Ashton Kutcher files for divorce from Demi Moore


LOS ANGELES (AP) — Ashton Kutcher filed court papers Friday to end his seven-year marriage to actress Demi Moore.


The actor's divorce petition cites irreconcilable differences and does not list a date that the couple separated. Moore announced last year that she was ending her marriage to the actor 15 years her junior, but she never filed a petition.


Kutcher's filing does not indicate that the couple has a prenuptial agreement. The filing states Kutcher signed the document Friday, hours before it was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court.


Kutcher and Moore married in September 2005 and until recently kept their relationship very public, communicating with each other and fans on the social networking site Twitter. After their breakup, Moore changed her name on the site from (at)mrskutcher to (at)justdemi.


Kutcher currently stars on CBS' "Two and a Half Men."


Messages sent to Kutcher's and Moore's publicists were not immediately returned Friday.


Moore, 50, and Kutcher, 34, created the DNA Foundation, also known as the Demi and Ashton Foundation, in 2010 to combat the organized sexual exploitation of girls around the globe. They later lent their support to the United Nations' efforts to fight human trafficking, a scourge the international organization estimates affects about 2.5 million people worldwide.


Moore was previously married to actor Bruce Willis for 13 years. They had three daughters together — Rumer, Scout and Tallulah Belle — before divorcing in 2000. Willis later married model-actress Emma Heming in an intimate 2009 ceremony at his home in Parrot Cay in the Turks and Caicos Islands that attended by their children, as well as Moore and Kutcher.


Kutcher has been dating former "That '70s Show" co-star Mila Kunis.


The divorce filing was first reported Friday by People magazine.


___


Anthony McCartney can be reached at http://twitter.com/mccartneyAP.


Read More..

Medicare’s Chief Actuary, Richard Foster, Retiring


Carol T. Powers for The New York Times


Richard S. Foster testifying before the House Ways and Means Committee in 2004







WASHINGTON — Richard S. Foster, who as chief actuary of the Medicare program for the last 18 years nettled presidents of both parties with his projections of rapid growth in federal health care spending, will retire next month, the Obama administration said Friday.




Mr. Foster, 63, a career civil servant known for his fierce independence, has been an influential voice on Medicare, Medicaid and the new health care law.


With 100 million people on Medicare or Medicaid and an additional 20 million expected to get federal subsidies for private insurance under President Obama’s health care law, the need for accurate estimates of health spending has never been greater, lawmakers say.


Mr. Foster said that Medicare savings in the 2010 health care law, based on cutbacks in payments to hospitals and other health care providers, were probably unsustainable and could jeopardize access to care for beneficiaries, a judgment that displeased the Obama administration.


In 2003, Mr. Foster found himself in conflict with the Bush administration when he raised questions about the cost of a Republican bill adding a prescription drug benefit to Medicare. Federal investigators later found that a top Medicare official had threatened to fire Mr. Foster if he provided certain cost estimates to Congress.


Marilyn B. Tavenner, acting administrator of the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, praised Mr. Foster for “his adherence to the highest levels of professional independence and ethical conduct.” She said he “will be sorely missed by policy makers and officials throughout the administration and Congress.”


Ms. Tavenner said “we will soon begin a national recruitment effort” to find a successor to Mr. Foster, who began working for the federal government 40 years ago.


Proposals to rein in Medicare spending have been at the center of budget negotiations between President Obama and Speaker John A. Boehner. Both sides have relied on data from Mr. Foster’s office.


Congress bolstered the actuary’s independence in a 1997 law stipulating that the holder of the job can be removed from office “only for cause.”


In a report accompanying the law, Congress said that “the office of the actuary has a unique role,” serving both the administration and Congress, and often must work with lawmakers developing legislation.


With help from a staff of nearly 100, the chief actuary issues detailed annual reports on national health spending and the financial outlook for Medicare. In addition, the actuary’s office collects data used to calculate Medicare payment rates for doctors, hospitals and many other health care providers.


Read More..

E-book restrictions leave 'buyers' with few rights








There's a crass old joke about how you can never buy beer, just rent it. Who would think that the same joke applies to book buying in the digital age?

But that's the case. Many people who'll be unwrapping iPads, Amazon Kindles or Barnes & Noble Nooks on Tuesday morning and loading them with bestsellers or classics won't have any idea how limited their rights are as their books' "owners."

