throughout today, it came to light that
SW Cast
had been shut down by
Sound exchange
but their’s a lot of wining that this is not valid.
Firstly, have the
original
post that sparked this

> SWCast shut down >

Posted on April 19, 2011 by David Oxenford

SoundExchange Claims Credit for Shutting Down Webcaster Who Was Not Paying Royalties

SoundExchange claims on its website that webcaster SWCast.net was shut down when SoundExchange complained to its ISP that the service was not paying royalties for the use of the music played by the site. SWCast was an aggregator of webcast channels created by other individuals, who paid the company – allegedly for the streaming and for the royalties that were due for that streaming. According to the SoundExchange press release, the webcaster was shut down when SoundExchange “sent a letter requesting that the hosting ISP disable access to the SWCast site.” SoundExchange’s statement says that, despite repeated attempts to engage the webcaster, SWCast neither paid royalties nor filed reports of use for the songs streamed by the service, leading to SoundExchange’s action. As far as we know, this is the first time that SoundExchange has taken such an action.

How did this work? While we have not seen the letter that SoundExchange sent to the ISP, we can assume that it alleged that SWCast was infringing on copyrighted materials by not paying the required royalties. ISPs have a safe harbor under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, protecting them from liability for the infringement of users of their services, if the ISP does not encourage the infringement, registers an agent with the Copyright Office, and agrees to take down infringing content when properly notified by a copyright holder (see our post here). We can only assume that SoundExchange or the copyright holders themselves notified the ISP that the material streamed by this webcaster was infringing as no royalties were being paid and, to protect itself, the ISP blocked access to the site.

Does this action reflect a new aggressiveness on the part of SoundExchange? We have noted before that, from time to time, there seems to be a flurry of collection activity by SoundExchange. We have heard from several streaming companies that they have recently received notices from SoundExchange inquiring about various compliance issues. SoundExchange has been staffing up, and they have an attorney on staff whose principal job is enforcement. Perhaps, with a new President, and with the last webcasting royalty proceeding done but for the appeals, this is a time when SoundExchange feels comfortable enough to act to ensure compliance with its royalty requirements.

We’ve summarized the Internet radio royalty rates recently, and reminded webcasters not to forget their minimum fee payments and yearly election requirements. If you are streaming, this might be a good time to check your royalty compliance to make sure that you are doing all that is expected by SoundExchange. They may be watching!

so I headed over to the linked in portion of the sound exchange website, and found
this
here’s that article, as well.

Public notice of disabling of access to SWcast services
April 18th
In recent days, SoundExchange requested that access to Internet radio service SWCast.net be disabled by the hosting ISP in accordance with the provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and the ISP’s terms of service.

While regrettable, this step was necessary given SWCast’s repeated claims that it is a “provider of blanket music licensing and enhancement services” for online radio stations. SWCast collected monthly fees from webcasters using its service, in exchange for (it claimed) satisfying all of the reporting and royalty obligations of its webcaster clients. Among the obligations specifically listed on its site are those reporting obligations and royalties paid to rights-holders by webcasters through SoundExchange.

SWCast, however, does not provide the promised services. Specifically, and despite its claims, SWCast has failed to abide by its obligations under the statutory license, did not pay anything to SoundExchange for years, and, as of the date of this letter, has not even attempted to make any payment to SoundExchange for any period after 2005. SWCast has also never provided the reports of use that are clearly required by the statutory license.

SoundExchange repeatedly reached out to SWCast to seek its compliance, to no avail. Accordingly, SoundExchange sent a letter requesting that the hosting ISP disable access to the SWCast site. Individual webcasters who had been using SWCast’s services are free to rely on the statutory license going forward, either by submitting the necessary materials and payments to SoundExchange directly, or relying on a different third party service to submit such materials and payments on their behalf. Learn more about SoundExchange’s Licensing 101.

Thousands of webcasters have been able to thrive and to provide valuable services to their listeners while operating legally under the statutory license. It’s unfair for SWCast or anyone else to use artists’ work without compensating them, and it’s unfair to the webcasters who believed they were abiding by the law.

We’re sorry that SWCast chose not to comply with the law, and we hope SWCast fans will find another (legal) provider by which to enjoy the tracks we all love. Meanwhile, we’ll be holding down the fort here, making sure that artists and copyright holders see returns on their hard work, and have the means to continue creating new music.

