Saudis Drop the Banhammer on RIM

Image via cameraphonesplaza.com

Hey there PoorMacs using a BlackBerry device (it's for work right? RIGHT?), planning on visiting the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia anytime soon? Well don't be surprised when some of your BlackBerry's functionality doesn't work.

According to The Bangkok Post, at midday local time BlackBerry messages stopped functioning. The KSA recently announced it's plan to disable BlackBerry service earlier this week after the United Arab Emirates announced it's plans to shut down the service citing security concerns (read: They want unrestricted access to user's information). The UAE will reportedly shut down BlackBerry on October 11th.

Though RIM has vowed to fight both the KSA and UAE's decision to block the service, and getting the attention of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, neither of the Arab States seem to be backing down.

Via Bangkok Post

Holy Hot Dang Batman! IPhone 'Jailbreaking' No Longer 'Illegal'

This one comes in from the U.S. Copyright Office, a ruling was released today stating that "jailbreaking" your iPhone is not, as Steve Jobs had once put it, "illegal." The ruling clearly address the installation of "non authorized" software such as firmware, software, DVD content, and E-books!

I make that determination at the conclusion of a rulemaking proceeding conducted by the Register of Copyrights, who makes a recommendation to me. Based on that proceeding and the Register’s recommendation, I am to determine whether the prohibition on circumvention of technological measures that control access to copyrighted works is causing or is likely to cause adverse effects on the ability of users of any particular classes of copyrighted works to make noninfringing uses of those works. The classes of works that I designated in the previous proceeding expire at the end of the current proceeding unless proponents of a class prove their case once again.

Hooray for consumers' rights!

via U.S. Copyright Office

Net Neutrality - A Cheatsheet

It's gonna be a crazy week over at the FCC. October 22nd is the deadline for folks to voice their opinion to FCC and let them know why you'd like to keep the internet open for all. But with all the crazy talk on one particular cable network, it may not be clear what's at stake here.

First off: Net neutrality is NOT about restricting competition for your cable company, your phone company, satellite provider. Nope. Nah, not ever. How this net neutrality myth has gained steam lies really on the fact that this is a debate that's raged on longer than people considered the net to be cool.

Government regulation of the internet as Glenn "Asshat" Beck mentioned in his tirade is not about preventing a telecom from doing business; it's about making sure that said telecom continues to provide transparent services to their customers. Comcast regularly finds themselves (rightfully) as the target of many bloggers angst for their dubious regulatory practices in the name of protecting their business.

Clearly Beck must've not understand the concept of a "free market."

The proposed FCC regulations are designed to ensure that all ISPs - Comcast, Cablevision, Verizon, AT&T, et al will continue to provide internet service to their customers and provide clear, concise, no tiny print restrictions on their activities on said internet. Capping data downloads or uploads without expressly notifying their customers, restricting or crippling the use of specific websites would also be in violation of the proposed regulations.

How does this affect the regular guy/gal adventuring the interwebs? Well try to imagine an internet ran by AT&T (but you can just as easily insert your own ISP for the sake of fairness). In this internet, AT&T has an exclusive contractual agreement with Yahoo! for websearches; any AT&T customer that attempts to perform a search on Google or Bing will be (1) automatically re-directed to Yahoo! (2) be met with a 404 error (3) be in violation of their terms of service with AT&T and be subject to penalty.

Now imagine that your friend, coworker, client, family member is a Verizon customer with a Verizon email account. All emails sent from your AT&T account would be "lost" by Verizon in an effort to keep AT&T out of their "version" of the internet. You will not be amused to find out that you've lost a potential client because your ISP did not "approve" of their email address.

Clearly these are all doomsday scenarios but we must keep in mind that sometimes a little regulation is critical in maintaining order. Once upon a time there huge companies that owned raw materials, production, and finally point of sale. These were the "captains of industry," your blue-blood industrialists that brought forth the Industrial Age. They were also monopolizing giants that stifled innovation and oppressed their customers (and workers). And more importantly, needed regulation.

AT&T vs. Net Neutrality

Well this didn't take long at all. Lately the FCC under Chairman Julius Genachowski has begun to look into and possibly enforce regulations that keep telecoms "honest." Under the Obama Administration's push for an open internet, net neutrality is getting some attention in regular news these days.

Not to have their interests buried amongst your - the people of the interwebs - cries of free, available to everyone internet; AT&T asshat lobbyist, Jim Cicconi sent out an email (republished here) to all AT&T employees urging them to comment on the FCC's OpenInternet.gov blog and let Genachowski know that he's a communist that's trying steal their mone... err... jobs.

Long story short, not only is the FCC trying to make you poor by ensuring that an ISP cannot play dirty games, control and monitor, or otherwise cap your usage of the internet in a non ISP approved way; they're letting Google head the death panel committee. The horror.

via Actuarial Outpost