Music streaming service will permit non-subscribers to listen to an individual track a maximum of five times Spotify is to cut back the amount of free listening available to users from 20 to 10 hours. From 1 May, the music streaming service will reduce by half the amount of free music available to its six million users in the UK and Europe. Under the new restrictions, non-subscribers will only be allowed to listen to an individual track a maximum of five times. New users will be moved on to the restricted model within six months; it will apply to existing users from 1 May. Since its 2008 launch, Spotify’s free offering has proved popular enough to tempt more than 1 million people to become paying customers. Daniel Ek, Spotify’s co-founder, announced the changes in a blogpost on the company’s website on Thursday. “Making Spotify available to millions across Europe has seen the service become incredibly popular. People are listening to more music and from a wider range of artists than ever before, and are giving up on piracy, which is exactly what we hoped would happen,” he said. “So it’s vital that we continue offering an on-demand free service to you and millions more like you, but to make that possible we have to put some limits in place going forward.” Ek said that the changes would mainly affect heavier users of the service, and that users would still be able to listen to around 200 tracks or 20 albums for free each month. The move will no doubt rankle with some music fans, who had grown used to Spotify’s free streaming service being ” too good to be true “. The first commenter on Spotify’s official blogpost lamented : “So long Spotify. It was nice knowing you. Guess I’ll go back to pirating music again then.” More details soon… •
Continue reading …
The Italian edition of a youth catechism mistakenly gives the impression that contraception is permitted for Catholic couples A translation error suggesting Catholic couples are allowed to use contraception has forced an Italian publisher to temporarily withdraw a new book aimed at young Catholics. The Italian translation of YouCat, a youth catechism originally written in German and with a foreword from the Pope, mistakenly gave the impression that artificial means of contraception were permitted for Catholic couples. The Catholic church officially believes that it is wrong to use any form of intervention, from sterilisation to condoms or the contraceptive pill, to “render procreation impossible”, although “natural family planning” is allowed. The error in the Italian version of the book centred around the translation of the German word “Empfängnisregelung”, according to the Catholic News Agency , which was rendered in Italian as “metodi anticoncezionali”, or “contraceptive methods”. This meant that when the question “Can a Christian couple turn to contraceptive methods?” was asked in the catechism, it was answered with the response: “Yes, a Christian couple can and must be responsible about their capacity of being able to give life”. The English version, which will be published in the UK on Friday , is closer to the original German, reading rather: “May a Christian married couple regulate the number of children they have? Yes, a Christian married couple may and should be responsible in using the gift and privilege of transmitting life.” “The problem did not originate with the German text – at least not if the Italian translation is based on the same German text as that on which Ignatius Press based its translation. The German text of question 420 asks whether a Christian married couple may regulate the number of children they have. It does not ask whether the couple may use methods of contraception,” said Mark Brumley, president of the Ignatius Press , which is publishing the American edition of the book. “The English translation of YouCat … does not, of course, endorse contraception but clearly affirms the Church’s teaching that contraception is evil.” Vatican officials have now confirmed that the Italian publisher of the book, the Citta Nuova editorial group, had withdrawn it in order to fix the mistake. It has now crossed out the offending passage, and included “a paper insert with the correct translation that says the Church promotes natural family planning”, Vatican Radio reported. “It was only a mistake translating one word,” said the publisher, the Citta Nuova editorial group, today. Catholicism Religion Sex Pope Benedict XVI Alison Flood guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Tactics used by Met officers against climate camp demonstrators in 2009 contravened public order laws, says judgment The high court has ruled that the Metropolitan police broke the law in the way they “kettled” protesters at the G20 demonstrations in 2009. In a landmark judgment released on Thursday, high court judges found for protesters who had claimed police treated them unfairly. The court heard that officers used punches to the face, slaps and shields against demonstrators whom police chiefs accept had nothing to do with violence. The case concerned the G20 protests in London on 1 April 2009, during which Ian Tomlinson, a bystander, died after being struck by an officer. Police in charge of the protest ordered a climate camp to be kettled and then cleared, but officers were left to decide how much force they should use. Video shot on the day showed demonstrators trying to avoid being beaten by raising their hands in the air and chanting “this is not a riot” at police clad in helmets and riot gear. Officers on the videos are seen to strike demonstrators, who cannot be seen to be engaged in any violence. On 1 April 2009, there were several demonstrations in the area, but the court case deals with a climate camp in Bishopsgate. A