Can’t accept autonomous liability? Get out of the game, says Volvo
Volvo has an easy answer for all the hand-wringing about whose responsible when self-driving cars crash.Volvo chief executive officer and president Håkan Samuelsson says one of the most vexing challenges facing the auto industry can be solved with a simple statement: Manufacturers should be held responsible if their autonomous technology causes car accidents. Two days after the Swedish automaker pledged to be “fully liable” for accidents caused by its self-driving technology, Samuelsson pushed the entire industry to follow Volvo’s lead.
“We are the suppliers of this technology and we are liable for everything the car is doing in autonomous mode,” he said Thursday during an appearance in Washington DC. “If you are not ready to make such a statement, you shouldn’t try to develop an autonomous system.”
Google and Mercedes-Benz have made similar pledges, but it’s not yet clear whether other automakers will follow. A spokesperson for the Auto Alliance, an industry trade group representing major OEMs says the organization has no position on whether the industry should be held liable.
“If you are not ready to make such a statement, you shouldn’t try to develop an autonomous system.”
But in the span of a few short days, the series of announcements from Volvo, Google, and Mercedes-Benz set a substantial precedent. Even though self-driving cars aren’t yet on sale, the industry has been mulling questions over autonomous liability for some time, and no clear answers had emerged. Samuelsson said further inaction would hinder progress on commercial implementation of autonomobiles and stumped for federal guidance and regulation that would ready roads for deployment.
Details of Volvo’s liability pledge are still being discussed, but the CEO said his plan was ultimately a simple one. Volvo would accept liability for all crashes caused by the self-driving technology. It would not include coverage for incidents that occurred when autonomous-capable cars were under human control, nor would it cover instances when a car operated in autonomous mode could not avoid the reckless actions of another vehicle.
“If the system is causing an accident or over-speeding because it didn’t read a sign in the right way, that is what I mean,” he said. “That is what should be included.”
Signs might not even be needed in an autonomous future, a possibility raised during a panel discussion at the House of Sweden, where Samuelsson made the announcement. If that prospect struck some in the transportation community as far-fetched, it struck others as obvious, just as the notion that automakers should be held responsible for their products did.
“Why would Volvo accept liability for autonomous vehicles?” asked Alain Kornhauser, faculty chair of Princeton’s Autonomous Vehicles Engineering program. “Because they know it’s not going to cost them anything. They’re going to make it safe. They’re going to sell these suckers and make money off it, and insurance companies that see that will get rich off that.”
More than 32,000 people are killed and 400,000 injured in car crashes every year in the United States. Automakers haven’t said their autonomous technology will be perfect, but with human error responsible for 94 percent of accidents, they believe they can sharply improve on that toll. Embracing the liability may be a signal the technology is nearing readiness for deployment.
“Any corporation putting its name on something that will be driven without a driver is going to do that,” said Ron Medford, director of safety for Google’s self-driving car project. “Regulation is fine, and we support efforts being made to make sure the vehicle is safe. But the primary responsibility will be with the manufacturer, because it has to be.”
“The primary responsibility will be with the manufacturer, because it has to be.”
Another sign autonomous deployment may be nearing: After testing cars on public roads for six years, Google recently hired auto-industry veteran John Krafcik as the first CEO of its self-driving car program. While technology may be ready, public policy still needs development and refinement. Samuelsson, pictured above, pressed both the industry and federal government to find ways to ensure laws and regulations are adopted and consistent across the United States. In Europe, he said a patchwork of varying laws may hamper the sale and functionality of autonomous vehicles crossing from one jurisdiction into the other. He said the US could adopt a lead role by avoiding such confusion here.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration officials say they’re researching ways to create uniform testing practices and have initiated the process of rule-making for vehicle-to-vehicle communications, which could affect how self-driving cars interact in a broader traffic environment. The irony of an automaker calling for regulations and standards, which are often loathed by industry insiders, wasn’t lost on NHTSA administrator Mark Rosekind.
“From where I sit, you can have all kinds of strong voices literally yelling at us – ‘Don’t regulate, you’ll constrain innovation!’ – and at the same time, President Samuelsson is saying you need some consistency across the board,” he said.
