Japan man held over 'printed guns'

8 May 2014 Last updated at 11:40

A 27-year-old man from near Tokyo has been arrested for allegedly possessing guns made with a 3D printer, according to the Japan Broadcasting Corporation.

Five guns, two of which could fire lethal bullets, and a 3D printer were seized from Yoshitomo Imura's home, police sources told broadcaster NHK.

The first arrest of its kind in Japan, officers acted after he had displayed 3D-printed guns online, sources said.

Mr Imura reportedly said he had not realised printing the guns was illegal.

No live ammunition was found.

The investigation was launched in February after officers were made aware of video footage of Mr Imura displaying newly printed weapons, the sources added.

Defense Distributed

Desktop 3D printers can be bought on the High Street for as little as £500, with more sophisticated models costing tens of thousands.

The world's first 3D-printed gun was successfully fired in the US in May 2013 by a group called Defense Distributed, who made the blueprints available online.

However, the United States Department of State quickly demanded the immediate removal of the blueprints from the group's website.

Printed gun parts were thought to have been found in the UK in October 2013, however the parts turned out to be spare components for a 3D printer.

23.52 | 0 komentar | Read More

Pressure mounts over US net rules

9 May 2014 Last updated at 11:19

Pressure is mounting on the US Federal Communications Commission to delay or abandon plans to change the rules that govern how internet traffic is treated.

More than 50 venture capitalists have sent a letter expressing concerns about proposals to allow internet service providers (ISPs) to charge for prioritised network access.

It comes a day after 100 technology companies signed a similar letter.

Two FCC commissioners are now calling for the 15 May vote to be delayed.

The row centres around the issue of net neutrality - a central tenet of the internet that holds all online traffic should be treated equally.

Recently it emerged the FCC was considering letting ISPs charge fees to content providers for prioritised access to their networks as long as they acted "in a commercially reasonable manner".

"If established companies are able to pay for better access speeds or lower latency, the internet will no longer be a level playing field," the letter from venture capitalists reads.

Signatories included high-profile investors such as Ron Conway, of SV Angel, Chris Dixon, of Andressen Horowitz, and John Lilly, of Greylock Partners.

Meanwhile FCC commissioner Ajit Pai has joined fellow commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel in calling for a delay to the vote.

Reclassify ISP

The debate has taken on new urgency in recent months as ISPs grow increasingly impatient with the glut of bandwidth-heavy services such as video-on-demand.

They want to charge companies such as Netflix, Amazon and Disney a fee to ensure their traffic is carried at high speed on their networks.

In February, Verizon won a landmark case that challenged the FCC's right to stop it charging such fees.

At the time, civil liberty groups said the FCC would have more teeth to enforce net-neutrality rules if it reclassified ISPs as telecommunication services, which are more highly regulated.

A separate letter from more than 100 civil liberty groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, has also been sent to both the FCC and US President Barack Obama.

It read: "Internet service providers should not be in the business of picking winners and losers online.

"But the proposal the FCC is currently considering gives ISPs the power to do exactly that, which is why it must be abandoned."

Protesters are currently camping outside FCC headquarters in Washington ahead of a rally expected on 15th May.

23.52 | 0 komentar | Read More

Deal to combat piracy in UK imminent

9 May 2014 Last updated at 06:01 By Dave Lee Technology reporter, BBC News

Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.

Tinchy Stryder says illegal music downloaders should be fined, as a last resort

After years of wrangling, a deal between entertainment industry bodies and UK internet service providers to help combat piracy is imminent.

BT, Sky, TalkTalk and Virgin Media will send "educational" letters to customers believed to be downloading illegally.

But a document seen by the BBC shows that rights holders are set to make do with considerably weaker measures than originally asked for.

The first letters - known as "alerts" - are expected to be sent out in 2015.

The deal has been struck with the BPI, which represents the British music industry, and the Motion Picture Association (MPA), which covers film.

The bodies had originally suggested the letters should tell repeat infringers about possible punitive measures.

