Obama Administration Takes Sides In Aereo Case, Asks Supreme Court To Side With Broadcasters

(afagen)

The legal hill that cloud-based TV service Aereo has to climb just keeps getting a little bit steeper. This week, interested parties filed their briefs in Aereo’s Supreme Court case. Broadcast networks and cable companies hate Aereo, but now even the Obama administration is joining the pile-on, too.

The Supreme Court agreed in January to hear broadcasters’ case against Aereo this spring. As Deadline reports, yesterday the office of the Solicitor General filed an amicus curiae brief on the side of the broadcasters.

An amicus brief is a chance for interested parties to throw their opinions into someone else’s trial. And the administration’s opinion is that Aereo is up to no good, copyright-wise. The brief urges the court to side with the broadcasters, saying, “the proper resolution of this dispute is straightforward,” and adding:

Unlike a purveyor of home antennas, or the lessor of hilltop space on which individual consumers may erect their own antennas … [Aereo] does not simply provide access to equipment or other property that facilitates customers’ reception of broadcast signals. Rather, respondent operates an integrated system … whose functioning depends on its customers’ shared use of common facilities. The fact that as part of that system respondent uses unique copies and many individual transmissions does not alter the conclusion that it is retransmitting broadcast content ‘to the public.’ Like its competitors, [Aereo] therefore must obtain licenses to perform the copyrighted content on which its business relies.

The brief makes sure to clarify that just because they think Aereo is playing around with copyright, though, they don’t want all cloud-based tech, or new ventures, upturned. Though it claims the conclusion the court should draw is “straightforward,” it adds: “That conclusion, however, should not call into question the legitimacy of businesses that use the Internet to provide new ways for consumers to store, hear, and view their own lawfully acquired copies of copyrighted works.”

Several other businesses and groups have also filed amicus briefs related to the case this week. Cable and technology groups have asked the court to take a narrow view of Aereo’s specific actions, rather than to look at cloud-based broadcasting technologies as a whole.

Aereo, meanwhile, rapidly continues to expand its service to new cities, despite legal pushback.

White House Backs Broadcasters In Aereo Case [Deadline, via The Verge]

by Kate Cox via Consumerist

Twitter Freaks Everyone Out By Accidentally Sending A Bunch Of Password Reset Emails

(petesimon)

If you received an email from Twitter telling you to change your password and do it now, take a deep breath and don’t panic. You (probably) weren’t hacked and it’s not a phishing scam — someone at Twitter basically hit the wrong button late last night and sent an email to a bunch of people that weren’t meant to get it.

After a whole lot of users started sounding off last night that Twitter had sent an email asking them to change their passwords for security reasons, whispers of a hack or something else dastardly being afoot started, TechCrunch reported.

“Twitter believes that your account may have been compromised by a website or service not associated with Twitter,” read the original email. “We’ve reset your password to prevent others from accessing your account.”

But while the emails were very real, the email was a glitch, and your account wasn’t in danger unless it was a case of coincidental timing and you’ve noticed other signs of an account breach (spam direct messages or Tweets sent on your behalf, etc.). In which case, yes, change your password.

“We unintentionally sent some password reset notices tonight due to a system error. We apologize to the affected users for the inconvenience,” Twitter said in a statement after last night’s snafu.

Was Your Twitter Password Just Reset? Don’t Panic — Twitter Screwed Up [TechCrunch]

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Formaldehyde In Baby Shampoo Isn’t As Scary As It Sounds

Recently, Johnson & Johnson reformulated their classic yellow baby shampoo after a consumer outcry over a scary-sounding formaldehyde-based preservative in the product. If it’s not absolutely necessary, there’s no good reason to go slathering a product that contains unnecessary substances on infants. The important question is: should we be worried about formaldehyde in personal-care products at all?

Science writer Tara Haelle examined this question for Slate.

You can’t keep your child safe from formaldehyde as long as it’s on this planet. “Unless people calling for removal of quaternium-15 are also keeping their children from eating apples and french fries,” an American University chemist tells Slate, “I think their activism might be misplaced.”

Factory workers and embalmers come in contact with more formaldehyde than most of us, and they have a higher corresponding risk of certain cancers. The amount of formaldehyde in baby shampoo and the amount of time that a baby ever spends in the bath don’t really add up. One researcher calculated that it would take 40 million baby shampoo baths every day for one person to reach a level where super-stringent California law Proposition 65 would need to put a “may cause cancer” warning label on it. No baby likes to play with floaty toys that much.

