Phorm over function?

Phorm is, and will continue to be for some time I think a hugely divisive issue online. BBC have another story today about it, this time having spoken to the various security companies like F-Secure, McAffee etc about whether they will flag a message to the user about whether Phorm has been enabled or not.

Phorm management have come out saying "it's only a cookie", the same as many other sites use to provide tracking (such as Google Analytics), interactivity (such as shopping carts or ID maintenance on numerous retail sites), or a small amount of memory (configuration information for the BBC home page for example).

The difference, though, is that the information is being used differently because data is being shared.

This is what got the Information Commissioners Office's back up because sharing data between companies without users opting in is a breach of the Data Protection Act - "But not if it's anonymous data" say the legal eagles from Phorm - and technically they are correct. This is a case of adopting the letter of the law rather than the spirit of it.

Tim Berners-Lee came out saying he would move ISP if he found out they were using Phorm and whilst I admire his line I fear the vast majority of consumers won't care or rather just won't be bothered to switch - just see how many people actually switch bank or utilitiy companies.

For me this is a case of the slow erosion of privacy at the hands of our ISPs. In a massively competitive market where margins are being squeezed ever tighter, the sale of their user data to Phorm must have seemed like the proverbial golden goose.

It won't take long for someone to cotton onto the flip side of this and market aggressively on the privacy front. Talk Talk made huge inroads as an ISP on the back of their "The Internet should be free" campaign with regard to price (being bundled as it was with other services). Who will be the first to play the "Internet should be private" card and sign up to a deal not using Phorm or other tracking software?

In my cynical world view, I think the security firms have realised this and it is 99% of the reason for why they are looking at it all as the anti-spy, -mal and -virus software is worth billions.

In real terms Phorm isn't actually that clever a piece of technology - most of what has been achieved is in the brokering of deals between ISPs and content owners and then a bit of clever gluing in the middle.

In the end Phorm will either be a great white elephant and just slip off the radar the way many technologies and companies have done or else it may actually be a spur to drive privacy legislation forward in line with our digital behaviour - how long it will take to do this however is the question as government is typically a long way behind technology in terms of law-making.

DVD Jon strikes again

At Technology Treason we love DVD Jon or Jon Lech Johansen as he is more commonly known. This great Norwegian famously broke the DVD encryption put in place by the big firms with the release of some software primarily aimed at allowing DVDs to be played on computers and unlocking the regionality of DVDs and DVD players.

When he released DeCSS he ran afoul of the US DMCA and was almost charged, he was then indicted by Norwegian authorities acting on behalf of the US who actually did go to court twice to try and convict him of hacking. Both times they failed and decided not to go to the Supreme Court.

Imagine our complete amusement in the office when we find out he's now trying it on with Apple via iTunes.

iTunes is a love it or hate it product - if you are part of the Apple / Steve Jobs faithful it is obviously the greatest thing on earth, if you know nothing about technology it's a simple product that allows you to use one of those "fangled new digital music type thingies".

If you are a techie you see it as a proprietary lock in and try and avoid it like the plague. The main issue for most techies is you can't play your music on anything other than your PC / Mac that has iTunes installed and your iPod / iPhone / iTouch.

I've railed against lock in for time immemorial - just a quick count of my personal items puts the following music players at my disposal - mobile phone (x2 because my wife has one that can play music too), MP3 capable stereo, PC (x3 - my office, my home and laptop), PSP, Xbox, a real MP3 player and my Nokia Internet Tablet - 10 devices at my personal disposal that I want to play music from and indeed do play music from.

The thing is, I know how to do all of this so I just push the files around on memory cards or over my network (streaming from my media server for example) onto the various devices. For many people this isn't possible and Apple's enforcement of the iTunes lock ins firmly violate the right I have to play my music (or video) on whatever device I choose at whatever time I choose. I also vote with my wallet and don't buy tunes from Apple.

What DVD Jon has done with his software (available from DoubleTwist for free) is allow you to take files that are locked into iTunes and essentially it plays the file, re-encoding it into a format you can play on other devices (I haven't looked properly but presumably OGG or MP3).

Just to rub salt into the wound he's going to cause Apple and the US music industry he's decided to let you share your files with friends as well. One wonders how long it will be before a writ arrive from the RIAA and Apple... I'm sure they'll be racing to get in first.

So well done Jon - keep up the good work and keep fighting the good fight - media we have legitimately purchased is ours to use on any device we own for our personal use.

