美國政府 NLRB 給出競業及禁止挖角條款違法的判決

在「NLRB judge declares non-compete clause is an unfair labor practice (nlrbedge.com)」這邊看到的,原始文章是:「In First Case of its Kind, NLRB Judge Declares Non-Compete Clause Is an Unfair Labor Practice」。

NLRB (National Labor Relations Board) 這次是針對 J.O. Mory 的判決,原始判決本來想連結到 NLRB 的網站上,但發現現在連不上,先給這份好了:「09031d4583d765f7.pdf」。

裡面有兩個面向的判決,一個是競業的部分,另外一個是禁挖的部分。細節可以直接看原文,或是直接丟 Google Translate 或是叫 ChatGPT & Gemini 翻譯都可以。

競業條款的部分不算太意外,因為整個州政府與聯邦政府都在修法大幅限制企業在合約上面可以設定的競業條款,不再讓自由市場機制決定勞工的工作權益 (通常是弱勢方)。

禁挖條款的部分是這次看到覺得比較新鮮的,認定違法的原因與禁業的部分類似,都是以會影響勞工的工作權益而宣告違法。

這塊應該是進行式,這幾年應該還是可以看到不同的判決出現...

北韓的動畫承包團隊

2023 年的時候在北韓的 internet 上發現一台沒有設定好的伺服器,於是就有人 dump 下來分析裡面的內容,然後就發現看起來是中國的團隊轉包給北韓團隊用的 server:「What We Learned Inside a North Korean Internet Server: How Well Do You Know Your Partners?」。

像是這張圖,可以看到上面有「EKACHI EPILKA」,這查一下可以查到「株式会社エカチエピルカ」,另外也可以看到簡體中文以及韓文的說明:

雖然拼圖不夠完整,但應該是可以看出輪廓了:目前比較像的情況應該是中國拿到合約後轉包給北韓的團隊,這對於有在關注日本動畫產業的人來說應該也不算太意外,日本的動畫產業已經是高度分工,自己國家內二包三包本來就很常見,如果是先包到中國,再分包到北韓的話也不算太奇怪:

There is no evidence to suggest that the companies identified in the images had any knowledge that a part of their project had been subcontracted to North Korean animators. In fact, as the editing comments on all the files, including those related to US-based animations, were written in Chinese, it is likely that the contracting arrangement was several steps downstream from the major producers.

不過法律上就有些狀況了,北韓應該是被制裁對象...

德國法院認為 DNT header 具有法律的告知效力

HN 上面看到「German court declares Do Not Track to be legally binding (vzbv.de)」這個消息,原文是德文:「Gericht untersagt Datenschutzverstöße von LinkedIn」,Google Translation 翻譯的結果:「Court bans LinkedIn data protection violations」。

LinkedIn 告知使用者他們不會理會 DNT,德國法院則是認為 DNT header 是已經告知對方不願意被追蹤了:

„Wenn Verbraucher:innen die ,Do-Not-Track‘-Funktion ihres Browsers aktivieren, ist das eine klare Botschaft: Sie wollen nicht, dass ihr Surfverhalten für Werbe- und andere Zwecke ausgespäht wird“, sagt Rosemarie Rodden, Rechtsreferenin beim vzbv. „Webseitenbetreiber müssen dieses Signal respektieren.“

“When consumers activate the 'Do Not Track' function of their browser, it sends a clear message: They do not want their surfing behavior to be spied on for advertising and other purposes,” says Rosemarie Rodden, legal officer at vzbv. “Website operators must respect this signal.”

這好像是第一次看到 DNT 相關的法律判決?可以看看後續有沒有新的消息 (上訴之類的),來看看最終的判決會是怎麼樣。

歐盟 2024 年年底強制使用 USB-C 充電頭 (終於,iPhone...)

Hacker News Daily 上看到「EU Passes Law to Switch iPhone to USB-C by End of 2024」,裡面指到了歐盟的新聞稿:「Long-awaited common charger for mobile devices will be a reality in 2024」。

2024 年年底 (所以是 2025 年) 將強制手機與平板都使用 USB-C 充電頭,2026 年則是延伸涵蓋到筆電:

By the end of 2024, all mobile phones, tablets and cameras sold in the EU will have to be equipped with a USB Type-C charging port. From spring 2026, the obligation will extend to laptops.

終於定案公告了,之前傳言好久了...

