Calgary ParkPlus multi-million lawsuit and ownership settlement – An exclusive inside look at a “key” piece of evidence

Tuesday, 9 April, 2013

ParkPlus settlement with Dale Fraser, former CPA General Manager

Background of the “key” piece of evidence

Now that Calgary Parking Authority (CPA) has settled the Parkplus parking management system ownership dispute and disclosed some key information (see endnotes), this reporter feels comfortable in sharing an exclusive inside look at one piece of evidence against Mr. Dale Fraser’s ownership claim without risking harm to the city and CPA’s legal case.

This key piece of evidence (you can judge for yourself to see if you agree it is “key” or not) was an August 2008 video interview with Mr. Dale Fraser conducted by this reporter. In the extensive August 2008 interview (where Alderman Dale Hodges was also interviewed), a variety of ParkPlus topics (including patents) were discussed. This video evidence was almost “lost” at one point as it was originally uploaded and stored on the now discontinued Google Video service!

Fortunately, after some help from a Google engineer friend, the August 2008 interview was recovered along with a few hundred uploaded videos. The video interview was useful enough that Calgary Parking Authority licensed it to help its case which is why I’m claiming this as an “exclusive inside look“.

Unlike the parties involved in the legal settlement (Calgary Parking Authority, City of Calgary, Mr. Dale Fraser, and Mr. Allan Bazar), I am an independent reporter and not bound by any confidentiality agreement.

An exclusive inside look at a key piece of evidence

In the August 2008 interview, former Calgary Parking Authority General Manager Mr. Dale Fraser told this reporter,

”Calgary Parking Authority did create the proprietary approach to this new parking system. And we [CPA] do have a patent-pending on this approach at this time.”

During the 30+ minutes interview, at NO point did Mr. Fraser leave this reporter with the impression the pending Canada/US ParkPlus patent was his (or his & Mr. Allan Bazar’s) personal invention or intellectual property. In fact, Mr. Fraser seemed to me quite clear in explaining the system was developed by MTS Allstream with the funds/resources from Calgary Parking Authority.

As suggested in “The Patents” section in the 2008 August report “ParkPlus by Calgary Parking Authority – Reimagining the Wheels“,

US patent is one of the most important ones to apply for, simply because the US is one of the largest markets and it has a reasonably strong patent protection regime.

Here is my 2008 interview video (pay attention to time code ~3:40 to ~3:50).

[Please note that the interview is protected by copyright. License and use requests (including for press and media) are to be submitted via email and will be handled promptly.]

This article is cross-posted by me to examiner.

Endnotes: Although the settlement agreement has confidentiality clauses, the parties agree to disclose the following information (emphasis added) and I quote from the Media Release – ParkPlus Settlement – April 2013,

(1) The Defendants, Dale Fraser, Allan Bazar and 1707626 Alberta Ltd., (now Intelli-Park Corporation) acknowledge that the City of Calgary and CPA are the exclusive owners of the ParkPlus SystemTM and that none of the Defendants has any right, title or interest whatsoever in the ParkPlus SystemTM;
(2) While the ParkPlus SystemTM is valuable and all necessary consideration for settlement is acknowledged, there is no payment by the City of Calgary or CPA of any money whatsoever to any of the Defendants or any other person;
(3) The claims and counterclaims in the action will be wholly discontinued without costs; and
(4) The parties release each other from all claims and counterclaims in the action including any claims relating to the ParkPlus SystemTM or the employment of Dale Fraser and Allan Bazar with the City of Calgary and CPA.


“Chilling” effect on federal archivists and librarians

Wednesday, 20 March, 2013

From “ABCs of ‘behaviour regulation’ for federal librarians and archivists

The code says that LAC staff, which includes Canada’s leading librarians and archivists, who set foot in classrooms, attend conferences or speak up at public meetings on their own time are engaging in “high risk” activities.

Given the dangers, the code says, the department’s staff must clear such “personal” activities with their managers in advance to ensure there are no conflicts or “other risks to LAC.”

The code is already having a “chilling” effect on federal archivists and librarians, who used to be encouraged to actively engage and interact with groups interested in everything from genealogy to preserving historical documents, says archivist Loryl MacDonald at the University of Toronto.


Shall Copyright Law trump Freedom of Press? NASCAR and Encana seem to think so.