In fact, they won't be owners at all. They'll be licensees. Unlike the owners of a physical tome, they won't have the unlimited right to lend an e-book, give it away, resell it or leave it to their heirs. If it's bought for their iPad, they won't be able to read it on their Kindle. And if Amazon or the other sellers don't like what they've done with it, they can take it back, without warning.






All these restrictions "raise obvious questions about what 'ownership' is," observes Dan Gillmor, an expert on digital media at Arizona State University. "The companies that license stuff digitally have made it clear that you own nothing."

Typically, e-book buyers have no idea about these complexities. How could they? The rules and limitations are embodied in "terms of service" documents that Amazon, Apple, B&N and other sellers shroud in legalese and bury deep in their websites. That tells you how little they want you to know.

The rules are based, in turn, on the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act, with which Congress hoped to balance the rights of copyright holders and content users. "In the digital environment, that's always been the trickiest balance to strike," Annemarie Bridy, a specialist in intellectual property law at the University of Idaho, told me. In those terms, the DMCA looks like a failure.

Both camps have important rights to protect. Let's start with copyright owners.

In the non-digital world, copyright ends with the first sale of each copyrighted object. Under the "first sale" doctrine, once you buy a book, that physical book is yours to lend, give away, or resell. Copyright is safeguarded by the limitations of physical transfer — once the book is given or loaned, the original buyer no longer has access to it. If a library owns five copies of a book, only five borrowers can read it at the same time. Theoretically a book can be photocopied, but only at great effort and with a perceptible loss of quality.

In digital-dom, however, technology allows infinite copies to be made, with no loss of quality. Absent the usual restrictions, one could give away an e-book and still have it to read. Unrestricted transferability becomes a genuine threat to the livelihood of authors, artists, filmmakers, musicians.

So some limitation is sensible. That's usually done through digital rights management, or DRM, which encodes copy or usage limitations into the digital file. The DMCA protected DRM by outlawing efforts to circumvent it (with a few exceptions).

The question is whether the balance has tipped too far in favor of the booksellers, at the consumers' expense. The answer is yes.

For one thing, DRM has put far too much power in the hands of digital booksellers. Amazon, in particular, has shown it can't be trusted with that power. In 2009, having learned that it inadvertently had sold unauthorized e-book versions of George Orwell's "1984" and "Animal Farm" through its website, the company simply deleted those e-books from buyers' Kindles stealthily, without warning.

An uproar followed, not least because Amazon's Orwellian behavior involved those Orwellian masterpieces. Amazon settled a subsequent lawsuit by promising never to steal a book back from a Kindle without the device owner's permission.

But earlier this year, the company was revealed to have unilaterally shut down the access of Linn Jordet Nygaard, a Norwegian Kindle owner, to her library of 43 e-books, for reasons it refused to divulge. Another uproar, and Amazon backed down again, restoring Nygaard's account — again without explanation. Amazon refused my request for comment.

Another downside of e-book DRM is that most e-books are tied to the seller's reading device or apps. Buy a book from Amazon, and you can read it only on a Kindle or Amazon app. Buy it from Apple, and it can be read only on an Apple device.

This lock-in gives the booksellers power over not only consumers but publishers. In fact, it led several publishers to make a price-fixing deal with Apple that aimed to undermine Amazon's market power, but ended with their getting whacked with a big federal antitrust fine instead.

Moreover, notwithstanding the public impression that digital is forever, nothing is permanent in the digital world. In fact, digital content can be less permanent than physical books. In libraries you can find volumes that date back hundreds of years and can still be read (if carefully); but there are digital files that date back only a decade yet are completely unintelligible today.

Nowhere does Amazon, Apple or any other distributor pledge to support its digital formats in perpetuity. Quite the contrary: They typically warn that they can cancel their service at any time, without warning, in a way that could end your access to a lifetime of e-book purchases in the flash of an electron. They could also go out of business, leaving millions of dependent customers in the lurch.

Amazon keeps your purchased content for free on its own servers — the term is "in the cloud" — for downloading to your Kindles as needed. You pay once for an e-book and can use it on all the Kindles you own. I can't find any written promise by Amazon that this storage will always be free. If it announces a few years from now that henceforth there will be a monthly fee to store books purchased, say, more than 10 years ago, what rights will you have to resist? None.