They also wanted access to a database of known illegal downloaders, opening the possibility of further legal action against individuals.

Continue reading the main story

Analysis

They would not say it publicly, as they do not want to be seen as rocking the boat, but it is the ISPs who will be happiest with this deal.

Ecstatic, even. The contrast between what was originally put on the table - throttling internet speeds, or cutting people off altogether - and what is now coming to pass could not be more stark.

But sources close to the discussion suggest there could be a bigger game at play here. Within the leaked agreement, one important point: if this system does not have a big effect on piracy, then rights holders will call for the "rapid implementation" of the Digital Economy Act, and all the strict measures that come with it.

Steve Kuncewicz, an expert in online and internet law, agreed. He speculated that the deal "may be a Trojan horse exercise in gathering intelligence about how seriously downloaders take threats".

In other words, if it can be shown that asking nicely does not have a significant effect on curbing piracy, rights holders will for the first time have a seriously credible set of data with which to apply pressure for harder enforcement on those who simply do not want to pay for entertainment.

However, following almost four years of debate between the two sides, the final draft of the Voluntary Copyright Alert Programme (Vcap) contains neither of those key measures.

Steve Kuncewicz, a lawyer specialising in online and internet law, said the agreement had been "watered down beyond all recognition".

"I imagine the content owners are going to be very angry about it," he added.

"There's no punitive backstop to any of this."

Softened

Instead, letters sent to suspected infringers must be "educational" in tone, "promoting an increase in awareness" of legal downloading services.

The rights holders have agreed to pay £750,000 towards each internet service provider (ISP) to set up the system, or 75% of the total costs, whichever is smaller.

A further £75,000 (or 75% of total costs) will be paid each year to cover administration costs.

The BBC understands the UK's remaining ISPs are likely to join the agreement at a later stage.

It is expected that the deal will be finalised soon. The UK's data regulator, the Information Commissioner's Office, is advising the parties about the collection of data about which customers receive alerts.

A record of which accounts had received alerts, and how many, will be kept on file by the ISPs for up to a year.

The rights holders will receive a monthly break down of how many alerts have been sent out, but only the ISPs will know the identities of the customers involved.

A cap for the total number of alerts that can be sent out per year has also been set.

Between the four ISPS, no more than 2.5 million alerts can be sent out. As and when other ISPs join the agreement, this cap will be adjusted.

A maximum of four alerts - by either email or physical letter - can be sent to an individual customer account. Language will "escalate in severity" - but will not contain threats or talk of consequences for the accused users.

After four alerts, no further action will be taken by the ISPs.

Bitter argument

When it comes to piracy, the two sides have been locked - with the government playing occasional mediator - in discussion since the controversial introduction of the Digital Economy Act in 2010.

Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.

Lawyer Steve Kuncewicz: "There's no punitive backstop to any of this"

Enacted just before the end of the last Labour government, the DEA included various measures to deal with copyrighted infringement including, but not limited to, cutting off repeat offenders from the internet.

But ISPs, and various internet rights groups, put up vocal opposition - arguing that it would force ISPs to police their users, while raising questions about whether internet access should be considered a human right.

Continue reading the main story

How the system will work

• Rights holders identify IP addresses of devices or locations they believe to be downloading files illegally. This is done through a variety of methods, including "listening in" to traffic on Bittorrent networks - a common practice
• A "Copyright Infringement Report", known as a CIR, will be sent to the ISP involved. It will contain the IP address as well as the date and time the alleged infringement took place
• The ISP will then match that report to a customer account it knows was connected to the internet from that IP address at the time of the download
• It will then send out an alert to that customer about the behaviour, either as an email or a physical letter
• Identifying users in this way is not an exact science. Sometimes, it will be unable to determine which customer account was being used at the time.
• Furthermore, in the alerts, no individual person will be directly accused - as a single IP address could be used by several people at a time, or even, to use one example, by someone using a neighbour's wifi without their knowledge.