Tuesday, 26 February, 2013

Shall Copyright Law trump Freedom of Press? The senior executives NASCAR and Encana seem to think copyright law should be more powerful than many people will permit it to be. I for one would love the Supreme Court of US and Supreme Court of Canada to decide some of these “copyright” cases so that any potentially ruthless & illegal actions cannot be taken again in US and Canada! Of course, IANAL (I am not a lawyer) and I rely on further instructions and guidelines from the justices at the two Supreme Courts to decide one way or another in each of the countries. Quoting an Feb 21st article by me,

“It should be noted that copyright law has been used in Canada in recent years to over-reach (in my opinion) into other unrelated areas. Take Euro-Excellence Inc. v. Kraft Canada Inc., 2007 SCC 37, [2007] 3 S.C.R. 20, a Supreme Court of Canada judgment on Canadian copyright law as an example, it ultimately is a case about the import of chocolate that somehow got twisted into a case about copyright.”

For the case of NASCAR, see reports in Washington Post and Paid Content.

For the case of Encana, see my summary reporter in examiner.com.

Claimed “copyrighted” video clip in the NASCAR case:

Claimed ”copyrighted” audio clip in the Encana case.


eps02 chat with “Father of Computing in Canada” Prof. Kelly Gotlieb

Wednesday, 20 February, 2013

eps02 with Prof. Kelly Gotlieb, Father of Computing in Canada

This is the second (eps 02) of a series of extensive chats with Professor Emeritus C.C. Kelly Gotlieb, (Wikipedia) “Father of Computing in Canada”, Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto. In this video episode (as oppose to audio recording only in episode #1), we further discussed Google Driverless Cars and Google Glasses in a bit more details, and a few other topics. (I will try to provide a time code key when I have time later or if someone can help me with providing a time code key to the interview.)

eps02 chat with “Father of Computing in Canada” Prof. Kelly Gotlieb

P.S. Incidentally, I am happy to claim credit for suggesting Kelly to setup a Google+ account and then also helped him to setup his computer this morning so that we were able to conduct a successful Live Broadcast using the Google+ Hangout On Air technologies using its YouTube engine! It puts a smile on my face in helping the man who helped bought the second electronic computer (a Ferranti machine for $300,000) in the world in 1951 to use Google’s cutting edge technologies to broadcast live from his and my home!


Interview with “Father of Computing in Canada” re Google Car, Google Glasses, Alan Turing

Wednesday, 13 February, 2013

20130212 Father of Computing Kelly interview - pix

Interview with “Father of Computing in Canada” Prof Gotlieb re Google Car, Google Glasses, Alan Turing

This is an extensive interview with Professor Emeritus C.C. Kelly Gotlieb, (Wikipedia) “Father of Computing in Canada”, Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Feb 2013 interviewed by Independent reporter Kempton Lam
KL: Kempton Lam
KG: Professor Emeritus C.C. Kelly Gotlieb
Table of content (with time codes):
0:00 KL: Introducing Professor Emeritus C.C. (Kelly) Gotlieb, “Father of Computing in Canada”, University of Toronto
0:29 KL: My question about Google Driverless Cars. Three US states already has law permitting testing of Google Driverless Cars. Talking about California governor signed the bill, “SB-1298 Vehicles: autonomous vehicles: safety and performance requirements” into law.
2:07 KL: Bill SB-1298 allows Google to test the Google Driverless Car provided Google pays a $5 million insurance, and provided there is a driver in the car.
2:21 KG: “That’s what I expected.”
2:35 KL: My concerns were concerns raised by Kelly in an earlier speech of his.
2:47 KG: listing some of the concerns he has with concepts like Google Driverless Cars. “United States is a very litigious society.”
3:12 KG: Google Driverless Car gets into an accident, whose to blame? And who can you sue? The person who wrote the program? Google who authorize the car? Car manufacture? The person who is in the car? Or all of the above? […] Lots of questions to be asked when failure happen. Read the rest of this entry »


Nobel Laureate professor Ronald Coase on China’s One-Child Policy

Friday, 25 January, 2013

Photo credit: by Zhaofeng Xue (薛兆丰) 2009

Yesterday, in our bilingual Google+ Hangout LIVE YouTube show Wallace and I talked about “Little Emperors: Behavioral Impacts of China’s One-Child Policy” (with LIVE recorded video).