police chief accepts it was peaceful but decided it should be contained to avoid potentially violent people joining it. Officers were told they were containing or detaining those in the climate camp to prevent a breach of the peace. Protesters would be held for hours. Notebooks secured from some officers contain admissions they used violence, but officers said this was to protect themselves or colleagues. The protesters bringing the case say police were indiscriminate in detaining and isolating the peaceful climate camp. In documents setting out their case, their lawyers say: “The police took action against the climate camp as if it were a violent crowd … That is how the instruction to impose containment was interpreted by officers on the ground.” The Metropolitan police says kettling, or detaining a mass of people, is a necessary tactic to tackle the potential for violence at demonstrations. The force and its lawyers are expected to study the judgment. Police Protest G20 Climate Camp Activism Vikram Dodd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Tactics used by Met officers against climate camp demonstrators in 2009 contravened public order laws, says judgment The high court has ruled that the Metropolitan police broke the law in the way they “kettled” protesters at the G20 demonstrations in 2009. In a landmark judgment released on Thursday, high court judges found for protesters who had claimed police treated them unfairly. The court heard that officers used punches to the face, slaps and shields against demonstrators whom police chiefs accept had nothing to do with violence. The case concerned the G20 protests in London on 1 April 2009, during which Ian Tomlinson, a bystander, died after being struck by an officer. Police in charge of the protest ordered a climate camp to be kettled and then cleared, but officers were left to decide how much force they should use. Video shot on the day showed demonstrators trying to avoid being beaten by raising their hands in the air and chanting “this is not a riot” at police clad in helmets and riot gear. Officers on the videos are seen to strike demonstrators, who cannot be seen to be engaged in any violence. On 1 April 2009, there were several demonstrations in the area, but the court case deals with a climate camp in Bishopsgate. A police chief accepts it was peaceful but decided it should be contained to avoid potentially violent people joining it. Officers were told they were containing or detaining those in the climate camp to prevent a breach of the peace. Protesters would be held for hours. Notebooks secured from some officers contain admissions they used violence, but officers said this was to protect themselves or colleagues. The protesters bringing the case say police were indiscriminate in detaining and isolating the peaceful climate camp. In documents setting out their case, their lawyers say: “The police took action against the climate camp as if it were a violent crowd … That is how the instruction to impose containment was interpreted by officers on the ground.” The Metropolitan police says kettling, or detaining a mass of people, is a necessary tactic to tackle the potential for violence at demonstrations. The force and its lawyers are expected to study the judgment. Police Protest G20 Climate Camp Activism Vikram Dodd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Tactics used by Met officers against climate camp demonstrators in 2009 contravened public order laws, says judgment The high court has ruled that the Metropolitan police broke the law in the way they “kettled” protesters at the G20 demonstrations in 2009. In a landmark judgment released on Thursday, high court judges found for protesters who had claimed police treated them unfairly. The court heard that officers used punches to the face, slaps and shields against demonstrators whom police chiefs accept had nothing to do with violence. The case concerned the G20 protests in London on 1 April 2009, during which Ian Tomlinson, a bystander, died after being struck by an officer. Police in charge of the protest ordered a climate camp to be kettled and then cleared, but officers were left to decide how much force they should use. Video shot on the day showed demonstrators trying to avoid being beaten by raising their hands in the air and chanting “this is not a riot” at police clad in helmets and riot gear. Officers on the videos are seen to strike demonstrators, who cannot be seen to be engaged in any violence. On 1 April 2009, there were several demonstrations in the area, but the court case deals with a climate camp in Bishopsgate. A police chief accepts it was peaceful but decided it should be contained to avoid potentially violent people joining it. Officers were told they were containing or detaining those in the climate camp to prevent a breach of the peace. Protesters would be held for hours. Notebooks secured from some officers contain admissions they used violence, but officers said this was to protect themselves or colleagues. The protesters bringing the case say police were indiscriminate in detaining and isolating the peaceful climate camp. In documents setting out their case, their lawyers say: “The police took action against the climate camp as if it were a violent crowd … That is how the instruction to impose containment was interpreted by officers on the ground.” The Metropolitan police says kettling, or detaining a mass of people, is a necessary tactic to tackle the potential for violence at demonstrations. The force and its lawyers are expected to study the judgment. Police Protest G20 Climate Camp Activism Vikram Dodd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Tactics used by Met officers against climate camp demonstrators