PUBLIC MARKS from multilinko with tag law

Detroit is making better cars. But Motown just can't win. Look at the April issue of Consumer Reports magazine, the bible of product testing. For the first time, each of the top 10 picks is Japanese. Two of them are hybrids -- the chic and green-tinged Toyota Prius and the Toyota Highlander Hybrid luxury SUV. Hybrids are hot. There are long waiting lists for the Prius -- its sales rose 100 per cent in 2005 -- and they command premium price tags. Toyota and Honda are going big on hybrids, which combine a conventional gasoline engine with an electric motor. Wary of missing out on yet another showroom hit, Detroit is going even bigger, it appears. The Ford Escape hybrid is for sale. Ford and GM will roll out a dozen others in the next few years, including hybrid versions of the Malibu, Silverado, Fusion and Vue (called the Vue Green Line). Is Detroit about to blow it again? Hybrids might be the most overhyped consumer product since New Coke or the five-blade razor and it's just a matter of time before the innocent wise up. The wheeled gadgets are expensive and represent dubious value. Their fuel economy stats are exaggerated and the auto makers, no slouches when it comes to cynical marketing, have figured out that hybrid technology can appeal to lube heads who adore power and cherish the ability to accelerate to the stop sign in 2.4 seconds flat. So much for green effect. While Consumer Reports gives high ratings to the Highlander and Prius (for things like comfort, performance and fuel efficiency) it also notes that hybrids make about as much financial sense as dry cleaning your underwear. Take the regular Honda Accord versus the hybrid Accord. The hybrid version costs $5,700 (U.S.) more. Therefore the sales tax and financing charges are higher. The higher sticker price translates into extra depreciation costs. But don't the fuel savings still make it a bargain? Forget it. The Accord hybrid gets only two miles per gallon (mpg) more than the non-hybrid. Add it all up and the extra cost over five years for the hybrid is $10,250, according to Consumer Reports. The extra five-year cost of a Prius over a Toyota Corolla is $5,250 even though the Prius does better than the Corolla by 15 mpg. Fine, you say; what's a few thousand bucks if it means saving the planet? Wrong, tree hugger. Hybrids aren't saving the planet. They still burn fossil fuels. Combustion of any type adds to smog and produces carbon dioxide, the gas that's turning the Arctic into a gigantic toaster oven. Yes, hybrids get better fuel economy than non-hybrids of similar size, but the difference isn't as big as you might think. You wouldn't know that from official government figures, though. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency measures the mileage of every car on the road, and the law states that only EPA figures can be used in advertising. The problem is that EPA tests pretty much ignore real-world driving. They do not take into account speeds greater than 100 km an hour or the extra burden put on an engine when the air conditioning is on. Take the Prius again. The EPA says the little sweetie gets 55 mpg. Consumer Reports puts the figure at 44. The lead-foots at Car & Driver magazine put it at 42, or about one-quarter less than the posted figure. Still, 42 is better than a Corolla's 29. Differences elsewhere can be minimal. The New York Times last year tested the Lexus SUV in regular and hybrid versions. The hybrid got 23 mpg, only 1.4 mpg more than the non-hybrid. So why buy a hybrid Lexus? In a word, power. The extra torque provided by combing a V6 gasoline engine with two electric motors boosts torque (or turning force), allowing it to accelerate faster than the non-hybrid in spite of the extra 150 kilos of weight. You can see what's starting to happen here. More and more cars and SUVs will get the hybrid treatment to improve acceleration first, fuel economy second. The auto makers hope this translates into marketing nirvana. Hybrids might allow them to attract the type of buyer who wants wheel-smoking performance without the environmental guilt that goes with it. Never mind that the SUV's green envelope is gossamer thin; the neighbours won't know. Consumers are enamoured. In February, sales of the Lexus SUV hybrid were 22 per cent of the total sales of that model family. Eventually, consumers will figure out the fuel savings of the vehicles are not worth the price premium, and that the green image is just that -- an image. Nonetheless, Detroit, coming late to the hybrid game, considers the hybrid the path to salvation. The sensible way to improve fuel economy is to build smaller, lighter cars. It takes great amounts of energy to propel greater amounts of mass, end of story. If the smaller cars are also safe, reliable and fun to drive -- a formula the Europeans and the Japanese figured out -- they will attract buyers. So instead of sticking an electric motor in the mediocre Chevy Malibu, why not make the Malibu better than the Honda Accord, its direct competitor, in every sense? The answer is that the hybrid propaganda is working. For now, that is.

