Xbox modding trial on hold after judge berates prosecution - msnbc.com

By Winda Benedetti

The criminal trial against a man accused of modifying, or "modding" Xbox game machines was put on hold Wednesday after the federal judge overseeing the case berated the prosecution and questioned their use of witnesses who may have, themselves, broken the law.

U.S. District Judge Philip Gutierrez told the prosecuting attorneys that he had “serious concerns about the government’s case,” according to a report from Wired.

As we reported earlier, opening statements were scheduled to begin Wednesday morning in the criminal trial of 28-year-old Matthew Crippen of Los Angeles. Crippen — who is accused of modifying Microsoft-made Xbox 360 game consoles for money so the machines could play pirated games and other content — faces time in prison if convicted. (msnbc.com is a joint venture of Microsoft and NBC Universal.)

Authorities arrested Crippen last year on accusations that he violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. He was ultimately charged with two counts of trying to circumvent anti-piracy measures. This trial marks the first time a federal prosecution for console-modding has reached a jury trial.

Wired writer David Kravets has been in the courtroom and reports:

Among the judge’s host of complaints against the government was his alarm that prosecutors would put on two witnesses who may have broken the law.

One is Entertainment Software Association investigator Tony Rosario, who secretly video-recorded defendant Matthew Crippen allegedly performing the Xbox mod in Crippen’s Los Angeles suburban house. The defense argues that making the recording violates California privacy law. The other witness is Microsoft security employee Ken McGrail, who analyzed the two consoles Crippen allegedly altered. McGrail admitted that he himself had modded Xboxes in college.

“Maybe two of the four government witnesses committed crimes,” the judge said from the bench. “I think it is relevant and the jury is going to hear about it — both crimes.”

Wired reports that opening arguments were put on hold and, after the berating was over, federal prosecutors asked for a recess to determine whether they would offer the defendant a deal, seek dismissal of the case or move forward with it.

Fore related stories, check out:
Kinect sex – what's the holdup?
With Kinect controller, hackers take liberties
Kinect vs. Move vs. Wii: Fight!

Winda Benedetti writes the Citizen Gamer column for msnbc.com. You can follow her tweets about games and other things right here on Twitter.

View the original article here

Judge orders Gawker.com to take down leaked pages of Sarah Palin's book ... - New York Daily News

Pages from Sarah Palin's upcoming tome, 'America by Heart,' which were featured on Gawker.com ordered pulled by judge.

Sarah Palin's "America by Heart" is nothing to gawk at. For now, anyway.

A judge has ordered Gawker.com to pull down pages it featured from the former Alaskan governor's upcoming book.

According to the injunction, the website must immediately cease "continuing to distribute, publish or otherwise transmit pages from the book" pending a hearing on Nov. 30.

Gawker has apparently complied, and did so in a very un-Gawker-like fashion, without a witty retort.

The tongue-in-cheek site, which mixes news and gossip and was one of several sites to post images of the book’s pages, was initially defiant when Palin complained about the leak last week. It refused to pull the pages even after receiving a letter demanding it do so, Palin's lawsuit said.

The Fox News commentator wrote via Twitter on Thursday, "the publishing world is LEAKING out-of-context excerpts of my book w/out my permission? Isn't that illegal?"

Gawker responded in a post of its own, with a title, "Sarah Palin is Mad at Us for Leaking Pages From Her Book." In the post it added, "or skip the totally boring reading and call one of your lawyers. They'll walk you through it."

HarperCollins filed a legal complaint Friday in federal court asking that the site be banned from what it termed "further copyright infringement."

According to the leaked pages, Palin attacks President Obama and "American Idol," and defends the Tea Party movement against claims of racism.

With News Wire Services

msheridan@nydailynews.com; or follow him at Twitter.com/NYDNSheridan

View the original article here

Yemen Judge Orders Arrest of Qaeda-Linked Cleric - New York Times

BEIRUT, Lebanon — A Yemeni judge on Saturday ordered the “forcible arrest” of Anwar al-Awlaki, the American-born cleric who is believed to play an important role in the regional branch of Al Qaeda.

