EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

03.25.14

Microsoft Partners/Allies Are Attacking Net Neutrality

Posted in Apple, DRM, Microsoft at 3:16 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Transmitting DRM-emcumbered and proprietary software-bound packets first

Vintage TV

Summary: Those who advocate DRM and proprietary software dislike net neutrality, as demonstrated by Apple’s and Netflix’s opposition to the principle of packet delivery without discrimination

Microsoft has, for a long time in fact, been an opponent of net neutrality, based on its actions (we covered those). No company wants to be seen as anti-net neutrality, so they all pretend to be for it while their actions speak for themselves.

Netflix is clearly against net neutrality based on its actions and a reader sent us this article about Netflix’s CEO, noting that “ISPs are already getting paid for both ends of the connection. What ISPs are trying to get now is paying twice at both ends, that is to say collecting four ways for the same connection.”

The corporate press recently ran the story “Netflix Just Opened the Door to Paying ISPs More Access Fees” [1]. Disregard the spin and PR from the CEO of Netflix [2,3], who is basically claiming that he is against what he is doing. Also ignore the nonsense from AT&T [4] and other cable companies [5]; they just fear client alienation, so they tell to the public (existing or prospective customers) what the public wants to hear while doing exactly the opposite.

Apple, being Apple, is a lot more arrogant and selfish, hardly ever trying to hide its real agenda. Apple not only helps Microsoft [6] but it also helps cable companies kill net neutrality [7,8]. Apple is following the lead of Netflix in this case, ending what we once knew as a network which treats packets equally.

Related/contextual items from the news:

  1. Netflix Just Opened the Door to Paying ISPs More Access Fees

    Netflix (NFLX) Chief Executive Officer Reed Hastings is seeking your help to keep Internet service providers from charging higher fees to stream all the video its customers watch. In the process, he may have just opened his wallet to any Cox, Time Warner Cable (TWC), Verizon Communications (VZ), or AT&T (T) across the nation.

  2. Netflix CEO lashes out against ISPs like Comcast that do not follow ‘net neutrality’
  3. Netflix CEO Slams US ISPs Over Net Neutrality

    Netflix CEO Reed Hastings says it reluctantly pays US ISPs for interconnection fees, but argues providers shouldn’t be allowed to abuse their position

  4. AT&T promises to lower your Internet bill if FCC kills net neutrality

    If the Federal Communications Commission lets Internet service providers charge Web companies like Netflix for faster delivery of content to consumers, AT&T will lower its customers’ Internet bills. That’s what AT&T said Friday in a filing in the FCC’s “Protecting and Promoting the Open Internet” proceeding.

  5. Level 3 and Cogent ask FCC for protection against ISP “tolls”

    Network operators Level 3 and Cogent Communications today urged the Federal Communications Commission to prevent Internet service providers from charging what they deem to be excessive fees for interconnection.

  6. Windows 8 picks up an unlikely ally in Apple

    Windows 8 picks up an unlikely ally in Apple

    Apple is dropping Windows 7 support in Boot Camp — and Mac-based Windows users won’t like the reasons why

  7. Apple courts Comcast for net neutrality-evading TV service

    GADGET MAKER Apple and ISP Comcast are planning a joint venture for streaming TV service, in a move that might ramp up the net neutrality debate.

    According to the Wall Street Journal, the companies are in talks to create a service that will provide the Apple TV with a direct connection to a new video on demand (VOD) channel, bypassing internet congestion that could otherwise cause buffering or pixelation to customers.

  8. Apple in talks with Comcast for priority services for its set-top box

    We recently reported Netflix CEO, Reed Hastings talk about the essence of net neutrality saying that ISPs such as AT&T and Comcast should not restrict, influence, or otherwise meddle with the choices consumers make. If reports are to be believed, Apple is talking to Comcast to get priority services for its set-top box that will bypass any congestion created by internet traffic.

03.18.14

Xbox Last: Chief Product Officer Abruptly Quits Microsoft

Posted in DRM, Hardware, Microsoft at 2:16 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

In Sovietised West, Xbox watches YOU!

