Tag Archives: Finland

Brand new and blue: our Brazilian Raspberry Pi 3

Post Syndicated from Mike Buffham original https://www.raspberrypi.org/blog/raspberry-pi-brazil/

Programa de revendedor aprovado agora no Brasil — our Approved Reseller programme is live in Brazil, with Anatel-approved Raspberry Pis in a rather delicious shade of blue on sale from today.

A photo of the blue-variant Raspberry Pi 3

Blue Raspberry is more than just the best Jolly Ranger flavour

The challenge

The difficulty in buying our products — and the lack of Anatel certification — have been consistent points of feedback from our many Brazilian customers and followers. In much the same way that electrical products in the USA must be FCC-approved in order to be produced or sold there, products sold in Brazil must be approved by Anatel. And so we’re pleased to tell you that the Raspberry Pi finally has this approval.

Blue Raspberry

Today we’re also announcing the appointment of our first Approved Reseller in Brazil: FilipeFlop will be able to sell Raspberry Pi 3 units across the country.

Filipeflop logo - Raspberry Pi Brazil

A big shout-out to the team at FilipeFlop that has worked so hard with us to ensure that we’re getting the product on sale in Brazil at the right price. (They also helped us understand the various local duties and taxes which need to be paid!)

Please note: the blue colouring of the Raspberry Pi 3 sold in Brazil is the only difference between it and the standard green model. People outside Brazil will not be able to purchase the blue variant from FilipeFlop.

More Raspberry Pi Approved Resellers

Raspberry Pi Approved Reseller logo - Raspberry Pi Brazil

Since first announcing it back in August, we have further expanded our Approved Reseller programme by adding resellers for Austria, Canada, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Slovakia, Sweden, Switzerland, and the US. All Approved Resellers are listed on our products page, and more will follow over the next few weeks!

Make and share

If you’re based in Brazil and you’re ordering the new, blue Raspberry Pi, make sure to share your projects with us on social media. We can’t wait to see what you get up to with them!

The post Brand new and blue: our Brazilian Raspberry Pi 3 appeared first on Raspberry Pi.

Swedish Data Authority Investigates Piracy Settlement Letters

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/swedish-data-authority-investigates-piracy-settlement-letters-171115/

Companies that aim to turn piracy into profit have been in existence for more than a decade but still the controversy around their practices continues.

Most, known colloquially as ‘copyright trolls’, monitor peer-to-peer networks such as BitTorrent, collecting IP addresses and other data in order to home in on a particular Internet account. From there, ISPs are sued to hand over that particular subscriber’s personal details. Once they’re obtained, the pressure begins.

At this point, trolls are in direct contact with the public, usually by letter. Their tone is almost always semi-aggressive, warning account holders that their actions are undermining entire industries. However, as if by magic, all the harm can be undone if they pay up few hundred dollars, euros, or pounds – quickly.

That’s the case in Sweden, where law firm Njord Law is representing the well-known international copyright trolls behind the movies CELL, IT, London Has Fallen, Mechanic: Resurrection, Criminal, and September of Shiraz.

“Have you, or other people with access to the aforementioned IP address, such as children living at home, viewed or tried to watch [a pirate movie] at the specified time?” Njord Law now writes in its letters to alleged pirates.

“If so, the case can be terminated by paying 4,500 SEK [$550].”

It’s clear that the companies involved are diving directly for cash. Indeed, letter recipients are told they have just two weeks to pay up or face further issues. The big question now is whether these demands are permissible under law, not necessarily from a copyright angle but due to the way they are presented to the alleged pirates.

The Swedish Data Protection Authority (Datainspektionen) is a public authority tasked with protecting the privacy of the individual in the information society. Swedish Radio reports that it has received several complaints from Swedes who have received cash demands and as a result is investigating whether the letters are legal.

As a result, the authority now has to determine whether the letters can be regarded as a debt collection measure. If so, they will have to comply with special laws and would also require special permission.

“They have not classified this as a debt collection fee, but it is not that element that is crucial. A debt collection measure is determined by whether there is any kind of pressure on the recipient to make a payment. Then there is the question of whether such pressure can be considered a debt collection measure,” says lawyer Camilla Sparr.

Of course, the notion that the letters exist for the purposes of collecting a debt is rejected by Njord Law. Lawyer Jeppe Brogaard Clausen says that his company has had no problems in this respect in other jurisdictions.

“We have encountered the same issue in Denmark and Finland and it was judged by the authorities that there is no talk about a debt collection letter,” Clausen told SR.

A lot hinges on the investigation of the Data Protection Authority. Njord Law has already obtained permission to find out the identities behind tens of thousands of IP addresses, including a single batch where 25,000 customers of ISP Telia were targeted.

At least 5,000 letters demanding payment have been sent out already and another 5,000 are lined up for the next few months. Clausen says their purpose is to change Swedes’ attitude towards illegal file sharing but there’s a broad belief that they’re part of a global network of companies whose aims are to generate profit from piracy.

But while the Data Protection Authority does its work, there is plenty of advice for letter recipients who don’t want to cave into demands for cash. Last month, Copyright Professor Sanna Wolk advised them to ignore the letters entirely.

“Do not pay. You do not even have to answer it,” Wolk told people receiving a letter.

“In the end, it’s the court that will decide whether you have to pay or not. We have seen this type of letter in the past, and only very few times those in charge of the claims have taken it to court.”

Of course, should copyright holders actually take a matter to court, then recipients must contest the claim since failure to do so could result in a default judgment. This means they lose the case without even having had the opportunity to mount a defense.

Importantly, one such defense could be that the individual didn’t carry out the offense, perhaps because their WiFi isn’t password protected or that they share their account with others.

“Someone who has an open network cannot be held responsible for copyright violations – such as downloading movies – if they provide others with access to their internet connection. This has been decided in a European Court ruling last year,” Wolk noted.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN discounts, offers and coupons

Dallas Buyers Club Loses Piracy Lawsuit, IP-Address is Not Enough

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/dallas-buyers-club-loses-piracy-lawsuit-ip-address-is-not-enough-171110/

In recent years, BitTorrent users around the world have been targeted with threats. They can either pay a significant settlement fee, or face far worse in court.

The scheme started in Germany years ago, and copyright holders later went after alleged pirates in Australia, Denmark, Finland, the UK, US, and elsewhere.

This summer, the copyright holders behind the movie Dallas Buyers Club added Spain to the mix, going after dozens of alleged pirates in Bilbao and San Sebastian. The ‘filmmakers’ are part of a tight group of so-called copyright trolls which are constantly expanding their business to other countries.

While they have had some success, mainly by sending out settlement letters, in Spain the first court case brought bad news.

The Commercial Court of Donostia dismissed the claim against an alleged file-sharer due to a lack of evidence. Dallas Buyers Club identified the infringer through an IP-address, but according to Judge Pedro José Malagón Ruiz, this is not good enough.

“The ruling says that there is no way to know whether the defendant was the P2P user or not, because an IP address only identifies the person who subscribed to the Internet connection, not the user who made use of the connection at a certain moment,” copyright lawyer David Bravo tells TorrentFreak.

