Google is rocking RICO, potentially, as are other Search Engines and ISPs. One would think Metallica’s suit citing RICO in 2000 versus Napster also naming several universities in the suit claiming the universities violated Metallica’s music copyright by students illegally file sharing Metallica songs via Napster access through university servers would be lesson enough for Congress to get it that Fair Use does not constitute a defense against copyright infringement.
Used to be telephone calls routed through a telephone company had implications on Fraud conducted through the wires. ID theft alone climaxes, annually, way above 1.9 million…Fair Use? Safe Habor? Theft is theft. Wires? Fibres? Whats the diff when it comes to Theft by Techno Titan? Congress is moving to slow in its efforts to get ahead of the Copyright Identity and Intellectual Property Ball to stop it in its tracks. One would think the news of Legislators and Staffers Information stored in someplace you don’t know waiting for another Snowden to happen is lesson enough to learn Aesop’s Fable of the Scorpion and the Fox (www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2cu5HauS1E)
But, gosh darn, if Ben Franklin didn’t it right hundreds of years ago. The Founding Father didn’t need to know about Google. Ben Franklin knew about people. “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
18 USC § 1343 – Fraud by wire, radio, or television
“ Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings, signs, signals, pictures, or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. If the violation occurs in relation to, or involving any benefit authorized, transported, transmitted, transferred, disbursed, or paid in connection with, a presidentially declared major disaster or emergency (as those terms are defined in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122), or affects a financial institution, such person shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both…”
Google didn’t tell people in 1979, the Master Plan was to capture people’s Identity, Property and the People’s ways to make a living or that Google intended to talk about putting chips in peoples brains and such. In 1979, Google said in a court case “a person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turns over to third parties.” The Court said people’s communications are processed by the recipient’s ECS, electronic communication service, provider in the course of delivery.
Consumer Watchdog director John Simpson says “Google has finally admitted they don’t respect privacy. People should take them at their word; if you care about your email correspondents’ privacy don’t use Gmail.” Courts explained in using the telephone, a person “voluntarily convey(s) numerical information to the telephone company and ‘expose(s)’ that information to its equipment in the ordinary course of business.” The difference between the phone and the Internet is that while a person conveys their email adress to the Search Engine and ISP, while THAT information is being exposed voluntarily the expectation was not their written content and attachments were being exposed then taken for profit making.
A four year old “WATCH THIS alert” revived on the Internet is making Email Rounds again. The warning focuses on Privacy Loss and Risk of Cell personal pics sent from a Cell Phone. SNOPES the online “rumor has it’ detective (www.snopes.com) confirmed it is true that Cell phone and PDA photos posted online give your life away. The security alert focuses consumers on disengaging automatic geotagging information, included in cell phone pictures, that once sent then posted online, can have the geotagging data in the photos read by anyone. Even criminals. Even Search Engines and ISPs who bundle and sell users, human trafficking, to sites like dating websites, www.spokeo.com ‘like and others. Hear anything about the vascular bump in Identity Theft recently? Javelin Strategies released their “2013 IDENTITY FRAUD REPORT: Data Breaches Becoming a Treasure Trove for Fraudsters” (www.javelinstrategy.com/brochure/276) Now you have a bit of an insight where the ID Bump is happening, lightning fast on a curve up, as the lure for Capitol invested into software and Jump-On-Board-Free-Apps startups are hitting their stride for Venture Capitalists and Investors. You also know another piece of technology’s Bigger Picture like why newer technology like Smartphones are coming without removable backs. The big bad VOODOO DADDY want to know where you are always. Identity Fraud is going to continue to increase.
Geotagging should scare consumers, globally.
A person’s identity that used to be given away in the malls for that chance to win that Brand New Car or two week free gym membership. My, from Mall to Mobile, how advertising has changed. Not! Its all about data capture. The high price for free e-books, free APPS is that photos of Johnny and Jane sent to Grandma from and/or to PDAs are telling Persons Unknown where you are, what you look like, who you know, where you are and where you are going. And where Grandma is…too. Persons Unknown are collecting your geodata – Latitude and Longitude- saved in the metadata of the pictures. That APP? Comes with a very steep price.
