agregador de noticias

Signed-In Maps Mean More Location Data For Google

Slashdot YourRightsOnline - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 17:05
mikejuk writes The announcement on the Google Geo Developers blog has the catchy title No map is an island. It points out that while there are now around 2 million active sites that have Google Maps embedded, they store data independently, The new feature, called attributed save, aims to overcome this problem by creating an integrated experience between the apps you use that have map content and Google Maps, and all it requires is that users sign in. So if you use a map in a specific app you will be able to see locations you entered in other apps.This all sounds great and it makes sense to allow users to take all of the locations that have previously been stored in app silos and put them all together into one big map data pool. The only down side is that the pool is owned by Google and some users might not like the idea of letting Google have access to so much personal geo information. It seems you can have convenience or you can have privacy. It might just be that many users prefer their maps to be islands.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.








Categorías: Free Culture [en]

¿Venderá Apple iPhones en Irán?

ReadWriteWeb España - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 16:30

Apple está tomando posiciones para vender sus productos en Irán, ante la perspectiva de que el bloqueo comercial de Occidente al país persa desaparezca o, al menos, disminuya, a corto plazo.

Así lo publica el Wall Street Journal, que asegura, citando a fuentes cercanas a las negociaciones, que ejecutivos de la compañía de Cupertino se habrían reunido con potenciales distribuidores iraníes en las oficinas de Apple en Londres. Al parecer, la firma explora la posibilidad de vender sus productos en tiendas iraníes, aunque no la de abrir Apple Stores en Irán. Esta fórmula, la de franquiciar a establecimientos ya existen para que distribuyan sus productos, ya ha sido empleada por Apple en otros lugares de Europa y Asia.

Irán parece interesado en derribar el telón de acero que Europa y Estados Unidos levantaron como medida de presión ante su política de armamento nuclear. Una oleada de primeros contactos entre compañías occidentales y ejecutivos iraníes ha alcanzado ya a multinacionales como Renault y Boeing, disparando los rumores sobre una posible relajación de las sanciones económicas.

Apple podría aprovecharse, por ejemplo, del levantamiento en 2013 por parte de la Oficina del Tesoro Estadounidense para el Control de Activos Extranjeros de la prohibición de vender electrónica de consumo en Irán, y vender sus iPhones allí. Otras restricciones han sido eliminadas, como la exportación de piezas de aeronáutica y automóviles, pero muchas continúan en vigor. Las entidades financieras iraníes, por ejemplo, siguen bloqueadas en el exterior, haciendo muy difícil o prácticamente imposible cualquier transacción económica con el país, algo que se plantea muchos obstáculos a Apple y a cualquier otra compañía que quiera operar allí.

Los 77 millones de personas que conforman el mercado iraní dibujan un apetitoso panorama para Apple, más aun si se tiene en cuenta que un 42% de la población tiene menos de 25 años, dado el gusto del público joven, más receptivo a las marcas extranjeras, por los productos de la manzana, y que existe una clase media cada vez más representativa.

En cualquier caso, y a pesar de que Apple nunca ha estado presente de forma oficial en Irán, no resulta difícil encontrar iPads y iPhones en su mercado local, en lugares como los bazares del mercado negro.

Foto cc: Blondin Rikard

 




Categorías: Cultura libre [es]

Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Warg Faces Danish Jail Time

Slashdot YourRightsOnline - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 16:23
Hammeh writes BBC news reports that Pirate Bay co-founder Gottfrid Warg has been found guilty of hacking into computers and illegally downloading files in Denmark. Found guilty of breaching security to access computers owned by technology giant CSC to steal police and social security files, Mr Warg faces a sentence of up to six years behind bars. Mr Warg argued that although the computer used to commit the offence was owned by him, the hacks were carried out by another individual who he declined to name.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.








Categorías: Free Culture [en]

Aprobada la reforma de la Ley de Propiedad Intelectual en España

Barrapunto - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 15:20
Se acaba de aprobar la reforma de la Ley de Propiedad Intelectual en el Congreso de los Diputados. En diferentes medios y sitios de Internet se están haciendo eco de esta noticia. Aunque para una breve y certera consideración sobre este acontecimiento, en microsiervos resumen muy atinadamente dicha reforma; 'en España los políticos acaban de aprobar una ley que va incluso contra la jurisprudencia de la Unión Europea al respecto. Claro que para cuando se resuelvan los recursos que se pondrán al respecto la reforma de la Ley de Propiedad Intelectual llevará años siendo aplicada, los que la han aprobado se habrán cobrado los favores correspondientes, y nadie pagará por los platos rotos salvo los usuarios de Internet'. Pues eso, y ¿tú ya sabes cómo te va a afectar esta reforma?
Categorías: Cultura libre [es]

Madrid estrena el primer cajero automático para Bitcoins

ReadWriteWeb España - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 15:00

Si estás un poco al tanto de la actualidad de la tecnología, seguro que conoces el Bitcoin, la divisa digital que se está abriendo paso como una moneda que no tiene banco central ni depende de ningún gobierno, y que promete romper con las estructuras de los medios de pago convencionales. Uno de los problemas del Bitcoin es que no hay una manera sencilla de convertirla a una moneda convencional y, por ello, la empresa Bitcoin Spain está empezando a instalar cajeros automáticos para comprar y vender Bitcoins, y el primero de ellos se ha estrenado ayer en el hotel One Shot Recoletos, situado en la calle Salustiano Olózaga 4, 28001, Madrid.

