<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Southwest Cyberport &#187; copyright</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.swcp.com/tag/copyright/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.swcp.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 16 Mar 2013 20:57:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>The Right to Internet Access</title>
		<link>http://www.swcp.com/2013/internet-access-rights/</link>
		<comments>http://www.swcp.com/2013/internet-access-rights/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2013 20:33:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jnelson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[How the Net Works]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[broadband]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cybercrime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet access]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.swcp.com/?p=2043</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How essential is the Net? How vital is access to the Internet at all times? Does being cut off impair or maybe even threaten modern life? If you&#8217;re one of the many who would argue that yes, the ability to get online is absolutely basic to life, work, society, and entertainment, you&#8217;re not alone. And in a landmark ruling, the highest court in Germany agrees with you. Recently, the German Federal Supreme Court ruled that consumers can demand damages – financial compensation – for service outages. The case involved a suit by a man who lost his DSL connection for 2 months. For Germans, the decision places Internet access in the same small class of assets protected because they are necessary to survive and function in modern society. These  include homes, telephones, and automobiles. Consider that: loss of Internet access is deemed as big an inconvenience as losing a car! This means that sanctions denying access may not be applied. German Federal Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger said, &#8220;The judgment of the Federal Court shows that for an informed life, the network has become  fundamental. It is a realization that the use of the Internet is a civil right.&#8221; This is not the first time a government had declared Internet access is a basic human right. France was first to do so back in 2009. Finland went even further later that year when it declared it would provide each citizen with &#8230; <a href="http://www.swcp.com/2013/internet-access-rights/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.swcp.com/2013/internet-access-rights/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The 3D Replicator Revolution Is Here</title>
		<link>http://www.swcp.com/2012/3d-printing-revolution/</link>
		<comments>http://www.swcp.com/2012/3d-printing-revolution/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Oct 2012 22:34:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jnelson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Interesting Items]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[3d printing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DRM]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.swcp.com/?p=1955</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[While the world has been suffering through the Great Recession and many still worry about all the manufacturing jobs lost overseas, the next industrial revolution was quietly launched in garages, basements, and labs right here at home. This new method of producing goods will cause greater changes and more social upheaval than anything since Henry Ford started up his assembly line. This new technology is called 3D printing and it will change how we make everything from what we wear and what we eat to the vehicles we drive and the jobs we perform. 3D printing will give the average person the freedom of expression and specialty crafted goods which was once the exclusive realm of royalty and the super-rich. Not just in the abundance of “bespoke” objects available as customized products or reproductions of rare artworks, either, but in terms of the sheer variety of things also. The ability to render mathematical expressions in solid form gives designers, engineers, and architects a tool of incredible power. Since the 1980s, expensive professional devices have been able to prototype new gadgets. But the tech is now finally poised to enter the consumer market. 3D printing is, of course, the latest step in the digitization of the world. It may be helpful in imagining the effects of this new way of doing things by recalling how digital 2D printing altered everything. Before the invention of the personal computer, printing was an established &#8230; <a href="http://www.swcp.com/2012/3d-printing-revolution/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.swcp.com/2012/3d-printing-revolution/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CISPA: The Fight for Privacy Continues</title>
		<link>http://www.swcp.com/2012/cispa-privacy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.swcp.com/2012/cispa-privacy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Apr 2012 21:52:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jnelson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CISPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cybercrime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EFF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[file sharing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Protect IP Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SOPA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.swcp.com/?p=1814</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The price of freedom, it is said, is eternal vigilance. That has been demonstrated once again in the ongoing legal struggle over privacy on the Internet. The celebration and congratulations among the people who united to defeat SOPA, the &#8220;Stop Online Piracy Act&#8220;, the last proposed draconian legislation aimed at protecting copyright and intellectual property, had not even ended before another such bill was proposed. This