Internetwars : De Grote IT-oorlog

[discuz]

Toch wel interessant hoe de aanhouding van het hoofd Development Software van Megaupload, een arrestatie in Nederland, wordt stilgehouden.

Pas vandaag werd bekend dat de man vrijdag al gearresteerd is, gisteren al voor een rechter is verschenen en zijn aanhouding met 60 dagen is verlengd:

THE HAGUE (AFP) - Dutch police have arrested an Estonian man in connection with the Megaupload case into massive online piracy, Dutch prosecutors said Tuesday.

"He was arrested on Friday at the request of the United States," said Paul van der Zanden, spokesman for the prosecutors' office.

"He appeared before a judge on Monday, who decided he should remain in custody for another 60 days," Van der Zanden told AFP.

Saying the arrest was "in connection with the Megaupload case" the Dutch spokesman declined to give further details about the Estonian, adding "the FBI is handling the case" and that the Netherlands have not yet received an extradition request from the US.

A 72-page indictment before a US court however contained the name of Andrus Nomm, which it named as a "citizen of Estonia" and Megaupload's head of Development Software Division.

Geen nieuw erover in de mainstream Nederlandse media, op een enkel regeltje na. En waar de nederlandse servers in beslag zijn genomen mogen we ook niet weten.

Jaja, 'the FBI is handling the case' ...

[den dinges]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Mam

Dat dacht ik ook. Stel dat er geen "kopie"versies meer circuleren, dan ga ik heus niet meer cd's, films, encyclopedieën en boeken kopen.
Muziek kan je nog altijd via de radio beluisteren, films komen ook op tv (en de voor de echt goeie gaan we naar de cinema), er is zonder encyclopedieën al veel informatie op het internet te vinden, en voor (belangrijke) boeken bestaan er nog bibliotheken.
De strijd tegen allerlei vormen van "kopies" lijkt me sowieso een gevecht tegen de bierkaai. Ze waren er ook reeds voor de verspreiding van/op het internet.

Gewoon een taxe op de internetabonnementen van een paar euros, die naar de artiesten gaat, en verder iedereen vrij laten downladen.
Dit alles doet mij denken aan wanneer de eerste lege casette's verkocht werden...

[Baka]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door den dinges

Gewoon een taxe op de internetabonnementen van een paar euros, die naar de artiesten gaat, en verder iedereen vrij laten downladen.
Dit alles doet mij denken aan wanneer de eerste lege casette's verkocht werden...

Vergeet't dude.
Gegarandeerd dat die centen allemaal naar Gaga , U2 en andere mainstreambrol gaat.
No EFFING WAY

[Baka]

26 alternatieven voor megaupload

[Johnny Blaze]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door den dinges

Gewoon een taxe op de internetabonnementen van een paar euros, die naar de artiesten gaat, en verder iedereen vrij laten downladen.
Dit alles doet mij denken aan wanneer de eerste lege casette's verkocht werden...

We betalen al extra taxen genoeg op leeg cd's, dvd's en BRd's, zelfs al brand je er je eigen materiaal op.

[Kasumi]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Johnny Blaze

We betalen al extra taxen genoeg op leeg cd's, dvd's en BRd's, zelfs al brand je er je eigen materiaal op.

En alles anders wat geheugen heeft, zoals harde schijf, usb stick, smarthone, mp3 speler. Het is welletjes zo.

[discuz]

De mediadinosaurussen hebben het nog altijd niet door. Dat ze - om hun doodsstrijd nog wat te rekken, want veel gaan er niet overblijven - de centen halen bij die er geld aan verdienen. Maar lang niet alle IP-inbreuken leveren centen op.

[discuz]

[BREAKING]

Het nieuwe Privacybeleid en de nieuwe Servicevoorwaarden van Google zijn van kracht vanaf 1 maart 2012. Als u ervoor kiest Google te blijven gebruiken zodra de wijziging is doorgevoerd, doet u dit conform het nieuwe Privacybeleid en de nieuwe Servicevoorwaarden.

Zag net dit verschijnen op de Google zoekpagina. Hebben ze net als al de andere schrik gekregen, of nemen ze gewoon alle concurrentie over?

[zonbron]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door discuz

[BREAKING]



Zag net dit verschijnen op de Google zoekpagina. Hebben ze net als al de andere schrik gekregen, of nemen ze gewoon alle concurrentie over?

Dit houdt in dat als U op google als gebruiker inlogt, U voor alle googleproducten dezelde ID heeft.

Meer:google-changes-again-launches-one-privacy-policy-to-rule-them-all/

Het zal dus als het ware, al Uw gebruikersgegevens doen samensmelten in slechts 1 databank.