Xbox

Summary: Xbox “One” so big a failure — not just a surveillance device — that its chiefs continue to jump ship, leaving Microsoft in disarray

THERE has been an exceptionally major departure of high-level staff inside Microsoft and we mostly covered it years ago (well before Ballmer stepped down). These days we cover additions to this list only when readers send us links such as this one, which says that the Xbox Chief Product Officer is quitting Microsoft and canceling his appearance at GDC. “Infecting wireless Hi-Fi and audio company Sonos now,” says our reader, alluding to a culture of moles such as Elop.

Xbox-related departures are frequent and many. Recent posts noted that Xbox One was failing to sell. It is far behind the competition, which almost doubles it in terms of sales (Sony easily holds the crown).

Why would anyone at all ever buy anything that’s branded “Xbox”? It’s not only burning down houses, killing people inside those houses (due to design flaws in Xbox 360). It’s an abusive piece of DRM in a box. Those who buy Xbox are in essence paying for what we know to be surveillance equipment that spies on the buyer [1, 2, 3] for various governments such as Britain’s. If more people knew what Xbox is really doing, then nobody would be foolish enough to buy it anymore and the whole product line would have to be cancelled, just like Microsoft’s many failed platforms for mobile.

02.24.14

Netflix Killed the Free Web With DRM, Now Kills Net Neutrality

Posted in DRM at 8:00 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Microsoft’s close partner, Netflix, is quickly turning the Internet into another Big Cable/Telecom-controlled DRM streaming conduit

WHEN Net Neutrality was dying in the US many people wondered why Netflix did almost nothing in response. Well, just like Google, Netflix should not be assumed to be an advocate for Net Neutrality. Both companies, along with Microsoft, promote DRM on the Web. Google pretty much stopped fighting for Net Neutrality several years ago. All Google cared about was itself. If it could make the policies work out for its business model (e.g. not discriminating among users of YouTube), then why should it bother with the interests of the vast majority of the population? The same goes for privacy and the so-called ‘resistance’ NSA faces from Facebook, Google, Microsoft, et al.

According to new reports, Comcast and Netflix sort of collude against Net Neutrality (even though the corporate press will not say it like that). “Comcast,” says the New York Times, “the country’s largest cable and broadband provider, and Netflix, the giant television and movie streaming service, announced an agreement Sunday in which Netflix will pay Comcast for faster and more reliable access to Comcast’s subscribers.”

This is appalling. So Netflix is now actively helping Big Cable/Telecom end Net Neutrality. Suffice to say, the bias from the press of Rupert Murdoch continues shamelessly [1], comparing the situation of Net Neutrality to “Traffic Jam” (right there in the headline) while the Internet’s Net Neutrality is not even mentioned (in the whole article). The corporate press (all of it from New York in this case) is now telling us [2] that Tom Wheeler, the mole inside the FCC, is going to write new rules. Perhaps it’s all about normalising this new status quo. He never really fought for Net Neutrality. The mega-corporations got their way on the Internet (and the Web) yet again. We are losing the battle for free and equal speech. Those in power eliminate it little by little.

Related/contextual items from the news:

  1. America’s 10-Year Experiment in Broadband Investment Has Failed

    Tom Wheeler, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, announced Wednesday that there would be new rules written to guarantee net neutrality. It’s a good thing any website can reach any person unimpeded by tolls, and it’s good that Wheeler still wants to make this possible. The Internet service providers will first work to dilute the new rules, of course, and then sue to overturn them. Entire legal departments, lobbying outfits, and public-relations firms live for this moment, the beginning of a now-familiar three-year grind with the FCC.

  2. Netflix Agrees to Pay Comcast to End Traffic Jam

    Deal Ends Standoff Over Streaming, Would Give Netflix Direct Access to Comcast Systems

02.13.14

DRM is Protectionism and Misuse of Laws, Nothing Technical

Posted in DRM at 10:55 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: Interpretation of recent, truly troubling news about DRM and back doors, which are being promoted at a political level

ONE OF the world’s best known critics of DRM recently explained why the W3C lost credibility with its DRM moves. A week ago he explained [1] (getting applause/hat tip from the original Pirate Party’s founder [2] and TechDirt [3]) why DRM without corruption in politics is a pointless exercise of futility. DRM can, by definition, easily be circumvented, but it’s new laws that ban circumvention that make DRM what it is. It’s criminalisation of copying — even copying of what’s legally copyable. It’s a war on sharing. Apple is a big proponent of this and Microsoft became the biggest facilitator when it dumped Vista (and its predecessors) on this world. We need to fight back against those who are waging a war against our rights.

