The artist still known as a tosser

Prince threatens to sue his fans over online images

He has threatened to sue thousands of his biggest fans for breach of copyright, provoking an angry backlash and claims of censorship. His lawyers have forced his three biggest internet fansites to remove all photographs, images, lyrics, album covers and anything linked to the artist's likeness.

A coalition named Prince Fans United, representing Housequake.com, Princefans.com and Prince.org, has been formed by the website organisers to fight back. They said they would contest the action on the basis that it was an attempt "to stifle all critical commentary about Prince". They added that the "cease and desist" notices went as far as calling for the removal of pictures taken by fans of their Prince tattoos and their vehicles carrying Prince-inspired licence plates.

Yeah, sue the very people who made you a success you moronic midget. Personally I would be happy to never see your silly, pouting mug ever again.

Via J-Walk

Archimedes, eat ya heart out

How a bowl of warm water can help you buy a bra that fits better

Shiver me timbers

Pirates, Or Merely Devoted Fans?

A study conducted on 2000 Canadians has shown that most people download songs off the Internet simply because they want to try-before-buy or because they were unable to find this music in their local stores.

Yet, the recording industry is playing deaf, dumb and blind, endlessly trying to prove that sharing, by its very nature, is bad.

The two researchers at the University of London that conducted the study for the Canadian Government estimated that the effect of one additional P2P download per month is actually an increase in music purchasing by 0.44 CDs per year.

In other words, P2P sharing (or pirating, however you want to put it) increases music sales.

This is in stark contrast with the usual drabble from the record industry which often has insane models of calculating P2P’s “damages”, counting every downloaded song as a direct loss in sales.

Do not pass Go, do not receive an education, go straight to jail

Queen's Speech 'will raise school age to 18'

Ministers are set to raise the school leaving age in England to 18, triggering another devolution flashpoint with Scotland, where the legal age is to remain at 16. Teenagers south of the Border who leave school before 17 in 2013 or 18 in 2015 will face fines and ASBOs if they do not go into training or take up an apprenticeship, Ed Balls, the Schools Secretary, said yesterday.

What a perfect solution. Having failed these youngsters after having them for twelve years, full time, the answer is lock them in to the same system for another couple of years. Then, having utterly failed to deliver an education to them we are going to fine them, criminalize them and, eventually, imprison them. What a load of...Balls!

I will wear purple, and blog!

Blogging granny a hit with surfers

"Today it's my birthday and my grandson, who is very stingy, gave me a blog." So reads the first entry by one of the world's oldest Webloggers, Maria Amelia Lopez, who, at the age of 95, has surprised herself by a sudden conversion from Web-illiterate to cybercelebrity.

"At first I thought a blog was just a type of paper notebook," said Lopez, a great grandmother. "When I saw my grandson using the Internet, it caught my attention. I said to myself 'What's this? You can find out about anything. I want an Internet!'" With 60,000 regular readers so far, Lopez's homely mix of memory and chat, available at amis95.blogspot.com, attracts regular readers from around the world and has put her back in touch with the younger generation in a way she had never imagined.

"No one pays any attention to old women any more. Not many people love us. But I was surprised by the Internet, because young people who were 18 years of age, or 14 or 15, tell me about their lives and what they think and ask my advice," said Lopez.

Why a State of Emergency?

Tariq Ali: Pakistan Sinks Deeper into Night

Why? They feared that a Supreme Court judgement due next week might make it impossible for Musharraf to contest the elections. The decision to suspend the Constitution was taken a few weeks ago. Benazir Bhutto, was informed and left the country. She is reportedly on her way back. Till now she has offered no comment on the new martial law, despite the fact that a senior leader of her party, Aitzaz Ahsan has been arrested for denouncing the coup. Intoxicated by the incense of power she might now discover that it Remains as elusive as ever...

The two institutions targeted by the Emergency are the judiciary and the lively network of independent TV stations, many of whose correspondents supply information that can never be gleaned from politicians...

If the constitution remains in suspension for more than three months then Musharraf himself might be pushed aside by the Army and a new strongman put in place. Or it could be that the aim of the operation was limited to a cleansing of the Supreme Court and controlling the media. That is what Musharraf indicated in his broadcast to the nation. In which case a totally rigged election becomes a certainty next January. Whatever the case Pakistan's long journey to the end of the night continues.

Gotcha!

Analytical Blogging again

Apparently there's not enough 'analytical blogging' going, on to which my response is - thank fuck! UK blogs are accused of being just too tabloid.  Rubbish! What a terrible slur.

