After The Tornado 03 - Panel: 20 Years of Internet Policy - YouTube: "Christopher Marsden, University of Sussex (UK)
Gigi Sohn, Open Society Foundations, Georgetown, and Mozilla
Sally Wentworth, The Internet Society
ABOUT AFTER THE TORNADO
Twenty years ago, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission issued Kevin Werbach’s working paper, Digital Tornado, one of the first examinations by a government agency of the transformative potential of the internet. Today we find ourselves in a world where little remains untouched by the wave of digital connectivity. Yet fundamental questions remain unresolved, and even more serious new questions have emerged." 'via Blog this'
Monday, 27 November 2017
Thursday, 23 November 2017
Week 7: Uber: under suspicion
Uber: under suspicion: "Yet the latest admission — that Uber covered up the theft by hackers of data from 50m passengers and 7m drivers — is so bad it is increasingly hard to see an unimpaired initial public offering in that timeframe.
Financial effects already exist from Uber’s serial moral failings: it has bled market share to rival Lyft.
But the handling of the data breach puts it in another tier of jeopardy. From May next year a tough EU rule, the General Data Protection Regulation will allow Brussels to levy fines of up to 4 per cent of turnover if data are leaked. If Uber maintains its current growth rate, its annual net revenues should be $9bn — and the potential fine $360m. Gross bookings would make it five times higher.
That is real money, even to the largest private tech company.
That is hypothetical. But the severity of the punishments reflects the vengeful public mood.
Real liabilities exist in the US from the breach, from the Federal Trade Commission, state attorneys-general and in lawsuits.
The bigger problem is that estimating the scope of Uber’s myriad wrongdoing and the scale of potential punishments is impossible." 'via Blog this'
Financial effects already exist from Uber’s serial moral failings: it has bled market share to rival Lyft.
But the handling of the data breach puts it in another tier of jeopardy. From May next year a tough EU rule, the General Data Protection Regulation will allow Brussels to levy fines of up to 4 per cent of turnover if data are leaked. If Uber maintains its current growth rate, its annual net revenues should be $9bn — and the potential fine $360m. Gross bookings would make it five times higher.
That is real money, even to the largest private tech company.
That is hypothetical. But the severity of the punishments reflects the vengeful public mood.
Real liabilities exist in the US from the breach, from the Federal Trade Commission, state attorneys-general and in lawsuits.
The bigger problem is that estimating the scope of Uber’s myriad wrongdoing and the scale of potential punishments is impossible." 'via Blog this'
Wednesday, 22 November 2017
Russia to act against Google if Sputnik, RT get lower search rankings: official
Russia to act against Google if Sputnik, RT get lower search rankings: official: "Russia’s Zharov said he would monitor “how discriminating this measure will be in its practical embodiment,” Sputnik reported Tuesday. “It is obvious that we will defend our media,” he said.
RT had received guaranteed ad revenue from YouTube until September, when the Google unit removed it as preferred partner.
“We didn’t see this a few years ago,” Schmidt told the Halifax gathering about the propaganda. “We didn’t realize this could be so pervasive.”" 'via Blog this'
RT had received guaranteed ad revenue from YouTube until September, when the Google unit removed it as preferred partner.
“We didn’t see this a few years ago,” Schmidt told the Halifax gathering about the propaganda. “We didn’t realize this could be so pervasive.”" 'via Blog this'
Tuesday, 21 November 2017
CDA 230 Then and Now: Does Intermediary Immunity Keep the Rest of Us Healthy? | The Recorder
CDA 230 Then and Now: Does Intermediary Immunity Keep the Rest of Us Healthy? | The Recorder: "The internet’s development over the past twenty years has benefited immeasurably from the immunities conferred by §230. We’ve been lucky to have it.
But any honest account must acknowledge the collateral damage it has permitted to be visited upon real people whose reputations, privacy, and dignity have been hurt in ways that defy redress. Especially as that damage becomes more systematized—now part of organized campaigns to shame people into silence online for expressing opinions that don’t fit an aggressor’s propaganda aims—platforms’ failures to moderate become more costly, both to targets of harassment and to everyone else denied exposure to honestly-held ideas.
As our technologies for sifting and disseminating content evolve, and our content intermediaries trend towards increasing power and centralization, there are narrow circumstances where a path to accountability for those intermediaries for the behavior of their users might be explored." 'via Blog this'
But any honest account must acknowledge the collateral damage it has permitted to be visited upon real people whose reputations, privacy, and dignity have been hurt in ways that defy redress. Especially as that damage becomes more systematized—now part of organized campaigns to shame people into silence online for expressing opinions that don’t fit an aggressor’s propaganda aims—platforms’ failures to moderate become more costly, both to targets of harassment and to everyone else denied exposure to honestly-held ideas.
