November 2010 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Re: [nexa] [NEXA]Ma è uno scherzo?
by Stefano Quintarelli Jan. 11, 2011

Jan. 11, 2011

considerando 4-6 della direttiva. lo spirito della direttiva è aumento della circolazione dei dispositivi art 3.c gli stati hanno la facoltà di richiedere certificazioni ovvero apertura e facoltà di chiedere certificazioni il ns recepimento dice che è installabile autonomamente solo ciò che verrà definito a me sembra contrarionallo spirito. il fatto che poi le certificazioni si ereditino, rafforza il mio convincimento. cfr sul mio blog i requisiti per un cablaggio infibra, non mi pare sensato. il recepimento della direttiva era una occasione per liberalizzare. invece... -- www.reeplay.it www.eximia.it Il giorno 26/nov/2010, alle ore 15.37, marco scialdone <marcoscialdone(a)gmail.com> ha scritto: > Io ho scritto queste due fesserie (più utili sicuramente i link all'interno del post) > http://scialdone.blogspot.com/2010/11/esistono-piu-norme-di-quante-voi-uman… > > Sinceramente io non vedo nè contrasti con la direttiva (nè con le sue finalità, nè con il dato letterale) nè grandi cambiamenti rispetto al quadro normativo esistente. > > 2010/11/26 Paolo Brini <paolo.brini(a)iridiumpg.com> > Il 26/11/2010 15:01, Stefano Quintarelli ha scritto: > > come scritto nei commenti al mio post (dove ci sono altre chicche che vi invito a leggere) lo spirito della direttiva era rimuovere vincoli, non metterli. hanno aumentato significativamente le sanzioni > > Non ho letto la Direttiva, è stata trasposta male (tanto per cambiare)? > Qualche giurista sa dire se ci sono estremi per una segnalazione alla > Commissione? > > Ciao, > Paolo > > > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > > > > -- > Avv. Marco Scialdone > Blog: http://scialdone.blogspot.com > Site: www.computerlaw.it > PEC: marcoscialdone(a)ordineavvocatiroma.org > Flavors me > My profile: www.linkedin.com/in/marcoscialdone > CC Network: https://creativecommons.net/marcoscialdone/ >

4 6

Nemesys in EUPL: una proposta
by marco scialdone Dec. 29, 2010

Dec. 29, 2010

Ieri Punto Informatico ha ripreso<http://punto-informatico.it/2970592/PI/News/banda-larga-consumatori-meta.as…>la proposta avanzata negli ultimi giorni da me e Fabio Bravo affinchè l'AGCOM rilasci Nemesys, il software per la misurazione della velocità delle connessioni a banda larga, con licenza EUPL. So che in lista ci sono persone che lavorano all'AGCOM. Sarebbe interessante poter aprire un dialogo su questo punto. Magari dopo le ferie :-) M.S. -- Avv. Marco Scialdone Blog: http://scialdone.blogspot.com Site: www.computerlaw.it PEC: marcoscialdone(a)ordineavvocatiroma.org Flavors me <http://flavors.me/marcoscialdone> My profile: www.linkedin.com/in/marcoscialdone CC Network: https://creativecommons.net/marcoscialdone/

2 2

Puglia/M$
by athos gualazzi Dec. 3, 2010

Dec. 3, 2010

La risposta del presidente della Regione Puglia alle osservazioni che sono nate in Rete in seguito alla firma del protocollo con Microsoft: <http://www.partito-pirata.it/content/risponde-il-presidente-nichi-vendola> athos -- Athos Gualazzi presidente Associazione Partito Pirata http://www.partito-pirata.it http://www.piratpartiet.it http://www.anonet.it

2 1

[NEXA]Internet, la Costituzione italiana e i fanatici della Rete | Sotto Un Cielo di Bit
by vale.it＠gmail.com Dec. 1, 2010

Dec. 1, 2010

Vi segnalo alcune argomentazioni in tema di Internet, interessanti e da tener presente ma che non mi trovano d'accordo: http://www.massimomelica.net/tecnologie-societa/794/internet-costituzione-i… A presto, Valentin

