Day: February 19, 2004

Archos Gmini 220

I am a total sucker for gadgets like the Archos Gmini 220 (what a horrible product title).

Okay, it’s your basic 20 gb MP3 player. But wait, there’s more. Add an attachment and it becomes an FM radio as well, and you can record directly to the HD. But there’s still more — add an external microphone and capture lectures and presentations.

Not enough? Transfer and store files from all major flash memory cards onto the HD — great for temporarily storing digital photographs on the road to free up that expensive flash memory.

The unit can display the photos, but only in monochrome. I’m only interested in storing them not viewing them, so that’s not a big issue for me, but might be for others.

And the price is a rather respectable $350. I think I’m in love.

GreyTuesday.Org

Via Boing! Boing! it appears that activists have set up GreyTuesday.Org to encourage people to mirror The Grey Album on February 24.

The Grey Album is a mix album making the rounds that takes the vocals from Jay-Z’s The Black Album and mixes it with samples from the Beatles’ White Album.

Rolling Stone called The Grey Album “an ingenious hip-hop record that sounds oddly ahead of its time” and the Boston Globe said it was the “most creatively captivating” album of the year.”

Okay, I will grant that it does make Jay-Z (barely) listenable for more than a few minutes at a time, though a couple run throughs on the CD player was all I needed.

Anyway, the Grey Tuesday folks apparently are upset that there’s no compulsory licensing system for samples of music. So if you want to re-record a Beatles tune you can, you just have to pay a set fee to do so. If you want to sample a Beatles tune, you have to pretty much beg the Beatles’ record company to do so, and they’re going to say no regardless of how much money you offer them.

Protocol to the African Charter on Human Rights Goes Into Effect

On January 25, 2004, the Protocol to the African Charter on Human Rights and Peoples’ Rights entered into force creating an African court to judge human rights violations on that continent.

Comoros paved the way for the Protocol to come into effect when it became the 15th African state to ratify the Protocol in December 2003. The other states that have ratified the Protocol since its creation in 1998 are: Algeria; Burkina-Faso; Burundi; Côte d’Ivoire; Gambia; Lesotho; Libya; Mali; Mauritius; Rwanda; Senegal; South Africa; Togo; and Uganda.

Unfortunately — as with other human rights initiatives associated with the African Charter — this is likely to be just another paper tiger. The African Commission on Human and People’s Rights, for example, took six years to admonish Nigeria to respect the rights of the Ogoni people.

Proponents of the Protocol argue that the Commission’s decisions were not binding while Protocol will create a decision whose findings are binding . . . right up until the point that African nations decide to ignore them. Does anyone really believe that the same group of nations that has looked the other way at Zimbabwe’s human rights violations is suddenly going to grow a spine because 15 nations have adopted a protocol?

I wouldn’t bet the farm on it.

Sources:

African human rights court created. UN Wire, January 28, 2004.

Establishing an African Court on Human Rights. Press Release, Amnesty International, January 26, 2004.

Denver City Council Hears Debate Over Ballot Initiative to Ban Circus Animals

At its January 12 meeting the Denver City Council heard speakers on both sides of a ballot initiative aimed at banning circus animals within city limits. That initiative will be put before voters in August.

The initiative is the brain child of 15-year-old Heather Herman, who formed a group called Youth Opposed to Animal Acts to ban circus animals from the city. Herman told TheDenverChannel.Com,

I’ve always cared about animals and just thought of them traveling in smaller cages and I just always thought that was wrong.

Denver is a bit famous (or infamous depending on our point of view) for its ballot initiatives. Denver voters recently voted down, for example, a ballot initiative that would have required the city council to reduce the level of stress in the city. Although Denver has a population topping half a million, only 6,000 signatures are required to put an initiative before voters.

Herman was aided in gathering the signatures by animal rights activist Tamara Lackey and her group, Political Voice for Animals. Lackey told the Rocky Mountain News,

I was completely impressed with her [Herman] — just how totally unselfish she is, and caring, and that she would give so much of her time at the age of 13 and 14 to work for animals. I just find her extremely impressive. She really is the force behind all this. . . . I was not something we would have ever pursued on our own. She was definitely the impetus for us.

Ringling Bros. is the circus that would be impacted the most by the ban, and it is actively campaigning against the proposed ban. Ringling Brothers’ Cassie Folk told TheDenverChannel.Com,

This proposed ban is a solution in search of a problem as the vast majority of circus animals are well cared for and pose no danger. Enacting the ordinance would deny the people of Denver the opportunity to choose what type of entertainment they will and will not attend. Attending the circus, or the rodeo or stock show, like the choice of what kind of food to eat or clothes to wear, is a personal choice, and not one that should be determined by city ordinances.