As our technologies for sifting and disseminating content evolve, and our content intermediaries trend towards increasing power and centralization, there are narrow circumstances where a path to accountability for those intermediaries for the behavior of their users might be explored." 'via Blog this'
Saturday, 18 November 2017
Week 5: Lords push for new regulations to protect children online
Lords push for new regulations to protect children online | Society | The Guardian: "“Earlier this year we legislated for a new code of practice for social media companies, and are consulting on our internet safety strategy which will put it into practice,” he said. “We want to keep children safe online, but this particular amendment risks creating confusion about data protection responsibilities.”
A Whitehall source said a code of conduct had already been introduced in other legislation.
But Kidron said the code was restricted to social media companies and concerned with bullying and abuse.
“It is voluntary, and the government have gone on record to confirm this,” she said, arguing that her amendment would be enforceable." 'via Blog this'
A Whitehall source said a code of conduct had already been introduced in other legislation.
But Kidron said the code was restricted to social media companies and concerned with bullying and abuse.
“It is voluntary, and the government have gone on record to confirm this,” she said, arguing that her amendment would be enforceable." 'via Blog this'
Wednesday, 15 November 2017
Week 5/6 + Copyright: Julia Reda – New EU law prescribes website blocking in the name of “consumer protection”
Julia Reda – New EU law prescribes website blocking in the name of “consumer protection”: "European Parliament passed the Consumer Protection Cooperation regulation. Unfortunately, it contains an overreaching general website blocking provision. Additionally, consumer protection improvements were watered down or removed completely in last-minute trilogue negotiations with the Council." 'via Blog this'
Week 7: Contracts for the supply of digital content and personal data protection | European Parliamentary Research Service Blog
Contracts for the supply of digital content and personal data protection | European Parliamentary Research Service Blog: "The interplay between this proposed private law instrument and the existing public law rules on data protection (notably the recently adopted General Data Protection Regulation) have been the subject of some debate. The European Data Protection Supervisor’s recent opinion was critical of the proposal, arguing that, in the EU, personal data ‘cannot be conceived as a mere economic asset’ and cannot therefore be treated as the consumer’s contractual counter-performance in lieu of money.
The draft report prepared by the co-rapporteurs in Parliament includes those contracts in which consumers do not pay a price (but potentially provide data) within the scope of the proposal. It eliminates however the notion of personal data as a form of contractual ‘counter-performance’." 'via Blog this'
The draft report prepared by the co-rapporteurs in Parliament includes those contracts in which consumers do not pay a price (but potentially provide data) within the scope of the proposal. It eliminates however the notion of personal data as a form of contractual ‘counter-performance’." 'via Blog this'
Week 5: Commemorating the 20th Anniversary of Internet Law’s Most Important Judicial Decision | The Recorder
Commemorating the 20th Anniversary of Internet Law’s Most Important Judicial Decision | The Recorder: "§230’s implications first became clear from the first appellate court opinion interpreting it, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling in Zeran v. AOL.
The Zeran case involved a pernicious cyber-harassment attack. An unknown perpetrator posted inflammatory messages to AOL purporting to be from Zeran, which prompted outraged readers to bombard Zeran with angry phone calls.
The Fourth Circuit concluded that §230 protected AOL from liability for publishing the inflammatory messages.
The Zeran case interpreted §230 quite broadly, providing liability immunity even when online publishers exercise editorial control over third party content, and even when the online publisher fails to respond to takedown notices.
Due to its timing and its breadth, the Zeran opinion had an enormous influence on subsequent courts’ interpretations of §230, leading them to apply the statutory immunity expansively across a wide range of circumstances.
Together, §230 and the Zeran ruling helped create a trillion-dollar industry centered around user-generated content.
Because of its influence on such a key issue, the Zeran ruling is widely considered the most important Internet Law ruling ever.
It is also a controversial opinion, and debates about the ruling’s conclusion and implications continue to this day." 'via Blog this'
The Zeran case involved a pernicious cyber-harassment attack. An unknown perpetrator posted inflammatory messages to AOL purporting to be from Zeran, which prompted outraged readers to bombard Zeran with angry phone calls.
The Fourth Circuit concluded that §230 protected AOL from liability for publishing the inflammatory messages.