“A relative or a guest could have been using the network, or even someone accessing the wifi if it was open,” he adds.

In addition, the Judge agreed with the defense that there is no evidence that the defendant actively made the movie available. This generally requires a form of intent. However, BitTorrent clients automatically share files with others, whether it’s the intention of the user or not.

“The upload of the data from the P2P programs occurs automatically by the program configuration itself. […] This occurs by default without requiring the knowledge or intention of the user,” Judge Malagón Ruiz writes in his verdict, quoted by Genbeta.

In other words, these BitTorrent transfers are not necessarily an act of public communication, therefore, they are not infringing any copyrights.

The case provides hope for other accused file-sharers who are looking to have their cases dismissed as well. Not in the last place because the defense was coordinated online, without active involvement of a lawyer.

Bravo, together with two colleague lawyers, offered self-help forms to accused file-sharers free of charge. Defendants could use these to mount a proper defense, which paid off in this case.

“This ruling sets a precedent,” Bravo tells TorrentFreak, noting that it’s a clear setback for the copyright holders who are involved in these mass file-sharing lawsuits.

While the lawyer cautions that other courts may come to a different conclusion, it appears that Dallas Buyers Club and other copyright trolls will meet some fierce ‘p2p coordinated’ resistance in Spain.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN discounts, offers and coupons

Piracy ‘Fines’ Awareness Causes 13% of Pirates to Stop Pirating, Study Finds

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/piracy-fines-awareness-cause-13-of-pirates-to-stop-pirating-study-finds-171105/

Figuring out what to do about the online piracy problem is an ongoing puzzle for rightsholders everywhere. What they’re all agreed upon, however, is the need to educate the public.

Various approaches have been deployed, from ISP-based ‘education’ notices through to the current practice of painting pirate sites as havens for viruses and malware. The other approach, of course, has been to threaten to sue pirates in an effort to make them change their ways.

These threats have traditionally been deployed by so-called copyright trolls – companies and groups who have the sole intention of extracting cash payments from pirates in order to generate an additional revenue stream. At the same time, many insist that their programs are also designed to reduce piracy via word of mouth.

While that might be true in some cases, there’s little proof that the approach works. However, a new study carried out on behalf of the Copyright Information and Anti-Piracy Center (CIAPC) in Finland suggests that they may have had some effect.

The survey was carried out between 11 September 2017 and 10 October 2017 among people aged 15 to 79-years-old. In total, 1001 people were interviewed, 77% of whom said they’d never used pirate services.

Of all people interviewed, 43% said they’d heard about copyright holders sending settlement letters to Internet users, although awareness rates were higher (between 51% and 55%) among people aged between 25 and 49-years-old. Predictably, awareness jumped to 70% among users of pirate services and it’s these individuals that produced some of the study’s most interesting findings.

Of the pirates who said they were aware of settlement letters being sent out, 13% reported that they’d terminated their use of pirate services as a result. A slightly higher figure, 14%, said they’d reduced their use of unauthorized content.

Perhaps surprisingly (given that they aren’t likely to receive a letter), the study also found that 17% of people who listen to or play content on illegal online services (implication: streaming) stopped doing so, with 13% cutting down on the practice.

“According to the Economic Research Survey, these two groups of respondents are partly overlapping, but it can still be said that the settlement letters have had a decisive impact on the use of pirated services,” CIAPC reports.

The study also found support for copyright holders looking to unmask alleged Internet pirates by compelling their ISPs to do so in court.

“The survey found that 65 percent of the population is fully or partly in favor of rightsholders being allowed to find out who has infringed their rights anonymously on the Internet,” the group adds.

Overall, just 17% of respondents said that rightsholders shouldn’t be able to find out people’s identities. Unsurprisingly, young pirates objected more than the others, with 35% of 25 to 49-year-old pirates coming out against disclosure. That being said, this figure suggests that 65% of pirates in this group are in favor of pirates being unmasked. That appears counter-intuitive, to say the least.

Speaking with TorrentFreak, Pirate Party vice council member of Espoo City Janne Paalijärvi says that study seems to have omitted to consider the effects of legal alternatives on pirate consumption.

“The analysis seemingly forgets to fully take into account the prevalence of legal streaming services such as Netflix,” Paalijärvi says.

“Legitimate, reasonably-priced and easy-to-use delivery platforms are the number one weapon against piracy. Not bullying your audience with copyright extortion letters. The latter approach creates unwanted hostility between artists and customers. It also increases the demand for political parties wanting to balance copyright legislation.”

Overall, however, Finland doesn’t appear to have a serious problem with piracy, at least as far as public perceptions go. According to the study, only 5% of citizens believe that unauthorized file-sharing is acceptable. The figure for 2016 was 7%.

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

Welcome Carlo!

Post Syndicated from Yev original https://www.backblaze.com/blog/welcome-carlo/

Welcome Carlo!
As Backblaze continues to grow, we need to keep our web experience on point, so we put out a call for creative folks that can help us make the Backblaze experience all that it can be. We found Carlo! He’s a frontend web developer who used to work at Sea World. Lets learn a bit more about Carlo, shall we?

What is your Backblaze Title?
Senior Frontend Developer

Where are you originally from? 
I grew up in San Diego, California.

What attracted you to Backblaze?
I am excited that frontend architecture is approaching parity with the rest of the web services software development ecosystem. Most of my experience has been full stack development, but I have recently started focusing on the front end. Backblaze shares my goal of having a first class user experience using frameworks like React.

What do you expect to learn while being at Backblaze?
I’m interested in building solutions that help customers visualize and work with their data intuitively and efficiently.

Where else have you worked?
GoPro, Sungevity, and Sea World.

What’s your dream job?
Hip Hop dressage choreographer.

Favorite place you’ve traveled? 
The Arctic in Northern Finland, in a train in a boat sailing the gap between Germany and Denmark, and Vieques PR.

Favorite hobby?
Sketching, writing, and dressing up my hairless dogs.

Of what achievement are you most proud?
It’s either helping release a large SOA site, or orchestrating a Morrissey cover band flash mob #squadgoals. OK, maybe one those things didn’t happen…

Star Trek or Star Wars?
Interstellar!

Favorite food?
Mexican food.

Coke or Pepsi?
Ginger beer.

Why do you like certain things? 
Things that I like bring me joy a la Marie Kondo.

Anything else you’d like you’d like to tell us?
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Wow, hip hop dressage choreographer — that is amazing. Welcome aboard Carlo!

The post Welcome Carlo! appeared first on Backblaze Blog | Cloud Storage & Cloud Backup.

Trolls Want to Seize Alleged Movie Pirates’ Computers

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/trolls-want-to-seize-alleged-movie-pirates-computers-171101/

Five years ago, a massive controversy swept Finland. Local anti-piracy group CIAPC (known locally as TTVK) sent a letter to a man they accused of illegal file-sharing.