Miscarriage of justice

New appeal in Dando case to start

I watched a programme on TV last night about the conviction of Barry George for the murder of Jill Dando and I was astonished by just how weak the original case against him was. The programme also revealed that misgivings by the forensic service about the interpretation of firearms evidence given at his trial were not revealed at his first appeal in 2002. One expert on the programme claimed that had this not been about Jill Dando the case against Barry George wouldn't even have gone to trial, so weak was the evidence against him.

The speck of firearm residue found in his pocket was considered by the forensic expert who gave evidence at his original trial as 'neutral' and of no evidential value. Another expert called it 'worthless'. All the witnesses claimed that the man they saw had long hair - Barry George's barber (who wasn't called at his trial) asserts that George's hair was always short. A woman who saw, for a few seconds, a man acting strangely over four hours before the murder and who failed to pick out George in a line-up nevertheless picked him out from a series of photographs seventeen months later! It was revealed that a photograph which George had denied ever seeing, thus leading to him being accused of lying, had been taken years earlier and had only been printed after George's arrest when police found rolls of undeveloped film in his flat. And on it goes...

Given that George lost his first appeal and was refused leave to appeal to the House of Lords I suspect that the Court of Appeal this week won't find it in them to exonerate him completely and show up the investigation and trial for what they were but will, instead, order a retrial. A retrial which would certainly return a verdict of not guilty. Given the collapse of most of the evidence I think it would be scandalous for the CPS to proceed with another trial which they have no chance of winning but I suspect they will keep quiet and do nothing and the police will suggest that they are not seeking anyone else in relation to the killing leaving both the police and the CPS free to maintain the impression that Barry George got away with murder.

There are many similarities here with the case of Colin Stagg and the murder of Rachel Nickell in 1992. Fortunately for Stagg the trial judge threw the case out but for years Stagg was openly regarded by press (particularly The Daily Mail) and police as the killer until a fresh investigation discovered DNA evidence which completely exonerated him. 

Sunday Variety

From the legendary Count Arthur Strong

Gazaesque

Palestine Chronicle - Kris Petersen: ‘Welcome To Gaza!’

As I discovered, getting into Gaza is a convoluted, Kafkaesque process and is virtually impossible if you are unable to provide a “good” reason to the Israel Defense Force; indeed, many qualified people are barred from entry without explanation almost as a matter of routine. Under the terms of the 2005 Disengagement Plan, Israel retains total control over Gaza’s borders (including surveillance of the Rafah crossing at the Egyptian border), Gaza’s coastline and airspace. This means that the final say over an individual’s entrance into the Strip, Palestinian or not, is in Israel’s hands.

Inevitably my choice of destination led to some special treatment from Israeli officials. When I arrived at Ben Gurion airport, for example, I was immediately flagged by customs officials and questioned extensively about my intentions and contacts in Gaza. “Why are you interested in going to Gaza? Were you coerced into coming? Do you hate Israel? Are you planning to criticize the Israeli military? Were you coerced into coming? Haven’t you packed a little light for your stay? Do you support Hamas?” And once again for good luck: “So you were coerced into coming?”

Surfing it ain't

The Smirking Chimp - Waterboarding: Don't Ask. Don't Tell. SHOW.

There seem to be folks on the right who remain unclear on the concept -- not the least among them, Attorney General nominee, Michael Mukasey.

When asked during his confirmation hearings if water-boarding was torture, Mukasey said he couldn't really say, since he was not familiar with the details of the technique. Which is a kinda hard to swallow since the technique has been described in excruciating detail in the popular press since it first burst into the national consciousness a couple of years ago...

But all the publicity surrounding water-boarding seems to have left at least some public officials on the right unclear on whether it's torture or not torture. Some seem to feel that water-boarding is no more cruel than forcing a cat to take a bath.

Which is why I've concluded the only solution is to stop telling and start showing. And what better way to get a handle on the concept than for those who support the technique to step up to the plate and declare, "I say water-boarding is not a form of torture, as described by national and international law. And to prove it I am submitting myself to the process.

See also: Top US legal adviser refuses to rule out 'torture' technique

Obscuring realities

Imperial denialism

...there is a way of talking about Iraq without mentioning the genocidal levels of murder there, without mentioning the death squads and the torture chambers and the corrupt autocracy behind the facade of elections, and that happens to be the way that most media commentators discuss it. In light of this, a reader or viewer might be expected to accept wholly absurd conclusions about Iraq being a 'failure' or the empire being a force for good in the world, despite the little screw-up here and there.

Similarly, one could discuss the coup in Haiti without describing the genocidaires, the French-American record of enslaving the country, the despicable crew of sweatshop owners and murderers who supported the coup, even the fact that it was a coup. One could discuss the violent repression in Haiti as an extension of aid offered by a desperate international community befuddled by the country's refusal to pull itself together. It so happens that this is how it has mostly been discussed. And so on.