The Zeran case interpreted §230 quite broadly, providing liability immunity even when online publishers exercise editorial control over third party content, and even when the online publisher fails to respond to takedown notices.
Due to its timing and its breadth, the Zeran opinion had an enormous influence on subsequent courts’ interpretations of §230, leading them to apply the statutory immunity expansively across a wide range of circumstances.
Together, §230 and the Zeran ruling helped create a trillion-dollar industry centered around user-generated content.
Because of its influence on such a key issue, the Zeran ruling is widely considered the most important Internet Law ruling ever.
It is also a controversial opinion, and debates about the ruling’s conclusion and implications continue to this day." 'via Blog this'
Week 7: ECtHR: Einarsson v Iceland, Defamation on social media and Article 8
Case Law, Strasbourg: Einarsson v Iceland, Defamation on social media and Article 8 – María Rún Bjarnadóttir | Inforrm's Blog: "ECtHR´s statement about the internet as a platform raises a special interest. The case regards the expression of an individual that had no commercial interest or as a media or public persona, and was using what he presumed to be a personal social media platform. In light of this background, the ECtHR statement about the nature of the internet and its potential harms is noteworthy.
It states that “the risk of harm posed by content and communications on the Internet to the exercise and enjoyment of human rights and freedoms, particularly the right to respect for private life, is certainly higher than that posed by the press” and continues to refer to the findings in the case of Delfi v. Estonia [46)]. In Delfi, the ECtHR found that an online news platform, that had a commercial interest in the online distribution of material, could be held liable for malicious third party material. The reference is likely intended to address the potential infliction of harm of damaging material online due to the vast scope of possible online distribution, even if the ECtHR does not discuss the issue further in the Judgement. As social media platforms increasingly serve as platforms for heated societal debates in Iceland as other states, it is not impossible to assume that the impact of Judgement will be a form of temperature control for public debate in those spheres."
'via Blog this'
It states that “the risk of harm posed by content and communications on the Internet to the exercise and enjoyment of human rights and freedoms, particularly the right to respect for private life, is certainly higher than that posed by the press” and continues to refer to the findings in the case of Delfi v. Estonia [46)]. In Delfi, the ECtHR found that an online news platform, that had a commercial interest in the online distribution of material, could be held liable for malicious third party material. The reference is likely intended to address the potential infliction of harm of damaging material online due to the vast scope of possible online distribution, even if the ECtHR does not discuss the issue further in the Judgement. As social media platforms increasingly serve as platforms for heated societal debates in Iceland as other states, it is not impossible to assume that the impact of Judgement will be a form of temperature control for public debate in those spheres."
'via Blog this'
Week 11 Zero-rating and net neutrality - decisions (so far) in the EU
Zero-rating and net neutrality - decisions (so far) in the EU | Technology's Legal Edge: "Many European regulators are yet to consider the issue of net neutrality and zero-rated services following the 2015 Regulations. For those who have reached decisions since the introduction of the 2015 Regulations, most seem to have concluded that as long as the service provider does not discriminate between zero-rated services and non-zero-rated services once a user’s data cap is reached, the service provider’s zero-rated offerings will be found to be in compliance with the 2015 Regulations. If, however, the user is permitted to continue using the zero-rated services after reaching a data cap, the BEREC guidelines (which say that allowing a zero-rated service to continue when others are blocked is an automatic per se breach) have been followed." 'via Blog this'
Week 7: Who’s responsible for what happens on Facebook? Analysis of a new ECJ opinion
EU Law Analysis: Who’s responsible for what happens on Facebook? Analysis of a new ECJ opinion: "Who is responsible for data protection law compliance on Facebook fan sites? That issue is analysed in a recent opinion of an ECJ Advocate-General, in the case of Wirtschaftsakademie.
This case is one more in a line of cases dealing specifically with the jurisdiction of national data protection supervisory authorities, a line of reasoning which seems to operate separately from the Brussels I Recast Regulation, which concerns jurisdiction of courts over civil and commercial disputes. While this is an Advocate-General’s opinion, and therefore not binding on the Court, if followed by the Court it would consolidates the Court’s prior broad interpretation of the Data Protection Directive. While this might be the headline, it is worth considering a perhaps overlooked element of the data-economy: the role of the content provider in providing individuals whose data is harvested." 'via Blog this'
This case is one more in a line of cases dealing specifically with the jurisdiction of national data protection supervisory authorities, a line of reasoning which seems to operate separately from the Brussels I Recast Regulation, which concerns jurisdiction of courts over civil and commercial disputes. While this is an Advocate-General’s opinion, and therefore not binding on the Court, if followed by the Court it would consolidates the Court’s prior broad interpretation of the Data Protection Directive. While this might be the headline, it is worth considering a perhaps overlooked element of the data-economy: the role of the content provider in providing individuals whose data is harvested." 'via Blog this'
Monday, 13 November 2017
Week 9/Cyber: MINIX — The most popular OS in the world, thanks to Intel | Network World
MINIX — The most popular OS in the world, thanks to Intel | Network World: "But here’s the crazy part: That’s not the only operating system you’re running.