The documents advised the man to pay a settlement of 600 euros and sign a non-disclosure document, to make a threatened file-sharing lawsuit disappear. He made the decision not to cave in.

Then, in November 2012, there was an 8am call at the man’s door. Police, armed with a search warrant, said they were there to find evidence of illicit file-sharing. Eventually the culprit was found. It was the man’s 9-year-old daughter who had downloaded an album by local multi-platinum-selling songstress Chisu from The Pirate Bay, a whole year earlier.

Police went on to seize the child’s Winnie the Pooh-branded laptop and Chisu was horrified, posting public apologies on the Internet to her young fans. Five years on, it seems that pro-copyright forces in Finland are treading the same path.

Turre Legal, a law firm involved in defending file-sharing matters, has issued a warning that copyright trolls have filed eight new cases at the Market Court, the venue for previous copyright battles in the country.

“According to information provided by the Market Court, Crystalis Entertainment, previously active in such cases, filed three new copyright cases and initiated five pre-trial applications in October 2017,” says lawyer Herkko Hietanen.

The involvement of Crystalis Entertainment adds further controversy into the mix. The company isn’t an official movie distributor but obtained the rights to distribute content on BitTorrent networks instead. It doesn’t do so officially, instead preferring to bring prosecutions against file-sharers’ instead.

Like the earlier ‘Chisu’ case, the trolls’ law firms have moved extremely slowly. Hietanen reports that some of the new cases reference alleged file-sharing that took place two years ago in 2015.

“It would seem that right-holders want to show that even old cases may have to face justice,” says Hietanen.

“However, applications for enforceability may be a pre-requisite for computer confiscation by a bailiff for independent investigations. It is possible that seizures of the teddy bears of the past years will make a comeback,” he added, referencing the ‘Chisu’ case.

Part of the reason behind the seizure requests is that some people defending against copyright trolls have been obtaining reports from technical experts who have verified that no file-sharing software is present on their machines. The trolls say that this is a somewhat futile exercise since any ‘clean’ machine can be presented for inspection. On this basis, seizure on site is a better option.

While the moves for seizure are somewhat aggressive, things haven’t been getting easier for copyright trolls in Finland recently.

In February 2017, an alleged file-sharer won his case when a court ruled that copyright holders lacked sufficient evidence to show that the person in question downloaded the files, in part because his Wi-Fi network was open to the public

Then, in the summer of 2017, the Market Court tightened the parameters under which Internet service providers are compelled to hand over the identities of suspected file-sharers to copyright owners.

The Court determined that this could only happen in serious cases of unlawful distribution. This, Hietanen believes, is partially the reason that the groups behind the latest cases are digging up old infringements.

“After the verdict of the summer, I assumed that rightsholders would have to operate with old information, at least for a while,” he says. “Rightsholders want to show that litigation is still possible.”

The big question, of course, is what people should do if they receive a settlement letter. In some jurisdictions, the advice is to ignore, until proper legal documentation arrives.

Hietanen says the matter in Finland is serious and should be treated as such. There’s always a possibility that after failing to receive a response, a copyright holder could go to court to obtain a default judgment, meaning the alleged file-sharer is immediately found guilty.

In the current cases, the Market Court will now have to decide whether unannounced seizures are required to preserve evidence. For cases already dating back two years, there will be plenty of discussions to be had, for and against. But in the meantime, Hedman Partners, the company representing the copyright trolls, warn that more cases are on the way.

“We have put in place new requests for information after the summer. We have a large number of complaints in preparation. More are coming,” lawyer Joni Hatanmaa says.

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

Amazon Redshift Dense Compute (DC2) Nodes Deliver Twice the Performance as DC1 at the Same Price

Post Syndicated from Quaseer Mujawar original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/big-data/amazon-redshift-dense-compute-dc2-nodes-deliver-twice-the-performance-as-dc1-at-the-same-price/

Amazon Redshift makes analyzing exabyte-scale data fast, simple, and cost-effective. It delivers advanced data warehousing capabilities, including parallel execution, compressed columnar storage, and end-to-end encryption as a fully managed service, for less than $1,000/TB/year. With Amazon Redshift Spectrum, you can run SQL queries directly against exabytes of unstructured data in Amazon S3 for $5/TB scanned.

Today, we are making our Dense Compute (DC) family faster and more cost-effective with new second-generation Dense Compute (DC2) nodes at the same price as our previous generation DC1. DC2 is designed for demanding data warehousing workloads that require low latency and high throughput. DC2 features powerful Intel E5-2686 v4 (Broadwell) CPUs, fast DDR4 memory, and NVMe-based solid state disks.

We’ve tuned Amazon Redshift to take advantage of the better CPU, network, and disk on DC2 nodes, providing up to twice the performance of DC1 at the same price. Our DC2.8xlarge instances now provide twice the memory per slice of data and an optimized storage layout with 30 percent better storage utilization.

Customer successes

Several flagship customers, ranging from fast growing startups to large Fortune 100 companies, previewed the new DC2 node type. In their tests, DC2 provided up to twice the performance as DC1. Our preview customers saw faster ETL (extract, transform, and load) jobs, higher query throughput, better concurrency, faster reports, and shorter data-to-insights—all at the same cost as DC1. DC2.8xlarge customers also noted that their databases used up to 30 percent less disk space due to our optimized storage format, reducing their costs.

4Cite Marketing, one of America’s fastest growing private companies, uses Amazon Redshift to analyze customer data and determine personalized product recommendations for retailers. “Amazon Redshift’s new DC2 node is giving us a 100 percent performance increase, allowing us to provide faster insights for our retailers, more cost-effectively, to drive incremental revenue,” said Jim Finnerty, 4Cite’s senior vice president of product.

BrandVerity, a Seattle-based brand protection and compliance‎ company, provides solutions to monitor, detect, and mitigate online brand, trademark, and compliance abuse. “We saw a 70 percent performance boost with the DC2 nodes for running Redshift Spectrum queries. As a result, we can analyze far more data for our customers and deliver results much faster,” said Hyung-Joon Kim, principal software engineer at BrandVerity.

“Amazon Redshift is at the core of our operations and our marketing automation tools,” said Jarno Kartela, head of analytics and chief data scientist at DNA Plc, one of the leading Finnish telecommunications groups and Finland’s largest cable operator and pay TV provider. “We saw a 52 percent performance gain in moving to Amazon Redshift’s DC2 nodes. We can now run queries in half the time, allowing us to provide more analytics power and reduce time-to-insight for our analytics and marketing automation users.”

You can read about their experiences on our Customer Success page.

Get started

You can try the new node type using our getting started guide. Just choose dc2.large or dc2.8xlarge in the Amazon Redshift console:

If you have a DC1.large Amazon Redshift cluster, you can restore to a new DC2.large cluster using an existing snapshot. To migrate from DS2.xlarge, DS2.8xlarge, or DC1.8xlarge Amazon Redshift clusters, you can use the resize operation to move data to your new DC2 cluster. For more information, see Clusters and Nodes in Amazon Redshift.

