Tag Archives: Europe

Seller of ‘Fully Loaded’ Kodi Boxes Pleads Guilty to Money Laundering

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/seller-of-fully-loaded-kodi-boxes-pleads-guilty-to-money-laundering-170806/

In June 2015, police and Trading Standards officers in the UK carried out raids on sellers of Android boxes configured to receive unauthorized content. One seller, operating from GeekyKit.com, told customers that his physical shops would be shutting down.

“As you may be aware we were visited yesterday by Sky [television] in conjunction with Trading Standards. Whilst we continue to investigate our position the stores will remain closed and support will remain suspended. Our sincere apologies for any inconvenience caused,” he explained.

Julian Allen was arrested after raids at ‘Geeky Kit’ premises in Billingham and Middlesbrough in the north of England. One of the locations is pictured below.

Despite the seriously incriminating storefront claims, Allen insisted that his businesses couldn’t be held responsible for copyrighted TV shows, movies and sports received by customers on boxes his company supplied.

“We do not control the content that is accessible on the internet via the product that we sell. We are currently working with Trading Standards to ensure that we can sell our products whilst adhering to UK copyright laws,” he said.

This January, Allen appeared before Teesside Crown Court charged with laundering £135,173, money said to have been generated via the sale of pre-loaded set-top boxes and premium packages over a 30-month period.

Allen was expected to appear for a week-long trial scheduled to start this Monday but that was scrapped after the 40-year-old pleaded guilty to using or acquiring criminal property.

According to Gazette Live, a proceeds of crime hearing has been scheduled for next year. In the meantime, Allen was granted unconditional bail until sentencing on October 20, where he faces a potential jail sentence.

“I don’t know what the sentence will be until all the matters are known,” the judge said.

Ever since a European Court of Justice ruling earlier this year that found that selling “fully-loaded” streaming boxes are illegal, people in a similar position to Allen have seen their cases take a turn for the worse.

One such case, involving Middlesbrough shopkeeper Brian Thompson, appears to be progressing under different legislation, however. Thompson stands accused of two offenses under section 296ZB of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, which deals with devices and services designed to circumvent technological measures.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

TV Box Seller Emails Sky TV Bosses With ‘Pirate’ Offer, Gets Sued for $1m

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/tv-box-seller-emails-sky-tv-bosses-with-pirate-offer-gets-sued-for-1m-170804/

After relatively quiet treatment in the media, last year press in New Zealand began reporting on the booming ‘pirate’ set-top box business sweeping the world.

Often based around legal Kodi software boosted with third-party addons, the devices are known for providing free movies, TV shows, and sports.

Last November, ‘My Box NZ’ owner Krish Reddy, who said he would take on Sky in its own backyard with his custom streaming boxes, hit the headlines. The 27-year-old told NZHerald that “it seemed like a great idea so we decided to do it ourselves.”

The boxes offered some local free-to-air channels but also the all-important premium offerings from Sky, including Sky Movies and Sky Sports, an expensive proposition for an official subscriber.

“Why pay $80 minimum per month for Sky when for one payment you can have it free for good?” Reddy’s advertising said.

Reddy was confident in the abilities of his product but was also confident he wasn’t breaking the law.

“I don’t see why [Sky] would contact me but if they do contact me and … if there’s something of theirs that they feel I’ve unlawfully taken then yeah … but as it stands I don’t [have any concerns],” he told the Herald.

As things moved on, Reddy’s business really took off. He admitted to having sold 8,000 of the devices and then April this year, Sky appeared to ruh out of patience. In a letter from its lawyers, the pay TV company said Reddy’s devices breached copyright law and the Fair Trading Act. Reddy responded by calling the TV giant “a playground bully” and denied again that he was breaking the law.

“From a legal perspective, what we do is completely within the law. We advertise Sky television channels being available through our website and social media platforms as these are available via streams which you can find through My Box,” he said.

“The content is already available, I’m not going out there and bringing the content so how am I infringing the copyright… the content is already there, if someone uses the box to search for the content, that’s what it is.”

Stuff reports that the initial compensation demand from Sky against Reddy’s company My Box runs to NZD$1.4m (US$1m), an amount that could “rise by millions” by the time a judgment is reached.

“They have given us until September 24 to respond. We are not going to sit and take it,” Reddy told the publication. “How many people can say they went up against a multimillion dollar giant like Sky?”

And it seems that Reddy is absolutely determined to fight back. Earlier this year he said that his father always encouraged him as a child to seek out the big guy for a fight, something that is now playing out with one of the world’s biggest broadcasters.

“[Sky’s] point of view is they own copyright and I’m destroying the market by giving people content for free. To me it is business; I have got something that is new … that’s competition,” he said.

In Europe, where these kinds of cases have already been tested at the highest level, comments like these would be extremely ill-advised and enough to give any defending lawyer a high temperature, but Reddy really doesn’t seem to care.

In fact, a bulk email he sent out to 50,000 people advertising his product as “being better than Sky”, actually found the inboxes of 50 Sky TV staff and directors. He believes this triggered the legal action from the company.

While Reddy was on Sky’s radar long before the mailshot, the blatancy of his advertising and its targets won’t have helped his case one bit. Sky, for its part, is determined to get a ruling against a large player and Reddy seems the perfect catch.

“Anyone selling these boxes are within our sights. You have got to go after the big fish first,” said Sky spokeswoman Kirsty Way.

No case like this has ever gone to court in New Zealand so it could be important for setting the ground rules on several aspects of copyright law, including the making available right.

In addition to prosecutions, Way told Stuff that it could also be possible to introduce site-blocking laws such as those already in place in Australia and the UK. These would aim to render Kodi-powered devices less effective at providing copyrighted content from unauthorized sources.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Pimoroni is 5 now!

Post Syndicated from guru original https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/pimoroni-is-5-now/

Long read written by Pimoroni’s Paul Beech, best enjoyed over a cup o’ grog.

Every couple of years, I’ve done a “State of the Fleet” update here on the Raspberry Pi blog to tell everyone how the Sheffield Pirates are doing. Half a decade has gone by in a blink, but reading back over the previous posts shows that a lot has happened in that time!

TL;DR We’re an increasingly medium-sized design/manufacturing/e-commerce business with workshops in Sheffield, UK, and Essen, Germany, and we employ almost 40 people. We’re totally lovely. Thanks for supporting us!

 

We’ve come a long way, baby

I’m sitting looking out the window at Sheffield-on-Sea and feeling pretty lucky about how things are going. In the morning, I’ll be flying east for Maker Faire Tokyo with Niko (more on him later), and to say hi to some amazing people in Shenzhen (and to visit Huaqiangbei, of course). This is after I’ve already visited this year’s Maker Faires in New York, San Francisco, and Berlin.

Pimoroni started out small, but we’ve grown like weeds, and we’re steadily sauntering towards becoming a medium-sized business. That’s thanks to fantastic support from the people who buy our stuff and spread the word. In return, we try to be nice, friendly, and human in everything we do, and to make exciting things, ideally with our own hands here in Sheffield.

Pimoroni soldering

Handmade with love

We’ve made it onto a few ‘fastest-growing’ lists, and we’re in the top 500 of the Inc. 5000 Europe list. Adafruit did it first a few years back, and we’ve never gone wrong when we’ve followed in their footsteps.

The slightly weird nature of Pimoroni means we get listed as either a manufacturing or e-commerce business. In reality, we’re about four or five companies in one shell, which is very much against the conventions of “how business is done”. However, having seen what Adafruit, SparkFun, and Seeed do, we’re more than happy to design, manufacture, and sell our stuff in-house, as well as stocking the best stuff from across the maker community.

Pimoroni stocks

Product and process

The whole process of expansion has not been without its growing pains. We’re just under 40 people strong now, and have an outpost in Germany (also hilariously far from the sea for piratical activities). This means we’ve had to change things quickly to improve and automate processes, so that the wheels won’t fall off as things get bigger. Process optimization is incredibly interesting to a geek, especially the making sure that things are done well, that mistakes are easy to spot and to fix, and that nothing is missed.

At the end of 2015, we had a step change in how busy we were, and our post room and support started to suffer. As a consequence, we implemented measures to become more efficient, including small but important things like checking in parcels with a barcode scanner attached to a Raspberry Pi. That Pi has been happily running on the same SD card for a couple of years now without problems 😀

Pimoroni post room

Going postal?

We also hired a full-time support ninja, Matt, to keep the experience of getting stuff from us light and breezy and to ensure that any problems are sorted. He’s had hugely positive impact already by making the emails and replies you see more friendly. Of course, he’s also started using the laser cutters for tinkering projects. It’d be a shame to work at Pimoroni and not get to use all the wonderful toys, right?

Employing all the people

You can see some of the motley crew we employ here and there on the Pimoroni website. And if you drop by at the Raspberry Pi Birthday Party, Pi Wars, Maker Faires, Deer Shed Festival, or New Scientist Live in September, you’ll be seeing new Pimoroni faces as we start to engage with people more about what we do. On top of that, we’re starting to make proper videos (like Sandy’s soldering guide), as opposed to the 101 episodes of Bilge Tank we recorded in a rather off-the-cuff and haphazard fashion. Although that’s the beauty of Bilge Tank, right?

Pimoroni soldering

Such soldering setup

As Emma, Sandy, Lydia, and Tanya gel as a super creative team, we’re starting to create more formal educational resources, and to make kits that are suitable for a wider audience. Things like our Pi Zero W kits are products of their talents.

Emma is our new Head of Marketing. She’s really ‘The Only Marketing Person Who Would Ever Fit In At Pimoroni’, having been a core part of the Sheffield maker scene since we hung around with one Ben Nuttall, in the dark days before Raspberry Pi was a thing.

Through a series of fortunate coincidences, Niko and his equally talented wife Mena were there when we cut the first Pibow in 2012. They immediately pitched in to help us buy our second laser cutter so we could keep up with demand. They have been supporting Pimoroni with sourcing in East Asia, and now Niko has become a member of the Pirates’ Council and the Head of Engineering as we’re increasing the sophistication and scale of the things we do. The Unicorn HAT HD is one of his masterpieces.

Pimoroni devices

ALL the HATs!

We see ourselves as a wonderful island of misfit toys, and it feels good to have the best toy shop ever, and to support so many lovely people. Business is about more than just profits.

Where do we go to, me hearties?

So what are our plans? At the moment we’re still working absolutely flat-out as demand from wholesalers, retailers, and customers increases. We thought Raspberry Pi was big, but it turns out it’s just getting started. Near the end of 2016, it seemed to reach a whole new level of popularityand still we continue to meet people to whom we have to explain what a Pi is. It’s a good problem to have.