If you have a modern Intel CPU (released in the last few years) with Intel’s Management Engine built in, you’ve got another complete operating system running that you might not have had any clue was in there: MINIX.
That’s right. MINIX.
The Unix-like OS originally developed by Andrew Tanenbaum as an educational tool — to demonstrate operating system programming — is built into every new Intel CPU.
MINIX is running on “Ring -3” (that’s “negative 3”) on its own CPU. A CPU that you, the user/owner of the machine, have no access to. " 'via Blog this'
If you have a modern Intel CPU (released in the last few years) with Intel’s Management Engine built in, you’ve got another complete operating system running that you might not have had any clue was in there: MINIX.
That’s right. MINIX.
The Unix-like OS originally developed by Andrew Tanenbaum as an educational tool — to demonstrate operating system programming — is built into every new Intel CPU.
MINIX is running on “Ring -3” (that’s “negative 3”) on its own CPU. A CPU that you, the user/owner of the machine, have no access to. " 'via Blog this'
Friday, 10 November 2017
Week 8: 95 Theses about Technology: Facebook is not the Internet. Nor is Google. Nor is the World Wide Web
Thesis #5 | 95 Theses about Technology:
"A common misconception — which companies like Facebook in particular are eager to encourage — is that the Internet is the same thing as the service(s) that one uses every day. It’s not. Facebook, Google and the Web are just various kinds of data-traffic that run on an underlying infrastructure. That infrastructure is the Internet.
A good way of thinking about this is a railway network. It has two main components. One is its infrastructure of tracks, signalling, points and stations. The other is the various kinds of traffic — TGV trains, intercity trains, stopping trains, goods trains, maintenance trains, etc. — that runs on the tracks.
So thinking that, say, Facebook is the Internet is like thinking that Virgin Trains is the railway system.
This is important because the Internet is much bigger and more important than any particular kind of data-traffic that runs on it. And it’s much freer and more open than anything provided by giant tech companies. It’s a public utility, not the private fiefdoms that they own and run." 'via Blog this'
"A common misconception — which companies like Facebook in particular are eager to encourage — is that the Internet is the same thing as the service(s) that one uses every day. It’s not. Facebook, Google and the Web are just various kinds of data-traffic that run on an underlying infrastructure. That infrastructure is the Internet.
A good way of thinking about this is a railway network. It has two main components. One is its infrastructure of tracks, signalling, points and stations. The other is the various kinds of traffic — TGV trains, intercity trains, stopping trains, goods trains, maintenance trains, etc. — that runs on the tracks.
So thinking that, say, Facebook is the Internet is like thinking that Virgin Trains is the railway system.
This is important because the Internet is much bigger and more important than any particular kind of data-traffic that runs on it. And it’s much freer and more open than anything provided by giant tech companies. It’s a public utility, not the private fiefdoms that they own and run." 'via Blog this'
Wednesday, 8 November 2017
Week 7: How Facebook Figures Out Everyone You've Ever Met
How Facebook Figures Out Everyone You've Ever Met: "Facebook doesn’t like, and doesn’t use, the term “shadow profiles.” It doesn’t like the term because it sounds like Facebook creates hidden profiles for people who haven’t joined the network, which Facebook says it doesn’t do.
The existence of shadow contact information came to light in 2013 after Facebook admitted it had discovered and fixed “a bug.” The bug was that when a user downloaded their Facebook file, it included not just their friends’ visible contact information, but also their friends’ shadow contact information.
The problem with the bug, for Facebook, was not that all the information was lumped together—it was that it had mistakenly shown users the lump existed.
The extent of the connections Facebook builds around its users is supposed to be visible only to the company itself.
Facebook does what it can to underplay how much data it gathers through contacts, and how widely it casts its net." 'via Blog this'
The existence of shadow contact information came to light in 2013 after Facebook admitted it had discovered and fixed “a bug.” The bug was that when a user downloaded their Facebook file, it included not just their friends’ visible contact information, but also their friends’ shadow contact information.
