https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/meta-staff-torrented-nearly-82tb-of-pirated-books-for-ai-training-court-records-reveal-copyright-violations

prisiel mi mail z Lity o "LITA: Aktualizacia Vasej zmluvy o zastupovani"
tldr
ma to zmysel riesit?

https://nitter.cz/WolfieChristl/status/1596277060435345411

ahojte,

este predtym, nez vynajdem koleso, chcem si to overit aj tu:

chcem si vyrobit backup youtube videi, castokrat ich mazu a niektore kusky su na nezaplatenie. predstavujem si to nejak tak, ze bezne cez den ked pouzivam youtube, tak ak chcem nieco odzalohovat, mal by som napriklad v browseri plugin, ktory mi na 1 kliknutie to video ulozi do mojej sluzby.

existuje taka nahrada youtube, ktora poskytuje:
- web interface
- custom hostovanie videi bez nejakej potencialnej kontroly autorskych prav
- one-click youtube video download

mam vedomost o youtube-dl a este som davnejsie zachytil nejaku youtube interface alternativu (tusim kvoli recommenderu), ktoru uz ale neviem najst. ale nic konzistentne, co by splnalo vsetky poziadavky.

The Library Genesis collection is live on IPFS as of today, accessible via libgen.rs and libgen.fun.
https://freeread.org/ipfs/

https://github.com/ytdl-org/youtube-dl (!)
RIAA donutila Github (Microsoft) odstranit youtube-dl repozitar.

https://dennikn.sk/2015862/pavel-novotny-kufrik-s-ricinom-existuje-zbabrala-to-tajna-sluzba/?ref=mpm

Mohol by mi niekto skopčiť rozhovor pls?

Kritizované okrem iného veľkými internetovými platformami ale aj ďalšími subjektami sú najmä ustanovenia známe ako články 11 a 13 smernice.

Podľa článku 13 budú rozličné platformy zobrazujúce obsah od užívateľov vrátane sociálnych sietí zodpovedné za obsah nahrávaný ich užívateľmi a budú tak musieť tento samé aktívne monitorovať na obsah porušujúci autorské práva. Veľké platformy zrejme budú potrebovať automatické monitorovanie a pri súčasnej úrovni technológií to môže vyústiť v preventívne blokovanie často aj legitímneho obsahu.

Podľa článku 11 zase nebudú môcť napríklad vyhľadávače bez dohody zobrazovať väčšie úryvky zo spravodajských článkov médií.
http://dsl.sk/article.php?article=22300


podla novej smernice som sem nemohol pastnut vynatok z toho clanku napriklad

https://mobile.twitter.com/littlescale/status/949032404206870528

Dobry den. Chcem sa spytat ci tento rok maju vojst do platnosti nejake nove EU smernice ohladom autorskych prav. Pytam sa nakolko sa internetom siria spravy specialne medzi strankami .zaoberajucimi sa sci fantasy a pod. vid napr http://shirai.cz/clanek-zobraz/311/zmeny-po-novem-roce/ snazil som sa patrat o co presne ide ale nic som presne nenasiel. Dakujem za pomoc
https://forum.akihabara.cz/index.php?topic=5344 (nutné akihabara přihlášení)
http://ngfailsub.eu/2017/12/04/ac-neradi-tak-musime/

Neviem, ci je to offtopic, ale viete sem niekto hodit toto cele??
https://dennikn.sk/982686/dnes-vecer-zbombarduju-civilov-zakazanymi-zbranami-putovanie-po-oboch-stranach-frontu-v-donbase/
Merci

A Council of the European Union document leaked by Statewatch on 30 August reveals that during the summer months, that Estonia (current EU Presidency) has been pushing the other Member States to strengthen indiscriminate internet surveillance, and to follow in the footsteps of China regarding online censorship. Standing firmly behind its belief that filtering the uploads is the way to go, the Presidency has worked hard in order to make the proposal for the new copyright Directive even more harmful than the Commission's original proposal, and pushing it further into the realms of illegality. According to the leaked document, the text suggests two options for each of the two most controversial proposals: the so-called "link tax" or ancillary copyright and the upload filter.
https://edri.org/leaked-document-eu-presidency-calls-for-massive-internet-filtering/

https://www.wired.com/story/the-star-wars-video-that-baffled-youtubes-copyright-cops?mbid=social_fb