Source: Voluntary Copyright Alert Programme

In response to frustration from content industries that the measures were taking too long to enforce, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport suggested that a voluntary agreement be put forward.

But as recently as September 2013, the proposals were described as "unworkable" by ISPs, and so the final draft required considerable compromise, mostly on the part of the content industry groups.

In a joint statement, the BPI and MPA said: "Content creators and ISPs, with the support of government, have been exploring the possibility of developing an awareness programme that will support the continuing growth of legal creative content services, reduce copyright infringement and create the best possible customer experience online."

The groups declined to comment specifically on the leaked document. The four ISPs involved all confirmed that they were in discussion.

In the meantime, the content creators have been successful in having more than 40 websites blocked so that users in the UK could not reach them unless using technical workarounds.

The alert system is planned to run for three years - with regular reviews on its effectiveness.

In the agreement, it states that an ineffective system would lead rights holders to call for "rapid implementation" of stronger measures as outlined in the Digital Economy Act.

On the new plans, a source close to the discussions told the BBC: "The rights holders have accepted they can't use this process to go after individuals.

"The ISPs have insisted that already established, legal routes are used in that scenario. Instead, the purpose of any campaign will be to inform and raise awareness rather than punitive action."

Follow Dave Lee on Twitter @DaveLeeBBC

23.52 | 0 komentar | Read More

Tech firms warn of grave net threat

8 May 2014 Last updated at 11:54

More than 100 technology companies have written to the US Federal Communication Commission (FCC), opposing potential changes to net neutrality rules.

The FCC is considering allowing internet service providers (ISPs) to charge content providers to prioritise their traffic.

Google, Facebook, Twitter and Amazon warn that such a move represents a "grave threat to the internet".

One FCC commissioner has called for a delay to the vote, due on 15 May.

Net neutrality - the premise that all internet traffic should be treated equally - has been a cornerstone of the web for many years.

But with the growth of bandwidth-hungry services such as Netflix, ISPs have increasingly asked for the right to charge a fee for carrying such data at high speed on their networks.

A landmark court case in February, in which Verizon successfully challenged the FCC's right to stop it charging such fees, pushed the regulator into a major rethink of its rules.

Rather than enshrining the principle of net neutrality, leaked reports suggest the FCC will allow ISPs to strike such deals as long as they act "in a commercially reasonable manner".

In the letter, tech companies, ranging from three-person start-ups to the biggest names on the web, made clear their dismay at the feared U-turn.

"We write to express our support for a free and open internet," it said.

"The innovation we have seen to date happened in a world without discrimination.

"Instead of permitting individualised bargaining and discrimination, the commission's rules should protect users and internet companies on both fixed and mobile platforms against blocking, discrimination and paid prioritisation."

The letter urged the commission to "take the necessary steps to ensure that the internet remains an open platform".

Street protests

More than a million people have signed petitions to the FCC calling for it to abandon plans to allow a tiered internet.

A handful of protesters have gathered outside FCC headquarters in Washington, promising to camp there until the 15 May vote.

And a group of net firms and civil liberty groups have called on the FCC to reclassify broadband companies as "telecommunication services", which would give it the authority to impose net-neutrality rules on them.

One of the FCC's four commissioners, Jessica Rosenworcel, has called for the vote to be delayed by at least a month.

She said: "Rushing headlong into a rulemaking next week fails to respect the public response".

But an FCC spokesman said the vote would go ahead as planned.

"Moving forward will allow the American people to review and comment on the proposed plan without delay, and bring us one step closer to putting rules on the books to protect consumers and entrepreneurs online," he added.

23.52 | 0 komentar | Read More

London taxis plan anti-Uber gridlock

8 May 2014 Last updated at 13:22 By Dave Lee & Leo Kelion Technology, BBC News

London black-cab drivers are planning to cause gridlock in the city to protest against car service Uber.