We need a bigger space, but it’s been hard to find somewhere suitable in Sheffield that won’t mean we’re stuck on an industrial estate miles from civilisation. That would be bad for the crewwe like having world-class burritos on our doorstep.

The good news is, it looks like our search is at an end! Just in time for the arrival of our ‘Super-Turbo-Death-Star’ new production line, which will enable to make devices in a bigger, better, faster, more ‘Now now now!’ fashion \o/

Pimoroni warehouse

Spacious, but not spacious enough!

We’ve got lots of treasure in the pipeline, but we want to pick up the pace of development even more and create many new HATs, pHATs, and SHIMs, e.g. for environmental sensing and audio applications. Picade will also be getting some love to make it slicker and more hackable.

We’re also starting to flirt with adding more engineering and production capabilities in-house. The plan is to try our hand at anodising, powder-coating, and maybe even injection-moulding if we get the space and find the right machine. Learning how to do things is amazing, and we love having an idea and being able to bring it to life in almost no time at all.

Pimoroni production

This is where the magic happens

Fanks!

There are so many people involved in supporting our success, and some people we love for just existing and doing wonderful things that make us want to do better. The biggest shout-outs go to Liz, Eben, Gordon, James, all the Raspberry Pi crew, and Limor and pt from Adafruit, for being the most supportive guiding lights a young maker company could ever need.

A note from us

It is amazing for us to witness the growth of businesses within the Raspberry Pi ecosystem. Pimoroni is a wonderful example of an organisation that is creating opportunities for makers within its local community, and the company is helping to reinvigorate Sheffield as the heart of making in the UK.

If you’d like to take advantage of the great products built by the Pirates, Monkeys, Robots, and Ninjas of Sheffield, you should do it soon: Pimoroni are giving everyone 20% off their homemade tech until 6 August.

Pimoroni, from all of us here at Pi Towers (both in the UK and USA), have a wonderful birthday, and many a grog on us!

The post Pimoroni is 5 now! appeared first on Raspberry Pi.

Dutch Film Distributor to Target BitTorrent Users For Cash ‘Fines’

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/dutch-film-distributor-to-target-bittorrent-users-for-cash-fines-170802/

For many carefree years, Dutch Internet users were allowed to download copyrighted content, provided it was for their own personal use. In 2014, however, the European Court of Justice ruled that the country’s “piracy levy” to compensate rightsholders was unlawful. An immediate downloading ban followed.

That action took place more than three years ago but as recently reported by Dutch anti-piracy BREIN, the country still has an appetite for unauthorized content consumption. Some of that takes place with the assistance of torrent sites but for the most part, file-sharers have had little to worry about.

That could all be about to change with the news that local film distributor Dutch Filmworks (DFW) has announced its intention to monitor torrent site users and collect data on their online activities. The news comes via the Dutch Data Protection Authority (Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens), which needs to be formally advised in order for the data collection to go ahead.

DFW’s plans are outlined in a detailed application (Dutch, pdf) dated July 2017. It explains that DFW wishes to combat “the unlawful dissemination of copyright protected works” in order to protect their own interests, and this involves collecting data on Dutch individuals without their knowledge or permission.

“DFW intends to collect data from people who exchange files over the Internet through BitTorrent networks. The data processing consists of capturing proof of exchange of files via IP addresses for the purpose of researching involvement of these users in the distribution or reproduction of copyrighted works,” it reads.

DFW will employ an external German-based tracking company to monitor alleged pirates which will “automatically participate in swarms in which works from DFW are being shared.” Data collected from non-Dutch users will be stripped and discarded but information about local pirates will be retained and processed for further action.

However, in order for DFW to connect an IP address with an individual, the company will have to approach Internet service providers to obtain subscriber information including names and addresses. DFW says that if ISPs won’t cooperate voluntarily, it will be forced to take its case to court. Given past experience, that will probably have to happen.

In March 2016, anti-piracy outfit BREIN obtained permission from the Dutch Data Protection Authority to collect similar data on alleged BitTorrent users, aiming to change attitudes among pirates with fines and legal action.

Several ISPs, most prominently Ziggo, announced that they would not voluntarily cooperate with BREIN and that personal information would only be handed over if BREIN took them to court. It’s logical to presume that Dutch Filmworks will receive the same treatment.

Should the company be successful, however, it has had detailed a stepped plan. First, the alleged pirate will receive a warning and DFW will aim to reach “an amicable settlement” for the breach. If one cannot be reached, further legal action could be taken, up to and including prosecution and claims for damages.

The whole scheme certainly sounds like a classic “copyright trolling” operation in the making but only time will tell which end of the spectrum this project will fall. When asked by NU.nl whether DFW would actually be seeking cash from alleged pirates, it declined to comment.

“This is the first step in this process. We’re going to see what we’re going to do after 25 August,” a spokesperson said.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Italian ISPs Say New Copyright Amendment Infringes Human Rights

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/italian-isps-say-new-copyright-amendment-infringes-human-rights-170728/

After being spoken of in unfavorable terms by the United States Trade Representative in its Special 301 Reports, Italy achieved a sudden breakthrough in 2014.

“Italy’s removal from the Special 301 List reflects the significant steps the Government of Italy has taken to address the problem of online piracy, and the continued U.S. commitment to meaningful and sustained engagement with our critical partner Italy,” the USTR said in a special announcement.

This praise was in part due to the way Italy promised to deal with online piracy. Instead of legislating to make a piracy crackdown easier, the government handed AGCOM, the Italian Communications Regulatory Authority, the power to deal with infringement based on complaints filed by rightsholders.

Without any need for legal cases or court injunctions, at the end of March 2014, AGCOM was granted the power to have allegedly infringing content removed from sites and to have domains blocked at the ISP level.

Now, just over three years later, AGCOM has been granted even more power. Passed last week, Amendment 1.022 effectively gives AGCOM the power to order sites to not only take allegedly infringing content down but to keep it down permanently, all without intervention from the judiciary.

The decision has provoked a furious response from a body representing the country’s ISPs, which describes the “unconstitutional rules” as a way to protect the economic interests of right holders behind various creative works and live sporting events.

“This measure abolishes procedural safeguards for citizens, imposes interception obligations to Internet providers, and damages consumers by imposing technical measures that will result in increased costs,” the Italian Association of Internet Providers (AIIP) said in a statement.

According to AIIP, it is the judiciary that should have sole power over copyright infringement disputes in Italy. When other bodies such as AGCOM are given control over criminal issues, it represents a violation of both constitutional principles and EU law.

“Any rule that would require Internet Providers to filter and carry out preventive checks – as well as to remove content generated by users without a court order – is in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights, Community legislation on electronic communications services, and case law of the European Court of Justice,” AIIP says.

The ISP body says that AGCOM now possesses discretionary powers that even magistrates do not have, which from a technical perspective includes monitoring, interception, and blocking of user activity, a position that amounts to “gigantic state censorship.”

Only time will tell how the situation pans out but it’s crystal clear that ISPs feel that unlike the views of the copyright industry, their concerns have not been taken into consideration.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

BREIN Takes Down 231 Pirate Sites in Six Months, But That’s Not All

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/brein-takes-down-231-pirate-sites-in-six-months-but-thats-not-all-170722/

Over the years, the MPAA and RIAA have grabbed hundreds of headlines for their anti-piracy activities but recently their work has been more subtle. The same cannot be said of Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN.

BREIN is the most prominent outfit of its type in the Netherlands but it’s not uncommon for its work to be felt way beyond its geographical borders. The group’s report for the first six months of 2017 illustrates that in very clear terms.

In its ongoing efforts to reduce piracy on movies, music, TV shows, books and games, BREIN says it carried out 268 investigations during the first two quarters of 2017. That resulted in the takedown of 231 piracy-focused sites and services.

They included 45 cyberlocker linking sites, 30 streaming sites and 9 torrent platforms. The last eDonkey site in the Netherlands was among the haul after its operators reached a settlement with BREIN. The anti-piracy outfit reports that nearly all of the sites were operated anonymously so in many instances hosting providers were the ones to pull the plug, at BREIN’s request.

BREIN has also been actively tracking down people who make content available on file-sharing networks. These initial uploaders are considered to be a major part of the problem, so taking them out of the equation is another of BREIN’s goals.

In total, 14 major uploaders to torrent, streaming, and Usenet platforms were targeted by BREIN in the first six months of this year, with each given the opportunity to settle out of court or face legal action. Settlements typically involved a cash payment of between 250 and 7,500 euros but in several instances, uploaders were also required to take down the content they had uploaded.

In one interesting case, BREIN obtained an ex parte court order against a person running a “live cinema” on Facebook. He later settled with the anti-piracy group for 7,500 euros.

BREIN has also been active in a number of other areas. The group says it had almost 693,000 infringing results removed from Google search, pushing its total takedowns to more than 15.8 million. In addition, more than 2,170 listings for infringing content and devices were removed from online marketplaces and seven piracy-focused Facebook groups were taken down.

But while all of these actions have an effect locally, it is BREIN’s persistence in important legal cases that have influenced the copyright landscape across Europe.

Perhaps the most important case so far is BREIN v Filmspeler, which saw the anti-piracy group go all the way to the European Court of Justice for clarification on the law surrounding so-called “fully loaded” set-top boxes.

In a ruling earlier this year, the ECJ not only determined that selling such devices is a breach of copyright law, but also that people streaming content from an illicit source are committing an offense. Although the case began in the Netherlands, its effects will now be felt right across Europe, and that is almost completely down to BREIN.

But despite the reach of the ruling, BREIN has already been making good use of the decision locally. Not only has the operator of the Filmspeler site settled with BREIN “for a substantial amount”, but more than 200 sellers of piracy-configured set-top boxes have ceased trading since the ECJ decision. Some of the providers are the subject of further legal action.

Finally, a notable mention must go to BREIN’s determination to have The Pirate Bay blocked in the Netherlands. The battle against ISPs Ziggo and XS4ALL has been ongoing for seven years and like the Filmspeler case, required the attention of the European Court of Justice. While it’s still not over yet, it seems likely that the Supreme Court will eventually rule in BREIN’s favor.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

BREIN Wants to Speed Up Dutch Pirate Bay Blockade

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/brein-wants-to-speed-up-dutch-pirate-bay-blockade-170720/

While website blocking has become a common occurrence in many European countries, it has proven to be a rather cumbersome and slow-moving process in the Netherlands.

Seven years ago, Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN went to court to try and force local ISP Ziggo to block The Pirate Bay. Rival ISP XS4ALL later joined in on the action, which is still ongoing.

Initially, the court decided that blocking all subscribers went too far but BREIN wasn’t satisfied and took the case to a full trial, which they won.

Both Ziggo and XS4ALL filed subsequent appeals, arguing that the blockade was ineffective and denied subscribers’ free access to information, an argument which later proved successful.