No More Formaldehyde Baby Shampoo [Slate]

by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

The Polar Vortex Is Annoying, But It Could Be Good For Your Backyard

(Rick Drew)

Sure we’re all sick of winter. The crazy Polar Vortex has been wreaking havoc across the country and we’re ready for it to retire. But even with all the negatives the cold front has brought, including billions of dollars lost to canceled flights, it could be saving the government billions of dollars when it comes to containing invasive insects.

The unceasing cold weather has been decimating the populations of destructive insects that cause more than $2.1 billion in economic losses for the U.S. annually, Quartz reports.

Invasive insects such as the gypsy moth, hemlock woolly adelgid, and emerald ash borer have been dying thanks to the frigid temperatures this winter.

The adelgid population, which feeds off of hemlock forests lining the east coast, has all but disappeared in some parts of North Carolina and about 80% of the population in Massachusetts has died, officials say.

Gypsy moths and the emerald ash borer, which have killed millions of trees over the past decade, have also been dying in large numbers.

The colder than normal temperatures may also have an adverse affect on steps forest officials have made to combat invasive insects. Predator insects that are released to take out the invasive species are also dying off. Parasitoid wasps that are used to control emerald ash borers in Michigan and other states are more vulnerable than their prey.

While this year’s harsh winter may be helping keep costs of destruction down, it’s not likely to last long.

Officials say the extreme weather that’s bringing about the Polar Vortex maybe also be making winters warmer on average. And warmer winters mean the U.S. is becoming more hospitable to invasive species.

Stop hating the polar vortex: It’s killing some of the nastiest invasive insects around [Quartz]

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

Bitcoin: What The Heck Is It, And How Does It Work?

(Great Beyond)

The world of finance and economics is pretty complicated as-is, and now there’s “digital money” in the mix making it even worse. Bitcoin is everywhere in the news lately, from hacks to hearings and everything in between. But there are a lot of questions about Bitcoin — starting with, what the heck is all this, anyway? And so, here is everything you wanted to know about Bitcoin, but didn’t actually want to ask your tech-loving, early-adopter friend.

What is Bitcoin?

Bitcoin is the world’s biggest cryptocurrency. It was introduced in 2009, and is the longest-standing, best-known, and most widely-traded cryptocurrency.

Generally, Bitcoin with a capital B means the software and the system; bitcoin with a lowercase b means the actual money.

A what?

A cryptocurrency is digital money. It’s a virtual medium of exchange, not issued by, backed by, or tied to any particular nation or government.

It’s the biggest… but there are others?

Yup. The software that runs Bitcoin is open-source, and there are lots of other folks running with it, too. The Guardian covered nine of the biggest in late November. And of course, the internet being what it is, there are novelty versions, like the actually-popular dogecoin or the defunct Coinye West.

If it’s not issued by a government, where does it come from and who keeps track of it?

The acts of generating new bitcoins and of tracking Bitcoin transactions go hand in hand, and both are accomplished through a process known as “mining.” This is where it starts to get a little complicated.

Basically, mining occurs when a computer or a network of computers runs Bitcoin software. That software creates new entries in Bitcoin’s public record of transactions, called block chains. The math is complicated and hard to forge, so the block chain stays accurate. Because anyone can download and install the Bitcoin software for free, the payment processing and record-keeping for Bitcoin is done in a widely distributed way, rather than on one particular server.

When block chains are created, so are new bitcoins — but there’s a hard limit to how many will ever exist. The system was designed to create more bitcoins at first, then to dwindle exponentially over time. The first set of block chains each created 50 bitcoins. The next set each created 25 bitcoins, and so on. New block chains are created roughly every 10 minutes no matter what; when more computers are actively mining, the program they’re running gets harder (and therefore slower) to compensate. The bitcoin FAQ estimates that the final bitcoin will be mined in the year 2140, bringing the permanent circulation to just under 21 million. (Currently, there are roughly 12.4 million bitcoins in the world.)

How much is it worth?

As of this writing, 1 bitcoin = approximately USD $693. However, the bitcoin exchange rate is intentionally highly flexible.

What can you actually buy with bitcoins?

Swanky cocktails in Manhattan, a Tesla car, tickets and concessions for the Sacramento Kings, and anything you want from Overstock.com.

Also, stolen credit card numbers, drugs, guns, and pretty much anything else of questionable legality bought and sold online. It’s great for money laundering too, according to the FBI.

How do you store and spend your bitcoins? Is there any actual physical money?

Even though there are a handful of bitcoin ATMs in the world, bitcoin is not a physical currency. Spending takes place from one user’s virtual wallet to another user’s virtual wallet, via an exchange of public and private security keys.