The Warning Alert on cell phones being the GPS that gives your whereabouts away wasn’t 100% accurate. The E-Alert is wider. E-caution is in the Cards, the sandisk cards and other cards that are inserted into devices. All those phone numbers, passwords, birthdates, calendar reminders, diaries stored in the Cell Phone? One would have to be naïve to not admit there is an APP for accessing all that too. At risk too.
There is a remedy. One word…
Metadata is data about data. Metadata is embedded in a file containing accurate information it tells to computer programs. We never used to see Metadata. As a news photographer, I knew I was typing information into my Images that I sent to my Agency so my Image editors could see what I was shooting, where, who, why, when along with a three line pitch and then naively, embedding my adress and my European bank details into the File Info too. We didn’t need to talk in the phone moreso in an industry where seconds count in the race to post ‘News’ before anyone else. I was changing zipcodes, often, when I was shooting International Horseracing (http://animalfair.com/and-theyre-off-the-best-of-horseracing), Royals, boxing and Arnold gripping Maria’s cheeks (yes, those ones… ewww… but it was news) And then one day, OMG, a DC decade later, my confidential private life details were on Flickr along with my photo of Don King. Another day another story about Chilling Effects and DMCA Take Down notices violating an author’s copyright to their correspondence and emails but one day, my Confidential Take Down notice was online too with dedacted information gathered from information that changed when I did- 90210 for the UK, plus.
Metadata is a foreign language. Like English or Spanish or French, metadata must be learned before it can bewritten. Metadata cannot write itself. The ‘find and steal that Metadata’ command is programmed telling software to recognize and/or unlock information like the camera used, the software was used to create documents, how things are encoded, the dates and who the creator of the file was, camera settings (ISO, Aperture, Flash, lens type), processing software and location. As a photographer, EACH AND EVERY of my JPEG (and accidentally TIF) images went out to my Agency with my ‘© Carrie Devorah’ embedded in the photo. Let me repeat. EACH AND EVERY left my PC. How can I prove I did not release Orphan Works (http://carriedevorah.wordpress.com/2013/07/26/carrie-devorahs-orphan-works-comment-filed-with-the-register-of-copyrights/)? By producing the backups of my images that show my images were not released to the Internet scraped of my Metadata details as Technology Search Engines, ISPs etc are intentionally doing to orphan 2D IP and ID.
Now, I know we weren’t born yesterday, either, yet understanding HOW my Copyright got scraped off my image and how my images were getting everywhere many without my ‘© Carrie Devorah’ has been a headscratcher. I am a new girl to Ruby, learning to Code because I want to understand more of this coding puzzlement. Piecing info together here and there I learned about webcrawlers and spybots and one day it hit me. Lord, I wish I could pull back EVERY image I sent out from around the world, at least to get my data out of the Image back and lock my Copyright symbol on the image front. Grin, check me out on Google images. Thousands of my images there all without license in defiance of Fair Use and Safe Harbor, EVEN images I personally defaced by putting my Copyright notice across my image front.
So, here is how it goes…. Things every photographer knows but didn’t quite understand despite each and every time we did image rescue or recovery off of our Digital Cards. Metadata data doesn’t go away. It comes back to life on the internet with each new APP that comes along, it seems. Exchangeable Image File format, Exif, is standard use in Digital photographic device… Smartphones, iPads, cell phones, digital cameras. A good explanation can be read here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exchangeable_image_file_format) The Exif records the date and time the photo was taken along with other data photographers inset into the image. Professional photographers imbed information stored as metada such as their copyright along with who they photographed, when and where, addresses payments are sent to or if working internationally where the paycheck is sent to. Criminals exploit the photo Metadata information as well, to find out to the people on the photo in the world. If you upload a geotagged photo to the Internet then anyone with the ability to view the photo can check the location the photo was taken. After all Facebook Algorithms guess where we live and sites like www.spokeo.com bundle our ‘Nibbles and Bits’ together selling access to our data.