in 2009 contravened public order laws, says judgment The high court has ruled that the Metropolitan police broke the law in the way they “kettled” protesters at the G20 demonstrations in 2009. In a landmark judgment released on Thursday, high court judges found for protesters who had claimed police treated them unfairly. The court heard that officers used punches to the face, slaps and shields against demonstrators whom police chiefs accept had nothing to do with violence. The case concerned the G20 protests in London on 1 April 2009, during which Ian Tomlinson, a bystander, died after being struck by an officer. Police in charge of the protest ordered a climate camp to be kettled and then cleared, but officers were left to decide how much force they should use. Video shot on the day showed demonstrators trying to avoid being beaten by raising their hands in the air and chanting “this is not a riot” at police clad in helmets and riot gear. Officers on the videos are seen to strike demonstrators, who cannot be seen to be engaged in any violence. On 1 April 2009, there were several demonstrations in the area, but the court case deals with a climate camp in Bishopsgate. A police chief accepts it was peaceful but decided it should be contained to avoid potentially violent people joining it. Officers were told they were containing or detaining those in the climate camp to prevent a breach of the peace. Protesters would be held for hours. Notebooks secured from some officers contain admissions they used violence, but officers said this was to protect themselves or colleagues. The protesters bringing the case say police were indiscriminate in detaining and isolating the peaceful climate camp. In documents setting out their case, their lawyers say: “The police took action against the climate camp as if it were a violent crowd … That is how the instruction to impose containment was interpreted by officers on the ground.” The Metropolitan police says kettling, or detaining a mass of people, is a necessary tactic to tackle the potential for violence at demonstrations. The force and its lawyers are expected to study the judgment. Police Protest G20 Climate Camp Activism Vikram Dodd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Tactics used by Met officers against climate camp demonstrators in 2009 contravened public order laws, says judgment The high court has ruled that the Metropolitan police broke the law in the way they “kettled” protesters at the G20 demonstrations in 2009. In a landmark judgment released on Thursday, high court judges found for protesters who had claimed police treated them unfairly. The court heard that officers used punches to the face, slaps and shields against demonstrators whom police chiefs accept had nothing to do with violence. The case concerned the G20 protests in London on 1 April 2009, during which Ian Tomlinson, a bystander, died after being struck by an officer. Police in charge of the protest ordered a climate camp to be kettled and then cleared, but officers were left to decide how much force they should use. Video shot on the day showed demonstrators trying to avoid being beaten by raising their hands in the air and chanting “this is not a riot” at police clad in helmets and riot gear. Officers on the videos are seen to strike demonstrators, who cannot be seen to be engaged in any violence. On 1 April 2009, there were several demonstrations in the area, but the court case deals with a climate camp in Bishopsgate. A police chief accepts it was peaceful but decided it should be contained to avoid potentially violent people joining it. Officers were told they were containing or detaining those in the climate camp to prevent a breach of the peace. Protesters would be held for hours. Notebooks secured from some officers contain admissions they used violence, but officers said this was to protect themselves or colleagues. The protesters bringing the case say police were indiscriminate in detaining and isolating the peaceful climate camp. In documents setting out their case, their lawyers say: “The police took action against the climate camp as if it were a violent crowd … That is how the instruction to impose containment was interpreted by officers on the ground.” The Metropolitan police says kettling, or detaining a mass of people, is a necessary tactic to tackle the potential for violence at demonstrations. The force and its lawyers are expected to study the judgment. Police Protest G20 Climate Camp Activism Vikram Dodd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Tactics used by Met officers against climate camp demonstrators in 2009 contravened public order laws, says judgment The high court has ruled that the Metropolitan police broke the law in the way they “kettled” protesters at the G20 demonstrations in 2009. In a landmark judgment released on Thursday, high court judges found for protesters who had claimed police treated them unfairly. The court heard that officers used punches to the face, slaps and shields against demonstrators whom police chiefs accept had nothing to do with violence. The case concerned the G20 protests in London on 1 April 2009, during which Ian Tomlinson, a bystander, died after being struck by an officer. Police in charge of the protest ordered a climate camp to be kettled and then cleared, but officers were left to decide how much force they should use. Video shot on the day showed demonstrators trying to avoid being beaten by raising their hands in the air and chanting “this is not a riot” at police clad in helmets and riot gear. Officers on the videos are seen to strike demonstrators, who cannot be seen to be engaged in any violence. On 1 April 2009, there were several demonstrations in the area, but