El cajero, de la multinacional Robocoin, es muy sencillo de utilizar y sirve tanto para ingresar moneda convencional para comprar Bitcoins, como para obtener efectivo manera inmediata, en cuyo caso la comisión es de un 5 por cien (tanto al ingresar como al retirar efectivo) y con un límite diario y por usuario de 2.500 euros. Además, el cajero sirve también para enviar o recibir Bitcoins sin comisiones, aunque para ello no sea necesario el cajero ya que se puede hacer de multitud de formas.

La presentación de los primeros cajeros Bitcoin ha contado con el presidente de Bitcoin Spain, Antonio García Navarro, así como con la presencia de expertos como Félix Moreno de la Cova, imagen de Bitcoin a nivel internacional, o Víctor Escudero, así como con el director de la cadena de Hoteles One Shot Hotels que ha apoyado la instalación del primer cajero para Bitcoins. En la presentación, los expertos han defendido como Bitcoin, al ser una moneda descentralizada, pone el poder en manos de sus usuarios ya que no depende de bancos y no está sujeta a las devaluaciones de los gobiernos. Para el experto Félix Moreno, el Bitcoin es a las monedas tradicionales lo que el correo electrónico al correo tradicional y es mucho más justo y más seguro que las divisas convencionales.

Los cajeros de Robocoin y Bitcoin Spain llegan a nuestro país justo un año después de que se instalasen los primeros cajeros de este tipo en Canadá y España es el décimo noveno país en el que se instala un cajero de Robocoin. Por supuesto, el Bitcoin tiene algunos inconvenientes, fundamentalmente lo escasamente extendido que está todavía (casi se pueden contar con las manos las grandes empresas que admiten Bitcoin) y la incertidumbre que causan los cambios en su cotización, que llegó a estar en los casi 1.000 dólares por Bitcoin en diciembre de 2013 y, desde entonces, no ha dejado de descender hasta los 330 dólares que se encuentra actualmente.




Categorías: Cultura libre [es]

Civil Liberties Groups Tell Court that Government Should Not Be Allowed to Wipe Out Lawsuit on Vague Claims of Secrecy

Electronic Frontier Foundation - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 13:48

Last year, Greek businessman Victor Restis filed a defamation lawsuit against United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI), an advocacy group which, as part of a “name and shame” campaign, had accused his shipping company of doing business with Iran. Restis denies the allegations, while UANI sticks by them.

Ordinarily, each side would have its day in court, but now the U.S. government wants to wipe out the lawsuit altogether, invoking the state secrets privilege. In response, EFF has joined in an amicus brief by the American Civil Liberties Union in Restis v. UANI to ensure that government secrecy does not improperly get in the way of a fair resolution in this unusual case.

In cases that touch on national security, such as EFF’s challenges to NSA wiretapping, the government often invokes the privilege to try to withhold evidence that it says must remain secret. But Restis is a dispute between private parties, not a suit against the government, so it’s not clear where the risk of harm to national security comes from. Ordinarily, the government would at least file a public declaration by the head of an agency giving a general explanation of the need for secrecy. But in Restis, it isn’t giving the slightest indication. In fact, it says [.pdf] that even “the identity of the concerned federal agency. . .  cannot be disclosed without revealing classified and privileged matters.”

As far as we can tell, even by the opaque standards of state secrets privilege cases, the government’s actions here are unprecedented: It’s asking the court to dismiss the case without a shred of public information about why the privilege should apply. Any harm to the plaintiff, who may have a legitimate case—not to mention the public’s interest in a transparent and fair outcome—is a necessary but unfortunate casualty of protecting the government’s interest in secrecy.

As our amicus brief explains, the state secrets privilege is a legitimate but narrow legal tool to protect critical national security information held by the government. When it is properly invoked, the privilege removes secret evidence held by the government from the proceedings, and the case usually continues without it. Since 9/11, however, the government has increasingly relied on the privilege to avoid a determination of the legality of its actions in a variety of national security cases. In 2009, the Obama Administration issued new guidelines intended to limit assertions of the privilege to cases where disclosure would “significantly harm” national security, but these guidelines fail to respect the role of the courts in evaluating such claims.

Indeed, the government says it has followed procedure here, but it has provided no information to lawyers in the case who have security clearances, nor any unclassified public versions of its filings. We hope the court will require the government to make a better showing before it accepts the government’s claim of privilege.


Share this:   ||  Join EFF
Categorías: Free Culture [en]

Más del 60% de los expertos creen que un gran ciberataque se acerca, según estudio

ReadWriteWeb España - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 13:30

El 61% de los expertos en Internet y nuevas tecnologías creen que en los próximos once años se producirán uno o varios ciberataques a gran escala, que pondrán en peligro la seguridad y la capacidad de defenderse de naciones enteras, así como la de sus ciudadanos.

Así lo certifica, al menos, un estudio realizado por la firma Pew Research, que ha lanzado a 1.642 conocedores de este sector la siguiente pregunta: “¿Se producirá antes de 2025 un ciberataque que afecte a la seguridad nacional de distintos países y a su capacidad para defenderse y la de sus ciudadanos?” El 61% de los encuestados contestó que sí, mientras que el 39% restante dijo que no.