Last night, I reached out to professor Ning Wang (co-author of “How China Became Capitalist” with professor Coase) to ask him about his take on China’s One-Child Policy. Ning mentioned that a 2013 Jan video had been filmed in part to promote the launch of the Chinese edition of their book where professor Coase shared his critique of China’s One-Child Policy. I was so excited and immediately watched it twice. Here is the China’s One-Child Policy segment. (full transcript of interview here and full unedited interview video here)

Nobel Laureate Ronald Coase on China’s One-Child Policy


Kempton & Wallace talk Little Emperors: Behavioral Impacts of China’s One-Child Policy

Friday, 25 January, 2013

The news report “One-child policy: China’s army of little emperors – The one-child policy has fundamentally changed the psychology of a generation” intrigued Economic Analyst +Wallace Chan  & this independent reporter. So night, we held a LIVE YouTube chat about the research paper “Little Emperors” and China’s One-Child Policy in two languages. Here are the recordings.

(In English) Kempton & Wallace talk Little Emperors: Behavioral Impacts of China’s One-Child Policy 

(in Cantonese) 經濟分析師陳心田與獨立記者林錦堂講一講 – 小皇帝:中國的”一家一孩”政策對行為的影響

Ref: (1) “Little Emperors: Behavioral Impacts of China’s One-Child Policy” by L. Cameron, N. Erkal, L. Gangadharan, X. Meng

(2) ”沒有兄弟姐妹的社會” by 張五常 (Steven Cheung)

Jan 26, 2013 Update: Here is a new Jan 2013 video clip of “Nobel Laureate Ronald Coase on China’s One-Child Policy“. For more (including link to transcripts) see this article.


Belated Happy 102nd Birthday to Prof. Ronald Coase with special #PDFtribute

Saturday, 19 January, 2013

Happy belated 102nd Birthday to Nobel Economics Laureate Professor Ronald Coase. Wishing professor Coase good health and all the best in 2013!

In 2009, I took the initiative to spend a few days to download, process, upload, transcribe (small part of), and time-code professor Coase‘s 2003 Coase Lecture (a massive .mov file) to share on YouTube (6 clips in a playlist) to allow interested people from around the world to watch and learn as a way to celebrate professor Coase‘s 99th birthday.

Here is the 2003 Coase Lecture by Ronald Coase – Part 1. Watch the other 5 parts via this YouTube playlist.

For the last few birthdays of professor Coase, I mainly reshare the above video clips (with a new text interview in 2011). This time around, I’ve taken a new initiative to honour professor Coase‘s 102nd birthday. You see, a few years ago I went to the University of Calgary Law Library to conduct some US patent research for a client. As a bonus/treat for myself, I spent some time to download quite a few academic papers by professor Coase.

To celebrate professor Coase‘s 102nd birthday, I’ve uploaded the following three important papers plus a bonus paper as a special gift to readers of professor Coase‘s ideas.

Here are the PDFs of the academic papers
- 1937 – Nature of the Firm
1959 – The Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
1974 – The Lighthouse in Economics

Bonus academic papers
1947 – The Origin of the Monopoly of Broadcasting in Great Britain

In the wise words of professor Coase,

“The only support I got was from my contemporaries. […] If this tale has any general significance, it is that new ideas are most likely to come from the young who are also the group most likely to recognize the significance of those ideas.”

I was inspired to upload these academics papers by the #PDFtribute movement to honour the 26 years young Aaron Swartz (1986 – 2013) who died partly as a result from his fight with the outdated and outmoded JSTOR system to make academic papers available for free for all.

For me personally, I received these important papers for free from the Law Library. And I see them (Firm, FCCLighthouse) deserve to be read by as many people as possible instead of under the messed up limited JSTOR manner. The bottom line, to me, by having these papers available by a single click here is that this save people’s physical travel time to go down to their local university libraries where these papers can be downloaded for free anyway!

It has not escaped my attention and noticed the paradox that The Lighthouse in Economics is a paper that disprove, with facts, the incorrect belief by many people (including my former MBA classmate who has a B.A. degree in Economics) that Lighthouse services cannot be charged thus has to be made freely available by the governments!

*** Concluding thoughts ***

I want to emphasize that I totally agree with the many academics in the #PDFtribute movement and Aaron that it is about time we in Canada and US require academic papers to be made publicly downloadable for FREE in perpetuity if any part (or whole) of their research funding come from any level of government (thus tax payers’ money, our money)!

Happy 102nd birthday professor Coase!

Goodbye Aaron, you left us far too soon!


