華盛頓郵報的歷史創舉:呼籲對告密者的求刑

英國衛報華盛頓郵報因報導 Snowden 事件而拿到 2014 年的普立茲獎後,華盛頓郵報正式公開立場,表達應該將 Snowden 弄回美國受審,而非現在大家在呼籲的特赦:「WashPost Makes History: First Paper to Call for Prosecution of Its Own Source (After Accepting Pulitzer)」。

In doing so, the Washington Post has achieved an ignominious feat in U.S. media history: the first-ever paper to explicitly editorialize for the criminal prosecution of its own source — one on whose back the paper won and eagerly accepted a Pulitzer Prize for Public Service. But even more staggering than this act of journalistic treachery against the paper’s own source are the claims made to justify it.

華盛頓郵報的說法更是無恥:

The complication is that Mr. Snowden did more than that. He also pilfered, and leaked, information about a separate overseas NSA Internet-monitoring program, PRISM, that was both clearly legal and not clearly threatening to privacy. (It was also not permanent; the law authorizing it expires next year.)

這從來就不是合法的問題,而是侵犯人權的問題,合法的事情在事後甚至被制定憲法修正案而推翻的事情多的是。美國的女性在 1920 年才擁有投票權 (透過「美國憲法第十九修正案」)。

第四權必須發揮應有的能力去推動政府往正確的方向前進。在拿到普立茲獎後以「合法」的角度來論述淪落為政府打手,墮落至此...

歐盟法院認為公開無線網路的營運者不需要對使用者的侵權行為負責

歐盟法院 (The Court of Justice of the European Union) 認為公開無線網路的營運者不需要對使用者的侵權行為負責:「EU Court: Open WiFi Operator Not Liable For Pirate Users」。

不過這是有一些前提的,法院認為應該要符合這幾個要件,營運方才不要負責。基本上完全沒有 filter 限制的無線網路會符合這些條件:

The Court further notes that in order for such ‘mere conduit’ services to be exempt from third party liability, three cumulative conditions must be met:

– The provider must not have initiated the transmission
– It must not have selected the recipient of the transmission
– It must neither have selected nor modified the information contained in the transmission.

帶這並不代表丟著不管,而是在發生後要求改善:

In an effort to strike a balance between protecting a service provider from third party liability and the rights of IP owners, the Court ruled that providers can be required to end infringement.

“[T]he directive does not preclude the copyright holder from seeking before a national authority or court to have such a service provider ordered to end, or prevent, any infringement of copyright committed by its customers,” the Court found.

One such measure could include the obtaining of an injunction which would force an operator to password-protect his open WiFi network in order to deter infringement.

但法院並不同意直接監控:

On a more positive note, the Court rejected the notion of monitoring networks for infringement or taking more aggressive actions where unnecessary.

“[T]he directive expressly rules out the adoption of a measure to monitor information transmitted via a given network. Similarly, a measure consisting in terminating the internet connection completely without considering the adoption of measures less restrictive of the connection provider’s freedom to conduct a business would not be capable of reconciling the abovementioned conflicting rights,” the Court concludes.

網路對現在的言論自由非常重要,所以只有在確認侵犯他人權益的情況下才採取必要措施,歐盟法院這樣判大概是覺得這樣吧...

Facebook 操弄 Trending 裡的新聞

看了 GizmodoFacebook 的對話,就有種之前某長輩常說的「沒被抓到就不算犯罪喔~」的感覺:「Former Facebook Workers: We Routinely Suppressed Conservative News」。

Gizmodo 接到前員工的線報後,再加上透過關係問到其他的前員工,證實了標題的消息:

Facebook workers routinely suppressed news stories of interest to conservative readers from the social network’s influential “trending” news section, according to a former journalist who worked on the project. This individual says that workers prevented stories about the right-wing CPAC gathering, Mitt Romney, Rand Paul, and other conservative topics from appearing in the highly-influential section, even though they were organically trending among the site’s users.

Several former Facebook “news curators,” as they were known internally, also told Gizmodo that they were instructed to artificially “inject” selected stories into the trending news module, even if they weren’t popular enough to warrant inclusion—or in some cases weren’t trending at all. The former curators, all of whom worked as contractors, also said they were directed not to include news about Facebook itself in the trending module.

當然 Facebook 對於這種沒辦法證實的事情是全盤否認,不過再重複一次某長輩的「沒被抓到就不算犯罪喔~」的經典台詞...

英國將 10Mbps 上網訂為法定權利

在「UK govt to make 10 Mbps broadband a legal right」這邊看到英國政府打算更新法案,逐步將 10Mbps 上網速度訂為法定權利。

目前法定權利是 28.8Kbps 的撥接速度:

Currently, the minimum USO for data access in Britain is just 28.8 Kbps, or dial-up speeds.

打算在今年年底拉高為 2Mbps,並且在 2020 年拉高為 10Mbps:

Under the proposal, the minimum speed specified by the USO will be raised to 2 Mbps by the end of the year, before further increasing to 10 Mbps by 2020.

英國首相 David Cameron 公開說明,internet 應該被認定為基本權利:

"Access to the internet shouldn’t be a luxury; it should be a right – absolutely fundamental to life in 21st century Britain," Cameron said.