The case eventually moved to the Supreme Court, which referred some questions to the European Court of Justice. The highest European court ruled that there are no legal obstacles to have a site like The Pirate Bay blocked, and now the ball is back with the Supreme Court again.

BREIN, however, has grown impatient and doesn’t want to wait until the Supreme Court comes to a final decision, which isn’t expected to happen before 2018. To speed things up, the anti-piracy group wants a new preliminary injunction at a lower court.

A new hearing on the Pirate Bay blockade is currently scheduled to take place at a court in The Hague early September, Tweakers reports.

BREIN director Tim Kuik informs TorrentFreak that the preliminary injunction will only be valid until the final verdict is handed down.

“We are requesting a preliminary injunction until the final decision in the procedural trial, now pending before the Dutch Supreme Court. After that, the final blocking decision applies,” Kuik says.

Kuik stresses that its action is supported by the recent EU Court of Justice ruling which clarified that The Pirate Bay facilitates copyright infringement, as well as an earlier ruling from 2014, which confirmed that EU Internet service providers can be required to block access to such sites.

Based on the second ruling, pirate site blockades are warranted if they make it harder for the public to access these sites. This is certainly the case here, according to Kuik, who refers to blockades in thirteen other EU countries.

In addition, the EU court stressed that blocking injunctions must be proportional, so as not to unnecessarily stop subscribers from lawfully accessing information.

Responding to the news, a Ziggo spokesman told Tweakers that BREIN is running ahead of itself. The provider is of the opinion that they have to wait for the Supreme Court to make a final decision before taking any further action.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Write and Read Multiple Objects in Amazon Cloud Directory by Using Batch Operations

Post Syndicated from Vineeth Harikumar original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/write-and-read-multiple-objects-in-amazon-cloud-directory-by-using-batch-operations/

Amazon Cloud Directory is a hierarchical data store that enables you to build flexible, cloud-native directories for organizing hierarchies of data along multiple dimensions. For example, you can create an organizational structure that you can navigate through multiple hierarchies for reporting structure, location, and cost center.

In this blog post, I demonstrate how you can use Cloud Directory APIs to write and read multiple objects by using batch operations. With batch write operations, you can execute a sequence of operations atomically—meaning that all of the write operations must occur, or none of them do. You also can make your application efficient by reducing the number of required round trips to read and write objects to your directory. I have used the AWS SDK for Java for all the sample code in this blog post, but you can use other language SDKs or the AWS CLI in a similar way.

Using batch write operations

To demonstrate batch write operations, let’s say that AnyCompany’s warehouses are organized to determine the fastest methods to ship orders to its customers. In North America, AnyCompany plans to open new warehouses regularly so that the company can keep up with customer demand while continuing to meet the delivery times to which they are committed.

The following diagram shows part of AnyCompany’s global network, including Asian and European warehouse networks.

Let’s take a look at how I can use batch write operations to add NorthAmerica to AnyCompany’s global network of warehouses, with the first three warehouses in New York City (NYC), Las Vegas (LAS), and Phoenix (PHX).

Adding NorthAmerica to the global network

To add NorthAmerica to the global network, I can use a batch write operation to create and link all the objects in the existing network.

First, I set up a helper method, which performs repetitive tasks, for the getBatchCreateOperation object. The following lines of code help me create an NA object for NorthAmerica and then attach the three city-related nodes: NYC, LAS, and PHX. Because AnyCompany is planning to grow its network, I add a suffix of _1 to each city code (such as PHX_1), which will be helpful hierarchically when the company adds more warehouses within a city.

    private BatchWriteOperation getBatchCreateOperation(
            String warehouseName,
            String directorySchemaARN,
            String parentReference,
            String linkName) {

        SchemaFacet warehouse_facet = new SchemaFacet()
            .withFacetName("warehouse")
            .withSchemaArn(directorySchemaARN);

        AttributeKeyAndValue kv = new AttributeKeyAndValue()
            .withKey(new AttributeKey()
                .withFacetName("warehouse")
                .withName("name")
                .withSchemaArn(directorySchemaARN))
            .withValue(new TypedAttributeValue()
                .withStringValue(warehouseName);

        List<SchemaFacet> facets = Lists.newArrayList(warehouse_facet);
        List<AttributeKeyAndValue> kvs = Lists.newArrayList(kv);

        BatchCreateObject createObject = new BatchCreateObject();

        createObject.withParentReference(new ObjectReference()
            .withSelector(parentReference));
        createObject.withLinkName(linkName);

        createObject.withBatchReferenceName(UUID.randomUUID().toString());
        createObject.withSchemaFacet(facets);
        createObject.withObjectAttributeList(kvs);

        return new BatchWriteOperation().withCreateObject
                                       (createObject);
    }

The parameters of this helper method include:

  • warehouseName – The name of the warehouse to create in the getBatchCreateOperation object.
  • directorySchemaARN – The Amazon Resource Name (ARN) of the schema applied to the directory.
  • parentReference – The object reference of the parent object.
  • linkName – The unique child path from the parent reference where the object should be attached.

I then use this helper method to set up multiple create operations for NorthAmerica, NewYork, Phoenix, and LasVegas. For the sake of simplicity, I use airport codes to stand for the cities (for example, NYC stands for NewYork).

   BatchWriteOperation createObjectNA = getBatchCreateOperation(
                      "NA",
                      directorySchemaARN,
                      "/",
                      "NorthAmerica");
   BatchWriteOperation createObjectNYC = getBatchCreateOperation(
                      "NYC_1",
                      directorySchemaARN,
                      "/NorthAmerica",
                      "NewYork");
   BatchWriteOperation createObjectPHX = getBatchCreateOperation(
                       "PHX_1",
                       directorySchemaARN,
                       "/NorthAmerica",
                       "Phoenix");
   BatchWriteOperation createObjectLAS = getBatchCreateOperation(
                      "LAS_1",
                      directorySchemaARN,
                      "/NorthAmerica",
                      "LasVegas");

   BatchWriteRequest request = new BatchWriteRequest();
   request.setDirectoryArn(directoryARN);
   request.setOperations(Lists.newArrayList(
       createObjectNA,
       createObjectNYC,
       createObjectPHX,
       createObjectLAS));

   client.batchWrite(request);

Running the preceding code results in a hierarchy for the network with NA added to the network, as shown in the following diagram.

Using batch read operations

Now, let’s say that after I add NorthAmerica to AnyCompany’s global network, an analyst wants to see the updated view of the NorthAmerica warehouse network as well as some information about the newly introduced warehouse configurations for the Phoenix warehouses. To do this, I can use batch read operations to get the network of warehouses for NorthAmerica as well as specifically request the attributes and configurations of the Phoenix warehouses.

To list the children of the NorthAmerica warehouses, I use the BatchListObjectChildren API to get all the children at the path, /NorthAmerica. Next, I want to view the attributes of the Phoenix object, so I use the BatchListObjectAttributes API to read all the attributes of the object at /NorthAmerica/Phoenix, as shown in the following code example.

    BatchListObjectChildren listObjectChildrenRequest = new BatchListObjectChildren()
        .withObjectReference(new ObjectReference().withSelector("/NorthAmerica"));
    BatchListObjectAttributes listObjectAttributesRequest = new BatchListObjectAttributes()
        .withObjectReference(new ObjectReference()
            .withSelector("/NorthAmerica/Phoenix"));
    BatchReadRequest batchRead = new BatchReadRequest()
        .withConsistencyLevel(ConsistencyLevel.EVENTUAL)
        .withDirectoryArn(directoryArn)
        .withOperations(Lists.newArrayList(listObjectChildrenRequest, listObjectAttributesRequest));

    BatchReadResult result = client.batchRead(batchRead);

Exception handling

Batch operations in Cloud Directory might sometimes fail, and it is important to know how to handle such failures, which differ for write operations and read operations.

Batch write operation failures

If a batch write operation fails, Cloud Directory fails the entire batch operation and returns an exception. The exception contains the index of the operation that failed along with the exception type and message. If you see RetryableConflictException, you can try again with exponential backoff. A simple way to do this is to double the amount of time you wait each time you get an exception or failure. For example, if your first batch write operation fails, wait 100 milliseconds and try the request again. If the second request fails, wait 200 milliseconds and try again. If the third request fails, wait 400 milliseconds and try again.

Batch read operation failures

If a batch read operation fails, the response contains either a successful response or an exception response. Individual batch read operation failures do not cause the entire batch read operation to fail—Cloud Directory returns individual success or failure responses for each operation.

Limits of batch operations

Batch operations are still constrained by the same Cloud Directory limits as other Cloud Directory APIs. A single batch operation does not limit the number of operations, but the total number of nodes or objects being written or edited in a single batch operation have enforced limits. For example, a total of 20 objects can be written in a single batch operation request to Cloud Directory, regardless of how many individual operations there are within that batch. Similarly, a total of 200 objects can be read in a single batch operation request to Cloud Directory. For more information, see limits on batch operations.

Summary

In this post, I have demonstrated how you can use batch operations to operate on multiple objects and simplify making complicated changes across hierarchies. In my next post, I will demonstrate how to use batch references within batch write operations. To learn more about batch operations, see Batches, BatchWrite, and BatchRead.

If you have comments about this post, submit them in the “Comments” section below. If you have implementation questions, start a new thread on the Directory Service forum.

– Vineeth

Just How Risky is Internet Piracy in 2017?

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/just-how-risky-is-internet-piracy-in-2017-170715/

The world’s largest entertainment companies in the spheres of music, movies, and gaming would jump for joy if the Internet piracy phenomenon came to a crashing halt tomorrow. (Spoiler: it won’t)

As a result, large sums of money are expended every day in an effort to keep unlawful distribution under control. Over the years there have been many strategies and several of these have involved targeting end users.

The world is a very big place and the tackling of piracy differs from region to region, but what most consumers of unauthorized media want to know is whether they’re putting themselves at risk.

The short answer is that no matter where people are, there is always some level of risk attached to obtaining and using pirate content. The long answer is more nuanced.

BitTorrent and other P2P protocols

By its very nature, using BitTorrent to access copyrighted content comes with a risk. Since downloaders are also distributors and their IP addresses are necessarily public, torrent users are extremely easy to track. In fact, with a minimum of equipment, any determined rightsholder is able spot and potentially uncover the identity of a file-sharer.

But while basic BitTorrent sharing gets a 0/10 for privacy, that’s a bit like saying that a speeding car gets 0/10 for stealth. Like the speeding car, anyone can see the pirating torrent user, but the big question is whether there’s anyone around who intends to do anything about it.

The big surprise in 2017 is that users are still statistically unlikely to face any consequences.

In the United States, for example, where copyright trolling can be a serious issue for those who get caught up in the net, the problem still only affects a tiny, tiny proportion of pirates. A one percent risk of getting snared would be overstating the risk but these are still odds that any gambler would be happy to take.