Anwar al-Awlaki

Mr. Awlaki, who is thought to be hiding among fellow tribesmen in Yemen’s remote Shabwa Province, failed to appear Tuesday at a trial where he was accused of killing a foreigner. It is rare for a Yemeni judge to order the arrest of a defendant so soon after his failure to appear.

Yemen has been under increased American pressure to act decisively against Al Qaeda since powerful explosives were discovered Oct. 29 in two separate packages being sent by air cargo to the United States. On Friday, Al Qaeda’s regional branch, known as Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, claimed responsibility for the plot in an Internet posting, confirming what American officials had suspected since the plot was discovered.

The United States took the unusual step this year of authorizing the killing of Mr. Awlaki, an American citizen. Mr. Awlaki, whose eloquent sermons on Islam have long been available on tapes and on the Internet, has been the subject of intense American scrutiny since he was linked to Maj. Nidal Malik Hassan, the Army psychiatrist accused of killing 13 people in Fort Hood, Tex., last year, and to Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Nigerian charged with trying to blow up a Detroit-bound jetliner last Dec. 25.

Mr. Awlaki has called for violent jihad against the West. He is thought to play primarily an inspirational role in Al Qaeda, and it is not yet clear whether he had anything to do with the air freight plot.

On Tuesday, Mr. Awlaki was charged in absentia as a co-defendant at the trial of another man, Hisham Assem, who is accused of killing a Frenchman at an oil compound in September. Mr. Assem has denied those charges. Prosecutors have said Mr. Assem was in contact with Mr. Awlaki.

View the original article here

Judge tentatively rejects 'don't ask, don't tell' stay request - Los Angeles Times

A federal judge in Riverside who declared the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy banning gays unconstitutional issued a tentative ruling Monday rejecting the federal government's request to stay her decision while the case is appealed.

U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips said the government failed to provide sufficient proof that her injunction halting the policy would cause "irreparable harm" to the military or that the government's appeal would be successful. Phillips planned to issue her final decision early Tuesday.

Paul Freeborne of the U.S. attorney's office argued that the injunction immediately halting enforcement of the policy, which bans gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military, jeopardized national security.

He urged Phillips, who issued the injunction last week, to set aside her decision while the government appealed the ruling and injunction to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

In a sworn declaration submitted to the court, Clifford L. Stanley, undersecretary of defense for overall military readiness, cautioned that an abrupt transition would undercut the Pentagon's survey of military commands around the world to determine how best to create a policy that allowed people who are openly homosexual to serve.

"The stakes are so high, and the potential harm so great, that caution is in order," he said.

But Phillips on Monday rejected that argument. The judge said her ruling ordered an end to all discharge and separation proceedings under "don't ask, don't tell," but did not prohibit the military from crafting a new policy or educating military personnel about serving side by side with openly gay service members.

Phillips also said that the government failed to produce any evidence during the two-week trial that showed allowing gays in the military would harm military readiness or troop cohesion.

"The arguments by the government are vague … and belied by the evidence produced at trial," Phillips said Monday. She also chastised the federal government lawyers for not filing their objections when she was considering the injunction.

In her initial Sept. 9 ruling, Phillips found that the ban on gays had a "direct and deleterious effect" on the armed services, including the dismissal of crucial military personnel such as translators. She noted that the Pentagon violated the policy when it saw fit, routinely delaying the discharge of service members suspected of violating the law until they completed their deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan.

During Monday's hearing, Freeborne also argued that the judge exceeded her authority by issuing an injunction worldwide, as opposed to limiting it to the plaintiffs in the case or within her Southern California district. That argument will be a primary aspect of the government's appeal.

The ruling has put President Obama in a tricky spot. He strongly opposes the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which he once called a threat to national security, but says his administration has an obligation to defend laws passed by Congress.

