GCHQ and the NSA are consequently able to access and process vast quantities of communications between entirely innocent people, as well as targeted suspects.

June 22, 2013
Hot Air (Britain’s spy agency GCHQ has secretly gained access to the network of cables which carry the world’s phone calls and internet traffic and has started to process vast streams of sensitive personal information which it is sharing with its American partner, the National Security Agency (NSA).

The sheer scale of the agency’s ambition is reflected in the titles of its two principal components: Mastering the Internet and Global Telecoms Exploitation, aimed at scooping up as much online and telephone traffic as possible. This is all being carried out without any form of public acknowledgement or debate.
One key innovation has been GCHQ’s ability to tap into and store huge volumes of data drawn from fibre-optic cables for up to 30 days so that it can be sifted and analysed. That operation, codenamed Tempora, has been running for some 18 months.
GCHQ and the NSA are consequently able to access and process vast quantities of communications between entirely innocent people, as well as targeted suspects.

This includes recordings of phone calls, the content of email messages, entries on Facebook and the history of any internet user’s access to websites – all of which is deemed legal, even though the warrant system was supposed to limit interception to a specified range of targets.)

the program disregarded P2P downloads, even though one might presume that this would be a potential method to use for illicit communication over the open-source Internet.


You Can Now See All The Erroneous DMCA Takedown Requests Google Gets

December 13, 2012
You Can Now See All The Erroneous DMCA Takedown Requests Google Gets
Google does a lot of work for copyright holders in the US. Under the DMCA, Google has to delete infringing links from its search results. It used to be not such a bad job, but now the search giant is receiving over 12 million requests per month. All of those requests can’t be legitimate, right? A new tool from Google proves that to be the case.
TorrentFreak reports that Google has quietly rolled out a new feature in its transparency reports that details how many false DMCA takedown requests it receives from copyright holders. Google details these false requests in a newly updated FAQ:

From time to time, we may receive inaccurate or unjustified copyright removal requests for search results that clearly do not link to infringing content. An independent, third-party analysis of how frequently improper and abusive removal requests are submitted was conducted in 2006.

Google then lists a number of examples of where copyright holders submitted false DMCA takedown requests. Here’s some of the better ones:

A U.S. reporting organization working on behalf of a major movie studio requested removal of a movie review on a major newspaper website twice.

An individual in the U.S. requested the removal of search results that link to court proceedings referencing her first and last name on the ground that her name was copyrightable.
A driving school in the U.K. requested the removal of a competitor’s homepage from Search, on the grounds that the competitor had copied an alphabetized list of cities and regions where instruction was offered.

None of these scenarios fell under DMCA regulations, and therefore Google did not remove them. These are just examples, but Google still receives erroneous DMCA takedown requests. Our own Web site, WebProNews.com, was subject to two false takedown requests at the hands of AMC over our coverage of The Walking Dead season 3 premier. Of course, the link was non-infringing as it linked to AMC’s own stream of the premier.
DMCA takedown requests
The takedown request levied at our site, and others, was most likely fueled by AMC looking for links that mentioned “The Walking Dead” and “free.” There’s no thought put into the suggestion that there may be legitimate free sources to watch these episodes. Strangely enough, none of the links were removed despite some links offering illegitimate copies of The Walking Dead.
This latest offering from Google serves to make the DMCA takedown process more transparent, but it probably won’t have any effect on the amount of takedown requests sent by rightsholders. Current laws don’t enforce repercussions for those who send false takedown requests so there’s no reason for rightsholders to use caution. If laws ever do change, it’s almost guaranteed that the amount of takedown requests would drop to the few hundred thousand a month it was at in 2011.


More stupidity from the courts concerning #CyberStalking

April 25, 2012
Media_httpuploadwikim_fhhwj

As (Volokh) noted last year, a federal prosecutor indicted a man for his campaign of insulting Twitter messages about a Buddhist religious leader, and a federal judge then dismissed the indictment on First Amendment grounds.
Some of the Twitter posts might have been seen as threatening, but the government’s theory wasn’t that they were threatening, but that they where posted “with the intent to harass and cause substantial emotional distress to” the religious leader, and actual caused such distress, in violation of the federal antistalking statute, 18 U.S.C. § 2261A. The district court correctly held that the statute was unconstitutional as applied, and left open the possibility that it might be unconstitutional on its face as well. The government appealed, but earlier this month decided to drop the appeal.
Now the Senate, rather than tightening the law to prevent its being applied to constitutionally protected speech, is considering expanding it. Section 107 of the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2011 (which (Volokh) blogged about below, as to a different constitutionally troublesome provision) would take the existing statute and have it cover not just speech that causes substantial emotional distress, but also speech that “attempts to cause, or would be reasonably expected to cause substantial emotional distress,” so long as the speaker is intending to (among other things) “harass” the target. Anyone who

with the intent to … harass … uses the … any interactive computer service … to engage in a course of conduct that … causes, attempts to cause, or would be reasonably expected to cause substantial emotional distress to [the person or the person’s family member]

would now be committing a federal crime. If the statute were just limited to conduct and speech intended to threaten someone — which the rest of the statute does cover — there would be no constitutional problem. But trying to outlaw speech that is made “with the intent to … harass” and “would be reasonably expected to cause substantial emotional distress” often violates the First Amendment, as the federal judge rightly held in the Twitter case. It seems to me that Congress should be fixing this constitutional problem rather than expanding it.