Eventually the media industry will wake up and realise where they've been going wrong. Perhaps if EMI had taken notice of the way the world was going they wouldn't have had to cull a couple of thousand staff.

Why industries can still be revolutionised on the web

I'm a bit of a cynic really. Anyone that's trawled through the depths of this blog will know that I have a fairly acid tongue when it comes to technology. I am a walking example of the phrase "familiarity breeds contempt".

One of the projects I've been involved in rececntly has started generating press just by virtue of it being better than anything that has preceded it in this particular industry - I personally would have preferred them to be commenting about the content but any press is good press as they say.

By rights I should have a nice warm fuzzy feeling about having a site people talk about and it's always great to receive recognition for a job well done - especially for my more junior staff who have worked damned hard on the site - however it is disappointing that we still exist in an age online where just applying some good design, good information architecture and some well balanced technology is enough to turn an entire sector on it's head.

Apologists will hold up their hands and say "we're a young form of media - it's going to take time". I however am not in this camp - how much time do we need?

Personally I find it untenable that there are still sites being built using non-standards based HTML and CSS, that sites beyond a couple of holding pages are built using things like Dreamweaver and not content managed, that good structural web design is something that still amazes people rather than being the norm and that information architecture still hasn't found its way to the hearts of 95% of the digital agencies that service the web.

I am constantly lamenting the state of most industries' websites generally. Take a tour around the leisure industry and find a website for a hotel anywhere in the world. Look at most ecommerce sites for even big retailers and certainly go anywhere online in the government, volunteering or political sectors and you are sure to be assaulted by bad design, bad technology and most importantly bad information architecture.

Even five years ago there were excuses that bore merit - changing web standards and platforms, variation of internet connection speeds and different levels of web penetration in different markets. These excuses don't exist any more. And to be honest why was it when I was learning my craft as a developer all those years ago that I was told about things like usability, information design and later information architecture but the junior developers and designers now are not...

This is why there are still industries to revolutionise if you have the contacts, the desire or the contracts to do it. Here is my short list of the biggest problem industries:

1. Tourism and leisure - get some good design and photos, don't use bog stanard templates and for goodness sake stop sending my credit card details in unencrypted email.

2. Holiday / travel booking - get some fuzzy logic in your scripting. If I can't fly tomorrow but I can fly the next day tell me without making me guess. Also make it easy for me to bounce back and forth between different trips without having to start again. Remember all those lectures about how to maintain the state of a system in Computer Science... this is what they were for.

3. Retail - Keep your site updated with accurate stock levels. I also shouldn't have to go to the end of the check out process to find out what the shipping charges are. Do a detection on my regional settings or IP address and take a best guess and say it's a guess. 95% of the time you'll be right and I'll stop having to go back and forth.

4. Service Media - When will you learn that a flash site turns off most people as does a splash page. At least have an alternative HTML site so I can find your phone number / contact email or address. Also remember that table based design was around in 1997 - time to get with the times guys.

5. Volunteering / politics - Yes I know you are on a budget but just because someone you know or your favourite intern just happens to have a copy of dreamweaver doesn't make them a professional web designer or developer. More harm than good is done by casual development - find some budget, find someone aligned to your cause and they'll do it cheaper or for kudos value and develop a site worth looking at.

6. Government - Just because a turd is shiny doen't make it worth anything. Above all make sure someone in the procuring department knows the difference between HTML and CSS and you won't get shafted. Government expenditure online is extortionate for the value achieved. Given the amount of paperwork done for any bit of government work it is amazing that Information Architecture isn't put right to the centre of the brief... how many people using direct.gov.uk would that help?

So get stuck in and lets see some other industries and sectors turned on their head. It's about time the biggest information resource in history got a bit of a spit polish and had all the kinks straightened.

The warm glow of site launch

I've been in this game a long time but there is still nothing sweeter than launching a site after spending a months building it with your team and the client. As a TD, site launch brings a mix of emotion - fatigue from the lack of sleep for the 10 days prior to launch, relief that the site is launching on time and on budget and the client seems happy with it all and finally worry about whether the thing will work as expected, what will everyone else think about it and by god I hope the server doesn't fall over on Day 1 under load...

My grandfather was an engineer for Philips and he described to me the same feelings when they were launching a new product so I have a sense that irrespective of discipline, team based endeavours in engineering always foster the same heady mix of emotion fuelled by relief, adrenaline and fatigue.