Is Hong Kong Police Above the Law?香港警察是否可以無法無天,凌駕於法律之上?(op-ed)

Tuesday, 1 January, 2013

20130101 Is Hong Kong Police Above the Law - pix 1

After viewing the following video clip, I have one simple question. Is Hong Kong Police Above the Law? 香港警察是否可以無法無天,凌駕於法律之上?Has Hong Kong become a police state/city where Hong Kong citizens’ rights and legal due process need not be protected nor respected by the police? Have a watch and see for yourself in this legal protest. According to what was stated by one of the peaceful protesters (based on the observable footage), the crowd (“over 100″) has been detained by the police without any reasons given. When the police seemed to be willing to release the crowd, a police officier who seemed to be in charge halted the release of the protesters and clearly stated no reason is to be given nor needed for the crowd’s detention.

5:37署理警司:唔放得,全部圍住!

5:45署理警司:唔洗講,一陣咪話唔警告你。”

Note: Raw video footage linked to via Facebook status of HK Legislative Council member Leung Kwok-hung (梁國雄). Note that this reporter has no way to verify the video’s authenticity, there is no reason to believe it is doctored as there would likely be plenty of collaborating photographic and video evidences filmed by other media outlets present at the protest.

20130101 Is Hong Kong Police Above the Law - pix 2

20130101 Is Hong Kong Police Above the Law - pix 3


Viagra free-for-all: Viagra patent deemed impotent by Supreme Court of Canada

Thursday, 8 November, 2012

In a ground breaking 7-0 unanimous decision “Teva Canada Ltd. v. Pfizer Canada Inc., 2012 SCC 60″ today, Supreme Court of Canada has declared Pfizer’s Viagra patent void in Canada with serious sales/financial implications. Quoting Justice LeBel (emphasis added),

Patent 2,163,446 is void.

The patent application did not satisfy the disclosure requirements set out in the Patent Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P‑4 (“Act”).  The patent system is based on a “bargain”: the inventor is granted exclusive rights in a new and useful invention for a limited period in exchange for disclosure of the invention so that society can benefit from this knowledge.  Sufficiency of disclosure lies at the very heart of the patent system, so adequate disclosure in the specification is a precondition for the granting of a patent.

According to Globe & Mail, “Pfizer Canada made about $80-million last year from sales of Viagra.” Company doesn’t have to apply for patents and disclose the secrets of their inventions. Like Coke just keeps its formula as a trade secret. But if a company wants to get patents, the disclosure requirements are no joking matter and can mean billions as in this case.

Lets be clear on one thing, the declaration of Pfizer’s Viagra patent void doesn’t mean you get Viagra free as some men wish to! It does mean the patent protection afforded Pfizer exclusive right is now gone, and Canadian users of Viagra can expect cheaper generic version of Viagra type drugs to be available soon. In fact, according to CBC News,

The unanimous decision opens the door for Teva to introduce a generic version of Viagra. By the afternoon on Thursday, Teva had already moved to do just that, posting a message on its website, announcing the creation of Novo-Sildenafil and noting the product is available via prescription.

P.S. I am not a lawyer in Canada or U.S. so you should check with expert first. My understanding is that under the U.S. patent and trademark system, the “disclosure requirement” is better know as “2165 The Best Mode Requirement (linked to USPTO)” which I relied heavily in a 2006 patent review I did on an entrepreneur’s patent application within an episode of CBC award-winning hit TV show Dragons’ Den!

NOTE: This article is cross-posted by me at examiner.com


Cyberbullying Victim in Fake Facebook case can remain anonymous, Supreme Court of Canada rules

Sunday, 30 September, 2012

Good to read, “A Nova Scotia teenager has won the right to remain anonymous in a court battle against a cyberbully, but the Supreme Court of Canada rejected her request for a publication ban on some details of her case.

Read the Supreme Court of Canada ruling. Here is a brief excerpt,

“The critical importance of the open court principle and a free press has been tenaciously embedded in the jurisprudence. In this case, however, there are interests that are sufficiently compelling to justify restricting such access: privacy and the protection of children from cyberbullying.

Recognition of the inherent vulnerability of children has consistent and deep roots in Canadian law and results in the protection of young people’s privacy rights based on age, not the sensitivity of the particular child. In an application involving cyberbullying, there is no need for a child to demonstrate that he or she personally conforms to this legal paradigm. The law attributes the heightened vulnerability based on chronology, not temperament.