The Licensed Taxi Drivers Association complains that Uber's drivers are using a smartphone app to calculate fares despite it being illegal for private vehicles to be fitted with taximeters.

Transport for London has declined to intervene, because it disagrees that there has been a breach of the law.

LTDA now plans to force the issue by holding the action in early June.

"Transport for London not enforcing the Private Hire Vehicles Act is dangerous for Londoners," Steve McNamara, LTDA's general secretary, told the BBC.

"I anticipate that the demonstration against TfL's handling of Uber will attract many many thousands of cabs and cause severe chaos, congestion and confusion across the metropolis."

TfL told the association last month that it believed Uber's vehicles were not strictly "equipped" with taximeters since there was not "some sort of connection between the device and the vehicle".

Rather, the app was merely making use of data about the distance travelled and time taken, which was not illegal in itself.

LTDA rejects this distinction and is now threatening to seek a judicial review.

"We have seen no evidence to suggest that Uber London Ltd are not fit and proper to hold a London private hire vehicle operator's licence, but no final decisions have been made whilst Uber's operating model is still under investigation," TfL told the BBC.

The dispute marks the latest in a series of clashes between Uber and the established taxi trade.

The firm is also facing restrictions on its operations in Paris, Brussels, Berlin, Sydney and a number of US cities.

Disruptive drive

San Francisco-based Uber describes itself as a "pick-up" service that connects those needing a ride with a background-checked private driver, and takes a cut - typically 20% - of the fee.

It now operates in more than 100 cities across 30 countries, including Manchester where it launched this week.

The firm markets its service as offering "cutting-edge safety measures":

• allowing customers to see the name and photo of the driver before they arrive
• letting approved friends follow the journey on a live map
• providing an email of the route the car used, so that a client can ask for a charge to be reviewed if they believe the driver took a roundabout journey

Fees are based upon data gathered by the driver's app and whether "surge pricing" is in effect because of heavy demand.

The five-year-old firm acknowledges that it can prove a disruptive force.

"Competition in my view is always good for the customer because it makes all of us up our game in terms of quality and service," Uber's general manager in London, Jo Bertram, said.

"On the driver side, we offer a much more flexible model that is very different from the old-school private hire industry, that allows them to work as independent business operators however and whenever they choose."

The LTDA said while the taximeter was the focus of its complaint, it had wider objections to the firm.

"Uber, funded by Google, Goldman Sachs and others, has a stated aim of challenging legislation that is not compatible with its business model," said Mr McNamara.

"This is not some philanthropic friendly society, it's an American monster that has no qualms about breaching any and all laws in the pursuit of profit, most of which will never see a penny of tax paid in the UK."

A spokeswoman for Uber said it rejected this characterisation of its business,

European battles

Other traditional taxi associations are also taking a stand against the firm in Europe:

• In Brussels a complaint resulted in a court setting a 10,000 euro ($13,920; £8,205) fine as the penalty for Uber drivers who continued to pick up customers without the necessary licences
• Berlin's taxi association has won a temporary injunction against the firm, but has chosen not to enforce the action to avoid the risk of having to cover lost fees if the ruling is later overturned
• French operators have convinced their government to propose banning the use of GPS-enabled apps by private car services including Uber. The government had previously made such companies wait 15 minutes before picking up a booking, but the country's Supreme Court ruled the move anti-competitive

Uber does, however, have support from the European Commission.

Vice-president Neelie Kroes has said her staff used the service to "stay safe and save taxpayers money", adding that European authorities should help the firm comply with standards rather than trying to ban it.

"We very much welcome her support and her comments," said Ms Bertram.

23.52 | 0 komentar | Read More

Hackers hit 1.3 million Orange users

8 May 2014 Last updated at 13:34

Hackers have stolen the personal data of 1.3 million customers from the French branch of mobile network operator and internet service provider Orange.

The hackers have access to names, email addresses and phone numbers.

Orange France has been aware of the hack since 18 April but delayed announcements to asses the damage.

