“La palabra ‘pirata’ pareciera haberse convertido en una especie de fetiche” – El Mostrador

La reproducción y distribución ilegal de copias de obras protegidas por el derecho de autor generan -sólo en Chile- pérdidas superiores a los US$4 mil millones. Cómo frenar la circulación de material apócrifo y desincentivar el consumo de productos culturales falsos, es el desafío que se han impuesto la PDI y Editorial Santillana.

Fuente: “La palabra ‘pirata’ pareciera haberse convertido en una especie de fetiche” – El Mostrador

Lawsuit Seeks Transparency as Searches of Cellphones and Laptops Skyrocket at Borders

A number of recent cases in the media have revealed instances of U.S. citizens and others being compelled by CBP agents to unlock their devices for search. In some instances, people have claimed to have been physically coerced into complying, including one American citizen who said that CBP agents grabbed him by the neck in order to take his cellphone out of his possession.

Fuente: Lawsuit Seeks Transparency as Searches of Cellphones and Laptops Skyrocket at Borders

Secret Docs Reveal: President Trump Has Inherited an FBI With Vast Hidden Powers

For example, the bureau’s agents can decide that a campus organization is not “legitimate” and therefore not entitled to robust protections for free speech; dig for derogatory information on potential informants without any basis for believing they are implicated in unlawful activity; use a person’s immigration status to pressure them to collaborate and then help deport them when they are no longer useful; conduct invasive “assessments” without any reason for suspecting the targets of wrongdoing; demand that companies provide the bureau with personal data about their users in broadly worded national security letters without actual legal authority to do so; fan out across the internet along with a vast army of informants, infiltrating countless online chat rooms; peer through the walls of private homes; and more. The FBI offered various justifications of these tactics to our reporters. But the documents and our reporting on them ultimately reveal a bureaucracy in dire need of greater transparency and accountability.

Fuente: Secret Docs Reveal: President Trump Has Inherited an FBI With Vast Hidden Powers

Commander-In-Chief Donald Trump Will Have Terrifying Powers. Thanks, Obama.

He’ll control an unaccountable drone program, and the prison at Guantanamo Bay. His FBI, including a network of 15,000 paid informants, already has a record of spying on mosques and activists, and his NSA’s surveillance empire is ubiquitous and governed by arcane rules, most of which remain secret. He will inherit bombing campaigns in seven Muslim countries, the de facto ability to declare war unilaterally, and a massive nuclear arsenal — much of which is on hair-trigger alert.

Fuente: Commander-In-Chief Donald Trump Will Have Terrifying Powers. Thanks, Obama.

Privacy experts fear Donald Trump accessing global surveillance network | World news | The Guardian

Privacy activists, human rights campaigners and former US security officials have expressed fears over the prospect of Donald Trump gaining access to the vast global US and UK surveillance network.

Fuente: Privacy experts fear Donald Trump accessing global surveillance network | World news | The Guardian

Cupertino’s mayor: Apple ‘abuses us’ by not paying taxes | Technology | The Guardian

The last time the mayor of Cupertino walked into Apple – the largest company in his small Californian town and, it so happens, the most valuable company in the world – he hoped to have a meeting to talk about traffic congestion.Barry Chang barely made it into the lobby when Apple’s security team surrounded and escorted him off the property.

Fuente: Cupertino’s mayor: Apple ‘abuses us’ by not paying taxes | Technology | The Guardian

Google’s dominance faces a challenge at last. Shame it’s too late | Comment is free | The Guardian

Google’s dominance faces a challenge at last. Shame it’s too late | Comment is free | The Guardian.

Denmarks Economy Minister Margrethe Vest Taking on the search giant: EC competition commissioner Margrethe Vestager. Photograph: Keld Navntoft/AFP/Getty Images

So the European commission has finally decided that Google may have a case to answer in relation to claims that it has been abusing its monopoly position in search. On Thursday, Margrethe Vestager, the competition commissioner, announced that the preliminary findings of the commission’s investigation supported the claim that Google “systematically” gave prominence to its own ads, which amounted to an abuse of its dominant position in search. “I’m concerned,” she said, “that Google has artificially boosted its presence in the comparison shopping market with the result that consumers may not necessarily see what’s most relevant for them or that competitors may not get the commercial opportunity that their innovative services deserve.” Google, which, needless to say, disputes these claims, now has 10 weeks in which to respond.

