It seems the WTO ruled with Antigua after a long series of battles over the fact that US restrictions on online gambling were found to violate free trade agreements. Despite the decision, no new forms of offshore online betting were allowed in the US. In retaliation, Antigua received permission from the WTO to suspend US copyright obligations up to a value of $21 million dollars annually.

Zookz founder Hugh Marshall launched the site in the belief that the Antigua-based company is not subject to US copyright law until those within the space reach a profit of $21 million dollars. Nevertheless, it's unlikely that this is the case as it would mean that the WTO would allow Antigua-based websites to simply give away files or sell them at rock bottom prices in order to stay below the limit. While the actual terms of the WTO's sanction is blurry, John Healey of the LA Times suggests that the annual value limit is likely to represent the loss to US industries rather than the profit yielded. As well, the fact that the site is accessible by global audiences outside of Antigua makes this a particularly suspicious venture.

While the site's 1,500 movies and 50,000 songs represent a relatively small catalogue, it appears that for now, for the price of a Netflix monthly account, Zookz users can access unlimited downloads. Obviously this is tempting. Dubious legality aside, and regardless of how you perceive the RIAA and MPAA, please remember that in this case neither starving musicians nor billionaire record labels receive payment for the downloaded works. If you're still curious about the service, you can register at Zookz.com.

After the verdict, Thomas-Rasset told the Associated Press that the penalty was "kind of ridiculous," but also pointed out that she simply can't pay $2 million, so she is "not going to worry about it now."

As we pointed out in our earlier stories about this trial, the evidence clearly incriminated Thomas-Rasset, and the jury found that her conduct was willful. According to the Copyright Act, the jury could have awarded the music companies between $750 and $150,000 per song, but the jury, which clearly wasn't convinced by Thomas-Rasset's defense, came down in the middle at $80,000.

Could They Still Settle?

Ars Technica's Nate Anderson points out that RIAA spokesperson, Cara Duckworth, told reporters that the recording industry would still be willing to settle with Thomas-Rasset.

It seems like the RIAA is mostly interested in setting a precedent here, and if the two parties do eventually settle on a much smaller number (typically these cases ended in $5000 settlements), it surely wouldn't get the attention this current verdict received, leaving most of the public under the impression that a $80,000 fine per shared song is a real possibility.

Hard Drives, Best Buy, Kazaa, Terrastar, and Soft Drinks

There are considerable holes in Thomas' story, however. Among other things, she took her computer to Best Buy to get her hard drive replaced under warranty, exactly two weeks after MediaSentry informed her that she had been caught sharing these files. She then went ahead and brought this new drive in as evidence and swore under oath that the hard drive had been in the computer since 2004. According to a witness from Best Buy at today's trial, the drive must have been dead when Thomas took it in for repair, but it would be impossible to tell if she broke it accidentally (as she claims), or if this was done on purpose (breaking a hard drive is pretty easy, after all).

During the first day of her retrial, however, an expert witness who examined Thomas's computer also noted that an external hard drive had been hooked up to the computer, a fact that was new to the defense attorney.

Thomas' defense lawyers also produced a list of Thomas' purchases at Best Buy, but, as our friends at Ars Technica point out, if this was meant to show that Thomas was still buying a lot of music, this plan backfired, as she had bought a lot of soft drinks (seriously?), DVDs, and video games at Best Buy, but only one CD.

Thomas also generally used 'terrastar' as her handle, and the files on Kazaa were shared under that name. Given that Thomas' computer was password protected, what's the chance of somebody else using her login? In addition, Thomas also claims that she had never heard of Kazaa before this whole affair began.

It will be for the jury to decide if she is really guilty of these charges (judging from what we have seen, our best guess is that she will be found guilty), but the real problem isn't even really about her guilt or innocence. The real question here is if she really inflicted over $200,000 in damages by sharing 24 songs, as the music industry claims (or any damage at all). When the previous judge, Judge Michael Davis, Chief Justice of the Minnesota District Court, granted Thomas this retrial, he argued that the actual cost of the songs would be under $54 and implored Congress to address these damages, which he considered disproportionate, especially because Thomas didn't try to profit from her act.

