Apple Blames Music Labels For Insistence On iTunes DRM

itunesRecently it was revealed that many years ago, Apple actually deleted songs off its customers’ iPods that weren’t purchased from iTunes. It’s a startling revelation as it makes it seem like Apple is purposely trying to monopolize the music market and limiting the way their iPods are used and where it customers can get their music from.

However recently it looks like Apple has turned the blame onto the music labels. In a testimony given by iTunes chief Eddy Cue, it seems that Apple did not want any DRM on their music to begin with, but the major record labels had insisted upon it and would not participate in Apple’s plans unless they agreed to it.

Cue was quoted as saying, “They were saying we wanted this closed environment, but we had wanted DRM-free from day one. We had the best jukebox, we had the best store, and we had the best player. With DRM-free, we’d sell even more.” However it seems that the labels did not care for this. Warner Music’s then-CEO Edgar Bronfman was reported to have said at that time, “That argument is without logic and merit. We will not abandon DRM.”

DRM has always been somewhat controversial. In fact an article by Tim Lee back in 2005 mentioned how music labels implementing DRMs felt like they were treating honest customers as criminals. In fact this contention is not limited to the music industry, but the gaming industry as well as Microsoft had to rescind its own DRM policy for the Xbox One after they faced a huge amount of backlash over it.

So what do you guys think? Are the labels to blame for their insistence on DRM implementation? Or do you think Apple should shoulder some of the blame as well?

Apple Blames Music Labels For Insistence On iTunes DRM

, original content from Ubergizmo. Read our Copyrights and terms of use.

Tech Means 'Creative Renaissance' for TV: SMG's Scheppach

CHICAGO — The internet may have displaced newspapers, magazines and radio in many consumers’ lives. But advertising execs – even those from technology backgrounds – don’t believe TV is about to croak any time soon, a Beet.TV panel heard.

  • DigitasLbi’s programmatic strategy and analysis VP Brian Zaben: “It’s not going anywhere. It will just be more informed. The data points we’ll be able to (use) … will make it more relevant.”
  • Target digital media VP Brent Rosso: “TV’s not going anywhere. The medium, nothing rivals it. That said, we don’t know what we don’t know yet.”
  • AOL video sales VP Margee Anderson: “As demand for quality content continues to grow, we’re going to see it taking a stronghold in the media mix.”

Whilst advertising folks still love TV, that doesn’t mean they don’t think ads there can be upgraded by bringing more data to bear.

“I have several clients, because they’re having to serve a mass message, the message is so watered down, it doesn’t speak to the true audience,” said Starcom MediaVest Group’s precision video EVP Tracey Scheppach. “As tech and data improves, you’ll be able to improve the creatives – so I see a creative renaissance coming as well.”

They were interviewed by Vertere Group CEO Tim Hanlon for Beet.TV at the Beet.TV leadership summit on the transformation of television, presented by AOL. Please find more videos from the event here.

You can find this post on Beet.TV.

Cameron Diaz Rocks A LBD To 'Annie' Premiere

Cameron Diaz opted for a sleek look as she attended the premiere of her new movie “Annie” held at Ziegfeld Theater on Sunday in New York City

Here Are Some Of The Ways That Mary Landrieu Lost To Bill Cassidy In Louisiana

Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu’s 12-point loss in a weekend runoff ended up closer than several polls suggested it could be. But an Associated Press analysis of the returns show that a slide in turnout simply wasn’t enough for Landrieu to recover the ground she’d lost since her last victory six years ago.

Saturday’s vote resulted in a comfortable win for Rep. Bill Cassidy, a Baton Rouge Republican who will give the GOP a 54-seat majority when the Senate convenes in January. Cassidy ended up with a 151,231-vote advantage over Landrieu, who led an eight-candidate field in the Nov. 4 primary ballot, finishing 16,349 votes ahead Cassidy. But, as expected, the congressman picked up enough votes from vanquished GOP rivals to avoid any political drama as returns rolled in.

Here are some highlights of Cassidy’s win.

— Cassidy won 49 of Louisiana’s 64 parishes. Six years ago, when Landrieu defeated Republican John Kennedy without a runoff, the Democratic senator carried 38 parishes.

— Turnout was down from the primary, but that appeared to hurt Landrieu more across the board. Her vote total went down by 58,298 votes. Cassidy’s went up by 109,282.

