News came out a while ago that many of our laser printers were embedding “fingerprints” that allowed folks who knew how (like, say, the feds) to trace a printed page back to the day and time it was printed, and the serial number of the printer.

Or, at least that was the theory, until the EFF got all CSI on it. The image above is magnified 10x and illuminated with blue light to increase the contrast of the yellow dot pattern used by Xerox DocuColor printers. Some good reverse engineering efforts now allow folks to decipher those fingerprints, and the EFF even has a handy little form (go to the bottom of the page) to allow you to figure it out yourself.

dot patterns, eff, electronic frontier foundation, fingerprint, forensics, printer, printer fingerprinting, privacy, spying, tracking, xerox, xerox docucolor

Way back near the end of 2005, Lot 49 reported that the Federal Election Commission had basically ruled that bloggers are journalists:

The Federal Election Commission today issued an advisory opinion that finds the Fired Up network of blogs qualifies for the “press exemption” to federal campaign finance laws. The press exemption, as defined by Congress, is meant to assure “the unfettered right of the newspapers, TV networks, and other media to cover and comment on political campaigns.” The full ruling is available at the FEC site. A noteworthy passage: “…an entity otherwise eligible for the press exception would not lose its eligibility merely because of a lack of objectivity…” (emphasis added)

So, yeah, it’s double-edged, I mean that last line is basically the Fox News Channel exemption, but it also gives those bloggers who consider themselves citizen journalists a leg to stand on.

And the folks in that camp should be happy to have the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s help. As Donna Wentworth says, Bloggers: You Have a Right to Remain Vocal.

electronic frontier foundation, eff, blogging, bloggers, politics, objectivity, federal election commission, fec, ruling, fox, fnc, fox news, fox news channel, bias, journalism, citizen journalist, journalists, citizen journalists, citizen journalism, blogger

Donna Wentworth, over at Copyfight pointed out a JD Lasica piece detailing the responses from seven studios to his requests to use short (10-30 seconds) clips of their films in a non-commercial project he was working on with his child.

…four of the studios refused outright, two refused to respond, and the seventh wobbled.

This is the quandary millions of us face today: The Hollywood studios demand that we ask for permission to borrow from their works — and then they deny our requests as a matter of course.

One studio acknowledged the the “worthwhile intentions” of the project and seemed to understand that it would be shown only to family and friends (not on the internet), but refused as a matter of policy:

we have had to establish a general policy of non-cooperation with requests of this nature.

There’s nothing new in this, of course. Writer Chris Turner had to pay over $4 a word to quote a few lines from some Radiohead songs in his book about The Simpsons. Hip hop, once emblematic of “remix culture,” one example of voices and venues squashed (here’s what happens when artists try that today).

Anyway, Wendy Seltzer tells me it’s the EFF’s 15th birthday and they’re doing a blog-a-thon. This isn’t really about why I joined the “fight for my right to fair use and a vibrant public domain,” but it says a lot about why I’m still in it.

Related: The People Who Owned The Bible and Orphaned Works — when you can’t even find the people to ask for permission.

tags: copyfight, copyright, darknet, denied, deny, eff, eff15, hollywood, hollywood studios, home video, orphaned works, permission, permission culture, refuse, refused, remix, remix culture, studio, video clips

Copyfight is pointing to the EFF’s new Legal Guide for Bloggers. Most of the content is about liability, but it also addresses issues of access and privilege that are generally granted to journalists, election law, and labor law. From the introduction:

Whether you’re a newly minted blogger or a relative old-timer, you’ve been seeing more and more stories pop up every day about bloggers getting in trouble for what they post.

Like all journalists and publishers, bloggers sometimes publish information that other people don’t want published. You might, for example, publish something that someone considers defamatory, republish an AP news story that’s under copyright, or write a lengthy piece detailing the alleged crimes of a candidate for public office.

The difference between you and the reporter at your local newspaper is that in many cases, you may not have the benefit of training or resources to help you determine whether what you’re doing is legal. And on top of that, sometimes knowing the law doesn’t help – in many cases it was written for traditional journalists, and the courts haven’t yet decided how it applies to bloggers.

But here’s the important part: None of this should stop you from blogging. Freedom of speech is the foundation of a functioning democracy, and Internet bullies shouldn’t use the law to stifle legitimate free expression. That’s why EFF created this guide, compiling a number of FAQs designed to help you understand your rights and, if necessary, defend your freedom.

To be clear, this guide isn’t a substitute for, nor does it constitute, legal advice. Only an attorney who knows the details of your particular situation can provide the kind of advice you need if you’re being threatened with a lawsuit. The goal here is to give you a basic roadmap to the legal issues you may confront as a blogger, to let you know you have rights, and to encourage you to blog freely with the knowledge that your legitimate speech is protected.

Continue reading the EFF’s Legal Guide For Bloggers…

Technorati Tags: blogger, bloggers, blogging, copyright, court, eff, free expression, free speech, freedom, law, legal, legal guide, liability, stifle