BayTSP, a Los Gatos, CA-based company, is best known for putting the cease-and-desist smackdown on peer-to-peer copyright violators. The site serves infringement information forms to offending parties on behalf of the copyright holders. Think of them as the online debt collectors of the BitTorrent universe, with all the information security risk that implies.

If the information were secure, this might be fine. However, in some monumental lapse of judgement, the entire site was left open to search spiders and accordingly indexed by Google, allowing anyone with hackerish leanings ample opportunity to create all kinds of mischief.

A Google search for "'infringement information' site:baytsp.com" yields distressing results. Some of the pages have been removed, but you can still have a look at the cached versions:

Whoops!

Not only have the forms been online for Google and the waiting world to view; the forms could also be completed and submitted online by just about anyone.

More technically savvy tricksters could send infringement notices of their own. "And, on top of that," the TechDirt blogger writes, "some have discovered that BayTSP's site has some scripting vulnerabilities such that you could create a fake complaint and get people to, say, download malware or enter credit card data."

Although this recent debacle is simply one more PR disaster for the media industries themselves, my first thoughts were echoed by TechDirt commenter Mechwarrior: "Once this hits 4chan, it's over."

This appointment of Verrilli rounds out a Department of Justice that is now stocked with pro-copyright, RIAA/MPAA lawyers. Neil MacBride, for example, another new associate deputy attorney general, once led the BSA's nopiracy.com efforts, a program that tried to get employees to blow the whistle about the use of illegal software in their businesses.

DSLReports notes that Obama's own ethics rules would prohibit these appointees from directly working on copyright issues, as they previously represented the entertainment industry in these cases, but it is somewhat disconcerting that the Obama administration would pick so many industry insiders for these positions. We would have hoped that the administration had chosen a set of appointees with a more progressive attitude towards copyright.

CC-licensed images courtesy of flickr users MikeBlogs and jemsweb.

Today, the Harvard legal team representing Tenenbaum commented on the appeal pointing out that if the RIAA truly wants to educate people it should be embracing the narrowcast. The appeal really does beg the question: does the RIAA really want its voice heard by the masses?

Joel Tenenbaum, a 25-year old graduate student at Boston University received a notice in 2003 accusing him of downloading seven songs via a P2P service. The notice asked for a settlement of $3,500, Tenenbaum offered $500; the offer was declined.

Four years later, Tenenbaum received a complaint to appear in court. He filed an answer with a counterclaim asserting abuse of federal power and that the excessive damages were unconstitutional. This time around, Tenenbaum offered to settle for $5,000 and again the offer was declined; opposing council was asking for $10,500.

Now the RIAA wants over one million dollars.

The Joel Fights Back Dream Team

Enter Professor Charles Nesson and his team of Harvard Law students, who last month filed a motion asking the judge to allow audio-visual coverage of the trial proceedings over the Internet. Last week, Judge Gertner granted the motion (PDF) stating:

"In many ways, this case is about the so-called Internet Generation -- the generation that has grown up with computer technology in general, and the internet in particular, as commonplace." Additionally, Judge Gertner points out "It is reportedly a generation that does not read newspapers or watch the evening news, but gets its information largely, if not almost exclusively, over the internet."

Yesterday, Torrent Freak pointed out that the RIAA is appealing (PDF) the motion, pointing to a statement by RIAA's Cara Duckworth: "While this might be an interesting academic exercise for the professor and his class, there's been real world consequences for those who create music."

The point Ms. Duckworth seems to be missing is that there is a real world consequence for those who want to listen to music as well. We can only hope the appeal will be denied and the Harvard Dream Team gets the opportunity to bring this significant trial to the Web.