Meanwhile, the military has suspended enforcement of the policy while Phillips' injunction is in place.

The challenge to the "don't ask, don't tell" policy was filed in 2004 by the Log Cabin Republicans, the largest gay GOP political organization. It was the first successful broad-based constitutional challenge to the policy since Congress enacted it in 1993.

Dan Woods, the lead attorney for the Log Cabin Republicans, argued during Monday's hearing that lifting the judge's injunction would "deprive very patriotic Americans of their constitutional rights" and urged the judge to keep it in place.

Former President Clinton adopted the "don't ask, don't tell" policy as a reform to the military's practice of seeking out and discharging gays and lesbians. Under the policy, as long as gays and lesbians keep their sexual orientation secret, they are allowed to serve. More than 13,000 service members have been discharged under the policy.

The House of Representatives voted to repeal the policy last spring, contingent on the outcome of a Pentagon study to determine if it can adapt to the change without harming military readiness. The study is expected to be completed by December. The proposed repeal was blocked on the Senate floor, although it may be reconsidered during a lame-duck session after the November election.

phil.willon@latimes.com

View the original article here

Judge orders military to stop enforcing 'don't ask, don't tell' - CNN

Judge: Stop enforcing 'don't ask'NEW: The Defense and Justice departments are studying the rulingA researcher says he expects the Obama administration to appeal the orderLog Cabin Republicans hail the federal judge's ruling but advise cautionThe judge had previously ruled that the policy violated service members' rights

(CNN) -- A federal judge on Tuesday ordered the U.S. military to stop enforcing the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, effectively ending the ban on openly gay troops.

U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips' permanent worldwide injunction -- praised by gay rights organizations -- orders the military "immediately to suspend and discontinue any investigation, or discharge, separation, or other proceeding, that may have been commenced" under the "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

The judge, a Clinton appointee based in the Central District of California, previously ruled that the policy regarding gays serving in the military violated service members' Fifth Amendment rights to due process and freedom of speech, but had delayed issuing the injunction.

The military was sued by Log Cabin Republicans, a gay rights group.

Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler would say only that the department is "reviewing the ruling." The department has 60 days to appeal, but is not required to do so.

The Defense Department is reviewing the ruling to determine whether it has immediate impact and is consulting with the Justice Department, Pentagon spokeswoman Cynthia Smith said.

Air Force lawyers in a recent case argued the military -- not the courts -- is in the best position to evaluate and enforce the "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

President Barack Obama is pushing for a repeal of the controversial policy. A bill currently before Congress would overturn the measure after a Pentagon review is completed in December.

More than 12,500 people have been booted from the military since "don't ask, don't tell" went into effect. Along with barring known gay, lesbian and bisexual individuals from serving, the policy prevents the military from asking them about it.

Log Cabin Republicans praised the ruling but urged "caution by servicemembers considering coming out at this time, as the Obama administration still has the option to appeal."

The group said the ruling is a victory for strong national defense.

"No longer will our military be compelled to discharge servicemembers with valuable skills and experience because of an archaic policy mandating irrational discrimination," it said in a statement following the ruling.

Servicemembers United, which describes itself as the nation's largest organization of gay and lesbian troops and veterans, also hailed the judge's ruling but urged gays who serve to be careful about coming out now.

"This order from Judge Phillips is another historic and courageous step in the right direction, a step that Congress has been noticeably slow in taking," said executive director Alexander Nicholson.

Aaron Belkin, director of the Palm Center, a research institute of the University of California-Santa Barbara, said he expects the Obama adminsitration to appeal Tuesday's order.

"The case could be done next week if the administration decides not to appeal, or it could take five years if there is an appeal, or Congress could move faster than the Justice Department, which would render this case moot," said Belkin, whose institute researches sexual minorities in the military and advocates an end to the ban.

CNN's Carol Cratty and Jennifer Rizzo contributed to this report.

View the original article here