The problem with the bug, for Facebook, was not that all the information was lumped together—it was that it had mistakenly shown users the lump existed.
The extent of the connections Facebook builds around its users is supposed to be visible only to the company itself.
Facebook does what it can to underplay how much data it gathers through contacts, and how widely it casts its net." 'via Blog this'
Monday, 6 November 2017
Week 6: C‑194/16 Bolagsupplysningen OÜ, Ingrid Ilsjan v Svensk Handel AB
CURIA - Documents: "Court (Grand Chamber) hereby rules:
1. Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that a legal person claiming that its personality rights have been infringed by the publication of incorrect information concerning it on the internet and by a failure to remove comments relating to that person can bring an action for rectification of that information, removal of those comments and compensation in respect of all the damage sustained before the courts of the Member State in which its centre of interests is located.
When the relevant legal person carries out the main part of its activities in a different Member State from the one in which its registered office is located, that person may sue the alleged perpetrator of the injury in that other Member State by virtue of it being where the damage occurred.
2. Article 7(2) of Regulation No 1215/2012 must be interpreted as meaning that a person who alleges that his personality rights have been infringed by the publication of incorrect information concerning him on the internet and by the failure to remove comments relating to him cannot bring an action for rectification of that information and removal of those comments before the courts of each Member State in which the information published on the internet is or was accessible." 'via Blog this'
1. Article 7(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters must be interpreted as meaning that a legal person claiming that its personality rights have been infringed by the publication of incorrect information concerning it on the internet and by a failure to remove comments relating to that person can bring an action for rectification of that information, removal of those comments and compensation in respect of all the damage sustained before the courts of the Member State in which its centre of interests is located.
When the relevant legal person carries out the main part of its activities in a different Member State from the one in which its registered office is located, that person may sue the alleged perpetrator of the injury in that other Member State by virtue of it being where the damage occurred.
2. Article 7(2) of Regulation No 1215/2012 must be interpreted as meaning that a person who alleges that his personality rights have been infringed by the publication of incorrect information concerning him on the internet and by the failure to remove comments relating to him cannot bring an action for rectification of that information and removal of those comments before the courts of each Member State in which the information published on the internet is or was accessible." 'via Blog this'
Weeks 8/10 André Staltz - The Web began dying in 2014, here's how
André Staltz - The Web began dying in 2014, here's how: "There is a tendency at GOOG-FB-AMZN to bypass the Web which is motivated by user experience and efficient communication, not by an agenda to avoid browsers. In the knowledge internet and the commerce internet, being efficient to provide what users want is the goal. In the social internet, the goal is to provide an efficient channel for communication between people. This explains FB’s 10-year strategy with Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR) as the next medium for social interactions through the internet. This strategy would also bypass the Web, proving how more natural social AR would be than social real-time texting in browsers. Already today, most people on the internet communicate with other people via a mobile app, not via a browser.
The common pattern among these three internet giants is to grow beyond browsers, creating new virtual contexts where data is created and shared. The Web may die like most other technologies do: simply by becoming less attractive than newer technologies. And like most obsolete technologies, they don’t suddenly disappear, neither do they disappear completely. You can still buy a Walkman and listen to a tape with it, but the technology has nevertheless lost its collective relevance. The Web’s death will come as a gradual decay of its necessity, not as a dramatic loss." 'via Blog this'
The common pattern among these three internet giants is to grow beyond browsers, creating new virtual contexts where data is created and shared. The Web may die like most other technologies do: simply by becoming less attractive than newer technologies. And like most obsolete technologies, they don’t suddenly disappear, neither do they disappear completely. You can still buy a Walkman and listen to a tape with it, but the technology has nevertheless lost its collective relevance. The Web’s death will come as a gradual decay of its necessity, not as a dramatic loss." 'via Blog this'
SCL: Free Tips on Your Tech Law Career Journey
SCL: Free Tips on Your Tech Law Career Journey: "So, if there was a tech law career TripAdvisor-style app, you would certainly consult it. It would tell you about at least three important categories: the best place to visit en route, the best value accommodation and the places to go to meet the coolest people. It might even change your destination priorities.
The inaugural SCL Student Event, ‘A Path to Tech Law’, is the tech law career trip advice app. Not yet available on your phone, it requires attendance at a swish central London location on 29 November, which itself offers destination advice in concrete terms (not to mention leather and modern art).
You will get to hear from those who have trod the path, jumped the ravines and, crucially, found the fun. With a panel of speakers that includes some who can still recall what the early stages of the journey felt like, it really is an unmissable opportunity to gain insight and perhaps network a little.