Surprisingly, pirates are also less likely to encounter a simple friendly warning than they were last year too. The “Six Strikes” Copyright Alerts System operated by the MPAA and RIAA, that set out to advise large volumes of pirates using notices sent via their ISPs, was discontinued in January. Those behind it gave in, for reasons unknown.

This means that millions of torrent users – despite exposing their IP addresses in public while sharing copyrighted content – are doing so without significant problems. Nevertheless, large numbers are also taking precautions, by using anonymization technologies including VPNs.

That’s not to say that their actions are legal – they’re not – but outside the few thousand people caught up in trolls’ nets each year, the vast and overwhelming majority of torrent users (which number well over 100 million) are pirating with impunity.

In the UK, not even trolling is a problem anymore. After a few flurries that seemed to drag on longer than they should, copyright trolls appear to have left the country for more lucrative shores. No cases have gone through the courts in recent times which means that UK users are torrenting pretty much whatever they like, with no legal problems whatsoever.

It’s important to note though, that their actions aren’t going unnoticed. Unlike the United States, the UK has a warning system in place. This means that a few thousand customers of a handful of ISPs are receiving notices each month informing them that their piratey behavior has been monitored by an entertainment company.

Currently, however, there are no punishments for those who are ‘caught’, even when they’re accused of pirating on a number of occasions. At least so far, it seems that the plan is to worry pirates into submission and in some cases that will probably work. Nevertheless, things can easily change when records are being kept on this scale.

Germany aside (which is overrun with copyright trolling activity), a handful of other European countries have also endured relatively small troll problems (Finland, Sweden, Denmark) but overall, file-sharers go about their business as usual across the continent. There are no big projects in any country aiming to punish large numbers of BitTorrent users and only France has an active warning notice program.

Canada and Australia have also had relatively small problems with copyright trolls (the former also has a fairly toothless ISP warning system) but neither country is considered a particularly ‘dangerous’ place to share files using BitTorrent. Like the United States, UK, and Europe, the chances of getting prosecuted for infringement are very small indeed.

Why such little enforcement?

There are a number of reasons for the apparent lack of interest in BitTorrent users but a few bubble up to the top. Firstly, there’s the question of resources required to tackle millions of users. Obviously, some scare tactics could be deployed by hitting a few people hard, but it feels like most companies have moved beyond that thinking.

That’s partly due to the more recent tendency of entertainment groups and governments to take a broader view of infringement, hitting it at its source by strangling funds to pirate sites, hitting their advertisers, blocking their websites, and attempting to forge voluntary anti-piracy schemes with search engines.

It’s also worth noting that huge numbers of people are routinely protecting themselves with VPN-like technology, which allows them to move around the Internet with much improved levels of privacy. Just recently, anti-piracy outfit Rightscorp partly blamed this for falling revenues.

Importantly, however, the nature of infringement has been changing for some time too.

A few years ago, most people were getting their movies and music from torrent sites but now they’re more likely to be obtaining their fix from a streaming source. Accessing the top blockbusters via a streaming site (perhaps via Kodi) is for the most part untraceable, as is grabbing music from one of the hundreds of MP3 portals around today.

But as recent news revealed, why bother with ‘pirate’ sites when people can simply rip music from sites like YouTube?

So-called stream-ripping is now blamed for huge swathes of piracy and as a result, torrent sites get far fewer mentions from anti-piracy groups than they did before.

While still a thorn in their side, it wouldn’t be a stretch to presume that torrent sites are no longer considered the primary problem they once were, at least in respect of music. Now, the ‘Value Gap‘ is more of a headache.

So, in a nutshell, the millions of people obtaining and sharing copyrighted content using BitTorrent are still taking some risks in every major country, and those need to be carefully weighed.

The activity is illegal almost everywhere, punishable in both civil and criminal courts, and has the potential to land people with big fines and even a jail sentence, if the scale of sharing is big enough.

In truth, however, the chances of the man in the street getting caught are so slim that many people don’t give the risks a second thought. That said, even people who drive 10mph over the limit get caught once in a while, so those that want to keep a clean sheet online often get a VPN and reduce the risks to almost 0%.

For people who stream, life is much less complicated. Streaming movies, TV shows or music from an illicit source is untraceable by any regular means, which up to now has made it almost 100% safe. Notably, there hasn’t been a single prosecution of a user who streamed infringing content anywhere in the world. In the EU it is illegal though, so something might happen in future, potentially…..possibly…..at some point….maybe.

And here’s the thing. While this is the general position today, the ‘market’ is volatile and has the ability to change quickly. A case could get filed in the US or UK next week, each targeting 50,000 BitTorrent users for downloading something that came out months ago. Nobody knows for sure so perhaps the best analogy is the one drummed into kids during high-school sex education classes.

People shouldn’t put themselves at risk at all but if they really must, they should take precautions. If they don’t, they could easily be the unlucky one and that is nearly always miserable.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Analyze OpenFDA Data in R with Amazon S3 and Amazon Athena

Post Syndicated from Ryan Hood original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/big-data/analyze-openfda-data-in-r-with-amazon-s3-and-amazon-athena/

One of the great benefits of Amazon S3 is the ability to host, share, or consume public data sets. This provides transparency into data to which an external data scientist or developer might not normally have access. By exposing the data to the public, you can glean many insights that would have been difficult with a data silo.

The openFDA project creates easy access to the high value, high priority, and public access data of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The data has been formatted and documented in consumer-friendly standards. Critical data related to drugs, devices, and food has been harmonized and can easily be called by application developers and researchers via API calls. OpenFDA has published two whitepapers that drill into the technical underpinnings of the API infrastructure as well as how to properly analyze the data in R. In addition, FDA makes openFDA data available on S3 in raw format.

In this post, I show how to use S3, Amazon EMR, and Amazon Athena to analyze the drug adverse events dataset. A drug adverse event is an undesirable experience associated with the use of a drug, including serious drug side effects, product use errors, product quality programs, and therapeutic failures.

Data considerations

Keep in mind that this data does have limitations. In addition, in the United States, these adverse events are submitted to the FDA voluntarily from consumers so there may not be reports for all events that occurred. There is no certainty that the reported event was actually due to the product. The FDA does not require that a causal relationship between a product and event be proven, and reports do not always contain the detail necessary to evaluate an event. Because of this, there is no way to identify the true number of events. The important takeaway to all this is that the information contained in this data has not been verified to produce cause and effect relationships. Despite this disclaimer, many interesting insights and value can be derived from the data to accelerate drug safety research.

Data analysis using SQL

For application developers who want to perform targeted searching and lookups, the API endpoints provided by the openFDA project are “ready to go” for software integration using a standard API powered by Elasticsearch, NodeJS, and Docker. However, for data analysis purposes, it is often easier to work with the data using SQL and statistical packages that expect a SQL table structure. For large-scale analysis, APIs often have query limits, such as 5000 records per query. This can cause extra work for data scientists who want to analyze the full dataset instead of small subsets of data.

To address the concern of requiring all the data in a single dataset, the openFDA project released the full 100 GB of harmonized data files that back the openFDA project onto S3. Athena is an interactive query service that makes it easy to analyze data in S3 using standard SQL. It’s a quick and easy way to answer your questions about adverse events and aspirin that does not require you to spin up databases or servers.

While you could point tools directly at the openFDA S3 files, you can find greatly improved performance and use of the data by following some of the preparation steps later in this post.

Architecture

This post explains how to use the following architecture to take the raw data provided by openFDA, leverage several AWS services, and derive meaning from the underlying data.

Steps:

  1. Load the openFDA /drug/event dataset into Spark and convert it to gzip to allow for streaming.
  2. Transform the data in Spark and save the results as a Parquet file in S3.
  3. Query the S3 Parquet file with Athena.
  4. Perform visualization and analysis of the data in R and Python on Amazon EC2.

Optimizing public data sets: A primer on data preparation

Those who want to jump right into preparing the files for Athena may want to skip ahead to the next section.

Transforming, or pre-processing, files is a common task for using many public data sets. Before you jump into the specific steps for transforming the openFDA data files into a format optimized for Athena, I thought it would be worthwhile to provide a quick exploration on the problem.

Making a dataset in S3 efficiently accessible with minimal transformation for the end user has two key elements:

  1. Partitioning the data into objects that contain a complete part of the data (such as data created within a specific month).
  2. Using file formats that make it easy for applications to locate subsets of data (for example, gzip, Parquet, ORC, etc.).

With these two key elements in mind, you can now apply transformations to the openFDA adverse event data to prepare it for Athena. You might find the data techniques employed in this post to be applicable to many of the questions you might want to ask of the public data sets stored in Amazon S3.

Before you get started, I encourage those who are interested in doing deeper healthcare analysis on AWS to make sure that you first read the AWS HIPAA Compliance whitepaper. This covers the information necessary for processing and storing patient health information (PHI).

Also, the adverse event analysis shown for aspirin is strictly for demonstration purposes and should not be used for any real decision or taken as anything other than a demonstration of AWS capabilities. However, there have been robust case studies published that have explored a causal relationship between aspirin and adverse reactions using OpenFDA data. If you are seeking research on aspirin or its risks, visit organizations such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) or the Institute of Medicine (IOM).

Preparing data for Athena

For this walkthrough, you will start with the FDA adverse events dataset, which is stored as JSON files within zip archives on S3. You then convert it to Parquet for analysis. Why do you need to convert it? The original data download is stored in objects that are partitioned by quarter.

Here is a small sample of what you find in the adverse events (/drugs/event) section of the openFDA website.

If you were looking for events that happened in a specific quarter, this is not a bad solution. For most other scenarios, such as looking across the full history of aspirin events, it requires you to access a lot of data that you won’t need. The zip file format is not ideal for using data in place because zip readers must have random access to the file, which means the data can’t be streamed. Additionally, the zip files contain large JSON objects.

To read the data in these JSON files, a streaming JSON decoder must be used or a computer with a significant amount of RAM must decode the JSON. Opening up these files for public consumption is a great start. However, you still prepare the data with a few lines of Spark code so that the JSON can be streamed.

Step 1:  Convert the file types

Using Apache Spark on EMR, you can extract all of the zip files and pull out the events from the JSON files. To do this, use the Scala code below to deflate the zip file and create a text file. In addition, compress the JSON files with gzip to improve Spark’s performance and reduce your overall storage footprint. The Scala code can be run in either the Spark Shell or in an Apache Zeppelin notebook on your EMR cluster.