8 11

Google e l'indagine della Commissione Europea
by Marco Pancini Dec. 1, 2010

Dec. 1, 2010

Cari Tutti, Come avrete letto dagli organi di stampa, la Commissione europea ha aperto una indagine<http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/10/1624&format=H…>a carico di Google per presunto abuso di posizione dominante nel settore della ricerca online. Vi inoltro per vostra informazione la nostra posizione ufficiale sul tema: "Sin da quando l'azienda è stata creata, ci siamo impegnati per fare la cosa giusta per i nostri utenti e per il nostro settore: abbiamo fatto in modo che la pubblicità fosse sempre chiaramente indicata come tale, abbiamo fatto in modo che gli utenti possano trasferire i propri dati in modo semplice quando decidono di passare ad altri servizi e abbiamo investito pesantemente in progetti open source. Tuttavia, ci sarà sempre spazio di miglioramento e quindi lavoreremo con la Commissione per affrontare le loro preoccupazioni." Abbiamo anche chiarito il nostro pensiero sull’indagine in un post pubblicato sul nostro blog<http://googlepolicyeurope.blogspot.com/2010/11/our-thoughts-on-european-com…>ufficiale e che per vostra comodità riporto qui di seguito: Our thoughts on the European Commission review<http://googlepolicyeurope.blogspot.com/2010/11/our-thoughts-on-european-com…><http://googlepolicyeurope.blogspot.com/search/label/Competition>At Google, we’ve always focused on putting the user first by providing the best possible answers as quickly as possible - and our product innovation and engineering talent have delivered results that users seem to like, in a world where the competition is only one click away. However, given our success and the disruptive nature of our business, it’s entirely understandable that we’ve caused unease among other companies and caught the attention of regulators. Today, the European Commission has announced that they will continue to review complaints about Google's search and search advertising. We respect their process and will continue to work closely with the Commission to answer their questions. So that everyone understands how we approach search and ads ranking, we thought it would be helpful to state clearly the principles that guide our business: - Answering users' queries accurately and quickly is our number one goal. Sometimes the best, most relevant answer to a query is our traditional “ten blue links”, and sometimes it is a news article, sports score, stock quote, video, or a map. Today, when you type in “weather in London” or “15 grams in ounces” you get the answers directly (often before you even hit Enter). In the future, we will need to answer much more complex questions just as fast and as clearly. We believe ads are information too, which is why we work so hard to ensure that the advertisements you see are directly relevant to what you are looking for; - We built Google for users, not websites. It may seem obvious, but people sometimes forget this -- not every website can come out on top, or even appear on the first page of our results, so there will almost always be website owners who are unhappy about their rankings. The most important thing is that we satisfy our users. - We are always clear when we have been paid for promoting a product or service. Before we launched Google, many search engines took money for inclusion in their results without making that clear to users. We have never done that and we always distinguished advertising content from our organic search results. As we experiment with new ad formats and types of content, we promise to continue to be transparent about payments. - We aim to be as transparent as possible. We provide more information about how our ranking works than any other major search engine, through our webmaster central site <http://www.google.com/webmasters/>, blog<http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/>, diagnostic tools<https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/home?hl=en#utm_source=en-et-gwcblog…>, support forum <http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters?hl=en>, and YouTube channel <http://www.youtube.com/GoogleWebmasterHelp>. We give our advertisers information about the ad auction<http://adwords.blogspot.com/2010/08/adwords-myths-understanding-adwords.html>, tips on how to improve their ad quality scores<http://adwords.google.com/support/aw/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=10215>, and the ability to simulate their bids<http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2009/08/bid-simulator-and-more-trans…>to give them more transparency. And we’re committed to increasing that transparency going forward. At the same time, we don’t want to help people game our system. We do everything we can to ensure that the integrity of our results isn’t compromised. Our final principle: the only constant is change. We’ve been working on this stuff for well over a decade, and in that time our search technology has improved by leaps and bounds. Our results are continuing to evolve from a list of websites to something far more dynamic. Today there’s real-time content, automatically translated content, local content (especially important for mobile devices), images, videos, books, and a whole lot more. Users can search by voice -- and in a variety of languages. And we’ve developed new ad formats such as product listing ads<http://adwords.blogspot.com/2010/11/product-listing-ads-rolling-out-to-all.…>and new pricing models such as cost-per-action<http://adwords.google.com/support/aw/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=60788>. We cannot predict where search and online advertising will be headed, but we know for sure that they won’t stay the same. By staying focused on innovation we can continue to make search even better -- for the benefit of users everywhere. Posted by Susan Wojcicki, Senior Vice President, Product Management and Udi Manber, Vice President, Engineering Ogni commento o feedback è il benvenuto. A presto. marco -- Marco Pancini European Senior Policy Counsel Google Italy Corso Europa, 2 20122 Milano, Italia Tel. +39 02 36618524 Cell. +39.348.9946222 pancini(a)google.com Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/googlepolicyit This email may be confidential or privileged. If you received this communication by mistake, please don't forward it to anyone else, please erase all copies and attachments, and please let me know that it went to the wrong person. Thanks.