Sony, another infamous DRM booster (going as far as illegally sabotaging people’s computers with rogue DRM), is still fighting to spread DRM to books/literature [4] and Valve proved itself to be equally guilty (like Sony and Microsoft in consoles) by using the courts to prevent passage of digital data [5] (not even copying, just passage of ‘purchased’ — in reality rented — media). Meanwhile, as we learn from the press, “OEM “Kill-switch” anti theft bill proposed by California State” (criminalising devices with no back doors) [6].

If this is where technology is going, namely the enforcement of back doors and suspension of ability to copy and pass data (disguised as ‘technological solution’ when it’s actually political), then we are seriously destroyed. We are losing power over technology to a bunch of tyrannical technophobic plutocrats. DRM is their weapon of choice and it is one among several. DRM helps censor and divide the population, making everyone exceedingly dependent on copyright ‘masters’.

Related/contextual items from the news:

  1. What happens with digital rights management in the real world?

    In the real world, “bare” DRM doesn’t really do much. Before governments enacted laws making compromising DRM illegal (even if no copyright infringement took place), DRM didn’t survive contact with the market for long. That’s because technologically, DRM doesn’t make any sense. For DRM to work, you have to send a scrambled message (say, a movie) to your customer, then give your customer a program to unscramble it. Anyone who wants to can become your customer simply by downloading your player or buying your device – “anyone” in this case includes the most skilled technical people in the world. From there, your adversary’s job is to figure out where in the player you’ve hidden the key that is used to unscramble the message (the movie, the ebook, song, etc). Once she does that, she can make her own player that unscrambles your files. And unless it’s illegal to do this, she can sell her app or device, which will be better than yours, because it will do a bunch of things you don’t want it to do: allow your customers to use the media they buy on whatever devices they own, allow them to share the media with friends, to play it in other countries, to sell it on as a used good, and so on.

    The only reason to use DRM is because your customers want to do something and you don’t want them to do it. If someone else can offer your customers a player that does the stuff you hate and they love, they’ll buy it. So your DRM vanishes.

    A good analogue to this is inkjet cartridges. Printer companies make a lot more money when you buy your ink from them, because they can mark it up like crazy (millilitre for millilitre, HP ink costs more than vintage Champagne). So they do a bunch of stuff to stop you from refilling your cartridges and putting them in your printer. Nevertheless, you can easily and legally buy cheap, refilled and third-party cartridges for your printer. Same for phone unlocking: obviously phone companies keep you as a customer longer and make more money if you have to throw away your phone when you change carriers, so they try to lock the phone you buy with your plan to their networks. But phone unlocking is legal in the UK, so practically every newsagent and dry cleaner in my neighbourhood will unlock your phone for a fiver (you can also download free programs from the net to do this if you are willing to trade hassle for money).

  2. Because Of DRM, The Entire Copyright Monopoly Legislation Is A Lie

    Would you consider it reasonable if the copyright monopoly legislation ended with the words “but if publishers think this law is too permissive, they can rewrite it as they like, and we’ll enforce that instead”? Because that’s exactly what the law looks like.

  3. DRM Is The Right To Make Up Your Own Copyright Laws

    We’ve written about the problems of DRM and anti-circumvention laws since basically when we started way back in 1997. Cory Doctorow has been writing about the same stuff for just about as long (or perhaps longer). And yet, just when you think everything that can be said about this stuff has been said, Doctorow comes along and writes what may be the best column describing why DRM, combined with anti-circumvention laws, is so incredibly nefarious. Read the whole thing. It’s so well done, and so important, I’m actually going to write two posts about it, because there are two separate issues that deserve highlighting.

