Anzeige: T.I.S.P.-Zertifizierung: Der Weg zum IT-Sicherheitsexperten

Das Zertifikat TeleTrusT Information Security Professional (T.I.S.P.) bestätigt umfassende Kompetenzen im Bereich der IT-Sicherheit. Die Golem Karrierewelt bietet einen fünftägigen Online-Workshop an, der auf die Prüfung vorbereitet. (Golem Karrierewel…

Das Zertifikat TeleTrusT Information Security Professional (T.I.S.P.) bestätigt umfassende Kompetenzen im Bereich der IT-Sicherheit. Die Golem Karrierewelt bietet einen fünftägigen Online-Workshop an, der auf die Prüfung vorbereitet. (Golem Karrierewelt, Server-Applikationen)

LG and Samsung are getting serious about their OLED panel deal again

Samsung is getting price gouged, and LG is bleeding cash. It could be a win-win.

Samsung 77-inch QD-OLED TV

Enlarge / A 77-inch QD-OLED was one of the new TVs announced at CES 2023. (credit: Samsung Display)

It's been a rollercoaster ride for Korean tech conglomerates LG and Samsung. In 2021, it was reported that they were about to reach a major business deal regarding OLED panels, but in 2022 it seemed like the talks fell through. Now, in 2023, the talks may have resumed.

The Elec reports that Samsung Electronics and LG Display have resumed discussions on a deal that would see LG supplying more than 200,000 white OLED (WOLED) panels to Samsung for a new line of Samsung-branded TVs that could launch as soon as 2024. That number would potentially be just the start of a longer partnership.

When news of the negotiations first broke a couple of years ago, it was reported that the conversation was started at the behest of the South Korean government in response to an international situation wherein LCD panel-producing Chinese companies like BOE were driving up the cost of LCD panels, threatening Samsung's TV dominance. At that time, Samsung was all in on LCD technology in its TVs, competing with LG's increasing focus on OLED.

Read 7 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Trendy “raw water” source under bird’s nest sparks diarrheal outbreak

Health officials would like to remind you that drinking untreated water is a bad idea.

A glass gets filled with drinking water.

Enlarge (credit: Getty | Florian Gaertner)

Nineteen people fell ill with a diarrheal disease in Montana last year after drinking untreated water many believed to be from a natural spring but was, in fact, just creek drainage brimming with pathogenic bacteria.

One person was hospitalized in the outbreak, which ended only after authorities diverted the water source, local health officials reported Thursday in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly.

The outbreak follows a trend that sprung up in the US several years ago of drinking so-called "raw water." That is untreated, unfiltered water collected directly from freshwater sources that is often claimed—without evidence—to have health benefits.

Read 7 remaining paragraphs | Comments

“A really big deal”—Dolly is a free, open source, ChatGPT-style AI model

Dolly 2.0 could spark a new wave of fully open source LLMs similar to ChatGPT.

The Databricks Dolly logo

Enlarge (credit: Databricks)

On Wednesday, Databricks released Dolly 2.0, reportedly the first open source, instruction-following large language model (LLM) for commercial use that's been fine-tuned on a human-generated data set. It could serve as a compelling starting point for homebrew ChatGPT competitors.

Databricks is an American enterprise software company founded in 2013 by the creators of Apache Spark. They provide a web-based platform for working with Spark for big data and machine learning. By releasing Dolly, Databricks hopes to allow organizations to create and customize LLMs "without paying for API access or sharing data with third parties," according to the Dolly launch blog post.

Dolly 2.0, its new 12-billion parameter model, is based on EleutherAI's pythia model family and exclusively fine-tuned on training data (called "databricks-dolly-15k") crowdsourced from Databricks employees. That calibration gives it abilities more in line with OpenAI's ChatGPT, which is better at answering questions and engaging in dialogue as a chatbot than a raw LLM that has not been fine-tuned.

Read 8 remaining paragraphs | Comments

Copyright Claims Board Dismisses ‘Piracy’ Case Against Cloudflare

The Copyright Claims Board has dismissed a complaint filed by popular reading app AnyStories against Cloudflare. The app’s Singaporean parent company condemned the American CDN provider for sharing inaccurate contact information regarding an alleged pirate site. While this may be true, it’s not a proper copyright infringement claim, the board concludes.

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

cloudflare logoLast summer, the US Copyright Claims Board (CCB) officially launched. Through this Copyright Office-hosted venue, rightsholders can try to recoup alleged damages outside the federal court system.

The CCB aims to make it cheaper for creators to resolve disputes. There’s no attorney required and the filing fee is limited to $100 per claim. Accused parties also benefit as the potential damages are capped at $30,000. Those who prefer traditional lawsuits can choose to opt-out.

Many of the cases that have been submitted thus far are filed against direct infringers. This includes sites and services that use copyrighted material, such as photos, without obtaining permission from rightsholders.

There are also cases where claimants argue that defendants are liable for the acts of a third party. A claim filed by popular reading app AnyStories against CDN provider Cloudflare last September is one such example.