The event, held at Reed Smith’s offices in Broadgate Tower in London, is open to all students with an eye on a career in tech law and, with tech law skills proving increasingly vital to practice in most areas of law, that’s a lot of students." 'via Blog this'
The inaugural SCL Student Event, ‘A Path to Tech Law’, is the tech law career trip advice app. Not yet available on your phone, it requires attendance at a swish central London location on 29 November, which itself offers destination advice in concrete terms (not to mention leather and modern art).
You will get to hear from those who have trod the path, jumped the ravines and, crucially, found the fun. With a panel of speakers that includes some who can still recall what the early stages of the journey felt like, it really is an unmissable opportunity to gain insight and perhaps network a little.
The event, held at Reed Smith’s offices in Broadgate Tower in London, is open to all students with an eye on a career in tech law and, with tech law skills proving increasingly vital to practice in most areas of law, that’s a lot of students." 'via Blog this'
Friday, 3 November 2017
Week 5: Intermediary Liability for Online User Comments under ECHR
Intermediary Liability for Online User Comments under the European Convention on Human Rights | Human Rights Law Review | Oxford Academic: "Human Rights Law Review, ngx001, https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngx001
Published: 01 March 2017
In the recent judgments of Delfi AS v Estonia and Magyar T.E. and Index.hu Zrt v Hungary, the European Court of Human Rights for the first time sought to clarify the limits to be imposed on intermediary liability regimes for online user comments and the factors to be assessed in the determination of the appropriate balance between the Article 10 speech rights of online intermediaries and the Article 8 reputational rights of those targeted by unlawful user comments. In doing so, the Court has left open to Contracting States the choice of intermediary liability regime to be adopted at the domestic level.
The author, a judge of the Strasbourg Court, comments extrajudicially on the compatibility of the potential liability regimes with the Court’s new line of case law and the criticisms levelled at the decision in Delfi AS. He argues that the Court may be seen to have adopted a middle ground between two diametrically opposing viewpoints on the regulation of the Internet, one advocating for an environment relatively free from regulation of online conduct, and the other campaigning for a regulated Internet where the same legal principles apply both online and offline." 'via Blog this'
Published: 01 March 2017
In the recent judgments of Delfi AS v Estonia and Magyar T.E. and Index.hu Zrt v Hungary, the European Court of Human Rights for the first time sought to clarify the limits to be imposed on intermediary liability regimes for online user comments and the factors to be assessed in the determination of the appropriate balance between the Article 10 speech rights of online intermediaries and the Article 8 reputational rights of those targeted by unlawful user comments. In doing so, the Court has left open to Contracting States the choice of intermediary liability regime to be adopted at the domestic level.
The author, a judge of the Strasbourg Court, comments extrajudicially on the compatibility of the potential liability regimes with the Court’s new line of case law and the criticisms levelled at the decision in Delfi AS. He argues that the Court may be seen to have adopted a middle ground between two diametrically opposing viewpoints on the regulation of the Internet, one advocating for an environment relatively free from regulation of online conduct, and the other campaigning for a regulated Internet where the same legal principles apply both online and offline." 'via Blog this'
Week 7 Big data meets Big Brother as China moves to rate its citizens | WIRED UK
Big data meets Big Brother as China moves to rate its citizens | WIRED UK: "So just how are people rated? Individuals on Sesame Credit are measured by a score ranging between 350 and 950 points. Alibaba does not divulge the "complex algorithm" it uses to calculate the number but they do reveal the five factors taken into account.
The first is credit history. For example, does the citizen pay their electricity or phone bill on time? Next is fulfilment capacity, which it defines in its guidelines as "a user's ability to fulfil his/her contract obligations".
The third factor is personal characteristics, verifying personal information such as someone's mobile phone number and address.
But the fourth category, behaviour and preference, is where it gets interesting.
Under this system, something as innocuous as a person's shopping habits become a measure of character. Alibaba admits it judges people by the types of products they buy. "Someone who plays video games for ten hours a day, for example, would be considered an idle person," says Li Yingyun, Sesame's Technology Director. "Someone who frequently buys diapers would be considered as probably a parent, who on balance is more likely to have a sense of responsibility." So the system not only investigates behaviour - it shapes it. It "nudges" citizens away from purchases and behaviours the government does not like.
Friends matter, too. The fifth category is interpersonal relationships. What does their choice of online friends and their interactions say about the person being assessed? Sharing what Sesame Credit refers to as "positive energy" online, nice messages about the government or how well the country's economy is doing, will make your score go up.