To get the latest Amazon Redshift feature announcements, check out our What’s New page, and subscribe to the RSS feed.

ЕСПЧ: твърдения за факти и отговорната журналистика

Post Syndicated from nellyo original https://nellyo.wordpress.com/2017/09/21/echr_journ/

В решение по делото Halldorsson v. Iceland   Европейският съд по правата на човека (ЕКПЧ) заявява, че журналист, отговорен за телевизионна новина, която засяга доброто име на идентифицируемо публично лице, трябва да може да докаже, че е действал добросъвестно, що се отнася до точността на твърденията в новината. Журналистът не може да се позовава на тайна на източниците на информация, когато не може да представи доказателства за сериозни обвинения. И в по-ранни решения ЕСПЧ вече е посочвал, че правата на журналистите могат да ползват тези, които действат добросъвестно и според стандартите на отговорната журналистика (вж Pentikainen v Finland).

Жалбоподателят е журналист, работещ в новинарската редакция на Исландската национална телевизия (RUV). Телевизията  излъчва серия от новинарски предавания за сделка  от около 20 милиона евро между исландско дружество и компания   в Панама. Съобщава се, че са замесени трима исландски бизнесмени (A, B и C). Показани са техни снимки заедно с текст  „разследва се”, придружен от съобщението, че властите разследват случая. В друга новина  снимки на А, Б и С са показани над карта на света, като купчинка пари се прехвърлят визуално върху снимките на мъжете, като се споменава, че парите са в “джобовете на тройката”. Обобщение на съдържанието на излъчваните новинарски материали е публикувано и на интернет страницата на RUV. След излъчването на новините единият от засегнатите А   отрича всяка връзка с предполагаемата заподозряна сделка.  По-късно А подава дело срещу клевета срещу Свавар Халдорсон,  автор на новините.    Халдорсон е осъден да заплати на А около 2,600 евро като обезщетение за неимуществени вреди.

Пред Европейския съд по правата на човека Халдорсон поддържа, че изявленията в новините не са  засегнали  А,    не са клеветнически и не се твърди, че А е виновен за финансово престъпление или други действия, наказуеми от закона.
Стандартите

В съответствие с констатациите на националните съдилища ЕСПЧ потвърждава, че новините действително съдържат сериозно обвинение за незаконни и престъпни деяния; следователно ЕСПЧ е на мнение, че спорът изисква проучване на справедливото равновесие между правото на зачитане на личния живот и правото на свобода на изразяване

Принципите, които се отнасят до въпроса дали “в демократичното общество е необходима намеса в свободата на изразяване”, са добре установени в практиката на Съда (вж Delfi AS срещу Естония). [37].

Съдът е постановил, че доброто име  на дадено лице, дори ако е критикувано в рамките на обществен дебат, е част от неговата лична самоличност и психологическа неприкосновеност и следователно попада в приложното поле на неговия “личен живот” “. За да влезе в действие член 8, атаката срещу личната чест и доброто име  трябва да е достигнала определено ниво на сериозност.  [38].

Тъй като многократно е трябвало да разглежда спорове, изискващи проверка на справедливото равновесие между правото на зачитане на личния живот и правото на свобода на изразяване, Съдът е разработил общи принципи, произтичащи от богата съдебна практика в тази  област. [39].

Критериите, които са от значение за балансирането на правото на свобода на изразяване срещу правото на зачитане на личния живот, са inter alia: приносът към дебатите от общ интерес; колко добре е известно заинтересованото лице и какъв е предметът на публикацията; предишното му поведение; метода за получаване на информацията и нейната достоверност; съдържанието, формата и последствията от публикацията; строгостта на наложената санкция (вж. например Axel Springer AG срещу Германия и Von Hannover срещу Германия (№ 2 ).

Накрая, Съдът напомня, че в зоната на преценка на националните власти   са необходими сериозни мотиви, за да не се приеме  становището на националните съдилища.   [40].

Решението

ЕСПЧ е съгласен, че А трябва да се смята за публична фигура и че предметът на спорните новинарски материали е въпрос от обществен интерес.

Съдът потвърждава   заключенията на Върховния съд на Исландия, че Халдорсон не е действал добросъвестно. Не е потърсил информация от А, докато подготвя новината. ЕСПЧ отново заявява, че защитата, предоставена от член 10 от ЕКПЧ на журналистите по отношение на докладването по въпроси от общ интерес, зависи от условието те да действат добросъвестно и на точна фактическа основа и да предоставят  надеждна и точна  информация в съответствие с етиката на журналистиката.

Съдът посочва, че не намира  основания журналистът да се отклони от   задължението си  да проверява фактическите изявления, които засягат доброто име.

Отхвърлени са аргументите на Халдорсон, които се отнасят до правото  да запази поверителните си източници и документацията, послужили за изготвяне на новините. ЕСПЧ потвърждава, че защитата на журналистическите източници е едно от основните условия за свободата на медиите, липсата на защита ги демотивира да оказват помощ на пресата при информирането на обществеността по въпроси от обществено значение.   ЕСПЧ пояснява обаче, че  простото позоваване на защитата на източниците не може да освободи журналист от задължението да докаже достоверността на твърденията, или да има достатъчно основания за сериозни обвинения от фактически характер – задължение, което може да бъде изпълнено, без непременно да се налага да се разкриват източниците.[51]

И накрая, ЕСПЧ не смята, че финансовата компенсация и изплащането на разноските по вътрешното производство са прекомерни или  с възспиращ ефект  върху упражняването на свободата на медиите. Според Съда потенциалното въздействие на медията е важен фактор при отчитането на пропорционалността на намесата. В това отношение ЕСПЧ напомня становището си, че аудиовизуалните медии имат по-непосредствен и мощен ефект от печатните медии.

Върховният съд на Исландия е уравновесил правото на свобода на изразяване с правото на зачитане на личния живот, взел е предвид критериите, определени в съдебната практика на ЕСПЧ,  действал е в рамките на предоставената му преценка и е постигнал разумен баланс между наложените мерки, ограничаващи правото на свобода на изразяване.

 

Поради това ЕКПЧ заключава с единодушие, че не е налице нарушение на чл. 10 от ЕКПЧ.

 

 

Filed under: Media Law Tagged: еспч

ЕС: реформата на авторското право среща съпротива

Post Syndicated from nellyo original https://nellyo.wordpress.com/2017/09/14/eu_copyright_reform/

IP Watch следи хода на реформата на авторското право в Европейския съюз.

Реакцията на интернет компаниите срещу някои от предложенията е ясна и разбираема, както е разбираемо и  – симетрично – желанието на носителите на права за още контрол по отношение на платформите.

Известно е и мнението на академичните среди и експерти, очертаващо аргументирано проблемите в предложения проект.

В публикация от тази седмица се отбелязва позицията на   държави от ЕС  срещу проекта, в частност по въпроса за наблюдението на входа:  дали мониторингът при ъплоуд нарушава правата на човека? Цитира се документ, според който Белгия, Чехия, Финландия, Холандия и др. настояват Правната служба на Съвета да прецени дали член 13, разпоредбата за наблюдение при ъплоуд,  съответства на Хартата за основните права  и Директивата за електронната търговия в светлината на решенията на Съда на ЕС.