As we begin this new year, the executive branch of our government has been caught eavesdropping on huge numbers of American citizens and has brazenly declared that it has the unilateral right to continue without regard to the established law enacted by Congress precisely to prevent such abuses. It is imperative that respect for the rule of law be restored in our country.

Calling the ability to convert analog video content to a digital format a "significant technical weakness in content protection," H.R. 4569 would require all consumer electronics video devices manufactured more than 12 months after the DTCSA is passed to be able to detect and obey a "rights signaling system" that would be used to limit how content is viewed and used. That rights signaling system would consist of two DRM technologies, Video Encoded Invisible Light (VEIL) and Content Generation Management System—Analog (CGMS-A), which would be embedded in broadcasts and other analog video content. Under the legislation, all devices sold in the US would fall under the auspices of the DTCSA: it would be illegal to "manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide or otherwise traffic" in such products. It's a dream-come-true for Hollywood, and in combination with a new broadcast flag legislation (not yet introduced) would strike a near-fatal blow to the long-established right of Fair Use.

The federal government has introduced a bill to make it easier for police and CSIS to monitor private cellphone conversations and communication on the internet. The Modernization of Investigative Techniques Act, if passed, would require internet companies to give the police confidential information on their subscribers.

Bill C-37 is that rarest of legislative entities: an act of Parliament that could actually improve the quality of your life. The law, if passed, would allow any Canadians who did not want to be called at home by telemarketers to place their names on what is known as a do-not-call list. It would be against the law for telemarketers to contact anyone on the list, with stiff penalties in place for those who transgressed.

The Globe and Mail reports that Canadian law professors have countered the Canadian recording industry's misinformation campaign in a new 600-page book that is being made freely available under a creative commons license. Led by Professor Michael Geist, the book provides full coverage of the possibility of Canada adopting DMCA-like copyright laws.

TORONTO (CP) - The Canadian Recording Industry Association is calling on Ottawa to make sure Canada's copyright law is up to par after an Australian court ruled popular file-swapping network Kazaa was illegal. "The law that is currently on the books - that's enforced - is so antiquated that the net result has been, (that) despite all of our best efforts, Canada's become a piracy haven," association president Graham Henderson said in an interview Monday. "We have lobbied for years . . . to get those laws up to date so we're in line with everyone in the world - and I mean everyone else."

On the third day of hell, the president gets tough: “I have zero tolerance for lawlessness.” With all undue respect, Mr. President, you have a great deal of tolerance for a vast array of lawlessness. You tolerate corporate crime: fraud, tax evasion, no-bid contracts and cooking the books. You tolerate political crime: disenfranchisement, election fraud, slander and outing intelligence agents for political revenge. You tolerate international crime: overthrowing democratic governments, torture, attacks on journalists, the Geneva conventions and wars of aggression. You tolerate the pharmaceutical industry’s malfeasance, trading thousands of lives for arthritis relief. You tolerate intolerable labor standards both here and abroad. You tolerate industrial waste, poisoning the air, land and water, and contributing far more than your fair share to the problem that precipitated this “act of god.” In many ways, yours is the most tolerant administration in history.

The proposal is a complicated formula based on the dimensions (not weight) of six different categories of such vehicles. Smaller pickups, minivans, and SUVs would have to become stingier on gas between now and 2011 than under current law (28.4 miles per gallon instead of 23.5 m.p.g.); for larger light truck models, the requirement would actually be reduced somewhat (21.3 m.p.g. instead of 23.5 m.p.g.). Highway behemoths - Hummer H2s, Ford Excursions, and other models weighing between 8,500 and 10,000 pounds - would remain exempt from fuel economy standards on the grounds that they're a very small percentage of all personal vehicles on the road today.

Canadians who share music files on the Internet can now be sued by the record industry, but it will not be an easy process, according to legal experts. A Canadian Federal Court of Appeal's decision, released Thursday afternoon, upheld a ruling last year denying the recording industry's demand that Internet Service Providers be forced to reveal the identities of 29 people that the Canadian Recording Industry Association had identified as major downloaders. But the appeals decision is being interpreted as a win by both sides in the music download debate, since it left the door open to future suits when the judge indicated copyright law must still be respected.