Facebook: Watch Party wird zum illegalen Anschauen von Filmen benutzt

Die Facebook-Funktion Watch Party wird zunehmend auch zum Anschauen von urheberrechtlich geschütztem Material genutzt. Aktuelle Kinofilme und Fernsehserien werden dabei von vielen Zuschauern illegal angeschaut. Nach Hinweisen hat Facebook einige Watch-…

Die Facebook-Funktion Watch Party wird zunehmend auch zum Anschauen von urheberrechtlich geschütztem Material genutzt. Aktuelle Kinofilme und Fernsehserien werden dabei von vielen Zuschauern illegal angeschaut. Nach Hinweisen hat Facebook einige Watch-Party-Gruppen deaktiviert. (Facebook, Urheberrecht)

Umweltschutz: Paris bestellt 800 Elektrobusse

Der Pariser Nahverkehrsbetreiber RATP hat 800 Elektrobusse bei drei Herstellern bestellt. Sie sollen Busse mit Verbrennungsmotor ersetzen und noch vor den Olympischen Sommerspielen 2024 zum Einsatz kommen. (ÖPNV, Technologie)

Der Pariser Nahverkehrsbetreiber RATP hat 800 Elektrobusse bei drei Herstellern bestellt. Sie sollen Busse mit Verbrennungsmotor ersetzen und noch vor den Olympischen Sommerspielen 2024 zum Einsatz kommen. (ÖPNV, Technologie)

Unfallreport: Teslas Autopilot verursacht mehr Unfälle

Teslas umstrittenes Assistenzsystem Autopilot kommt im firmeneigenen Sicherheitsbericht nicht gut weg. Das System provoziert mehr Unfälle als früher – aber immer noch weniger als ein menschlicher Fahrer. (Tesla, Technologie)

Teslas umstrittenes Assistenzsystem Autopilot kommt im firmeneigenen Sicherheitsbericht nicht gut weg. Das System provoziert mehr Unfälle als früher - aber immer noch weniger als ein menschlicher Fahrer. (Tesla, Technologie)

DSLR: Canon EOS 250D nimmt 4K auf und fokussiert auf Augen

Eine kleine und leichte Spiegelreflexkamera soll die Canon EOS 250D sein. Die Kamera ist der Nachfolger der 200D und unterscheidet sich vor allem durch eine 4K-Videoaufnahme und einen Augenautofokus vom Vorgängermodell. (Canon, DSLR)

Eine kleine und leichte Spiegelreflexkamera soll die Canon EOS 250D sein. Die Kamera ist der Nachfolger der 200D und unterscheidet sich vor allem durch eine 4K-Videoaufnahme und einen Augenautofokus vom Vorgängermodell. (Canon, DSLR)

Mysterious safety-tampering malware infects a second critical infrastructure site

Use of game-changing Triton malware to target safety systems isn’t an isolated incident.

Critical infrastructure sites such as this oil refinery in Port Arthur, Texas, rely on safety systems.

Enlarge / Critical infrastructure sites such as this oil refinery in Port Arthur, Texas, rely on safety systems. (credit: IIP Photo Archive)

Sixteen months ago, researchers reported an unsettling escalation in hacks targeting power plants, gas refineries, and other types of critical infrastructure. Attackers who may have been working on behalf of a nation caused an operational outage at a critical-infrastructure site after deliberately targeting a system that prevented health- and life-threatening accidents.

There had been compromises of critical infrastructure sites before. What was unprecedented in this attack—and of considerable concern to some researchers and critical infrastructure operators—was the use of an advanced piece of malware that targeted the unidentified site’s safety processes. Such safety instrumented systems (SIS) are a combination of hardware and software that many critical infrastructure sites use to prevent unsafe conditions from arising. When gas fuel pressures or reactor temperatures rise to potentially unsafe thresholds, for instance, a SIS will automatically close valves or initiate cooling processes to prevent health- or life-threatening accidents.

By focusing on the site’s SIS, the malware carried the threat of physical destruction that depending on the site and the type of accident had the potential to be serious if not catastrophic. The malware was alternately named Triton and Trisis, because it targeted the Triconex product line made by Schneider Electric. It’s development was ultimately linked to a Russian government-backed research institute.