If you have any questions, please review www.soundexchange.com or feel free to contact our licensing and enforcement department at 202.559.0555 or L&E@soundexchange.com.

so as a member of staff on both
JJRN
and
Mojo Radio
and a concerned listener, I contacted the phone number listed, and spoke with Mandi Nash of the licensing and enforcement department.
I determined, during that conversation that what I was reading was true and accurate, and as further proof, she sent me what all stations were receiving upon request.

________________________________

From: Mandi Nash [mailto:anash@SOUNDEXCHANGE.COM]
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 3:43 PM
To: shane@shaned.net
Subject: Notice of Violation of Terms of Statutory License by SWCast

Re: Notice of Violation of Terms of Statutory License by SWCast

Dear Sir or Madam:

This is a courtesy notice provided to you by SoundExchange regarding the current compliance status of your webcasting station. As you may know, SoundExchange, Inc. is the non-profit entity designated by the Copyright Royalty Board to collect royalties owed under the statutory license for the public performance of sound recordings via certain noninteractive digital audio transmissions (e.g., “webcasting”) and the making of certain ephemeral phonorecords. See 17 U.S.C. §§ 112(e), 114; 37 C.F.R. Parts 370, 380 (the “Statutory License”). SoundExchange, in turn, distributes the royalties it collects to the performing artists and copyright owners of such sound recordings.

We write to you regarding your webcasting service that has been made available through SWCast.net (“SWCast”). SWCast purports to be an Internet radio service for small webcasters and a “provider of blanket music licensing and enhancement services” for online radio stations. As part of its services, SWCast offers a so-called “Joint Performance Licensing Program” (“JPL Program”). Through the JPL program, SWCast offers, for a fee, to satisfy all of the reporting and royalty obligations of its webcaster clients whose streaming it hosts and manages (the “Webcaster Clients”). Among the obligations specifically listed are those reporting obligations and royalties paid to rights-holders by webcasters through SoundExchange. SWCast promises to provide “small U.S. Webcasters with the licensing coverage, expertise, and peace of mind they need,” in exchange for monthly payments from its Webcaster Clients.

SWCast, however, does not provide the promised services. Specifically, and despite its claims, SWCast has completely failed to abide by its obligations under the statutory license, did not pay anything to SoundExchange for years, and, as of the date of this letter, has not even attempted to make any payment to SoundExchange for any period after 2005. SWCast has also never provided the reports of use that are clearly required by the statutory license.

SoundExchange has tried for months to rectify this unacceptable situation with SWCast, to no avail. Accordingly, on March 28, 2011, SoundExchange sent a letter to the Internet service provider for SWCast.net informing the ISP that SWCast.net had failed to comply with the terms of the statutory license, was engaging and/or assisting in infringing activity and had violated the ISP’s terms of service. The letter requested that the ISP disable access to the SWCast.net site, in accordance with the provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and the ISP’s terms of service.

We are writing to you to inform you of SWCast’s failure to comply with the terms of the statutory license. If you wish to rely on the statutory license for your webcasting service going forward, you may decide to submit royalty payments, statements of account and reports of use directly to SoundExchange, or you may decide to rely on a different third party to submit such materials and payments to SoundExchange on your behalf. Please let us know by May 6, 2011 how you intend to proceed. If you wish to submit materials and payments directly to SoundExchange, you may use the rates, forms and other information provided on SoundExchange’s web site at www.soundexchange.com/service-provider/how-do-i-pay/ . Please note that SoundExchange does not endorse any particular third-party service and that – should a third-party service fail to meet its obligations on your behalf going forward – you remain ultimately responsible for your own service’s compliance with the terms of the statutory license.

If you have any questions, please review our web site at www.soundexchange.com or feel free to contact our licensing and enforcement department at 202.559.0555 or L&E@soundexchange.com.

* * *

This letter does not constitute a waiver of our members’ right to recover damages incurred by virtue of any unlicensed transmissions or reproductions of copyrighted sound recordings, and such rights as well as claims for other relief are expressly retained. Also, please be advised that SoundExchange does not make any determination as to whether a service is in fact eligible to use the Statutory License. Instead, the applicable authorization for such services to publicly perform sound recordings derives from federal law, and eligibility for such activity is thus a matter of law. Accordingly, SoundExchange’s acceptance of notices of use, payments, statements of account, or reports of use does not express or imply any acknowledgment that a service is in fact eligible for or otherwise in compliance with the requirements of the Statutory License. If you have questions about whether your service is eligible for the Statutory License, you should consult your own legal counsel for advice.

