Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn) and John Thune (R-SD), introduced legislation Wednesday to inform Internet users of the privacy and security risks associated with file-sharing software programs.
Their bill would require software developers to clearly inform users when their files are made available to other users over the Internet. Such software, known as peer-to-peer programs, are most commonly used to download music and movies and make up the largest portion of Internet traffic. Popular examples include BitTorrent and LimeWire.
But they can also lead to the inadvertent sharing of sensitive documents, the Federal Trade Commission found this week. The agency discovered widespread data breaches at 100 companies, where personal information of employees and customers—from drivers license numbers to social security numbers—were accidentally exposed while sharing other files.
Klobuchar says families run the “risk of unintentionally sharing all of their private files like tax returns, legal documents, medical records, and home movies when they are connected to peer-to-peer networks.”
“This bill will let people know—in a way that they can understand—that their personal files are being shared with complete strangers,” she added.
The bill would require file-sharing software to display a pop-up box alerting Internet users when they encounter such programs. The bill would also let consumers and employers block or disable file-sharing programs. Similar legislation passed the House in December.
An Italian court on Wednesday sentenced three Google executives to six months in prison because of a controversial video played repeatedly on its website.
Italian authorities requested the search engine giant, also the owner of Google Video, remove a 2006 clip in which a boy with Down syndrome is being bullied at school.
Google promptly complied and helped law enforcement officials locate the video's filmers. But a group that represents Down syndrome patients ultimately said that was not enough and took the tech firm to court on the grounds it infringed on Italian privacy laws. Google argued in response that it should not be held responsible for videos posted by others on its website, just as the Post Office is not held responsible for hate mail it delivers unwittingly.
But a Milan judge disagreed. He sentenced three of the four Google executives named in the case to jail time, he told Reuters on Wednesday.
Later, in a blog post, Google railed on the decision, promised an appeal and predicted the ruling would set a dangerous precedent on internet freedom.
"In essence this ruling means that employees of hosting platforms like Google Video are criminally responsible for content that users upload," said Matt Sucherman, one of the company's depute general counsels. "We will appeal this astonishing decision because the Google employees on trial had nothing to do with the video in question. Throughout this long process, they have displayed admirable grace and fortitude. It is outrageous that they have been subjected to a trial at all."
"But we are deeply troubled by this conviction for another equally important reason. It attacks the very principles of freedom on which the Internet is built," he continued. "Common sense dictates that only the person who films and uploads a video to a hosting platform could take the steps necessary to protect the privacy and obtain the consent of the people they are filming."
Today Congress will examine just how closely your cell phone is tracking your every move.
Those applications that direct your BlackBerry to the nearest Starbucks, automatically shows your locale on Twitter, or locates your precise location on Google Maps on your iPhone uses GPS technology to pinpoint your coordinates at any given time.
It works great when you're trying to navigate an unfamiliar city. But as privacy advocates warn, it could also bring serious drawbacks. Read more...
The Federal Communications Commission is poised to hand a big victory to the cell phone industry by allocating more airwaves for mobile broadband services.
The FCC's goal is to make available 500 megahertz of spectrum for commercial broadband providers over time, according to sources with knowledge of the matter.
Under pressure from the Obama administration to make broadband service ubiquitous across the country, the agency is in the final stages of putting together its long-awaited National Broadband Plan, which is due to Congress March 17. The plan is expected to outline the spectrum goal, sources said.
The White House wants the public's help in crafting a national intellectual property enforcement strategy. Victoria Espinel, the new White House intellectual property enforcement coordinator, is charged with putting together a strategy to help protect America's innovation and creativity from falling seize to piracy and counterfeiting.
The strategy was mandated by the Pro IP Act passed by Congress in 2008, which also created Espinel's position. She's been in the job less than 3 months.
According to a notice in the Federal Register today, Espinel is looking for input on ways to decrease the supply of counterfeit goods both in the U.S. and overseas. She also wants recommendations from the public regarding the "objectives and content" of the strategic plan to improve the government's intellectual property enforcement efforts.
Comments must be submitted by March 24.
The Chamber of Commerce last week urged the administration to deliver the plan to Congress by the summer.
"Our government's efforts to promote and protect our innovative and creative industries will be a crucial element of our economic recovery," said David Hirschmann, president and CEO of the Chamber's Global Intellectual Property Center.
"A government-wide national intellectual property strategy should be a fundamental part of our nation's job strategy," he said.
It seems Intel, too, was the target of repeated cyberattacks throughout the month of January.
The tech firm noted in its most recent filing to the Securities and Exchange Commission that it was victim to multiple "attempts by others to gain unauthorized access through the Internet to our information technology systems by, for example, masquerading as authorized users or surreptitious introduction of software."
Intel officials ultimately reported they were unsure of who launched the attacks, though they did speculate the attempts could be the result of "industrial or other espionage, or actions by hackers seeking to harm the company..."
But they have since taken great care to distance their difficulties with those of Google, which was subject to a series of cyberattacks around the same time as Intel.
Google believes two Chinese schools, one of which has close ties to the state's military, launched an attack on the search engine giant on January 12, specifically targeting human rights activists using the company's popular Gmail service.
But an Intel spokesman stressed that incident was in no way related to his company's current difficulties.
“The only connection between what we saw in January and the attacks on Google is timing,” Chuck Mulloy, an Intel spokesman, told The New York Times, which first discovered the SEC report.
Intel's full explanation, pulled from their SEC filing, follows the jump.
Most Viewed RSS Feed »