If you are unfamiliar with either Apache Zeppelin or the Spark Shell, the following posts serve as great references:

 

import scala.io.Source
import java.util.zip.ZipInputStream
import org.apache.spark.input.PortableDataStream
import org.apache.hadoop.io.compress.GzipCodec

// Input Directory
val inputFile = "s3://download.open.fda.gov/drug/event/2015q4/*.json.zip";

// Output Directory
val outputDir = "s3://{YOUR OUTPUT BUCKET HERE}/output/2015q4/";

// Extract zip files from 
val zipFiles = sc.binaryFiles(inputFile);

// Process zip file to extract the json as text file and save it
// in the output directory 
val rdd = zipFiles.flatMap((file: (String, PortableDataStream)) => {
    val zipStream = new ZipInputStream(file.2.open)
    val entry = zipStream.getNextEntry
    val iter = Source.fromInputStream(zipStream).getLines
    iter
}).map(.replaceAll("\s+","")).saveAsTextFile(outputDir, classOf[GzipCodec])

Step 2:  Transform JSON into Parquet

With just a few more lines of Scala code, you can use Spark’s abstractions to convert the JSON into a Spark DataFrame and then export the data back to S3 in Parquet format.

Spark requires the JSON to be in JSON Lines format to be parsed correctly into a DataFrame.

// Output Parquet directory
val outputDir = "s3://{YOUR OUTPUT BUCKET NAME}/output/drugevents"
// Input json file
val inputJson = "s3://{YOUR OUTPUT BUCKET NAME}/output/2015q4/*”
// Load dataframe from json file multiline 
val df = spark.read.json(sc.wholeTextFiles(inputJson).values)
// Extract results from dataframe
val results = df.select("results")
// Save it to Parquet
results.write.parquet(outputDir)

Step 3:  Create an Athena table

With the data cleanly prepared and stored in S3 using the Parquet format, you can now place an Athena table on top of it to get a better understanding of the underlying data.

Because the openFDA data structure incorporates several layers of nesting, it can be a complex process to try to manually derive the underlying schema in a Hive-compatible format. To shorten this process, you can load the top row of the DataFrame from the previous step into a Hive table within Zeppelin and then extract the “create  table” statement from SparkSQL.

results.createOrReplaceTempView("data")

val top1 = spark.sql("select * from data tablesample(1 rows)")

top1.write.format("parquet").mode("overwrite").saveAsTable("drugevents")

val show_cmd = spark.sql("show create table drugevents”).show(1, false)

This returns a “create table” statement that you can almost paste directly into the Athena console. Make some small modifications (adding the word “external” and replacing “using with “stored as”), and then execute the code in the Athena query editor. The table is created.

For the openFDA data, the DDL returns all string fields, as the date format used in your dataset does not conform to the yyy-mm-dd hh:mm:ss[.f…] format required by Hive. For your analysis, the string format works appropriately but it would be possible to extend this code to use a Presto function to convert the strings into time stamps.

CREATE EXTERNAL TABLE  drugevents (
   companynumb  string, 
   safetyreportid  string, 
   safetyreportversion  string, 
   receiptdate  string, 
   patientagegroup  string, 
   patientdeathdate  string, 
   patientsex  string, 
   patientweight  string, 
   serious  string, 
   seriousnesscongenitalanomali  string, 
   seriousnessdeath  string, 
   seriousnessdisabling  string, 
   seriousnesshospitalization  string, 
   seriousnesslifethreatening  string, 
   seriousnessother  string, 
   actiondrug  string, 
   activesubstancename  string, 
   drugadditional  string, 
   drugadministrationroute  string, 
   drugcharacterization  string, 
   drugindication  string, 
   drugauthorizationnumb  string, 
   medicinalproduct  string, 
   drugdosageform  string, 
   drugdosagetext  string, 
   reactionoutcome  string, 
   reactionmeddrapt  string, 
   reactionmeddraversionpt  string)
STORED AS parquet
LOCATION
  's3://{YOUR TARGET BUCKET}/output/drugevents'

With the Athena table in place, you can start to explore the data by running ad hoc queries within Athena or doing more advanced statistical analysis in R.

Using SQL and R to analyze adverse events

Using the openFDA data with Athena makes it very easy to translate your questions into SQL code and perform quick analysis on the data. After you have prepared the data for Athena, you can begin to explore the relationship between aspirin and adverse drug events, as an example. One of the most common metrics to measure adverse drug events is the Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR). It is defined as:

PRR = (m/n)/( (M-m)/(N-n) )
Where
m = #reports with drug and event
n = #reports with drug
M = #reports with event in database
N = #reports in database

Gastrointestinal haemorrhage has the highest PRR of any reaction to aspirin when viewed in aggregate. One question you may want to ask is how the PRR has trended on a yearly basis for gastrointestinal haemorrhage since 2005.

Using the following query in Athena, you can see the PRR trend of “GASTROINTESTINAL HAEMORRHAGE” reactions with “ASPIRIN” since 2005:

with drug_and_event as 
(select rpad(receiptdate, 4, 'NA') as receipt_year
    , reactionmeddrapt
    , count(distinct (concat(safetyreportid,receiptdate,reactionmeddrapt))) as reports_with_drug_and_event 
from fda.drugevents
where rpad(receiptdate,4,'NA') 
     between '2005' and '2015' 
     and medicinalproduct = 'ASPIRIN'
     and reactionmeddrapt= 'GASTROINTESTINAL HAEMORRHAGE'
group by reactionmeddrapt, rpad(receiptdate, 4, 'NA') 
), reports_with_drug as 
(
select rpad(receiptdate, 4, 'NA') as receipt_year
    , count(distinct (concat(safetyreportid,receiptdate,reactionmeddrapt))) as reports_with_drug 
 from fda.drugevents 
 where rpad(receiptdate,4,'NA') 
     between '2005' and '2015' 
     and medicinalproduct = 'ASPIRIN'
group by rpad(receiptdate, 4, 'NA') 
), reports_with_event as 
(
   select rpad(receiptdate, 4, 'NA') as receipt_year
    , count(distinct (concat(safetyreportid,receiptdate,reactionmeddrapt))) as reports_with_event 
   from fda.drugevents
   where rpad(receiptdate,4,'NA') 
     between '2005' and '2015' 
     and reactionmeddrapt= 'GASTROINTESTINAL HAEMORRHAGE'
   group by rpad(receiptdate, 4, 'NA')
), total_reports as 
(
   select rpad(receiptdate, 4, 'NA') as receipt_year
    , count(distinct (concat(safetyreportid,receiptdate,reactionmeddrapt))) as total_reports 
   from fda.drugevents
   where rpad(receiptdate,4,'NA') 
     between '2005' and '2015' 
   group by rpad(receiptdate, 4, 'NA')
)
select  drug_and_event.receipt_year, 
(1.0 * drug_and_event.reports_with_drug_and_event/reports_with_drug.reports_with_drug)/ (1.0 * (reports_with_event.reports_with_event- drug_and_event.reports_with_drug_and_event)/(total_reports.total_reports-reports_with_drug.reports_with_drug)) as prr
, drug_and_event.reports_with_drug_and_event
, reports_with_drug.reports_with_drug
, reports_with_event.reports_with_event
, total_reports.total_reports
from drug_and_event
    inner join reports_with_drug on  drug_and_event.receipt_year = reports_with_drug.receipt_year   
    inner join reports_with_event on  drug_and_event.receipt_year = reports_with_event.receipt_year
    inner join total_reports on  drug_and_event.receipt_year = total_reports.receipt_year
order by  drug_and_event.receipt_year


One nice feature of Athena is that you can quickly connect to it via R or any other tool that can use a JDBC driver to visualize the data and understand it more clearly.

With this quick R script that can be run in R Studio either locally or on an EC2 instance, you can create a visualization of the PRR and Reporting Odds Ratio (RoR) for “GASTROINTESTINAL HAEMORRHAGE” reactions from “ASPIRIN” since 2005 to better understand these trends.

# connect to ATHENA
conn <- dbConnect(drv, '<Your JDBC URL>',s3_staging_dir="<Your S3 Location>",user=Sys.getenv(c("USER_NAME"),password=Sys.getenv(c("USER_PASSWORD"))

# Declare Adverse Event
adverseEvent <- "'GASTROINTESTINAL HAEMORRHAGE'"

# Build SQL Blocks
sqlFirst <- "SELECT rpad(receiptdate, 4, 'NA') as receipt_year, count(DISTINCT safetyreportid) as event_count FROM fda.drugsflat WHERE rpad(receiptdate,4,'NA') between '2005' and '2015'"
sqlEnd <- "GROUP BY rpad(receiptdate, 4, 'NA') ORDER BY receipt_year"

# Extract Aspirin with adverse event counts
sql <- paste(sqlFirst,"AND medicinalproduct ='ASPIRIN' AND reactionmeddrapt=",adverseEvent, sqlEnd,sep=" ")
aspirinAdverseCount = dbGetQuery(conn,sql)

# Extract Aspirin counts
sql <- paste(sqlFirst,"AND medicinalproduct ='ASPIRIN'", sqlEnd,sep=" ")
aspirinCount = dbGetQuery(conn,sql)

# Extract adverse event counts
sql <- paste(sqlFirst,"AND reactionmeddrapt=",adverseEvent, sqlEnd,sep=" ")
adverseCount = dbGetQuery(conn,sql)

# All Drug Adverse event Counts
sql <- paste(sqlFirst, sqlEnd,sep=" ")
allDrugCount = dbGetQuery(conn,sql)

# Select correct rows
selAll =  allDrugCount$receipt_year == aspirinAdverseCount$receipt_year
selAspirin = aspirinCount$receipt_year == aspirinAdverseCount$receipt_year
selAdverse = adverseCount$receipt_year == aspirinAdverseCount$receipt_year

# Calculate Numbers
m <- c(aspirinAdverseCount$event_count)
n <- c(aspirinCount[selAspirin,2])
M <- c(adverseCount[selAdverse,2])
N <- c(allDrugCount[selAll,2])

# Calculate proptional reporting ratio
PRR = (m/n)/((M-m)/(N-n))

# Calculate reporting Odds Ratio
d = n-m
D = N-M
ROR = (m/d)/(M/D)

# Plot the PRR and ROR
g_range <- range(0, PRR,ROR)
g_range[2] <- g_range[2] + 3
yearLen = length(aspirinAdverseCount$receipt_year)
axis(1,1:yearLen,lab=ax)
plot(PRR, type="o", col="blue", ylim=g_range,axes=FALSE, ann=FALSE)
axis(1,1:yearLen,lab=ax)
axis(2, las=1, at=1*0:g_range[2])
box()
lines(ROR, type="o", pch=22, lty=2, col="red")

As you can see, the PRR and RoR have both remained fairly steady over this time range. With the R Script above, all you need to do is change the adverseEvent variable from GASTROINTESTINAL HAEMORRHAGE to another type of reaction to analyze and compare those trends.