AnyStories vs. Cloudflare

AnyStories allows independent authors to earn revenue from sharing their writings in public. However, these stories are easily copied and posted on pirate sites, much to the frustration of READ ASAP, AnyStories’ Singapore-based parent company.

The Singapore company had some success with sending DMCA notices but one site in particular, infobagh.com, proved to be unresponsive.

Hoping for a breakthrough, AnyStories sent DMCA notices to Cloudflare, calling out Infobagh.com as a pirate site. While Cloudflare provides CDN services for that site, it’s not the hosting company. This means that Cloudflare generally doesn’t intervene.

Indeed, Cloudflare didn’t take action against its customer. Instead, it shared the contact information of Infobagh.com’s hosting company, urging AnyStories to follow the issue up with them.

AnyStories tried to do so, but since the hosting company’s contact information was reportedly inaccurate, it decided to file a claim against Cloudflare at the CCB instead.

Vague Claim, No Damages

The initial claim was rather vague and didn’t really pinpoint alleged wrongdoing at Cloudflare. AnyStories said it hoped that the pirated content would be removed and that Infobagh.com would apologize.

There were no copyright infringement allegations against Cloudflare and no request for monetary damages either.

pirate boy

The Board reviewed the complaint but decided that it couldn’t do much with it as it doesn’t comply with the CASE Act requirements. This was pointed out to AnyStories, and the company was given the opportunity to amend its claim, but it didn’t help.

“Your amended claim does not provide enough facts about allegedly infringing activity by the respondent, Cloudflare Inc,” the CCB wrote, concluding that the amended claim was still non-compliant.

“By contrast, your allegations about Cloudflare do not show how it committed infringement. Instead, you appear to describe responses that Cloudflare made, which you found unsatisfactory, to your inquiries about the allegedly infringing ‘pirated website’.”

Third Claim Fails as Well

In January, the CCB provided detailed information and pointers on how AnyStories could fix these shortcomings. Most importantly, it stressed that the claim should include a direct, contributory, or vicarious copyright infringement allegation.

Despite these detailed instructions, the third claim was again rather brief. While it included a $15,000 damages demand, a concrete copyright infringement allegation against Cloudflare was still absent.

“We tried to communicate with the service provider called CLOUDFLARE, INC., but the service provider provided us with an incorrect contact, which led us to still be unable to contact the actual operator of the pirated website,” it reads, adding that the infringing content remains online.

allegation

This was the third and final try for AnyStories, and the Board again concludes that the allegations are insufficient. The main claim that Cloudflare failed to provide accurate contact information for the pirate site’s host has nothing to do with copyright infringement.

“Providing incorrect contact information is not an infringing act, and the claimant has not explained how Cloudfare contributed to the alleged infringement here,” the Board writes.

“The claimant has not described any actions by Cloudflare that would constitute copyright infringement, nor has it described any service that Cloudflare provides to infobagh.com or identified grounds to hold Cloudflare liable for infringement on that site.”

Refile and Repeat?

This isn’t the decision AnyStories was looking for but the CCB is actually quite helpful and points out, again, how the company can lodge a proper contributory infringement claim against Cloudflare.

If the company wants to refile its claim, it should at least show that Cloudflare knew about the infringing activity and induced or caused it (contributory infringement). Alternatively, it can show that Cloudflare had the ability to control the infringing activity and financially benefited from it (vicarious infringement).

The present case stops here, however, and READ ASAP’s complaint is dismissed. These types of dismissals are actually quite common for CCB cases. As Plagiarism Today points out, many filings turn out to be defective.

Thus far, the Copyright Claims Board hasn’t led to a wave of rulings. On the contrary, of the 415 cases file to date, only one has resulted in a full decision. In that case, the board awarded $1,000 to a photographer who discovered that his work was used on the website of a California-based law practice.

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

Tesla is stonewalling discrimination probe, California state agency charges

Calif. Civil Rights Dept. petitions court, says Tesla must be forced to comply.

Aerial view of cars parked in a Tesla factory parking lot. A Tesla logo is painted on the concrete.

Enlarge / Cars parked at the Tesla Fremont Factory in Fremont, California, on February 10, 2022. (credit: Getty Images | Josh Edelson)

Tesla was sued yesterday by a California state agency that says the Elon Musk-led carmaker is stonewalling an investigation into alleged discrimination and harassment.

"Tesla's failure to comply with my office's obligation to investigate allegations of workplace misconduct shows a lack of respect for the rights and well-being of their workers," Kevin Kish, director of the California Civil Rights Department, said today in a press release. Kish said his agency "will not accept any attempts to obstruct our investigation" and that "Tesla is not above the law."

The agency's press release said that Tesla "fail[ed] to comply with a subpoena in connection to an ongoing, confidential investigation into allegations of unlawful harassment and discrimination." The agency filed a petition in Alameda County Superior Court asking for "an order directing respondent Tesla to appear before this Court and to show cause as to why it has refused to comply and/or not fully complied with CRD's investigative discovery."

Read 9 remaining paragraphs | Comments