Here's news from the Dark Web: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17738207 On the other hand: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-17728045 [h=1]Euro MP David Martin dismisses anti-counterfeiting treaty[/h] The Acta treaty has seen thousands take to European cities in protest Indeed,such treaties are not necessary for the police and security services to do their jobs...
Google co-founder rips Hollywood on anti-piracy efforts Hollywood and the entertainment industry are "shooting themselves in the foot, or maybe worse than the foot" by pushing the current anti-piracy legislation, according to Google co-founder Sergey Brin. He said the Stop Online Piracy Act and the Protect IP Act that Hollywood has been lobbying for would have led to the U.S. using the same technology and approach it has criticized China and Iran for using. Brin made the comments in an exclusive interview with the U.K.'s Guardian newspaper. The entertainment industry, he said, is failing to understand that users will continue to download pirated content as long as it is easier to acquire and use than legitimately obtained material. "I haven't tried it for many years but when you go on a pirate website, you choose what you like, it downloads to the device of your choice and it will just work - and then when you have to jump through all these hoops (to buy legitimate content), the walls created are disincentives for people to buy." Brin's criticism of Hollywood was part of an alarming portrait he painted of the current Internet landscape. He said that the principles of openness and universal access that fostered the creation of the Internet three decades ago are under greater threat than ever. There are "very powerful forces that have lined up against the open internet on all sides and around the world. I am more worried than I have been in the past ... it's scary," Brin said. He said the threat came from a combination of governments increasingly trying to control access by their citizens, the entertainment industry attempting to crack down on piracy and the rise of Facebook and Apple, which he said tightly control software on their platforms. He said five years ago he did not believe China or any country could effectively restrict the Internet for long but he had been proven wrong. "I thought there was no way to put the genie back in the bottle, but now it seems in certain areas the genie has been put back in the bottle," Brin said. He cited China, Saudi Arabia and Iran as the greatest threats. He said that Facebook and Apple can stifle innovation and "Balkanize" the web with their proprietary platforms and controlled user access. "There's a lot to be lost," he said. "For example all the information in apps — that data is not 'crawlable' by web crawlers. You can't search it." Some will take Brin's comments on its rival Facebook, which has seen huge growth and now has more than 800 million members globally, with a grain of salt. The social network has announced plans for a $100 billion IPO. Had Facebook existed, he and Google co-founder Larry Page could not have created Google, Brin said. "You have to play by their rules, which are really restrictive. The kind of environment that we developed Google in, the reason that we were able to develop a search engine, is the web was so open. Once you get too many rules that will stifle innovation." Source
Facecrap supports CISPA, luckily I don't use that. Considering things on Facebook are never really deleted, it can become a quagmire for certain people if the law passes.
thanks acrsn, for the notification that yet another legal assault on the www and its users is underway.. and yes, i did sign the petition, even though i hate to disclose my email adress.. but i would like to point out, that what we see here, is just another brick in the same tired old wall... a lot has already been said here in serious discussion, the crux is, that those guys think that they can get away with pushing such legislation through, and if it fails in one way, they will just try another.. like you said, we countered sopa, pipa, acta, so now we get cispa.. and if we counter that too, there will be another s**tsa..they will just keep them coming, unless we users vote with our feet. that is what i liked about this black march idea.. i have found very little, alas, on the effect of that, but it is the only real countermeasure, imho.. like this billionaire bringoogleguru put it, for reasons that i would not care to be associated with, let them know know they are shooting in their own old greedy foot.. just my 2 cents..
Berners-Lee: Don't let record labels upset web openness By Olivia Solon, wired.co.uk Tim Berners-Lee at a press conference at W3C We mustn't allow record companies' fear that their business model isn't working to upset the openness of the internet, Tim Berners-Lee told Wired.co.uk in a press conference at W3C. The inventor of the web was referring to recent controversial pieces of legislation, including SOPA and PIPA in the US, and ACTA globally, which have all sought to clamp down on piracy and have all been strongly supported by record labels. He said that most of the things that are taking place on the internet are social, and downloading and listening to music is just a small part of that. He said that record companies and other organizations seeking these pieces of legislation shouldn't be allowed to "take away the rule that you should only punish someone after appropriate court proceedings." Berners-Lee supports any platform that allows people to pay for music online and said that there should be more ways of "getting money back to the person who creates" content, including paying for music and donating to blogs. However, he said that "this doesn't necessarily need to be a system created by the big record labels." Image courtesy of wired.co.uk Source
it is good that there is still some old-fashioned intelligence around, r29k,, but i still have that old feeling, those copyright boys are trying to own the old www.. just who the f*** do they think they are?
Keep the web open,Any censoring is bad. let the pedophiles openly discuss on forums and such, it will make it that much easier to catch those freaks. I don't want to see a web underground.
