Police scour social websites to tackle brutality and boasts of young criminals: “Social networking websites such as Bebo, YouTube and MySpace have been identified by police as having a big influence over gang culture and youth violence.”
Dissident websites crippled by Burma on anniversary of revolt: “A year after e-mailed images of its brutal crackdown against democracy
demonstrations were transmitted across the world, Burma has launched a
ferocious ‘cyber-war’ against dissidents who use the internet.”
Arrested Malaysian Blogger Freed Following Public Outcry: “It’s hard to figure out what the government of Malaysia is thinking in its ongoing trouble in dealing with critical bloggers (some of whom were so powerful that they got elected). Last week, we noted that one of the more popular bloggers, whose blog had been ordered blocked by ISPs was arrested, just as the block on his blog was removed. Not surprisingly, the arrest led to a public outcry, and the government has now relented and freed the blogger, who quickly posted an anti-government rant on his blog, promising not to back down. The whole thing makes you wonder how tone deaf the leading party politicians in Malaysia are that they didn’t expect this to happen. Arresting an opposition blogger was bound to create further outcry, and this move only helped legitimize the points he’s been making. You would think that at least someone in the ruling party would have been savvy enough to recognize that this was inevitable.
As US Looks To Re-legalize Online Poker, Germany Bans It: “Just as the US seems to be moving forward with efforts to relegalize online poker, it appears that Germany is moving in the opposite direction, passing a law to ban online poker — even to the point of allowing German authorities to put online poker players in jail (though, no one seems to think that’s likely to happen).
Post from: TorrentFreak
An ISP which was ordered by a court to stop illegal file-sharing on its network, says it simply can not. The Belgian ISP Scarlet says the court’s verdict is unworkable and after trying to slow traffic and also filter it, it says it’s not possible to stop the flow of illicit files since Audible Magic doesn’t work.
In mid-2007, after a battle with copyright group SABAM, a court in Belgium ruled that Internet Service Providers can be forced to block and/or filter copyright infringing files on P2P networks. Although most people familiar with the technical hurdles recognized that this was a massive if not impossible task, the judge in the case ruled that ISPs are indeed capable of blocking infringing content and gave Scarlet six months to comply.
Scarlet said right from the start that it believed that if it complied with the court order it would be breaking the law. The ISP claimed that Belgian law forbids it from spying on its customers so it lodged an appeal against the ruling, with managing director Gert Post saying: ‘This measure is nothing else than playing Big Brother on the Internet. If we don’t challenge it today, we leave the door open to permanent, and invisible and illegal, checks of personal data.’
Now, over a year later, Scarlet’s lawyers argued in court that the company simply cannot stop the flow of illicit files, which is a serious situation since the ISP has to pay compensation of 2,500 Euros for each day it fails to do so. According to a report, Scarlet has tried different techniques to try to comply with the ruling but has had no success.
First of all, Scarlet slowed down P2P traffic with the help of some Cisco technology. All this led to was complaints from the customers, and it did nothing to stop the availability of the illicit files. A lawyer for Scarlet, Christoph Preter said: ‘We have actually received complaints that P2P traffic was slower, but it remained possible. It is only a deterrent measure.’
The ISP quite rightly refused to block all P2P traffic, since it said it would be blocking legitimate traffic too. However, copyright group SABAM said this was not a valid excuse. ‘The argument put forward by Scarlet,’ said SABAM’s lawyer, ‘is not about the impossibility of blocking, but about the consequences.’ SABAM clearly doesn’t care who is affected, as long as it gets its way, stating that Scarlet simply hasn’t tried hard enough to comply with the court.
The second solution, the filtering of illicit files, was a solution put forward last year by SABAM itself. On the advice of an appointed P2P ‘expert’, the court ruled that Scarlet must use the content filtering technology offered by Audible Magic. However, Scarlet tried this system and it didn’t work when scanning for files on their network. During last year’s court case it was claimed that Audible Magic had experience with filtering in the US with Verizon and in Asia with another ISP. However, Scarlet made inquiries with Verizon about the partnership but was told that no such deal exists and Audible Magic refused to reveal who the Asian ISP is.
‘We have misled the court,’ said SABAM’s lawyer. ‘But SABAM followed the expert in the choice of Audible Magic, so we were acting in good faith.’
A ruling in the case is not expected until 2010.
Site glitches blamed for abandoned shopping carts on the web: “Almost nine out of ten people who try to buy online run into problems, a survey has found. The research found that those problems can seriously affect businesses, as 41% of customers would abandon transactions if they came across a problem.”
(Via OUT-LAW News.)
Rejected From College Because Of Your Facebook Profile?: “We’ve all seen the stories about potential dates or employers scanning your social network profiles to decide what they think of you, but what about your potential university? Slashdot points us to a study suggesting that 10% of universities now examine social network profiles as part of their efforts to evaluate applicants. And, in some of those cases, the profiles hurt candidates to the point of having admissions directors change their minds. Other universities claim that they don’t think it’s right to view such ‘personal’ spaces, but you have to wonder if that view will change over time. Personally, I don’t see anything wrong with universities doing this. They’re used to just seeing a carefully controlled image of the student, and what’s on their social networking sites may reveal a lot more useful info. However, it seems like students should at least be aware that this public display of information is being added to their ‘permanent record’ for consideration at universities.