Ringling Bros., along other circuses and zoos, is subject to stringent animal welfare regulations under the Animal Welfare Act. The U.S. Department of Agriculture conducts regular unannounced inspections of our animals and the animal compound, and in the 30 years under current ownership, Ringling Bros. has never been found in violation for abuse, neglect or mistreatment of our animals. In fact, in all aspects of animal care and safety, Ringling Bros. meets or exceeds all federal animal welfare standards. In addition, Ringling Bros. must and does comply with numerous state and local animal welfare regulations.

The Rocky Mountain News cited the California animal abuse prosecution of Ringling Bros. Mark Olivier Gebel as an example of how activists put forth animal abuse claims against circuses that appear strong but fall apart on closer examination. As the Rocky Mountain News put it,

Complaints were brought by an officer with the Santa Clara County Humane Society, which has police powers, and a San Jose policewoman, but during the trial the two failed to convince the jury they had actually seen any abuse. The prosecution’s case was so weak that Gebel’s lawyers didn’t even offer a defense, and the jury voted unanimously to acquit him. Gebel’s victory never got the same attention the accusations did . . .

Those opposed to the initiative also point out that the circus brings as much as $8 million a year to Denver — more than 250,000 people have seen Ringling Bros. in Denver over the past couple years — and if the initiative passes both Ringling Bros. and that $8 million will simply relocate to a nearby location.

Beyond whether or not circuses are cruel, there is a very curious provision to the Youth Opposed to Animal Acts proposed ban on performing animals — it includes a number of exemptions to protect a number of other Denver-area animal acts. Here’s the section of the initiative that explicitly bans animal acts, followed immediately by a whole host of exemptions,

It shall be unlawful for any person to put on or sponsor a wild or exotic animal display on any public or private land within the City and County of Denver. This prohibition, however, shall not apply to the Denver Zoological Gardens (The Denver Zoo), The Denver Downtown Aquarium (Ocean Journey) subject to accreditation as set forth below, The National Western Stock Show, or any entity accredited by the American Zoo and Aquarium Association, the Association of Sanctuaries or the American Sanctuary Association, or their successors.

The National Western Stock Show is a rodeo. Ah yes, yet another set of activists with the courage of their convictions.

The full text of the ballot initiative can be read here.

Sources:

Denver Initiative To Ban Circus Up For Debate. TheDenverChannel.Com, January 12, 2004.

Circus tries to tame fight over exotic animals. Mark Couch, Denver Post, January 2004.

Teen tosses animal-abuse claim into wrong ring. Bill Johnson, Rocky Mountain News, January 14, 2004.

Don’t ban circuses from Denver; Allegations of abuse turn out to be flimsy. Rocky Mountain News, January 14, 2004.

Denver, Colorado Ordinance No. Council Bill No. 1007 (2003) – Ban on Circus Animals

BY AUTHORITY

ORDINANCE NO. COUNCIL BILL NO. 1007

SERIES OF 2003 COMMITTEE OF REFERENCE:

HUMAN CAPITAL AGENDA

A BILL

For an ordinance providing for the submission to a vote of the qualified and registered electors of the City and County of Denver at a special municipal election to be held on August 10, 2004 an initiated ordinance prohibiting the display of wild or exotic animals for public entertainment and amusement, with exceptions for the Denver Zoo, Ocean Journey, The National Western Stock Show, and other accredited organizations.

WHEREAS, on December 2, 2003 the Denver Election Commission forwarded to the City Council a petition for an initiated ordinance as more fully set forth herein, upon a determination that the petition contained the validated signatures of registered electors of the City and County of Denver totaling at least 5% of the total votes cast for the office of Mayor in the last election at which the mayor was elected; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to § 8.3.3 (C) of the Denver Charter, upon receipt of a petition containing the aforesaid number of signatures, the City Council may either enact the ordinance without alteration within 35 days of receipt or submit the question of whether or not the ordinance should be enacted to a vote of the people at the next scheduled citywide election held not less than 55 days after submission by the Council; and

WHEREAS, the next scheduled citywide election is the state primary election due to occur on August 10, 2004; and

WHEREAS, pursuant to §§ 31-10-108 and 1-7-116, C.R.S., and § 8.2.3 of the Denver Charter, the City Council is authorized to call a special City and County election to be coordinated with the State primary election.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER:

Section 1. The City Council hereby calls for a special City and County election to be conducted at the same time and coordinated with the State primary election to be held on August 10, 2004

Section 2. There is hereby submitted to the properly qualified and registered electors of the City and County of Denver at the special City and County election to be held August 10, 2004, an initiated ordinance to read as follows:

Section 1. Sections 8-5 through 8-8 D.R.M.C. added.