Where and how personal photographs are posted on the Internet makes a difference. Contrary to what the news video linked above suggests, some photo-sharing and social media web sites (such as Facebook and Twitter) automatically strip some or all of the Exif metadata from uploaded pictures. They claim they do so in order to protect privacy. In fact, they are creating Orphan Works referred to above, part of the Internet Association expressed agenda to “We want to show Congress that the Internet impacts every city, every district, and every state in every economic sector — from Main Street to rural America. The Internet is not just Silicon Valley…” Michael Beckerman, President & CEO- “Every day, the Internet provides access to information and personalized content to hundreds of millions of people around the globe – free of charge and free of political interference….Internet Freedom.” How best to Free of Charge 2D IP, Intellectual Property and ID, Identity, make it ones self.
Game. Set. Match.
Enforce legislation that anyone or any entity who does not leave Exif metadata intact, participates in removing Identity from others property is under 18 USC § 1343 – Fraud by wire, radio, or television “ Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings, signs, signals, pictures, or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.”
So in the same way the metadata valuable for photographers organizing/archiving/stating ownership claim is, as usual, has bad that comes with the good. Metadata is valuable to thieves too for algorithms, demographics and stats analysis, that the everyday person (which Legislators are too) doesn’t know about until it is too late.
Bubbling to the surface, are solutions for Legislators to employ to stave Technology’s crush to remove Arts ownership 2D IP, ID and Commerce towards mitigating © Copyright theft. The solutions are not new. The solutions just need to be enforced. Legislators must defer to Title XVIII, the Criminal Code, as Legislators, not just on the Judiciary, adress Title XVII. The conversation on Capitol Hill has been going round and round about Privacy, Copyright and Technology. Theft is theft AND covering up a crime is moreso aggregious than just stealing. Why is taking metadata out of a JPEG less of a crime than taking license plates off a car at the Chop Shop or grinding an owners name off a piece of silver or a bike? It isnt except in the Judiciary perview under the Technology push to change the Founding Fathers gift of Property Rights. Expand RICO to include FIBRES, the Cloud and other such technological advancements since one thing isnt going to change. Taking what belongs to others is theft.
RICO RESOURCE FACILITATOR:
(1) “racketeering activity” means (A) any act or threat involving murder, kidnapping, gambling, arson, robbery, bribery, extortion, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act), which is chargeable under State law and punishable by imprisonment for more than one year; (B) any act which is indictable under any of the following provisions of title 18, United States Code: Section 201 (relating to bribery), section 224 (relating to sports bribery), sections 471, 472, and 473 (relating to counterfeiting), section 659 (relating to theft from interstate shipment) if the act indictable under section 659 is felonious, section 664 (relating to embezzlement from pension and welfare funds), sections 891–894 (relating to extortionate credit transactions), section 1028 (relating to fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents), section 1029 (relating to fraud and related activity in connection with access devices), section 1084 (relating to the transmission of gambling information), section 1341 (relating to mail fraud), section 1343 (relating to wire fraud), section 1344 (relating to financial institution fraud), section 1351 (relating to fraud in foreign labor contracting), section 1425 (relating to the procurement of citizenship or nationalization unlawfully), section 1426 (relating to the reproduction of naturalization or citizenship papers), section 1427 (relating to the sale of naturalization or citizenship papers), sections 1461–1465 (relating to obscene matter), section 1503 (relating to obstruction of justice), section 1510 (relating to obstruction of criminal investigations), section 1511 (relating to the obstruction of State or local law enforcement), section 1512 (relating to tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant), section 1513 (relating to retaliating against a witness, victim, or an informant), section 1542 (relating to false statement in application and use of passport), section 1543 (relating to forgery or false use of passport), section 1544 (relating to misuse of passport), section 1546 (relating to fraud and misuse of visas, permits, and other documents), sections 1581–1592 (relating to peonage, slavery, and trafficking in persons).,  section 1951 (relating to interference with commerce, robbery, or extortion), section 1952 (relating to racketeering), section 1953 (relating to interstate transportation of wagering paraphernalia), section 1954 (relating to unlawful welfare fund payments), section 1955 (relating to the prohibition of illegal gambling businesses), section 1956 (relating to the laundering