When I talk about IP, I mention DRM. Of course you would remove DRM only for legal reasons...
https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/ways-to-remove-drm-from-ebooks/
How to Remove DRM From Your Ebooks: 6 Methods to Try
(Ditto)
https://www.makeuseof.com/how-to-remove-watermark-from-photo/
How to Remove a Watermark From a Photo: 5 Easy Ways
Freebie. Registration required.
CISO with a small security team? Learn from your peers' experience with this free e-book
… In the e-Book "10 CISOs With Small Security Teams Share Their Must Dos and Don'ts" (Download it here), CISOs of teams up to 5 across the industries share their challenges and what worked with them in terms of efficiency.
Eventually, digital passports and CBP can copy that image.
CBP proposes to require mug shots of all non-US citizen travelers
From Papers, Please!
Last December we called attention to plans by US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to require mug shots of all travelers entering or leaving the US by air or sea, including US citizens.
Within days, CBP issued a press release falsely accusing us of incorrectly reporting the official CBP notice of its plans, and saying that it would withdraw its notice the next time the regulatory agenda was published.
So what happened?
Earlier this month, CBP withdrew the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)... and issued a new notice of proposed rulemaking the same day that wouldn’t apply to US citizens, but would require all non-US citizens, including permanent US residents (green-card holders) to be photographed whenever they enter or leave the US by any means: air, land, or sea.
Read more on Papers, Please!
A lot of my friend’s parents spoke Italian to each other. Would CBP have detained them? Speaking Klingon though…
Speaking Spanish is a not a lawful basis for being made to show ID
From Papers, Please!
US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has agreed to pay a “monetary sum” to two native-born US citizens and Montana residents who were made to show ID and detained for about 40 minutes (including continuing detention even after they showed their Montana drivers licenses) solely because a CBP agent overhead them speaking Spanish to each other.
The amount of the settlement has not been made public.
The ACLU of Montana represented the two Latinx residents of Havre, MT, in their lawsuit, which initially sought a declaratory judgement “that race, accent, and language cannot create suspicion to justify seizure and/or detention” (which ought to go without saying) in addition to money damages.
Read more on Papers, Please!
An argument I’m watching…
Law enforcement is using location tracking on mobile devices to identify suspects, but is it unconstitutional?
… Chatrie is now asking a federal judge in Richmond, Virginia, to suppress evidence uncovered as a result of the warrant. His lawyers argue the warrant is unconstitutional, characterizing it as “a general warrant purporting to authorize a classic dragnet search of every Google user [and only Google users Bob] who happened to be near a bank in suburban Richmond during rush hour on a Monday evening.”
The government counters the warrant was “narrowly constrained based on location, dates, and times.” It says the limited geographic and time scopes make the warrant “particular”—lingo from the Fourth Amendment that states warrants must “particularly” describe the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. At press time, a hearing on the motion to suppress evidence was scheduled for Nov. 17.
Privacy advocates reject the idea that geographic and time limits render these warrants “particular.”
“Judges may know the size of an area being tracked and the duration, but it’s impossible for them to know how many people were in that area,” Cahn says.
Strategic implications? Limit data released in answer to each request…
https://www.cpomagazine.com/data-protection/german-court-slashes-gdpr-fine-for-telecoms-giant-by-90/
German Court Slashes GDPR Fine for Telecoms Giant by 90%
A German court has slashed a General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) fine assessed to one of the country’s largest telecommunications service providers by over 90%, calling it “unreasonably high.”
… 1&1 Telecom GmbH was fined by the Federal Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information (BfDI) for an issue with the company’s customer service department. Callers to the customer service line were being provided with personal information from user accounts by doing nothing more than providing that user’s name and date of birth. The issue came to light when a customer filed a complaint against a stalker, a former partner who had made use of this security flaw to obtain the customer’s new phone number.