This is fascism. plain and simple. proving a person has intent to upset another person is no reason to take their free expression away. I have experience with this kind of legal abuse. I’m not allowed to tell you about it apparently… or rather I’d rather not find out how stupid the legal system is again.


Is It a Crime to Publish Parody Videos That Use “Lewd … Language” Meant to “Embarrass and Emotionally Torment” Police Officers?

December 26, 2011

(Volokh.com) Yes, the Renton (Wash.) city prosecutor’s office concludes, applying the Washington “cyberstalking” statute — an excellent example of the dangers of the broad “cyberbullying” and “harassment” statutes that I have often condemned. KIRO-TV reports:

The Renton City Prosecutor wants to send a cartoonist to jail for mocking the police department in a series of animated Internet videos.
The “South-Park”-style animations parody everything from officers having sex on duty to certain personnel getting promoted without necessary qualifications…. [Last week, the prosecutor filed] a search warrant accusing an anonymous cartoon creator, going by the name of Mr. Fiddlesticks, of cyberstalking (RCW 9.61.260). The Renton Police Department and the local prosecutor got a judge to sign off as a way to uncover the name of whoever is behind the parodies….
The series of web-based short cartoons feature a mustachioed street cop and a short-haired female bureaucrat. The dry, at times, witty banter between the two touches on some embarrassing insider secrets, some of which seem to match up with internal affairs investigations on file within Renton PD.
Cartoon Character of Officer: “Is there any reason why an anonymous video, with no identifying information that ties it to the department or city is being taken more seriously than officers having sex on duty, arguing with outside agencies while in a drunken stupor off duty, sleeping while on duty, throwing someone off a bridge, and having inappropriate relationships with coworkers and committing adultery?”
Cartoon Character of Bureaucrat: “The reason is that internal dirt is internal. The department will crucify certain people and take care of others.”
A criminal court document, uncovered by Team 7 Investigators, not only shows how badly the city of Renton wants to “out” the cartoonist (who goes by the name MrFiddlesticks), but states some of the fake character’s lines discuss real life incidents….

Here’s the potentially relevant text from Rev. Code Wash. 9.61.260:

A person is guilty of cyberstalking if he or she, with intent to harass, intimidate, torment, or embarrass any other person, and under circumstances not constituting telephone harassment, makes an electronic communication [defined as transmission of information by wire, radio, optical cable, electromagnetic, or other similar means … includ[ing] … internet-based communications] to such other person or a third party: (a) Using any lewd, lascivious, indecent, or obscene words, images, or language, or suggesting the commission of any lewd or lascivious act ….

Under the prosecutor’s view, any statement — including on a blog, in a YouTube video, in a newspaper article, on television, or whatever else — is a crime if it is made “with intent to harass, … torment, or embarrass” the subject of the person “[u]sing any lewd, lascivious, indecent, or obscene words, images, or language.” A comedian’s joke that “lewd[ly]” or “lascivious[ly]” described President Clinton’s behavior with Monica Lewinsky, or for that matter Congressman Weiner’s behavior, would be a crime if it was made “with intent to … embarrass” the President or the Congressman. The Hustler parody attacking Jerry Falwell, which the Supreme Court held to be protected against civil liability under the “intentional infliction of emotional distress tort,” would be a crime. Indeed, in this very case, the theory is that the videos are criminal because they described alleged police sexual misconduct using “lewd” or “indecent” words with the intent to torment or embarrass particular officers. (The theory expressed in the document — a search warrant application — is that the videos sufficiently identify the particular police officers who were involved in the incidents to which the video alludes.)
If the prosecutor is right that the statute should be interpreted this broadly, then it’s clearly unconstitutionally overbroad. Speech to the public doesn’t lose its constitutional protection because it’s intended to torment or embarrass. (It may lose such protection when it’s intended to be perceived as a true threat of criminal attack, but that’s not the issue here.) Nor does lose its constitutional protection because it uses “lewd” or “indecent” terms. And while one-to-one speech said to an unwilling listener may in some circumstances be restricted — which is the reason traditional telephone harassment laws, if properly crafted, may be constitutional — this rationale can’t be used to suppress speech said to the public, even if the people discussed in the speech are tormented or embarrassed by it.
Moreover, the statute would be clearly unconstitutional as applied to this video, and the prosecutor and the judge ought to know this. (The prosecutor is Renton Chief Prosecutor Shawn Arthur; the judge is James Cayce.) A search warrant can only be issued if there is probable cause to believe that it will uncover evidence of a crime; since the material described in the affidavit can’t be made criminal under the cited statute, given the First Amendment, the warrant ought not have been issued. The government is not permitted to use its coercive power to identify the author of this constitutionally protected video.
Thanks to Cory Andrews for the pointer. UPDATE: I originally said I didn’t know which judge signed this warrant, but that was a mistake on my part — Judge Cayce’s signature is right there on the last page.