— Cassidy fell 93,274 votes short of the combined total that he and third-place primary finisher Rob Maness, a tea party Republican, got in the primary. That suggests some drop off in enthusiasm among arch-conservatives who never fully embraced Cassidy — Maness got 202,556 votes in November — but it didn’t affect the final outcome.

— Landrieu has always depended heavily on her advantage in cities, but she couldn’t drive up her margins there enough to make up for the support she and her party have lost in small towns and rural precincts.

In the eight parishes that contain Louisiana’s largest municipalities, Landrieu managed an 18,568-vote advantage over Cassidy’s and Maness’s combined total in November. She managed only to widen the gap to 21,037 on Saturday. Both figures would have been steep deficits if not for Orleans Parish, Landrieu’s hometown and still a principal source of African-American and white liberal votes for Louisiana Democrats.

— Cassidy managed to tighten the margin in other urban parishes. He lost his home parish of East Baton Rouge by 7,130 votes. But that shaved off almost 500 votes from Landrieu’s advantage over Cassidy and Maness in the primary. Landrieu again won Orleans Parish by an overwhelming margin. But Cassidy closed the gap by more than 5,000 votes.

————-

Follow Barrow on Twitter at https://www.twitter.com/BillBarrowAP .

Police Are The 'Harlem Globetrotters' Of The Legal System. 'They Don't Lose'

WASHINGTON — The decisions of two grand juries not to indict the police officers responsible for the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner have sparked emotional reactions and protests throughout the country.

But for those who have toiled in the criminal justice system — prosecuting cases involving police shootings and representing victims in civil and criminal suits — the surprising thing, in many respects, is that people are surprised at all.

“It is not more often than not” that a police officer won’t get indicted in cases like this, said Doug Sparks, a prominent civil attorney who has tried cases of police brutality. “I would say it is never.”

In the latest episode of “Drinking and Talking,” Sparks, along with Donald Temple, a civil rights attorney and former chairman of the D.C. Civilian Complaint Review Board, offered insiders’ perspectives on why this is the case and what other options families have for pursuing justice.

Together with Jamelle Bouie, a staff writer at Slate, and Jason Cherkis, a reporter with The Huffington Post, they also dove deep into the Brown and Garner cases, offering telling new insights into the dubious ways in which the Brown case was handled. And they helped discern why the legal system appears so rigidly beneficial toward the police.

“They’re the Harlem Globetrotters,” said Cherkis. “They don’t lose.”

Watch the video above. Here’s an index of key moments in the discussion:

0:00 — What would it take to indict a cop?
4:30 — What’s the purpose of the grand jury system?
6:55 — Ferguson: What the police did on day one.
11:53 — Ferguson testimony: The inconsistencies and the rest.
17:55 — Ferguson: What happened to the chain of custody?
21:16 — Eric Garner: Video evidence and its limitations.
29:15 — Part of the playbook: Smearing the victim.
32:51 — What happens in a civil case?
40:27 — A historical perspective on police killings.

Listen to the audio of the show below:

Protect Our Daughters… and Our Sons

I have a daughter and a granddaughter, and I want to protect them from sexual assault at all costs. If they ever experience the horror of sexual assault, I want the law to do everything possible to bring the perpetrator to justice and repair my loved one’s life.

I also have a son and a grandson, and I want to protect them from false allegations of sexual assault. False allegations happen much more than people might think or than we are allowed to discuss openly in today’s climate, especially on campuses where this issue is getting overdue but not particularly balanced attention.

Unfortunately, the law does almost nothing to go after those who level false charges, and the falsely accused person’s life is often damaged if not ruined.

Everyone is currently focused on the careless journalism behind the now apparently discredited Rolling Stone story of a young woman, “Jackie,” who claims she was gang raped on the University of Virginia campus in 2012.

2014-12-06-uvarollingstone.jpg

It is the Rolling Stone reporter taking all of the (well-deserved) heat. No one seems to care that a young woman may have made up a gang rape story. And certainly no one I’ve heard of seems to care about those accused.

The evil of sexual assault is clear, and sexual assault is more abominable than making a false allegation of sexual assault. But false allegations are horrible and ruinous. Anyone who doubts that is either being willfully blind or clearly hasn’t been in the presence of someone falsely accused.

A good friend of mine runs an organization that fights to get wrongly convicted people out of prison. His group has gotten 53 people released who have served an astounding total of 1,083 years behind bars for crimes they didn’t commit.

My friend says often that when he was a young man, he believed everyone in prison was guilty. Now he knows better.