Aunque entre los que respondieron que sí hay divergencias respecto a cuestiones más concretas, también existe un acuerdo generalizado respecto a aspectos fundamentales de la naturaleza del ataque. Por ejemplo: que más conectividad implica, casi de forma inevitable, mayor vulnerabilidad y que los ciudadanos son los más expuestos a los riesgos de los futuros avances de las nuevas tecnologías, aunque las empresas y negocios tampoco están a salvo.

Además, un término tan controvertido como el de la “ciberguerra” aparece en varias de las respuestas de los expertos, aunque éstos sí difieren respecto a la forma en la que ésta se materializará. Mientras algunos creen que los gobiernos emprenderán una carrera de ciberarmamento cuya meta será la capacidad de destrucción mutua, y citan como antecedente a la Guerra Fría, otros señalaron a los ciberataques como un posible recurso para grupos enemigos del poder que deseen poner en jaque a las autoridades de su país.

Y casi todos los que creen en este riesgo utilizaron el mismo argumento: la posibilidad de que se den grandes ciberataques es innegable… porque ya se han producido. A este respecto, los consultados se refirieron a las sospechas de que gobiernos como el ruso o el chino cuentan con departamentos dedicados a diseñar malware, y a ataques como Stuxnet, que entre 2009 y 2010 fue propagado para atacar a las plantas nucleares de Irán. Se sospechó de Estados Unidos e Israel.

Por supuesto, entre las contestaciones no faltan las alusiones al Internet de las cosas, un territorio que abre un nuevo panorama de riesgos para los usuarios. Muchos de los entrevistados parecen de acuerdo en la idea de que la seguridad no suele ser un criterio a la hora de diseñar y construir nuevas aplicaciones de Internet. La mayoría de las veces la reacción tiene lugar cuando ya se ha producido “alguna catástrofe”.

Foto cc: watchingfrogsboil




Categorías: Cultura libre [es]

Intellectual Property Strategy and the Long Tail: Evidence from the Recorded Music Industry

Infojustice - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 12:49
Author: Laurina Zhang Abstract: Digitization has impacted firm profitability in many media industries by lowering the cost of copying and sharing creative works. I examine the impact of digital rights management (DRM) – a prevalent strategy used by firms in media industries to address piracy concerns – on music sales. I exploit a natural experiment, [...]
Categorías: Free Culture [en]

October’s Very Bad, No Good, Totally Stupid Patent of the Month: Filming A Yoga Class

Electronic Frontier Foundation - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 12:29

EFF recently learned about a patent that covered a method of filming a yoga class. We reviewed the patent and discovered that it was just as ridiculous as it sounded. Despite our familiarity with absurd patents and our concerns about cursory review at the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO), we were still surprised that this one issued. It seemed the so-called “invention” wasn’t the kind of thing that should be patented at all—or at the very least, was not something novel or nonobvious. Yet another stupid patent, and winner of our October accolades.

There’s a silver lining to this story. The yoga community affected by this stupid patent wasn’t willing to give in. Instead, the community fought back, and as our post was set to go live (and on the day EFF contacted the patentee’s lawyers for comment), the patentee publicly disclaimed all interest in the patent. So this stupid patent is now a stupid ex-patent.

Even though the patent owner, YogaGlo, Inc., has already given up, we think the story of this patent is still worth telling. We think it reveals a lot about how our patent system is desperately broken. This story is one of a grave series of omissions and errors that resulted in a patent that should never have been granted in the first place, and a patent applicant incentivized to do everything in its power to keep filing for more. This blog post goes into this history in detail.

Filing for a Patent on Filming a Yoga Class

U.S. Patent No. 8,605,152 claims to cover a “method and apparatus for yoga class imaging and streaming.” To be clear, the patent involves slightly more than just filming a class, but not much. The claims require, among other things, “a studio having a front area and a rear area,” “a line of sight corridor,” and an “image capturing device” at a “height of about three feet.” In non-patent speak: a room, a direct view of the instructor, and a camera positioned about three feet above the ground. Figure 2 from the patent, shown below, is described as “an embodiment of the present invention,” and shows all the elements of the claimed “invention.”

The yoga patent came out of U.S. Patent Application No. 13/763,569 (the “’569 Application”), filed on February 8, 2013. Derik Mills, the CEO of YogaGlo, Inc., a Santa Monica based company that strives to provide “the experience of being in the class at your home,” listed himself as the inventor.

At the time the ‘569 Application was filed, a related patent was also making its way through the PTO. Mills had previously filed U.S. Patent Application 13/220,621 (the “’621 Application”) on August 29, 2011. Both applications claimed priority (meaning there was a claim to an earlier date of “invention”) to a previous application filed August 27, 2010.

This sort of “continuation practice"—having multiple applications relating to the same or related inventions—is common at the PTO. What was not common, however, was that the original ’621 Application was literally identical to the original ’569 Application: Mills sought to claim the exact same thing through both the ‘569 and ‘621 Applications. (It is unclear why Mills filed two applications with exactly the same claims. One possibility is that Mills felt his chances with the second examiner were better than the first.)

Often, similar or related applications are assigned to the same examiner. But Mills’ applications were given to two different examiners for review (we're not sure why). The ’569 Application was assigned to Examiner Nhon T. Diep and the ’621 Application was Examiner Mohammad J. Rahman.