To those of us who follow these things, the most interesting thing about Thursday’s announcement is the way it highlights the radical differences that are emerging between European and American attitudes to internet giants. The Wall Street Journal recently revealed that the US Federal Trade Commission had investigated similar claims about Google’s abuse of monopoly power in 2012 and that some of the agency’s staff had recommended charging the company with violating antitrust (unfair competition) laws. But in the end, the FTC backed off.

Now it turns out that its staff had been in regular communication with the European commission’s investigators in Brussels, which means that the Europeans knew what the Americans knew about Google’s activities. But the commission has acted, whereas the FTC did not. Why?

Leaving aside conspiracist explanations (eg that the American authorities don’t wish to enfeeble US companies that will ensure continued US economic hegemony in the digital era), the difference may be a reflection of the way in which antitrust law has been gradually infected by neoliberal ideology. Once upon a time, it was taken for granted that industrial monopolies were, by their very nature, intolerable for the simple reason that, as Lord Acton famously observed, power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

But then a radically different idea was injected into the legislative bloodstream by Robert Bork, a distinguished American lawyer, in his 1978 book, The Antitrust Paradox. One implication of Bork’s argument was that overwhelming market dominance was not necessarily a bad thing. Monopoly could be a reflection of a firm’s superior efficiency: we should expect truly exceptional firms to attract the majority of the customers, and so overzealous antitrust prosecutions could effectively punish excellence and thus disadvantage, rather than protect, consumers.

Google 'illegally took content from Amazon, Yelp, TripAdvisor,' report finds | Technology | The Guardian

Google ‘illegally took content from Amazon, Yelp, TripAdvisor,’ report finds | Technology | The Guardian.

 Google has been a leading silicon valley supporter of the Obama administration. Photograph: Marcio Jose Sanchez/AP
Google sign at the company's headquarters in Mountain View, California

Google manipulated its search results to promote its own services over those of rival websites in ways that led to “real harm to consumers”, a previously unpublished report by American regulators has concluded.

The revelations were seized on by those calling for Brussels to challenge Google’s monopoly over search in Europe, and have sparked new claims that the search giant’s financing of Barack Obama’s re-election campaign swayed US regulators.

America’s Federal Trade Commission (FTC) voted unanimously to end its investigation into Google in early 2013 after extracting concessions from the silicon valley company.

But documents accidentally handed to the Wall Street Journal show the FTC’s own investigators claim Google’s “conduct has resulted – and will result – in real harm to consumers and to innovation in the online search and advertising markets”.

The findings, contained in a report produced in 2012 by FTC staff to advise commissioners before their final decision on the case, claim Google also caused “harm to many vertical competitors”.

Las tecnológicas toman el mando | Economía | EL PAÍS

Las tecnológicas toman el mando | Economía | EL PAÍS.

El sector domina la clasificación de las 50 firmas con mayor valor en Bolsa con Apple distanciándose como líder absoluto

Sede de Apple en Cupertino (California). / EFE

Han pasado casi 15 años desde el estallido de la burbuja tecnológica que llevó al índice bursátil Nasdaq a superar los 5.000 puntos. En el arranque de 2015, las empresas tecnológicas vuelven a tomar el mando. El Nasdaq tiene a tiro sus máximos históricos y la nueva economía es el sector más representado entre las 50 compañías con mayor capitalización bursátil al cierre de 2014. La lista está encabezada por tercer año consecutivo por Apple, pero esta vez tiene a su lado a otras 13 firmas tecnológicas y tres de telecomunicaciones. La tecnología vence a las finanzas y a la energía en el Olimpo empresarial.