Can’t accept autonomous liability? Get out of the game, says Volvo
Volvo has an easy answer for all the hand-wringing about whose responsible when self-driving cars crash.Volvo chief executive officer and president Håkan Samuelsson says one of the most vexing challenges facing the auto industry can be solved with a simple statement: Manufacturers should be held responsible if their autonomous technology causes car accidents. Two days after the Swedish automaker pledged to be “fully liable” for accidents caused by its self-driving technology, Samuelsson pushed the entire industry to follow Volvo’s lead.
“We are the suppliers of this technology and we are liable for everything the car is doing in autonomous mode,” he said Thursday during an appearance in Washington DC. “If you are not ready to make such a statement, you shouldn’t try to develop an autonomous system.”
Google and Mercedes-Benz have made similar pledges, but it’s not yet clear whether other automakers will follow. A spokesperson for the Auto Alliance, an industry trade group representing major OEMs says the organization has no position on whether the industry should be held liable.
“If you are not ready to make such a statement, you shouldn’t try to develop an autonomous system.”
But in the span of a few short days, the series of announcements from Volvo, Google, and Mercedes-Benz set a substantial precedent. Even though self-driving cars aren’t yet on sale, the industry has been mulling questions over autonomous liability for some time, and no clear answers had emerged. Samuelsson said further inaction would hinder progress on commercial implementation of autonomobiles and stumped for federal guidance and regulation that would ready roads for deployment.
Details of Volvo’s liability pledge are still being discussed, but the CEO said his plan was ultimately a simple one. Volvo would accept liability for all crashes caused by the self-driving technology. It would not include coverage for incidents that occurred when autonomous-capable cars were under human control, nor would it cover instances when a car operated in autonomous mode could not avoid the reckless actions of another vehicle.
“If the system is causing an accident or over-speeding because it didn’t read a sign in the right way, that is what I mean,” he said. “That is what should be included.”
Signs might not even be needed in an autonomous future, a possibility raised during a panel discussion at the House of Sweden, where Samuelsson made the announcement. If that prospect struck some in the transportation community as far-fetched, it struck others as obvious, just as the notion that automakers should be held responsible for their products did.
“Why would Volvo accept liability for autonomous vehicles?” asked Alain Kornhauser, faculty chair of Princeton’s Autonomous Vehicles Engineering program. “Because they know it’s not going to cost them anything. They’re going to make it safe. They’re going to sell these suckers and make money off it, and insurance companies that see that will get rich off that.”
More than 32,000 people are killed and 400,000 injured in car crashes every year in the United States. Automakers haven’t said their autonomous technology will be perfect, but with human error responsible for 94 percent of accidents, they believe they can sharply improve on that toll. Embracing the liability may be a signal the technology is nearing readiness for deployment.
“Any corporation putting its name on something that will be driven without a driver is going to do that,” said Ron Medford, director of safety for Google’s self-driving car project. “Regulation is fine, and we support efforts being made to make sure the vehicle is safe. But the primary responsibility will be with the manufacturer, because it has to be.”
“The primary responsibility will be with the manufacturer, because it has to be.”
Another sign autonomous deployment may be nearing: After testing cars on public roads for six years, Google recently hired auto-industry veteran John Krafcik as the first CEO of its self-driving car program. While technology may be ready, public policy still needs development and refinement. Samuelsson, pictured above, pressed both the industry and federal government to find ways to ensure laws and regulations are adopted and consistent across the United States. In Europe, he said a patchwork of varying laws may hamper the sale and functionality of autonomous vehicles crossing from one jurisdiction into the other. He said the US could adopt a lead role by avoiding such confusion here.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration officials say they’re researching ways to create uniform testing practices and have initiated the process of rule-making for vehicle-to-vehicle communications, which could affect how self-driving cars interact in a broader traffic environment. The irony of an automaker calling for regulations and standards, which are often loathed by industry insiders, wasn’t lost on NHTSA administrator Mark Rosekind.
“From where I sit, you can have all kinds of strong voices literally yelling at us – ‘Don’t regulate, you’ll constrain innovation!’ – and at the same time, President Samuelsson is saying you need some consistency across the board,” he said.