There are ways to protect your e-books from grasping e-booksellers or the future. Programs available on the Web can strip the DRM code from your purchased items — for books, one possible method involves an e-library management program called Calibre. The program easily can be augmented with a DRM-stripping application so you can convert e-books sold in any proprietary format into a different format or even as plain text.

But is it legal? No one is quite sure, and that's a problem. The DMCA makes it unlawful to circumvent certain DRM protection, but doing so on an item you've bought and want to keep in a different format for your own use — not to make multiple copies for sale — may not break the law. On the other hand, distributing software that enables that is illegal under the DMCA even if the goal is legitimate, which is absurd.

Even if reformatting a file you own is legal, what if you don't own it? The hard-to-find terms of service of e-book sellers specify that you're only licensing a book, not buying it (although the Amazon order page does say you're "buying" it). "In the digital context, it's not clear that the 'first sale' has ever occurred," says Bridy.

It should be a top priority for Congress to clear out the murk. Buyers of e-books must have the explicit right to reformat their purchases and save backup copies for their own use, permanently. The sale of an e-book must be irrevocable. On the other side, it must remain strictly illegal to make multiple unauthorized copies of any copyrighted work for distribution. Lending by libraries, one digital copy at a time, should be facilitated — it tends to widen the audience for books.

The guiding principle must be that an e-book owner's rights and responsibilities parallel those of a book owner, and the same must go for authors, publishers and booksellers. "Someone once observed to me that if libraries were being invented today, publishers would try to make them illegal," Gillmor says.

Clarify these rules of e-book commerce, and the book market will reap the benefit. The power of electronic booksellers over publishers might be reduced, and consumers would know what they were buying — and would own what they bought. Leave the rules as vague as they are, and the victims will be authors, consumers and publishers.

Michael Hiltzik's column appears Sundays and Wednesdays. Reach him at mhiltzik@latimes.com, read past columns at latimes.com/hiltzik, check out facebook.com/hiltzik and follow @latimeshiltzik on Twitter.






Read More..

LAPD investigation of killing hobbled by DEA









The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration has refused for more than two years to allow its agents to cooperate with a Los Angeles Police Department investigation into the death of a drug suspect shortly after he was arrested in a DEA operation, according to LAPD records.


The LAPD's homicide investigation has effectively stalled, and officials said in documents reviewed by The Times that without assistance from the DEA they cannot determine how the man's fatal injuries were inflicted.


An autopsy found that the suspect's ribs had been fractured in 21 places and coroner's officials concluded that the injuries were caused by "blunt force." The fractures led to internal bleeding, which ultimately killed the man, the coroner found.





The LAPD believes DEA agents may have caused the injuries when they placed the suspect on his stomach while handcuffing him, according to the documents. But without being able to interview the DEA agents who made the arrest, it's impossible for the detectives to determine whether the excessive force was used.


Dawn Dearden, a spokeswoman for the DEA, said the U.S. Justice Department's own Office of the Inspector General is conducting an investigation into the death to determine whether DEA agents broke federal civil rights laws by using excessive force when arresting the man. Dearden said the DEA has provided the LAPD with some information and documentation about the incident.


"However, it is not uncommon for an agent under multiple ongoing investigations to decline specific law enforcement interviews until an inspector general investigation is completed," she said.


LAPD officials said they need to conduct their own homicide investigation. Chief Charlie Beck outlined the department's struggles with the case in a report recently submitted to the L.A. Police Commission. Beck reports to the civilian panel on all serious use-of-force cases and in-custody deaths.


Beck wrote that his detectives had made "numerous requests" to the DEA for interviews with the involved agents but have repeatedly "been met with negative results."


The incident began on a July night in 2010 in a parking lot a few blocks from Hollywood Boulevard. For months, DEA special agents had been working the area to arrest drug dealers and gang members, according to the report. On this night, an informant working with the DEA had arranged to meet two suspected dealers to purchase 10 ounces of crystal methamphetamine, the report said.


The informant, wired with a hidden microphone, approached the suspects' car and received the drugs from Alberto Arriaga, who remained in the passenger seat throughout the exchange. Drug agents moved in and are believed to have pulled Arriaga from the car, laid him face down on the pavement and handcuffed him, according to the LAPD report.


Eventually, officers from the LAPD were called in to take Arriaga and the other suspect to a nearby station to be booked, the report said. A station supervisor asked the men if they had any medical issues. Arriaga complained of leg pain from a previous injury but mentioned nothing else, the report found. The men were then placed in a holding cell together.