While evidence of a direct, harmful consequence to an individual applicant is relevant, courts may also conclude that there is objectively discernable harm. It is logical to infer that children can suffer harm through cyberbullying, given the psychological toxicity of the phenomenon. Since children are entitled to protect themselves from bullying, cyber or otherwise, there is inevitable harm to them — and to the administration of justice — if they decline to take steps to protect themselves because of the risk of further harm from public disclosure. Since common sense and the evidence show that young victims of sexualized bullying are particularly vulnerable to the harms of revictimization upon publication, and since the right to protection will disappear for most children without the further protection of anonymity, the girl’s anonymous legal pursuit of the identity of her cyberbully should be allowed.”


Google Driverless Car – A Brave New Tech & Legal Experiment

Wednesday, 26 September, 2012

CA Governor Brown Signs SB1298 (Autonomous Vehicles)

At the Google headquarters in Mountain View yesterday, California governor Jerry Brown signed the bill, “SB-1298 Vehicles: autonomous vehicles: safety and performance requirements“, making California the third state in US taking steps to make driverless cars eventually legal on roads and highways (not just for testing purpose).

CA Governor Brown Signs SB1298 (Autonomous Vehicles)

Technologically, Google will need to do a lot of testing to make sure its system works in many different basic conditions and to prove that it is “safe” in basic conditions which is a challenge in itself. The bigger problem, at least as this reporter sees it, is a legal one.

As Google and its co-founder Sergey Brin indicated, the hope is to allow the driverless cars to be used by blind people and people who are too intoxicated to drive. Imagine a Google driverless car involving in a car accident (especially one with fatality), who will then be held accountable? The blind driver? The software developer? The software project manager? Or the autonomous vehicle technology providers (like Google)?

Comparison has been made of Google driverless car with self-driving train and that we have those trains for some years now, isn’t it ok? Well, self-driving train (or centrally controlled driver-less train) like the SkyTrain in Vancouver runs on “grade-separated tracks, running mostly on elevated guideways” thus are not subject to the randomness of roads filled by other cars, random animals, and most important of all, often unpredictable people/pedestrians.

In a litigious place like California, United States, it is worth mentioning one of the two unresolved issues in the signed bill (as stated in the 08/24/12 Assembly Floor Analysis, emphasis added),

First, automobile makers fear that when this technology is added on to the vehicles they have designed for use by human operators, they may be drawn into liability litigation after an accident caused by the failure of that after-market equipment or of its installation rather than due to any inherent safety problem with the vehicle itself. Although existing tort law and case law can be interpreted to absolve them of any liability in such instances, the automakers sought to have explicit language incorporated into the bill to make this clear. Ultimately, the contending parties were unable to agree on a formula that met one another’s needs.

California legal experts may have better insight of why the above issue remains unresolved. To the average Joe and Jane citizens, a valid question is whether Google or other autonomous vehicle technology providers should be trusted to be 100% correct all the time with no driver to provide override in the future (when blind/intoxicated people may be the only passengers in the car)? Given the automobile makers are worried enough to try (but unsuccessfully) to shield themselves with explicit language in the bill, may be citizens should ask Google or the legislators what happen if a driverless car is involved in an accident with/without fatality?

Note: Currently, the California bill has a five million dollars insurance provision in this testing phase when there will ALWAYS be a driver on the driver seat to take over when things go wrong. What amount of “evidence of insurance, surety bond, or self-insurance” should be required when the system is truly driverless?!

P.S. this article is cross-posted by me at examiner.com


Doctor and medical student interrupt Minister Joe Oliver at press conference

Monday, 25 June, 2012

Chris Keefer - Doctor and medical student interrupt Minister Joe Oliver at press conference - pix 01

Faria Kamal - Doctor and medical student interrupt Minister Joe Oliver at press conference - pix 02

My personal thanks to the doctor and medical student who spoke up on our behalf. Shame on our Canadian government. Shame on us Canadians that we are not more aware of this problem. Canadians are BETTER than the actions of our current government in power!

According to the YouTube clip info, the names of the doctor and medical student speaking up are Chris Keefer and Faria Kamal respectively. I applaud Chris and Faria’s brave protest, risking retribution from the Harper government and their hospital administration.

Shame on Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

Doctor and medical student interrupt Minister Joe Oliver at press conference

See CBC News, “Refugee health cuts protest cuts off Oliver announcement

TorStar, “A new low for refugees in Canada

The issue (a website) as posted in the YouTube clip info.

Chris Keefer & Faria Kamal - Doctor and medical student interrupt Minister Joe Oliver at press conference - pix 03


Conflicts in Reality TV and psychological profiling – The Chicken or The Egg – Most fascinating and controversial session at 2012 Banff World Media Festival

Saturday, 23 June, 2012

The Chicken or The Egg - Casting for Reality session at #banff2012 - pix 1

The conflicts in reality TV as we seen in the most recent “old days” were created by show creators’ or casting directors’ gut instinct. They put interesting people or people with opposing characteristics on a show and “hope” for the best.

