Different businesses received different fliers based on what industry they’re involved in, such as airport service providers, rental cars, and financial institutions. The fliers were released privately to the businesses but, as these things are wont to do, the fliers eventually made their way into the public.

While some businesses, such as the examples listed above, might be natural allies in the FBI’s anti-terrorism effort, some of the other businesses entreated to help the FBI are a little puzzling, to say the least. For instance, did you know that tattoo parlors and MAC makeup counters are popular watering holes for terrorists? Because they are! Well, at least according to the FBI. Check out the flier below that was issued to tattoo shops.

(As much as this sounds like a joke, I assure you this is real.)

Tattoo Shops

So remember: the next time you and three of your best buds visit your local tattoo artist to get matching tattoos of some goofy character that supposedly means “bravery,” you may be getting profiled as a suspected terrorist. And for the love of god, don’t bring any friends that are missing any digits. Everybody knows those people are nothing but bad news.

Alternately, those of you who frequently add to your makeup collection might be causing a blip on the FBI’s radar as well. Here’s the flier the FBI issued to beauty/drug distributors:

Beauty Drug Distributors

I’d just like to point out that “travels illogical distance to store” and “evasive or vague about intended use of products” perfectly describes every teenager’s first experience with buying condoms at a drug store. Might wanna consider keeping it in your pants, kiddos, or else you might be drawing some federal-level heat.

On their Web site today, the FCC detailed the planned changes to the Lifeline program. For those unaware, the Lifeline program “fulfills Congress’ mandate to ensure the availability of communications to all Americans.” The program prides itself on providing millions of low-income Americans basic phone service.

While the program has raised the rate of households with phone service from 80 percent in 1985 to 92 percent last year, there’s still more to be done according to the FCC. They say that the program contains rules that have “failed to keep pace as consumers increasingly choose wireless phone service.”

The FCC plans to save $200 million in 2012 and force themselves to adopt a budget for 2013 after reviewing a six-month report. They are to create a National Lifeline Accountability Database to “prevent multiple carriers from receiving support for the same subscriber.” There is also the creation of an eligibility database to cut down on fraud. The group is lastly establishing a one-per-household rule that would define a household as an “economic unit” so that multiple low-income families living at the same address can get connected.

The FCC will be phasing out support for services like Toll Limitation – “subsidies to carriers for blocking or restricting long-distance service” and ending Link Up – “subsidies to carriers for initial connection charges.” They do, however, say that Link Up will continue in tribal lands.

The more interesting part is that the FCC will be modernizing Lifeline to include money that will help low-income families afford broadband Internet.

They will establish the “Broadband Adoption Pilot Program” using $25 million in savings from other reforms. They will start soliciting applications from broadband providers this year and will select a number of projects to fund. They want to clarify that this is not a free meal. Lifeline will help reduce the monthly cost of broadband, but applicants will have to pony up for the cost of the devices and become digitally literate.

They also propose digital literacy training at libraries and schools. This will build on FCC efforts to “close the broadband adoption gap and address digital literacy.”

Lastly, they want to provide Lifeline support for “bundled services plans combining voice and broadband or packages including optional calling features.”

It’s about time that the FCC brings the Internet to low-income households. The Internet has become so ingrained in our culture that not having it essentially puts a person out of the job market and reduces access to information and education.

Is this playing into the idea of the Internet as a basic human right? Or is the FCC just, as they say, modernizing their program? Let us know in the comments.

Data belonging to users of Megaupload could be deleted as soon as Thursday according to federal prosecutors. CBS is reporting that the company is defending itself by saying that their service was primarily used to store data like family photos and personal documents. Those users hoped they would be able to get their data back.

Megaupload hired two outside companies to store the data. As part of the investigation, the federal government froze the company’s account so they can’t pay the hosting fees.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia filed a letter in the case Friday saying that the storage companies, Carpatha Hosting and Cogent Communications Group, may begin deleting data Thursday.

The letter went on to say that the government copied some data from the servers. They have executed their search warrants so they have no right to access the data. The servers belong to the two companies so any inquiries need to be brought up with them.

Megaupload’s attorney Ira Rothken said that the company is working towards an agreement to keep the data from being erased. Not only is the data important to the 50 million customers that used the service, but it is essential for the company’s defense as well.

“We’re cautiously optimistic at this point that because the United States, as well as Megaupload, should have a common desire to protect consumers, that this type of agreement will get done,” he said.

This could complicate efforts by the Pirate Party to bring a formal complaint against the FBI for the many users who used the service for legal file storage.

We’ll keep you up to date on any developments in the Mega saga.

In a document obtained by TorrentFreak, it has come to light that copyright holders held a meeting with search engines like Google, Bing and Yahoo to make demands in regards to copyright. The meeting was held by the UK Department for Media, Culture and Sport.