Sometime later that night, after the booking process had been completed, detention officers tried to move Arriaga, 45, to another jail facility. He told the jailers he was having abdominal pain "and had been beaten up by the DEA agents who arrested him," the report said. Arriaga was taken by ambulance to Hollywood Presbyterian Hospital. There, according to coroner's records, he waited 16 hours without receiving medical attention despite his worsening condition and then died.


The coroner's autopsy revealed that Arriaga's fractured ribs had caused internal bleeding in his chest that led to respiratory failure. Because the ribs had been broken by "blunt force injuries" that came from the back, the coroner classified the death as a homicide.


The exam also found that Arriaga had cirrhosis of the liver, a condition that can impair the blood's ability to clot and so could have exacerbated the internal bleeding.


As it does with all in-custody deaths and cases involving serious force by officers, the LAPD deployed a team of specialized investigators to look into Arriaga's death. Such investigations typically focus on LAPD officers and determine if they violated any department rules or committed any crimes.


However, the Arriaga case was complicated. Pursuing the theory that Arriaga's ribs were broken while he was being taken into custody, the investigators found that no LAPD officers had been involved in the arrest or even had been present to witness it.


An LAPD detective who had been briefed on the arrest by a DEA agent told investigators he had learned that Arriaga "was not cooperative in coming out of the vehicle, was subsequently pulled out of the vehicle and then placed on the ground," according to the LAPD report.


The report concluded that Arriaga's wounds were not inflicted by LAPD officers when he was custody — a finding corroborated by the Police Commission. The report did not address whether he could have been beaten by a fellow inmate but noted that the department is working to have better video surveillance of the lockup facilities.


The investigators asked the DEA repeatedly for permission to interview the agents involved in the arrest, but were rebuffed, according to the report.


At first DEA officials told the LAPD that the agents needed some time to find attorneys who would accompany them.


Then, once legal counsel was arranged, the DEA said the interviews would have to wait until after Arriaga's autopsy results were completed, which occurred a short time later. Still, the agency did not make the agents available.


Frustrated by the DEA's inaction, LAPD investigators went for assistance to local prosecutors in the district attorney's office, who concluded they did not have the authority to compel federal agents to cooperate with a local police department's investigation.


Several months later, the LAPD turned to U.S. Atty. Andre Birotte for help getting the agents to talk. According to Beck's report, agents from Birotte's Los Angeles office agreed to conduct the interviews with the DEA agents. Those interviews were put on hold, however, and have never occurred.


joel.rubin@latimes.com


Times staff writer Frank Shyong contributed to this report.





Read More..

North Korean Video Game Has Western Ties






Video games represent a true luxury for most North Koreans living in a country where even the elite have only hours of electricity each day. That has not stopped a Western company in the capital city of Pyonyang from creating what may be the first North Korean game widely available online.


The game, called “Pyongyang Racer,” is a simple Web browser game that allows players to drive a car around North Korea’s capitol city of Pyongyang, according to Beijing Cream. Players must avoid hitting cars and collect gasoline in the form of petrol barrels to keep their run going as long as possible — all while getting warnings from one of Pyongyang’s famously picturesque traffic girls.






“Pyongyang Racer” has an unusual development history as a video game. The North Korean programmers who made the game work for Nosotek, a Western company that describes itself as the “first western IT venture” in North Korea.


Nosotek’s North Korean programmers previously made mobile-phone games based on the Hollywood films “The Big Lebowski” and “Men in Black.” Those games ended up getting published through a subsidiary of Rupert Murdoch‘s News Corp (owner of Fox News), according to Bloomberg News.


Nosotek claims to have “attracted the cream of local talent as the only company in Pyongyang offering Western working conditions and Internet access.” That would likely be true in North Korea, given the nuclear-armed country’s pariah status among Western countries and businesses.


The Nosotek website also praises the advantages of working in North Korea because “IP secrecy and minimum employee churn rate are structurally guaranteed.” Translation: North Korean programmers would likely never leave Nosotek with the company’s intellectual property secrets because they have practically no other employment options.


Nosotek built the game for Koryo Tours, a company based in Beijing, China, to distribute “Pyongyang Racer” through the Koryo Tours website. Koryo Tours is currently the leading company that runs tours of secretive North Korea for Westerners and other foreigners.