Whilst I am an old hand at this within this industry these days, having been here since the dawning, it is great to watch members of the team for whom this is the first of many site launches in their career and their happiness that it is done and their complete pride in their work.

Having seen photos of workers completing railways and other major constructions in the 19th and early 20th century one can't help notice the parallels of young engineers completing a job regardless of whether they are working with steel, glass or lines of code.

Potent messages of impotent industries

I should probably know better than to open my mouth but the obvious has to be stated on this one. For anyone that is netSavvy enough to know what BitTorrent is, the news that TorrentSpy has just lost its court case against the MPAA isn't exactly surprising.

Hearking back all the way to Naptser we seem to have an annual tag teaming of court cases brought about by the RIAA and the MPAA in order to bring these "nasty pirate companies" such as TorrentSpy to heel.

Sites documenting the ins and outs of the case are plentiful so I won't go into detail. (For more info see the BBC report as it's quite neutral)

After every one of these cases new technologies spring up to either to protect people's privacy better or make the technology better (Naptser giving way to Kazaa and others which gave way to the BitTorrent protocol).

The recording and movie industries are worried because they are no longer the gate keepers to content and can charge what they like for it. As such the "dirty pirates" must be prosecuted even if they are, as in TorrentSpy's case, nothing more than a pointer to where the content is being held.

The great amusement in this particular case is that the only reason the MPAA "won" in this instance is because of TorrentSpy's refusal to provide the tracker and user data because this was a breach of Dutch Data Protection laws. As such the MPAA won by default.

Had this truly been a court case, it would have come to light that TorrentSpy provide a framework for people to post tracker data about any files they have on their machines and indeed they don't have copies of any of the physical files. The MPAA probably would have still had them closed down but their legal case was always going to be shaky.

So TorrentSpy will be closed, they will be bankrupted but there will be a dozen smaller companies waiting in the wings to see if they can bleed the MPAA that little bit drier.

You see the big problem here is that the MPAA can't let up now. It doesn't have the mechanics in place to distribute online properly (unlike same music where iTunes and others provide the service) not least because of the antiquated territorial boundaries films get sold by.

As such we'll be seeing another legal case next year - maybe ISOHunt will be next - and another company collapsed but then dozens more set up for a brief stab at providing content to the people.

The quote from the MPAA spokesman is great:

"The court's decision... sends a potent message to future defendants that this egregious behaviour will not be tolerated by the judicial system," John Malcolm, the MPAA's executive vice president and director of worldwide anti-piracy operations, said in a statement.

"The sole purpose of TorrentSpy and sites like it is to facilitate and promote the unlawful dissemination of copyrighted content. TorrentSpy is a one-stop shop for copyright infringement."

What's most amusing is that according to many sources, music being downloaded from "official" sources is almost as much as that being downloaded illegally. Surprising how given the tools, a cessation of hostility towards the users and a price point that accurately reflects the product being sold and the consumer comes to the party once again.

The MPAA still has a lot to learn about the Internet - one wonders how much it will cost them in legal fees in the mean time.

Let the new gaming witch hunt begin

I'm in my thirties now and I've been playing computer games from the age of about four when my dad first brought home the venerable Vic 20 - partly because he was doing a computer science degree at University but mostly because he wanted to tinker.

Through my life I've borne witness to the rise of computer gaming as a media format to rival and now surpass film and I've seen countless witch hunts focus on computer games as being the root of many of society's teenage evils - everything from being the cause of the obesity epidemic to turning children into cold blooded murderers and violent criminals.

I'd like to think that I'm pretty normal - whilst I have my own individual quirks as everyone does, psychological assessments that I've taken for a couple of employers have branded me pretty average on the whole "serial killer" metric. And even though I'm now suffering from the onset of a bit of "middle-agd-spread", as a teenager and child I was pretty skinny.

In thirty years of gaming I'd say I'm "above average" in terms of the amount of time I spent gaming. I wouldn't have hit "compulsive" but as a kid I'd spend a good hour or two a day playing on the computer. Conversely though I'd spend an hour or two playing outside per day though the key factor was that I watched virtually no TV.

You see my parents had a rule in our house - TV or Computer but not both. When my mum thought we had been spending a bit too much time in front of either she'd pull the plug out of the wall and summarily kick us out the door with the instructions that "it was a nice day - go enjoy it" - this held true even if it was raining or the middle of winter!