Read 7 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Netflix ends AirPlay support on iOS in an ongoing souring of its Apple relationship

Change was made because of AirPlay support on new devices like LG, Samsung TVs.

The Apple TV 4K and remote.

Enlarge / The Apple TV 4K and remote. (credit: Samuel Axon)

Netflix has confirmed that it no longer supports AirPlay, citing "technical limitations" with Apple's video-slinging feature. The reasoning isn't exactly about technical limitations that prevent Netflix from supporting the feature at all, though. Rather, Netflix has either chosen not to support it because the company can't control the user experience the way it wants to or because of bigger issues of competition and collaboration between the two companies.

AirPlay is a feature in Apple devices (and now in some third-party devices from partners like LG and Samsung) that allows streaming audio or video from one gadget to another over the local network. A few days ago, users began noticing that they could no longer use AirPlay in the iOS Netflix app, and MacRumors discovered that a support document on Netflix's website had been updated to say, "Airplay is no longer supported for use with Netflix due to technical limitations."

Netflix soon elaborated with an official statement to certain press outlets covering the story. Here's the statement:

Read 9 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Dutch F-16 takes cannon fire from… itself

Fighter safely lands after accelerating through cloud of its own shells.

A Dutch Air Force F-16 had a close encounter with its own cannon shells in January.

Enlarge / A Dutch Air Force F-16 had a close encounter with its own cannon shells in January. (credit: Getty Images)

The Netherlands’ Defense Safety Inspection Agency (Inspectie Veiligheid Defensie) is investigating an incident during a January military exercise in which a Dutch Air Force F-16 was damaged by live fire from a 20-millimeter cannon—its own 20-millimeter cannon. At least one round fired from the aircraft’s M61A1 Vulcan Gatling gun struck the aircraft as it fired at targets on the Dutch military’s Vliehors range on the island of Vlieland, according to a report from the Netherlands’ NOS news service.

Two F-16s were conducting firing exercises on January 21. It appears that the damaged aircraft actually caught up with the 20mm rounds it fired as it pulled out of its firing run. At least one of them struck the side of the F-16’s fuselage, and parts of a round were ingested by the aircraft’s engine. The F-16’s pilot managed to land the aircraft safely at Leeuwarden Air Base.

The incident reflects why guns on a high-performance jet are perhaps a less than ideal weapon. The Vulcan is capable of firing over 6,000 shots per minute, but its magazine carries only 511 rounds—just enough for five seconds of fury. The rounds have a muzzle velocity of 3,450 feet per second (1.05 meters per second). That is speed boosted initially by the aircraft itself, but atmospheric drag slows the shells down eventually. And if a pilot accelerates and maneuvers in the wrong way after firing the cannon, the aircraft could be unexpectedly reunited with its recently departed rounds.

Read 3 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Windows on ARM to support Chrome, Opera, and Brave browsers

Microsoft is developing a new version of its Edge web browser based on Google’s open source Chromium project. That means it uses the Blink rendering engine instead of EdgeHTML, has a user interface that’s more than a little reminiscent of G…

Microsoft is developing a new version of its Edge web browser based on Google’s open source Chromium project. That means it uses the Blink rendering engine instead of EdgeHTML, has a user interface that’s more than a little reminiscent of Google Chrome, and should be able to render any web pages that work in Chrome. […]

The post Windows on ARM to support Chrome, Opera, and Brave browsers appeared first on Liliputing.

EU Court Asked to Rule on ‘Piracy Liability’ of Usenet Provider

After more than a decade in court, the legal dispute between anti-piracy group BREIN and Usenet provider News-Service.com has landed on the desk of the European Court of Justice. The Dutch Supreme Court referred questions to the EU court seeking clarification on several piracy liability related issues.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.

In 2009, anti-piracy group BREIN took News-Service Europe (NSE) – one of Europe’s largest Usenet providers at the time – to court.

Representing the movie and music industries, BREIN argued that NSE must delete all infringing content from its servers, and in 2011 the Court of Amsterdam sided with the anti-piracy group.

In its initial verdict, the Court concluded that NSE willingly facilitated online piracy through its services. As a result, the company was ordered to remove all copyrighted content and filter future posts for possible copyright infringements.

According to the Usenet provider, this filtering requirement would be too costly to achieve. It shut down its service but appealed the case.

