Germany’s top publisher bows to Google in news licensing row (Re/Code, 5 Nov 2014) – Germany’s biggest news publisher, Axel Springer, has scrapped a bid to block Google from running snippets of articles from its newspapers, saying that the experiment had caused traffic to its sites to plunge. Springer said a two-week-old experiment to restrict access by Google to its news headlines had caused Web traffic to its publications to plunge, leading it to row back and let Google once again showcase Springer news stories in its search results. Chief Executive Mathias Doepfner said on Wednesday that his company would have “shot ourselves out of the market” if it had continued with its demands for the U.S. firm to pay licensing fees. Springer, which publishes Europe’s top-selling daily newspaper, Bild, said Google’s grip over online audiences was too great to resist, a double-edged compliment meant to ram home the publisher’s criticism of what it calls Google’s monopoly powers. Publishers in countries from Germany and France to Spain have pushed to pass new national copyright laws that force Google and other web aggregators to pay licensing fees – dubbed the Google Tax – when it publishes snippets of their news articles. Under German legislation that came into effect last year, publishers can prohibit search engines and similar services from using their news articles beyond headlines. Last week, Spain’s upper house passed a similar law giving publishers an “inalienable” right to levy such licensing fees on Google.

 

Provided by MIRLN.

Image courtesy of FreeDigitalPhotos.net/KROMKRATHOG

 

 

 

The latest backlash of the NSA spying scandal may not be directed squarely at the U.S. government, but at U.S. businesses.  President Rousseff of Brazil is proposing legislation which would require data generated within the country to also be stored on servers within the country.  What kind of data and exactly how this would work given the breadth and complexity of identifying where data originates from in our ever interconnected world is not yet clear.

As this article in Bloomberg points out, Latin Americans have long been suspicious of U.S. spying activities in the continent.  However, Brazil would not be the first country to make such a requirement on technology companies.  Currently, European countries require personal sensitive data to be stored on servers in-country.  Technology advocates cite slower traffic speeds and increased potential problems with the proposed legislation.  Requiring companies to house servers domestically may also result in protectionist measures meant to bolster local technology industries, and perhaps even trade disputes.

 

The recent revelations about the NSA’s technological surveillance of American citizens have caused many in the US and overseas to question their level of trust in the US government. The German government and citizens have been particularly vocal about their skepticism of US surveillance practices.  The issue is coloring the recent election season, as the media outlets post encryption techniques and question the use of US based social networking sites. Given the country’s history, it is understandable why they would be particularly attuned to fears of a “surveillance state”. Compared to American data privacy laws, which are few and fragmented, Germany has a single data protection act enforced by 17 state supervisors dedicated protecting individual privacy.

These fears have led to an increased distrust of US technology.  The German Ministry of Economic Affairs has become uneasy over the security of the Windows 8 operating system, particularly in the Trusted Platform Module which is being built into an increasing number of windows PCs.  The TPM chip collects cryptographic data stored for Windows BitLocker, has total control over what programs can and cannot be run on the PC, and even allows remote administration of the device.  What is most striking is that the system cannot be overridden through the operating system.  Fears abound that this technology would allow for an even greater level of secret surveillance, one which PC users would be unable to escape.  Apart from fears of state surveillance, having such a chip raises confidentially issues, should third parties find a method of exploiting the system.

Image provided by windows.com

The European Commission recently passed legislation requiring public telecommunication companies to notify regulators within 24 hours of security breaches of their data.  A more detailed account of the security breach must be reported within 3 days after the initial report.

The Telecom must also notify the private individuals affected by the security breach if it is likely to adversely affect their personal data or privacy- a determination that is left wholly within the hands of the Telecoms itself.  The private individual must be notified without “undue delay,” although no specific timeframe is mandated.

Further information is available at: http://www.mondaq.com/x/258672/data+protection/European+Commission+Tightens+The+Deadline+Data+Breach+Notification+Within+24+Hrs&email_access=on

The Supreme Court of New Jersey has just ruled that under its constitution, police must obtain a warrant before accessing cell phone location information (CSLI) in criminal investigations.  Based on the way that cell phones access service towers, CSLI can often give police a precise record of an individual’s location 24 hours a day for as long as the individual has the phone.  Privacy advocates view this type of monitoring as highly intrusive and well beyond what police are allowed to do under the Fourth Amendment.  Many jurisdictions however recognize this sort of information as public, both because it is being broadcast to a third party (the cell phone company) and because an individual’s movements outside of their home can be observed legally without a warrant, by an undercover detective for example.  Privacy advocates respond by saying that no one intends to broadcast their minute by minute location information simply by having a cell phone, and that this type of surveillance goes well beyond what police would be capable of through traditional methods.

Because federal law has not yet clearly taken a stance on using CSLI data under the Fourth Amendment, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled under their own constitution, stating that a cell phone user has a reasonable expectation of privacy in their CSLI data.  This decision could persuade other states to take similar stances requiring warrants for access to the data, however as the court ruled under its own constitution, the federal question is still very much open to debate.

Image provided by cbc.ca

Recall that Time Magazine’s person of the year for 2011 was the protester.  From the Arab Spring to Occupy Wall Street,  decentralized demonstrations rocked the foundations of entrenched societies across the globe.  These protesters were able to harness technology  in order to coordinate, disseminate information, and stay fluid in the face of opposition.  In Egypt, where the revolution toppled a 30 year long regime, protesters developed a number of brilliant methods for communication using their mobile devices to overcome the shutting down of phone and internet service across the country.

Two years later, those innovators who developed apps out of necessity are now at the forefront of an explosion of tech startups developing tools for decidedly less combative needs.  One app started as a way to use bluetooth to coordinate movements among protesters, and is now being retooled as a way to overcome high network traffic on an average day.   Other startups are developing new ways of collaborative learning, digital convenience, and are using technology to ensure that a post revolution Egypt can stay solid going into the future.

 

Image provided by david-campbell.org