So, in what seems like a biennial event another review of gaming has been started - the Byron Review this time is being headed up by the very smart Dr Tanya Byron - an expert in Child Behaviour (and TV personality to add some celebrity to the proceedings). Whilst the review is supposed to cover the full range of technology, Gaming and the Internet are always the first things to crop up as being responsible for the decline of morality amongst our youth.

What won't be taken into account properly though in my opinion is how the role of the parent has changed in relation to these technologies. My parents looking back on it were pretty good (though I know I didn't think it at the time) in policing our internet and gaming activities (our family had access to the internet through a BBS at my dad's Uni).

The modern parent has completely divested themselves of any responsibility for policing their childs' activities. This isn't just limited to gaming and the internet but is a wider social epidemic we are starting to see the symptoms of - everything from anti-social behaviour to academic performance.

I know of adults who have bought games for their children aged under 10 that are clearly marked as being 18 certified. All because of pester power and the guilt that they have over not seeing their child because they have to go off and work all day. What scares me is the "oh well" attitude of these parents - and the fact that because the console is in their kid's bedroom they don't see the actual content themselves. For me games were played in the living room in full view of the rest of the house.

In the face of this blatant irresponsibilty from parents, what can the games industry do? They've created a product they have submitted to the classification board, risking censorship and potentially loss through narrowing their market but then the parents ignore it and go buy the game for their child anyway.

After the fact, parents are the ones calling for tougher regulation and a realignment of the game makers moral compass when it comes to producing the content but it is their failure and own moral ambiguity that has caused the problem in the first place.

For all the public outcries about video game related violence and exposure to sexual content, there is deafening silence regarding the lack of parenting skills to avoid exactly this situation. My parents could do it as could those of my friends - how have we lost that skill in a single generation?

DRMed for Life

In the news recently has been the whole thing about not only the copy protection on HD-DVD and Blu-Ray disks being cracked but people posting digg links with decryption keys in them. I can understand Digg's position in removing said posts until the community kicked off and they then decided they'll go down with the ship if they got prosecuted. Hurrah for someone over there seeing sense.

One part of my brain always goes "Hooray for the hackers" whenever we hear stories about DRM being hacked in whatever guise it has been created. Another part of my brain, probably the more rational side I guess, does kick in afterwards and say that putting these things out in the wild will enable more software / media piracy and will incur costs for the companies that produce it which will make them either raise costs or step up counter-piracy methods. I never get to the "woe is me" stage like most media company execs do as they are truly multi-billion dollar organisations so it's hardly going to come out of the mail boy's pay cheque and they are unlikely to go bust.

What I do question properly though is the rationale that got us here in the first place. Since the 60s with tape-to-tape reels starting to replace vinyl records, music, film and software piracy has got bigger and bigger. What has happened though is nothing short of an arms race. Consistent through this entire arms race have been three key points:

1. That me, or anyone else, once they have bought a product has the right to play or use it for their own personal enjoyment whenever they see fit. This is the argument that most consumers will play - I might by a CD album but I want to play it on my MP3 player. I might buy a DVD but I want to play it on my Linux laptop as well as on my TV.

2. Companies that produce consumable media assume that anyone that wants to copy a product is inherently up to no good and they are now labelled as pirates and are probably taking the music / film / software and selling it in backstreet market stalls.

3. The profligacy of piracy is directly related to the first two points and how policed piracy is within the community.

One can directly see that paid for knock off copies of movies and music is completely against the law as you are selling someone's work and is tantamount to counterfeiting. However the framework for dealing with these people exists within the law and we are starting to see this go down.

The media companies will tell you that it's because of their anti-copy protection, however in reality it is because of better policing and it being viewed as being a black market operation and it having been historically a move away from "hard crimes" that has occured over the last 20 years.

This argument doesn't wash at all with consumers. Once I purchase a peice of media it is mine to use how I want on whatever device I want.

The barriers that are being put up by the media companies in their zero tolerance to consumers is assuring their position as the "big bad ogre" in all of this. Were they to engage with the consumers who are most likely to want to move content from one form to another they would probably be able to reach a solution.

Indeed were they to strip all DRM from their content altogether and then spend the money on producing better content or else supporting better policing they would probably turn a larger profit.

In the words of Nixon, "I am not a crook" - but I do want to watch Spiderman 3 when it comes out possibly on my TV from my XBOX, on my Linux Laptop, Windows Media centre and my PDA. At the moment I'll be lucky if one of those four work so I probably won't buy it at all.