The Chicken or The Egg – Casting for Reality session at 2012 Banff World Media Festival gave me a deep and insightful insider look of the current practice in casting for reality TV. Psychological personality tests like the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2) are used to precisely create (I debate using the word “manipulate”) the reality TV casts composition to manufacture the right mix for “fireworks” to happen on screen.

The Good and The Bad

I agree that tests like MMPI-2 will help screened out extreme contestants that should NOT to be allowed on TV in order to protect themselves from potential harm (sometimes self-inflicted). In some sense, even the contestants have probably signed their lives away and give up any rights to launch any legal actions if anything go wrong (an analogy is the forms you have to sign before your parachute jump),  the reality TV shows makers should be more aware and ready to provide help to the contestants when troubles arises. The speakers of the session are aware the duty of care they are responsible of, even though they may not be legally bound to. Have a watch of the follow video clip and share your thoughts.

The Chicken or The Egg - Casting for Reality session at #banff2012 - pix 2

The Chicken or The Egg - Casting for Reality session at #banff2012 - pix 3

Since we are talking about reality TV, Ricky Gervais, winner of the Sir Peter Ustinov Award for Comedy at the 2010 Banff World TV Festival, had an interesting take in the finale of Extras (highly recommended funny comedy). I was lucky to ask Ricky specifically about the finale. Here is a clip.

Official The Chicken or The Egg session description from 2012 Banff.

The Chicken or The Egg – Casting For Reality
Uncovering the characters in reality television can be a challenge as producers search for engaging and genuine subjects. In this behind-the-scenes look at the nuances of discovering incredible individuals to participate in this ever growing genre, you will hear first-hand from a producer and personality expert from some of the hottest reality shows. They will discuss the fine line between creating television that is entertaining, yet not exploitative, that presents the nitty-gritty of real-life drama.
What is the creative process in finding the characters that drive our favourite reality shows?
What are some of the challenges in putting together the perfect ensemble cast of characters?
What is the network involvement in casting for reality series?”

Official 2012 Banff bio for Jonathan Glazier.

“Jonathan Glazier – Creative Director – Entertainment Master Class and Pepper Rafferty Read the rest of this entry »


Why the Chinese government can always win in court? The “tax case” of Ai Weiwei @aiww 艾未未

Wednesday, 20 June, 2012

Q: Why the Chinese government can always win in court?

A: The Chinese government can always lock up or magically make your lawyer “unreachable”. In addition, they can send police to block you from attending your own court hearing. And as if these are not enough, the judges will always follow the wishes of the central government to ensure prompt victory by the governments.

Guardian June 20, 2012, ”Ai Weiwei barred from court hearing by Chinese police – Dissident artist says police warned him to stay away from court hearing on company’s lawsuit against Beijing tax authorities

CNN June 20, 2012, “China dissident Ai Weiwei harassed by police, he says

Guardian June 20, 2012, “Ai Weiwei’s lawyer missing as artist is warned away from tax hearing – Chinese dissident being told not to attend court as it considers his challenge to a fine for alleged unpaid taxes

Bloomberg June 19, 2012, “Dissident Artist Ai Weiwei Says Police Block Him From Court

Reuters, June 20, 2012 “Chinese police warn Ai Weiwei to avoid tax hearing

***

Update: I am thrilled that Ai Weiwei retweeted this post and I am ready to see Chinese spambots starting to flood my Twitter stream now!  At the same time, I asked & replied with a serious and fundamental questions/concerns for foreigners and foreign businesses “@aiww Sad u can’t attend your tax case in court + they “disappear” your lawyer. How can foreigners or int. businesses trust Chinese courts?


Bank of Canada confirms poor-quality counterfeit polymer $100 notes as it launches 4 new PSAs to help educate public to prevent financial crimes

Wednesday, 16 May, 2012

Bank of Canada - pix 00

Yesterday, Bank of Canada unveiled four public service announcements (PSAs) at Toronto Police Service headquarters.

The Bank of Canada takes counterfeiting very seriously and responds by researching and developing new notes with innovative security features that are both easy to check and hard to counterfeit. The Bank of Canada will be unveiling four new public service announcements to help educate the public and assist in the prevention of Financial Crimes.