Playdate: Giving away Snake’s watch with ‘Metal Gear Online’
Metal Gear Online hasn’t even been active a week and yet and it’s dealing with some pretty serious issues. First there’s the whole real-money for in-game insurance thing, and as Eurogamer reports, there’s a load of balancing and server issues too. But, who needs a game when you could have bitchin’ watch modeled after the one Big Boss/Venom Snake/Who Even Knows wears in Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain? While you’re enjoying today’s broadcast you have the distinct chance to win just that: a Seiko watch that’s subtle enough to not trigger any alarms, but those in the know will give a hearty smile if they spot it.
Tune in starting at 6pm ET / 3pm PT for your chance to win as myself and Sean Buckley attempt to not (virtually) die repeatedly. Join us here on this post, Twitch.tv/joystiq (if you want to hop into chat) or the Engadget Gaming homepage for two hours of stealth multiplayer mayhem.
http://www.twitch.tv/joystiq/embedWatch live video from Joystiq on www.twitch.tv
[We’re streaming Metal Gear Solid Online through OBS at 720p, so rest assured it’s going to look far prettier on your TV at home.]
- Entries are handled through the Rafflecopter widget above. Comments are no longer accepted as valid methods of entry. You may enter without any obligation to social media accounts, though we may offer them as opportunities for extra entries. Your email address is required so we can get in touch with you if you win, but it will not be given to third parties.
- Contest is open to all residents of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Canada (excluding Quebec), 18 or older! Sorry, we don’t make this rule (we hate excluding anyone), so direct your anger at our lawyers and contest laws if you have to be mad.
- Winners will be chosen randomly. One (1) winner will receive one Seiko NextAge Metal Gear Solid V TPP Collaboration Watch (2,500 limited edition).
- If you are chosen, you will be notified by email. Winners must respond within three days of being contacted. If you do not respond within that period, another winner will be chosen. Make sure that the account you use to enter the contest includes your real name and a contact email or Facebook login. We do not track any of this information for marketing or third-party purposes.
- This unit is purely for promotional giveaway. Engadget and AOL are not held liable to honor warranties, exchanges or customer service.
- The full list of rules, in all its legalese glory, can be found here.
- Entries can be submitted until October 9th at 8:00PM ET. Good luck!
Firefox will stop supporting web plugins (except for Flash) by the end of 2016
Horrible browser plugins used to offer extended multimedia features for website, often at the cost of a much worse overall experience — thankfully, they’re going the way of the dodo. Chrome recently banished plugins like Java and Silverlight (and made auto-playing Flash ads disabled by default), and now Firefox is doing the same. Mozilla just announced in a blog post that nearly all old-school plugins will not be supported in Firefox by the end of 2016. That’s a long ways away, but it’s still good news.
Naturally, the impossible-to-kill Adobe Flash platform is exempted from this doom, but everything else will be completely disabled. Mozilla also noted that new platforms, like the 64-bit Firefox for Windows, will launch without plugin support since they don’t have to support a legacy base of users. Let’s take a moment of thanks for standards like HTML5 making the web a better place to browse and start counting down the days until Flash can join Java in the internet’s trash pile.
Via: PC World
Source: Mozilla
Computer Science is the most popular major for women at Stanford
Stanford reportedly has 214 female students enrolled in its Computer Science major — that’s 30 percent of the major’s total enrollment — making it the most popular major with women at the university for the first time. Women constitute 49 percent of the school’s total student body and Computer Science accounts for 20 percent of the university’s total enrollment. Computer Science did just barely eke out the previous title-holder, human biology, for the top spot by a mere six students.
“We’ve crossed that threshold where women feel supported and comfortable,” Eric Roberts, a Stanford professor emeritus of computer science, told Reuters. “What we need to do is not turn anyone away because they feel unsupported, and a vibrant core community with a critical mass is essential.” This marks a decided shift in the field, which has traditionally been dominated by men. It’s especially auspicious given Stanford’s close proximity to Silicon Valley and the numerous (albeit overwhelmingly white and peniled) tech giants that reside there.
[Image Credit: Getty Images]
Source: Reuters
App Content Will Soon Be Available in Safari Search Results as Google Expands App Indexing to iOS 9
Google today announced that its app indexing feature is now compatible with the HTTP deep link standards for iOS 9, which will allow iOS users to open mobile app content directly from the Google Search results page in Safari for iOS.