 Written questions from the authorities of Belgium, Czech Republic, Finland, Hungary, Ireland and the Netherlands to the Council Legal Service regarding Article 13 and Recital 38 of the proposal for a Directive on copyright in the digital single market (от сайта на Statewatch)

 

Ето началото на въпросите:

Член 13 от предложението на Комисията за директива относно авторското право в единния цифров пазар налага задължение на някои платформи за активно предотвратяване на качването от потребители на съдържание, което съдържа защитени произведения или предмет, които притежателите на права искат да блокират. Това може да се постигне само чрез използване на технологията за идентифициране и филтриране.
Същевременно Комисията заявява, че ще поддържа съществуващите принципи на електронната търговия в Директива 2001/29 / ЕО.

Предварителната идентификация и филтриране преди етапа на качване на съдържанието ще се осъществи автоматично, когато идентификационната технология намери съвпадение с дадено произведение или защитен предмет. Този процес ще се прилага за голямо разнообразие от онлайн услуги и платформи, използвани от европейските граждани, за да качват съдържание в интернет. На практика това би станало независимо от факта, че потребителят може да се възползва от изключение от авторското право.

Освен това установената съдебна практика на Съда на ЕС подчертава конфликта между мониторинга и основни права като защита на личните данни и право на стопанска дейност. В решението по делото Sabam / Netlog, Съдът на ЕС отказа да наложи задължение за систематичен мониторинг върху съдържанието на основание чл. 8, 11 и 16 от Хартата на основните права на ЕС.

Въпрос:
Дали мярка / задължение, както се предлага съгласно член 13, би била съвместима с Хартата (и по-специално член 11 – свободата на изразяване и информация, член 8 – Защита на личните данни – и член 16 – Свобода на стопанска дейност) в светлината на юриспруденцията на Съда на ЕС, която има за цел да осигури справедлив баланс при прилагането на конкуренцията на основни права?
Дали предложените мерки са оправдани и пропорционални?

*

Междувременно Естония –  като държава, председателстваща   Съвета на ЕС – е изпратила компромисен текст до държавите, запазващ идеите за наблюдение на входа. Въпреки режима на Директивата за електронната търговия се предвижда платформите и потребителите да носят отговорност за нарушения на авторските права.

Proposal for a a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on copyright in the Digital Single Market – Presidency compromise proposal regarding Articles 1, 2 and 10 to 16 (от сайта на Statewatch)

Освен разпоредбата на чл.13, спорна остава и разпоредбата на чл.11 от проекта  относно издателските права.

Ако се анализира каква беше перспективата през 2015 г., когато ЕП одобри доклада на Юлия Реда – и каква е  перспективата сега, на прага на приемането на ревизията, ще се види какъв шанс за адекватна уредба е все по-вероятно да бъде пропуснат.

 

Filed under: Digital, EU Law, Media Law

ЕСПЧ: висока степен на защита на свободата на словото при отразяване на съдебната система

Post Syndicated from nellyo original https://nellyo.wordpress.com/2017/09/13/echr_10/

Още едно решение на Съда за правата на човека, в което се обсъжда критичната функция на медиите по отношение на лица от съдебната система. И отново тази предметна област е подчертана като област, представляваща значителен обществен интерес.

*

В решението   по делото Tavares de Almeida Fernandes and Almeida Fernandes v. Portugal  ЕСПЧ констатира нарушение на чл.10 – свобода на изразяване.

В началото са припомнени общи принципи, които Съдът прилага при решенията по чл.10 ЕКПЧ, като се казва [53-59], че

  • Общите принципи за преценка дали намесата в упражняването на правото на свобода на изразяване е “необходима в едно демократично общество” по смисъла на член 10 § 2 от Конвенцията са добре установени в съдебната практика на Съда. Наскоро те бяха обобщени в решенията по дела Bédat v Switzerland   (2016 г.) и Pentikäinen v. Finland [GC] ( 2015 г. ).
  • Журналистическата свобода   обхваща евентуално преувеличаване или дори провокация (вж. Prager и Oberschlick).
  • Чл.10 няма указания за ограничаване на политическото слово или за дебатите по въпроси от обществен интерес (виж Morice  v France 2015 г., с по-нататъшни препратки). Висока степен на защита на свободата на изразяване  обикновено се предоставя, когато се засяга въпрос от обществен интерес, какъвто е случаят по-специално с функционирането на съдебната система (пак там).
  • Съдът   винаги е правил разграничение между твърдения за факти, от една страна,  и оценки. Съществуването на факти може да се докаже, истинността на оценките  – не. Ако обаче дадено твърдение представлява оценка, пропорционалността на намесата зависи от това дали има достатъчна  фактическа основа  за оспорваното твърдение: ако не, тази оценка може да се окаже прекомерна (вж. Lindon, Otchakovsky- Laurens и др. срещу Франция).
  • Защитата, предоставена от член 10 на журналисти във връзка с  въпроси от обществен интерес, е подчинена на условието те да действат добросъвестно и  да предоставят точна и надеждна информация в съответствие с етиката на журналистиката ( виж Божков срещу България 2011 г.). В ситуации, в които има твърдение за факт без достатъчно доказателства  – но журналистът обсъжда въпрос от истински обществен интерес – се проверява дали журналистът е действал професионално и добросъвестно (Касабова срещу България).
  •  Съдът  проверява дали  е постигнат справедлив баланс между защитата на свободата на изразяване  и защитата на доброто име на засегнатите лица. В два съвсем неотдавнашни случая ЕСПЧ продължи да определя  критерии, които трябва да бъдат взети предвид, когато правото на свобода на изразяване се балансира спрямо правото на зачитане на личния живот (Axel Springer AG v Germany  и Von Hannover v Germany (№ 2).
  •  На последно място, естеството и тежестта на наложените санкции са също фактори, които трябва да бъдат взети предвид при оценката на пропорционалността на намесата. Както вече изтъква Съдът, намесата в свободата на изразяване може да има смразяващ ефект върху упражняването на тази свобода (вж. Morice ).
  • Накрая  Съдът напомня, че  взема предвид обстоятелствата и цялостния контекст, в който са били направени съответните изявления (вж.  Morice,  § 162).

Случаят:

португалски журналист пише редакционна статия, озаглавена “Стратегията на паяка”, в която дава мнението си за избора на съдия  на поста председател на Върховния съд.Той е осъден да плати неимуществени вреди за  нарушаване  на доброто име на съдията – постъпка “с отрицателно въздействие върху личната сфера, включително   семейния и професионалния кръг на ищеца”.

Въпросът е в центъра на оживени дебати в Португалия, което националните съдилища пропускат да вземат предвид.  Няма съмнение, че към този въпрос има значителен обществен интерес. Съдът отбелязва изрично, че функционирането на съдебната система,  която е от съществено значение за всяко демократично общество,  е въпрос от обществен интерес (пак там, § 128). Лицата, които са избрани да представляват различните институции в съдебната система, също представляват значителен интерес. Следователно  ограниченията на свободата на изразяване в тази сфера трябва да се тълкуват стриктно.