Why This is Important

The fines are hugely inappropriate. The Digital Theft Deterrence and Copyright Damages Improvement Act of 1999 sets damages of $750 to $30,000 for each infringement, and as much as $150,000 for a willful violation. The Act is old. Particularly when you look at it from the fast paced lane of the Web; change is clearly needed.

The RIAA managed to score some points last month when it announced it would no longer target individuals and instead work more closely with ISPs to identify alleged copyright infringers. Unfortunately they also mentioned they would continue with cases already underway, and the Tenenbaum case falls into that category.

If the Internet feed goes ahead, it will be provided by the Courtroom View Network and streamed on the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School where it is scheduled to go live on Thursday Jan. 22 at 2 pm ET.

At the end of the day, it appears the RIAA has confused itself. If it is serious in wanting to educate the public on the business and legal issues facing the music industry - and copyright in general - it must get in front of the public and speak up; it cannot hide behind bureaucracy any longer. Living in the Internet age we know it's time that organizations with such antiquated ideologies catch up; problem is - when will they work it out?

This arrangement was brokered by New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo and, at its core, resembles the RIAA's deal with a number of colleges.

It's Not that Easy

We are happy to see the flood of lawsuits against file sharers come to an end, but we also think that there are some problems with this plan, which, of course, is mostly geared towards allowing the RIAA to save on legal fees while being able to reach far more people by simply sending an email to an ISP.

More importantly, however, we agree with Cindy Cohn of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who argues that this will mean that people won't be able to access the Internet "based on allegations of breaking a law that have not been evaluated in a court of law."

It is still a bit hard to flully evaluate this deal without knowing the exact details and which ISPs actually agreed to this, but, as most people could have told them a long time ago, the RIAA has clearly decided that its current approach wasn't working, as overall music sales have continued to decline, while file sharing has only increased.

In the original trial, the jury was instructed by U.S. District Judge Michael Davis that evidence for the fact that the music on Thomas' computer was actual distributed to anybody was not necessary. Instead, for the jury to find Thomas guilty, all it needed was evidence that she was "making copyrighted sound recordings available." The judge has now decided that this instruction was wrong and has granted Thomas a new trial.

This new trial will most likely put a stronger burden on the RIAA to prove that Thomas not only made files accessible, but that those files were actually downloaded from her computer. The judge also makes it clear that downloads by the RIAA or MediaSentry (the investigative arm of the RIAA) can constitute infringement. However, because it is impossible to know if the jury used the erroneous instruction as the basis for its verdict instead of the fact that the RIAA provided evidence for possible distribution, the judge has granted Thomas a new trial.

Still Guilty?

During Thomas' original trial, her lawyer argued that she never actually shared any songs. Her hard drive, which was presented as evidence, was clean because Best Buy replaced it two weeks after she received her first notice from the RIAA (though she originally told her lawyer that it was replaced one or two months before she received the notice). It is also noteworthy that Thomas' Kazaa login, which was linked to her IP address by the RIAA, was the same as the username she used for her email and MySpace accounts.

Based on this, and the fact that the RIAA can use its own downloads as evidence, we still assume that a new jury will find Thomas guilty of copyright infringement. Hopefully, though, this new jury will take a closer look at the ridiculously high fines per song the first jury awarded to the RIAA.

Popular playlist sharing site Muxtape got taken down by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) in mid-August and it is unfortunately still non-operational. The fact is that Muxtape didn't pay its internet radio licensing fees. In our recent RWW Live podcast on online music, Lucas Gonze (creator of similar playlist service Webjay, which was acquired by Yahoo in 2006) said that Muxtape was "trying to become a big service, i.e. get too big to fail and so cut a deal [with labels]." Unfortunately Muxtape failed to escape the notice of the RIAA.

NetShare (iPhone app)

Nullriver's NetShare was an iPhone app that, according to Gizmodo, allowed you to tether your laptop to your iPhone using the handset's 3G modem as your laptop's own. Basically this let you have full Internet access on your laptop without Wi-Fi, for free. There was talk that this violates AT&T's terms of service, but whatever the reason the app has been pulled from Apple's App Store. The last message on the site is dated 4 August and states: "We're working with Apple to get NetShare back up on the AppStore." But we're not holding our breath.