Both the ‘569 Application and the ‘621 Application were initially rejected. Diep initially rejected the ‘569 Application on July 3, 2013, on two grounds: double patenting (can’t get two patents on the same thing) and obviousness (the “invention” was not different enough from what came before). In making the obviousness rejection, Examiner Diep relied exclusively on patents or patent applications. Shortly after that, on August 5, 2013, Rahman (faced with the exact same claims that had just been rejected) rejected the ’621 Application for the same reasons.

But from there, the two applications and their histories at the PTO diverge.

“YogaGlo intends to enforce its intellectual property rights”

On August 26, 2013, despite having both its patent applications initially rejected on multiple grounds, YogaGlo sent demand letters to its competitors, including Yoga International. In the letter, YogaGlo (through its lawyers) pointed to its patent applications and stated its belief that Yoga International “streams online fitness classes that mimics [sic] the method and technique of YogaGlo’s U.S. patent application." Although YogaGlo did not explicitly demand that Yoga International remove the videos it believed infringed YogaGlo’s not-yet-existing rights, it warned that the letter “shall serve as actual notice of the existence of the YogaGlo Patent Applications” and “upon patent issuance, damages may be due retroactively to the date of patent publication.”

Yoga International, concerned by the idea that a company could get a patent on filming a yoga class, decided to fight back. It told the yoga community about the letter and the yoga community went into uproar. Yoga Alliance, another Yoga organization, started a petition asking YogaGlo to withdraw its patent applications and received over 14,000 signatures.

YogaGlo responded with its own interpretation of the situation, saying that it filed for the patents “in order to continue to provide our community with this distinctive online yoga class experience at an affordable price.” In effect, YogaGlo’s argument appeared to be that without patent protection, it would cease to exist.

Except that for at least the first few years of YogaGlo’s existence, this wasn’t true. YogaGlo, it seemed, had been flourishing for many years without the patent protection it now felt it needed.

Patent Protection Not Required Nor Deserved

Patents are only supposed to be granted on what is novel and nonobvious. The Patent Office, in initially rejecting YogaGlo’s patents, relied on other patents and patent applications. But filming a yoga class didn’t seem to us like something that should (or would) be in a patent or patent application. Filming methods just aren’t something that are traditionally patented (nor should they be).

Instead, it seemed to us that prior art for systems and methods for filming would most likely be found in actual films. So in order to help understand just how “novel” YogaGlo’s invention was, we did an Internet search for other, similar “systems” and “methods." Below is a collection of just some of the videos we found, all uploaded or filmed before YogaGlo filed its patent application:

Based on our search, it seems like YogaGlo’s patent should never have issued. But even more interesting is that last screen shot. Its similarity to Figure 2 of YogaGlo’s patent applications is not surprising, because it is from YogaGlo’s own website—and it’s dated July 28, 2009.

This is a problem for YogaGlo. Even if something is novel and nonobvious, a patent should not be granted if the application is filed more than one year after the “invention” is made, used, or sold. This is commonly referred to as the “one-year statutory bar." Basically, you can’t patent something once the public has known about it for over a year. The public policy rationale is that patents are meant, in part, to get inventors to disclose their inventions to the public. If the invention has already been disclosed, the applicant didn’t need the patent “carrot”.

The one-year statutory bar is well known by patent practitioners and is often used to invalidate a patent or prevent one from issuing. One organization, after receiving YogaGlo’s letter, found YogaGlo’s invalidating videos and recognized their importance. After receiving YogaGlo’s letter, and before any patent issued, that organization sent YogaGlo’s lawyers a letter and pointed to the videos as prior art,.

And Yoga International wasn’t the only ones who noticed that YogaGlo shouldn’t be able to get a patent. A comment on YogaGlo’s own website on the post about YogaGlo’s patent applications, dated before any patent issued, also highlighted the videos:

That link at the end? That’s to the “Manual of Patent Examining Procedure” and the section on the one-year statutory bar.

Back at the Patent Office

Because YogaGlo filed its original patent application (the one to which both its applications claimed priority to) on August 27, 2010, more than one year after it had posted videos using its “invention," no patent should have been allowed. The one-year statutory bar prohibits it.

But if the PTO doesn’t know about prior art, it can’t use it to reject an application. This is why the patent office relies on patent prosecutors (the people who file applications on behalf of inventors) to bring to light prior art known to the applicant. The PTO itself will do a search, but it’s expected that prosecutors will point out art too. Indeed, they have a duty to do so.

In prosecuting the two applications, Mills and YogaGlo were represented by patent prosecutor working at the same office as the lawyer who sent Yoga International and others the letter about YogaGlo’s patent applications. This is also the same the law firm office that received the responses, including its mention of YogaGlo’s own invalidating videos. But despite the duty of disclosure, neither Mills, YogaGlo’s lawyers, nor anyone else associated with YogaGlo notified the PTO about YogaGlo’s own videos that implicated the one-year statutory bar.

At this point, its important to note is that the ’569 Application was filed under what’s called the “Accelerated Examination Program.” This program allows applicants to get their applications reviewed more quickly if they can meet certain requirements, including making a statement regarding the “most closely related” prior art and how the “invention” is different than what came before. (Normally a hopeful patentee isn’t required to particularly point this art out. It’s enough to merely list it on a form). YogaGlo identified and discussed some prior art, but it failed to bring up the most damning examples: its own videos.