Physical bitcoins — which can look like coins or bills, or can be any other item — are storage devices for private keys. In one way, storing private keys in physical media is extremely secure; hackers can’t access the box under your bed via a virtual back door. On the other hand, storing private keys in physical media is as insecure as keeping cash on hand; thieves can access the box under your bed via a literal back door. Or you could end up losing the external hard drive with your $5 million on it.

Is this risky? It sounds kind of risky.

There certainly is a lot of volatility in the bitcoin market. The exchange rate has shifted by over $90 this week alone.

The government backing a standard currency — like, say, the US dollar — works hard to keep its money stable. We have the Federal Reserve issuing monetary policy and acting as a central bank to keep the value of a dollar from flying up and down like the stock market does.

For the first three to four years of its life, bitcoin was actually fairly stable, as historical charts show. The price increased very gradually from roughly $0.05 per bitcoin to more like $5 per bitcoin, which is indeed a good rate of return for early investors. And that concept of “investors” is key. Bitcoin is a market full of speculators, and because it’s not tied to anyone’s monetary policy or oversight, it’s prone to boom and bust. Since the beginning of 2013, the value of bitcoin has jumped as high as $1116 and dropped to $539.

Bitcoin values from Jan. 1 2013 through Mar. 3 2014, via Coinbase.

Investment losses or devaluation are only one of the two big ways bitcoin users can be left high and dry. The other is good old-fashioned theft. While the US money you keep at a standard bank is insured against disaster by the FDIC, there is no such backstop for bitcoin wallets. If the virtual place your virtual money is stored loses it all, you’re screwed.

Speaking of losing money, what’s all this about Mt. Gox?

Mt. Gox is — or rather, was — one of the largest bitcoin exchanges, a site where people bought and sold their virtual money to each other. As Wired reports in detail, it was apparently a poorly-run, mismanaged venture, and hackers were able to gain access and siphon off bitcoins. Lots of them. About $460 million worth, on top of a 2011 hack that cost $8.75 million, and another $27 million “missing from its bank accounts.” All told, in three years Mt. Gox has somehow lost or had stolen nearly a half-billion actual dollars’ worth of alternative money.

And if you’re curious why it’s called Mt. Gox, it’s because it originally stood for “Magic: the Gathering Online Exchange” before becoming a bitcoin trading site in 2010.

So is all this “alternative money” legal? Do the feds care?

Yes, and sort of. It’s not illegal, at any rate.

The Senate Banking Committee and Senate Homeland Security Committee held hearings on Bitcoin back in November. The outcomes were largely positive for Bitcoin, with the Obama administration and Senate willing to leave Bitcoin alone for the moment.

However, the complete collapse of Mt. Gox has returned federal attention to the world of cryptocurrency. Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) has called for a ban on bitcoins, and the Senate Banking Committee brought in Federal Reserve chair Janet Yellen to testify about the potential for regulating Bitcoin. The thing is, there is no such potential, Yellen said, at least not now. She testified that Bitcoin is “a payment innovation that’s taking place outside the banking industry,” and added:

To the best of my knowledge there’s no intersection at all, in any way, between Bitcoin and banks that the Federal Reserve has the ability to supervise and regulate. So the Fed doesn’t have authority to supervise or regulate Bitcoin in any way.”

Yellen also added, “It’s not so easy to regulate Bitcoin because there’s no central issuer or network operator,” calling Bitcoin a decentralized, global entity.

To Bitcoin developers and users, that global reach and lack of central authority is a core feature, not a bug. Meanwhile, federal prosecutors have sent subpoenas to Mt. Gox, which on Friday declared bankruptcy.

At today’s exchange rate, there’s an equivalent to $8.5 billion out there in the world in bitcoins. It seems likely that regulators and governments will want to keep an eye on where it goes in the future.

by Kate Cox via Consumerist

Supreme Court Takes On Amazon Warehouse Workers’ Case Over Unpaid Time

(Protohiro)

Should warehouse workers have to spend their own free time waiting for security procedures after their work shift is done, or should companies like Amazon have them on the clock during that process? Amazon workers have been fighting to collect pay for that time spent in line waiting for security checks, and the United States Supreme Court has agreed to hear their case.

The SCOTUS will use this Amazon case to consider whether or not companies should have to pay their employees for activities they require of them, like having their personal belongings searched before they leave work, reports Bloomberg News.

The justices will review a federal appeals court decision that allowed the Amazon lawsuit over security lines at warehouses in Nevada.

Similar claims have popped up at companies like CVS and Apple as well, so whatever the justices decide will likely have a far-reaching effect anywhere there’s a theft prevention policy in place.

The Fair Labor Standards Act requires compensation for both pre- and post-shift activities that are “integral and indispensable” to an employee’s basic job functions. The SCOTUS ruled on another part of that law in January, saying that companies don’t have to pay workers for the time they spend putting on or taking off safety gear in situations where a collective bargaining agreement doesn’t include compensation.

