UCAN

In our last newsletter  (click here to have one mailed to you), we noted the astonishing correlation between public approval of politicians and gas prices.  We also speculated that gas prices are artificially low - and could remain that way - until the oil industry defeats new legislation that is being debated in the Senate right now.

The higher the price of gasoline, the lower the public’s approval of politicians. In June of 2007, the president’s popularity reached an all-time low of 29% at a time when gas prices reached a record breaking national average of  $3.20 a gallon.  This table, which expresses the price of gasoline as a percentage, clearly demonstrates a “mirror image” effect where the higher the price of gas, the lower the president’s popularity (and vice/versa). Chart Source: Original research by UCAN. Data sources: Polling Report, and U.S. Energy Information Agency.

The new law kills, or at least cuts back on, obscene tax breaks for the oil industry, provides incentives for the development of renewable or "green" energy, and forces automakers to build vehicles with an average of 35 mile per gallon.  With oil hovering above $90 a barrel, all of these reforms are urgent and necessary. 

Apparently, the oil industry is HOWLING about the proposed changes, and today, the New York Times reported that oil lobbyists are going "berserk" over the new legislation.  This law puts politicians between a rock and a hard place: If they vote "yes" they gain the goodwill of the voters and will likely be targeted by big Oil in the future. If they vote "no" they'll get lots of urgently needed cash from the most powerful lobby in the free world, and the justified contempt of informed voters.

Looking for cheaper gas? Visit UCAN's not-for-profit Gas Project, or send for our FREE 28-page guide with over 100 gas-saving tips.

Have you been receiving debt collection phone calls and messages from 800-684-8429? If so, you are not alone. A UCAN member recently filed a complaint regarding incessant phone calls and messages she had received about someone else's debt from the number 800-684-8429. The calls appear to be made on behalf of HSBC Bank, or Orchard Bank, a banking and credit provider. Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, debt collectors must honor any request to cease telephone communication and contact you only in writing.

• Tell HSBC to quit calling you and Stop Debt Collection Harassment using our sample letter.

• If HSBC is calling you about a debt that you do not owe, send them a Collection Agency Debt Dispute letter.

(you can also see my local news interview on Iphone hacks, open networks, and cancelling your cell phone contract. Please share your thoughts on cracking the Iphone.)

The days of soldering parts together to unlock your iPhone are over.... unless you just enjoy soldering, and in that case, as you were. For everyone else, put your soldering guns away. Today, a San Francisco-based group is claiming to have developed software that will allow users to "unlock" their AT&T iPhones so they can be used on other networks. In the US, the only other GSM carrier is T-Mobile, but that gives you one more choice than you had before.

Perhaps the most important point to make is that there is a strong argument that using the software to unlock your iPhone is legal, as long as it is for personal use. Basic American copyright law protects the software code, or firmware that runs the Iphone and locks it to AT&T's network. Additional protections exist from the always controversial Digital Millenium Copyright Act (let's just say that if a laws appeared on celebrity gossip sites, the DMCA would be front and center most days). The DMCA offers additional protection to rights holders by restricting users of copyrighted material from circumventing technological protection measures intended to restrict access to the copyrighted material. This includes accessing content even for legitimate, fair uses of content. However, in November of 2006, the Copyright Office approved 6 exceptions to the DMCA "anti-circumvention" restrictions.

While there is nuance to discuss, and attorneys will appear on both sides, one of these exceptions clearly included provisioins allowing consumers to unlock their cellphones "for the sole purpose of lawfully connecting to a wireless telephone communication network."

"For the sole purpose" is the key phrase here. It indicates that you, for your personal need to use your iphone on a communication network other than AT&T's, can circumvent protections AT&T has embedded into its phone. On the other hand, you will not likely see a bunch of unlocked phones on Ebay in a few days, since circumventing technological protection measures in order to make them available for sale would not be viewed as for the "sole purpose of lawfully connecting..."

That said, there is a key grey area that will likely decide the future of unlocking your iphone. This is the concept of whether it is legal to distribute, for free, the code that allows users to unlock there phones. There will be a great deal of disagreement on this subject, but a good argument from attorney Bart Showalter suggests that if the software is narrowly focused on busting the network lock, it would likely fit into the anti-circumvention exception to the DMCA. In other words, if the Copyright Office granted users the right to unlock their cell phone for certain reasons, it would be an illogical contradiction to then say that distributing the means (software code) to exercise those rights is illegal. At the very least there is a basic argument to be made(though some IP lawyers will scream secondary liability a la DeCSS) that anyone distributing this is certainly not directly circumventing Iphone firmware, and is simply making available software that allows users to do something that the Copyright explicitly permitted.

Either way, the unlocking of the Iphone is proof positive that consumers demand networks that allow them to use the technology and software of their choice.

Check out these links as well

• Engadget story on Iphone crack
• Engadget Iphone crack legalities story
• PCWorld's article on DMCA challenges to Iphone hackers
• UCAN interview on Iphone hacks, open networks, and breaking your contract

A recent story by Jason Leopold on Truthout.org reports that Vice President Dick Cheney was aware of price manipulation and artificial powerplant shutdowns during the 2000-2001 California energy crisis, but kept the information from the public. According to the story, just before Cheney's National Energy Policy was to be announced, the Vice President ordered the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to seal documents related to settlements with two energy companies that had been investigated for wrongdoing. Leopold writes:

So in May 2001, just days before Cheney unveiled his long-awaited National Energy Policy, FERC entered into confidential settlements with Williams in which the company forfeited $8 million it was owed by California's grid operator for power Williams sold into the marketplace at inflated prices. Williams did not admit any guilt for the power plant shutdown and, on orders from Cheney, FERC agreed to keep details of the settlement sealed. FERC later entered into a similar settlement with Reliant. The company agreed to forfeit $13.8 million it was owed by California's grid operator, did not admit to any wrongdoing, and FERC kept the details of the settlement confidential.

Williams and Reliant never admited guilt. But do you remember the audio tapes with Enron employees laughing about all the money they had stolen from poor "Grandma Millie" in California? That's who these guys are. They don't have to admit their guilt because there are tapes and transcripts that have recorded it for us. One Reliant employee is quoted in the report as having said, "we decided as a group that we were going to make [the money we lost] back up, so we turned like about almost every power plant off. It worked." A Williams employee is quoted as having told a powerplant operator that it wouldn't hurt the companies' feelings, "if the power plant that was down for repairs was kept offline for an extended period of time so the company could continue to be paid the 'premium' for its emergency energy supplies from the ISO."

Dick Cheney's decision to keep such blatant wrong-doing from the public is part noble, and part sickening. Cheney was protecting a friend. After all, the man who had hand-picked Dick to succed him as the top man at Halliburton sat on Williams' board of directors. And that man, Thomas Cruikshank, had told Cheney that FERC, "was in possession of incriminating audio tapes in which a Williams official and an AES power plant operator discussed keeping a Southern California power plant offline so Williams could continue to receive the $750 per megawatt hour premium for emergency power...".

Instead of having knowledge about the potential risks of a deregulated energy market, the public was kept in the dark. The Vice President's National Energy Policy, which in reality consisted of little more than a "wishlist" from the energy industry, became law and the rest is history. The $30 billion swindle kind of history, and that's just California. In order to help some pals, Dick sold out the country, or rather, "sold off" the country.