So on October 7, 2013, when it came time to address the examiner’s initial rejection, YogaGlo did not identify its own videos and correct the failure to identify them at the outset. Instead, it filed an “amendment” and “request for reconsideration” of its ‘569 Application. YogaGlo modified its claims slightly, and argued that the claims were now patentable. The reason? The prior art, according to YogaGlo, didn’t disclose “a line of sight corridor." In plain English: YogaGlo argued that when filming a teacher from eye level at the back of the room, it wasn’t known or obvious to keep students from blocking the camera’s view of the teacher (yes, really).

Incredibly, Mills and YogaGlo—despite Yoga International’s letter, posts on their blog, and explicit recognition of the duty of candor—never told the PTO about its videos. Instead, on October 29, 2013 and without explanation, Examiner Diep allowed YogaGlo’s patent, having never been given the chance to consider the art that was so clearly important.

To be clear, Examiner Diep did a search for prior art. He searched databases available at the PTO, but he did not do a YouTube (or even general Internet) search. Perhaps unsurprisingly, he did not find YogaGlo’s videos, or the many other videos that predated YogaGlo’s “invention," among the patent databases he searched. The ‘569 Application issued on December 10, 2013, almost two months after YogaGlo received the information pointing out YogaGlo’s prior art videos, and more than four years after YogaGlo had first started posting its videos.

If at First You Succeed, Try Again?

Having received one patent, YogaGlo continued to seek a second through its ‘621 Application. On February 5, 2014, like with the ‘569 Application, YogaGlo modified its claims slightly and argued that the claims of the ‘621 Application were now patentable. Again YogaGlo did not disclose its own videos. But unlike Examiner Diep, Examiner Rahman searched for prior art on YouTube. Below is part of his results:

Through this YouTube search, Examiner Rahman was able to easily find YogaGlo’s own videos that implicated the one-year statutory bar. On that basis, the ‘621 Application was finally rejected on March 7, 2014.

But in a practice that has become all too common at the patent office, the “final” rejection became not so final. On September 17, 2014, YogaGlo asked the examiner to reconsider the application. In an act that can only be called brazen, YogaGlo argued that it’s own videos were not prior art, because “while the video appears to show the line of sight corridor, it is clear that it does not show the widening of the corridor as shown in Fig. 1”

Here is Figure 1 from the application with another frame from that “John Friend” video:

We’re having a hard time figuring out how this does not blow YogaGlo’s claim out of the water. When looking at the frame (a different one than that cited by the examiner), YogaGlo’s argument seems completely frivolous to us. But because the examiner cited to a different frame, YogaGlo was able to cite to some minute distinction between its claim and the picture Examiner Rahman found, and ignored the rest of its video. But even if a distinction exists, why does it matter? Is this really something that’s a “patentable distinction” over the prior art? Should someone be entitled to a patent every time a room is set up differently or a camera is moved slightly? 

Practices at the PTO encourage applicants to keep filing, and to make this sort of meaningless distinction. Examiner Rahman had already finally rejected this application once. But YogaGlo is insistent. Unfortunately, if Examiner Rahman wants to get this work off his plate, the quickest and easiest way is to allow the patent. And applicants know this.

Symptom of a Larger Problem

YogaGlo’s patent never should have been filed, and never should have issued. Even more importantly, hopeful patentees should not be incentivized to continue to push for patents despite clear evidence showing the claims are invalid.

In the broader view, it seems unlikely that patents are needed in order to incentivize people to develop new systems and methods for filming. Hollywood has existed for many generations without every director rushing out to patent new styles and angles of filming. Most likely, this is because patenting a new way of filming just doesn’t seem like something that patents were meant to protect, and nor are they needed in order to encourage the next Stanley Kubrick. And YogaGlo seems to acknowledge this: their own statement says they wanted to protect the “look and feel” of their videos. This is not something our patent system was designed to protect. But our culture of overclaiming of intellectual property rights likely encouraged YogaGlo to file for a patent and incentivized YogaGlo to seek it at all costs—including honesty. We don’t know why YogaGlo’s decided to not disclose its own videos, but its failure to do so seems questionable (at best). We asked YogaGlo’s lawyer for comment, but he declined.

The PTO relies on applicant disclosures, and should be able to, but in this case, it is clear that such reliance was misplaced. And what is also clear is that an incentive exists to not disclose. The fee worksheet in the file history for the ‘569 patent application shows that YogaGlo paid $663 when it filed its application. After paying a few more thousand in fees during the pendency of the application, YogaGlo got an almost twenty-year monopoly on its systems and methods for filming a yoga class.

We strongly believe that YogaGlo’s patent never should have issued. And we’re glad YogaGlo has belatedly agreed. YogaGlo’s pending patent application is as deeply flawed as the issued patent. It should do the right thing and abandon its application too. Although pressure from the Yoga community convinced YogaGlo to do the right thing at least with respect to the issued patent, for most people getting rid of a patent is not so easy. To invalidate a patent, the cost is a minimum of $6,000, which is the cost of filing an ex parte re-examination. 