Regards,

Brad Prendergast
Counsel
SoundExchange, Inc.
1121 Fourteenth St. NW, Suite 700
Washington, DC 20005
Tel: 202-559-0550
Fax: 202-640-5883
email: bprendergast@soundexchange.com

In other words, SW cast is dead. and you’ll need to find an alternate licensing source before may 6, 2011.
Feel free to comment as either a station owner, a listener, or what have you. It’ll be interesting to see your views.

Mirrored from shane and krista's rantings and musings..

so those of you that surf
you tube
may have come across
this
video.
Great video. I love it, hey, I have the original in mp3, somewhere around here.
Who knew that speech synthesizers such as dectalk, the braille n speak, among others
thought the same!
I’m highly amused!
Sing it synthesizers, sing it!
Oh, and because I’m nice, have the
original
for your amusement.

Mirrored from shane and krista's rantings and musings..

Yeah, I use
4 square
when I’m out, why the hell not. but seriously, do we really need it proclaimed as a
Holiday?
Seriously?
Great service, stupid holiday.
Just my opinion.

Mirrored from shane and krista's rantings and musings..

so
amazon.
has launched this great knew service that allows it’s customer to store their music on their services for playing on multiple devices.
I took a look at it, and like the idea, a tad inaccessible, but what you gonna do, right?
Well now, amazon’s facing possible
legal
action because they don’t have the proper licensing.
small note to the record labels.
Your gonna be ass wholes, I’ll stick to my torrents, thanks.
Amazon’s already licensing enough content from you people, they shouldn’t have to buy more because they had the brains to put together a service that allows their customers to, oh my god, take their music with them on whatever device they happen to have hanging arouned.

Mirrored from shane and krista's rantings and musings..

Once again, we here in canada proove we have a better handle on this digital thing than the united states.
We took the year by storm with
18% growth
over the united states impressive 1%.
Oh, wait, it gets better.
In 2009, our digital growth was 38%, and the united states was… what’s that? only 8%? sorry you suck, again.
It’s impressive to see that our digital and non digital markets rank the same, number 7 in the world.
Again, united states? RIAA/MPAA, head out of your asses, right the hell now.

Mirrored from shane and krista's rantings and musings..

So yesterday everyone and their mother was wining about
facebook shutting down
but sadly, it’s
not
so please do be shutting your mouth and do your research before you wine.
More proof that the claim was
false
can be found right
over here
so in short, please get your facts straight before believing things like
this
thanks for coming out to play, though.

Mirrored from shane's rants.

people always ask me, why won’t you buy a mac.
My simple answer, I’m happy with what I’ve got.
If I want to play in the mac environment I’ll crank it up in a VM.
Well, I’ve found another reason.
Reading RSS feeds, we see that an apple
service provider is
suing
a customer for complaining online.

An Apple authorized Service Provider called System Graph is suing a customer who complained online about poor service from them. The customer Dimitrios Papadimitriadis took his iMac to them because he was seeing gray spots on his LED panel.

The Greek company System Graph recommended a full interior cleaning of the iMac and performed the service for Dimitrios. He then got his iMac back and noticed moisture behind the screen and that it still did not work properly and took it back to the repair center. System Graph then told him that they needed to keep his iMac to replace the LED screen and he would be without it for another week.

Dimitrios was now angry and demanded that his iMac be replaced pursuant to Article 540 of the Civil Code and section 5 of Act 2251. System Graph refused saying they were not the original retailer that he purchased the iMac from.

Dimitros has posted the entire story on a forum (Google Translated) and is now being sued by System Graph for 200,000 euros which is approximately $267,000 USD for slandering their good name. He has already gotten a large amount of support on both twitter and the forum.

What I don’t understand is what the company System Graph expects to get out of this suit. They will not be clearing their name by suing a customer, and what will Apple think if one of their Authorized Service Provider is suing an Apple customer. With the explosion of this news all over the web it will undoubtedly bring more attention to the company than they ever wanted.

if that’s the level of service we get from authorized apple dealers? Thanks, but no thanks apple, I’ll stick with windows, even though it does suck.
I’d rather avoid getting sued, when I file a valid complaint.
Apple, time to clean house, k? get rid of that service provider and i *might* consider switching, unlikely, but it had to be said.

Mirrored from shane's rants.