El Zeus indiscutible de ese Olimpo es Apple. La firma fundada por Steve Jobs ni siquiera aparecía a finales de 2008 entre las 50 empresas con mayor valor en Bolsa. Con los éxitos del iPod, el iPhone y el iPad se ha instalado en lo más alto y se destaca de sus perseguidores. Por primera vez, la distancia entre la primera y la segunda empresa con mayor en Bolsa a cierre de un ejercicio es de más de 200.000 millones de euros. Dirigida por Tim Cook, el lanzamiento del iPhone 6 ha catapultado a Apple en Bolsa. En 2014, el valor de la empresa aumentó en 168.000 millones de euros, más de lo que vale Samsung.

Microsoft, muy fuerte en 2014, y Google escoltan a Apple en el podio tecnológico. La gran irrupción del año fue, sin embargo, Alibaba. La empresa china de comercio electrónico, Internet y medios de pago digitales se estrenó en Bolsa en septiembre del año pasado y ya es la 13ª compañía cotizada con mayor capitalización. Facebook, que entró en la lista en 2013 por primera vez escala 24 posiciones y ya es la vigésima de la clasificación.

Otras ocho compañías tecnológicas se sitúan entre las 50 más valiosas. Con ello, el sector adelanta al financiero por número de representantes. ¿Una nueva burbuja? Los analistas marcan diferencias muy notables entre lo que ocurrió a finales de los noventa del pasado siglo con lo que está sucediendo ahora en los mercados. Las grandes compañías tecnológicas cotizadas, como Apple, Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Oracle, IBM, Intel, Alibaba o Samsung tienen sólidos ingresos y beneficios. Es cierto que puede haber excesos de valoración en algunas empresas menos consolidadas, como Uber o SnapChat, pero no afectan al núcleo de las grandes empresas cotizadas del sector.

Apple gana el juicio por monopolio en la reproducción de música en el iPod | Tecnología | EL PAÍS

Apple gana el juicio por monopolio en la reproducción de música en el iPod | Tecnología | EL PAÍS.

Steve Jobs durante la presentación de iTunes en Japón en 2005. / SHIZUO KAMBAYASHI (AP)

Enviar a LinkedIn5
Enviar a TuentiEnviar a Eskup


Un jurado de Oakland (California) falló este martes a favor de la empresa tecnológica Apple en el juicio que se libraba en su contra por presunta violación de las leyes antimonopolio al impedir reproducir en los viejosiPod música procedente de plataformas que no fueran iTunes, su propia tienda de contenidos multimedia. La demanda colectiva de una coalición de consumidores le reclamaba 350 millones de dólares. Durante el juicio, los abogados de los demandantes no dudaron en recurrir a correos enviados por el fallecido Steve Jobs, entonces en uno de los momentos más dulces de su vida, mostrando su reacción ante la posible competencia.

What Bad, Shameful, Dirty Behavior is U.S. Judge Richard Posner Hiding? Demand to Know. – The Intercept

What Bad, Shameful, Dirty Behavior is U.S. Judge Richard Posner Hiding? Demand to Know. – The Intercept.Featured photo - What Bad, Shameful, Dirty Behavior is U.S. Judge Richard Posner Hiding? Demand to Know.


(updated below)

Richard Posner has been a federal appellate judge for 34 years, having been nominated by President Reagan in 1981. At a conference last week in Washington, Posner said the NSA should have the unlimited ability to collect whatever communications and other information it wants: “If the NSA wants to vacuum all the trillions of bits of information that are crawling through the electronic worldwide networks, I think that’s fine.” The NSA should have “carte blanche” to collect what it wants because “privacy interests should really have very little weight when you’re talking about national security.”

His rationale? “I think privacy is actually overvalued,” the distinguished jurist pronounced. Privacy, he explained, is something people crave in order to prevent others from learning about the shameful and filthy things they do:

Much of what passes for the name of privacy is really just trying to conceal the disreputable parts of your conduct. Privacy is mainly about trying to improve your social and business opportunities by concealing the sorts of bad activities that would cause other people not to want to deal with you. 

