil category, as it seems to be breaking into the major media.

Having Democratic House Judiciary members give Clinton Curtis a platform didn't hurt (video and transcript).

Posted in Politics: US | Comments Off on Followup to Vote-Rigging Program Item

Inching Towards Harvard’s Library and Miami’s Climate

John Battelle's Searchblog: Google To Launch Major Pilot Program with Harvard, Stanford, U Mich, Others:

Harvard University is embarking on a collaboration with Google that could harness Google's search technology to provide to both the Harvard community and the larger public a revolutionary new information location tool to find materials available in libraries. In the coming months, Google will collaborate with Harvard's libraries on a pilot project to digitize a substantial number of the 15 million volumes held in the University's extensive library system. Google will provide online access to the full text of those works that are in the public domain. In related agreements, Google will launch similar projects with Oxford, Stanford, the University of Michigan, and the New York Public Library. As of 9 am on December 14, an FAQ detailing the Harvard pilot program with Google will be available at http://hul.harvard.edu…

This doesn't mean I get to enjoy Harvard's library while basking in Miami's climate: the public access will be limited to the public domain. But I'm one step closer.

Meanwhile, it does mean that we're going to feel the pinch of 100 year copyright even more than we already do.

Posted in Internet | 1 Comment