The document begins with a lengthy diatribe on why search engines are hurting legitimate business in the UK by linking to illegal sites first instead of their Web sites:

Consumers rely on search engines to find and access entertainment content and they play a vital role in the UK digital economy. At present, consumers searching for digital copies of copyright entertainment content are directed overwhelmingly to illegal sites and services. This causes consumer confusion and significantly impedes the development of licensed digital entertainment markets in the UK. Search engines, as trusted intermediaries, should assist consumers in finding legal services and should not contribute to copyright infringement.

This paper proposes the introduction of a voluntary Code of Practice for search engines, overseen by Government, which would help to ensure that consumers are directed to safe and legal sources for entertainment content online and grow the UK digital economy.

The paper then goes on to list its propositions:

- assign lower rankings to sites that repeatedly make available unlicensed content in breach of copyright

-prioritise Web sites that obtain certification as a licensed site under recognized scheme

-stop indexing Web sites that are subject to court orders while establishing suitable procedures to de-index substantially infringing sites

- continue to improve the operation of the “notice and takedown” system and ensure that
search engines do not encourage consumers toward illegal sites via suggested
searches

-ensure that they do not support illegal sites by advertising them or placing advertising
on them, or profit from infringement by selling key words associated with piracy or
selling mobile applications which facilitate infringement.

The paper goes on to detail the voluntary “Code of Practice” for search engines that would actively direct consumers to “legal entertainment content,” encourage Web sites towards improved online behavior, ensure that consumers reduce their exposure to malware or scams, ensure the existing system of removing illegal content from search results works to optimum effect, and help ensure that search engines unwittingly profit from illegal content.

The paper quotes a survey that says consumers are overwhelmingly in support of search engines directing them to legal sources of entertainment. The paper says that consumers favor legal sites over illegal sites because they don’t want to break the law unwittingly by downloading from illegal sources.

The paper then details individual actions for each of the propositions listed above. There’s a lot there and it’s a good read. The paper is listed as “private and confidential” but it’s too important not to see. There’s some good stuff here on how businesses interact with search engines. I suggest you take some time out of your day to read it.

Proposals to Search Engines

TorrentFreak is reporting that many popular file hosting services are drastically limiting the services they offer or are just shutting down.

Filesonic, one of the biggest file sharing sites on the net, removed its rewards program and revoked access to files from third parties. In short, you can only download files that you uploaded yourself.

Fileserve, another major player, ended its reward program as well. It has also banned all third party downloads.

Users of Fileserve are reporting to TorrentFreak that they are having their files deleted and accounts banned for violating the site’s terms of service.

Uploaded.to took a more direct approach and banned all U.S. ISPs from accessing their Web site. This could be a move to remove itself from U.S. jurisdiction as the government shut down MegaUpload for having a server based in the U.S.

VideoBB and VideoZer, popular video streaming sites, are reportedly shutting down their rewards program and deleting massive amounts of accounts and videos.

Other file hosting services ending their rewards programs and deleting accounts include FileJungle, UploadStation and FilePost.

The major reason for all of this is that one of the reasons behind MegaUpload’s indictment was their rewards program that fed them money over the sharing of copyrighted files. File hosting services, even if they only serve legitimate users with business or persona files, don’t want to be considered targets by the federal government.

The group’s Privacy Project Director John M. Simpson wrote a letter to Competition Commissioner Joaquin Almunia, saying, “The Commission’s role in keeping Google’s abuses in check is essential. Its executives have close relationships with many U.S. officials and the company just spent a record $9.7 million in 2011 lobbying policymakers in Washington. We have faith the Commission will not succumb to such influence. The Internet is too important to allow an unregulated monopolist to dominate it. We call on you to take the steps necessary to prevent it: block the Motorola merger and file a formal antitrust complaint against Google.”

If you’re unfamiliar with Consumer Watchdog, they’re the U.S.-based consumer advocacy group responsible for this:

And this:

Simpson is currently in Brussels to discuss standards for a Do Not Track mechanism at a meeting of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Tracking Protection Working Group.

The group expects the Commission to decide its position on the Motorola deal by mid-February, and a decision on whether to file a formal antitrust complaint by the end of March.

Below is Simpson’s letter to Almunia in its entirety:

Dear Vice President Almunia:

John M. Simpson
Privacy Project Director
Consumer Watchdog

Open source development is a great thing. With NASA opening a new open source software-dedicated Web site, it allows street coders to access and improve the source code that NASA is working on. This can lead to new discoveries that the professional engineers at NASA could possibly never think of.

In 2009, the White House issued the Open Government Directive, which required federal agencies to achieve milestones while keeping their business transparent. NASA’s plan has been one of the best. They were even among those who received awards for going above and beyond hte call of duty in the “Participation and Collaboration” and “Flagship Initiatives” categories of the Open Government Directive.