2 1

US Trade on EU vote
by Blengino Nov. 30, 2010

Nov. 30, 2010

FYI Carlo -----Original Message----- From: Sean Flynn <sflynn(a)WCL.AMERICAN.EDU> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 11:46:47 -0500 Subject: US Trade on EU vote EU Parliament ACTA Resolution Opens Doors To Final Approval Posted: November 29, 2010 A majority of European Union Parliamentarians last week indicated their support for the Anticounterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) by passing a non-binding resolution that could pave the way for the Parliament's final approval of the agreement. The adopted resolution expressed general support of the ACTA as a good first step toward curbing counterfeiting, though the resolution notes that the agreement will not solve the complex and multi-dimensional problem. It sets no conditions for the final approval of the ACTA by the Parliament but asks the European Commission to “confirm that ACTA's implementation will have no impact on fundamental rights and data protection, on the ongoing EU efforts to harmonize IPR enforcement measures, or on e-commerce.” But it does not ask for an explicit report or “impact assessment” from the European Commission as would have been the case in an alternative resolution sponsored by left of center parties. The resolution passed by a 331- 294 vote on Nov. 24, and was tabled by the Parliament's center-right majority, which is represented by the Group of the European People's Party (EPP) and the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR). The alternative resolution that was not adopted had been tabled by the Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D), the Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats (ALDE), the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance (Greens/EFA), and the Confederal Group of the European United Left - Nordic Green Left (GUE/NGL). The resolution approved by the Parliament notes that the agreement will not violate the EU acquis communautaire, which is the body of legal rights and obligations to which member states are bound. To illustrate that point, the resolution notes that ACTA will not require personal searches for counterfeit goods nor a “three-strikes” policy that would obligate an Internet service provider to cut off access of a subscriber to the Internet after a certain number of alleged infringing activities are detected. EPP lawmakers, in a Nov. 24 press statement, also rejected allegations from left leaning political parties that the ACTA would lead to changes to the acquis. In a Nov. 24 statement, Greens member Eva Lichtenberger of Austria said that an impact assessment of ACTA on the acquis by the Commission would have given Parliament members “the opportunity to judge the agreement on a factual basis.” “Blind trust towards the commission has never been a good recipe,” she said. “Moreover, it does not reflect the new role of the European Parliament under the Treaty of Lisbon.” The treaty gave Parliament new powers to approve or reject trade deals negotiated by the commission. She noted that the majority for an approval of the ACTA is not guaranteed given the tight vote on the resolution last week. The resolution noted that the ACTA falls short on including a definition of “counterfeit geographical indications” in the section on general definitions and said this was “regrettable.” “This omission could create confusion or at least complicate the tasks of administrative and judicial authorities in the interpretation and enforcement of ACTA,” the resolution states. The EU had long pushed for coverage of geographic indications (GIs) in the ACTA, which it secured through the application of a broad-based scope of “intellectual property rights” in most sections. But this deviate d from the original EU demand that GIs be explicitly mentioned throughout the ACTA as an IPR covered by the agreement, which the U.S. strongly opposed. However, the resolution does acknowledge the efforts of the commission to include GIs within the scope of the ACTA. The ACTA will be the subject of a technical meeting this week in Australia, where countries will conduct a “legal scrub” of the agreement starting Nov. 30. The negotiating parties released a final text of the agreement on Nov. 15. The U.S., the EU, Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, and Switzerland participated in the ACTA negotiations. Sean Flynn Associate Director Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property American University Washington College of Law 202 274 4157 www.pijip.org

1 0

Open Data - IGF Italia 2010
by Giuseppe futia Nov. 29, 2010

Nov. 29, 2010

Open Data - IGF Italia 2010 Il Centro NEXA su Internet e Società del Politecnico di Torino ( nexa.polito.it), il consorzio TOP-IX (www.top-ix.org<http://www.evpsi.org/www.top-ix.org> ) e il progetto EVPSI, coordinato dall’Università di Torino (www.evpsi.org<http://www.evpsi.org/www.evpsi.org>), organizzano un incontro tematico* *sull'Open Data che si terrà* *all'interno dell'edizione 2010 dell' *Internet Governance Forum Italia* (IGF Italia 2010<http://www.igf-italia.it/igf-italia10> ). Nel corso dell'incontro verranno discussi gli aspetti tecnologici, economici e giuridici del modello Open Data. La discussione prenderà spunto dal primo caso italiano di piattaforma *Open Data: dati.piemonte.it* (www.dati.piemonte.it) Partendo da una prima riflessione sullo stato dell’arte a livello internazionale, si discuteranno le sfide e le criticità da superare per affermare il modello in Italia. Open Data è un tema centrale per lo sviluppo di Internet perché riguarda da vicino i cittadini, le imprese e la pubblica amministrazione: la disponibilità su Internet del patrimonio informativo pubblico (per brevità PSI, Public Sector Information) rappresenta, infatti, non solo uno strumento importante per la partecipazione democratica e per lo sviluppo di nuovi modelli di gestione della cosa pubblica, ma anche un volano per la creazione di nuovi modelli di business innovativi. *Link utili* * IGF Italia 2010 <http://www.igf-italia.it/igf-italia10>

