Nach dem ersten erfolgreichen Flug konnte das Unternehmen Stratolaunch keine Aufträge für das Trägerflugzeug erhalten. Mittlerweile plant das Unternehmen laut internen Quellen, die Operation einzustellen und erwägt Strategien, aus dem Geschäft auszuste…
Nach dem ersten erfolgreichen Flug konnte das Unternehmen Stratolaunch keine Aufträge für das Trägerflugzeug erhalten. Mittlerweile plant das Unternehmen laut internen Quellen, die Operation einzustellen und erwägt Strategien, aus dem Geschäft auszusteigen. Der Flieger bleibt dafür im Hangar. (Flugzeug, Technologie)
Following an application by several music industry labels and groups, a judge in Australia ordered local ISPs to block four hugely popular YouTube-ripping sites. The judgement, published this week, contains the judge’s reasoning. Detailing the rights of uploaders and of making copyrighted content available to the public without permission, the document makes for interesting reading.
As part of the music industry’s war on so-called ‘stream-ripping’, earlier this year Sony, Universal, and Warner, with assistance from Music Rights Australia and the Australasian Performing Right Association, demanded that ISPs in Australia block access to several YouTube-ripping platforms.
Following a Federal Court appearance in April, during which the music groups asked for action against four key players – 2conv, Flv2mp3, FLVto, and Convert2mp3 – Justice Perram handed down an order requiring most of the country’s ISPs to block the platforms.
This week, the Judge published the reasoning for his decision. While the blocking aspects are specific to Australian law, it contains some interesting comments about the activities of such platforms that may inform similar cases and actions in other regions.
In setting up his arguments, Justice Perram places an emphasis on the differences between streaming and downloading from YouTube.
While it has been argued that in practice there is only one difference (the former is a transient process while the latter goes a step further by retaining the data), the Judge indicates that is not for the end user to decide. The decision is made by the entity that uploads the data to YouTube and by YouTube itself.
“A person who uploads media to YouTube is required, as part of that process, to determine who can view that media and under what circumstances. It is possible as part of that process to grant permission to permit downloading of files,” the Judge writes.
In most cases uploading takes place after the user selects the ‘Standard YouTube License’, which only allows end users to stream the media, not download. Uploading under a ‘Creative Commons License’ can permit end users to download but the labels do not upload on this basis. In essence, the decision of whether to allow streaming or downloading from YouTube lies with the uploader, the Judge says.
YouTube then delivers that content to end users under the terms of the uploading agreement, which is “achieved by YouTube defaulting to delivery of the media via the HTML5 format which enables streaming but not downloading.”
Turning to the ripping sites themselves, the Judge notes that in testing the platforms a paralegal at a law firm was able to “strip music files” out of the musical works uploaded to YouTube by the record companies. Since she was given permission, that was fine, but the Judge noted that there is “no doubt” that anyone else doing so would have infringed copyright.
After ripping took place on the sites in question, the resulting content was made available to end users. That, the Judge notes, is a “communication to the public” so in respect of the musical works detailed in the case, that represents copyright infringement.
“It follows that the operators of the websites are infringing the relevant music and performance copyrights by copying the soundtracks out of music videos streamed from YouTube,” the Judge writes.
“They are also infringing the same copyrights by making soundtracks then available online and electronically transmitting them to users. The operators also facilitate the infringement of both kinds of copyright by permitting users to make a copy of the soundtrack.”
Given that uploaders can grant the ability to allow streaming or downloading, the Judge says that such ripping platforms will only be of use to anyone where YouTube does not allow download functionality, i.e “where no permission is given to make a copy of media on YouTube.”
A statement published on the ConvertMP3 platform, that claims that downloading from YouTube is “completely legal” when users have obtained permission from the copyright owner to do so, is described as “technically correct” by the Judge. However, he dismissed the disclaimer as “entirely without substance”, existing only to “underscore the dishonesty of the website operators.”
The traffic to the websites listed in the order is considerable (66.5 million visits to Convert2mp3.net in January 2019 and 112.4 million to Flvto.biz in January 2019 alone), something which indicates that they are “responsible for piracy of music from music videos on an industrial scale.”
While it’s important to repeat that the order was considered and granted under Australian law, there are common threads with legislation in other regions that may yet prove important in cases against similar platforms.
Over $7 million goes to finalists who built the best systems.
Enlarge/ Part of the winning team's system. (credit: XPRIZE)
The winners of the latest XPRIZE competition were announced on Friday. Sponsored by Shell with a bonus prize from the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the competition focused on the challenge of exploring the seafloor and saw 32 teams from around the world competing for $7 million.
The primary goal was to build an autonomous, high-resolution seafloor-mapping system that could be launched from a similarly uncrewed boat. Seafloor mapping is incredibly expensive, which limits its use. If the research vessel and extensive crew weren't necessary, a lot more work could get done with the current amount of funding.
XPRIZE’s competition overview.