With SOPA it would have killed many websites and open source software sites like sourceforge and github just a few. I know this because I am an open source developer and I have done my research, I DO NOT VOTE NOR SUPPORT FOR SOPA OR ANY LAWS LIKE IT WOULD HURT MANY PEOPLE AND COMPANIES STARTING UP I KNOW THIS FOR SURE MORE RESEARCH. IN FACT IT WOULD KILL MANY WEBSITES, COMPANIES, AND BUSINESSES THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY ILLEGAL NOR DONE ANY ILLEGAL ACTS AT ALL.
SOPA Poopa thingy is back kinda, thanks EFA11 http://torrentfreak.com/google-chrome-dragged-internet-censorship-fight-150205/
Maternity Dresses Formal Yes, online piracy must be stopped. Get in touch with us at Shoppersfeed to find an ultimate collection of maternity dresses formal that are perfectly designed for you. So what else you are waiting for? Visit us and explore our web store now!
MPAA Plans For Site Blocking in the U.S. Dealt a Blow By Andy on November 11, 2015 News While the opportunity for US-based copyright holders to easily block foreign 'pirate' sites was temporarily thwarted with the death of SOPA, the MPAA has been busy making other plans to achieve the same goals. However, following a Court of Appeals ruling handed down yesterday, one of those options now appears to be off the table. It’s 2012 and you’re the organization representing the world’s largest movie studios. You’ve just received a bloody nose while failing to get the extremely unpopular SOPA legislation passed. All that SOPA entailed, site blocking included, is now off the table. What do you do, give up? Not a chance. Help us block, ITC As revealed last year, the MPAA continued to explore other options to have unauthorized sites and content blocked in the United States, one of which involved leveraging the powers of the International Trade Commission (ITC). The ITC determines the impact of imports on industry in the U.S. and can tackle unfair trade practices including those involving patents, trademarks and copyright infringement. The MPAA quietly hoped that it could encourage the ITC to order blocks against ISPs carrying infringing content across U.S. borders. It also hoped it could obtain injunctions against regular ISPs to stop them providing access to overseas “rogue” sites. At the time the MPAA’s lawfirm highlighted several problems, not least that no actual goods are sent across U.S. borders by ‘rogue’ sites. This is important. The definition of “articles” under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 is what allows the ITC to take action in such cases. The big question is whether an “article” must be a physical item or whether it can relate to content in the digital realm. The answer lies in a case about crooked teeth. At first view ClearCorrect v. ITC looks like just another boring patent case but it has been closely monitored by the MPAA. ClearCorrect, a competitor of invisible brace manufacturer Invisalign, had one of its subsidiaries in Pakistan create 3D models of braces. These were sent over the Internet and 3D-printed in its office in Texas, potentially infringing Invisalign’s patents. Invisalign parent company Align Technologies complained to the International Trade Commission in the hope of getting something done about the alleged cross-border infringement. In the short term it paid off, with the ITC ruling against ClearCorrect while noting that the Tariff Act of 1930 does allow it take action against the transmission of digital files. ClearCorrect objected against the decision and the case was heard by the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals. Yesterday the Court handed down its decision, overturning the ITC’s initial ruling. “The Commission’s decision to expand the scope of its jurisdiction to include electronic transmissions of digital data runs counter to the ‘unambiguously expressed intent of Congress’,” Judge Sharon Prost wrote. “Here, it is clear that ‘articles’ means ‘material things,’ whether when looking to the literal text or when read in context ‘with a view to [the term’s] place in the overall statutory scheme.’ We recognize, of course, that electronic transmissions have some physical properties — for example an electron’s invariant mass is a known quantity — but commonsense dictates that there is a fundamental difference between electronic transmissions and ‘material things’.” The Court’s majority 2-1 ruling (Judge Newman dissenting) that the ITC has no jurisdiction in this case and possesses no expertise when it comes to ensuring that the “Internet remains an open platform for all” has upset the MPAA. “This ruling, if it stands, would appear to reduce the authority of the ITC to address the scourge of overseas web sites that engage in blatant piracy of movies, television programs, music, books, and other copyrighted works,” the Hollywood group said. After filing a brief in the case, interests group Public Knowledge described the ruling as a “big win” for the open Internet. “By rejecting the ITC’s attempt to expand its jurisdiction, the Federal Circuit helps to ensure that Internet users have unfettered access to the free flow of information that has proved so useful for innovation and free expression,” said Charles Duan, Director of Public Knowledge’s Patent Reform Project. “In particular, Judge O’Malley’s concurrence strongly recognized the importance of ensuring that ‘the Internet remains an open platform for all.’ This recognition of the central role that open information flow has played in the digital age is heartwarming to advocates like us who have tirelessly worked to protect that Internet openness.” Countering, the MPAA chose to cite the opinions of the one dissenting judge. “As Judge Newman’s dissent trenchantly argues, the majority ‘ignores precedent and logic, and removes a vast body of technology from the protection of a statute designed for its protection.’ We will be watching closely for further proceedings in this case, including potential en banc review, and continue to support the ITC in its efforts to address 21st Century challenges.” In other words, the MPAA won’t be giving up on its site-blocking ambitions just yet.