To use the feature, developers need to add Universal Links to their iOS apps and then integrate with Google’s SDK. For end users, this change will result in better integration between search results and apps.
For example, when searching for a restaurant with Google Search and getting a Yelp result, clicking on the Yelp link will open the Yelp app on iOS instead of opening the Yelp website within Safari.
Google’s app indexing feature for iOS was announced in May, but prior to today, it was limited to the Chrome browser and Google app for iOS. iOS users will begin to see app content in Safari on iOS starting at the end of October.
How to Personalize Your Watch Face and Complications in watchOS 2
watchOS 2, the first major update to the Apple Watch’s operating system, was released in September, just five months after the device’s debut. If you didn’t face any download issues getting watchOS 2 on your Apple Watch, you are well on your way towards looking for the new features the update brings.
One major change we’d been anticipating for months is the ability to personalize watch faces with the photos we’ve taken, and third-party complications are another fantastic addition that will add more variety and more functionality to the look of the Apple Watch. A third addition, time-lapse video watch faces, is sure to wow your friends and will give you some dynamic scenery to look at each time you raise your wrist.
To help you get started, we’ve created this how-to guide to show you how to set up each of the new watch face features.
This guide assumes you know how to customize your Apple Watch’s watch face. If you don’t already know the process, head over to our how-to guide on that topic for reference.
Photos Watch Faces
Adding photos to your watch face only takes a few minutes to set up. In watchOS 2, you can either select a specific photo to display all of the time, or choose a photo album to see a different image every time you wake your watch.
Read more 
The problem and future of App Store Optimization
Whenever you go to the Play Store (or App Store, or Windows Store, or whatever store you use) and search for something, the store goes though multiple algorithms to determine exactly what apps to show you, and it does it so fast, you don’t even know it’s happening. But when you stop to think about it, what exactly are those algorithms searching for when they are looking for your perfect app?
I recently got the chance to talk to Gareth Price of Ready Set Rocket about App Store Optimization (ASO) and why the current system is completely broken. So open your mind tanks because I (with Gareth’s help) am about to drop some high octane knowledge on you! Let’s ride!
If you have not heard of Ready Set Rocket, they are a marketing firm based in New York City that specializes in optimizing marketing across channels. They also utilize apps and services to help reach untapped customers. Basically, they are marketing for the digital age when many customers are not reachable through TV ads, billboards, and magazines.
What is ASO?
For those of you who do not know what ASO is, here is a little basic info. App store optimization is used by developers to see how apps are entered into the app store and making sure that the correct app gets in front of the right customer. This can be done though naming, logos, app descriptions, reviews, and number of downloads. Ready Set Rocket represents premium brands with large audiences which means that ASO is extremely important for them. They have to make sure that they app they make for a client not only performs well and looks nice, but that it is also discoverable by the right audience. In a world full of fake apps, it is crucial to get the official app noticed and downloaded by customers.
So what’s wrong with it?
A group of obviously fake reviews
Unfortunately, Gareth says that the current set up for ASO is broken. In the early 2000’s, search engine optimization (SEO) suffered from people and companies attempting to game the system to cheating their websites to higher placements in search results. Now, ASO is experiencing the same fate with developers and creators discovering loopholes to bump their apps to the top of search results.
You may have noticed that from time to time, poorly created, low quality apps appear in the top apps for a certain day or week. You can tell by either downloading them or looking at screenshots that the app is not good, but it still has thousands of downloads and high ratings. Odds are, this app faked its reviews and installs.
Gareth revealed to me that there are many ways to game the system. The simplest way is to pay for a bulk amount of reviews and installs on your app. This action is often referred to as black hat. While this is easy and effortless, it is pretty obvious to tell which apps have cheated this way. Usually, the reviews are all similar in length, wording, and general tone.
There are other ways to game the system. If you have ever played a game that offered you tokens (or gems, coins, etc) for downloading a certain app, odds are you downloaded the app, got your tokens, and uninstalled it. While this is not as inherently bad as purchasing installs, it is still a way to gain dishonest installs for an app.