Fortunately for the Yoga community, people were willing and able to fight back. But often communities aren’t able to do so, and EFF can't help with every stupid patent we find (trust us, we see a lot of them). This is why reform is needed: too many incentives exist to encourage patent applicants to be less than forthcoming, and it is too expensive and difficult to challenge stupid patents. We hope that in telling this story we can start a dialog on how to fix the system to make sure that no one gets a stupid patent on filming a yoga class again.

Related Issues: PatentsInnovation
Share this:   ||  Join EFF
Categorías: Free Culture [en]

Conectarse y trabajar en un FTP mediante la terminal

Usemos Linux - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 12:29

Para subir, bajar o administrar el contenido de un FTP tenemos un sin fin de aplicaciones gráficas, Filezilla es de las más populares. Pero, ¿cómo hacer esto desde la línea de comandos?

Sobre todo cuando trabajamos en un servidor y no tenemos GUI, necesitamos subir algún archivo a un FTP o simplemente borrar algo, crear una carpeta, etc, hacer cualquier cosa y solo contamos con nuestra terminal, nada más.

Para trabajar con un servidor FTP nos basta un solo comando:

ftp

Ponemos el comando ftp y seguido de él la dirección IP (o host) del servidor FTP al que deseamos conectarnos y listo, por ejemplo:

ftp 192.168.128.2

Como se muestra en la imagen más abajo, nos solicitará el usuario, lo escribimos y presionamos Enter, seguidamente nos pedirá el password, lo escribimos y presionamos Enter, listo ya entramos!

Ahora es donde escribimos los comandos en esta nueva shell que es la shell de ftp, por ejemplo para listar usamos el comando ls

ls

Aquí un screenshot:

Hay muchos más comandos, por ejemplo:

  • mkdir : Crear carpetas
  • chmod : Cambiar permisos
  • del : Borrar archivos

¿se parecen a los de Linux no? … jeje, si escriben help en la shell del FTP les salen comandos que pueden usar:

La cuestión (y que algunos se preguntan) imagino sea … ¿cómo subir un archivo no?

Para subir un archivo el comando es send

La sintaxis es:

send archivo-local archivo-final

Por ejemplo, supongamos que tengo en mi Home un archivo llamado video.mp4 y deseamos subirlo a una carpeta llamada videos, el comando sería:

send video.mp4 videos/video.mp4

Siempre deben especificar el nombre del vídeo final, no importa si es el mismo o si no desean que cambien, deben especificarlo igual, es obligatorio.

Así de simple, el log/output que nos devuelve es similar a este:

local: video.mp4 remote: videos/videdo.mp4 200 PORT command successful. 150 Opening BINARY mode data connection for test. 226 Transfer complete. 0 bytes transferred. 0.00 KB/sec.

Como siempre les digo, si desean conocer muchas más opciones basta con leerse el manual del comando:

man ftp

O bien leerse el manual en algún sitio de internet.

Bueno eso, no pretendo que esto sea un super manual ni mucho menos … es para sentar las bases solamente ;)

Aún así, espero le haya sido de utilidad a algunos.

Saludos

The post Conectarse y trabajar en un FTP mediante la terminal appeared first on Desde Linux.

Categorías: Cultura libre [es]

Bash: Convertir una columna de texto en un fila

Usemos Linux - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 12:22

Supongamos que tenemos un archivo de texto llamado distros.txt con lo siguiente:

archlinux
debian
ubuntu
kaos
fedora
slackware
gentoo

Y deseamos convertirlo en:

archlinux debian ubuntu kaos fedora slackware gentoo

Para lograr esto usaremos un ciclo for y un echo -n :

for i in `< distros.txt`; do echo -n ${i}" ";done; echo ""

Listo, esto hace el truco :)

Esto nos mostrará en la terminal el resultado deseado, si por otra parte queremos ya que se guarde en otro archivo .txt redireccionamos el output:

for i in `< distros.txt`; do echo -n ${i}" ";done; echo "" > distros-nuevas.txt

Y listo :)

Bueno nada, espero les sea de utilidad. Válido aclarar que también se puede hacer con expresiones regulares, solo que no sé cómo… pero, con expresiones regulares se puede hacer casi todo jajaja.

The post Bash: Convertir una columna de texto en un fila appeared first on Desde Linux.

Categorías: Cultura libre [es]

Hacking Team Manuals: Sobering Reminder That Privacy is Elusive

Slashdot YourRightsOnline - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 12:13
Advocatus Diaboli writes with a selection from The Intercept describing instructions for commercial spyware sold by Italian security firm Hacking Team. The manuals describe Hacking Team's software for government technicians and analysts, showing how it can activate cameras, exfiltrate emails, record Skype calls, log typing, and collect passwords on targeted devices. They also catalog a range of pre-bottled techniques for infecting those devices using wifi networks, USB sticks, streaming video, and email attachments to deliver viral installers. With a few clicks of a mouse, even a lightly trained technician can build a software agent that can infect and monitor a device, then upload captured data at unobtrusive times using a stealthy network of proxy servers, all without leaving a trace. That, at least, is what Hacking Team's manuals claim as the company tries to distinguish its offerings in the global marketplace for government hacking software. (Here are the manuals themselves.)

Read more of this story at Slashdot.