the court case deals with a climate camp in Bishopsgate. A police chief accepts it was peaceful but decided it should be contained to avoid potentially violent people joining it. Officers were told they were containing or detaining those in the climate camp to prevent a breach of the peace. Protesters would be held for hours. Notebooks secured from some officers contain admissions they used violence, but officers said this was to protect themselves or colleagues. The protesters bringing the case say police were indiscriminate in detaining and isolating the peaceful climate camp. In documents setting out their case, their lawyers say: “The police took action against the climate camp as if it were a violent crowd … That is how the instruction to impose containment was interpreted by officers on the ground.” The Metropolitan police says kettling, or detaining a mass of people, is a necessary tactic to tackle the potential for violence at demonstrations. The force and its lawyers are expected to study the judgment. Police Protest G20 Climate Camp Activism Vikram Dodd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Tactics used by Met officers against climate camp demonstrators in 2009 contravened public order laws, says judgment The high court has ruled that the Metropolitan police broke the law in the way they “kettled” protesters at the G20 demonstrations in 2009. In a landmark judgment released on Thursday, high court judges found for protesters who had claimed police treated them unfairly. The court heard that officers used punches to the face, slaps and shields against demonstrators whom police chiefs accept had nothing to do with violence. The case concerned the G20 protests in London on 1 April 2009, during which Ian Tomlinson, a bystander, died after being struck by an officer. Police in charge of the protest ordered a climate camp to be kettled and then cleared, but officers were left to decide how much force they should use. Video shot on the day showed demonstrators trying to avoid being beaten by raising their hands in the air and chanting “this is not a riot” at police clad in helmets and riot gear. Officers on the videos are seen to strike demonstrators, who cannot be seen to be engaged in any violence. On 1 April 2009, there were several demonstrations in the area, but the court case deals with a climate camp in Bishopsgate. A police chief accepts it was peaceful but decided it should be contained to avoid potentially violent people joining it. Officers were told they were containing or detaining those in the climate camp to prevent a breach of the peace. Protesters would be held for hours. Notebooks secured from some officers contain admissions they used violence, but officers said this was to protect themselves or colleagues. The protesters bringing the case say police were indiscriminate in detaining and isolating the peaceful climate camp. In documents setting out their case, their lawyers say: “The police took action against the climate camp as if it were a violent crowd … That is how the instruction to impose containment was interpreted by officers on the ground.” The Metropolitan police says kettling, or detaining a mass of people, is a necessary tactic to tackle the potential for violence at demonstrations. The force and its lawyers are expected to study the judgment. Police Protest G20 Climate Camp Activism Vikram Dodd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Tactics used by Met officers against climate camp demonstrators in 2009 contravened public order laws, says judgment The high court has ruled that the Metropolitan police broke the law in the way they “kettled” protesters at the G20 demonstrations in 2009. In a landmark judgment released on Thursday, high court judges found for protesters who had claimed police treated them unfairly. The court heard that officers used punches to the face, slaps and shields against demonstrators whom police chiefs accept had nothing to do with violence. The case concerned the G20 protests in London on 1 April 2009, during which Ian Tomlinson, a bystander, died after being struck by an officer. Police in charge of the protest ordered a climate camp to be kettled and then cleared, but officers were left to decide how much force they should use. Video shot on the day showed demonstrators trying to avoid being beaten by raising their hands in the air and chanting “this is not a riot” at police clad in helmets and riot gear. Officers on the videos are seen to strike demonstrators, who cannot be seen to be engaged in any violence. On 1 April 2009, there were several demonstrations in the area, but the court case deals with a climate camp in Bishopsgate. A police chief accepts it was peaceful but decided it should be contained to avoid potentially violent people joining it. Officers were told they were containing or detaining those in the climate camp to prevent a breach of the peace. Protesters would be held for hours. Notebooks secured from some officers contain admissions they used violence, but officers said this was to protect themselves or colleagues. The protesters bringing the case say police were indiscriminate in detaining and isolating the peaceful climate camp. In documents setting out their case, their lawyers say: “The police took action against the climate camp as if it were a violent crowd … That is how the instruction to impose containment was interpreted by officers on the ground.” The Metropolitan police says kettling, or detaining a mass of people, is a necessary tactic to tackle the potential for violence at demonstrations. The force and its lawyers are expected to study the judgment. Police Protest G20 Climate Camp Activism Vikram Dodd guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …