-

Young Man Killed by Tiger Was Quiet One, Witness Says

2008-01-03T08:40:00.000-08:00

Did a group of young men taunt a Siberian tiger before it escaped from its enclosure at the San Francisco Zoo on Christmas Day and attacked them?

A witness to the incident added weight to that claim in an interview today in The San Francisco Chronicle, saying that the young men “were roaring at” the zoo’s lions and acting “boisterous” for the four to five minutes when she was watching.

But the witness, Jennifer Miller, apparently did not add anything to the suspicions being investigated by police that a large rock, a tree branch and other items were thrown into another exhibit area holding the 350-pound tiger.

If the police conclude that a crime was committed, it would be a misdemeanor.

Lawyers for the men flatly denied that there had been teasing of any kind, and a police official pointed out that Ms. Miller’s account could amount to “what kindergartners do at the zoo every day,” The Chronicle reported.

“The lion was bristling, so I just said, ‘Come on, let’s get out of here.’ ” Ms. Miller said. “My kids were disturbed by it.”

The tiger’s rampage began minutes later, and didn’t end until two of the young men were hurt, and another, Carlos Sousa Jr., was killed. According to Ms. Miller, Mr. Sousa was the only one in the group that did not participate in the rough-housing:

“He wasn’t roaring. He wasn’t taunting them,” she recalled. “He kept looking at me apologetically like, ‘I’m sorry, I know we are being stupid.’ “

Of course, no one deserves to be mauled, not even a taunting teenager. But Mr. Sousa’s death seemed especially tragic. The zoo reopened today with new signs posted, evidently inspired by a 17-year-old who died while following the rules:

PLEASE don’t tap on glass, throw anything into exhibits, make excessive noise, tease or call out to them.”

The Iowa Caucuses: Five Not-So-Unlikely Surprises

2008-01-03T07:59:00.000-08:00

The smart money — not to mention the latest polls — gives an edge to Barack Obama and Mike Huckabee in tonight’s Iowa caucuses.

But take a couple hundred thousand Midwesterners, pack them into gyms and libraries and town halls on a frigid Iowa night, add a heaping measure of peer pressure to the equation, and, well, anything can happen.

Here are five unlikely results you that shouldn’t be shocked to see when the final precinct tallies come in:

1) John Edwards Wins Going Away

No one in presidential campaign history has ever worked a state like John Edwards has worked Iowa. No one. But for a brief hiatus for the 2004 general election, Edwards has been campaigning there non-stop since early 2003. He’s answered more questions from more voters at more diners and summer cookouts — in every last corner of the state — than Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama combined.

(Hillary Clinton recently tried to barnstorm some of the state’s far-flung counties by helicopter. Edwards, by contrast, has worked the backroads — having personally visited each of the state’s 99 counties — not once but twice!)

For a process wherein your average caucus goers expect to have shaken the hand of the candidate they support, Edwards has simply reached out to more Iowans than his competitors. There’s an intangibility to that personal connection. And it will likely pay off for Edwards in precincts in rural Western Iowa where he invested much of his time in 2003 — and where he again outdid his opponents this cycle.

Then there’s the Bill Richardson factor. The New Mexico governor is polling at 6 percent in the Hawkeye State — largely on the strength of his Get-Out-ASAP prescription for ending the Iraq war. When Richardson fails to pull in the requisite 15 percent support needed to be considered “viable,” his supporters will be forced to caucus in another corner, and guess who just endorsed a plan to pull all combat troops out within 10 months of taking office?

Finally, there’s Edwards’ unspeakable advantage — shhh! — he’s the last white guy standing. As one prominent Democratic strategist told me earlier this cycle: “Obama and Clinton are terrific candidates, but they each represent an untested threshold in American politics. You have to entertain the idea that when Democrats really think about who is going to ensure that the party wins in 2008, a lot of people might get nervous and say, ‘Damn it, we need a good-looking, charismatic white guy.’ I hate to be crass. But that’s baldfaced politics.”

These folks are hiding in plain sight in the polls: Some are in Chris Dodd’s camp. Others are backing Joe Biden. Others show up among the six percent of undecideds. As the Other White Guys become “non-viable” it shouldn’t be a shock if their backers break, predominately, for Edwards.

All told, according to the latest Des Moines Register poll, 19 percent of likely caucus goers are uncommitted to a viable candidate. If even half of those folks find their way to Edwards, they’ll call his victory a landslide.