Unlike you and your need to hide your bad and dirty acts, Judge Posner has no need for privacy – or so he claims: “If someone drained my cell phone, they would find a picture of my cat, some phone numbers, some email addresses, some email text,” he said. “What’s the big deal?” He added: “Other people must have really exciting stuff. Do they narrate their adulteries, or something like that?”

I would like to propose a campaign inspired by Judge Posner’s claims (just by the way, one of his duties as a federal judge is to uphold the Fourth Amendment). In doing so, I’ll make the following observations:

Entrevista a Julian Assange, fundador de Wikileaks: “Google nos espía e informa al Gobierno de Estados Unidos”

Entrevista a Julian Assange, fundador de Wikileaks: “Google nos espía e informa al Gobierno de Estados Unidos”.

Escrito por Ignacio Ramonet / Le Monde Diplomatique
Lunes, 01 de Diciembre de 2014 11:59

Desde hace treinta meses, Julian Assange, paladín de la lucha por una información libre, vive en Londres, refugiado en las oficinas de la Embajada de Ecuador. Este país latinoamericano tuvo el coraje de brindarle asilo diplomático cuando el fundador de WikiLeaks se hallaba perseguido y acosado por el Gobierno de Estados Unidos y varios de sus aliados (el Reino Unido, Suecia). El único crimen de Julian Assange es haber dicho la verdad y haber difundido, vía WikiLeaks, entre otras revelaciones, las siniestras realidades ocultas de las guerras de Irak y de Afganistán, y los tejemanejes e intrigas de la diplomacia estadounidense.

Como Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning y Glenn Greenwald, Julian Assange forma parte de un nuevo grupo de disidentes que, por descubrir la verdad, son ahora rastreados, perseguidos y hostigados no por regímenes autoritarios sino por Estados que pretenden ser “democracias ejemplares”…

En su nuevo libro, Cuando Google encontró a WikiLeaks (Clave Intelectual, Madrid, 2014), cuya versión en español está en librerías desde el 1 de diciembre, Julian Assange va más lejos en sus revelaciones, estupendamente documentadas, como siempre. Todo parte de una larga conversación que Assange sostuvo, en junio de 2011, con Eric Schmidt, presidente ejecutivo de Google. Este vino a entrevistar al creador de WikiLeaks para un ensayo que estaba preparando sobre el futuro de la era digital. Cuando se publicó el libro, titulado The New Digital Era (2013), Assange constató que sus declaraciones habían sido tergiversadas y que las tesis defendidas por Schmidt eran considerablemente delirantes y megalomaníacas. El nuevo libro del fundador de WikiLeaks es su respuesta a esas elucubraciones del presidente de Google. Entre muchas otras cosas, Assange revela cómo Google –y Facebook, y Amazon, etc.– nos espía y nos vigila; y cómo transmite esa información a las agencias de inteligencia de Estados Unidos. Y cómo la empresa líder en tecnologías digitales tiene una estrecha relación, casi estructural, con el Departamento de Estado. Afirma también Assange, que hoy, las grandes empresas de la galaxia digital nos vigilan y nos controlan más que los propios Estados.

Cuando Google encontró a WikiLeaks es una obra inteligente, estimulante y necesaria. Una fiesta para el espíritu. Nos abre los ojos sobre nuestras propias prácticas de comunicación cotidianas cuando usamos un smartphone, una tablet, un ordenador o cuando navegamos simplemente por Internet con la candidez de quien se cree más libre que nunca. ¡Ojo! Nos explica Assange, como Pulgarcito, vas sembrando rastros de ti mismo y de tu vida privada que algunas empresas, como Google, recogen con sumo cuidado y archivan secretamente. Un día, las utilizarán contra ti…

Para conversar de todo esto y de algunas cosas más, nos encontramos con un Julian Assange entusiasta y fatigado, en Londres, el pasado 24 de octubre, en una pequeña sala acogedora de la Embajada de Ecuador. Llega sonriente y pálido, con una barba rubia de varios días, con su cabeza de ángel prerrafaelista, cabellos largos, rasgos finos, ojos claros… Es alto y delgado. Habla con voz muy baja y lenta. Lo que dice es profundo y pensado, le sale de muy adentro. Tiene un algo de gurú… Habíamos previsto charlar no más de media hora, para no cansarlo, pero con el paso del tiempo la conversación se fue poniendo interesante. Y finalmente hablamos más de dos horas y media…

Julian Assange on Snowden, disliking Google, and his “inevitable” freedom | Ars Technica

Julian Assange on Snowden, disliking Google, and his “inevitable” freedom | Ars Technica.

WikiLeaks man talks with Ars—new book may reveal more about him than its subject.

It would be too much to say that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange feels optimistic. He’s been holed up in the Ecuadorean embassy in London for more than two years now, with cameras and police—”a £3 million surveillance operation,” he calls it—just meters away.

“There’s a sense of inevitability now,” Assange said when we asked if his situation might change.

Assange: “The situation is clarifying politically and legally.”

Ars: “I just want to be clear on this point—are you saying you’re hopeful you’ll be free soon?”

Assange: “I wouldn’t say hopeful. I would say it’s inevitable. It’s inevitable that we will win the diplomatic standoff we’re in now.”

It’s getting late in London, where Assange is doing a barrage of press interviews on the eve of his new book, When Google Met Wikileaks (it goes on sale in the US later this week). We called at the agreed upon time, and a man who didn’t identify himself answered the number, which was for a London cell phone. He said call back in five minutes, and only then was the phone finally handed to Assange.

We’re supposed to focus on the book. But first, we want to know what life trapped in the embassy involves—where does he eat, sleep, do laundry? What is the room he’s in now like?

“For security reasons, I can’t tell you which sections of the embassy I utilize,” he said. “As to the rest, in a way, it’s a perfectly normal situation. In another way, it’s one of the most abnormal, unusual situations that someone can find themselves in.”

Assange ushered WikiLeaks through several massive leaks of secret US government reports and a tumultuous relationship with some prominent newspapers. first came the disclosure of hundreds of thousands of military reports on the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts, then a leak of more than 250,000 diplomatic cables from the State Department.

He sought asylum from Ecuador when he was on the verge of being extradited to Sweden to face sexual-assault charges in that nation. If he leaves the embassy, he’ll be arrested, although it isn’t clear where he’ll be sent first. It’s widely assumed the US has an ongoing investigation into Assange over the leaks.

Asked about what his future outside the embassy walls might look like, he stays focused on the legal battles ahead. “We have a lot of dominos to knock over,” he said. “There are three or four different legal cases going on, and technical means to obstruct the asylum.”

He knows his travel will always be circumscribed to a degree, but Assange seems comfortable with that. He’s cognizant of the parallels between his situation and that of Edward Snowden.

“He has freedom of movement,” Assange acknowledged. “But his freedom of movement excludes a number of countries which can be pressured by the US, and that’s also true for me.”

His voice sounded scratchy as he spoke to Ars about how Google and its chairman Eric Schmidt were at the “center of American power,” pushing an “aggressive new ideology.” In the background, another phone started ringing. Assange wasn’t distracted. Half prisoner, half professor, he kept talking in the same slow cadence, with an insistent and didactic focus on making his point.

Court Secretly Loosens Surveillance Rules and Expands NSA Power


Court Secretly Loosens Surveillance Rules and Expands NSA Power

|Jul. 8, 2013 9:52 am


ApprovedPublic DomainI have, oh-so-cynically, referred to the court set up under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act as a “phony baloney” court that grants rubber-stamp approval to virtually every snooping request that comes its way. Of course, I base that subjective assessment on the fact that, in 11 years, the court has denied only 10 applications, and modified a few dozen, and approved more than 15,000. The president says if people share my jaded take on such judicial review, then “we’re going to have some problems here.” But, as noted at Reason 24/7, we already have a problem, in that this rubber-stamp body is secretly transforming the laws governing surveillance, and enormously expanding the powers available to the National Security Agency,