Month: October 2020

Illegale Billionen-Geschäfte von Banken

Nach der Aufdeckung von illegalen Geschäften zahlen Banken wie die US-Großbank JP Morgan Rekordstrafen, die sie nicht wirklich stören und ohnehin werden sie als “too big to fail” im Notfall aufgefangen

Nach der Aufdeckung von illegalen Geschäften zahlen Banken wie die US-Großbank JP Morgan Rekordstrafen, die sie nicht wirklich stören und ohnehin werden sie als "too big to fail" im Notfall aufgefangen

This congressperson wants to ramp up COVID-19 testing

Mikie Sherrill’s new bill would reward labs for extra quick turnarounds.

Doctor in protection gloves examining & organising test kit for COVID-19 in laboratory.

Enlarge / Doctor in protection gloves examining & organising test kit for COVID-19 in laboratory. (credit: Tang Ming Tung | Getty Images)

The US's COVID testing failure has unfurled in stages. First, there weren’t close to enough tests, thanks to cascading policy failures and supply chain issues. Once the supply problem gradually came under control, it was replaced by processing backlogs: As cases soared over the summer, many people were having to wait a week or more to get results back. A national survey in August found that only 37 percent of people receiving nasal swab tests were getting results back in the two-day window necessary for effective contract tracing, while nearly a third of tests were taking longer than four days. This delay meant that, as Bill Gates colorfully told WIRED’s Steven Levy in August, “The majority of all US tests are completely garbage.” The root of the problem, Gates said, was that the federal reimbursement rate for the labs that process COVID tests is the same regardless of how long the results take. Change that, he argued, and the labs processing tests “will fix it overnight.”

A new House bill would aim to make Gates’ idea reality. On Thursday, Mikie Sherrill, a freshman congressperson from New Jersey, introduced the SPEEDY Act, which would tie federal reimbursement to test result speeds. (The full name is the “Strictly Pay for Efficient and Expedited Delivery of Your (SPEEDY) COVID-19 Test Act.”) At the outset of the pandemic, the government was paying about $51 per test for people covered by federal health plans. (The average marginal cost of a standard PCR test varies, but at a high-volume lab it runs at about $40.) To encourage labs to increase capacity, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) raised that to $100 in April. Under the SPEEDY Act, tests that deliver results in 24 hours would be rewarded with $125; within 48 hours, the current $100 rate would apply; and for results within 72 hours, labs would go back to the pre-April reimbursement. The government wouldn’t pay at all for results that come back after 72 hours. (To avoid having labs just give up on tests after that window closes, the law would require them to still process the tests in order to participate in Medicare.)

Read 8 remaining paragraphs | Comments

EU Allows Accused ‘Pirate’ Sites to Rebut Copyright Holder Claims

The European Commission is working on its 2020 piracy watch list, which will provide an overview of notorious markets located outside of the EU. The annual report is largely based on input from copyright holders but the Commission is actively approaching accused pirate sites to rebut these claims before publication.

From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

EU CopyrightFollowing the example of the United States, the EU started publishing its very own piracy watchlist two years ago.

The annual ‘Counterfeit and Piracy Watch List’ is put together by the European Commission. As in the US, it is based on reports from copyright holder groups that report several problematic sites and services.

For example, the first watch list included ‘non-EU’ targets such as The Pirate Bay, Torrentz2, Rapidgator, Uploaded, Sci-Hub, and H2converter. In addition, some third-party intermediaries such as Cloudflare were called out as well.

EU’s 2020 Piracy Watchlist

The European Commission is currently working on its 2020 watchlist and has already completed the public consultation. This resulted in a list of sites and services which are now being vetted for publication.

“This list will again identify and describe the most problematic marketplaces […] in order to encourage their operators and owners as well as the responsible local authorities and governments to take the necessary actions and measures to reduce the availability of IPR infringing goods or services,” the Commission writes.

A common critique with this type of watchlist is that they are often based on one-sided input. The ‘piracy’ and ‘copyright infringement’ claims come from copyright holders and are often repeated before hearing from the accused party.

EU Commission Consults Accused Sites

The European Commission breaks with this tradition. It has recently contacted several accused parties, allowing them to have their say. TorrentFreak spoke to the operator of a torrent site who, on the condition of anonymity, agreed to share the letter he received from the Commission.

“We contact you because the website you operate was one of the reported marketplaces,” the letter starts.

“According to the stakeholders, [redacted] is reportedly a popular BitTorrent website hosted in [redacted] facilitating access to a wide range of content, including music, films, TV programmes, software and videogames.”

The Commission acknowledges that the targeted site responds to takedown notices, but copyright holders report that infringing material is usually quickly reposted. In addition, the site reportedly generates income from ad revenue and pay-per-install links that could link to malware.

Based on these third-party reports, the EU Commission is inclined to add the site to the forthcoming piracy watch list. However, it allows the site operator to have his say as well.

“Based on the public consultation, we are considering including the name of the site you operate in the next edition of the Watch List. We would like to give you the opportunity to express your views concerning the above-mentioned allegations reported by stakeholders and to send us your comments.”

Proper Verification is Welcome

The site operator we spoke with isn’t sure whether he is going to reply. However, it is laudable that targeted sites are allowed to chime in before the list is published.

It’s not entirely clear what constitutes a ‘pirate’ site in the eyes of the EU Commission. The letter suggests that simply taking down reported files isn’t good enough as they will simply reappear. However, that same logic applies to many sites and services, including YouTube.

When the European Commission announced its most recent consultation earlier this year it said that all information received will be thoroughly verified. This is crucial, as its first report wasn’t free of errors, and included a perfectly legitimate site.

From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.