PreVail Cammer Arrested

It's no secret that watermark technology has become part of the theatrical film experience. Although largely invisible to most individuals, those with an eye for the technology will spot the watermarks, which typically appear as a set of arranged dots. These dots, when arranged in a specific manner, indicate the film's exact theatrical location. Watermark technology gives investigators a powerful tool. When a movie shows up online, investigators will know where the film was recorded. This is known as camming, which refers to the art of sitting in a theater with a video/audio capturing device, and from there distributing it in the physical or digital market. Online release groups such as PreVail depend on cammers in order to keep their supply of movie releases flowing. Unfortunately for one alleged cammer, who provided his work to PreVail, the watermark technology finally caught up to him. An Australian man was arrested on February 13 and his residence was raided by New South Wales Police. According to the MPA's press release, police seized: "…sophisticated video camcording equipment, and computer equipment. The video camcording equipment is alleged to have been used for making illegal video recordings of a number of latest release titles including “He’s Just Not That Into You”, “Marley and Me”, “Yes Man”, “Bedtime Stories”, and “Beverley (sic) Hills Chihuahua”." PreVail is a well-known release group, and the loss of one cammer won't pose a significant threat to its ability to provide releases. It's a surprising arrest in any event - typically release groups and cammers go out of their way to eliminate any watermarking evidence. But this one slipped through the cracks. The alleged cammer in this circumstance has posted bail, and is awaiting arraignment.

Source: http://www.slyck.com/story1833_PreVail_Cammer_Arrested

Labels want $13 million from Pirate Bay as trial starts

The trial of The Pirate Bay's backers kicked off Monday in Sweden as the prosecutor laid out an opening statement and the labels asked for $13 million in fines. Meanwhile, the defendants were tweeting from the dock. The Pirate Bay's "spectrial" got underway in Sweden Monday morning as prosecutors laid out the charges. Appearing before a packed house of bloggers, press, and people dressed as pirates, prosecutor Hakan Roswall made his opening statement, charging The Pirate Bay with aiding in massive copyright infringement and profiting from its actions. Three Pirate Bay defendants and Carl Lundstom, a Swedish businessman who used to run Rix Telecom and is accused of being a Pirate Bay investor, were in the dock listening. Roswall painted the group as businesspeople out to make serious money from their operations, and he detailed the site's genesis and growth since being launched back in 2004. Those who understand what The Pirate Bay is and how BitTorrent works won't find much new or shocking in Roswall's summary of the case; the question is simply whether creating a search engine and tracker service that traffics mainly in copyrighted content is illegal in Sweden or not. The music labels did provide a bit of new information, however—specifically, the amount of money they want from The Pirate Bay. It turns out to be over $13 million (117 million krona).

Source: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/02/labels-want-13-million-from-pirate-bay-as-trial-starts.ars

Apple sued over screen rendering technology

Apple is being sued over the screen rending technology that it uses in the iPhone and iPod touch according to reports on the Internet. If successful Apple could be forced to payout huge sums as well as possibly change the way users interact with the popular smartphone. In the suit, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, Macworld magazine reports that "Picsel Technologies claims that the rendering process Apple uses on the iPhone violates Picsel's patents." The company says that its technology accelerates the process of updating the display on a device. According the report, "users would experience long screen update delays if it weren’t for the use of the patented technology. Zooming and panning documents, Web sites, and images would not work on the iPhone as fluidly."

Source: http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/news/news.phtml/22255/23279/apple-sued-over-screen-rendering.phtml