Earlier this year, Orange saw the personal data of 800,000 of its clients stolen in a similar attack.

"For the people concerned, the data recovered includes their first names and surnames," an Orange representative said.

"In addition, depending on the information supplied, email addresses, mobile and fixed-line phone numbers, the identity of the person's internet operator and their date of birth, were also recovered."

Orange was not able to say whether the stolen data was encrypted, although the company has warned customers that the theft could be used to contact those concerned by email, SMS or phone, particularly for phishing purposes.

Customers have expressed their anger at the situation on the company's Facebook page and across Twitter.

An Orange representative said: "All necessary actions have been implemented to correct the relevant technical dysfunctions and to prevent any new illegitimate access to this data."

Phishing for data

Phishing is a process of acquiring sensitive information, such as passwords or bank details, by indirect means, often using social engineering techniques to deceive users.

A typical phishing email will provide a link to a cloned version of a legitimate website, which hackers can then use to harvest login details from unsuspecting individuals.

Some Orange France customers are now at more risk from these attacks than others - if you think you may be at affected, guidance from Get Safe Online suggests users should check that websites are secure before entering any private information.

Basic measures such as ensuring the padlock symbol in the address bar is visible when entering an alleged secure website could save many individuals from becoming victims of a phishing scam.

A similar instance of data theft within the telecommunications industry occurred in September 2013, which saw Vodafone Germany fall victim to a hacker who claimed to have stolen the personal data of two million customers.

23.52 | 0 komentar | Read More

Snapchat settles with US regulators

8 May 2014 Last updated at 22:35

Ephemeral messaging service Snapchat has settled with US regulators over charges it deceived users when it promised their messages would disappear.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) said Snapchat misled users over data collection and failed to inform them that their messages could be saved.

As part of the agreement, Snapchat agreed to be monitored by the FTC for 20 years.

Snapchat did not admit any wrongdoing.

"While we were focused on building, some things didn't get the attention they could have," said Snapchat in a blog post.

"One of those was being more precise with how we communicated with the Snapchat community."

Growing pains

The rapidly-growing messaging application, which allows users to send photos and videos that then self-delete after a short period of time, reportedly turned down a multi-billion dollar offer from Facebook.

Founded in 2011 by 23-year-old Evan Spiegel, Snapchat said that as of May, users were sending over 700 million photos and videos a day.

However, that stunning growth has come with some costs: in January, a security breach allowed hackers to get the usernames and phone numbers of 4.6 million users.

That happened after security experts had warned the firm about a vulnerability in the "find friends" feature.

"If a company markets privacy and security as key selling points in pitching its service to consumers, it is critical that it keep those promises," said FTC chairwoman Edith Ramirez in a statement.

There was not a financial component to the settlement.

23.52 | 0 komentar | Read More

Apple 'in talks' to acquire Beats

9 May 2014 Last updated at 03:03

Technology giant Apple is in talks to buy headphone maker and music-streaming service provider Beats Electronics, according to various media reports.

The reports claim Apple could pay as much as $3.2bn (£1.9bn) and a deal could be announced next week.

If completed, it will be Apple's biggest ever acquisition.

It is being seen as a move by Apple to get a stronger foothold in the phone and music accessories business and bolster its online music offerings.

The two areas are expected to see fast growth in the coming years.

The Financial Times, which was the first to report the talks, cited a source as saying the firms were still negotiating the details.

'Really puzzling'

Continue reading the main story

This is really puzzling. You buy companies today to get technologies that no one else or customers that no one has"

End Quote James McQuivey Forrester

Beats was founded by music producer Jimmy Iovine and the hip-hop star Dr Dre and until recently was best known for its headphones.

It started a subscription-based music streaming service earlier this year.

However, Apple already has its own iTunes store which is the world's largest music download service. It also launched iTunes Radio last year.

That has made some industry watchers question the move.

James McQuivey, an analyst with Forrester, said there was a big overlap of customers between the two firms.