During the post-press conference Q&A, Bank of Canada representative confirmed with this reporter that since the launch of the new polymer $100 notes in November 2011, there have been attempts to counterfeit the polymer $100 notes and the counterfeit $100s were in circulation. Fortunately, according to the Bank representative, the quality of these counterfeit C$100 notes were of very poor quality, for example, these counterfeit notes didn’t even have the transparent windows, one of the most obvious and easily verifiable security features. Which is why the Bank is emphasizing the importance of educating the public to detect counterfeit polymer notes. You can watch my questions and the Bank representative’s answers at the 20:00 mark of this YouTube video.

Full press conference video: Fighting Fraud On The Front Lines ~ Bank of Canada & Toronto Police Financial Crimes Unit

Bank Note Counterfeiting – from Bank of Canada

A good way to check bank notes is FLP (Feel, Look, and Flip) as explained here at the 3:20 mark.

Some readers may remember I’ve previously written about polymer banknotes since Bank of Canada first announced (in March 2011) that it would launch polymer notes in Canada. The following are my in-depth research articles based on information known or found at the time.

March 2011, “Secrets of Bank of Canada’s new plastic money: An advance look of 12 possible security features

March 2011, “Bank of Canada’s new polymer banknote – Patents & technologies by Securency International

June, 2011, “Canada New Polymer $100 Notes in Nov 2011 – Now your money is smooth & will bounce!

November, 2011, “Canada polymer $100 banknote hands-on look finally! (with video)

Note: See also this 660 News article reporting about the BoC press conference, “Bank of Canada launches fraud prevention campaign“.

Note: article is cross-posted to examiner.com

Bank of Canada - pix 01

Bank of Canada - pix 02

Bank of Canada - pix 03


Pre-Ceremony intro for Queen’s Park Ontario Police Memorial this Sunday (May 6th)

Friday, 4 May, 2012

Pre-Ceremony intro:site test for Queen's Park Ontario Police Memorial this Sunday (May 6th) - pix 01

It was my honour to work with Toronto Police Constable +Scott Mills this afternoon in preparation for this Sunday (May 6th, 10:30am EST) Queen’s Park Ontario Police Memorial LIVE broadcast. More info here.

Watch the video to see the site for yourself.

Pre-Ceremony intro:site test for Queen's Park Ontario Police Memorial this Sunday (May 6th) - pix 03

Pre-Ceremony intro:site test for Queen's Park Ontario Police Memorial this Sunday (May 6th) - pix 04

Pre-Ceremony intro:site test for Queen's Park Ontario Police Memorial this Sunday (May 6th) - pix 05

Pre-Ceremony intro:site test for Queen's Park Ontario Police Memorial this Sunday (May 6th) - pix 06

I especially love this last screen capture where a beautiful butterfly lands next to the broadcast equipment.

Pre-Ceremony intro:site test for Queen's Park Ontario Police Memorial this Sunday (May 6th) - pix 07


Meeting The Straits Times reporter Ching Cheong (程翔)

Sunday, 29 April, 2012

Dinner with Ching Cheong 程翔 pix 03

It was my honour and pleasure to meet and have dinner with Singapore’s The Straits Times reporter Ching Cheong (程翔) tonight. Quoting Wikipedia,

“He is best known for having been detained by the People’s Republic of China on allegations of spying for Taiwan. He was imprisoned from April 2005 to February 2008, spending more than 1000 days in prison.[1] Human rights advocates and Chinese patriots called for his release saying the charges were groundless. Throughout the process, he was viciously accused, deplorably defamed (falsely accused of having a mistress) and unreasonably imprisoned.”

I remember during Ching‘s groundless and unreasonable imprisonment, the media reports alway emphasize that he is a Chinese patriot and what had the Chinese government became when they put him in prison! This excerpt from “ST journalist recounts ordeal in China prison” really touched me.

Background Story – BITTERSWEET FAMILY REUNION

I [Ching Cheong] looked around and realised that father was not among the family members present.

At first, I thought that perhaps father had stayed at home as he was weak and had problems moving about. I thought that one of my siblings would be bringing him over when dinner was ready to start.

So I asked: ‘Who is going to get father?’

It was only then that mother told me that father had passed away on May 20, 2006!

On hearing this, I knelt before mother and cried: ‘Father, I have let you down! Mother, I have let you down!’

I asked mother: ‘Did father blame me?’

She said: ‘No, of course not. Rather, your father comforted me, telling me not to worry. He said, ‘Don’t we know what our son is like?”