Fans of the YouTube channel Auralnauts, which posted the doctored Star Wars scene in 2014 as a tongue-in-cheek tribute to the emotional power of Williams’ score, loved it for that weirdness. But another set of viewers—those with the rights to the movie’s soundtrack—tuned in to these sounds of silence and heard something else: the ka-ching of a cash register.
That’s what the Auralnauts discovered earlier this summer when they received word that Warner/Chappell—the global music publishing arm of Warner Music Group—had filed a monetization claim on their “Star Wars Minus Williams” video through YouTube's Content ID System. That’s right: The copyright holder was claiming ownership of something that wasn’t there. Under the claim, Warner would receive any future ad revenue the video earns, which has been viewed more than 4 million times. The company’s effort to monetize silence transformed the Auralnauts video: Once just a clever gag, it quickly became a flashpoint in the broader YouTube conflict between freedom of expression and copyright protection.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/06/scientific-research-piracy-site-hit-with-15-million-fine/

zaujimavy text o vyvoji a podstate academic publishing
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jun/27/profitable-business-scientific-publishing-bad-for-science?CMP=fb_gu

Mate niekto skusenosti ako je to s pravami na YT, ak chcem vo svojom (entertainment/gaming) videu pouzit kratke utrzky z roznych filmov a pesniciek ako zabavne referencie?

Z toho co som nasiel to vyzera, ze je to na dobrej voli autorov. Ak to niekto nahlasi, tak mi to jednoducho mozu vypnut. Ako to riesia napr. taketo pripady, myslite, ze maju od HBO povolenie?

https://tech.sme.sk/c/20558116/nemci-vytvorili-open-source-paradajku-a-obilie.html#axzz4k67mDxlQ

×÷ßßß$ˇ~[☼◙ş→☻ü84ó♀ÇüŮń§►♫☺♀♂ć☺<\ˇ

The European Parliament has passed draft rules mandating 'content portability', i.e. the ability to take your purchased content and services across borders within the EU. Freedom of movement rules, which allow EU citizens to live and work anywhere in the EU, require that the individual is able to take their life with them -- family, property, and services. Under the new rules, someone who pays for Netflix or BBC iPlayer and then moves to another EU country will retain access to those services and the same content they had previously. Separately, rules to prevent geofencing of content within the EU entirely are also moving forward.
https://torrentfreak.com/eu-votes-today-on-content-portability-to-reduce-piracy-170518/

Čaute,

potom ako dali v novembri dole what.cd - pls, neviete či sa nevytvorilo už niečo obdobné a náhradné?

Ď.

Somewhere at Google there is a database containing 25 million books and nobody is allowed to read them.
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/04/the-tragedy-of-google-books/523320/

The European Union's top court ruled in May 2014 that people could ask search engines, such as Google or Microsoft's Bing, to remove inadequate or irrelevant information from the web results produced from searches for people's names. Today, the court is limiting the so-called "right to be forgotten" principle, ruling that individuals cannot demand that personal data be erased from company records in an official register. Reuters reports:
In Thursday's ruling the European Court of Justice said that company registers needed to be public to ensure legal certainty and to protect the interests of third parties. Company registers only contained a limited amount of personal information and, as executives in companies should disclose their identity and functions, it said. This did not constitute too severe an interference in their private lives and personal data. However, the court said there might be specific situations in which access to personal data in company registers could be limited, such as a long period after a company's dissolution. But this should be determined on a case-by-case bas

On Monday, W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) director Tim Berners-Lee released a post defending his decision to allow Netflix, Microsoft, Apple and Google to enshrine DRM in Web standards, arguing that blocking it would be pointless. Zak Rogoff, FSF campaigns manager, writes in the response:

"As Director of the W3C (World Wide Web Consortium), Berners-Lee has the ability to block [the DRM proposal] from ratification as an official Web standard... Of course, a refusal to ratify could not immediately stop the use of DRM, but it could meaningfully weaken the position of DRM in the court of public opinion, and put EME proponents Netflix, Microsoft, Apple, and Google on notice that a very prominent figure was willing to stand up to them on behalf of users. Changes in society's technological infrastructure require political movements, not just technological arguments, and political movements benefit greatly from the support of prominent figures."

Berners-Lee takes the position that "The web has to be universal, to function at all. It has to be capable of holding crazy ideas of the moment, but also the well polished ideas of the century. It must be able to handle any language and culture. It must be able to include information of all types, and media of many genres. Included in that universality is that it must be able to support free stuff and for-pay stuff, as they are all part of this world.

"This means that it is good for the web to be able to include movies, and so for that, it is better for HTML5 to have EME than to not have it."