Vandaar de nieuwe privacy policy.
Een mooie stap naar de unieke internet-ID toe.

Verder...

...

Google said the new privacy policy responds to demands from regulators around the globe that users have a simpler, more concise way to understand what Google does with their information. Right now users have to navigate a complex web of privacy policies and terms of service for different Google products.

Google says it's been combining information it gleans about users logged into Google for years to tailor search results and ads to their interests. Now it will be able to do that even more broadly. For example, if you search for skateboard tricks on Google and then hop over to YouTube, the video sharing site will recommend offerings from skateboard pro Tony Hawk.

Google says users can still control their information through the privacy dashboard and the Ads Preferences Manager.

Google says it's helping users. But it's also clearly helping itself, said Danny Sullivan, editor of SearchEngineLand.com.

"This may cause more critics to complain that there is no escaping the clutches of Google," Sullivan said.

Meer google-to-merge-user-data-across-more-services-

[discuz]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door zonbron

Een mooie stap naar de unieke internet-ID toe.

Ze lachen ons in ons gezicht uit. Nog altijd.

[zonbron]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door discuz

Ze lachen ons in ons gezicht uit. Nog altijd.

Tja, U leest de privacy policy, aanvaardt die of laat google voor wat het is.

Wenst U privacy ? Gebruik startpage.com

[the_dude]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door zonbron

Tja, U leest de privacy policy, aanvaardt die of laat google voor wat het is.

Wenst U privacy ? Gebruik startpage.com

of hoehel.be of geen goed idee?

[CyberpunX]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door zonbron

Het zal dus als het ware, al Uw gebruikersgegevens doen samensmelten in slechts 1 databank.

Vandaar de nieuwe privacy policy.
Een mooie stap naar de unieke internet-ID toe.

Ze hebben pas hun 'real name' policy opgegeven. Google staat dus nog vrij ver van een internet ID en moeten dus gaan data ronselen via alle diensten. Alhoewel iTunes natuurlijk wel voor die data kan zorgen want die koppelen je aan een creditcard.

[zonbron]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door the_dude

of hoehel.be of geen goed idee?

, maar nee, dat is geen goed idee als U Uw gegevens wil beschermen.

[zonbron]

Het moet blijkbaar snel gaan...

Obama Signs Global Internet Treaty Worse Than SOPA

White House bypasses Senate to ink agreement that could allow Chinese companies to demand ISPs remove web content in US with no legal oversight

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
Thursday, January 26, 2012

Months before the debate about Internet censorship raged as SOPA and PIPA dominated the concerns of web users, President Obama signed an international treaty that would allow companies in China or any other country in the world to demand ISPs remove web content in the US with no legal oversight whatsoever.



The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement was signed by Obama on October 1 2011, yet is currently the subject of a White House petition demanding Senators be forced to ratify the treaty. The White House has circumvented the necessity to have the treaty confirmed by lawmakers by presenting it an as “executive agreement,” although legal scholars have highlighted the dubious nature of this characterization.

The hacktivist group Anonymous attacked and took offline the Federal Trade Commission’s website yesterday in protest against the treaty, which was also the subject of demonstrations across major cities in Poland, a country set to sign the agreement today.

Under the provisions of ACTA, copyright holders will be granted sweeping direct powers to demand ISPs remove material from the Internet on a whim. Whereas ISPs normally are only forced to remove content after a court order, all legal oversight will be abolished, a precedent that will apply globally, rendering the treaty worse in its potential scope for abuse than SOPA or PIPA.

A country known for its enforcement of harsh Internet censorship policies like China could demand under the treaty that an ISP in the United States remove content or terminate a website on its server altogether. As we have seen from the enforcement of similar copyright policies in the US, websites are sometimes targeted for no justifiable reason.

The groups pushing the treaty also want to empower copyright holders with the ability to demand that users who violate intellectual property rights (with no legal process) have their Internet connections terminated, a punishment that could only ever be properly enforced by the creation of an individual Internet ID card for every web user, a system that is already in the works.

“The same industry rightsholder groups that support the creation of ACTA have also called for mandatory network-level filtering by Internet Service Providers and for Internet Service Providers to terminate citizens’ Internet connection on repeat allegation of copyright infringement (the “Three Strikes” /Graduated Response) so there is reason to believe that ACTA will seek to increase intermediary liability and require these things of Internet Service Providers,” reports the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

The treaty will also mandate that ISPs disclose personal user information to the copyright holder, while providing authorities across the globe with broader powers to search laptops and Internet-capable devices at border checkpoints.

In presenting ACTA as an “international agreement” rather than a treaty, the Obama administration managed to circumvent the legislative process and avoid having to get Senate approval, a method questioned by Senator Wyden.