Chapter 8, Article I of the Revised Municipal Code of the City and County of Denver is hereby revised by adding Sections 8-5 through 8-8 to read as follows:

Sec. 8-5. Purpose and Intent.

It is the intent of the people of the City and County of Denver to protect the public against hazards that wild and exotic animals used in entertainment pose to society, and protect wild and exotic animals from cruel and inhumane treatment when they are exhibited for public entertainment or amusement.

Sec. 8-6. Definitions.

These words and phrases, whenever used in this ordinance, shall be construed as follows:

(a) “Wild or exotic animal display” means to exhibit a wild or exotic animal for amusement or entertainment, and includes, without limitation, any such exhibition in a circus, ride, trade show, fair, carnival, parade, race, photographic opportunity or live performance.

(b) “Wild or exotic animal” means any animal in the following orders and families, whether bred in the wild or in captivity, and any animal hybrid resulting from the breeding of an animal that is a member of the following orders and families:

Non-human primate and prosimians (e.g. chimpanzees, monkeys), Felidae (except domesticated cats), Canidae (except domesticated dogs), Ursidae (e.g. bears), Proboscidae (e.g. elephants), Cetacea (e.g. whales, dolphins, porpoises), Crocodilia (e.g. alligators, crocodiles), Marsupialia (e.g. kangaroos, opossums), Reptilia over 8 feet in length and snakes and reptiles of the venomous variety, Perissodactyla (e.g. rhinoceroses, tapirs, not horses or donkeys, or mules), Artiodactyla (e.g. hippopotamuses, giraffes, camels, not cattle, buffalo, swine, sheep or goats), Hyaenidae, Mustelidae (e.g. skunks, weasels, otters, badgers), Procyonidae (e.g. raccoons,

coatis), Edentata (e.g. anteaters, sloths, armadillos), Viverridae (e.g. mongooses, civets, and genets), Pinnipedia (e.g. seals, sea lions, walruses), Struthioniformes (e.g. ostriches), Casuariiformes (e.g. emus). 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

Sec. 8-7. Display of Wild or Exotic Animals Prohibited.

It shall be unlawful for any person to put on or sponsor a wild or exotic animal display on any public or private land within the City and County of Denver. This prohibition, however, shall not apply to the Denver Zoological Gardens (The Denver Zoo), The Denver Downtown Aquarium (Ocean Journey) subject to accreditation as set forth below, The National Western Stock Show, or any entity accredited by the American Zoo and Aquarium Association, the Association of Sanctuaries or the American Sanctuary Association, or their successors.

Sec. 8-8. Enforcement.

The manager of environmental health or the managerÂ’s designee shall enforce the provisions of this ordinance.

Section 2. Section 8-2 (a)(2) D.R.M.C. Repealed.

Section 8-2 (a)(2) of the Revised Municipal Code of the City and County of Denver is hereby repealed.

Section 3. The voting machines and paper ballots for said election shall carry the following designation, which shall be the title and submission clause:

Shall the voters of the City and County of Denver adopt an ordinance prohibiting the display of wild or exotic animals for public entertainment and amusement, with exceptions for the Denver Zoo, Ocean Journey, The National Western Stock Show, and other accredited organizations?

Yes _____ No _____

Section 4. Each elector voting at the election and wishing to vote for or against the ordinance shall indicate the elector’s choice by depressing the appropriate counter of the voting machine which indicates the word “YES” or the word “NO,” or by appropriate marking upon paper ballots when used.

Section 5. The proper officials of the City and County of Denver as are charged with duties relating to the election shall, before the election, issue such calls, make such certifications and

publications, give such notices, make such appointments, and do all such other acts and things in connection with the submission of this initiated ordinance to the registered electors of the City and County of Denver at the election as are required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Colorado and the Charter and ordinances of the City and County of Denver

Section 6. The Clerk and Recorder shall publish the initiated ordinance in a manner consistent with the publication of other ordinances before such election is held.

Section 7. The ballots cast at such election shall be canvassed and the results ascertained, determined, and certified in accordance with the requirements of the Constitution and laws of the State of Colorado and the Charter and ordinances of the City and County of Denver.