  4. Sony and Barnes & Noble look like their ebook days are numbered
  5. You can’t resell Valve games in Germany – court

    A German court has dismissed a ‘reselling’ case in favour of Valve Software, the maker of Steam OS. German consumer group Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband (vzbv) had filed a complaint against Valve as Valve’s EULA (End User Licence Agreement) prohibits users from re-selling their games.

  6. OEM “Kill-switch” anti theft bill proposed by California State

    As more and more persons become owners of smart phones, thieves have found an ever increasing number of targets to prey on. Theft of cellphones is at an all time high in major urban centers across the US and many other countries, and the Californian government has decided to take a stance against it. With cellphones taking a more prominent roll in our lives, we all store sensitive information on our devices, and this is what the bill proposes to address.

01.28.14

DRM is Coming to the Web (as ‘Standard’). Now What?

Posted in DRM, Europe at 4:44 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Criminalising Web users for “stealing” “content” won’t work in Europe

Shoplifters

Summary: The W3C is unlikely to pull away from DRM, but a high European court says that DRM can sometimes be legally circumvented

THE outrage over DRM inside Web 'standards' is a thing of the past. It couldn’t last forever and people have moved on to other problems. The MPAA got its way and given the new financial dependence on it (W3C was bribed by the MPAA [1]) we find it hard to believe that the Web’s founder and his colleagues will change course. TechDirt received credit for its coverage of the subject [2] and a new report from TechDirt says that “Europe’s Highest Court Says DRM Circumvention May Be Lawful In Certain Circumstances” [3].

Maybe civil disobedience or even circumvention of DRM on the Web will therefore be legitimate protest. Will that only be permissible in the Europe and, if so, under what circumstances? Either way, it’s good to know that the legal grounds of DRM (claiming that format shifting is an offence) are challenged and the illusion of control over surfers shaken somewhat.

Related/contextual items from the news:

  1. Don’t let the MPAA buy the Web

    Last week, the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) became a paying and governing member of World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) (no, seriously).

  2. Will Hollywood force DRM on web users via HTML5?

    Techdirt has a disturbing report about Hollywood attempting to force DRM on web users via HTML5.

  3. Europe’s Highest Court Says DRM Circumvention May Be Lawful In Certain Circumstances

    One of the many problems with DRM is its blanket nature. As well as locking down the work in question, it often causes all kinds of other, perfectly legal activities to be blocked as well — something that the copyright industry seems quite untroubled by.

01.14.14

DRM is Not Dying, It is Spreading Like a Virus, Even to the World Wide Web

Posted in DRM at 10:28 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: DRM is destroying decades of technological advancement and even the biggest tool of communication, data sharing, and perhaps multimedia (competing with broadcast)

CORY from BoingBoing spent many years of his life fighting DRM. He is seemingly depressed, and claims to be unable to sleep, over what the World Wide Web Consortium is doing these days [1-3], noting additionally that DRM is now spreading to hardware [4,5]. GNU/Linux has already come under attack from Sony [6] because of DRM [7]. Steam, a DRM-loving rival of Sony, is also deleting games remotely right now, using DRM [8-9]. Some Linux-based ebook readers only support DRM ebooks that are also being deleted remotely, and the same goes for DRM-free ebooks [10], which can also be deleted remotely over the Internet. This makes DRM virtually a back door. It shows that Linux without freedom is not enough. DRM is a serious threat. It’s turning computing devices, not just data on them, into some kind of rented facilities, controlled remotely by some other party. How utterly disgusting. Amazon, which deleted books remotely (several times, even against the law), is now remotely deleting movies too [11,12]. The FOSS community is trying to fight back [13], but it cannot keep up with attacks on coding itself. The concept of ‘authorised’ programming/code (like DRM) is being introduced also [14], exceeding legal restriction and imposing them technically.

DRM is destroying our world. It is destroying our culture, it is ruining the Web, it burns books, it harms software development, and it also enables remote ‘bricking’ of machines. Devices become jails for their users, not just instruments of surveillance, and the very little useful function that remains in them can be removed or turned against the owners (remotely, with no indication of of it happening).

Those who still don’t understand why DRM is a very bad thing probably just don’t fully grasp DRM. DRM is in many way like a back door and now that the MPAA is part of the World Wide Web Consortium we expect future Web browsers — even FOSS browsers — to contain blobs and perhaps back doors. The MPAA spent many years lobbying to put back doors in every PC, not in order to target terrorists but in order to support an antiquated business model (protectionism, monopoly, and profit).

