Navigation

Archive | Free Information

Appeals court blocks the Pirate Bay in Sweden

By on February 13, 2017 in Big Entertainment, Censorship, Copyright, File Sharing, Free Information, Intellectual Property, Internet, Sweden

A Swedish appeals court (the court for market and patent related issues) today ruled that the Internet service provider Bredbandsbolaget must block the Pirate Bay and the streaming service Swefilmer.

By definition, this is censorship.

Also, it is a ruling in direct conflict with the EU the eCommerce-directives principle of »mere conduit« stating that net operators can not be held liable for what users are doing in their cables.

However, this is in line with court rulings in other European countries. And the court claims that the decision is based on EU law.

To confuse things further, the ISP has not been subject to any criminal charges or accusations of illegal activities. Nevertheless, the court seems to refer to a general »responsibilty« to stem illegal activities.

Where all of this leave the »mere conduit« principle (in the EU eCommerce directive) is unclear. Apparently, there are two conflicting sets of rules.

To abolish »mere conduit« is like holding the Post Office responsible for what is written and sent by mail. Or to hold road operators responsible for the intentions and actions of people traveling in cars using their infrastructure.

This is not reasonable. The ruling will open up for more censorship and surveillance.

And to top things of, no matter what, this form of blocking is not very effective and quite easy to circumvent.

/ HAX

Torrentfreak: The Pirate Bay Must Be Blocked in Sweden, Court of Appeal Rules »

1

Germany going after whistleblowers

By on January 30, 2017 in Free Information, Freedom of the Press, Germany

EDRi observer Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte’s (GFF) most recent Constitutional Court case in Germany concerns an anti-whistleblowing provision threatening the freedom of the press. Part-time journalists and bloggers, as well as the legal or IT experts on which journalists rely, now risk a prison sentence of up to three years for handling “leaked” data. (…)

Prohibiting the trade in stolen data may make sense for stolen credit card information or login credentials. The new law, however, is so broadly worded that it also encompasses information “leaked” by whistleblowers, which is an obvious threat to the freedom of the press that systematically relies on such information. For example, under the new law, the documents leaked by Edward Snowden arguably can no longer be legally used on German soil.

EDRi » Germany: Fighting the anti-whistleblower provision »

0

China striking down on VPN-services

By on January 23, 2017 in Anonymity, Big Brother, China, Free Information, Human rights, Privacy

China is reinforcing its censorship of the internet with a campaign to crack down on unauthorized connections, including virtual private network (VPN) services, that allow users to bypass restrictions known as the Great Firewall. (…)

The ministry said it was forbidden to create or rent communication channels, including VPNs, without governmental approval, to run cross-border operations.

Reuters: China cracks down on unauthorized internet connections »

0

The Dark Web going even darker

By on January 23, 2017 in Anonymity, Free Information, Hacktivism, Internet, TOR

Sites on the so-called dark web, or darknet, typically operate under what seems like a privacy paradox: While anyone who knows a dark web site’s address can visit it, no one can figure out who hosts that site, or where. It hides in plain sight. But changes coming to the anonymity tools underlying the darknet promise to make a new kind of online privacy possible. Soon anyone will be able to create their own corner of the internet that’s not just anonymous and untraceable, but entirely undiscoverable without an invite.

Wired: It’s About To Get Even Easier to Hide on the Dark Web »

0

Apps, the next frontier of censorship

By on January 20, 2017 in Big Brother, Censorship, Democracy, Free Information, Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press

Blocking a website is like trying to stop lots of trucks from delivering a banned book; it requires an infrastructure of technical tools (things like China’s “Great Firewall”), and enterprising users can often find a way around it. Banning an app from an app store, by contrast, is like shutting down the printing press before the book is ever published. If the app isn’t in a country’s app store, it effectively doesn’t exist. The censorship is nearly total and inescapable.

NYT » Clearing Out the App Stores: Government Censorship Made Easier »

0

Communia: No to filtering of user-uploaded content

By on January 13, 2017 in Civil rights, Copyright, EU, Free Information

A project tackling issues concerning the public domain in the digital environment has called on the European Commission to abandon its proposals for mandatory service provider filtering of user-uploaded content. Communia, which has Creative Commons as a founder member, says such filters will violate users’ fundamental rights.

Torrentfreak: Public Domain Project Calls on EU to Abandon Piracy Filter Proposals »

0

An absurd battle over free speech

By on January 13, 2017 in Free Information, Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press

As you may have heard, last week we were sued for $15 million by Shiva Ayyadurai, who claims to have invented email. We have written, at great length, about his claims and our opinion — backed up by detailed and thorough evidence — that email existed long before Ayyadurai created any software. We believe the legal claims in the lawsuit are meritless, and we intend to fight them and to win.

There is a larger point here. Defamation claims like this can force independent media companies to capitulate and shut down due to mounting legal costs. Ayyadurai’s attorney, Charles Harder, has already shown that this model can lead to exactly that result. His efforts helped put a much larger and much more well-resourced company than Techdirt completely out of business.

So, in our view, this is not a fight about who invented email. This is a fight about whether or not our legal system will silence independent publications for publishing opinions that public figures do not like.

And here’s the thing: this fight could very well be the end of Techdirt, even if we are completely on the right side of the law.

Techdirt: Techdirt’s First Amendment Fight For Its Life »

0