Според решението вече е добре установено в практиката на Съда, че членовете на съдебната власт, които действат в качеството си на длъжностни лица, могат да бъдат подложени  на  критика в по-широки граници в сравнение с   обикновените граждани (виж  SARL Libération  § 74 , ЕКПЧ 2008). В същото време Съдът многократно подчертава особената роля   на съдебната власт, която като гарант на справедливостта е фундаментална ценност в държава, ръководена от върховенството на закона. Може да се окаже необходимо съдебната власт да бъде защитавана срещу разрушителните атаки, когато са необосновани.

Португалските съдилища приемат, че личният интерес на ищеца за защитата на репутацията му надхвърля правото  на свобода на изразяване. Те намират, inter alia, че някои твърдения в статията  са  прекомерни, надхвърлят границите на приемливата критика и правото на информиране и представляват атака срещу правата на личността на новия председател на ВС.

Според ЕСПЧ:

На първо място  Съдът отбелязва, че тези изявления представляват оценки, при това с достатъчна фактическа основа.

На второ място Съдът приема, че националните съдилища не са коментирали метафоричния тон на оспорваните твърдения и не е обсъдено съдържанието и смисъла им. Те като че ли са разглеждали твърденията изолирано от останалата част от статията. За ЕСПЧ твърденията остават в рамките на допустимите критики и преувеличения. Португалските  съдилища не обясняват в достатъчна степен как журналистът е надхвърлил правото си на критика и защо правото му да изразява своето мнение е трябвало да бъде ограничено.

На последно място, що се отнася до наложеното наказание, Съдът подчертава, че съгласно Конвенцията присъждането на обезщетение   за обида или клевета трябва да е разумно  пропорционално на претърпяната вреда.

В заключение: Съдът не намира,   че намесата “е необходима в едно демократично общество”. Според ЕСПЧ португалските съдилища са превишили предоставената им свобода на преценка по отношение на възможното ограничаване на дебатите от обществен интерес.

Нарушение на член 10 от Конвенцията.

Filed under: Media Law Tagged: еспч

Mandatory Piracy Filters Could Breach Human Rights, EU Members Warn

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/mandatory-piracy-filters-could-breach-human-rights-eu-members-170906/

Last year, the European Commission published its long-awaited proposal to modernize EU copyright law. Among other things, it will require online services to do more to fight piracy.

Specifically, Article 13 of the proposed Copyright Directive requires online services to monitor and filter pirated content, in collaboration with rightsholders.

This means that online services, which deal with large volumes of user-uploaded content, must use fingerprinting or other detection mechanisms to block copyright infringing files, similar to YouTube’s Content-ID system.

The Commission stressed that the changes are needed to support copyright holders. However, many legal scholars, digital activists, and members of the public worry that they will violate the rights of regular Internet users.

They believe that mandatory filters ignore established case law and human rights. This critique is now, in part, backed up by questions from several EU member states.

Authorities in Belgium, Czech Republic, Finland, Hungary, Ireland and the Netherlands have recently sent a series of questions to the Council Legal Service, requesting clarification on several issues.

The document (pdf), published by Statewatch, asks whether a mandatory piracy filter is proportionate and compatible with existing law.

“Would the standalone measure/ obligation as currently proposed under Article 13 be compatible with the Charter of Human Rights […] in the light of the jurisprudence of the CJEU that aims to secure a fair balance in the application of competing fundamental rights?

“Are the proposed measures justified and proportionate?” the member states add.

Specifically, the member states suggest that the filters may hinder people’s right to freedom of expression and information, the right to protection of personal data, and freedom to conduct a business.

One of the problems is that such filters work by monitoring the communications of all citizens uploading to platforms, which would go against existing EU law. In the Sabam v Netlog case, the European Court of Justice ruled that hosting sites can’t be forced to filter copyrighted content, as this would violate the privacy of users and hinder freedom of information.

The letter, which was sent on July 25, also stresses that important copyright exceptions, such as parody and the right to quote, are not taken into account.

“The [Commission’s] proposal does not provide for appropriate measures that would enable these users to actually benefit from public interest copyright exceptions. It is important to point out that certain exceptions to copyright, such as e.g. parody or the quotation right are the embodiment in copyright of fundamental rights other than the right to property.”

This is not the first time that member states have responded critically to the proposal. Tweakers notes that the Dutch Government previously stressed that there should be a better balance between the rights of consumers and copyright holders.

The recent letter from the six member states backs up many of the questions that have been asked by activists, scholars and members of the public, including the “Save the Meme” campaign. These critics hope that the proposal will be changed substantially, ideally without mandatory piracy filters, when it’s voted on in the EU Parliament.

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

AWS Hot Startups – August 2017

Post Syndicated from Tina Barr original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/aws-hot-startups-august-2017/

There’s no doubt about it – Artificial Intelligence is changing the world and how it operates. Across industries, organizations from startups to Fortune 500s are embracing AI to develop new products, services, and opportunities that are more efficient and accessible for their consumers. From driverless cars to better preventative healthcare to smart home devices, AI is driving innovation at a fast rate and will continue to play a more important role in our everyday lives.

This month we’d like to highlight startups using AI solutions to help companies grow. We are pleased to feature:

  • SignalBox – a simple and accessible deep learning platform to help businesses get started with AI.
  • Valossa – an AI video recognition platform for the media and entertainment industry.
  • Kaliber – innovative applications for businesses using facial recognition, deep learning, and big data.

SignalBox (UK)

In 2016, SignalBox founder Alain Richardt was hearing the same comments being made by developers, data scientists, and business leaders. They wanted to get into deep learning but didn’t know where to start. Alain saw an opportunity to commodify and apply deep learning by providing a platform that does the heavy lifting with an easy-to-use web interface, blueprints for common tasks, and just a single-click to productize the models. With SignalBox, companies can start building deep learning models with no coding at all – they just select a data set, choose a network architecture, and go. SignalBox also offers step-by-step tutorials, tips and tricks from industry experts, and consulting services for customers that want an end-to-end AI solution.

SignalBox offers a variety of solutions that are being used across many industries for energy modeling, fraud detection, customer segmentation, insurance risk modeling, inventory prediction, real estate prediction, and more. Existing data science teams are using SignalBox to accelerate their innovation cycle. One innovative UK startup, Energi Mine, recently worked with SignalBox to develop deep networks that predict anomalous energy consumption patterns and do time series predictions on energy usage for businesses with hundreds of sites.

SignalBox uses a variety of AWS services including Amazon EC2, Amazon VPC, Amazon Elastic Block Store, and Amazon S3. The ability to rapidly provision EC2 GPU instances has been a critical factor in their success – both in terms of keeping their operational expenses low, as well as speed to market. The Amazon API Gateway has allowed for operational automation, giving SignalBox the ability to control its infrastructure.