2 2

Fwd: [opennetcoalition] The Pirate Bay Decision, or the Political Persecution of Sharing
by Paolo Brini Nov. 29, 2010

Nov. 29, 2010

-------- Messaggio originale -------- Oggetto: [opennetcoalition] The Pirate Bay Decision, or the Political Persecution of Sharing Data: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 13:57:03 +0100 Mittente: La Quadrature du Net <jz(a)laquadrature.net> Rispondi-a: opennetcoalition(a)laquadrature.net A: opennetcoalition(a)laquadrature.net La Quadrature du Net - For immediate release Permanent link: http://www.laquadrature.net/en/the-pirate-bay-decision-or-the-political-per… The Pirate Bay Decision, or the Political Persecution of Sharing *** The Internet, November 27th 2010 - The decision to sentence the co-founders of The Pirate Bay to jail is both absurd and unfair. It illustrates how an obsolete copyright law and its indiscrimate application are harmful to society as a whole. Such an incomprehension of technological, economic and social realities should not mask the fact that this decision is above all political. *** Citizens who care about the Internet and digital technologies are startled by the decision of the Appeal court of Svea to confirm (reduced) jail sentences of F. Neij, P. Sunde and C. Lundström, founders of the Pirate Bay. The court has also upheld huge fines and increased damages to the music firms that sued them. * On a technical and legal point of view, the decision is unfair because The Pirate Bay is nothing but an index, which links to resources that already exist online. This decision amounts to condemning a library catalog instead of the author of some infringing content or activity. * On a philosophical point of view, this decision is unfair because it tends to condemn the act of sharing. Sharing is good and legitimate. Culture only exists because it is shared. The problem is that today's copyright laws and their implementation are obsolete. They are fundamentally at odds with the new uses that create and disseminate today's and tomorrow's culture. * On a political point of view, the decision is revolting. It is a statement to convince people that sharing is bad for creators, when it has a proven positive effect on cultural diversity, revenues from concerts and other activities and no proven negative effect on sales of music or other media [1]. This decision will become the emblem of the imperious necessity to adapt copyright to reality instead of trying to change reality so it fits copyright interests. [2] "The Pirate Bay founders can probably challenge this decision, and take this case to a higher court, and we hope that justice will be restablished soon. We are convinced that in a few years time, this decision will appear to everyone as reminiscent of a decaying system, keen on scoring a few last hits before the advent of an inevitable change." conclude together Jérémie Zimmermann and Philippe Aigrain, co-founders of La Quadrature du Net. Courage, Peter, Fredrik, and Carl! * Références * 1. See http://lqdn.fr/wiki/Documents 2. Commissioner Kroes recently declared at the Forum of Cultures: "In some sectors, the levels of piracy demand that we ask ourselves what are we doing wrong. We must ensure that copyright serves as a building block, not a stumbling block." ** About la Quadrature du Net ** La Quadrature du Net is an advocacy group that promotes the rights and freedoms of citizens on the Internet. More specifically, it advocates for the adaptation of French and European legislations to respect the founding principles of the Internet, most notably the free circulation of knowledge. In addition to its advocacy work, the group also aims to foster a better understanding of legislative processes among citizens. Through specific and pertinent information and tools, La Quadrature du Net hopes to encourage citizens' participation in the public debate on rights and freedoms in the digital age. La Quadrature du Net is supported by French, European and international NGOs including the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Open Society Institute and Privacy International. List of supporting organisations : http://www.laquadrature.net/en/they-support-squaring-net-la-quadrature-du-n… ** Press contact and press room ** Jérémie Zimmermann, jz(a)laquadrature.net, +33 (0)615 940 675 http://www.laquadrature.net/en/press-room _______________________________________________ Opennetcoalition mailing list Opennetcoalition(a)laquadrature.net http://laquadrature.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opennetcoalition

1 0

Puglia/Microsoft
by athos gualazzi Nov. 27, 2010

Nov. 27, 2010

mi permetto di segnalare l'articolo: <http://www.partito-pirata.it/content/analisi-dell-accordo-regione-pugliamic…> buon fine settimana -- Athos Gualazzi presidente Associazione Partito Pirata http://www.partito-pirata.it http://www.piratpartiet.it http://www.anonet.it

1 0

anche tu il 30 novembre con il co-fondatore di Wikileaks per i nuovi diritti civili?
by a.dicorinto＠uniroma1.it Nov. 27, 2010

Nov. 27, 2010

2 1