Amazon Warehouse Worker Case Accepted by Supreme Court [Bloomberg News]

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Couple’s $10M Gold Coin Find Could Be From 1900 San Francisco Mint Heist

Finders keepers, right? Maybe not in the case of a California couple who found $10 million in gold coins while hiking with their dog. A newly found century-old news item has shed light on where the huge treasure may have originated.

Last year, while walking on their property the couple noticed a rusted, half-buried can. Taking a closer look they found the can housed mint-condition gold coins. In all, the couple found six cans containing 1,427 gold coins valued at $10 million.

But, now, new information about the treasure’s origins may put a damper on the couple’s plan to sell the coins, the San Francisco Chronicle reports.

A Northern California historian claims to have found a connection between the coins and the unsolved 1900 gold heist at the San Francisco Mint. If the coins are indeed those stolen from the Mint, the couple may be entitled to a finder’s fee but they likely won’t be able to keep the haul.

The coins’ face value of $27,000 and the fact that the coins are mostly in chronological order, meaning they were never circulated, match what is known about the heist.

Additionally, the coins’ unearthing adds credibility that the heist was likely an inside job at the Mint.

One of the coins included in the find, an 1866 Liberty $20 gold piece, does not include the words “In God We Trust” leading historians to believe the coin was from someone’s private collection.

“This was someone’s private coin, created by the mint manager or someone with access to the inner workings of the Old Granite Lady (San Francisco Mint),” the historian tell the Chronicle. “It was likely created in revenge for the assassination of Lincoln the previous year (April 14, 1865). I don’t believe that coin ever left The Mint until the robbery. For it to show up as part of the treasure find links it directly to that inside job at the turn of the century at the San Francisco Mint.”

SF heist at turn of century may explain buried gold [San Francisco Chronicle]

by Ashlee Kieler via Consumerist

Today’s The Day You Can Get Free Pancakes At IHOP

It’s that time of year again: The day designated by IHOP as National Pancake Day. All you really need to know that it means you can get free pancakes today, for a good cause.

While maybe thought you’d missed the free flapjacks — considering last year’s event was in February — you’ve got the entire day today to get a free short stack of buttermilk pancakes at your local IHOP.

And although the food is free of charge, IHOP asks that diners consider leaving a donation for Children’s Miracle Network Hospital or another local charity.

The goal this year is to raise $3 million for the charity, after raising a total of $13 million total since it started handing out free pancakes in 2006.

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist

Laundry Shrink Ray Zaps Tide Slightly, Keeps Number Of Loads The Same

Can you shave a few milliliters off the amount of detergent that you use in every load of laundry and still get your clothes as clean? You probably can, but we’re curious after checking out this slight change in the amount of Tide detergent in a bottle while the number of loads per bottle remains unchanged.

“I noticed this today at Wal-Mart,” she writes. “New and old packaging side by side. Maybe the lid size changed…? Couldn’t find any evidence on the bottles.”

Hmm. We’re not sure. We dropped Procter & Gamble an e-mail, and will update this post if we hear anything from them.

by Laura Northrup via Consumerist

RadioShack Closing Up To 1,100 Stores Across The Country

(My Other Boss Chris)

After announcing earlier this month that it would likely have to close around 500 stores in the coming months, RadioShack is now planning on making a much deeper cut of up to 1,100 store closures. That accounts for about 20% of all its locations in the U.S.

While the company didn’t say whether it’s now a total of 1,100 stores or an additional number on top of the 500 previously slated for the chopping block, RadioShack says it will still have more than 4,000 stores in the U.S., which includes dealer franchise locations, reports the Wall Street Journal.

That makes us think it’ll be 1,100 total, as The Shack has about 4,300 U.S. locations and an additional 950 other franchised locations worldwide.

Despite giving Super Bowl viewers a chuckle with its commercial poking fun at itself, that featured popular ’80s icons taking back their stuff from the store, RadioShack has been suffering losses as it’s fighting to update its image in recent years.

The Shack had said it was working with advisers on how best to restructure the company, advisers that apparently felt 500 shuttered locations wasn’t going to do it. Chief Executive Joseph Magnacca, who was hired last February, said the company is making progress in its turnaround efforts, despite lower store traffic and other operational issues.

We’ve reached out to ask RadioShack for a list of locations that will be closed, but in the meantime the company has said it’s shuttering stores based on location, area demographics, lease duration and financial performance.

RadioShack to Close Up to 1,100 Stores [Wall Street Journal]

by Mary Beth Quirk via Consumerist