2) Hillary Clinton Comes in Third

It’s entirely possible that the top three Democratic candidates will emerge from Iowa as deadlocked as they entered it. And barring the kind of self-inflicted wound Dean caused with his infamous scream, all of this ado about Iowa may be moot, with the caucuses merely serving to kick the can to New Hampshire… where Edwards will fade, and Obama and Clinton can duke it out for real.

But Iowa will truly be a difference maker if the national front-runner takes only the bronze. And that could easily be Hillary’s fate. It’s easy to see how Edwards finishes stronger than he’s polled. Ditto for Obama, who is counting on unprecedented turnout to goose his precinct tallies. But where are Hillary’s hidden backers? I can’t see them.

And neither, apparently, can the Clinton camp. Surrogate Tom Vilsack, Iowa’s former governor, is already lowering expectations, spinning that a third-place finish would be just dandy.

But let’s get real: If Obama wins, Edwards places, and Hillary tumbles into third by any notable margin, her candidacy could be toast. Inevitable candidates don’t finish last.

3) Mitt Romney Springboards Toward Inevitability

Tomorrow night, Mike Huckabee could well get his shoestring clipped — and his clock cleaned — by Mitt Romney. Huckabee’s a grassroots, movement candidate, and his Jesus-fearing faithful may still propel him to victory. But Romney’s got the money, the organization, and the plan.

His strong suit is supposed to be as an executive, and here’s his chance to prove it. He rescued an Olympiad that seemed to be sunk in Salt Lake City, and he’s got a chance to pull a similar rabbit out of his hat tomorrow night.

And if he can pull off a win in Iowa, Romney will emerge all the stronger for having fended off the Huckabee surge. Before Huck, it was hard to say Iowa mattered very much on the GOP side. But now, for Romney, this would have been a real victory against a formidable opponent — and a huge momentum boost heading into his (vacation) home turf of New Hampshire.

They say Democrats fall in love with their candidates; Republicans fall in line. An Iowa-anointed Romney should have little trouble regaining his footing in the Granite State. And that one-two early-state punch would give him all the Big Mo he needs to tackle South Carolina.

If Romney takes Iowa, he could. go. all. the. way.

Washington Post sticks by RIAA story despite evidence it goofed

2008-01-03T07:16:00.000-08:00

It's late on Wednesday evening and the Washington Post has yet to correct a story that accused the recording industry of trying to paint law-abiding music fans as criminals.

But the paper should make things right and soon.

Marc Fisher, a Post columnist, wrote on Sunday that the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) asserted in a legal brief that anyone who copies music from a CD onto their computer is a thief. The document, filed last month, was part of the RIAA's copyright suit against Jeffrey Howell, an Arizona resident accused of illegal file sharing.

Quoting from the brief, Fisher wrote that the RIAA had argued that MP3 files created from legally bought CDs are "unauthorized copies" and violate the law. If it were true, the move would represent a major shift in strategy by the RIAA, which typically hasn't challenged an individual's right to copy CDs for personal use.

The problem with Fisher's story is that nowhere in the RIAA's brief does the group call someone a criminal for simply copying music to a computer. Throughout the 21-page brief, the recording industry defines what it considers to be illegal behavior and it boils down to this: creating digital recordings from CDs and then uploading them to file-sharing networks.

A sentence on page 15 of the brief clearly spells out the RIAA's position: "Once (Howell) converted plaintiff's recording into the compressed MP3 format and they are in his shared folder, they are no longer the authorized copies distributed by Plaintiff."

The key words there are "shared folder" and it's an important distinction. It means that before the RIAA considers someone a criminal, a person has to at least appear to be distributing music.

The Post story, which followed similar pieces in Ars Technica and Wired.com, has spurred scores of other media outlets to repeat the paper's erroneous assertion. Ironically, even typically anti-RIAA blogs, such as Engadget, Gizmodo and TechDirt have jumped in on the side of the RIAA.

"The Washington Post story is wrong," said Jonathan Lamy, an RIAA spokesman. "As numerous commentators have since discovered after taking the time to read our brief, the record companies did not allege that ripping a lawfully acquired CD to a computer or transferring a copy to an MP3 player is infringement. This case is about the illegal distribution of copyrighted songs on a peer-to-peer network, not making copies of legally acquired music for personal use."

After reading Lamy's statement, Fisher didn't back down.

He responded in an e-mail to CNET News.com: "The bottom line is that there is a disconnect between RIAA's publicly stated policy that making a personal copy of a CD is ok and the theory advanced by its lawyers that in fact, transferring music to your computer is an unauthorized act."

He took one more shot before signing off: "Rather than suing its customers and slamming reporters, the RIAA might better spend its energies focusing on winning back the trust of an alienated consumer base."

