Swedish Internet service provider Bahnhof continues to fight against copyright holders that target alleged file-sharers. The company explains that it has setup its logging policies in such as way that it can refuse requests for IP-address information from so-called copyright trolls, suggesting that other ISPs should follow suit.
Torrent Freak: ISP Deletes IP-address Logs to Fend Off Piracy “Extortion Letters” »
A well-known American photographer has now sued Getty Images and other related companies—she claims they have been wrongly been selling copyright licenses for over 18,000 of her photos that she had already donated to the public for free, via the Library of Congress.
ArsTechnica: Photographer sues Getty Images for selling photos she donated to public »
Update » TorrentFreak: Getty Images Bites Back in $1 Billion Copyright Dispute »
The United Nations Security Council wants a global “framework” for censoring the Internet, as well as for using government propaganda to “counter” what its apparatchiks call “online propaganda,” “hateful ideologies,” and “digital terrorism.” To that end, the UN Security Council this week ordered the UN “Counter-Terrorism Committee” — yes, that is a real bureaucracy — to draw up a plan by next year. From the Obama administration to the brutal Communist Chinese regime, everybody agreed that it was time for a UN-led crackdown on freedom of speech and thought online — all under the guise of fighting the transparently bogus terror war.
Zerohedge: UN Plots War On Free Speech To Stop “Extremism” Online »
Obama has warned of the imminent perils of a Trump presidency, but on the key issue of freedom of the press, which is intimately tied to the ability of officials to talk to journalists, his own administration has established a dangerous precedent for Trump — or any future occupant of the Oval Office — to use one of the most punitive laws of the land against some of the most courageous and necessary people we have. One section of the Espionage Act even allows for the death penalty.
The Intercept: Obama’s gift to Trump: a policy of cracking down on journalists and their sources »
As the government acknowledges, courts operate on precedent. So if the FBI wins this time, it means it is more likely to win the next.
This year, a favorable ruling could decide whether laptop cameras can be conscripted as spies or smartphones become permanent homing beacons.
In a year or two, the same ruling may have set laid the groundwork for whether your car becomes your police van or your home becomes your holding cell.
The Guardian: Beyond surveillance: what could happen if Apple loses to the FBI »
IPRED — the EU Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive — was highly criticised when introduced. It gave IPR holders wider rights to go after e.g. illegal filesharers than the police, skewing the legal system in favour of the industry. (But even then, IPRED has never been really effective.)
In 2014, the Italian EU presidency announced its’ plans to beef up IPRED. On this blog, I quoted the reaction from Brussels-based NGO EDRi on the matter…
“However, having established that the current legislative framework is not fit for purpose, the best thing that the Presidency can think of proposing is to expand and deepen the failed, not fit for purpose enforcement measures that are currently in force. The Italians apparently hope that, if they do the same thing over and over again, different results will be produced.”
But such objections do not discourage Brussels. The political process continues.
Preparing IPRED 2 the European Commission now has launched a consultation (normally being the first step for new or revised legislation). Once again EDRi explains it best…
“Injunctions, internet blocking, blackmailing of individuals accused of unauthorized peer-to-peer filesharing – the so-called IPRED Directive has been very controversial. Now, the European Commission has launched a consultation on the Directive (whose full name is Directive 2004/48/EC on the enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPRED) in the online environment).”
“The consultation is of great importance not only to those working on copyright or “intellectual property rights” in general, but in fact crucial to anyone using the Internet. This consultation covers to how private companies should or should not be involved in law enforcement online – for example by removing your online content in case it might include copyrighted material. It also covers the range of internet intermediaries that could or should be subject to legal obligations to undertake law enforcement activities.”
This consultation is open for everyone to respond to. And as political processes are easier to influence the earlier you get into them, this is an opportunity that should not be missed.
In order to make it easier for individuals to answer the consultation, EDRi has created an “answering guide” – an online tool with the European Commission’s questions and our analysis to guide your responses. The answering guide can be found here: http://youcan.fixcopyright.eu/limesurvey/index.php/829127?lang=en
Please get involved. Your reactions can shape the future of the Internet.
And a big thank you to EDRi for hacking the political system — analyzing, explaining and opening up the process for everyone to participate.
/ HAX
While most of tech companies seems to side with Apple in the San Bernardino case there also are other opinions…
Bill Gates is siding with the FBI and says Apple should unlock the phone of the San Bernardino shooter. In an interview with FT, the Microsoft founder simply reiterates the Justice Department’s claim that this is a one-off case and the FBI is not asking for a general unlocking tool.
Bill Gates Says Apple Should Unlock The iPhone »
As the standoff between the Department of Justice and Apple Inc. continues over an iPhone used by one of the suspects in the San Bernardino terrorist attacks, 51% say Apple should unlock the iPhone to assist the ongoing FBI investigation. Fewer Americans (38%) say Apple should not unlock the phone to ensure the security of its other users’ information; 11% do not offer an opinion on the question.
More Support for Justice Department Than for Apple in Dispute Over Unlocking iPhone »
While it might be understandable that many members of the general public have not realised the implications of such action – it is worrying that the man behind the world’s most widely used operating system have not.
“This court order also begs the question: Where does this kind of coercion stop? Can the government force Facebook to create software that provides analytic data on who is likely to be a criminal? Can the government force Google to provide the names of all people who searched for the term ISIL? Can the government force Amazon to write software that identifies who might be suspicious based on the books they ordered?”
Sign the petition!
Tell Netflix NOW: “Stand up to Big Media bullies and do not block pro-privacy VPN technology.” »