When you hear about something like paying for fake reviews, you have to wonder about the legality of it. Gareth helped shed some light on this for me. He said that purchasing reviews is not illegal, but it goes against the Terms of Service for app stores. So technically these developers are not committing fraud, but just violating the terms they agreed to. App store owners like Google and Apple can remove apps that engage in this activity, but there is no legal action that can be taken.
There’s gotta be something we can do!
So let’s say you have created an app that is awesome and does everything a person could ask of it, but it is getting lost in search results to apps that have gained fake installs. Is there anything you can do about it? Unfortunately, Gareth says there is currently no way for developers, creators, and users to fight these faked apps.
I would suggest writing real reviews on apps you have installed and suspect might be gaining illegitimate installs to let users know how the app really is. App store providers like Google and Apple are the only ones who can directly act against black hat. They can remove apps and developers who go against the terms of service for their stores which may help better apps rise to the top ranks legitimately.
What needs to change about ASO?
We have heard what is bad about ASO, how people can cheat the system, and what can be done to stop it, but now we need to talk about what needs to change about ASO. Gareth believes that app store providers should tweak their algorithms to be more based on quality than quantity. Perhaps have app stores analyze the semantics of reviews to help spot fakes.
To determine the quality of the app, Gareth feels like there shoulAd be more complex algorithims that go past just installing the app. Take into account how much time the app is used and how long the app is installed before the user removes it should all come into play when determining an apps placement in the app store. Making these algorithms more transparent also doesn’t help the ASO situation because it allows developers to find ways to game the system. If you kept the algorithms shadowed and complex, developers would spend more time, money, and resources creating a better app than attempting to move up in the rankings.
When will it change?
So are we going to see a change in ASO soon? Unfortunately, probably not. People only have a finite number of app needs, and as app stores reach maturity, those needs are mostly taken care of. The companies that run these app stores (Apple, Google, etc.) are not focused on helping each developer’s app reach it correct position. They are focused on meeting the customers’ needs with the apps they provide. As long as there is a quality app available for users’ needs, these companies are going to be content. As for getting rid of fake reviews and revamping the ranking system, Gareth says we are far away from that.
This whole article might have sounded like one big downer. If you create a quality app, companies who can afford to buy installs and reviews will be rated higher than you even if their app isn’t good. There is not much users can do to stop those who game the system. And app store providers are not too worried about the fake reviews flooding their stores because customer needs are met. If you were a developer reading all of that, you’d probably feel pretty awful.
But Gareth left me with a fantastic piece of advice for developing apps. “Making a high quality product that people need is the best way to find success.” If that does not lift you up and make you want to try harder, then I do not know what will. Sure, these cheating apps are currently ranked higher than far more quality apps, but that will not last forever. Making a quality app will grow your users organically, and they are way more likely to stay with your app instead of looking for an alternative.
I hope that you have all learned something from this informative and educational. I would like to thank Gareth Price for taking the time to talk with me about app store optimization and to remind everyone that quality always trumps quantity.
The post The problem and future of App Store Optimization appeared first on AndroidGuys.
TwitchCon made me a Twitch convert
I’m going to admit this right up front: I wasn’t looking forward to covering the first-ever TwitchCon. Sure, I co-host our weekly Playdate broadcasts and absolutely adore talking with our community of regulars who show up three times per week to watch us play games, but outside of that, I didn’t spend time on Twitch. My worry for TwitchCon was that I’d be trapped inside Moscone West in San Francisco with thousands of screaming “personalities” — like the guy I’d watched (for approximately 45 seconds, max) shout and swear his way through Choice Chamber, for an entire weekend. That all changed after attending a number of panels and talking with some of the biggest broadcasters on the service. This first show was one of the best events I’ve been to for work, period. And I recently found myself doing something I never thought: watching Twitch for fun.
Slideshow-327679
Community is the bedrock of Twitch. Over 20,000 fans made their pilgrimage to San Francisco for a weekend in September without a clue of what to expect from TwitchCon. What they got was an event that catered specifically to them. But somehow, it didn’t seem pandering; it felt earnest. The overt fan focus of the show was all too evident: From the opening keynote where Twitch Director of Programming Marcus “djWHEAT” Graham self-deprecatingly recounted his history of broadcasting to the final moments of Deadmau5’s thumping set at the official after-party.