Alibaba is adamant that, currently, anything negative posted on social media does not affect scores (we don't know if this is true or not because the algorithm is secret).
But you can see how this might play out when the government's own citizen score system officially launches in 2020. " 'via Blog this'
The first is credit history. For example, does the citizen pay their electricity or phone bill on time? Next is fulfilment capacity, which it defines in its guidelines as "a user's ability to fulfil his/her contract obligations".
The third factor is personal characteristics, verifying personal information such as someone's mobile phone number and address.
But the fourth category, behaviour and preference, is where it gets interesting.
Under this system, something as innocuous as a person's shopping habits become a measure of character. Alibaba admits it judges people by the types of products they buy. "Someone who plays video games for ten hours a day, for example, would be considered an idle person," says Li Yingyun, Sesame's Technology Director. "Someone who frequently buys diapers would be considered as probably a parent, who on balance is more likely to have a sense of responsibility." So the system not only investigates behaviour - it shapes it. It "nudges" citizens away from purchases and behaviours the government does not like.
Friends matter, too. The fifth category is interpersonal relationships. What does their choice of online friends and their interactions say about the person being assessed? Sharing what Sesame Credit refers to as "positive energy" online, nice messages about the government or how well the country's economy is doing, will make your score go up.
Alibaba is adamant that, currently, anything negative posted on social media does not affect scores (we don't know if this is true or not because the algorithm is secret).
But you can see how this might play out when the government's own citizen score system officially launches in 2020. " 'via Blog this'
Thursday, 2 November 2017
Top 20 Facebook Statistics - Updated October 2017
Top 20 Facebook Statistics - Updated October 2017: "Worldwide, there are over 2.01 billion monthly active Facebook users for June 2017 (Facebook MAUs) which is a 17 percent increase year over year. (Source: Facebook 7/26/17) What this means for you: In case you had any lingering doubts, statistically, Facebook is too big to ignore.
There are 1.15 billion mobile daily active users (Mobile DAU) for December 2016, an increase of 23 percent year-over-year. (Source: Facebook as of 2/01/17) This is hugely significant and shows the dramatic growth of mobile traffic on Facebook. Mobile advertising revenue represented approximately 87 percent of advertising revenue for Q2.
1.32 billion people on average who log onto Facebook daily active users (Facebook DAU) for June 2017, which represents a 17 percent increase year over year (Source: Facebook as 07/26/17) The Implication: A huge and vastly growing number of Facebook users are active and consistent in their visits" 'via Blog this'
There are 1.15 billion mobile daily active users (Mobile DAU) for December 2016, an increase of 23 percent year-over-year. (Source: Facebook as of 2/01/17) This is hugely significant and shows the dramatic growth of mobile traffic on Facebook. Mobile advertising revenue represented approximately 87 percent of advertising revenue for Q2.
1.32 billion people on average who log onto Facebook daily active users (Facebook DAU) for June 2017, which represents a 17 percent increase year over year (Source: Facebook as 07/26/17) The Implication: A huge and vastly growing number of Facebook users are active and consistent in their visits" 'via Blog this'
Week 5: Lumen
About :: Lumen: "Lumen is an independent 3rd party research project studying cease and desist letters concerning online content. We collect and analyze requests to remove material from the web. Our goals are to educate the public, to facilitate research about the different kinds of complaints and requests for removal--both legitimate and questionable--that are being sent to Internet publishers and service providers, and to provide as much transparency as possible about the “ecology” of such notices, in terms of who is sending them and why, and to what effect." 'via Blog this'
Transparency Report
Transparency Report: "Governments ask us to remove or review content for many reasons. Some requests allege defamation, while others claim that content violates local laws prohibiting hate speech or adult content. The laws surrounding these issues vary by country. Our teams assign each request a category, such as hate speech, obscenity, and defamation. Note that we did not begin providing reason data about the reason for the request until the December 2010 reporting period.