When I heard this, my tears fell uncontrollably. This is the greatest trust that a father can place in a child; this is the most precious legacy that he has left me.

Now, whenever I recall his words, I would still cry uncontrollably.

I was amazed when Mr. Ching told us he received full financial and legal support from The Straits Times, including full salary for the three years he was in prison and also fighting the Chinese government to give him proper legal representation. Unimaginable to westerns accustomed to a fair judicial system, his first Beijing based lawyer backed out the case because of government pressure and he was unable to hire another Beijing lawyer.

Dinner with Ching Cheong 程翔 pix 01

Dinner with Ching Cheong 程翔 pix 02

Note: As an aside because of the recent escape of Chinese rights activist and blind lawyer Chen Guangcheng (陳光誠), a friend was wearing a set Chen free t-shirt he got previously.

Free Chen Guangcheng 陳光誠 t-shirt


City of Edmonton goes Google Apps – (Part 1/2) Financial, Technological Impacts

Wednesday, 11 April, 2012

Chris Moore, City of Edmonton Chief Information Officer, interview

Update: Part 2/2 Privacy Issues, USA Patriot Act, FOIP Act has now been posted.

Yesterday, City of Edmonton announced it “will become the first major municipal government in Canada to use Google email and other office technology apps for all City employees“. Google Enterprise stated, “While Edmonton may be the first city in Canada to go Google, it’s in great company with other city governments in North America ─ like PittsburghOrlando and Zapopan, Mexico ─ that have already made the move.” It is only natural for people in Calgary, Toronto, and other cities to ask and find out if there are anything we can learn from Edmonton?

In a video interview with Chris Moore, Chief Information Officier of City of Edmonton, Moore said all 6 departments, 31 branches, 10,000+ people, will move to use Google Apps for Government. The press release states, “The change will be phased in over the next few years with Google email and calendar put in place in late 2012, into 2013 and the other apps available for employees to use late next year.

In fact, Moore told me a few hundred employees are already in pilot projects using Google Apps. (note: While the police services will stay on their separate system, the city’s fire services, parks & recreations, waste management/day-to-day garbage pickup, tax department, etc are part of this move.) In a phone interview with Dr. Jonathan Schaeffer, University of Alberta Vice Provost and Associate Vice President (Information Technology) responsible for moving the university to Google Apps for Education, he said U of A has successfully transition 125,000 people and have 3,000 people to go in a phased migration. The U of A project started in March 2011 and is expected to be completed in early fall 2012.

According to city of Edmonton manager Simon Farbrother, “This move supports our City Vision, The Way Ahead, to use the most innovative technologies available. We will now have a more inclusive work environment where all employees will have access and be able to share and collaborate in real time on the same document whenever they want, in any location, and on any device such as smartphones and laptops.

By going to a cloud-based solution, Moore explained the city is moving away from the old model of software licenses installed on desktops and laptops, with upgrades every year or every other year, to the concept of iterative changes which people have already experiencing in their use of technologies at home.

According to Moore, 3.2 million dollars is the estimated up front cost for moving to Google Apps (e.g. implementation, training, documentation, etc). The cost savings over five years is about 9.2 million dollars, Read the rest of this entry »


Wiebo Ludwig (1941 – 2012)

Tuesday, 10 April, 2012

CBC News reported “Anti-oilpatch activist Wiebo Ludwig dies at 70“. Wiebo Ludwig (1941 – 2012) is an misunderstood man. In 2011, I interviewed David York, director of the insightful NFB documentary Wiebo’s War to talk about Ludwig when the film screened at the Calgary International Film Festival. (see full article with more video here). Here is my interview with David York.

Note: I’ve reached out to try to interview David to talk about Ludwig, I was told he is declining interviews.

Here is Wiebo’s War (NFB synopsis and trailer),

This feature documentary focuses on Wiebo Ludwig, a suspect in a recent string of pipeline bombings. The bombings echo a campaign of sabotage he waged against the oil and gas industry in the 90s – barricading roads and blowing up wells. And when a 16-year-old girl was fatally shot on the family farm in 1999, Wiebo’s fight with the industry was thrust further into the media spotlight.

The Ludwig family are part of a Christian community that lives in close adherence to their religious values. The community is comprised of 5 married couples, 7 unmarried adult children and 38 grandchildren. They are self-sufficient in food and energy, but live in isolation and believe that those that don’t share their religious beliefs, like filmmaker David York, are living in terrible darkness.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 605 other followers

%d bloggers like this: