Citizens around the globe are more concerned than ever with SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act), ACTA (Anti- Counterfeiting Trade Agreement), and PIPA (Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act). Behind all of these mechanisms are economic interests from big companies who claim to lose more than 200 billion euros per year, due to piracy.

The legislation has broad support from organizations that rely on copyright, such as the Motion Pictures Association of America, the Recording Industry Association of America, Macmillan US, Viacom, Nike, L´Oreal, and Acushnet among others. The opposition group includes companies such as Google, Yahoo, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, AOL, Linkendin, Ebay, Mozilla Corporation, Human Rights Watch, and many more.

SOPA and PIPA are two sister bills currently being considered by the House of Commons and the Senate, respectively. Both are designed to tackle the problem of foreign-based websites that sell pirated movies, music and other products. SOPA and PIPA are very similar, but SOPA includes a provision making it illegal to stream unauthorized copyrighted content. Access could be blocked by making it impossible for users to type in a simple web address into a browser to reach the site, or by requiring search engines like Google to disable links to the sites.

What is clear, is that ACTA and SOPA have the same objective, which is to protect against copyright infringement, by blocking certain elements of the internet.  Monica Horten (www.iptegrity.com) defines SOPA as a mechanism to stop websites from being visible or trading in the United States, in order to avoid American citizens getting access to websites and services which are hosted outside the United States.

SOPA is a theft and antipiracy bill that seeks to protect American property, so it appears like a way to give US authorities carte blanche to police copyright worldwide.

It is important to point out that ACTA does not comply with American intellectual property and copyright law, as SOPA does, stopping websites that are indulging in unethical behavior, such as cyber crimes, or intellectual property right violations, which can be forced to be taken down or blocked in U.S. websites. For example, Megavideo and Megaloud have been some of the victims of SOPA, while FilseSonic has disabled its feature allowing users to share files on its site.

ACTA could be viewed as international version of SOPA, which aims to establish international intellectual property standards, focusing on conterfeit goods, generic medicines and copyright infringement. Countries need to have their own versions of copyright law. The proposals of ACTA focus on counterfeit goods and generic medications. This means that generic drugs and food patents will be more difficult to obtain in countries like India and Brazil, who are against ACTA.

Phil Hunt, the UK Pirate Party’s foreign policy spokesman told theinquirer.net: “Criticism of ACTA has often focused on the harm it will do to the Internet, but that doesn’t address one of the most important issues that ACTA presents: the fact that it will kill sick people in developing countries by denying them access to affordable generic drugs- whilst doing nothing to address the issue of unsafe counterfeit medications.”

The ACTA treaty was signed by the United States, Australia, Japan, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, and South Korea last October. The European Union, Mexico, and Switzerland have not yet signed because of their domestic procedures. The treaty has be to translated into all of the E.U. languages. In the United States, there is a petition to end ACTA and to protect internet privacy, signed by more than 30,000 citizens who are calling on the Obama administration to veto the treaty.

In Europe, opposition to ACTA has picked up in the past few weeks, with thousands protesting across Eastern Europe and in Germany, France, and Ireland. On January 26, while the Polish Government signed ACTA, Polish Members of Parliament wore Guy Fawkes masks, like the one in V for Vendetta, in order to protest the treaty. It was an ironic jab at Time Warner, who owns the intellectual rights to the movie.

Last week, the European Union suspended attempts to ratify the international anti-counterfeiting treaty, ACTA, and asked Europe’s high court to see if the controversial proposal violates any fundamental E.U. rights. E.U. trade commissioner Karel De Gucht said on Wednesday that an opinion from the European court of justice would clear what he called the “fog of misinformation” surrounding ACTA. De Gucht told reporters in Brussels, “ACTA will not censor websites, or shut them down; ACTA will not hinder freedom of the internet or freedom of speech.”

De Gucht continued, “Intellectual property is Europe’s main raw material, but the problem is that we currently struggle to protect it outside the E.U. This hurts our companies, destroys jobs, and harms our economies.”

Image Courtesy of   http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidberkowitz/

The article ACTA, SOPA and PIPA Threaten Internet Freedom appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Consumer Watchdog called on President Obama to use the State of the Union message to endorse baseline privacy legislation and support “Do Not Track” regulations that would give consumers control of whether their information is gathered while they use the Internet.

“You recently expressed your commitment to maintaining freedom of expression on the Internet. Consumer Watchdog shares that commitment. Just as important, however, is protecting online privacy. Indeed, without adequate privacy protection freedom of expression ultimately is undermined,” wrote John M. Simpson, director of Consumer Watchdog’s Privacy Project.

The open letter to the president continued:

“When you, your wife or your children go online you are all tracked, usually without your knowledge and consent. What you and other people click on, purchase, or share with others is compiled, analyzed and used to build a profile.

The online data gathered about people is often used to target advertising, but can also be used to make assumptions about them in connection with employment, housing, insurance, and financial services; for purposes of lawsuits against individuals; and for government surveillance.

At the moment there are no state or federal limits on what information can be collected, with whom it can be shared, how long it can be retained or how it can be used. Unlike most other countries, there is no baseline privacy law in the United States. People have virtually no meaningful way to control how data about them is gathered or used…”

“As you know, both the Commerce Department and the Federal Trade Commission will soon issue reports recommending online privacy policies. Industry is lobbying to make these proposals as ineffective as possible, but people should have meaningful privacy protections. I urge you to use the State of the Union message as a vehicle to call for privacy legislation based on the Fair Information Practices principles and that would also provide for a so-called ‘Do Not Track’ mechanism.”

A “Do Not Track” mechanism is a method that allows a computer user to send a clear, unambiguous message that one’s online activities should not be tracked, Consumer Watchdog said. There are a number of ways this could be accomplished. In fact the “Do Not Track” concept is technology neutral.

It is any method that sends the message to Websites a consumer visits that one’s activities should not be tracked. Simply put, “Do Not Track” is like posting a “No Trespassing” sign on your property. Legislation is necessary so the “Do Not Track” message is honored, the nonprofit public interest group said.

The letter continued:

“Giving Americans a visible, uncomplicated choice to stop Internet companies from tracking us online will not end online advertising, but it will force advertisers to respect our personal boundaries. If that means fewer targeted sales of Viagra or shady mortgage refinance schemes, so be it.

“The ‘Do Not Track Me’ movement is so important because it sets the principle and precedent of the first real governmental limits on the Wild West of Internet data mining. It establishes our right to be online without being tracked and makes clear the Internet has become a necessity of life that government must protect.

“Privacy violations are not victimless. Identity theft has run rampant because so much of our personal information is available in so many places. Teenagers are particularly at risk because they tend to share too much information online. And our jobs, familial relationships and friendships can be jeopardized if information about our medical condition, sexual preferences or lifestyle choices is evident and available to anyone who can see the advertisements on our computer screens.”

Consumers are uncomfortable with online tracking and targeting, Consumer Watchdog said. A poll conducted by Grove Insight for Consumer Watchdog in July 2010 revealed that 90 percent of Americans wanted more laws to protect online privacy, 86 percent favored the creation of an “anonymous button” that allows individuals to stop anyone from tracking their online searches or purchase, and 80 percent wanted a “Do Not Track Me” feature for online companies that would be administered by the Federal Trade Commission.

“A ‘Do Not Track’ mechanism would give consumers better control of their information and help restore their confidence in the Internet. That’s a win-win for consumers and business. I urge you to endorse privacy legislation and ‘Do Not Track’ during the State of The Union message,” Simpson concluded.

Randall Stevens / Shutterstock.com

The article Consumer Watchdog Calls For President Obama to Endorse “Do Not Track” appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The September 11 terrorist attacks brought more than the loss of American lives, they brought considerable impact on internal affairs of the United States. The CIA’s involvement with the NYPD is considered, by many, another stain on the Agency’s long history of scandals.