To learn more about SignalBox, visit here.

Valossa (Finland)

As students at the University of Oulu in Finland, the Valossa founders spent years doing research in the computer science and AI labs. During that time, the team witnessed how the world was moving beyond text, with video playing a greater role in day-to-day communication. This spawned an idea to use technology to automatically understand what an audience is viewing and share that information with a global network of content producers. Since 2015, Valossa has been building next generation AI applications to benefit the media and entertainment industry and is moving beyond the capabilities of traditional visual recognition systems.

Valossa’s AI is capable of analyzing any video stream. The AI studies a vast array of data within videos and converts that information into descriptive tags, categories, and overviews automatically. Basically, it sees, hears, and understands videos like a human does. The Valossa AI can detect people, visual and auditory concepts, key speech elements, and labels explicit content to make moderating and filtering content simpler. Valossa’s solutions are designed to provide value for the content production workflow, from media asset management to end-user applications for content discovery. AI-annotated content allows online viewers to jump directly to their favorite scenes or search specific topics and actors within a video.

Valossa leverages AWS to deliver the industry’s first complete AI video recognition platform. Using Amazon EC2 GPU instances, Valossa can easily scale their computation capacity based on customer activity. High-volume video processing with GPU instances provides the necessary speed for time-sensitive workflows. The geo-located Availability Zones in EC2 allow Valossa to bring resources close to their customers to minimize network delays. Valossa also uses Amazon S3 for video ingestion and to provide end-user video analytics, which makes managing and accessing media data easy and highly scalable.

To see how Valossa works, check out www.WhatIsMyMovie.com or enable the Alexa Skill, Valossa Movie Finder. To try the Valossa AI, sign up for free at www.valossa.com.

Kaliber (San Francisco, CA)

Serial entrepreneurs Ray Rahman and Risto Haukioja founded Kaliber in 2016. The pair had previously worked in startups building smart cities and online privacy tools, and teamed up to bring AI to the workplace and change the hospitality industry. Our world is designed to appeal to our senses – stores and warehouses have clearly marked aisles, products are colorfully packaged, and we use these designs to differentiate one thing from another. We tell each other apart by our faces, and previously that was something only humans could measure or act upon. Kaliber is using facial recognition, deep learning, and big data to create solutions for business use. Markets and companies that aren’t typically associated with cutting-edge technology will be able to use their existing camera infrastructure in a whole new way, making them more efficient and better able to serve their customers.

Computer video processing is rapidly expanding, and Kaliber believes that video recognition will extend to far more than security cameras and robots. Using the clients’ network of in-house cameras, Kaliber’s platform extracts key data points and maps them to actionable insights using their machine learning (ML) algorithm. Dashboards connect users to the client’s BI tools via the Kaliber enterprise APIs, and managers can view these analytics to improve their real-world processes, taking immediate corrective action with real-time alerts. Kaliber’s Real Metrics are aimed at combining the power of image recognition with ML to ultimately provide a more meaningful experience for all.

Kaliber uses many AWS services, including Amazon Rekognition, Amazon Kinesis, AWS Lambda, Amazon EC2 GPU instances, and Amazon S3. These services have been instrumental in helping Kaliber meet the needs of enterprise customers in record time.

Learn more about Kaliber here.

Thanks for reading and we’ll see you next month!

-Tina

 

Pirate Bay Founders Ordered to Pay Music Labels $477,000

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-founders-ordered-to-pay-music-labels-477000-170823/

In November 2011, the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), with support from Finnish anti-piracy group Copyright Information and Anti-Piracy Center (CIAPC), filed a lawsuit in the Helsinki District Court against The Pirate Bay.

IFPI, which represents the world’s major labels, demanded that the site’s operators stop facilitating the unauthorized distribution of music and pay compensation to IFPI and CIAPC-affiliated rightsholders for the damages caused through their website.

Progress in the case has been somewhat glacial but this morning, almost six years after the complaint was first filed, a decision was handed down.

Fredrik Neij and Gottfrid Svartholm, two founder members of the site, were ordered by the District Court to cease-and-desist the illegal operations of The Pirate Bay. They were also ordered to jointly and severally pay compensation to IFPI record labels to the tune of 405,000 euros ($477,000).

The Court was reportedly unable to contact Neij (aka TiAMO) or Svartholm (aka Anakata) in connection with the case. With no response received from the defendants by the deadline, the Court heard the case in their absence, handing a default judgment to the plaintiffs.

Last year a similar verdict was handed down by the Helsinki District Court to Pirate Bay co-founder Peter Sunde.

Sony Music Entertainment Finland, Universal Music, Warner Music, and EMI Finland sued Sunde claiming that the music of 60 of their artists has been shared illegally through The Pirate Bay.

Sunde was also found liable in his absence and ordered to pay the major labels around 350,000 euros ($412,000) in damages and 55,000 euros ($65,000) in costs. He later announced plans to sue the labels for defamation.

“I’m a public person in Finland and they’re calling me a criminal when they KNOW I’m not involved in what they’re suing me for,” Sunde told TorrentFreak at the time. “It’s defamation.”

Fredrik Neij, Gottfrid Svartholm, and Peter Sunde all owe large sums of money to copyright holders following decisions relating to The Pirate Bay dating back at least eight years. In all cases, the plaintiffs have recovered nothing so the latest judgment only seems likely to add to the growing list of unpaid bills.

Meanwhile, The Pirate Bay sails on, seemingly oblivious to the news.

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

Surge of Threatening Piracy Letters Concerns Finnish Authorities

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/massive-surge-in-threatening-piracy-letters-concerns-finnish-authorities-170726/

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.

In a country with a population of just over five million, copyright holders have cast their net wide. According to local reports, Internet providers handed over details of one hundred thousand customers last year alone.

This practice has not been without controversy. As the settlement letters were sent out, recipients – including some pensioners – started to complain. Many of the accused denied downloading any pirated material but felt threatened by the letters.

Thus far, complaints have been filed with the Market Court, the Finnish Communications Regulatory Authority, the Consumer Authority, and the Ministry of Education and Culture.

In May, the Ministry of Education set up a working group to create a set of ‘best practices’ for copyright enforcement. The working group includes, among others, Internet providers, and outfits that are involved in sending the influx of settlement letters.

Anna Vuopala, a Government’s counselor at the Ministry of Education and Culture, told Kauppaleht that rightsholders should act within the boundaries of the law.

“We strive to create good practices [for copyright enforcement] and eliminate practices that are contrary to law,” says Vuopala, who’s leading the working group.

If the parties involved can’t reach an agreement on how to proceed, the Government considers changing existing copyright law to defuse the situation. What these changes could be is unclear at this point.

Earlier this year the Finnish market court already dealt a blow to local copyright trolls. In a unanimous ruling, seven judges ruled that the privacy of alleged BitTorrent pirates outweighs the evidence provided by the rightsholders.

While it was clear that copyright infringement was taking place, the rightsholders failed to show that it was significant enough to hand over the requested personal details.