one is called CISPA, the &#8220;Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act&#8220;, which indicates it&#8217;s a somewhat different beast than SOPA, directed against hackers rather than file-sharers. (You can download a PDF of the actual bill, H.R. 3523, here.) It&#8217;s not quite SOPA risen like a zombie from the grave, but it is written in such ambiguous language that many privacy advocates consider it even more insidious and potentially harmful. CISPA, opponents claim, allow &#8220;cyber entities&#8221; such as ISPs, social networks, and cell phone and other service providers, to circumvent Internet privacy laws. It allows the government to monitor online communications if it suspects any kind of cybersecurity threat to be involved. And since the bill does not really define cybersecurity, that leaves the door wide open, allowing virtually anyone to be spied on for any reason. Not only the government is given this power. If a cyber entity thinks a threat is involved, it can take action. The only safeguard built in is that it cannot be done for &#8220;unfair competitive advantage&#8221;. All that&#8217;s &#8230; <a href="http://www.swcp.com/2012/cispa-privacy/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.swcp.com/2012/cispa-privacy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ACTA: The Internet Fight Goes International</title>
		<link>http://www.swcp.com/2012/acta-internet-fight/</link>
		<comments>http://www.swcp.com/2012/acta-internet-fight/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2012 19:41:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jnelson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Interesting Items]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ACTA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Protect IP Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SOPA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.swcp.com/?p=1640</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Internet activists who are celebrating the apparent defeat of the SOPA and PIPA bills have found their party already interrupted by the appearance, or rather, re-appearance of a piece of legislation that could have an even more significant effect: ACTA, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement. Whereas SOPA and PIPA were merely proposed US laws, ACTA is an international treaty, so its scope is much wider. It will become law for all signatory states and override any contrary provisions in US codes. On January 26, the European Union and 22 member states formally signed ACTA, and apparently it now goes before the European Parliament. Last, October, ACTA was signed by 10 nations, including the US which helped sponsor it. However, though the President signed it as an executive agreement, constitutionally the treaty must still be ratified by the US Senate. Mexico, Switzerland, Germany, the Netherlands, Estonia, Cyprus, and Slovakia are some of the most important nations that have still not signed on. There is a huge amount of suspicion across the Internet surrounding the treaty because it was negotiated in secrecy by industry and government trade representatives of some of the richest countries without any input from anyone else. In fact, time after time, parliaments and interest groups around the world were told they could not see it while it was being worked on. For a long time the only information about the provisions of the proposed treaty came through diplomatic cables &#8230; <a href="http://www.swcp.com/2012/acta-internet-fight/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.swcp.com/2012/acta-internet-fight/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What about the Stop Internet Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect-IP Act (PIPA)?</title>
		<link>http://www.swcp.com/2011/sopa-pipa-piracy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.swcp.com/2011/sopa-pipa-piracy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2011 22:01:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jnelson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[copyright]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DMCA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[piracy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Protect IP Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SOPA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.swcp.com/?p=1556</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Recently, a customer wrote in for more information on these two important pieces of legislation. Here&#8217;s the response from SWCP President Mark Costlow, that we thought was so good, it deserved to be posted: SOPA and PROTECT-IP are both very bad ideas. They are attempts to address something that is a real problem (theft of intellectual property) but they do it in such a flawed way that the cure would be much worse than the disease. One can argue back and forth about how much of a problem piracy really is. Both sides tend to blow their positions out of proportion. But giving people the power to turn off (read: destroy) web sites at will, without due process, is irresponsible and dangerous. The existing mechanisms for removing infringing material from the internet already have &#8220;baby vs bathwater&#8221; problems, and these bills would make it worse. Here&#8217;s one example. DMCA Takedowns are routinely used to remove videos from YouTube which are deemed to contain a media company&#8217;s copyrighted material, when in fact the usage is in a news or commentary context and therefore covered under the Fair Use doctrine. The harmed party can protest the takedown and get it reversed, but that process is lengthy. For someone who makes their living commenting on current events, the takedown essentially nullifies the content.  It&#8217;s almost useless when they restore it 2 weeks later. Here&#8217;s a write-up of a recent case of this, but it&#8217;s &#8230; <a href="http://www.swcp.com/2011/sopa-pipa-piracy/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.swcp.com/2011/sopa-pipa-piracy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>