After several more years of litigation, the Amsterdam appeals court then ruled that NSE wasn’t liable for pirating users after all, but that it is required to offer a fast and effective notice and takedown procedure, possibly with additional measures.

BREIN was not happy with this outcome and decided to take the matter to the Dutch Supreme Court. While NSE is no longer a threat, the case could prove crucial for many other Usenet providers.

BREIN has been very critical of some commercial Usenet companies, describing them as a refuge for pirates of all ilks, with uploaders, site owners and resellers working in tandem to facilitate copyright infringement.

The Dutch Supreme Court has taken on the case but it’s struggling with some key questions on the liability side. In an order last week, it, therefore, decided to ask the European Court of Justice (ECJ) for input.

The four questions all relate to the role of Usenet providers, similar to NSE, as third-party intermediaries. NSE argues that its role is no different than a regular hosting service that stores content, in the sense that it merely offers a platform where people can share content.

However, NSE also facilitated the availability of content, which was sometimes synchronized with that of other Usenet providers. In addition, it offered a search functionality which made it easier for customers to find files.

The Supreme Court questions whether NSE is “communicating to the public” and whether it’s liable for the infringements of users. Among other things, this depends on whether it has an “active” or “passive” role under EU law.

To get more clarity, the following questions (translated and summarized) are referred to the EU Court of Justice. These apply to Usenet providers that operate in a similar fashion to NSE. This includes selling subscriptions to its servers and offering a substantial quantity of copyright infringing works.

1. Is such a Usenet provider performing an act of communication to the public under EU law?

2. If the answer to question 1 is yes, is the Usenet provider liable for this act of communication or is it shielded under Article 14 of the E-commerce Directive?

3. If the answer to question 1 is no, is the Usenet provider playing an active role that would make it liable for copyright infringements?

4. If the Usenet provider is shielded from liability, it there anything else it can be required to do?

Interestingly, the Dutch Supreme Court also references “Article 13” (now Article 17) of the new EU Copyright Directive. This article requires online content sharing service providers to obtain licenses, or ensure that infringing content stays off their platforms once notified.

While the legal framework has yet to be adopted and implemented, the Supreme Court states that it’s unclear how this should be taken into account.

All in all, the answers from the EU court will be crucial for the NSE case and the future of many other Usenet providers in Europe that operate in a similar fashion. The Court previously ruled in similar cases against The Pirate Bay and a seller of fully-loaded streaming boxes, which were both held liable.

That liability based on EU law is not limited to pirate sites and media boxes, which became apparent in an order handed down by the Supreme Court of Italy last month.

In a case filed by the TV company Mediaset, the Italian court ruled that Yahoo! can be held liable for broadcasting infringing videos under certain conditions. The Supreme Court set specific guidelines for when a hosting service is seen as operating “actively” or “passively,” and sent the case back to a lower court.

BREIN obviously hopes that the EU Court of Justice will conclude that Usenet providers can indeed be held liable. If that’s the case, the anti-piracy group is likely to put pressure on other providers, similar to what it did with dozens of streaming box sellers last year.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and more. We also have VPN reviews, discounts, offers and coupons.

Tesla has been giving some of its most loyal customers the runaround

“I feel the way Charlie Brown felt,” a full self-driving customer tells Ars.

Elon Musk gives a talk on a stage.

Enlarge (credit: Mark Brake/Getty Images)

Nothing better exemplifies Elon Musk's haphazard approach to corporate decision-making than Tesla's treatment of customers who paid thousands of dollars to pre-order the "full self-driving" option. Tesla introduced the option in 2016, and at the time Musk predicted it would be ready in around two years. Today, the technology still seems far from completion.

Last month, Tesla added insult to injury, announcing that existing customers who hadn't already paid for the full self-driving option could do so at a lower price. That enraged some earlier full self-driving customers who had yet to get anything for their money, yet Tesla refused to offer them partial refunds.

To mollify these early adopters, Tesla promised that they would "receive an invitation to Tesla’s Early Access Program (EAP). EAP members are invited to experience and provide feedback on new features and functionality before they are rolled out to other customers." The opportunity to beta-test Tesla's software excited many eligible customers. After all, they had purchased the upgrade precisely because they wanted to be on the cutting edge.

Read 14 remaining paragraphs | Comments