Related/contextual items from the news:

  1. Requirements for DRM in HTML5 are a secret

    The work at the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) on adding DRM to HTML5 is one of the most disturbing developments in the recent history of technology. The W3C’s mailing lists have been full of controversy about this ever since the decision was announced.

    Most recently, a thread in the restricted media list asked about whether the requirements for DRM from the studios — who have pushed for DRM, largely through their partner Netflix — demonstrated that these requirements are secret.

    It’s hard to overstate how weird this is.

    Standardization is the process by which all the parties in a technical subject agree on how things should be done. It starts with a gathering of requirements — literally, “What is the standard required to do?” Without these requirements, it’s hard to see how standardization can take place. If you don’t know what you’re standardizing for, how can you standardize at all?

  2. Hollywood Needs The Internet More Than The Internet Needs Hollywood… So Why Is The W3C Pretending Otherwise?

    Last week, we wrote about the MPAA joining the W3C almost certainly as part of its ongoing effort to push for DRM to be built into HTML5. Cory Doctorow has a beautifully titled blog post about all of this, saying that “we are Huxleying ourselves into the full Orwell.”

  3. We are Huxleying ourselves into the full Orwell.

    As near as I can work out, there’s no one poised to do anything about this. Google, Apple and Microsoft have all built proprietary DRM silos that backed the WC3 into accepting standardization work on DRM (and now the W3C have admitted the MPAA as a member – an organization that expressly believes that all technology should be designed for remote, covert control by someone other than its owner, and that it should be illegal to subvert this control).

  4. High-end CNC machines can’t be moved without manufacturers’ permission
  5. Latest Twist On DRM Of Physical Products: Machines Locked Down By Geolocation

    As the Boing Boing article quoted above explains, this seems to be a requirement of the US government, and is designed to prevent machines being sent to Iran in violation of the embargo placed on that country.

    [...]

    What’s particularly troubling is that the cost of adding GPS capabilities is already low, and will inevitably become lower. That raises the possibility of a wider range of devices being locked down by geolocation — and of their owners’ rights being eroded down even more.

  6. Sony Class Action Over Linux On PS3 Partially Revived

    A Ninth Circuit panel on Monday partially reversed a lower court decision squashing a putative class action accusing Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC of reneging on its promise to let users run alternative operating systems on their PlayStation 3s.

  7. Blu-ray Encryption—Why Most People Pirate Movies

    I get a fair amount of e-mail from readers asking how a person could do “questionable” things due to limitations imposed by DRM. Whether it’s how to strip DRM from ebooks, how to connect to Usenet or how to decrypt video, I do my best to point folks in the right direction with lots of warnings and disclaimers. The most frustrating DRM by far has been with Blu-ray discs.

  8. Steam Removes Game ‘Order Of War: Challenge’ From User Libraries
  9. Valve deletes ‘Order of War: Challenge’ from Steam user libraries

    Lot of games have been taken down from Steam store in the past years, but for the very first time Steam has removed games from user libraries. Yes, the very game that the users had purchased with their money. The game in question is Order of War: Challenge, a World war II strategy game developed by Wargaming.net and published by Square Enix in 2009.

  10. Kobo Aura HD eReader is Linux-friendly

    So you can quite easily add your own existing ebooks to the Aura HD; however you can also, if you wish, take advantage of Kobo’s online ebook store. If you purchase ebooks from the store or even just wish to sample a preview, it will be added to your Kobo account and automatically synced to your device, which is nice. But if you wish to only buy and use DRM-free ebooks, you can do so and avoid the Kobo store altogether.

  11. Can’t stream that Christmas movie you “bought” on Amazon? Blame Disney
  12. Amazon Pulls Access to Purchased Christmas Videos During Christmas

    Disney has decided to pull access to several purchased Christmas videos from Amazon during the holiday season, as the movie studio wants its TV-channel to have the content exclusively. Affected customers have seen their videos disappear from their online libraries, showing once again that not everything you buy is actually yours to keep.