Nine finalist teams split $1 million last year before the final rounds of testing. Each team took its creations to Kalamata, Greece (an audible after hurricanes scrambled the initial plan to work in Puerto Rico), where they had 24 hours to map 250 square kilometers of seafloor at least 5m resolution. The teams' maps were checked against an existing, high-quality one.
The late Terry Pratchett is likely smiling in some version of an afterlife.
Heaven and Hell prepare to face off in the long-planned battle of Armageddon, but an angel, a demon, and a rebellious Antichrist aren't quite as enthusiastic about the prospect in Good Omens. The six-part limited series is based on the original 1990 novel by Neil Gaiman and the late Terry Pratchett, and it's every bit as entertaining as the source material.
(Some spoilers for the book and series below.)
Confession: I am an uber-fan, having read the book multiple times over the last 19 years. I'll likely read it several more times before I kick off this mortal coil, so I'm very much in the target audience for the series. Good Omens is the story of an angel Aziraphale (Michael Sheen) and a demon Crowley (David Tennant) who gradually become friends over the millennia and team up to avert Armageddon. They've come to be rather fond of the Earth and all its humans with their many foibles, you see—not to mention the perks that come with it, like sleek electronics and quaint little restaurants where they know you. The supernatural pair doesn't really want the Antichrist—an 11-year-old boy named Adam (Sam Taylor Buck) who has grown up unaware of his pivotal role in the coming apocalypse—to bring an end to all of that.
Some of us are anxiously awaiting the photonics revolution, where photons will band together to overthrow the tyranny of electrons. One of the perpetual problems that's slowing up the revolution is light sources: you need to have a laser that is coupled to a circuit that is going to do something. All of this has to be on a tiny scale that can compete with electronics. It shouldn’t consume much power either.
That's a hard collection of hurdles to clear. But there is a loophole: a photonic circuit could have the sort of application that electronic devices don't do very well.
Now, researchers have used that loophole as an excellent excuse to do a very cool experiment in powering lasers. The researchers showed how to power a laser with a laser—something that anyone with a modicum of laser physics knowledge can do. However, this is quite different: the powering laser changes the electronic structure of the medium to trick it into lasing.
DHL liefert künftig auch auf den Mond. Deren Partner Astrobotic und zwei weitere Firmen haben von der Nasa den Zuschlag für unbemannte Lander bekommen. (Mond, Nasa)
DHL liefert künftig auch auf den Mond. Deren Partner Astrobotic und zwei weitere Firmen haben von der Nasa den Zuschlag für unbemannte Lander bekommen. (Mond, Nasa)
In einer Sammelklage gehen Nutzer gegen Facebook im Skandal um Cambridge Analytica vor. Das soziale Netzwerk will jedoch keinen Schaden seiner Mitglieder durch die Datenweitergabe anerkennen. (Facebook, Google)
In einer Sammelklage gehen Nutzer gegen Facebook im Skandal um Cambridge Analytica vor. Das soziale Netzwerk will jedoch keinen Schaden seiner Mitglieder durch die Datenweitergabe anerkennen. (Facebook, Google)
Many cryptocurrency startups and investors are unhappy with the Securities and Exchange Commission’s uncertain approach to the sector, saying the agency is killing innovation and driving companies from the US. Now the Canadian social media company Kik—backed by prominent voices in the crypto world—is stepping up its effort to use the courts to force the SEC’s hand.
On Tuesday, Kik announced a crowdfunding effort to help it fight the SEC over the company’s 2017 initial coin offering, in which it sold nearly $100 million worth of a token it called kin. The company says it sold a currency that could be used across a network of apps, whether to get paid for taking surveys or to buy new stickers and themes. The SEC disagrees, arguing in a proposed action last November that kin are securities—investments subject to strict rules about how they can be sold.
Kik’s fight has drawn interest from major investors and cryptocurrency exchanges such as Circle, that are hoping for changes in how tokens are regulated. By drawing the SEC into a legal battle, Kik and its backers are hoping the courts will devise rules that would impact a wide array of crypto companies. The catch? The SEC hasn’t taken any action yet, and it’s unclear if it will.
In Berlin sollen weitere Hunderte Google-Mitarbeiter eingestellt werden. Zwei andere deutsche Standorte sind jedoch noch deutlich größer. (Google, Silicon Valley)
In Berlin sollen weitere Hunderte Google-Mitarbeiter eingestellt werden. Zwei andere deutsche Standorte sind jedoch noch deutlich größer. (Google, Silicon Valley)
On July 1, 1999, a new application was uploaded to the Internet. Named Napster, it was the first tool that created a file-sharing network of millions of people, something that had never been done before. Two years later that network shut down, but its impact still resonates today, two decades on.
Somewhere in the fall of 1998 a user named ‘Napster’ joined the w00w00 IRC channel, a chatroom on the EFnet network populated by a few dozen elite ‘hackers’.
‘Napster’ shared a new idea with the group. The then 17-year-old developer wanted to create a network of computers that could share files with each other. More specifically, music tracks.
To many people, including some in the IRC channel, that idea sounded absurd. At the time people could already download files from the fringes of the Internet but on a very limited scale. And even then, the choice was limited, and transfers were very unreliable.