yes… that sounds like Washington State… but it would be illegal for the same reasons for me to explain why I know this. Censorship is alive and well in the state of facebook. They will extradite people from outside their state to uphold their backward views on free expression. It happened to me too. The most amusing finding from out there is that a FOIA document can be published, but it is illegal to comment on it. I find it outrageous that people are not reacting to any of this… not just in Washington State, but in the rest of the country where the state seems to think they can cherry pick people out of their homes who offend the judicial in the social networking state.


Cyberbully and Cyberstalker Loren Feldman 1938Media, Hackers, GoDaddy and MediaTemple are still Cybersquatting, Cyberbullying and Cyberstalking. Hacker and so called Successful Women Involved

September 6, 2011
Scary when puppeteers give psychiatric advice

…the enraged reaction shows that this certainly registered an emotional response…

…This was what was seen on Noah David Simon dot com on Wednesday September 23rd 2009. GoDaddy was warned that Loren Feldman was Cybersquatting and Harassing with bigotry and continues to promote his hate speech. …here is an example of the harassing messages Loren Feldman sends to me from the domain name he is stealing and defaming. This is not parody. this is harassment….

Godaddy_it_was_agreed between us that noahdavidsimon.com should not be on your servers at which time you wrongly switched the server to “MediaTemple“. I contacted your organization about 6 months ago about a man who is cybersquatting my name and business and is sending harrassing and at times Anti-Semitic messages from my own rightfull domain name ( this was witnessed by the Jewish Internet Defense Force and also many members of the Jewish online community. http://twitter.com/JIDF/statuses/3680124281 ) here is the icann report. Loren Feldman 1938media.com ICANN Abuse | Cairo cai.icann.org
Here is a another video of Loren Feldman harassing Igor Berger and buying his name as well as mine. Please allow me to buy my own name. What you are doing with the cybersquatting is enabling Anti-Semitism by allowing Loren Feldman to broadcast his bigotry from my name and business name. It should not take a legal team for you to do the right thing. Noah Madieros of your company suggested I take this action, but I am hoping that in light that Loren Feldman is breaking the law and is harassing the Jewish community through Anti-Semitic jokes from the domain, that action should be taken because of principle. I am also sending a copy of this email to Jewish Groups like the JIDF [PROOF] cordially, NoahDavidSimon …This was the original beef that I had with Loren Feldman. he defended a Hiemietown joke on Strumpette known as @AmandaChapel on twitter that I complained about. I had the Amanda Chapel name on facebook destroyed because it isn’t an actual person. @AmandaChapel is really a man named Brian Connolly who tried to frame myself “Noah” for rape. Strumpette is BrianConnolly’s blog.


backup: The data contained in GoDaddy.com, Inc.’s WhoIs database,Registrant: 1938 Media Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com) Domain Name: NOAHDAVIDSIMON.COM Domain servers in listed order: NS1.MEDIATEMPLE.NET NS2.MEDIATEMPLE.NET