Still, Fisher received little support from respected and independent copyright experts. William Patry, the copyright guru at Google--not exactly known as a lackey for copyright holders--wrote on his blog that the RIAA is being "unfairly maligned" in the Post story.

Patry does, however, caution that recent statements made by the RIAA and included in Fisher's story reflect the group's growing tendency to use language as a means of control.

Fisher quoted Sony BMG's chief of litigation, Jennifer Pariser, who testified recently in court that "when an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song."

Patry disagreed.

"This new rhetoric of 'everything anyone does without (RIAA) permission is stealing' is well worth noting and well worth challenging at every occasion," Patry wrote. "It is the rhetoric of copyright as an ancient property right, permitting copyright owners to control all uses as a natural right; the converse is that everyone else is an immoral thief."

Oil Trades Near $100 as OPEC Officials Say They Can't End Rally

2008-01-03T03:30:00.000-08:00

Jan. 3 (Bloomberg) -- Crude oil traded near yesterday's record of $100 a barrel as OPEC officials said the group can't curb prices and the U.S. refused to release emergency supplies.

The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries is unable to counter the rally, Libyan and Qatari officials said today. The U.S. doesn't plan to tap strategic reserves, a spokeswoman for President Bush said yesterday. A report today is expected to show U.S. commercial stockpiles fell for a seventh week.

``The U.S. government's refusal to open the SPR, especially with cold weather approaching, is helping to keep prices near that $100 record,'' said Robert Laughlin, a senior broker at MG Global Ltd. in London. ``OPEC, while under pressure after yesterday's high, will ignore it.''

Crude oil for February delivery rose as much as 36 cents, or 0.4 percent, to $99.98 a barrel, in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. The contract traded at $99.70 at 11:20 a.m. in London. Yesterday, it jumped $3.64, or 3.8 percent, to a record close of $99.62 a barrel after touching $100 earlier in the session.

OPEC's production is already close to maximum capacity and the organization ``can do nothing'' to curb prices, Shokri Ghanem, the chairman of Libya's National Oil Corp., said in a telephone interview from Tripoli today.

OPEC, supplier of more than 40 percent of the world's oil, can't lower the price because it's driven by speculative investors rather than fundamentals, Al Arabiya reported, citing Qatari Oil Minister Abdullah al-Attiyah.

Brent Crude

Brent crude for February settlement rose as much as 66 cents, or 0.7 percent, to a record intraday price of $98.50 a barrel. The contract traded at $97.92 at 11:20 a.m. on London's ICE Futures Europe exchange. Yesterday, it gained $3.99, or 4.3 percent, to a record close of $97.84.

U.S. crude oil inventories probably fell for a seventh straight week last week to a three-year low, a Bloomberg News survey indicated. Stockpiles fell 2.18 million barrels in the week ended Dec. 28 from 293.6 million, according to the median of responses by 12 analysts before a report later today from the Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration.

OPEC kept its production targets unchanged at its last meeting on Dec. 5, rebuffing calls by the U.S. to pump more oil. The group next meets Feb. 1. Other OPEC officials said the group is ready to boost output to cover any shortages.

``If the dispute in Nigeria leads to a shortage, OPEC will consider it appropriate to meet the shortfall,'' Iran's OPEC governor Hossein Kazempour Ardebili said today in a telephone interview from Tehran.

Nigeria Violence

Indonesia, the second-smallest OPEC producer, will propose that the group increase supply by at least 500,000 barrels a day to lower prices, Maizar Rahman, OPEC governor for Indonesia, said by telephone today.

Oil's push to $100 a barrel was aided by renewed violence in Nigeria, forecasts for a decline in U.S. inventories, disruption at a European refinery, and a weaker dollar.

The dollar's 11 percent slide last year against the euro helped boost oil prices because it made commodities cheaper for buyers outside the U.S. and attracted investors seeking a hedge against inflation.

Nigerian militants killed 12 people in the oil city of Port Harcourt on Jan. 1. Violence has curbed daily output in Africa's biggest oil producer by almost a quarter. Militants have halted about 500,000 barrels a day of output, almost a quarter of the country's total, since the beginning of 2006.

``It was the violence in Nigeria that pushed prices up there, combined with the fact that a lot of the bigger players are back in the market after the holiday,'' said David Aleman, a senior analyst at Grand Central Trading Co. in Newport Beach, California. ``The market was looking for bullish reasons to keep going higher and this event fits the bill.''

A pipe explosion at Petroplus Holdings AG's 110,000 barrel- a-day Ingolstadt refinery in Germany, reported by newspaper Donaukurier, added to concerns about product supply during the period of peak winter demand.