Categorías: Free Culture [en]

Tim Cook (Apple): “Estoy orgulloso de ser gay”

ReadWriteWeb España - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 12:00

“Durante años, he mostrado de forma abierta mi orientación sexual a la gente que me rodea. Muchos de mis compañeros de trabajo en Apple saben que soy gay […] Aunque nunca he negado mi sexualidad, tampoco la he manifestado públicamente hasta ahora. Así que dejadme que sea claro: estoy orgulloso de ser gay, y considero éste uno de los mayores regalos que dios me ha hecho”.

Quien firma las anteriores líneas es Tim Cook, director ejecutivo de la archipoderosa Apple desde que el fallecido Steve Jobs abandonase el cargo. El CEO de la compañía de Cupertino se ha sincerado así en una carta que publica Bloomberg, en la que explica que ha decidido salir del armario ante la opinión pública porque considera que sus palabras pueden ayudar a otras personas.

“Tengo la suerte de trabajar en una empresa que ama la creatividad y la innovación y que sabe que éstas florecen cuando se celebra la diferencia. Pero no todo el mundo es tan afortunado”, reconoce en su misiva.

“Merece la pena sacrificar mi intimidad”

Nacido en Alabama, al tradicional sur de Estados Unidos, Cook ha manifestado en varias ocasiones su apoyo al colectivo LGBT, como cuando, hace apenas unos días, instó a las autoridades de su estado de origen a garantizar la libertad sexual de sus habitantes. Su condición sexual es, asimismo, un secreto a voces desde hace tiempo en un lugar tan políticamente correcto como América. A un periodista de la CNBC se le “escapó” en junio en directo, cuando le preguntó a un colaborador si pensaba que Cook era “abierto respecto a su homosexualidad”.

En cualquier caso, el directivo nunca ha ocultado ni desmentido su condición. Ha decidido dar un paso al frente, porque, explica, aunque su país avanza hacia la igualdad de derechos, existen todavía lugares en los que “se puede disparar a la gente simplemente porque es gay”. Cook denunció esto en su última visita a Alabama, y se refirió, en concreto, a ese estado. En la carta también cita que un casero puede desahuciar a un inquilino porque es gay, y que los homosexuales aún se encuentran con dificultades en situaciones como las visitas y el cuidado a un familiar enfermo o las herencias.

“A lo largo de mi carrera, he tratado de mantener un nivel básico de privacidad […] Pero me he dado cuenta de que ese deseo de intimidad me ha impedido hacer algo que es mucho más importante”, asegura. “No me considero un activista, pero sí sé lo mucho que me he beneficiado del sacrificio de otros. Así que, si escuchar que el CEO de Apple ayuda a alguien que lucha por saber quién es o inspira a gente para pelear por su igualdad, en ese caso, merece la pena que sacrifique mi intimidad”, sentencia.

Medios de todo el mundo ya se están haciendo eco de la noticia, aunque Cook asegura, remitiéndose a sus orígenes humildes, que nunca ha sentido deseos de llamar la atención. Prefiere, dice, que sea su compañía la que la reciba, en lugar de él. “Me gusta centrarme en nuestros productos”, afirma. Apple acaba de lanzar dos nuevos modelos de iPhone -6 y 6 Plus- y se prepara para comercializar en 2015 su primer reloj inteligente, el Apple Watch. En los próximos días, su CEO protagonizará muchos titulares internacionales. La promoción está asegurada.

Foto cc: Andy Ihnatko




Categorías: Cultura libre [es]

Error de compilación de JAG un puzzle libre

Música, aguardiente y poesía - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 11:44

Saludos a todos, como ya es costumbre, tengo tiempo sin publicar algo.  Esta vez escribo para los que quieran instalar el juego JAG, un puzzle bien interesante multiplataforma, pero que los instaladores en la página para GNU/Linux son 64bits únicamente. Si bien los pasos a seguir para la instalación están bastante claros, al igual que las dependencias, me daba este error a la hora de compilar:

/usr/bin/ld: displaywrapper.o: referencia sin definir al símbolo ‘XOpenDisplay’
//usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libX11.so.6: error adding symbols: DSO missing from command line
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
Makefile:202: recipe for target ‘bin/jag’ failed
make: *** [bin/jag] Error 1

En el archivo Makefile añadimos -lX11 al final de la línea en donde esta LIBS. Eso es todo, saludos.

 


Categorías: Cultura libre [es]

Motorola Mobility ya es de Lenovo

ReadWriteWeb España - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 10:30

Ahora sí, Motorola ya es de Lenovo. Es lo que estos últimos y Google, propietarios de la compañía de móviles desde 2011, acaban de anunciar a través de comunicados varios, con lo que la operación de compra de Motorola por parte de Lenovo, de la que informaron en enero de este año, ha quedado cerrada tras pasar todos los controles de las autoridades de competencia de EEUU, China, la Unión Europea, Brasil y México.

En total, el precio de la compra ha ascendido a aproximadamente 2.910 millones de dólares. De ellos, 660 millones de dólares se pagaron en efectivo, 750 millones de dólares en forma de acciones de Lenovo (519.107.215 acciones concretamente, un 4,7% del total) y los 1.500 millones de dólares restantes se pagarán a través de un pagaré a tres años.

En cuanto a en qué situación queda Motorola una vez finalizada la operación, la gente de Lenovo ha explicado que dirigirán la empresa como una filial de su total propiedad, manteniendo su sede actual situada en Chicago, que Rick Osterloh no perderá su puesto de presidente y COO de Motorola, y que Liu Jun, vicepresidente ejecutivo y presidente de Lenovo Mobile Business Group, pasar a ser el presidente del consejo directivo de Motorola.

