Child Internet Safety and Censorship Measures Unveiled for UK ISPs

UPD New Child Internet Safety and Censorship Measures Unveiled for UK ISPs - ISPreview UK: "Jim Killock, Executive Director of the Open Right Group: “Cameron’s announcement is symptomatic of the way the Internet is viewed and treated by policy makers. The technical challenges and consequences of policies are viewed as less important than the moral purpose justifying calls for action. Policies are announced before they have been properly considered. And worse, these announcements risk being another case of blaming the commercial intermediaries because that is easier and cheaper than doing what is really necessary.”" 'via Blog this'

Legal language: Analyzing Yahoo's PRISM non-denial

slight paranoia: Analyzing Yahoo's PRISM non-denial: "Yahoo's General Counsel posted a carefully worded denial regarding the company's alleged participation in the NSA PRISM program. To the casual observer, it might seem like a categorical denial. I do not believe that Yahoo's denial is as straightforward as it seems. Below, I have carefully parsed Yahoo's statement, line by line, in order to highlight the fact that Yahoo has not in fact denied receiving court orders under 50 USC 1881a (AKA FISA Section 702) for massive amounts of communications data." 'via Blog this'

Facebook: Not Just Between Friends

Facebook: Not Just Between Friends: "In Martin & Ors v Gabriele Giambrone P/A Giambrone & Law [2013] NIQB 48, Horner J had to rule on a claim by the defendant that his posting on his Facebook page was confidential as his Facebook site is restricted to communications to his friends only. He claimed that use of the document would constitute a breach of confidence.
The issue arose because a Mareva Injunction was obtained against Gabriele Giambrone, who practises as Giambrone and Law (and who is said to specialise in media law), which included a restriction on his dissipating his assets." 'via Blog this'

Graham Smith on AVMS 2: “Preparing for a Fully Converged Audiovisual World: Growth, Creation and Values”

The Green Paper is a typical Commission mixture of current technology trends (dual screening gets a mention), market statistics leavened with a few anecdotes, lobbyists’ issues of the moment and hints of interventions that the Commission may have in mind for the future.  These are all underpinned by an unwavering belief in the efficacy of State-led intervention to achieve the Commission’s chosen public policy objectives.

As is de rigeur in documents such as this, the Commission has a grand vision: “to seize the opportunity of this changing technological environment to ensure the widest possible access to European diversified content for all Europeans and, the widest choice of high quality offers”.  That hints of a more interventionist Fortress Europe attitude than the Commission’s December 1997 Convergence Green Paper (PDF): “This first step is intended to pave the way for the development of an appropriate regulatory environment which will facilitate the full achievement of the opportunities offered by the Information Society, in the interests of Europe and its citizens as the 21st century begins.”

Beyond the grand vision there is some fairly controversial stuff in the new Green Paper, particularly around the possibility of extending the Audiovisual MediaServices Directive both in scope and to non-EU service providers. 

Verizon Win In FCC Net Neutrality Case Seen Roiling Industry

Verizon Win In FCC Net Neutrality Case Seen Roiling Industry VZ - Investors.com: "King wrote: "While pigeonholing is imperfect, we generally believe Republican-appointed judges would be better for the challengers and Democratic judges would be better for the FCC, and there are more Republicans on the court." Nice to see blind justice - or rather one-eyed. Whereas English judicial politics is almost all on the side of private property rights against government and citizens (though more hypocritical in rarely explicitly challenging democratic institutions)! 'via Blog this'

Is the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act the 'worst law in technology'?

Is the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act the 'worst law in technology'? | Dan Gillmor | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk: "In the end, people who want change in bad laws have to work for it. This is doubly hard given Congress' pay-to-play system of legal bribery, where dollars translate into votes. Maybe that will have to change first, as the "United Re:Public" coalition says, but we need to get started or get used to a system that puts everyone at risk. We could begin by calling our legislators and insist they get behind "Aaron's Law". 'via Blog this'

EMI Records Ltd & Ors v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd & Ors [2013] EWHC 379 (Ch)

EMI Records Ltd & Ors v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd & Ors [2013] EWHC 379 (Ch) (28 February 2013): "Turning to question 4, the Oberster Gerichtshof expresses concern at [4.1] that Courts in different Member States have reached different conclusions on the proportionality of blocking orders. It suggests at [4.2] that the question "should be judged in a uniform manner throughout Europe" in accordance with "guidelines for assessing the proportionality of specific blocking measures" laid down by the CJEU. I would respectfully suggest that, whether or not the CJEU accedes to the invitation to issue guidelines, the proportionality of a blocking order is bound to be a context-sensitive question. As I hope my judgments in 20C Fox v BT, Dramatico v Sky (No 2) and the present case demonstrate, this Court does not make such orders without thorough consideration of whether it is appropriate to make an order in the light of the specific facts of each case. Question 4 suggests that blocking orders "require not inconsiderable costs and can easily be circumvented without any special technical knowledge". I shall address these points in turn." 'via Blog this'