Creating a network of hundreds, thousands, or even millions of people who would all open up their hard drives to the rest and offer up bandwidth, was something that was entirely alien. ‘Napster’, however, had a feeling that people might be interested.
This feeling was shared by another teenage computer fanatic named ‘Man0War’. The two shared ideas online and eventually decided to meet up.
That’s when Shawn Fanning (aka Napster), who got the Napster nickname for his ‘nappy’ hair, first saw Sean Parker (aka Man0War). Together, they came up with a plan to bring the idea to fruition.
Fast forward a few months and it’s June 1, 1999. What started as a distant vision was now a fully-fledged application that was ready to shake the world. The software, which carried the name of its inventor, Napster, soon found its way to millions of computers all over the world.
Napster
From there, things developed quickly. After roughly three months, Napster already provided access to four million songs and in less than a year, 20 million people had downloaded the application.
What started as a simple idea quickly transformed into a multi-million dollar business. The company, which employed several people that were in the w00w00 IRC channel, changed the way millions of people enjoyed music.
For many of Napster’s users, the application represented something magical. It was a gateway for musical exploration that dwarfed even the largest record stores in town. And all for free.
Initially, the novelty concealed the fact that people were not supposed to share their music libraries with the rest of the world, but this would quickly change. Within a year, the RIAA sued Napster Inc. and soon after several artists including Metallica and Dr. Dre followed.
Like most record labels, these artists saw the file-sharing software as a threat. They felt that it would destroy the music industry, which was at its peak at the time. However, there were also more positive sounds from artists who recognized the promotional effect of Napster.
While Dr. Dre said “Fuck Napster,” Chuck D famously described it as “the new radio.”
Napster’s users were not concerned about what the labels and artists thought. They were interested in expanding their music libraries. While there are no official numbers, Napster was responsible for a significant portion of the global Internet traffic at the time.
Napster
University campuses were soon transformed into file-sharing hotspots. At some campuses over half of all bandwidth was consumed by MP3-sharing students and staff. This eventually led to a ban of the application at several universities, even before copyright issues arose.
Meanwhile, the user base swelled to a peak of more than 26.4 million users worldwide in February 2001. But despite the epidemic growth and backing from investors, the small file-sharing empire couldn’t overcome the legal challenges.
The RIAA case resulted in an injunction from the Ninth Circuit Court, which ordered the network to shut down. This happened during July 2001, little more than two years after Napster launched. By September that year, the case had been settled for millions of dollars.
While the Napster craze was over, file-sharing had mesmerized the masses and the cat was out of the bag. Grokster, KaZaa, Morpheus, LimeWire, and many others popped up and provided sharing alternatives, for as long as they lasted. Meanwhile, BitTorrent was also knocking on the door.
While the aforementioned software was often associated with piracy, Napster had a momentous impact on the development of legal services. People clearly signaled that there were interested in downloading music, so the first download stores were launched, with iTunes taking the lead.
These download portals never came close to what Napster offered though. Many music fans were not interested in buying a few tracks here and there, they wanted millions of files at their fingertips, ready to be played. This included a Swedish teenager named Daniel Ek.
The Napster experience eventually triggered Ek to come up with a legal alternative that would replicate his first experience with piracy. That application was Spotify, which for its part sparked a music streaming subscription boom.
Interestingly, music streaming is now the most important source of income for the music industry. These Napster-inspired services are good for roughly half of all the music revenues worldwide, completing the circle, in a way.
Even the Napster brand, which has switched owners several times, lives on as a music subscription service today, owned by US retailer Best Buy.
Napster’s founders, meanwhile, went on to create several other successful companies.
Sean Parker is a multi-billionaire now, in part thanks to his early involvement with Facebook. Fanning, aka Napster, is not doing badly either, with a net worth of more than 100 million, much like many other members of the w00w00 IRC channel.
Nach dem ersten erfolgreichen Flug konnte das Unternehmen Stratolaunch keine Aufträge für das Trägerflugzeug erhalten. Mittlerweile plant das Unternehmen laut internen Quellen, die Operation einzustellen und erwägt Strategien, aus dem Geschäft auszusteigen. Der Flieger bleibt dafür im Hangar. (Flugzeug, Technologie) 
DHL liefert künftig auch auf den Mond. Deren Partner Astrobotic und zwei weitere Firmen haben von der Nasa den Zuschlag für unbemannte Lander bekommen. (
In einer Sammelklage gehen Nutzer gegen Facebook im Skandal um Cambridge Analytica vor. Das soziale Netzwerk will jedoch keinen Schaden seiner Mitglieder durch die Datenweitergabe anerkennen. (
In Berlin sollen weitere Hunderte Google-Mitarbeiter eingestellt werden. Zwei andere deutsche Standorte sind jedoch noch deutlich größer. (
Somewhere in the fall of 1998 a user named ‘Napster’ joined the w00w00 IRC channel, a chatroom on the EFnet network populated by a few dozen elite ‘hackers’.
You must be logged in to post a comment.