Although this decision supports the rights of those who are falsely accused, the Government believes that a set of good practices is still needed to prevent future excesses and controversy.

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

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.

Introducing Our NEW AWS Community Heroes (Summer 2017 Edition)

Post Syndicated from Tara Walker original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/introducing-our-new-aws-community-heroes-summer-2017-edition/

The AWS Community Heroes program seeks to recognize and honor the most engaged Amazon Web Services developers who have had a positive impact in the global community.  If you are interested in learning more about the AWS Community Heroes program or curious about ways to get involved with your local AWS community, please click the graphic below to see the AWS Heroes talk directly about the program.

Now that you know more about the AWS Community Hero program, I am elated to introduce to you all the latest AWS Heroes to join the fold:

These guys and gals impart their passion for AWS and cloud technologies with the technical community by sharing their time and knowledge across social media and via in-person events.

Ben Kehoe

Ben Kehoe works in the field of Cloud Robotics—using the internet to enable robots to do more and better things—an area of IoT involving computation in the cloud and at the edge, Big Data, and machine learning. Approaching cloud computing from this angle, Ben focuses on developing business value rapidly through serverless (and service full) applications.

At iRobot, Ben guided the transition to a serverless architecture on AWS based on AWS Lambda and AWS IoT to support iRobot’s connected robot fleet. This architecture enables iRobot to focus on its core mission of building amazing robots with a minimum of development and operations effort.

Ben seeks to amplify voices from dev, operations, and security to help the community shape the evolution of serverless and event-driven designs for IoT and cloud computing more broadly.

 

 

Marcia Villalba

Marcia is a Senior Full-stack Developer at Rovio, the creators of Angry Birds. She is originally from Uruguay but has been living in Finland for almost a decade.

She has been designing and developing software professionally for over 10 years. For more than four years she has been working with AWS, including the past year which she’s worked mostly with serverless technologies.

Marcia runs her own YouTube channel, in which she publishes at least one new video every week. In her channel, she focuses on teaching how to use AWS serverless technologies and managed services. In addition to her professional work, she is the Tech Lead in “Girls in Tech” Helsinki, helping to inspire more women to enter into technology and programming.

 

 

Joshua Levy

Joshua Levy is an entrepreneur, engineer, writer, and serial startup technologist and advisor in cloud, AI, search, and startup scaling.

He co-founded the Open Guide to AWS, which is one of the most popular AWS resources and communities on the web. The collaborative project welcomes new contributors or editors, and anyone who wishes to ask or answer questions.

Josh has years of experience in hands-on software engineering and leadership at fast-growing consumer and enterprise startups, including Viv Labs (acquired by Samsung) and BloomReach (where he led engineering and AWS infrastructure), and a background in AI and systems research at SRI and mathematics at Berkeley. He has a passion for improving how we share knowledge on complex engineering, product, or business topics. If you share any of these interests, reach out on Twitter or find his contact details on GitHub.

 

Michael Ezzell

Michael Ezzell is a frequent contributor of detailed, in-depth solutions to questions spanning a wide variety of AWS services on Stack Overflow and other sites on the Stack Exchange Network.

Michael is the resident DBA and systems administrator for Online Rewards, a leading provider of web-based employee recognition, channel incentive, and customer loyalty programs, where he was a key player in the company’s full transition to the AWS platform.

Based in Cincinnati, and known to coworkers and associates as “sqlbot,” he also provides design, development, and support services to freelance consulting clients for AWS services and MySQL, as well as, broadcast & cable television and telecommunications technologies.

 

 

 

Thanos Baskous

Thanos Baskous is a San Francisco-based software engineer and entrepreneur who is passionate about designing and building scalable and robust systems.

He co-founded the Open Guide to AWS, which is one of the most popular AWS resources and communities on the web.

At Twitter, he built infrastructure that allows engineers to seamlessly deploy and run their applications across private data centers and public cloud environments. He previously led a team at TellApart (acquired by Twitter) that built an internal platform-as-a-service (Docker, Apache Aurora, Mesos on AWS) in support of a migration from a monolithic application architecture to a microservice-based architecture. Before TellApart, he co-founded AWS-hosted AdStack (acquired by TellApart) in order to automatically personalize and improve the quality of content in marketing emails and email newsletters.

 

 

Rob Gruhl

Rob is a senior engineering manager located in Seattle, WA. He supports a team of talented engineers at Nordstrom Technology exploring and deploying a variety of serverless systems to production.

From the beginning of the serverless era, Rob has been exclusively using serverless architectures to allow a small team of engineers to deliver incredible solutions that scale effortlessly and wake them in the middle of the night rarely. In addition to a number of production services, together with his team Rob has created and released two major open source projects and accompanying open source workshops using a 100% serverless approach. He’d love to talk with you about serverless, event-sourcing, and/or occasionally-connected distributed data layers.

 

Feel free to follow these great AWS Heroes on Twitter and check out their blogs. It is exciting to have them all join the AWS Community Heroes program.

–  Tara

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.

Danish ISPs Stand Up Against ‘Mafia-Like’ Copyright Trolls

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/danish-isps-stand-up-against-mafia-like-copyright-trolls-170530/

In recent years, file-sharers all across Europe have been threatened with lawsuits, if they don’t pay a significant settlement fee.

The process was pioneered in Germany where it turned into an industry by itself, and copyright holders later went after alleged pirates in the UK, Finland and elsewhere.

These so-called “copyright trolls” have also landed in Denmark, where the number of targeted Internet subscribers is growing at a rapid rate.

In 2015, rightsholders received permission from courts to obtain the personal details of 6,187 alleged BitTorrent pirates, based on their IP-addresses. A year later the number of accused subscribers increased by nearly 250 percent, to 21,163.

Local ISPs are not happy with this development and plan to fight it in court, Berlingske Business reports.

“We think there is a fundamental legal problem because the courts do not really decide what is most important: the legal security of the public or the law firms’ commercial interests,” Telenor’s Legal Director Mette Eistrøm Krüger says.

As is often the case in these type anti-piracy campaigns, the rightsholders prefer to settle out of court. Thus far, no named defendant has mounted a defense before a Danish judge.

“There was a verdict in one case, and this was a default judgment because the defendant didn’t show up,” Mette Eistrøm Krüger adds.

To stop the trolling efforts from getting out of hand, Telenor is now preparing to build a new case at the Frederiksberg Court, hoping to protect the identities of its subscribers.

This is not the first time Telenor has taken action against these anti-piracy efforts. The ISP did the same in Norway, with success. Last month the Norwegian Supreme Court threw out several troll cases due to a lack of evidence.

In Denmark, Telenor is supported by fellow Internet provider Telia, which says it will be more critical toward trolling efforts going forward.

The branch organization Telecommunications Industry in Denmark notes that other ISPs are backing Telenor’s efforts as well. The group’s director, Jakob Willer, describes the copyright trolling scheme as a “mafia-like” practice, which should be stopped.

“There is full support from the industry to Telenor to take this fight and protect customers against mafia-like practices,” Willer says.

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