Microsoft Azure will now offer customers protection against patent trolling, via Redmond's considerable collection of 10,000 legal patents. The practice of patent trolling has become an industry hazard for startups in the last fifteen years, with companies forming solely for the purpose of exploiting obscure or difficult-to-research patents which may overlap with the IP of startups. As of today, Azure is offering 'uncapped indemnification coverage', including coverage against open-source implementations of entities such as Hadoop, which forms the basis of Azure's HD Insight product.

je to známe už dlho, ale zodpovedné firmy to asi majú na saláme - platiaci zákazník dostane horšiu kvalitu, ako neplatiaci, aj kvôli tomu je motivovaný neplatiť.
http://technet.idnes.cz/platici-zakaznik-nejhure-0hm-/tec_technika.aspx?c=A170126_151357_tec_technika_nyv

×÷ßßß$ˇ~[☼◙ş→☻ü84ó♀ÇüŮń§►♫☺♀♂ć☺<\ˇ

Automakers are using the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to shut down tools used by car mechanics -- but three states are trying to stop them. An anonymous reader quotes IFixIt.Org:
in 2014, Ford sued Autel for making a tool that diagnoses car trouble and tells you what part fixes it. Autel decrypted a list of Ford car parts, which wound up in their diagnostic tool. Ford claimed that the parts list was protected under copyright (even though data isn't creative work) -- and cracking the encryption violated the DMCA. The case is still making its way through the courts. But this much is clear: Ford didn't like Autel's competing tool, and they don't mind wielding the DMCA to shut the company down...

Thankfully, voters are stepping up to protect American jobs. Just last week, at the behest of constituents, three states -- Nebraska, Minnesota, and New York -- introduced Right to Repair legislation (more states will follow). These 'Fair Repair' laws would require manufacturers to provide service information and sell repair parts to owners and independent repair shops.

Activist groups like the EFF and Repair.org want to "ensure that repair people aren't marked as criminals under the DMCA," according to the site, arguing that we're heading towards a future with many more gadgets to fix. "But we'll have to fix copyright law
https://repair.org/

Via ach
http://www.theverge.com/2016/11/17/13669832/what-cd-music-torrent-website-shut-down

;((((

Dufam ze co sa tyka OPSEC su ok.. Ale pochybujem o tom.

You may have thought that if you owned your digital devices, you were allowed to do whatever you like with them. In truth, even for possessions as personal as your car, PC, or insulin pump, you risked a lawsuit every time you reverse-engineered their software guts to dig up their security vulnerabilities—until now.

Last Friday, a new exemption to the decades-old law known as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act quietly kicked in, carving out protections for Americans to hack their own devices without fear that the DMCA’s ban on circumventing protections on copyrighted systems would allow manufacturers to sue them. One exemption, crucially, will allow new forms of security research on those consumer devices. Another allows for the digital repair of vehicles. Together, the security community and DIYers are hoping those protections, which were enacted by the Library of Congress’s Copyright Office in October of 2015 but delayed a full year, will spark a new era of benevolent hacking for both research and repair.
https://www.wired.com/2016/10/hacking-car-pacemaker-toaster-just-became-legal/?mbid=social_fb

Reuters is reporting that Playboy has won a lawsuit against a Netherlands news site for linking to photos without permission: "'It is undisputed that GS Media (which owns GreenStijl) provided the hyperlinks to the files containing the photos for profit and that Sanoma had not authorized the publication of those photos on the internet,' the Luxembourg-based Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) said in a statement. 'When hyperlinks are posted for profit, it may be expected that the person who posted such a link should carry out the checks necessary to ensure that the work concerned is not illegally published.' The European Commission, the EU executive, is set next week to propose tougher rules on publishing copyrighted content, including a new exclusive right for news publishers to ask search engines like Google to pay to show snippets of their articles."
Neil_Brown adds:
The Court of Justice of the European Union has ruled today on whether posting, on a website, hyperlinks to copyright infringing works constitutes a "communication to the public" for the purposes of EU copyright law, an act which requires permission of the rights holder or other authorizing basis. The court held that, if the links are provided "without the pursuit of financial gain by a person who did not know or could not reasonably have known the illegal nature of the publication of those works on that other website," the act of posting the hyperlink is not an infringement of copyright. However, if the links are providing in the pursuit of financial gain, the poster of such links is deemed to have known that they were infringing copyright, unless they can prove otherwise. The court has stated that those sites operating "for profit" are expected to have carried out the (impossible?) "necessary checks to ensure that the work concerned is not illegally published on the website to which those hyperlinks lead." The court does not clarify what is meant by "the pursuit of financial gain." If previous decisions are followed, any sites which host ads (Papasavvas), or perhaps even just accrue value to a brand (if the Advocate General's opinion in McFadden is followed), might be treated as operating for financial gain.

https://juliareda.eu/2016/08/victory-for-net-neutrality/