Loren Feldman 1938media.com ICANN Abuse

Loren Feldman is a Cyberbully who abuses ICANN policy against Anticybersquating. See the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act. Loren Feldman abuses people on the Internet by hateful attack on them via his website and domain names of his victims. Some of the prominent web people that he attacked are Dave Winer, Robert Scoble, Jason Calacanis, and Shel Israel (Loren Feldman bought and registered www.shelisrael.com with GoDaddy.com), so GoDaddy was aware of his behavior before they allowed him to by Noah and Igor’s property. Loren Feldman attacked and made fun of Shel Israel via a Puppet parody, both on 1938media.com and Shelisrael.com …Because Noah David Simon and Igor Berger stood up to Loren Feldman and alerted the Internet Social Media community of his Cyberbullying, he started attacking. He registered Noahdavidsimon.com and Igorberger.com with Godaddy.com (Loren Feldman stated in his Ustream live video that he will use the sites for parody to attack) He even said that on Igor’s domain that he will make fun of Igor’s dead mother who passed away a month before Igor’s and Noah’s name was bought. Here are the videos where he claims to have bought the domain in order to terrorize. Loren Feldman’s video message to Noah David Simon and Loren Feldman’s video message to Igor Berger These videos were originally posted by Loren Feldman on seesmic. Igor download the videos from Seesmic and uploaded them to his Youtube account as evidence. Noahdavidsimon.com is registered by 1938media Loren Felman. @salzano Corey Salzano bought Igorberger.com with Loren Feldman. He works together with Loren Feldman @1938media Loren Feldman in his Ustream live video asked Corey Salzano to buy Igorberger.com then he in Seesmic video said Loren Feldman of owned Igorberger.com
Salzano and Feldman’s relationship was recorded on Twitter. Whois record of Igorberger.com registrant is Salzano. Loren Feldman Tweeted and tormented Igor about his dead mother in a video right after his mother died by threatening to speak Latin Curses on his name by buying Igor’s and Noah’s intellectual property. Loren Feldman gloated on Twitter over getting the domain name. Corey Salzano admited he and Loren bought these domain to terrorize. Loren Feldman and Corey Salzano must return these domains to the registrar because as per Anticybersquating he cannot use these domains of other people names to profit from. Loren Feldman promotes his brand 1938media through the domains he Cybersquates on.

yes, Hackers do try to frame you

June 3, 2011


Google Blames Being Hacked On China

Wiener’s Wiener: Dem. Rep’s ‘Hacking’ Story Falls Apart?

On Wednesday, Google admitted that some Gmail users–including senior U.S. government officials, military personnel and Chinese political activists–had been the target of a hacking campaign. And they believe that the attack came from the Chinese city of Jinan. This is the second time China and Jinan have been in Google’s crossfires. Last year it traced another attack to Jinan–the site of an important military installation–and China’s actions caused Google to decide not to cooperate with China’s censorship demands. The latest hacking offense seemed to aimed at monitoring particular users’ emails and creating unfettered access to hacked accounts by forwarding mails.  Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images via nymag.com and Google Says Chinese Hackers Stole Gmail Passwords [NYT]

anyone else think hacking is rare? …but bloggers on the right still think Wiener is guilty….

It’s possible.  After all, we know the Chinese intelligence services are very adept at hacking.  And Weiner has been a critic of China’s human rights record for years, so China might have a motive.

was that offensive?
Here have some…
Nazi Porn

And we are being told that what is possible and what might have happened must be what happened.


But what is possible may not be what has happened.



It is now up to you to prove that I am wrong about the Chinese hacking theory.  If you can’t disprove it, then I am right.  And Weiner is in the clear.  Right?  I said, right? via legalinsurrection.blogspot.com


I don’t believe for one second that Wiener is guilty. I am a Jewish activist online… and I got myself into a very sticky situation legally (so bad I can’t talk about it), but the day I went to talk to a judge was the day a hacker sent something from my twitter account that framed me. It happened a few times and from multiple networks. I am still fighting to tell my story. I’m very involved with my friend the JIDF and Wiener was very involved in fighting Jihadist video on Google. There is a very good chance he was framed.

This elaborate “I was hacked” story does not ring true?

Weiner Calls for
Removal
of More than
700 Terrorist Videos
on YouTube…
could this be a motive
to hack his account
and destroy his life…
nah!


weiner

Failing to Recognize
Yerushalayim by Wiener

…Winer is guilty because you don’t believe people’s accounts get hacked?  that is a lot of faith for a network who was hacked by Iranian hackers. in fact I suspect some of the employees at twitter are part of the prank… but I have about as much evidence as this blogger has that Wiener wanted to destroy his life

Twitter hacked by Iranian Cyber Army;
signs off with poem to Khamenei



go figure… Washington State again with the accusation against men… particularly Jewish men. I hope Wiener learns a little about what goes on in this liberal state and changes his politics. I didn’t comment before because I felt my dislike of Macho Spaz Anthony Wiener would make me biased, but after reading this you know this is a sexual lynch mob as usual from the usual place. They accuse this guy of being a predator online because they refuse to acknowledge that accounts can be hacked. http://xrl.us/WienersWiener

Wiener’s Wiener with GoAnimate.com by CriticalAnalyst


YouTube death threat against Rep. Eric Cantor nets two-year prison term

April 28, 2011
Apparently he was stalking the
Jewish Internet Defense Force
before he went postal on Youtube…

Norman LeBoon, the man who admitted to posting a death threat against Rep. Eric Cantor on YouTube, received a two-year prison sentence Thursday. h/t @JIDF
Guess Laboon’s background!

Media_httpwwwcsmonito_fwqez