How easy it is to make false allegations and be believed.

The three Duke lacrosse players accused of rape by a young woman in 2006 but ultimately cleared of any charges were among the “lucky” victims of false accusations because their case was so widely publicized and so hideously pursued by the ambitious — and eventually disbarred district attorney — that the truth had a chance to emerge. (The accuser was convicted in 2013 of murdering her boyfriend but never charged with anything for the lie that ruined three young men’s lives in 2006 and still, from prison, maintains her story was the truth.)

2014-12-06-dukelacrosse.jpg

Most of those falsely accused aren’t so fortunate. They either are prosecuted and sometimes convicted, or the whole thing goes away and they are stigmatized as even those close to them wonder, Did it maybe happen?

And that’s the problem. Once a false accusation is in the air, people tend to believe it. Where there’s smoke, and all that nonsense. It doesn’t seem to matter if the smoke is there because an arsonist set the fire.

The Washington Post story which did the heavy lifting in showing the massive holes in the Rolling Stone piece stated, “A group of Jackie’s close friends, who are advocates at U-Va. for sex-assault awareness, said they believe that something traumatic happened to her, but they also have come to doubt her account.”

Her friends believe “something traumatic happened to her…”

We believe the allegation, or tend to believe “something traumatic happened.” It could be 100 percent false, but once someone puts an allegation out there, we think, well, something had to have happened.

The statistics about false sexual assault allegations vary widely. A 2006 article in the Cambridge Law Journal showed a range of two percent to 90 percent, though most of the studies were in the high teens to low 20s. Few people seem to believe the high end, but few should believe the figure of two-to-eight percent that has appeared in some other studies.

But even if the number is eight percent, there were about 237,000 sexual assaults and rapes reported in the United States in 2010. If only eight percent of those were false reports, that’s close to 19,000 people false accused.

Most sexual assault claims are true. Sexual assault is a horrific crime that ruins lives and should be prosecuted.

Falsely accusing someone is a horrific crime that ruins lives. It is almost never prosecuted.

Do we all think that is perfectly okay?

Man Seriously Mauled By Lions At Barcelona Zoo

MADRID (AP) — Officials in Spain say a man has been rescued from the lions’ enclosure at Barcelona Zoo after being seriously mauled by three lions.

Barcelona’s fire department was called Sunday to the northeastern city’s zoo where witnesses had seen a man wearing a military-style uniform jump into the den, according to a statement from the city government. Emergency services used fire hoses to distance the lions from the man, who had been attacked and dragged into a tunnel within their enclosure.

Around half an hour after he had entered the enclosure, rescue services removed the man, described as a 45-year-old Spanish national, and took him to a hospital where he is in serious, but not life-threatening, condition, the statement says.

Still an American Dilemma

What happens to a dream deferred?

Maybe it just sags like a heavy load. Or does it explode?

That was the poet Langston Hughes, in 1951. In that year, more than half a century ago, the most basic dreams of African Americans were deferred. Segregation was mandatory in the old South. Discrimination was legal everywhere in America, whether in housing, education, or employment. Blacks were not just separated, but isolated, marginalized, restricted to the worst jobs and most dilapidated neighborhoods, the most dismal schools.

For many, the racism just sagged, like a heavy load. It destroyed hope that hard work would be rewarded. The deferred dreams of that era seldom produced explosions, because the state had a very efficient system of terror. Blacks who resisted were likely to be lynched, jailed, or otherwise destroyed.

It is a testament to sheer grit, tenacity and courage that large numbers of blacks managed to get educations, raise families, start businesses, enter professions and demand inclusion in civic life at all.

The next 20 years were almost miraculous. From the small beginnings of local bus boycotts and sit-ins came the transformation of civil rights laws, finally giving African American full civic and legal equality, a hundred years after Lincoln.

The progress of the 1960s reflected a combination of the courage of the civil rights movements, the alliance with decent whites, and the leadership of an accidental president. Lyndon Johnson was able to prick the conscience of just enough of white America, to cajole and pressure just enough legislators, and to make a startling alliance between the White House and the radicals in the streets.

If you have never read or watched Johnson’s “We Shall Overcome” speech, you have missed a key moment in American history.

It helped that the economy was booming, so that economic progress for blacks did not equate to explicit sacrifices for whites (though whites did have to give up their role as a privileged caste). It helped that there were still liberal Republicans in that era, without whom none of the great civil rights laws could have passed.