Image courtesy of Gizmodo

The CLQ

Adam Steinberg of EventVue wrote in to tell us that he misses The CLQ (the acronym stands for Champions League for Quake style games). It's an app that kept track of "millions of game players (Quake, Unreal, Half-life, Tribes, etc.) on thousands of online game servers." It was a very popular app in its niche, however it was stopped. The developers claim that this was due to "incredible amounts of e-mail, GameSpy monopolizing access to game servers, constant upgrading of hardware and software to process increased traffic, games getting their own statistics, etc."

The good news for CLQ fans is that one of the developers, Nico de Vries, is currently working on a version 2.0.

PubSub

PubSub was one of our favorite 'future search' products back in the early days of web 2.0 - you could enter keywords and the product would deliver search results to you automatically. This feature is now common place in news sites, for example Google News has it, but back in '03-'05 PubSub was an innovator.

So it was a great product, but PubSub spectacularly imploded in mid-2006 after founder Bob Wyman blogged about "internal political issues". Wyman left the company shortly after and the product sunk along with its creator. Perhaps PubSub will rise again, because apparently it still exists today. Here is the message on its frontpage currently:

Others have risen since to take over the reins in future search. A few of our favorites are ZapTXT, FeedRinse and BlastFeed. We discussed those and other services here. But we'll always have a soft spot for PubSub...

AllPeers

In March we heard that P2P browser plug-in AllPeers had shut down, a blow to a market that seemed very promising back in 2006. AllPeers set out to add "file sharing to the web browser". Technically the service seemed fine, however the reason for the closure according to the company was that "we have not achieved the kind of growth in our user base that our investors were expecting, and as a result we are not able to continue operating the service."

Scrabulous (Facebook app)

We reported in April that Scrabulous, the extremely popular but unauthorized Scrabble Facebook app, was under fire from Hasbro and Mattel. Those two companies own the rights to Scrabble - Hasbro in North America, and Mattel in the rest of the world. In July the bigcos had their way and Scrabulous was taken offline.

After more legal ducking and weaving, in which the app was first pulled in North America and then internationally too, the app got re-born under the name Wordscraper. It uses circles instead of Scrabble-like square tiles. Unfortunately the change isn't proving too popular. This comment by a Facebook user is an example of the reaction:

"I loved Scrabulous !
Wordscraper is kinda the same but I do not like the round tiles , it makes it difficult to play , kinda messes everything together, change it to SQUARES and it would be alot better."

The old version, with squares

Pandora

OK you can still use Pandora in the US, despite concerns that it might be on the verge of closing. But those of us who live outside the US haven't been able to access this lovely music discovery service for too long a time.

Qumana

Tris Hussey tweeted to tell us that Qumana was a great java-based blog editor, "easy and light." Unfortunately it is not being updated anymore and the homepage isn't accessible.

Crgslst

Back in March we reported on a very slick multi-city search tool for Craigslist, called crgslst. As we noted, Craigslist itself doesn't offer a multi-search service. By combining the publicly available RSS feeds from Craigslist with AJAX, crgslst fills this need "so fast, we left the vowels behind." We noted at the time that crgslst may be in violation of the Craigslist terms of use and could face the same shutdown that other similar projects have in the past.

Indeed this has turned out to be the case. Currently when you visit crglst, you are greeted with this despairing pop-up message:

ShareYourOPML

This site for sharing OPML files was "retired" by creator Dave Winer in January. He wrote at the time that "now that Google and Bloglines both have discovery mechanisms, based on what you and others like, there would only be a future for SYO if it were a thriving and growing community, and it isn't."

The good news for OPML fans is that Toluu has risen to fill the void. We reviewed it in March, noting that it lets you share your OPML with others in order to discover new feeds, see what your friends are reading, and even discover new people who share your same interests. We were impressed by the service, even more so in May when enhancements were announced.