Summary

In this walkthrough:

  • You used a Scala script on EMR to convert the openFDA zip files to gzip.
  • You then transformed the JSON blobs into flattened Parquet files using Spark on EMR.
  • You created an Athena DDL so that you could query these Parquet files residing in S3.
  • Finally, you pointed the R package at the Athena table to analyze the data without pulling it into a database or creating your own servers.

If you have questions or suggestions, please comment below.


Next Steps

Take your skills to the next level. Learn how to optimize Amazon S3 for an architecture commonly used to enable genomic data analysis. Also, be sure to read more about running R on Amazon Athena.

 

 

 

 

 


About the Authors

Ryan Hood is a Data Engineer for AWS. He works on big data projects leveraging the newest AWS offerings. In his spare time, he enjoys watching the Cubs win the World Series and attempting to Sous-vide anything he can find in his refrigerator.

 

 

Vikram Anand is a Data Engineer for AWS. He works on big data projects leveraging the newest AWS offerings. In his spare time, he enjoys playing soccer and watching the NFL & European Soccer leagues.

 

 

Dave Rocamora is a Solutions Architect at Amazon Web Services on the Open Data team. Dave is based in Seattle and when he is not opening data, he enjoys biking and drinking coffee outside.

 

 

 

 

Half of All Football Fans Have Watched Illegal Streams

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/half-of-all-football-fans-have-watched-illegal-streams-170704/

Being a fan of top-flight football in the UK is an expensive proposition. In 2016, the average price of a season ticket was just shy of £500 a season while watching on TV can cost more than £60 per month.

Of course, there are good reasons for these high prices. Premier League footballers are notoriously highly-paid and with TV rights recently changing hands for more than £5.3bn, money has to be recouped in the most basic of ways – from the fans’ pocket.

While this is a success up to a point, there’s a growing factor upsetting the money men. The rise of online streaming is a thorn in the side of English Premier League, who are having to deal with large numbers of fans obtaining live matches for free via the Internet. But just how many fans are going down this route?

The results of a new survey carried out by the BBC reveal some shocking but perhaps not entirely unexpected results. Carried out online by ComRes between 7 and 15 March among 1,000 fans, it shows that large numbers of fans prefer the free option.

The headline figure is that 36% of football supporters stream Premier League matches online illegally at least once every month, a figure that reduces to just under a quarter (22%) when the frequency is once a week.

However, when fans were asked whether they had ever watched a match through an unofficial online provider, close to half (47%) said they had done so. That’s certainly a worryingly high number for the Premier League.

And if one removes older fans from the equation, things only get worse.

Almost two-thirds (65%) of younger fans aged 18 to 34 say they illegally stream live football matches online at least once a month. Among older fans aged 34 to 54 the figure improves to 33%, dropping to just 13% for the over 55s.

With 29%, the top reason fans gave for streaming content illegally was because “a friend/family member does it and they just watch.” Whether this is fans simply being coy is unclear, but it does suggest that watching football illegally has become a communal pastime, something which can likely be attributed to the rise of set-top boxes running software like Kodi.

Almost a quarter (24%) believe that TV sports packages do not represent good value for money but the only shock here is that the number isn’t higher. It’s certainly possible that many ‘streaming’ fans would never have paid in the first place, so pricing might be less of a factor for them.

Interestingly, 25% of respondents say they stream matches illegally because the quality is good. This is interesting since while illicit streams are both cheap and convenient, quality and reliability isn’t usually high up the checklist. That being said, the BBC research doesn’t differentiate between free streams and cheap IPTV streams, and the latter can indeed rival an official service.

There are also a few interesting revelations when it comes to fans’ opinions on the legality of illicit streaming.

A small 12% of fans think the practice is legal, almost three times less than the number who say it is illegal (34%). Almost three-quarters (32%) don’t know the legal status of streaming from an illicit source.

Following a recent ruling from the European Court of Justice, it is now clear that streaming from an unlicensed source amounts to copyright infringement.

However, enforcing that legislation against people in their own homes would provide similar challenges to prosecuting people who ‘tape’ a friend’s record collection or watch pirate DVDs. It’s just not realistic.

Interestingly, 10% believe it is legal to watch but illegal to upload a stream. That was believed to be the case before the ECJ ruling, but the former has now been clarified.

Uploading streams is very, very much illegal (as is supplying ‘pirate’ boxes) and in the right circumstances could lead to a custodial sentence. However, no regular consumer does this through conventional streaming (through a Kodi-powered device, for example), so it’s a moot point.

A tiny 4% of people believe that unauthorized streaming is not breaking the law but that Sky or BT could still fine them if they found out, which is technically wrong on both counts.

That being said, proving someone watched a stream is extremely difficult and since copyright law in the UK requires that infringers compensate for the losses they’ve caused, any ‘fine’ imposed might only amount to the cost of a match, for example.

Again, the chances of this happening in any way are very unlikely and have certainly never happened to date, even though millions are watching streams via their computers and set-top boxes loaded with Kodi. This is something the Premier League wants to change.

“Fans should know that these pre-loaded boxes enable pirate broadcasts of Premier League football, and other popular content, and are illegal. People who supply them have been jailed or ordered to pay significant financial penalties,” a spokesman told the BBC.

“We are increasingly seeing prominent apps and add-ons being closed down as the law catches up with them, leading to consumers being out of pocket.

“The Premier League will continue to protect its copyright, and the legitimate investment made by its broadcasting partners. Their contribution allows our clubs to develop and acquire players, invest in facilities and support the wider football pyramid and communities – all things that fans enjoy and society benefits from.”

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

200 ‘Pirate’ Media Player Sellers Shut Down After EU Court Ruling

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/200-pirate-media-player-sellers-shut-down-after-eu-court-ruling-170630/

The huge increase in popularity of piracy-configured set-top boxes has been nothing short of amazing over the past 18 months.

According to numerous reports, their use has become somewhat of an epidemic in Europe, prompting concern from anti-piracy organizations across the continent.

One group at the forefront is Dutch anti-piracy outfit BREIN, who took a case against a seller of ‘pirate’ boxes all the way to the European Court of Justice – and won.

Handed down in April, the decision concluded that selling devices pre-configured for piracy (such as those loaded with Kodi and third-party addons) is illegal under EU law.

While news of the decision was never likely to reach all sellers of ‘pirate’ boxes, those under the impression that sales occupied some kind of gray area were quickly corrected. That resulted in some sellers exiting the market and others changing the way they operate, such as selling boxes blank and expecting users to configure them themselves.

Due to the locality of the original case, sellers in the Netherlands were always likely to feel the impact of the ECJ ruling most initially, particularly with BREIN breathing down their collective necks. That has just been effectively confirmed by the anti-piracy group, with the news that around 200 ‘pirate’ media player sellers have ceased trading since the decision.

“This is a mixture of individuals and companies,” BREIN chief Tim Kuik informs TorrentFreak.

Kuik says that the sales were taking place via dedicated websites, online stores such as Amazon and eBay, plus social platforms including Facebook.

In an indication of how much in demand the devices are, the BREIN chief says that most of the sellers sold nothing else but ‘pirate’ boxes, to sustain a business or bring in some extra cash for the entrepreneurial individual.

Kuik says that 150 out of the 200 entities were contacted directly by BREIN, who advised them to stop what they’re doing to avoid things getting out of hand.

“Typically we send an explanatory letter with a cease and desist undertaking. Everyone gets the opportunity to settle. Most take it,” Kuik says.

Of course, others choose not to comply with BREIN’s demands, so for them, things have the potential to get more expensive and complicated, given the right conditions.

“We have now entered a phase in which willful infringement is assumed and this means no more warnings. If no settlement is reached the case will go to court. We have a couple of court cases under preparation,” Kuik explains.

This could mean a contested court case, which following the ECJ ruling is likely to end badly for anyone selling boxes filled with pirate addons. That being said, settling with BREIN can be expensive too.

“Providers who settle with BREIN pay up to 10,000 euros. Those who continue can count on a multiple of that. There’s a raw deal for those who think they’ll just get a warning. That time is now over.”

For those who ignore BREIN’s overtures and threats of legal action, there’s also the possibility of a case going ahead without them even being there.

“Under certain circumstances, an ex parte court order may be applied for,” Kuik concludes.

While the legality of such devices now seems completely clear in the EU, the market is yet to settle. Given past innovations, it’s more than likely that new avenues will open up to re-test the law to a new breaking point – and beyond.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Operation ‘Pirate On Demand’ Blocks Pirate IPTV Portals

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/operation-pirate-on-demand-blocks-pirate-iptv-portals-170628/

Via cheap set-top boxes, IPTV services (Internet Protocol TV) allow people to access thousands of live TV channels in their living rooms for a nominal fee.

Some of these services are available for just a few euros, dollars or pounds per month, often in HD quality.

While service levels can vary, some of the best also offer comprehensive Video On Demand (VOD), with hundreds and in some cases thousands of movies and TV shows on tap, supported by catch-up TV. Given their professional nature, the best IPTV products are proving a real thorn in the side for rights holders, who hope to charge ten times the money while delivering a lesser product.

As a result, crackdowns against IPTV providers, resellers and other people in the chain are underway across the world, but Europe in particular. Today’s news comes from Italy, where Operation “Pirate On Demand” is hoping to make a dent in IPTV piracy.

The operation is being headed up by the Guardia di Finanza (GdF), a department under Italy’s Minister of Economy and Finance. Part of the Italian Armed Forces, GdF says it has targeted nine sites involved in the unlawful distribution of content offered officially by local media giants Mediaset and Sky.

The authorities received assistance of a specialized team from the local anti-piracy group DCP, which operates on behalf of a broad range of entertainment industry companies.

According to GdF, a total of 89 servers were behind the portals which together delivered an estimated 178 terabytes of pirate content, ranging from TV shows and sports, to movies and children’s entertainment.

The nine portals are in the process of being blocked with some displaying the following message.

Seizure notice on the affected sites

The investigation began in September 2016 and was coordinated by Giangiacomo Pilia, the prosecutor at the Cagliari Court. Thus far, two people have been arrested.

A person arrested in the Varese area, who police believe is the commercial director of an illicit platform, has been charged with breaching copyright law.

A second individual arrested in Macerata is also suspected of copyright offenses, having technically managed the platform. Computer equipment, decoders, smart cards, and other electronic devices were also seized.

In addition to blocking various web portals, measures will now be taken to block the servers being used to supply the IPTV services. The GdF has also delivered a veiled threat to people who subscribed to the illicit services.

“It is also in the hands of investigators the position of those who have actively accessed the platforms by purchasing pirated subscriptions and thus benefiting by taking advantage,” GdF said.