Google 在歐盟的服務將提供 Reject All Cookies 的按鈕

看到「Google gives Europe a ‘reject all’ button for tracking cookies after fines from watchdogs」這篇,在講 Google 在歐盟的服務開始提供 Reject All Cookie 的按鈕,其中 Google 官方的公告可以在「New cookie choices in Europe」這邊看到。

Reject All Cookies 的按鈕是像這樣的設計:

照報導說的,今年初的時候法國罰了 Google 一億五千萬歐元,因為 Accept All Cookies 只要一個按鍵,但 Reject All Cookies 需要按很多選單才能達成,而法國認為這樣非對稱式的設計是違法的:

Earlier this year, France’s data protection agency CNIL fined Google €150 million ($170 million) for deploying confusing language in cookie banners. Previously, Google allowed users to accept all tracking cookies with a single click, but forced people to click through various menus to reject them all. This asymmetry was unlawful, said CNIL, steering users into accepting cookies to the ultimate benefit of Google’s advertising business.

Google 的說明裡面也有提到法國的事情,但當然沒有提到罰款:

Based on these conversations and specific direction from France’s Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés (CNIL), we have now completed a full redesign of our approach, including changes to the infrastructure we use to handle cookies.

另外就是這個功能目前只在法國啟用,後續會放到整個歐盟區:

We’ve kicked off the launch in France and will be extending this experience across the rest of the European Economic Area, the U.K. and Switzerland.

公平會對創業家兄弟與松果公司的 SEO 誘導轉向開罰

好像很少提到國內的新聞,但這則應該是這兩天蠻熱門的一個新聞,創業家兄弟與松果公司 (也是創業家兄弟公司) 被公平會開罰:「操作SEO搜尋關鍵字誤導消費者 創業家兄弟、松果公司挨罰」,相關的備份先留起來:Internet Archivearchive.today

公平會官方的新聞稿則可以在「利用程式設計引誘消費者「逛錯街」,公平會開罰」這邊看到,對應的網頁備份:Internet Archivearchive.today

用的是公平交易法第 25 條:

公平會於4月12日第1594次委員會議通過,創業家兄弟股份有限公司及松果購物股份有限公司利用「搜尋引擎優化 (Search Engine Optimization,簡稱SEO)」技術,並在搜尋引擎的顯示結果上不當顯示特定品牌名稱,使消費者誤認該賣場有販售特定品牌產品,藉以增進自身網站到訪率,違反公平交易法第25條規定,處創業家兄弟公司200萬元、松果公司80萬元罰鍰。

這條的條文可以從「公平交易法§25-全國法規資料庫」這邊看到:

除本法另有規定者外,事業亦不得為其他足以影響交易秩序之欺罔或顯失公平之行為。

主要的原因是點進去後卻沒有該項商品:

公平會發現,消費者在Google搜尋引擎打上特定品牌名稱,例如「悅夢床墊」時,搜尋結果會出現「悅夢床墊的熱銷搜尋結果│生活市集」、「人氣熱銷悅夢床墊口碑推薦品牌整理─松果購物」等搜尋結果,消費者被前述搜尋結果吸引點選進入「生活市集」、「松果購物」網站後,卻發現該賣場並無「悅夢床墊」之產品,此係生活市集及松果購物之經營者創業家兄弟公司及松果公司分別利用SEO技術所產生的現象。

而且會透過使用者在往站上搜尋的關鍵字產生對應的頁面:

公平會進一步調查後發現,創業家兄弟公司及松果公司對其所經營之「生活市集」及「松果購物」網頁進行設計,只要網路使用者在該2網站搜尋過「悅夢床墊」,縱然該2網站賣場並沒有賣「悅夢床墊」,其網站程式也會主動生成行銷文案網頁,以供搜尋引擎攫取。若有消費者之後在Google搜尋引擎查詢「悅夢床墊」時,搜尋結果便會帶出「悅夢床墊的熱銷搜尋結果│生活市集」、「人氣熱銷悅夢床墊口碑推薦品牌整理─松果購物」等搜尋結果項目,經消費者點選後即會導向「生活市集」、「松果購物」之網站。

然後判罰的部份:

公平會過往即曾就事業使用競爭對手事業名稱作為關鍵字廣告,並在關鍵字廣告併列競爭對手事業名稱之行為,認定違反公平交易法第25條規定。本案雖非創業家兄弟公司及松果公司直接使用「悅夢床墊」等他人商品品牌作為關鍵字廣告,但最終呈現之結果,本質上都是「誘導/轉向」(bait-and-switch)的欺罔行為,除了打斷消費者正常的商品搜尋與購買過程,也對其他販售該等品牌商品之經營者形成不公平競爭的效果。若任由發生而不予規範,未來將可能導致其他競爭者之競相仿效,消費者將更難以分辨搜尋結果呈現資訊之真偽,進而威脅電商市場之競爭秩序及消費者利益。故公平會認為違反公平交易法第25條「足以影響交易秩序之欺罔及顯失公平行為」,並分別處創業家兄弟公司200萬元、松果公司80萬元罰鍰。

所以這算是對 Dark pattern SEO 的部份開罰...

EULA 不能禁止使用者 decompile 修 bug

Hacker News Daily 上翻到的,歐洲法院認為 EULA 不能禁止使用者 decompile 修 bug:「EU court rules no EULA can forbid decompilation, if you want to fix a bug (europa.eu)」,官方的英文版文件在這邊可以翻到,不過原始判決是法文:

* Language of the case: French.