Though BfDI claimed the breach “posed a risk for the entire customer base,” a district court in Bonn decided upon review that the GDPR fine was too high due to the limited amount of information that an unauthorized party could potentially obtain.
(Related) Another GDPR loophole?
Dutch Court Overturns DPA Fine on Legitimate Interest Legal Basis
… According to the Dutch DPA, purely commercial interests do not constitute a legitimate interest that can serve as a legal basis for data processing activities under the GDPR.
In overturning the Dutch DPA’s decision, the court relied on guidance issued by the European Data Protection Board (the “EDPB”), which provides that legitimate interests can cover a range of different interests, provided that they are real and present (not speculative), meaning that all kinds of factual, economic and idealistic interests can qualify as legitimate interests.
A big market for surveillance?
https://www.bespacific.com/amazon-announces-new-employee-tracking-tech-and-customers-are-lining-up/
Mashable: “.Amazon-powered employee tracking is coming to a warehouse, and possibly a store, near you. The ecommerce, logistics, and (among other things) cloud computing giant quietly previewed Tuesday new hardware and software development kits (SDK) which add machine learning and computer vision capabilities to companies’ existing surveillance camera networks. And in what should come as no surprise as companies around the world ramp up employee monitoring, customers are already champing at the bit to sic Amazon’s tech on their own workers. Amazon, of course, is notorious for monitoring its fulfillment center workers’ movements in excruciating detail. From social-distance tracking systems to automatic tools that keep tabs on “the rates of each individual associate’s productivity,” Amazon has a well deserved reputation for invasiveness. AWS Panorama, shown off at the AWS re:Invent conference, offers some version of that future to companies willing to cough up the cash. And while Amazon partially advertises the new system as allowing “you to monitor workplace safety,” corporate customers clearly have a different purpose in mind.
(Related) Does this move strip out all value from Productivity Score?
https://www.makeuseof.com/microsoft-productivity-score-scaled-back/
Microsoft Scales Back the Privacy-Invading Productivity Score
Microsoft recently released a new tool called "Productivity Score" that allowed employers to check on how productive their workers are, but it quickly drew the ire of privacy advocates all over the world. In response, the software giant is making adjustments to the service to make it less intrusive.
… Microsoft has now made a post on Microsoft 365 tackling the controversy. First, the company is reshaping Productivity Score so that it removes all identifying information from workers. Employers can only use the data to see how their company as a whole is doing, and cannot use the tool to pry into what an individual is up to.
Second, Microsoft is refining the UI so that it presents the Productivity Score as a means of measuring how a business is adopting modern technology. It will no longer give the impression that it's meant to stalk individual workers. [Was that ‘impression’ deliberate? Bob]
Not sure about the witchcraft bit, but cheating sounds like a good idea.
https://www.bespacific.com/legal-research-no-longer-limited-to-keywords/
Legal research no longer limited to keywords
Tom Goldstein – SCOTUS Blog – “Longtime readers of SCOTUSblog are by now familiar with Casetext’s legal search tool. It solves an ever-present need for our team: finding opinions from all levels of the court system for our articles and case pages. Practitioners who read this blog, on the other hand, face a different need in their day-to-day work with the law. Rather than searching cases by name, attorneys need a way to search case law to find support for specific propositions. This task is challenging not just because the common law is vast, but because judges will use different articulations for the same proposition or principle. Casetext addresses this formidable challenge head on with their new tool: Parallel Search. As opposed to simple keyword search, the limitations of which most of us are intimately familiar with, Parallel Search uses machine learning technology to match full phrases and sentences with those with similar meanings in case law, even if the results and query have almost no words in common. It’s so powerful that users have described the technology as “straight up witchcraft” and “almost … like cheating” (though it certainly isn’t)…”
A few years ago, this would have been headline news. Now only a few of us scifi geeks even notice it.
China’s Chang’e 5 mission has successfully landed on the moon
The lander is expected to begin drilling operations very soon for lunar material that it will bring back to Earth
No comments:
Post a Comment