The moves this week are the latest to take place under the Operation “Pirate On Demand” banner. Back in March, authorities moved to shut down and block 15 portals offering illegal IPTV access to Mediaset and Sky channels.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

MPAA & RIAA Demand Tough Copyright Standards in NAFTA Negotiations

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-riaa-demand-tough-copyright-standards-in-nafta-negotiations-170621/

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between the United States, Canada, and Mexico was negotiated more than 25 years ago. With a quarter of a decade of developments to contend with, the United States wants to modernize.

“While our economy and U.S. businesses have changed considerably over that period, NAFTA has not,” the government says.

With this in mind, the US requested comments from interested parties seeking direction for negotiation points. With those comments now in, groups like the MPAA and RIAA have been making their positions known. It’s no surprise that intellectual property enforcement is high on the agenda.

“Copyright is the lifeblood of the U.S. motion picture and television industry. As such, MPAA places high priority on securing strong protection and enforcement disciplines in the intellectual property chapters of trade agreements,” the MPAA writes in its submission.

“Strong IPR protection and enforcement are critical trade priorities for the music industry. With IPR, we can create good jobs, make significant contributions to U.S. economic growth and security, invest in artists and their creativity, and drive technological innovation,” the RIAA notes.

While both groups have numerous demands, it’s clear that each seeks an environment where not only infringers can be held liable, but also Internet platforms and services.

For the RIAA, there is a big focus on the so-called ‘Value Gap’, a phenomenon found on user-uploaded content sites like YouTube that are able to offer infringing content while avoiding liability due to Section 512 of the DMCA.

“Today, user-uploaded content services, which have developed sophisticated on-demand music platforms, use this as a shield to avoid licensing music on fair terms like other digital services, claiming they are not legally responsible for the music they distribute on their site,” the RIAA writes.

“Services such as Apple Music, TIDAL, Amazon, and Spotify are forced to compete with services that claim they are not liable for the music they distribute.”

But if sites like YouTube are exercising their rights while acting legally under current US law, how can partners Canada and Mexico do any better? For the RIAA, that can be achieved by holding them to standards envisioned by the group when the DMCA was passed, not how things have panned out since.

Demanding that negotiators “protect the original intent” of safe harbor, the RIAA asks that a “high-level and high-standard service provider liability provision” is pursued. This, the music group says, should only be available to “passive intermediaries without requisite knowledge of the infringement on their platforms, and inapplicable to services actively engaged in communicating to the public.”

In other words, make sure that YouTube and similar sites won’t enjoy the same level of safe harbor protection as they do today.

The RIAA also requires any negotiated safe harbor provisions in NAFTA to be flexible in the event that the DMCA is tightened up in response to the ongoing safe harbor rules study.

In any event, NAFTA should not “support interpretations that no longer reflect today’s digital economy and threaten the future of legitimate and sustainable digital trade,” the RIAA states.

For the MPAA, Section 512 is also perceived as a problem. While noting that the original intent was to foster a system of shared responsibility between copyright owners and service providers, the MPAA says courts have subsequently let copyright holders down. Like the RIAA, the MPAA also suggests that Canada and Mexico can be held to higher standards.

“We recommend a new approach to this important trade policy provision by moving to high-level language that establishes intermediary liability and appropriate limitations on liability. This would be fully consistent with U.S. law and avoid the same misinterpretations by policymakers and courts overseas,” the MPAA writes.

“In so doing, a modernized NAFTA would be consistent with Trade Promotion Authority’s negotiating objective of ‘ensuring that standards of protection and enforcement keep pace with technological developments’.”

The MPAA also has some specific problems with Mexico, including unauthorized camcording. The Hollywood group says that 85 illicit audio and video recordings of films were linked to Mexican theaters in 2016. However, recording is not currently a criminal offense in Mexico.

Another issue for the MPAA is that criminal sanctions for commercial scale infringement are only available if the infringement is for profit.

“This has hampered enforcement against the above-discussed camcording problem but also against online infringement, such as peer-to-peer piracy, that may be on a scale that is immensely harmful to U.S. rightsholders but nonetheless occur without profit by the infringer,” the MPAA writes.

“The modernized NAFTA like other U.S. bilateral free trade agreements must provide for criminal sanctions against commercial scale infringements without proof of profit motive.”

Also of interest are the MPAA’s complaints against Mexico’s telecoms laws. Unlike in the US and many countries in Europe, Mexico’s ISPs are forbidden to hand out their customers’ personal details to rights holders looking to sue. This, the MPAA says, needs to change.

The submissions from the RIAA and MPAA can be found here and here (pdf)

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

The Pirate Bay Isn’t Affected By Adverse Court Rulings – Everyone Else Is

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-isnt-affected-by-adverse-court-rulings-everyone-else-is-170618/

For more than a decade The Pirate Bay has been the world’s most controversial site. Delivering huge quantities of copyrighted content to the masses, the platform is revered and reviled across the copyright spectrum.

Its reputation is one of a defiant Internet swashbuckler, but due to changes in how the site has been run in more recent times, its current philosophy is more difficult to gauge. What has never been in doubt, however, is the site’s original intent to be as provocative as possible.

Through endless publicity stunts, some real, some just for the ‘lulz’, The Pirate Bay managed to attract a massive audience, all while incurring the wrath of every major copyright holder in the world.

Make no mistake, they all queued up to strike back, but every subsequent rightsholder action was met by a Pirate Bay middle finger, two fingers, or chin flick, depending on the mood of the day. This only served to further delight the masses, who happily spread the word while keeping their torrents flowing.

This vicious circle of being targeted by the entertainment industries, mocking them, and then reaping the traffic benefits, developed into the cheapest long-term marketing campaign the Internet had ever seen. But nothing is ever truly for free and there have been consequences.

After taunting Hollywood and the music industry with its refusals to capitulate, endless legal action that the site would have ordinarily been forced to participate in largely took place without The Pirate Bay being present. It doesn’t take a law degree to work out what happened in each and every one of those cases, whatever complex route they took through the legal system. No defense, no win.

For example, the web-blocking phenomenon across the UK, Europe, Asia and Australia was driven by the site’s absolute resilience and although there would clearly have been other scapegoats had The Pirate Bay disappeared, the site was the ideal bogeyman the copyright lobby required to move forward.

Filing blocking lawsuits while bringing hosts, advertisers, and ISPs on board for anti-piracy initiatives were also made easier with the ‘evil’ Pirate Bay still online. Immune from every anti-piracy technique under the sun, the existence of the platform in the face of all onslaughts only strengthened the cases of those arguing for even more drastic measures.

Over a decade, this has meant a significant tightening of the sharing and streaming climate. Without any big legislative changes but plenty of case law against The Pirate Bay, web-blocking is now a walk in the park, ad hoc domain seizures are a fairly regular occurrence, and few companies want to host sharing sites. Advertisers and brands are also hesitant over where they place their ads. It’s a very different world to the one of 10 years ago.

While it would be wrong to attribute every tightening of the noose to the actions of The Pirate Bay, there’s little doubt that the site and its chaotic image played a huge role in where copyright enforcement is today. The platform set out to provoke and succeeded in every way possible, gaining supporters in their millions. It could also be argued it kicked a hole in a hornets’ nest, releasing the hell inside.

But perhaps the site’s most amazing achievement is the way it has managed to stay online, despite all the turmoil.

This week yet another ruling, this time from the powerful European Court of Justice, found that by offering links in the manner it does, The Pirate Bay and other sites are liable for communicating copyright works to the public. Of course, this prompted the usual swathe of articles claiming that this could be the final nail in the site’s coffin.

Wrong.

In common with every ruling, legal defeat, and legislative restriction put in place due to the site’s activities, this week’s decision from the ECJ will have zero effect on the Pirate Bay’s availability. For right or wrong, the site was breaking the law long before this ruling and will continue to do so until it decides otherwise.

What we have instead is a further tightened legal landscape that will have a lasting effect on everything BUT the site, including weaker torrent sites, Internet users, and user-uploaded content sites such as YouTube.

With The Pirate Bay carrying on regardless, that is nothing short of remarkable.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Pirate Bay Ruling is Bad News For Google & YouTube, Experts Says

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-ruling-is-bad-news-for-google-youtube-experts-says-170615/

After years of legal wrangling, yesterday the European Court of Justice handed down a decision in the case between Dutch anti-piracy outfit BREIN and ISPs Ziggo and XS4ALL.

BREIN had demanded that the ISPs block The Pirate Bay, but both providers dug in their heels, forcing the case through the Supreme Court and eventually the ECJ.

For BREIN, yesterday’s decision will have been worth the wait. Although The Pirate Bay does not provide the content that’s ultimately downloaded and shared by its users, the ECJ said that it plays an important role in how that content is presented.

“Whilst it accepts that the works in question are placed online by the users, the Court highlights the fact that the operators of the platform play an essential role in making those works available,” the Court said.

With that established the all-important matter is whether by providing such a platform, the operators of The Pirate Bay are effectively engaging in a “communication to the public” of copyrighted works. According to the ECJ, that’s indeed the case.

“The Court holds that the making available and management of an online sharing platform must be considered to be an act of communication for the purposes of the directive,” the ECJ said.

Add into the mix that The Pirate Bay generates profit from its activities and there’s a potent case for copyright liability.

While the case was about The Pirate Bay, ECJ rulings tend to have an effect far beyond individual cases. That’s certainly the opinion of Enzo Mazza, chief at Italian anti-piracy group FIMI.

“The ruling will have a major impact on the way that entities like Google operate, because it will expose them to a greater and more direct responsibility,” Mazza told La Repubblica.

“So far, Google has worked against piracy by eliminating illegal content after it gets reported. But that is not enough. It is a fairly ineffective intervention.”

Mazza says that platforms like Google, YouTube, and thousands of similar sites that help to organize and curate user-uploaded content are somewhat similar to The Pirate Bay. In any event, they are not neutral intermediaries, he insists.

The conclusion that the decision is bad for platforms like YouTube is shared by Fulvio Sarzana, a lawyer with Sarzana and Partners, a law firm specializing in Internet and copyright disputes.

“In the ruling, the Court has in fact attributed, for the first time, secondary liability to sharing platforms due to the violation of copyrights carried out by the users of a platform,” Sarzana informs TF.

“This will have consequences for video-sharing platforms and user-generated content sites like YouTube, but it excludes responsibility for platforms that play a purely passive role, without affecting users’ content. This the case with cyberlockers, for example.”

Sarzana says that “unfortunate judgments” like this should be expected, until the approval of a new European copyright law. Enzo Mazza, on the other hand, feels that the copyright reform debate should take account of this ruling when formulating legislation to stop platforms like YouTube exploiting copyright works without an appropriate license.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

ISP Doesn’t Have to Expose Alleged BitTorrent Pirates, Finnish Court Rules

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/isp-doesnt-have-to-expose-alleged-bittorrent-pirates-finnish-court-rules-170615/

finlandStarting three years ago, copyright holders began sending out thousands of settlement letters to alleged pirates in Finland, a practice often described as copyright trolling.