“This game was developed in 2012 and is not intended to be a high-end technological wonder hit game of the 21st century, but more a fun race game (arcade style) where you drive around in Pyongyang and learn more about the sites and get a glimpse of Pyongyang,” Koryo Tours said on the game’s website.


This story was provided by TechNewsDaily, a sister site to LiveScience. You can follow TechNewsDaily Senior Writer Jeremy Hsu on Twitter @jeremyhsu. Follow TechNewsDaily on Twitter @TechNewsDaily, or on Facebook.


Copyright 2012 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Gaming News Headlines – Yahoo! News





Title Post: North Korean Video Game Has Western Ties
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment




Read More..

Country singer Tate Stevens wins Fox's 'X Factor'


NEW YORK (AP) — Tate Stevens, who was mentored by music exec L.A. Reid on the second season of "The X Factor," has won the Fox singing competition.


The 37-year-old country singer from Belton, Mo., beat runner-up Carly Rose Sonenclar, a 13-year-old schoolgirl from Westchester, N.Y., and teenage girl group Fifth Harmony on the finale that aired live Thursday night.


Stevens wins a $5 million recording contract.


More than 35 million votes were cast by viewers after Wednesday's performance show.


Besides Reid, judges this season included Demi Lovato, Britney Spears and series creator Simon Cowell.


Thursday's show was also the grand finale for Reid. Earlier this month, he said he wouldn't be returning to "The X Factor" next year. No replacement has been announced.


Read More..

Stigma Fading, Marijuana Common in California


Jim Wilson/The New York Times


At a San Francisco concert in 2010, marijuana use was general while signatures were collected for a measure to decriminalize it.







LOS ANGELES — Let Colorado and Washington be the marijuana trailblazers. Let them struggle with the messy details of what it means to actually legalize the drug. Marijuana is, as a practical matter, already legal in much of California.




No matter that its recreational use remains technically against the law. Marijuana has, in many parts of this state, become the equivalent of a beer in a paper bag on the streets of Greenwich Village. It is losing whatever stigma it ever had and still has in many parts of the country, including New York City, where the kind of open marijuana use that is common here would attract the attention of any passing law officer.


“It’s shocking, from my perspective, the number of people that we all know who are recreational marijuana users,” said Gavin Newsom, the lieutenant governor. “These are incredibly upstanding citizens: Leaders in our community, and exceptional people. Increasingly, people are willing to share how they use it and not be ashamed of it.”


Marijuana can be smelled in suburban backyards in neighborhoods from Hollywood to Topanga Canyon as dusk falls — what in other places is known as the cocktail hour — often wafting in from three sides. In some homes in Beverly Hills and San Francisco, it is offered at the start of a dinner party with the customary ease of a host offering a chilled Bombay Sapphire martini.


Lighting up a cigarette (the tobacco kind) can get you booted from many venues in this rigorously antitobacco state. But no one seemed to mind as marijuana smoke filled the air at an outdoor concert at the Hollywood Bowl in September or even in the much more intimate, enclosed atmosphere of the Troubadour in West Hollywood during a Mountain Goats concert last week.


Arnold Schwarzenegger, the former Republican governor, ticked off the acceptance of open marijuana smoking in a list of reasons he thought Venice was such a wonderful place for his morning bicycle rides. With so many people smoking in so many places, he said in an interview this year, there was no reason to light up one’s own joint.


“You just inhale, and you live off everyone else,” said Mr. Schwarzenegger, who as governor signed a law decriminalizing possession of small amounts of marijuana.


Some Californians react disdainfully to anyone from out of state who still harbors illicit associations with the drug. Bill Maher, the television host, was speaking about the prevalence of marijuana smoking at dinner parties hosted by Sue Mengers, a retired Hollywood agent famous for her high-powered gatherings of actors and journalists, in an interview after her death last year. “I used to bring her pot,” he said. “And I wasn’t the only one.”


When a reporter sought to ascertain whether this was an on-the-record conversation, Mr. Maher responded tartly: “Where do you think you are? This is California in the year 2011.”


John Burton, the state Democratic chairman, said he recalled an era when the drug was stigmatized under tough antidrug laws. He called the changes in thinking toward marijuana one of the two most striking shifts in public attitude he had seen in 40 years here (the other was gay rights).


“I can remember when your second conviction of having a single marijuana cigarette would get you two to 20 in San Quentin,” he said.