  13. GStreamer Might Tackle DRM, Blu-Ray Support

    At the recent GStreamer Conference 2013 there was a presentation on “Taking Gstreamer to the Next Level” and in there some interesting features were brought up.

  14. German Court Says CEO Of Open Source Company Liable For ‘Illegal’ Functions Submitted By Community

    We just had an article mentioning that Germany has a ridiculous (and dangerously anti-innovation) view towards secondary liability, in which the country’s courts often default to making third parties liable for actions they did not do. We noted that a court in Stuttgart had decided that the Wikimedia Foundation could be held liable for content submitted by a community member on the site, though only after the organization was alerted to the content (which still has significant problems for what are hopefully obvious reasons).

12.24.13

Pipelight Project is Trouble, Helps Microsoft and Helps DRM

Posted in DRM at 7:29 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: A reasonably new project strives to make the Web a binary conduit of DRM-laden ‘content’, even for GNU/Linux users

MICROSOFT has already given up on Silverlight — its attempt to establish lock-in on the Web (worse than ActiveX) which was aided by another defunct project from a Microsoft MVP and mole. This has not, however, totally eliminated the efforts to pollute the Web with DRM, binary extensions, etc. Some project called Pipelight is trying to put Microsoft Silverlight right inside GNU/Linux. “A proposal has been submitted for having Microsoft Silverlight plug-in support in Ubuntu 14.04 LTS as part of the main archive via the Pipelight project,” Michael Larabel writes. “Previous to that there was work in 2012 for a patched version of Wine to get Netflix on Linux.”

This project which is run by Erich Hoover, Michael Müller, and Sebastian Lackner is not helping GNU/Linux. It is not a good thing. Netflix, which is closely connected to Microsoft, does a horrible thing by promoting DRM on the Web (even at standardisation level) and Microsoft is fighting against the open Web. We need to reject this, not become ‘compatible’ with it.

12.06.13

‘Unauthorised’ Programming and What It Means to Software Freedom

Posted in DRM at 11:50 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Summary: DRM and DMCA versus society, or how operation-restricting legal mechanisms are affecting coders, for whom not only software patents are now a creativity wall

PEOPLE WHO buy a mobile phone may think that they own it, but they don’t. Putting aside phones’ role as surveillance devices (tracking the so-called ‘owner’), phones are to be treated more like rented devices, especially after this new ban [1] which calls modification “unlocking” and then criminalises it. This unjust move is sheltered by some unjust laws previously passed against the people and for corporations. The same sorts of laws also ban circumvention of DRM, which based on reports [2] may actually be doing more harm than good to business.

The most interesting article, however, speaks of a Free software project [3] which is now held liable for third-party DRM-busting. This puts under unprecedented siege software developers all around the world. The legal system is yet again being used to impose restrictions on software developers.

Related/contextual items from the news:

  1. Unauthorized unlocking of smartphones becomes illegal Saturday

    The feds mandate fidelity between carriers and users: New rule under DMCA outlaws unlocking new handsets without carrier permission.

  2. What Piracy? Removing DRM Boosts Music Sales by 10 Percent

    DRM was once praised as the ultimate tool to prevent music piracy, but new research shows that the opposite is true. Comparing album sales of four major labels before and after the removal of DRM reveals that digital music revenue increases by 10% when restrictions are removed. The effect goes up to 30% for long tail content, while top-selling albums show no significant jump. The findings suggest that dropping technical restrictions can benefit both artists and the major labels.

  3. Court: Open Source Project Liable For 3rd Party DRM-Busting Coding

    A judgment handed down by a German court against an open source software project is being described as “worrisome” by the company at the heart of the case. Appwork, the outfit behind the hugely popular JDownloader software, can be held liable for coding carried out by third-party contributors, even when they have no knowledge of its functionality. Appwork informs TorrentFreak that the judgment will be a burden on the open source creative process.

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channels: Come and chat with us in real time

New to This Site? Here Are Some Introductory Resources

No

Mono

ODF

Samba logo






We support

End software patents

GPLv3

GNU project

BLAG

EFF bloggers

Comcast is Blocktastic? SavetheInternet.com



Recent Posts