"This is really puzzling," he said. "You buy companies today to get technologies that no one else or customers that no one has.

"They must have something hidden under the hood."

The reported price is also a huge premium on Beats's previous valuation.

Beats was valued at just $1bn after its last funding round in September, which saw it get a $500m investment from the Carlyle Group.

23.52 | 0 komentar | Read More

User security alert issued by Bitly

9 May 2014 Last updated at 10:22

Web-link shortening service Bitly has warned that user account credentials may have been compromised.

Bitly is used by millions of people to make long links into shorter ones in order to share them on social media.

The company said it had disconnected user accounts from automatically posting to Facebook and Twitter.

Bitly's chief executive Mark Josephson wrote: "The team has been working hard to ensure all accounts are secure."

He published a blog post outlining steps users were advised to take.

User protection

It included changing passwords and resetting the system's API key - used to link Bitly up with other services.

Mr Josephson wrote: "We have reason to believe that Bitly account credentials have been compromised.

"We have no indication at this time that any accounts have been accessed without permission.

"For our users' protection, we have taken proactive steps to ensure the security of all accounts, including disconnecting all users' Facebook and Twitter accounts.

"All users can safely reconnect these accounts at their next login."

Launched in 2008, Bitly is based in New York.

23.52 | 0 komentar | Read More

'Killer robots' to be debated at UN

9 May 2014 Last updated at 16:19

Killer robots will be debated during an informal meeting of experts at the United Nations in Geneva.

Two robotics experts, Prof Ronald Arkin and Prof Noel Sharkey, will debate the efficacy and necessity of killer robots.

The meeting will be held during the UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW).

A report on the discussion will be presented to the CCW meeting in November.

This will be the first time that the issue of killer robots, or lethal autonomous weapons systems, will be addressed within the CCW.

Continue reading the main story

"I support a moratorium until that end is achieved, but I do not support a ban at this time" "

End Quote Prof Ronald Arkin Georgia Institute of Technology

Autonomous kill function

A killer robot is a fully autonomous weapon that can select and engage targets without any human intervention. They do not currently exist but advances in technology are bringing them closer to reality.

Those in favour of killer robots believe the current laws of war may be sufficient to address any problems that might emerge if they are ever deployed, arguing that a moratorium, not an outright ban, should be called if this is not the case.

However, those who oppose their use believe they are a threat to humanity and any autonomous "kill functions" should be banned.

"Autonomous weapons systems cannot be guaranteed to predictably comply with international law," Prof Sharkey told the BBC. "Nations aren't talking to each other about this, which poses a big risk to humanity."

Prof Sharkey is a member and co-founder of the Campaign Against Killer Robots and chairman of the International Committee for Robot Arms Control.

Side events at the CCW will be hosted by the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots.

Automation of warfare

Prof Arkin from the Georgia Institute of Technology told the BBC he hoped killer robots would be able to significantly reduce non-combatant casualties but feared they would be rushed into battle before this was accomplished.

"I support a moratorium until that end is achieved, but I do not support a ban at this time," said Prof Arkin.

He went on to state that killer robots may be better able to determine when not to engage a target than humans, "and could potentially exercise greater care in so doing".

Prof Sharkey is less optimistic. "I'm concerned about the full automation of warfare," he says.

Drones

The discussion of drones is not on the agenda as they are yet to operate completely autonomously, although there are signs this may change in the near future.

The UK successfully tested the Taranis, an unmanned intercontinental aircraft in Australia this year and America's Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (Darpa) has made advances with the Crusher, an unmanned ground combat vehicle, since 2006.

The MoD has claimed in the past that it currently has no intention of developing systems that operate without human intervention.

On 21 November 2012 the United States Defense Department issued a directive that, "requires a human being to be 'in-the-loop' when decisions are made about using lethal force," according to Human Rights Watch.

The meeting of experts will be chaired by French ambassador Jean-Hugues Simon-Michel from 13 to 16 May 2014.

23.52 | 0 komentar | Read More