In a Field Poll of California voters conducted in October 2010, 47 percent of respondents said they had smoked marijuana at least once, and 50 percent said it should be legalized. The poll was taken shortly before Californians voted down, by a narrow margin, an initiative to decriminalize marijuana.


“In a Republican year, the legalization came within two points,” said Chris Lehane, a Democratic consultant who worked on the campaign in favor of the initiative. He said that was evidence of the “fact that the public has evolved on the issue and is ahead of the pols.”


A study by the California Office of Traffic Safety last month found that motorists were more likely to be driving under the influence of marijuana than under the influence of alcohol.


Read More..

U.S. economic growth in third quarter is revised upward









WASHINGTON — The U.S. economy grew faster in the third quarter than previously thought, but the last three months of the year are looking much weaker.


And many analysts see a sharper pullback early next year if the government's fiscal problems aren't resolved soon.


In its latest revision of economic growth data for the third quarter, the Commerce Department said Thursday that the nation's gross domestic product expanded at an annual rate of 3.1% in the three-month period. That was up from its earlier estimates of 2.7% and 2%.





The revision was encouraging, in one way, because U.S. exports and consumer spending were a little stronger than estimated. Still, the overall advance in the third quarter came largely from a buildup of inventories and federal defense spending, neither of which is likely to be sustained.


Consumer spending, which accounts for more than two-thirds of GDP, increased by a tepid 1.6% in the third quarter. And although the housing recovery is now clearly helping to lift the broader economy, businesses have been reducing their investments in items such as equipment.


Over the last year, GDP, which is the total value of goods and services produced, expanded at a respectable 2.6% pace. But that will probably be short-lived.


Economists see growth in the current quarter sliding back to a range of 1% to 2%, in part, because of the damage from Superstorm Sandy and concerns about the so-called fiscal cliff, the automatic spending cuts and tax hikes that would begin Jan. 1.


For now, most forecasters see GDP expanding next year at about a 2% rate — a pace too slow to make a meaningful dent in the unemployment rate. Many economists, however, say the economy could pick up steam in the second half, especially if the fiscal cliff can be averted.


don.lee@latimes.com





Read More..

New chief of California's prisons named









SACRAMENTO — Gov. Jerry Brown on Wednesday named a vocal advocate of shorter sentences and community treatment to run the state's crowded and troubled prison system.


Brown announced the selection of Jeffrey Beard, 65, the retired former Pennsylvania prisons chief, to succeed Matthew Cate, who stepped down last month after four years as secretary of corrections in California. Cate is now leader of the California State Assn. of Counties.


Beard, whose appointment is subject to Senate confirmation, spent nearly four decades in corrections in Pennsylvania, starting as a counselor and advancing to prison warden, eventually spending nine years as department head. He completed an expansion of that state's prison system, including the addition of 32,000 inmate beds.





He left in 2010, advocating for laws that put more criminals into work-treatment programs instead of prisons, telling lawmakers that an "over-reliance" on locking up non-serious offenders did little to improve public safety.


Though an official start date was not announced, Beard joins Brown's administration at a critical time. The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation has until Jan. 7 to produce a plan for reducing prison crowding or face the renewed threat of federal orders to release inmates early.


In addition, a federal receiver is attempting to negotiate terms for California to resume control over the delivery of healthcare to inmates. And the parole and healthcare divisions are laying off staff.


In announcing the appointment, Brown said Beard "has arrived at the right time to take the next steps in returning California's parole and correctional institutions to their former luster."


Beard's successor in Pennsylvania says Beard will fit right in.


"I think you guys hit a home run," said Pennsylvania Corrections Secretary John Wetzel.


Wetzel, who was appointed eight months after Beard retired, said the former director weighed in frequently with crucial advice and provided input on new legislation intended to reduce prison crowding in that state and on expanding community treatment and diversion programs.


In 2008, Beard lent support to a proposal to ease county jail crowding by sending felons serving more than two years to state prison. But it allowed for medical release and early release of nonviolent offenders who completed treatment and education programs.


Andy Hoover, legislative director for the Pennsylvania branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, said Beard played an active role in developing corrections policies and promoting them before the Legislature.


But Beard has critics as well, some of whom hold him responsible for expanding the use of solitary confinement in Pennsylvania and for a two-month moratorium on parole releases after the murders of two Philadelphia police officers. The moratorium caused such overcrowding that Pennsylvania began sending inmates to serve time in other states.