The CIA has been accused of infiltrating the police department and using its resources to conduct spying operations on a domestic level, mainly targeting the Muslim community in New York City. After a thorough investigation, the Associated Press has published an article revealing the relationship between the Agency and the NYPD in the past ten years.

Work have been done on two main levels. First, a veteran CIA officer was assigned to be in charge of training a police officer who would put into practice new espionage techniques inside the police units. This action allowed the CIA to influence and reorient NYPD towards serving intelligence instead of fulfilling its normal duty as a law enforcement institution.

Secondly, a senior CIA officer was sent to work as a clandestine operative inside the police headquarters, with the main goal of supervising and watching the progression of the project. Bookstores, cafes, bars and nightclubs are some of the public places targeted by the program which consisted of citizens’ surveillance, also referred to in the AP report as “human mapping.”

The same reports said that the NYPD has sent “rakers” into minority neighborhoods to spy and gather data. Police have also used informants, referred to as “mosque crawlers,” to report on religious sermons or gatherings in mosques, even in the absence of suspicious activity.

In his comments on the issue, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, admitted that NYPD is working with the CIA, but defended its practices saying, “If there are threats or leads to follow, then the NYPD’s job is to do it. The law is pretty clear about what’s the requirement and I think they follow the law. We don’t stop to think about the religion. We stop to think about the threats and focus our efforts there.”

In a response to the report, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Muslim civil rights organization, asked the Justice Department for an investigation into the case. CAIR attorney, Gadeir Abbas, believes that “the first amendment protects our right to associate freely with one another.”

“An investigation of a community [rather than of a crime or a particular person] unlawfully chills the rights of persons within that community. Furthermore, the Establishment Clause requires NYPD to maintain neutrality between all religions. Their intelligence unit appears to be failing to maintain that neutrality by institutionalizing suspicion of all things Islamic,” Abbas said.

Police involvement in CIA activities has blurred the lines of domestic and foreign affairs as well as the limits between local and federal jurisdiction.

Some say that the CIA’s dependence on the help of the NYPD is because of the the agency’s inexperience dealing with a domestic environment. The lack of diversity among the CIA’s personnel may also play into its inability to conduct operations independent of the police department. The NYPD has both features; a direct contact with citizens, as well as a culturally and linguistically diverse staff that more easily blends into the community.

Others are questioning why the CIA doesn’t try collaborating with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) instead of NYPD. Whatever the reason, the issues surrounding privacy and freedom is not only found in the U.S. Many Arabs are currently fighting against regimes, where spying on citizens is routine. Meanwhile, many New Yorkers are unaware of the spying efforts of the CIA and police department.

Glynnis Jones / Shutterstock.com

The article CIA Collaboration With Police in New York City appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

In Germany, Facebook has agreed to voluntarily sign a privacy code to protect users’ information. This agreement comes after Richard Allen, Facebook’s director of European public policy, met with Hans-Peter Friedrich, Germany’s Interior Minister.

Facebook has experienced widespread criticism in Germany for quite some time now about the company’s privacy policy. In early August, the German data protection authority asked Facebook to disable its’ facial recognition feature. The authorities argued that the feature allowed an unauthorized amount of data to be collected about individuals.

The problem started in August when Thilo Weichert, the privacy commissioner for the German state Schleswig-Holstein, announced that any website that featured Facebook’s “like” button on their website would be fined 50,000 Euros ($70,000). Weichert believes that the button violated German user data protection laws.

The exact code will be determined at a later date, however both sides agreed that the code will be sure to create a “stronger protection of users.” The code will go above and beyond the European Union code of law and create stronger protection for German citizens. Future talks about a privacy code will not only include Facebook but also other social networks.

For the time being, Facebook and the German Interior Ministry have been able to temporarily diffuse the situation. Weichert stated that “Right now we do not plan to prosecute a specific website owner.” He went on to say that the purpose of the fine was force Facebook to look into its privacy policy.