“That said, even if Obama has declared ACTA an executive agreement (while those in Europe insist that it’s a binding treaty), there is a very real Constitutional question here: can it actually be an executive agreement?” asks TechDirt. “The law is clear that the only things that can be covered by executive agreements are things that involve items that are solely under the President’s mandate. That is, you can’t sign an executive agreement that impacts the things Congress has control over. But here’s the thing: intellectual property, in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, is an issue given to Congress, not the President. Thus, there’s a pretty strong argument that the president legally cannot sign any intellectual property agreements as an executive agreement and, instead, must submit them to the Senate.”.

26 European Union member states along with the EU itself are set to sign the treaty at a ceremony today in Tokyo. Other countries wishing to sign the agreement have until May 2013 to do so.

Critics are urging those concerned about Obama’s decision to sign the document with no legislative oversight to demand the Senate be forced to ratify the treaty.

[zonbron]

Google censureert de zoekresultaten in opdracht van oa. de Britse regering

Leveson inquiry: Google asked to remove dozens of web pages for national security


Meer : Google takes the stand at the UK Leveson Inquiry and says: “We are not the Internet”

De nieuwe Google privacy policy vanaf 1 Maart 2012, gebruikers kunnen niet aan deze nieuwe maatregelen ontsnappen


***Maar zoals ik reeds vermeldde, als U niet inlogt blijft alles hetzelfde. Dit alhoewel ze op basis van enkel het IP-nummer dit wel kunnen (IMHO). Tip: gebruik dynamic IP of proxy...

Correction:

An earlier version of this article did not make clear that users who have not logged on to Google or one of its other sites, such as YouTube, are not affected by the new Google privacy policy. This version has been updated to include that information.

Uit de Washington Post: (link)
Google announces privacy changes across products; users can’t opt out




Google will soon know far more about who you are and what you do on the Web.

The Web giant announced Tuesday that it plans to follow the activities of users across nearly all of its ubiquitous sites, including YouTube, Gmail and its leading search engine.



Google has already been collecting some of this information. But for the first time, it is combining data across its Web sites to stitch together a fuller portrait of users. ****(zoiets noemt cross reference dames en heren !!!)

Consumers won’t be able to opt out of the changes, which take effect March 1. And experts say the policy shift will invite greater scrutiny from federal regulators of the company’s privacy and competitive practices !!!!!

The move will help Google better tailor its ads to people’s tastes. If someone watches an NBA clip online and lives in Washington, the firm could advertise Washington Wizards tickets in that person’s Gmail account.

Consumers could also benefit, the company said. When someone is searching for the word “jaguar,” Google would have a better idea of whether the person was interested in the animal or the car. Or the firm might suggest e-mailing contacts in New York when it learns you are planning a trip there.

But consumer advocates say the new policy might upset people who never expected their information would be shared across so many different Web sites.

A user signing up for Gmail, for instance, might never have imagined that the content of his or her messages could affect the experience on seemingly unrelated Web sites such as YouTube.

“Google’s new privacy announcement is frustrating and a little frightening,” said Common Sense Media chief executive James Steyer. “Even if the company believes that tracking users across all platforms improves their services, consumers should still have the option to opt out — especially the kids and teens who are avid users of YouTube, Gmail and Google Search.”

Google can collect information about users when they activate an Android mobile phone, sign into their accounts online or enter search terms. It can also store cookies on people’s computers to see which Web sites they visit or use its popular maps program to estimate their location. However, users who have not logged on to Google or one of its other sites, such as YouTube, are not affected by the new policy.

The change to its privacy policies come as Google is facing stiff competition for the fickle attention of Web surfers. It recently disappointed investors for the first time in several quarters, failing last week to meet earnings predictions. Apple, in contrast, reported record earnings Tuesday that blew past even the most optimistic expectations.

Some analysts said Google’s move is aimed squarely at Apple and Facebook — which have been successful in building unified ecosystems of products that capture people’s attention. Google, in contrast, has adopted a more scattered approach, but an executive said in an interview that the company wants to create a much more seamless environment across its various offerings.

“If you’re signed in, we may combine information you’ve provided from one service with information from other services,” Alma Whitten, Google’s director of privacy for product and engineering, wrote in a blog post.

“In short, we’ll treat you as a single user across all our products, which will mean a simpler, more intuitive Google experience,” she said.

Google said it would notify its hundreds of millions of users of the change through an e-mail and a message on its Web sites. It will apply to all of its services except for Google Wallet, the Chrome browser and Google Books.

The company said the change would simplify the company’s privacy policy — a move that regulators encouraged.

Still, some consumer advocates and lawmakers remained skeptical.