So here we are, approaching Christmas 2014. Racism still taints the American dream. And unlike, say, in 1964 when there was a sense of a movement on the march with history on its side, it is hard to summon up optimism.

It is one thing when the government decrees that blacks can’t vote, can’t patronize restaurants, can’t apply for good jobs. That sort of racism shames everyone.

But when cops brutalize young black men, and prosecutors wink, and grand juries refuse to indict, that sort of racism is deeper in the social fabric and much harder to explicitly root out. It is encouraging to see outraged citizens on the march again, heartening that the marches includes whites as well as blacks and other groups.

Yet what sort of movement, what sort of policies, what sort of majority support in the country can we imagine that will fix what is broken?

New York Mayor Bill DeBlasio, whose bi-racial son Dante sports a prominent Afro, has spoken of the need to “literally train him, as families have all over this city for decades, in how to take special care in any encounter he has with the police officers who are there to protect him.” That comment provoked outrage from the police.

Sunday, speaking on the ABC News program This Week, DeBlasio threaded his way between outrage and support for law enforcement, declaring:

We have to retrain police forces in how to work with communities differently. We have to work on things like body cameras that would provide different level of transparency and accountability. This is something systemic. And we bluntly have to talk about the historic racial dynamics underlie this.

There have in fact been moments when thoroughly racist local police departments have been made over to discard their worst racist practices. The Los Angeles Police Department, after decades of strife and civic reform, is better than it once was. But it took a consent agreement with the Justice Department and five years of direct federal supervision.

President Obama, who did manage to summon up some outrage in the Trayvon Martin murder (“If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon”), has been relatively circumspect, appealing both for reform and for order. He is not close to calling for federal supervision of local police.
Obama is no LBJ. And in fairness to Obama, in the absence of stronger public demands, the federal government is not well-positioned to remake local grand juries and police departments.

We have gone utterly backwards since the 1960s, a time when the Justice Department and the courts vigorously interceded to protect the right to vote. Now, the right to vote is being taken away and rightwing courts are tying the Justice Department’s hands.

We need a broad movement once again, to force government’s hand. As Dr. King appreciated in the last year of his life, it needs to be a movement for economic justice as well as civil rights, a multi-racial movement. Only when there is common appreciation that whites and blacks are common victims of an economic system that delivers all the gains to the top do we have a prayer of mobilizing the whole nation to demand action.

Robert Kuttner is co-editor of The American Prospect, a visiting professor at Brandeis University’s Heller School, and a senior Fellow at Demos. His latest book is Debtors’ Prison: The Politics of Austerity Versus Possibility.

Like Robert Kuttner on Facebook.

Ghostface Killah: 36 Seasons

Ghostface Killah: 36 Seasons

In my musical upbringing, Ghostface Killah is an oddity. Back in 2006, I was a senior in high school and my iPod was almost exclusively filled with classic rock tracks (thanks parents) and Rage Against The Machine (thanks teenage angst). There’s no reason that Ghostface Killah’s absolutely amazing Fishscale should have been anywhere near my radar.

Read more…



Impressive Drum Solo Done On An iPad

Making music on the iPad isn’t new as the iPad has apps that allows one to create all types of music, ranging from electronic to even rock. Well if you’re wondering how good a rock song can be on an iPad, a musician who goes by the nickname Appleman has demonstrated just how much one can rock out on an iPad.

In the video above, you will see Appleman performing a live drumset using only his iPad and his fingers. Safe to say that there is a lot of dexterity involved and one needs to be able to switch between the different parts of the drums quickly, deftly, and more importantly accurately as well. Given that the playstyle on the iPad is very different from real drums, we have to admit it does take considerable skill to pull this off.

Speaking to Cult of Mac, Appleman revealed that he had been drumming since the age of 11 and given his current location in Nagasaki, Japan, he was unable to get himself a real set of drums because he didn’t want to wake up the entire neighborhood, which is why he turned to his iPad to help him continue to enjoy the drums in a more controlled environment.

According to Appleman, “It took me a while to get used to playing the bass drum with my fingers. I practiced a lot. I got used to the iPad drum rhythm pattern that I created and (now) I don’t feel that much difficulty expressing the beat patterns I used play on a real drum kit.” In any case if you have a few minutes to spare, check his performance out in the video above.

Impressive Drum Solo Done On An iPad

, original content from Ubergizmo. Read our Copyrights and terms of use.