Por otro lado, como suele ser habitual en estos casos, todas las partes se han mostrado muy contentas con la finalización de la operación. Por ejemplo, Yang Yuanqing, presidente y CEO de Lenovo, comentó:

Hoy hemos conseguido un hito histórico para Lenovo y Motorola. Juntos estamos preparados para competir, crecer y ganar terreno en el mercado global de smartphones. Al posicionarnos terceros y convertirnos en un auténtico rival para los dos mayores fabricantes de smartphones del mundo, daremos al mercado algo que necesita: variedad, competencia y una nueva chispa de innovación”.

Larry Page, CEO de Google, dijo que “Motorola está en buenas manos con Lenovo, una compañía que siempre diseña dispositivos de alta gama”, y Osterloh manifestó lo siguiente:

Vemos en Lenovo un partner que comparte nuestra misión y que nos aportará escala global, además de un amplio portafolio de productos y su historia de aprovechar al máximo las oportunidades estratégicas. Juntos llegaremos más lejos, más rápido”

¿Y ahora qué?

La pregunta del millón ante lo expuesto, es qué va a pasar exactamente a partir de ahora con Motorola, y con los smartphones de Lenovo. A este particular, lo único que sabemos seguro es que Motorola va a continuar la estrategia de centrarse en productos con Android puro y brindar actualizaciones rápidas de software.

El tiempo dirá, pero la cosa pinta bien. El binomio es perfecto y de seguro dará más aire a Motorola, que en los dos últimos años ha conseguido transformarse e iniciar la senda de la rentabilidad (antes de que Google les comprara, se encontraban en una situación bastante mala, que han ido revirtiendo, aunque todavía no dan beneficios, lo que Lenovo espera que ocurra en entre 4 y 6 trimestres).




Categorías: Cultura libre [es]

Australian Gov't Tries To Force Telcos To Store User Metadata For 2 Years

Slashdot YourRightsOnline - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 09:28
AlbanX writes The Australian Government has introduced a bill that would require telecommunications carriers and service providers to retain the non-content data of Australian citizens for two years so it can be accessed — without a warrant — by local law enforcement agencies. Despite tabling the draft legislation into parliament, the bill doesn't actually specify the types of data the Government wants retained. The proposal has received a huge amount of criticism from the telco industry, other members of parliament and privacy groups. (The Sydney Morning Herald has some audio of discussion about the law.)

Read more of this story at Slashdot.








Categorías: Free Culture [en]

Australian Gov't Tries To Force Telcos To Store User Metadata For 2 Years

Slashdot YourRightsOnline - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 09:28
AlbanX writes The Australian Government has introduced a bill that would require telecommunications carriers and service providers to retain the non-content data of Australian citizens for two years so it can be accessed — without a warrant — by local law enforcement agencies. Despite tabling the draft legislation into parliament, the bill doesn't actually specify the types of data the Government wants retained. The proposal has received a huge amount of criticism from the telco industry, other members of parliament and privacy groups. (The Sydney Morning Herald has some audio of discussion about the law.)

Read more of this story at Slashdot.








Categorías: Free Culture [en]

Australian Gov't Tries To Force Telcos To Store User Metadata For 2 Years

Slashdot YourRightsOnline - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 09:28
AlbanX writes The Australian Government has introduced a bill that would require telecommunications carriers and service providers to retain the non-content data of Australian citizens for two years so it can be accessed — without a warrant — by local law enforcement agencies. Despite tabling the draft legislation into parliament, the bill doesn't actually specify the types of data the Government wants retained. The proposal has received a huge amount of criticism from the telco industry, other members of parliament and privacy groups. (The Sydney Morning Herald has some audio of discussion about the law.)

Read more of this story at Slashdot.








Categorías: Free Culture [en]

Australian Gov't Tries To Force Telcos To Store User Metadata For 2 Years

Slashdot YourRightsOnline - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 09:28
AlbanX writes The Australian Government has introduced a bill that would require telecommunications carriers and service providers to retain the non-content data of Australian citizens for two years so it can be accessed — without a warrant- by local law enforcement agencies. Despite tabling the draft legislation into parliament, the bill doesn't actually specify the types of data the Government wants retained. The proposal has received a huge amount of criticism from the telco industry, other members of parliament and privacy groups. (The Sydney Morning Herald has some audio of discussion about the law.)

Read more of this story at Slashdot.








Categorías: Free Culture [en]

Australian Gov't Tries To Force Telcos To Store User Metadata For 2 Years

Slashdot YourRightsOnline - 30 Octubre, 2014 - 09:28
AlbanX writes The Australian Government has introduced a bill that would require telecommunications carriers and service providers to retain the non-content data of Australian citizens for two years so it can be accessed — without a warrant- by local law enforcement agencies. Despite tabling the draft legislation into parliament, the bill doesn't actually specify the types of data the Government wants retained. The proposal has received a huge amount of criticism from the telco industry, other members of parliament and privacy groups. (The Sydney Morning Herald has some audio of discussion about the law.)

Read more of this story at Slashdot.








Categorías: Free Culture [en]
Distribuir contenido