So perhaps, sometimes, there is a silver lining in the dark cloud of web apps that close or get shut down!

Have Your Say

Tell us in the comments which web apps have disappeared in recent times that you used to love. Also let us know if anything has come along since that you perhaps like even better.

Due to the transparency of college networks, students are an easy target for the RIAA's resistant efforts. However, don't get it twisted. Colleges are not about to start defending the students that actually violate copyright laws. For not only are these students violating the laws of the music industry, but also those of the college. With that being said, colleges are fighting back because they feel that the resources and time spent on chasing these students is cutting into better things that faculty members could be doing.

The Costs and Efforts of the Hunt

So what exactly does it cost colleges to hunt down these students? With the increasing number of subpoenas and "cease-and-desist" letters coming from the RIAA, it's become a full-time job for college administration to keep up with students across their network, especially if the campus is huge. This has resulted in some colleges having to hire more full-time employees to monitor the networks and make sure the correct correspondents are actually violating the law and receive their notices. Talk about a time-consuming job! Not only that, colleges have also had to install more software to help track and monitor illegal network activities, which results in yet another software that IT employees have to get a handle on.

Just Not Worth All the Effort

In the end, it's understandable for some colleges to simply stop helping out the RIAA. Their efforts are costing them a ton of money and time. Instead, colleges are opting to focus their efforts towards their school's mission statements and to the academic well-being of their students. Colleges could spend more time better educating their students on the most current software, upgrading their own systems to reflect these teachings, and overall helping their students in a variety of other ways. We're sure students will be happy to hear this, but we'd like to warn college students once again that campus efforts to stop piracy will not stop completely.

Because it's a self hosted program, the bar for entry is a lot higher than for Muxtape of course, though as far as installation goes, all you have to do is to copy the OpenTape code into a publicly accessible directory on your server and you should be good to go (as long as your server runs Apache, PHP5, and curl). After that, all you have to do is set a password, give your mixtape a name, and start uploading songs (or FTP them into your 'songs' folder).

Playing and Embedding

Playing songs works just like in Muxtape or any of its competitors like 8tracks. Just click on a song and it starts playing - click again and it stops.

One nice feature of OpenTape is that it provides you with an embedded player.

RIAA

As others have pointed out, part of the reason people would want to host their mixtapes on their own server is to make it harder for the RIAA to shut down a particular server, but hosting a virtual mixtape with copyrighted music could quickly become a major nightmare, as the RIAA and others would probably have no problem with serving takedown notices and asking for enormous fines.

Still, OpenTape also has other applications - bands, for example, can host their own music with it (though that is also the only service Muxtape still offers), you could use it as a podcast player, or you could just use it to promote some of your favorite Creative Commons licensed music.

Limitations

While hosting your own mixtape (just one for now, unless you install numerous copies of OpenTape) is fine, the beauty of Muxtape or 8tracks is that you can also search for other people's mixtapes, which is often a great way to discover new music.

Of course, somebody could host a central repository for OpenTape mixtapes, but then that would make it even easier for the RIAA to go after alleged copyright violations.

For some, OpenTape might fill the void left behind by Muxtape's demise, but for most, the limitations of OpenTape and the fact that you have to host it yourself will make other like 8tracks a far more attractive alternative.

So, what, exactly is Genome, then? Well, it's not really just one thing - it's four:

1. Social Network: Genome a social network like any other. You'll have a user profile, friends, and tools that let you social with them in comfortable, natural ways.
2. Contact Manager: You'll be able to keep track of your contacts' information on Genome.
3. Instant Messenger: Genome will provide an open instant messenger that's integrated with your contacts.
4. Identity & Social Graph Provider: Genome will have an open identity policy so your Genome identity is easily sharable with other sites. That means that other sites and services can query Genome for some pieces of your personal information.

