YouTube not liable in Germany for users' copyright infringement
Published in News

YouTube and copyright has been a controversial subject since they first hit the internet. The problem is who is liable for copyright infringement. Is it the poster or the service? The copyright gang would love to tell you it is both. They want the chance to go after the individuals and also to be sure to get financially compensated by the service provider. Sadly in the US the courts are siding with the copyright cartels for a multitude of reasons (none are based on how technology works though). In EMEA, well things are a tad different over there.

California Lawmakers push to ban the sale of encrypted smartphones
Published in News

You would think that in 2016 the people in power would either understand technology, or would have been replaced by someone that does. Sadly, this is not the case in… well just about every place there is an elected official. Over the past few years we have seen some very stupid bit of technical legislation come over the wire. Everything from kill switches in smartphones to backdoors in software and encryption standards. All of the legislation proposed read like they were written by someone that has no clue about technology, but might watch a lot of TV… and bad TV at that.

Remember that little patent squabble that NVIDIA and Samsung got into last year? Well some things have happened and they are not all that good for NVIDIA. If you have already forgotten about this incident (we do not blame you) we will fill you in. NVIDIA decided to file a complaint with the ITC against Samsung and Qualcomm. The claim was that Samsung was using technology that violated patents that they owned (programmable shaders, parallel processing etc.). NVIDIA also filed a patent law suit at the same time.

After a long and complicated battle Kim Dotcom and the other Megaupload employees (Mathias Ortmann, Finn Batato, and Bram van der Kolk) might have lost an important battle. A district judge, Judge Nevin Dawson, has ruled that the US can present an extradition request for the four. Further Judge Dawson feels that none of the legal arguments brought forth by Dotcom and the others is sufficient to deny the request.

Asetek targets Giagbyte and AMD in patent dispute with Cooler Master
Published in News

Asetek is hard at work throwing its legal muscle around and they have rolled AMD and Gigabyte into their efforts. After winning a patent suit against Cooler Master over technology found in the pumps on some of their All in One water coolers. So far the list of infringing products include Gigabyte’s GTX 980 Water Force and AMD’s Fury X. Cooler Master has already been ordered to pay 14.5 % on sales of the Seidon, Nepton and Glacier products, but seems to have decided not to do so.

NSA mass data collection to stop in 20 days, but just on paper.
Published in News

In the post-Snowden era the idea that government agencies are spying on us is no longer the real of Movies/TV or conspiracy theorists. It is fairly well documented that this is happening every day. The question has moved from what if this happens, to what we are going to do to change it. Well one of the biggest hurdles has been trying to find people in power that even want this to change. When you consider the fact that the people with the power to stop the mass spying are likely to be the ones that voted to put it in place. This has meant that the average person must try to prove their case in the courts.

It seems that at least one person is rather annoyed at AMD for making claims about certain FX series CPUs running Bulldozer cores. On November 4th the news went out that Tony Dickey had filed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of himself and others. The suit was actually filed back on October 26th and alleges violations of the Consumer Legal Remedies Act. This act covers misrepresentation and false advertising. Dicky alleges that AMD knowing mislead consumers about the number of functional cores Bulldozer CPUs have. AMD claims that Bulldozer has eight independent cores, Dickey says that there are only four that are functional.

The term privacy has come to mean a great many things in the last few years. To some the idea of privacy is being able to do or say certain things without the fear of anyone finding out. Most people like to know that what they do on their own time is their business. Where things get a little muddy is when people liken the desire for privacy with a desire to hide wrongdoing. This belief couldn’t be farther from the truth . It is not just that it is wrong, but it is also dangerous. To imply that anyone that wants to have privacy is somehow hiding something illegal sets a dangerous precedent. Keeping this mentality alive will allow for a further erosion of peoples’ rights and grants very worrying powers to agencies that are there to protect, not to oppress.

Rights Corp might have offered a piece of the settlement pie to Cox
Published in News

The idea of copyright was and is a good thing. Being able to temporarily protect your artistic investment is never wrong. The problem comes when the copyright holders get greedy or feel that their copyright grants them special rights and powers. This is the situation we have with the current copyright cartel… I mean groups. They feel that they have powers that are not, in any way, part of the copyright laws and legal protections. They also feel like they exist in a special world that grants them more rights than anyone else.

Florida Judge Says that an IP Address is not enough to prove piracy
Published in News

If you have been following news about piracy, copyright, or indeed almost anything you will know that the copyright industry often employs some rather shady methods to get their way. One of the shadiest methods is the demand letter. If you are not familiar with this term let us explain (if you are bear with us): a demand letter is when a legal firm tries to tie IP addresses they have identified to actual ISP subscribers. They send large numbers of subpoenas to ISPs asking that they put the two together so that they (the law firm) can then send a settlement letter demanding money from the alleged pirate.