“The site represents a natural extension of NASA’s efforts to inform, educate and include the public in our mission to pioneer the future in space exploration, scientific discovery and aeronautics research,” Deborah Diaz, NASA’s Deputy Chief Information Officer, said. “Citizen involvement in our work is a critical component of our success.”

NASA Open Government launched the Web site as part of its Open Source Software Flagship Initiative. The goal is to showcase existing projects, provide a forum for discussion and guiding internal and external groups in open development, release and contribution.

“We released the site on January 4 and since have received an overwhelming response from people interested in using our code,” Nick Skytland, Program Manager of NASA’s Open Government Initiative, said. “Our goal is to provide the public direct and ongoing access to NASA technology.”

William Eshagh, NASA Open Government co-lead on the project at NASA’s Ames Research Center believes that the future of their space program will be built in the open with the help of the public working on their open source code.

For those who want to take a crack at NASA’s code, you can check it out here.

The internet is the most powerful tool we have for creating a more open and connected world. We can’t let poorly thought out laws get in the way of the internet’s development. Facebook opposes SOPA and PIPA, and we will continue to oppose any laws that will hurt the internet.

The world today needs political leaders who are pro-internet. We have been working with many of these folks for months on better alternatives to these current proposals. I encourage you to learn more about these issues and tell your congressmen that you want them to be pro-internet.

Zuckerberg even tweeted the message (his first tweet since March ’09):

No Google+ updates though, despite 624,988 people having him in their circles. He only has 118,854 Twitter followers.

On the company’s Washington D.C. page, Facebook says:

At Facebook, we take online piracy and copyright infringement very seriously. Rogue foreign sites that pirate American intellectual property or sell counterfeit goods pose significant problems for our economy. However, we believe the PROTECT IP Act (or PIPA) and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), which are currently being considered by Congress, are not the right solution to this problem, because of the collateral damage these overreaching bills would cause to the Internet.

On the same page, under “our position,” Facebook says:

PROTECT IP and SOPA could create very real problems for Internet companies like ours that are a primary driver of innovation, growth, and job creation in the 21st century economy. The bills contain overly broad definitions and create a new private cause of action against companies on the basis of those expansive definitions, which could seriously hamper the innovation, growth, and investment in new companies that have been the hallmarks of the Internet. In addition, we are concerned about provisions in the bills that could chill free expression or weaken the Internet’s architecture.

Facebook says it has been engaging in a “constructive dialogue” on fighting piracy, and points out that it makes it a priority to respond promptly, when it is made aware of illegal content.

Facebook points to this NetCoalition petition to “share your thoughts” with Congress.

Google site reliability engineer Liz Fong-Jones writes on Google+: “Surprising thing I noticed: Google’s NetPAC has given Rep. Lamar Smith (the architect of SOPA) $17,000 over the past 6 transparency years.”

She links to this pdf showing all of Google NetPAC’s contributions.

On its U.S. Public Policy site, Google talks about Google NetPac:

We created Google NetPAC in late 2006 to support federal officeholders and candidates who share Google’s goal of promoting the Internet as a free and open platform for communication and innovation, to the benefit of our users.

We base our giving decisions on a number of factors, including – and most importantly – the policy stances of Members of Congress. We support candidates who have demonstrated a commitment to Google’s public policy agenda, centered on policies to promote the continued openness and growth of the Internet. We also believe it is important to support policymakers representing the States and congressional districts where Google has operations and employees.

It looks like the last NetPac contribution to Smith was in 2010 for “Texans for Lamar Smith”. SOPA was introduced in the House of Representatives on October 26, 2011.

CNN reported when Google first launched Google NetPAC: “Google NetPAC will be funded through voluntary donations from staff and will consult a wider advisory committee of Google employees on what issues should be considered for lobbying.”

Smith said he expects markup of SOPA to be continued in February, following a delay.

For more of our SOPA coverage, follow this link.

Google’s head of web spam, Matt Cutts, who has been a vocal opponent of SOPA and PIPA for some time, has also put up a new blog post calling for people to call senators. about it. In fact, he even went so far as to include an interactive widget to call, email, tweet, or Facebook Senators (which it determines by your location).

“Now it’s time to rally and get loud. It’s time to call your Senators,” says Cutts. “Heck, it’s time to ask your parents to call their Senators. If you think the internet is something different, something special, then take a few minutes to protect it. Groups that support SOPA have contributed nine times more money in Washington D.C. than our side. We need to drown out that money with the sound of our voices. I’d like to flood every Senator’s phone, email, and office with messages right up until January 24th.”

“It’s time for action,” he says. ”Call your Senator right now. Spread the word to your friends and family. Promise not to vote for politicians who support SOPA. Print out some PDFs and post them at work or on your campus. There’s also protests and meetups happening today in New York, the Bay Area of California, and Seattle. Don’t live in the United States? You can still petition the State Department at americancensorship.org.”