Hoover said Beard was caught in a political bind, carrying out policies he had not set. "He was in an unfortunate position," Hoover said. "It was very much out of his hands."


Corrections historian Dan Berger, who was working on his doctoral degree at the University of Pennsylvania at the time, disagrees.


"Beard does not have a good reputation on health and human rights in prison," Berger said. "He gives more rhetoric to sentencing reform than believes it."


After retiring in 2010, Beard joined Pennsylvania State University's Justice Center for Research, and he has worked as a private consultant to a number of states, including California. He advised Sacramento on litigation over the care and housing of mentally ill offenders and has toured California prisons.


Beard is not shy about voicing opinions on where the criminal justice system fails. In 2010, he told Pennsylvania lawmakers that heavy reliance on incarceration of low-level offenders "has proven to have limited value in maintaining public safety."


"We must stop treating all offenders the same and move away from the 'get tough on crime' philosophy of locking up less serious offenders for longer periods of time," he told them.


In a 2005 commentary in an industry publication, Beard called for a rethinking of "who really belongs in prison" and an end to the then-popular "scared straight" programs he felt increased the likelihood that freed inmates would commit future crimes. "We must have the will to put an end to feel-good and/or publicly popular programs that simply do not work," Beard wrote.


Corrections officials said Beard was unavailable Wednesday but released a single statement quoting the incoming secretary as saying he was "honored" to be appointed "for this important public safety position."


paige.stjohn@latimes.com





Read More..

Kodak in $525 million patent deal, eyes bankruptcy end






(Reuters) – Eastman Kodak Co agreed to sell its digital imaging patents for about $ 525 million, a key step to bringing the photography pioneer out of bankruptcy in the first half of 2013.


The deal for the 1,100 patents allows Kodak to fulfill a condition for securing $ 830 million in financing.






The patent deal was reached with a consortium led by Intellectual Ventures and RPX Corp, and which includes some of the world’s biggest technology companies, which will license or acquire the patents.


Those companies are Adobe Systems Inc, Amazon.com Inc, Apple Inc, Facebook Inc, Fujifilm, Google Inc, Huawei Technologies Co Ltd, HTC Corp, Microsoft Corp, Research In Motion Ltd, Samsung Electronics Co Ltd and Shutterfly Inc, according to court documents.


Kodak still must sell its personalized and document-imaging businesses as part of the financing package, and also has to resolve its UK pension obligation.


Kodak said the patent deal puts it on a path to emerge from Chapter 11 in the first half of 2013.


“Our progress has accelerated over the past several weeks as we prepare to emerge as a strong, sustainable company,” said Antonio Perez, chairman and chief executive of the Rochester, New York-based company.


The patent portfolio was expected to be a major asset for Kodak when it filed for bankruptcy in January. An outside firm had estimated the patents could be worth as much as $ 2.6 billion.


Kodak’s patents hit the market as intellectual property values have soared and technology companies have plowed money into patent-related litigation.


For example, last year Nortel Networks sold 6,000 wireless patents in a bankruptcy auction for $ 4.5 billion and earlier this year Google spent $ 12.5 billion for patent-rich Motorola Mobility.


But Kodak’s patent auction dragged on beyond the initial expectation that it would be wrapped up in August. One patent specialist blamed those early, overly optimistic valuations, which he said encouraged Kodak’s team to set their sights too high.


“Unfortunately (Kodak management) was misled into thinking it was worth billions of dollars and it wasn’t,” said Alex Poltorak, chairman of General Patent Corp, a patent licensing firm. “I think they sold them at a very good price.”


He said after Google acquired Motorola, the search engine company no longer needed patents at any price, deflating the intellectual property market.


Kodak traces its roots to the 19th century and invented the handheld camera. But it has been unable to successfully shift to digital imaging.


It will likely be a different company when it exits bankruptcy, out of the consumer business and focused instead on providing products and services to the commercial imaging market.


The patent sale is subject to approval by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan.


The Kodak bankruptcy case is in Re: Eastman Kodak Co. et al, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, No. 12-10202.


(Reporting by Tom Hals in Wilmington, Delaware and Sruthi Ramakrishnan in Bangalore; Editing by Nick Zieminski,; John Wallace and Peter Galloway)


Tech News Headlines – Yahoo! News





Title Post: Kodak in $525 million patent deal, eyes bankruptcy end
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment




Read More..