Facebook is not the first website to have data protection issues with the German government. In 2010, Google was forced by both German federal and state protection authorities to blue street-level images of people’s homes. Hundreds of thousands of German citizens have opted to have their houses blurred out.

The article Facebook Faces Privacy Concerns in Germany Over ‘Like’ Button appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

A new, less invasive scanner has been installed in airports around the United States.

With controversy still surrounding the Transportation Security Administration’s decision to install airport scanners that allow TSA employees to see through the clothing of individual passengers, the new scanner has been installed in airports in Salt Lake City, Utah, Miami International Airport, and a number of other airports around the country.

It is believed that this new scanner will help assuage the numerous complaints that have been voiced since the original scanners were installed in March of last year.

Rather than showing the body specifics of any particular individual, this new scanner simply shows an avatar of a human. If there is any suspected weaponry or dangerous materials on the passenger, the locations of these objects are shown on the screen as small yellow boxes using an Automated Target Recognition program.

For instance, if a passenger had a suspicious object in his or her pants pocket, a yellow box would show on the screen in the same area. If anything suspicious shows up on the screen the suspected area is searched and the passenger is subject to a pat down. If there is nothing of note detected by the scanner, the screen shows “Ok” and the passenger is free to go.

The original airport scanner was introduced amid concerns by a number of individuals about the safety and privacy of travellers. Many complaints were directed at the use of an x-ray machine on such a wide number of people. Concerns were raised that the radiation produced by the x-rays could pose a number of health concerns.

However, TSA had done testing on the machines before installation and when they were first introduced the assistant administrator for security operations stated that the level of radiation emitted by these scanners “is equivalent to the amount of radiation that a passenger would receive in two minutes of flight.”

Despite assurances that the radiation levels were safe for the majority of passengers, concerns remained. The most controversial aspect to the original scanners was the fact that the image shown on the scanners revealed the nude body of the person being scanned.

The TSA tried to maintain the anonymity of the individual being scanned by having one TSA employee with the person being scanned, and another TSA employee viewing the image of the passenger. Despite the efforts by TSA to maintain an individual’s privacy to the extent that they could, many people still objected to the invasive nature of the scanners.

For individuals who are still not comfortable with the new scanners, or who are pregnant or concerned about the low levels of radiation admitted, they can still choose to have a pat down instead of going through the machine.

Now that these new scanners have a more generic picture for passengers, it helps to preserve the anonymity of the individual being scanned. It also saves costs for TSA since the image no longer needs to be screened in a separate location by a different TSA employee.

This less invasive procedure, if adopted more widely, will help to preserve the privacy of travellers, while still ensuring that their trip is safe for all involved.

Image Courtesy of  http://www.flickr.com/photos/33671002@N00/

The article New Airport Scanner Less Invasive appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

In April 2010 there was an event on Facebook that attracted more then 60,000 RSVPs.

It wasn’t a concert, or a sale, or a protest.

It was what appeared to be a house party, started by an unassuming looking young woman named Kate.

It created not only the 60,000 responses, but a huge variety of other facebook groups – “Is going to try to get with Kate at Kate’s Party”, “We met at Kate’s Party”, “Kate’s party would have gone off” and “Osama Bin Laden is at Kate’s Party”.

And it turns out it was all a hoax – Adelaide man, Dave Thorne, created the event to highlight the failings of Facebook privacy settings.

It became a huge sign of how quickly information can be spread by social media outlets like Twitter and Facebook.

Currently there is another event that has surpassed Kate’s house party in terms of guests.

As of March 14, there are over 100,000 people who have responded to Jess Cooper’s 16th open house party.

The event includes an address and phone number, which the party event says is Jess Coopers’.

Facebook took down the page for Kate’s party after it reached 60,000 guests, and it was confirmed to be a hoax.

It is not yet known whether this new event is another hoax, or a powerful warning to always be careful of privacy settings.

The article 100,000 at Facebook Event, Just a Hoax appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.