這是 Top System SA 與比利時政府打的訴訟,法院認為修 bug 而需要 decompile 這件事情是合法的,即使考慮到 Article 6 的規範:

In the light of the foregoing considerations, the answer to the first question referred is that Article 5(1) of Directive 91/250 must be interpreted as meaning that the lawful purchaser of a computer program is entitled to decompile all or part of that program in order to correct errors affecting its operation, including where the correction consists in disabling a function that is affecting the proper operation of the application of which that program forms a part.

In the light of the foregoing considerations, the answer to the second question referred is that Article 5(1) of Directive 91/250 must be interpreted as meaning that the lawful purchaser of a computer program who wishes to decompile that program in order to correct errors affecting the operation thereof is not required to satisfy the requirements laid down in Article 6 of that directive. However, that purchaser is entitled to carry out such a decompilation only to the extent necessary to effect that correction and in compliance, where appropriate, with the conditions laid down in the contract with the holder of the copyright in that program.

案子看起來應該還有得打?看起來好像不是最終判決...

REQUEST for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the Cour d’appel de Bruxelles (Court of Appeal, Brussels, Belgium), made by decision of 20 December 2019, received at the Court on 14 January 2020[.]

但不管怎樣,算是有些東西出來了... 然後 Hacker News 上面的討論就看到一些很歡樂的例子:

This becomes incredibly interesting in terms of e.g. Denuvo. This anti-piracy middleware has been shown to make games unplayable, and this EU law seems to support removing it.

哭啊怎麼提到該死的 Denuvo XDDD

Atlassian 在 ToS 內禁止使用者討論 Cloud 產品的效能

Hacker News Daily 上看到的:「Atlassian Cloud ToS section 3.3(I) prohibits discussing performance issues (atlassian.com)」,引用的頁面是「Atlassian Cloud Terms of Service」這邊。

翻了下 Internet Archive,看起來在 2018/11/01 生效的版本就有這條了:「20181102013014」。

出自這條:

3.3. Restrictions. Except as otherwise expressly permitted in these Terms, you will not: [...]; (i) publicly disseminate information regarding the performance of the Cloud Products; [...]

這個條文已經生效兩年多了,不過我猜就是被大家批一批還是依舊...

這類條款類似於 OracleMicrosoft 在資料庫系統上面的條款 (可以參考「Is it against license to publish Oracle and SQL Server performance test?」這邊的回答),看起來除非從法律層級禁止,不然應該只會有愈來愈多公司納入這類條款...

GitHub 拿掉所有非必要的 Cookie 了

GitHub 家的老大宣佈拿掉 cookie banner 了,因為他們直接把所有非必要的 cookie 都拿掉了:「No cookie for you」。

會有 cookie banner 主要是因為歐盟的規定:

Well, EU law requires you to use cookie banners if your website contains cookies that are not required for it to work. Common examples of such cookies are those used by third-party analytics, tracking, and advertising services. These services collect information about people’s behavior across the web, store it in their databases, and can use it to serve personalized ads.

然後他們的解法是拔掉:

At GitHub, we want to protect developer privacy, and we find cookie banners quite irritating, so we decided to look for a solution. After a brief search, we found one: just don’t use any non-essential cookies. Pretty simple, really. ?

是個「解決製造問題的人」的解法 XDDD (但是是褒意)

美國汽車的兒童安全座椅法律,影響生育的意願

Hacker News Daily 上看到的,原文標題比較漂亮:「Car Seats as Contraception」,在 Hacker News 上也有討論:「Car seats as contraception (ssrn.com)」,重點是作者之一 (David H. Solomon) 也有跑上去回應。

Abstract 的部份把重點都講出來了,1977 年美國通過汽車的兒童安全座椅法律,但大多數的汽車無法放下第三張座椅,這反而使得生第三胎的成本大幅提高 (需要買空間更大的車),然後另外拉出資料分析因為法律而制止的車禍數量:

Since 1977, U.S. states have passed laws steadily raising the age for which a child must ride in a car safety seat. These laws significantly raise the cost of having a third child, as many regular-sized cars cannot fit three child seats in the back. Using census data and state-year variation in laws, we estimate that when women have two children of ages requiring mandated car seats, they have a lower annual probability of giving birth by 0.73 percentage points. Consistent with a causal channel, this effect is limited to third child births, is concentrated in households with access to a car, and is larger when a male is present (when both front seats are likely to be occupied). We estimate that these laws prevented only 57 car crash fatalities of children nationwide in 2017. Simultaneously, they led to a permanent reduction of approximately 8,000 births in the same year, and 145,000 fewer births since 1980, with 90% of this decline being since 2000.

濃濃的政治不正確感 XD