Hello fellow blog readers
It’s been awhile since I posted something of major substance to the blind community here.
On
this blog
We have some very interesting posts to reference.
I’m going to post each of them below, exactly as posted, and I’ll follow each one of them up with my comments.
The first one is entitled

Critical security flaw in JAWS

and was posted on october 16, 2009.

Critical security flaw in JAWS
October 16, 2009 by Tyler Spivey
I have found a critical security flaw in the JAWS Screen reader that allows an attacker to gain full system-level access to

the machine. I have tested this on 32-bit Windows Vista
with JAWS 10.0.1154 and 32-bit Windows 7 with JAWS 11.0.611 Beta.

Instructions:

1. From the Windows logon screen with JAWS running, press insert+f2. Run JAWS Manager will appear.
2. Select Settings Packager, and press ok. Settings Packager will open.
3. From Settings Packager, go to File menu > Open, or press ctrl+o.
4. In the open dialog, type “%windir%\system32\*.exe” into the file name field (without the quotes) and press enter.
5. In the list of files, find cmd. Right click on it, or press the applications key and select Run as Administrator.
A system-level command prompt should open. To get out of it, type exit and press enter, then close the Settings Packager.

my comments on this one
Note that this was during the last public beta build of jaws 11, build 611. I was able to varrify this issue with this build of jaws on all machines I have access to. After build 729 the final release to the public on DVD version of jaws came out on october 19 2009, tyler reported in his next post, see below, had been fixed. but as this next will show, this problem still exists using a different set of varrifiable instructions.
The next post entitled

JAWS security flaw, round 2

has this to say.

JAWS security flaw, round 2
October 19, 2009 by Tyler Spivey
In my First Post, I described a security vulnerability that allowed local users to gain system-level access to a machine. A quick test with JAWS 11.0.729, the release build of JAWS 11, reveals that it is fixed. Here is a slightly different set of instructions that will do the same thing.
1. From the login screen, press insert+j, and navigate to utilities/configuration manager.
2. When configuration manager opens, press control+o.
3. press the Import button. The open dialog will appear.
4. On my Windows 7 test machine, I got an error box that can safely be dismissed. Once done, type %windir%\system32\*.exe into the open dialog.
5. find cmd in the list, and press the applications key on it. Select Run as administrator if it appears. If not, keep following these steps.
6. From cmd’s context menu, pick select. answer no to the question asking you to overwrite settings files, if it comes up.
7. press import, and pick cmd from the list again. Activate the context menu, and select Run as administrator.
If done correctly, you should have an administrative command prompt

I took that set of instructions and again tested them on as many systems as possible, and low and behold, I received an administrative command prompt.
But the ensanity doesn’t end there.
On the same day, this post

Gathering passwords with the JAWS builtin keylogger

hit his blog.
The text is below.

Gathering passwords with the JAWS builtin keylogger
October 19, 2009 by Tyler Spivey
JAWS so helpfully contains a built-in script that logs all keys pressed on the keyboard. This method has a better chance of working on XP than the others. You must have a user account on the machine to make this work.

1. Open Keyboard manager, and open the default file. Add a key to the “ToggleKeyboardLogging” script.

2. Once done, log out of the machine. Your profile will still be loaded. Press that key. The only thing JAWS will say is “enabled”. Log into the machine, then open keystrokes.log in your jaws program directory. all keys pressed will be there, from the last time the script was enabled

At the time of writing, do to my keyboard manager acting up, I have not been able to test this particular vulnerability relating to the keylogger.
At the time this went to press, Freedom scientific LLC,
http://www.freedomscientific.com
was closed.
But the following e-mail was dispatched to both the support and info addresses.

subject: freedom scientific’s response to the security wholes found in jaws 11?

To whom this may concern,
I am writing this message in reference to three blog posts available at:

http://tspivey.wordpress.com/

and who’s text and my comments were placed on my own blog at

http://www.shaned.net/blog

To summarize these posts, it was discovered that not only can system level access to the computer be gained using your software, but your program includes a hidden keylogger that isn’t even documented that logs all keystrokes entered and can gain sensative information from a users computer?
These keys hense are logged to keystrokes.log.
I would like to ask, what is freedom scientifics stand on these issues, and is freedom scientific willing to comment publicly for airing on ACBRadio’s main menu and in other public venues regarding these security wholes?
I Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Shane Davidson

We shall see what comes of this.
until then.
piece yall.

Mirrored from shane's rants!.