This week, however, the local Market Court has put the brakes on these efforts, with a rather significant ruling.

In the case in question, filmmakers requested the personal information of hundreds of alleged BitTorrent users from Internet provider DNA. However, after a careful review by a panel of seven judges, the Court decided not to grant the request.

The rightsholders provided a detailed log from a BitTorrent monitoring tool as evidence. While the Court didn’t doubt that the pirated material had been shared, it questioned how significant the infringements were.

The provided list of IP-addresses and timestamps don’t show how much data was shared, or for how long.

The evidence included an overview of the total number of users sharing the same file in a single BitTorrent swarm. However, the fact that thousands of people were sharing the same file says nothing about the significance of individual infringements.

“[T]he applicant has not claimed or provided any explanation that would indicate that the distribution of its work, by an IP address in the application, would have repeatedly occurred or for a longer period of time,” the Market Court writes.

The verdict, first reported by Iltalethi, refers to a recent case in the European Court of Justice, and stressed that the significance of an infringement must be weighed against the defendants’ privacy rights. In this case, the court decided that the evidence doesn’t warrant the exposure of the alleged pirates.

“Since the applicant has not provided sufficient proof of compliance with the conditions set out in Article 60a of the Copyright Act to adoption of an application, the application must be dismissed,” the Market Court writes.

The outcome is a clear victory for the accused BitTorrent users. Time will tell whether rightsholders will adapt their evidence to the ruling, or whether they will test their luck elsewhere. The current ruling can still be appealed.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Pirate Bay Facilitates Piracy and Can be Blocked, Top EU Court Rules

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-facilitates-piracy-and-can-be-blocked-top-eu-court-rules-170614/

pirate bayIn 2014, The Court of The Hague handed down its decision in a long running case which had previously forced two Dutch ISPs, Ziggo and XS4ALL, to block The Pirate Bay.

The Court ruled against local anti-piracy outfit BREIN, concluding that the blockade was ineffective and restricted the ISPs’ entrepreneurial freedoms.

The Pirate Bay was unblocked by all local ISPs while BREIN took the matter to the Supreme Court, which subsequently referred the case to the EU Court of Justice, seeking further clarification.

After a careful review of the case, the Court of Justice today ruled that The Pirate Bay can indeed be blocked.

While the operators don’t share anything themselves, they knowingly provide users with a platform to share copyright-infringing links. This can be seen as “an act of communication” under the EU Copyright Directive, the Court concludes.

“Whilst it accepts that the works in question are placed online by the users, the Court highlights the fact that the operators of the platform play an essential role in making those works available,” the Court explains in a press release (pdf).

According to the ruling, The Pirate Bay indexes torrents in a way that makes it easy for users to find infringing content while the site makes a profit. The Pirate Bay is aware of the infringements, and although moderators sometimes remove “faulty” torrents, infringing links remain online.

“In addition, the same operators expressly display, on blogs and forums accessible on that platform, their intention of making protected works available to users, and encourage the latter to make copies of those works,” the Court writes.

The ruling means that there are no major obstacles for the Dutch Supreme Court to issue an ISP blockade, but a final decision in the underlying case will likely take a few more months.

A decision at the European level is important, as it may also affect court orders in other countries where The Pirate Bay and other torrent sites are already blocked, including Austria, Belgium, Finland, Italy, and its home turf Sweden.

Despite the negative outcome, the Pirate Bay team is not overly worried.

“Copyright holders will remain stubborn and fight to hold onto a dying model. Clueless and corrupt law makers will put corporate interests before the public’s. Their combined jackassery is what keeps TPB alive,” TPB’s plc365 tells TorrentFreak.

“The reality is that regardless of the ruling, nothing substantial will change. Maybe more ISPs will block TPB. More people will use one of the hundreds of existing proxies, and even more new ones will be created as a result.”

Pirate Bay moderator “Xe” notes that while it’s an extra barrier to access the site, blockades will eventually help people to get around censorship efforts, which are not restricted to TPB.

“They’re an issue for everyone in the sense that they’re an obstacle which has to be overcome. But learning how to work around them isn’t hard and knowing how to work around them is becoming a core skill for everyone who uses the Internet.

“Blockades are not a major issue for the site in the sense that they’re nothing new: we’ve long since adapted to them. We serve the needs of millions of people every day in spite of them,” Xe adds.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

A rather dandy Pi-assisted Draisine

Post Syndicated from Alex Bate original https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/dandy-draisine/

It’s time to swap pedal power for relaxed strides with the Raspberry Pi-assisted Draisine from bicyle-modding pro Prof. Holger Hermanns.

Raspberry PI-powered Dandy Horse Draisine

So dandy…

A Draisine…

If you have children yourself or have seen them in the wild on occasion, you may be aware of how much they like balance bikes – bicycle frames without pedals, propelled by striding while sitting on the seat. It’s a nice way for children to take the first steps (bah-dum tss) towards learning to ride a bicycle. However, between 1817, when the balance bike (also known as a draisine or Dandy Horse) was invented by Karl von Drais, and the introduction of the pedal bike around 1860, this vehicle was the new, fun, and exciting way to travel for everyone.

Raspberry PI-powered Dandy Horse Draisine

We can’t wait for the inevitable IKEA flatpack release

Having previously worked on wireless braking systems for bicycles, Prof. Hermanns is experienced in adding tech to two wheels. Now, he and his team of computer scientists at Germany’s Saarland University have updated the balance bike for the 21st century: they built the Draisine 200.0 to explore pedal-free, power-assisted movement as part of the European Research Council-funded POWVER project.

With this draisine, his team have created a beautiful, fully functional final build that would look rather fetching here on the bicycle-flooded streets of Cambridge.

The frame of the bike, except for the wheel bearings and the various screws, is made of Okoumé wood, which looks somewhat rose, has fine nerves (which means that it is easy to mill) and seems to have excellent weather resistance.

Draisine 200.0

Uploaded by ecomento.tv on 2017-06-08.

…with added Pi!

Within the wooden body of the draisine lies a array of electrical components, including a 200-watt rear hub motor, a battery, an accelerometer, a magnetic sensor, and a Raspberry Pi. Checking the accelerometer and reading wheel-embedded sensors 150 times per second (wow!), the Pi activates the hub motor to assist the draisine, which allows it to reach speeds of up to 16mph (25km/h – wow again!).

Raspberry PI-powered Dandy Horse Draisine

The inner workings of the Draisine 200.0

More detailed information on the Draisine 200.0 build can be found here. Hermanns’s team also plan to release the code for the project once confirmation of no licence infringement has been given.

Take to the road

We’ve seen a variety of bicycle-oriented Pi builds that improve safety and help with navigation. But as for electricity-assisted Pi bikes, this one may be the first, and it’s such a snazzy one at that!

If you’d like to see more cycle-based projects using the Raspberry Pi, check out Matt’s Smart Bike Light, David’s bike computer, and, for the fun of it, the Pi-powered bicycle beer dispenser we covered last month.

The Pi Towers hive mind is constantly discussing fun new ways for its active cycling community to use the Raspberry Pi, and we’d love to hear your ideas as well! So please do share them in the comments below.

The post A rather dandy Pi-assisted Draisine appeared first on Raspberry Pi.

MPAA Chief Praises Site-Blocking But Italians Love Piracy – and the Quality

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-chief-praises-site-blocking-but-italians-love-pirate-quality-170606/

After holding a reputation for being soft on piracy for many years, in more recent times Italy has taken a much tougher stance. The country now takes regular action against pirate sites and has a fairly aggressive site-blocking mechanism.

On Monday, the industry gathered in Rome and was presented with new data from local anti-piracy outfit FAPAV. The research revealed that while there has been some improvement over the past six years, 39% of Italians are still consuming illicit movies, TV shows, sporting events and other entertainment, at the rate of 669m acts of piracy every year.

While movie piracy is down 4% from 2010, the content most often consumed by pirates is still films, with 33% of the adult population engaging in illicit consumption during the past year.

The downward trend was not shared by TV shows, however. In the past seven years, piracy has risen to 22% of the population, up 13% on figures from 2010.

In keeping with the MPAA’s recent coding of piracy in 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 variants (P2P as 1.0, streaming websites as 2.0, streaming devices/Kodi as 3.0), FAPAV said that Piracy 2.0 had become even more established recently, with site operators making considerable technological progress.

“The research tells us we can not lower our guard, we always have to work harder and with greater determination in communication and awareness, especially with regard to digital natives,” said FAPAV Secretary General, Bagnoli Rossi.

The FAPAV chief said that there needs to be emphasis in two areas. One, changing perceptions among the public over the seriousness of piracy via education and two, placing pressure on websites using the police, judiciary, and other law enforcement agencies.

“The pillars of anti-piracy protection are: the judicial authority, self-regulatory agreements, communication and educational activities,” said Rossi, adding that cooperation with Italy’s AGCOM had resulted in 94 sites being blocked over three years.

FAPAV research has traditionally focused on people aged 15 and up but the anti-piracy group believes that placing more emphasis on younger people (aged 10-14) is important since they also consume a lot of pirated content online. MPAA chief Chris Dodd, who was at the event, agreed with the sentiment.

“Today’s youth are the future of the audiovisual industry. Young people must learn to respect the people who work in film and television that in 96% of cases never appear [in front of camera] but still work behind the scenes,” Dodd said.

“It is important to educate and direct them towards legal consumption, which creates jobs and encourages investment. Technology has expanded options to consume content legally and at any time and place, but at the same time has given attackers the opportunity to develop illegal businesses.”

Despite large-scale site-blocking not being a reality in the United States, Dodd was also keen to praise Italy for its efforts while acknowledging the wider blocking regimes in place across the EU.

“We must not only act by blocking pirate sites (we have closed a little less than a thousand in Europe) but also focus on legal offers. Today there are 480 legal online distribution services worldwide. We must have more,” Dodd said.

The outgoing MPAA chief reiterated that movies, music, games and a wide range of entertainment products are all available online legally now. Nevertheless, piracy remains a “growing phenomenon” that has criminals at its core.

“Piracy is composed of criminal organizations, ready to steal sensitive data and to make illegal profits any way they can. It’s a business that harms the entire audiovisual market, which in Europe alone has a million working professionals. To promote the culture of legality means protecting this market and its collective heritage,” Dodd said.

In Italy, convincing pirates to go legal might be more easily said than done. Not only do millions download video every year, but the majority of pirates are happy with the quality too. 89% said they were pleased with the quality of downloaded movies while the satisfaction with TV shows was even greater with 91% indicating approval.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.