of monetary instruments), section 1957 (relating to engaging in monetary transactions in property derived from specified unlawful activity), section 1958 (relating to use of interstate commerce facilities in the commission of murder-for-hire), section 1960 (relating to illegal money transmitters), sections 2251, 2251A, 2252, and 2260 (relating to sexual exploitation of children), sections 2312 and 2313 (relating to interstate transportation of stolen motor vehicles), sections 2314 and 2315 (relating to interstate transportation of stolen property), section 2318 (relating to trafficking in counterfeit labels for phonorecords, computer programs or computer program documentation or packaging and copies of motion pictures or other audiovisual works), section 2319 (relating to criminal infringement of a copyright), section 2319A (relating to unauthorized fixation of and trafficking in sound recordings and music videos of live musical performances), section 2320 (relating to trafficking in goods or services bearing counterfeit marks), section 2321 (relating to trafficking in certain motor vehicles or motor vehicle parts), sections 2341–2346 (relating to trafficking in contraband cigarettes), sections 2421–24 (relating to white slave traffic), sections 175–178 (relating to biological weapons), sections 229–229F (relating to chemical weapons), section 831 (relating to nuclear materials), (C) any act which is indictable under title 29, United States Code, section 186 (dealing with restrictions on payments and loans to labor organizations) or section 501 (c) (relating to embezzlement from union funds), (D) any offense involving fraud connected with a case under title 11 (except a case under section 157 of this title), fraud in the sale of securities, or the felonious manufacture, importation, receiving, concealment, buying, selling, or otherwise dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act), punishable under any law of the United States, (E) any act which is indictable under the Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act, (F) any act which is indictable under the Immigration and Nationality Act, section 274 (relating to bringing in and harboring certain aliens), section 277 (relating to aiding or assisting certain aliens to enter the United States), or section 278 (relating to importation of alien for immoral purpose) if the act indictable under such section of such Act was committed for the purpose of financial gain, or (G) any act that is indictable under any provision listed in section 2332b (g)(5)(B);
(2) “State” means any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, any territory or possession of the United States, any political subdivision, or any department, agency, or instrumentality thereof;
(3) “person” includes any individual or entity capable of holding a legal or beneficial interest in property;
(4) “enterprise” includes any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity, and any union or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity;
(5) “pattern of racketeering activity” requires at least two acts of racketeering activity, one of which occurred after the effective date of this chapter and the last of which occurred within ten years (excluding any period of imprisonment) after the commission of a prior act of racketeering activity;
(6) “unlawful debt” means a debt
(A) incurred or contracted in gambling activity which was in violation of the law of the United States, a State or political subdivision thereof, or which is unenforceable under State or Federal law in whole or in part as to principal or interest because of the laws relating to usury, and
(B) which was incurred in connection with the business of gambling in violation of the law of the United States, a State or political subdivision thereof, or the business of lending money or a thing of value at a rate usurious under State or Federal law, where the usurious rate is at least twice the enforceable rate;
(7) “racketeering investigator” means any attorney or investigator so designated by the Attorney General and charged with the duty of enforcing or carrying into effect this chapter;
(8) “racketeering investigation” means any inquiry conducted by any racketeering investigator for the purpose of ascertaining whether any person has been involved in any violation of this chapter or of any final order, judgment, or decree of any court of the United States, duly entered in any case or proceeding arising under this chapter;
(9) “documentary material” includes any book, paper, document, record, recording, or other material; and
(10) “Attorney General” includes the Attorney General of the United States, the Deputy Attorney General of the United States, the Associate Attorney General of the United States, any Assistant Attorney General of the United States, or any employee of the Department of Justice or any employee of any department or agency of the United States so designated by the Attorney General to carry out the powers conferred on the Attorney General by this chapter. Any department or agency so designated may use in investigations authorized by this chapter either the investigative provisions of this chapter or the investigative power of such department or agency otherwise conferred by law.