“There is no way anyone expected this,” said Jeffrey Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy, a privacy advocacy group. “There is no way a user can comprehend the implication of Google collecting across platforms for information about your health, political opinions and financial concerns.”

Added Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass), co-chair of the Congressional Privacy Caucus: “It is imperative that users will be able to decide whether they want their information shared across the spectrum of Google’s offerings.”

Google has increasingly been a focus of Washington regulators.

The company recently settled a privacy complaint by the Federal Trade Commission after it allowed users of its now-defunct social-networking tool Google Buzz to see contacts lists from its e-mail program.

And a previous decision to use its social network data in search results has been included in a broad FTC investigation, according to a person familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the investigation is private.

Federal officials are also looking at whether Google is running afoul of antitrust rules by using its dominance in online searches to favor its other business lines.

Claudia Farrell, a spokeswoman for the FTC, declined to comment on any interaction between Google and regulators on its new privacy changes.

[zonbron]

Voor de liefhebbers. Hoe megaupload bij de lurven genomen werd.

How Megaupload Was Investigated and Indicted

The popular file upload site Megaupload was taken down today as part of a US DOJ investigation into the site for breaches of US copyright law.

From reading the indictment and digging around online you can start to reverse-engineer how the investigation was carried out.

The evidence in the grand jury indictment is of four forms:

Internal emails, dating back to 2005 - including correspondance between staff members and support emails.

Publicly accessible details such as URLs to pirated content, dates of domain registrations.

Information from the Megaupload PayPal account and correspondance between PayPal and Megaupload

Information from the Megaupload Moneybookers account.



The Megaupload corporate email was self-hosted on a dedicated server that was one of the 525 servers the company had located with Carpathia Hosting in Virginia. That mail server is no longer responding, but the MX record can still be found and pointing to an IP address belonging to Carpathia.

...

It amazes me that this company hosted its emails in plain text on a US-based server. The irony is that there are a number of internal Megaupload email threads discussing what they should do to better shield themselves from the US government. These conversations all take place on a server hosted in the USA. The bulk of the DOJ case will be built on the email archive - and hosting their own email server in the USA may become the major cause that resulted in their downfall.

...

It is thus likely that this investigation began in 2010, at the latest. The emails in the indictment date until November 2011, so the search warrant must have been carried out late last year. The indictment was filed on the 5th of January this year and only unsealed yesterday. The grand jury must have taken place late last year (in 2010).

The internal emails are often incriminating. I don't buy the argument that a DMCA takedown request requires you to remove every copy of the same file, since the each request requires a legal notice that the particular user who uploaded the file does not have explicit permission to host that file. What is a worry for MegaUpload is the internal emails between staff discussing piracy, where to find pirated material, rewarding uploaders with cash payments for uploading pirated material and helping out users to find pirated material in support emails (one support email asks 'I only bought a Megaupload account to watch (the name of some show)' and the staff responded with a link to a download).

Also incriminating is the money laundering evidence. In the year 2011 alone, Megaupload spent $7.8M on renting yachts in the Mediterranean for 'marketing purposes'. There were also numerous million-dollar or greater bank transfers between a large number of what look like shell companies.

For the sake of the Internet, I hope Kimble and Megaupload refuse any plea deal and take this all the way to court. They may be guilty on racketeering and money laundering, but we need those finer aspects of DMCA and safe harbor to be tested in a US court. I would also like to find out what probably cause was used to issue a search warrant for the email server and its contents - since that is where almost all of the evidence in this case originated from and there is very little evidence in the injunction outside of the contents of those emails.

[discuz]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door zonbron

Voor de liefhebbers. Hoe megaupload bij de lurven genomen werd.

Je bent nog een paar Skype-gesprekken vergeten. Die hebben de FBI ook afgeluisterd (of ze daarvoor een uitspraak van een rechter hadden is onbekend, de Patriot Act was misschien al genoeg?).

[the_dude]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door zonbron

, maar nee, dat is geen goed idee als U Uw gegevens wil beschermen.

btw wij zitten in België toch allemaal met een variabel ip adres toch? Buiten zij die speciaal een vast hebben aangevraagd.

[discuz]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door the_dude

btw wij zitten in België toch allemaal met een variabel ip adres toch? Buiten zij die speciaal een vast hebben aangevraagd.

In principe wel, ja. Maar ga zelf eens na hoe lang je hetzelfde IP houdt. Ik zit bij Telenet en dat is maanden ... Gelukkig kan je met een truukje een nieuw adres forceren.

Elk bedrijf dat van dicht of ver een link met de States heeft laat trouwens meteen de broek zakken voor de FBI. Ook Telenet dus.