Often times, government requests target political content and government criticism. Governments cite defamation, privacy, and even copyright laws in their attempts to remove political speech from our services. Our teams evaluate each request and review the content in context in order to determine whether or not content should be removed due to violation of local law or our content policies." 'via Blog this'
Often times, government requests target political content and government criticism. Governments cite defamation, privacy, and even copyright laws in their attempts to remove political speech from our services. Our teams evaluate each request and review the content in context in order to determine whether or not content should be removed due to violation of local law or our content policies." 'via Blog this'
Week 5: Twitter Government TOS reports
Government TOS reports: "This section covers government requests to remove content that may violate Twitter’s Terms of Service (TOS) under the following Twitter Rules categories: abusive behavior, copyright, promotion of terrorism, and trademark. It does not include legal requests, regardless of whether they resulted in a TOS violation, which will continue to be published in our Removal Requests report. As we take an objective approach to processing global Terms of Service reports, the fact that the reporters in these cases happened to be government officials had no bearing on whether any action was taken under our Rules." 'via Blog this'
Week 6: Twitter Removal requests
Removal requests: "The removal requests reflected in this section of the Transparency Report only include official legal process, such as court orders served on Twitter, and other legal requests that are specifically directed to our intake channels for law enforcement and other authorized reporters (“Legal Requests”). This section does not include requests, including those submitted by government officials, that are directed to our customer support team through our online support forms. More information about non-legal requests is available in the government TOS reports section." 'via Blog this'
Week 7 Privacy: Commissioners statement on Art29WP letter to WhatsApp
31-10-2017 Commissioners statement on Art 29 Working Party letter to WhatsApp. - Data Protection Commissioner - Ireland: "The DPC is continuing to engage directly with WhatsApp and Facebook Ireland in resolving the same issues. This engagement builds on the positive step that was taken by WhatsApp in August 2017 in launching its Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs), following extensive discussions with the DPC over several months. The DPC’s statement on these FAQs is available here, including the improved clarity and transparency now available to WhatsApp users on how their data is being shared and used:
August statement by Commissioner
The DPC is also pleased that WhatsApp and Facebook Ireland have re-confirmed that the current data sharing suspension will continue during this ongoing engagement with the DPC, specifically related to data sharing for use by Facebook Ireland to present products and ads. This specific data sharing will not be activated for EU-based WhatsApp users until WhatsApp confirms the mechanism to enable this specific data sharing with the DPC.
The DPC's engagement with WhatsApp and Facebook, and any outcomes arising from that engagement, are completely without prejudice to the actions of any other individual Data Protection Authority in relation to this matter or of the taskforce formed by the Article 29 Working Party to discuss this matter." 'via Blog this'
August statement by Commissioner
The DPC is also pleased that WhatsApp and Facebook Ireland have re-confirmed that the current data sharing suspension will continue during this ongoing engagement with the DPC, specifically related to data sharing for use by Facebook Ireland to present products and ads. This specific data sharing will not be activated for EU-based WhatsApp users until WhatsApp confirms the mechanism to enable this specific data sharing with the DPC.
The DPC's engagement with WhatsApp and Facebook, and any outcomes arising from that engagement, are completely without prejudice to the actions of any other individual Data Protection Authority in relation to this matter or of the taskforce formed by the Article 29 Working Party to discuss this matter." 'via Blog this'
Week 5: Liability Why are websites being blocked in the UK?
Why are websites being blocked in the UK?: "Mobile and broadband Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have created filters to stop under 18s from seeing harmful content online.
Unfortunately, filters block many harmless websites by mistake - even sites that are aimed at children!
Often website owners don't know that this is happening.
Around 3.5 million households have filters switched on, through choice, or by default. In addition, many mobile phone users have filters enabled as they are on by default.
We need people to use this tool to check and report sites that shouldn't be filtered. Not only will you be helping website owners, you will also increase transparency about filters by helping us to get a clearer picture about overblocking." 'via Blog this'
Unfortunately, filters block many harmless websites by mistake - even sites that are aimed at children!
Often website owners don't know that this is happening.
Around 3.5 million households have filters switched on, through choice, or by default. In addition, many mobile phone users have filters enabled as they are on by default.
We need people to use this tool to check and report sites that shouldn't be filtered. Not only will you be helping website owners, you will also increase transparency about filters by helping us to get a clearer picture about overblocking." 'via Blog this'
Wednesday, 1 November 2017
Week 6: CJEU Ruling on Internet Jurisdiction
SCL: CJEU Ruling on Internet Jurisdiction: "For the most part this seems like a rational decision based on the law, but not such a good ruling regarding the specifics of this case. It feels strange to give jurisdiction to a court in Estonia for a potential defamation occurring on a Swedish website, published in Swedish and dealing mostly with Swedish consumer issues, even if the company is based in Estonia. While it is understandable that the harm may occur where the person resides and conducts businesses, the harmful act itself took place in Sweden. The Court leaves this option open as well, the result being that, at least in principle, those affected by defamation (or other civil harm) could sue in both the country where they reside, and where they hold their centre of interest." 'via Blog this'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)