The Genome project has only been in development for three months and most of the details on how it operates, technically speaking, are being kept quiet. However, we got a look at some of their plans as well as some screenshots of the mobile app.

What Genome Is Not

Genome is not an aggregator spock.com profiles or FriendFeed. Genome can function as your central identity, not a collection of your identities out on the web nor a collection of your social web activities.

It's not a competitor to other data portability movements like Facebook Connect, MySpace's Data Availability, or Google Friend Connect. Instead, Genome will work cooperate with them to give users control over their own data. To do so, Genome will not use any closed, proprietary protocols - only open standards.

What Genome Will Let You Do

Because it will use open protocols, the goal is to let users carry their identites anywhere on the web. Updates made to those identities out on the web will make their way back to Genome instead of users having to return to Genome to edit their profiles.

You'll be able to access Genome's service from a web app, a desktop client (they have a Windows, Mac, and Linux client planned), and a mobile app. A Google Android client has already been built, too. In fact, Genome's creators are particularly focused on the mobile market and are working on real-time sync and location awareness in this area. Of course, developers will also be able to build their own web apps and clients thanks to Genome's open standards and API.

We got a sneak peek at the Android app, but be warned, the app is still very much in alpha and may change a lot prior to launch:

To deal with "noise" Genome is implementing something they're calling a "real-life relationships" model. In your real life, says co-founder Chernyshov, "you can control who knows what about you, and you can control what you know about them." Those granular relationships will be available on Genome, yet kept as simple as possible.

How You'll Use Genome (At First)

There aren't too many details on the specifics of how you will use Genome or the technical details as to how Genome operates, but we do that the first public release will only be the beginning of their effort to solve all the problems noted at the beginning of this post. The first iteration of Genome will be focused on the problem of identity management.

In the area of contact and identity management, the problems that Genome wants to solve specifically include the following: you can't import or export data on today's social networks, you can't control who sees what about you, you can't watch who knows what about you, and you can't ask a new web service to retrieve your name, email, contacts, etc. from a social network site. Well, as for that last issue, data portability is supposed to address this, but perhaps Genome's creators aren't interested in waiting for the major providers to make it work.

To start off, you'll be able to import your address book contacts and (possibly) import friends from various social networks. (They aren't sure if they will have that feature ready for the first public launch or not). However, they do plan on supporting Google Friend Connect and, further down the road, they will offer automatic contacts discovery.

Once you add a contact to Genome, it's yours - it's not locked in any way. Unlike a network like Facebook, for example, who locks in your contacts so you have to keep using their walled garden service, the data from Genome can be freely moved about the web. If you add someone to Genome then invite them to join the service, their profile will be automatically linked with the contact you've already created. The details don't need to be re-entered.

Other Issues Being Addressed

As the Genome project progresses, future versions of the service will focus more on privacy concerns, distractions, quality interactions, and advertisements. (More details can be found on this post about Genome.) How these issues will be dealt with is currently under wraps.

Privacy: Privacy levels will be set up to mirror real-life relationships: spouse or significant other, family, best friend, friend, buddy, colleague, business partner, high school acquaintance, contact, etc. Human relationships have detailed nuances - social networks should, too.

Distractions: Social networks today are bogging us down with messages, invitations, pokes, and friend requests. Some of these matter, some of these waste our time, but how can we pay attention to only the really important things? Genome plans to address this.

Quality Issues: The more "friends" you have, the less rich the interactions and the relationships you maintain with your friends on your social networks. Interactions become one-way, more similar to RSS than to real relationships.

Ads: Today's ads are often irrelevant, usually unwanted, and sometimes even inappropriate. Even targeted ads seem to miss the mark. If Genome truly has a solution for this problem, that will be extremely impressive.

Conclusion

At the moment, Genome sounds almost too good to be true - a social networking service that solves all our problems? Nevertheless, it's certainly intriguing. If it can really do what it proposes to do, then it's worth signing up for (sign-up is here).

Facebook Requests: Dan Zen