Flush with cash from Amazon’s $970 million acquisition, Twitch could’ve gotten practically anyone to play its after-party at San Francisco’s Bill Graham Civic Auditorium. Instead, the company hired electronic artists Darude and Deadmau5. The former likely because his 1999 track “Sandstorm” got a second life thanks to feature placement ahead of League of Legends streams, and the latter because he’s an incredibly active broadcaster on the service and a massive gamer in his own right.
Both artists seemed incredibly happy to be there, and the audience responded in kind. Chants of “We love TwitchCon” filled the gaps in Darude’s beats while Twitch-specific emoticons flashed on the massive video screen above the stage. “Way to restore my faith in the gaming community,” Deadmau5 later exclaimed from his LED-packed dais. “Way fucking better crowd than at the Dota 2 International.” Oh, and those tickets? $25 apiece, plus the $85 weekend con pass. Not a bad deal considering festival shows that he plays can cost $70 to get into, minimum.
WELP pic.twitter.com/7fbPEWAJLu
— Timothy J. Sepultura (@timseppala) September 27, 2015
That feeling of gratitude for the community was a running theme throughout the entire weekend. Panels and shows took place on the Kappa stage (the “main” Twitch emoticon), and in the Sandstorm, BibleThump and FrankerZ theaters — each name a heartfelt wink to the Twitch user-base. The talks themselves were largely focused on every facet of how to become a better broadcaster. I showed up a few minutes late to the “Broadcasting on a Budget” panel and had a hard time finding a seat. Near the end of that talk, there were people standing along the sides of the theater and snaking through the doorway.
When the floor opened for a question-and-answer session, six people immediately jumped up to the mic, asking everything from how to stream from a Mac (use Boot Camp), how to get discovered on the service (persistence) and how much to spend on a streaming setup (around $800 for your computer). The “Women in Gaming” panel was even more popular, with BibleThump (one of the bigger theaters) at capacity, and at least 20 folks in line for the open-mic question session.
Even at their most tired, the people I ran into were all smiles. As I sat at San Francisco International Airport at 3AM on Sunday to catch my early flight home, I noticed a small group of TwitchCon attendees draped in the company’s trademark shade of purple. They were parting ways, heading back to their respective corners of the country, hugging, laughing and promising to come back next year. Almost every person I talked to that weekend was friendly and more than willing to give advice or just talk for a few minutes. Hell, I even had a chance to meet up with one of our Playdate regulars, Austin “Yauddle” Busch, take him out for drinks and break his five-year Taco Bell abstinence.
This, sadly, was as close as I got to my scheduled interview with Fred Durst at TwitchCon.
All of this goodwill culminated in the heretofore unthinkable: I now watch Twitch instead of, you know, playing video games myself. For the past few months, Engadget features editor and gaming overlord Joseph Volpe has been raving about a channel called Excessive Profanity. I’d followed the channel a while back, but never actually tuned in for a stream. When the email ping came through indicating the channel had gone live late that Saturday, unlike every time before it, I heeded its suggestion and Chromecasted the show to my TV. The streamer EP (real name: Cody Hargreaves), was playing Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain, a game I’ve been miserably stuck in since our own Playdate broadcast.
All of this goodwill culminated in the unthinkable: I now watch Twitch instead of playing video games myself.
A few minutes into his stream, it finally all made sense to me; I “got” why people watched Twitch instead of playing a game for themselves. It was like TV, but something I could participate in, in real time. Having EP give me and around 700 other viewers at the time a guided tour — replete with some seriously funny, curse-laden Australian commentary — was the perfect way to experience a few hours of Hideo Kojima’s latest title.
I got wrapped up in the chat, sharing my glee with everyone else when EP manned a mini-mech and fled the scene as a skyscraper-sized bipedal weapon chased him down. I even dropped a RalpherZ emoticon. I’ll likely never beat The Phantom Pain, or sadly even get past the “Honeybee” mission (I’ve tried multiple times since), but now I know why people love it so much. I don’t have time to devote to beating every game that’s released, but I do have an hour or so to watch others play and comment on them.
I’ve even done some late-night Destiny streaming on my personal Twitch channel since returning home; something that wouldn’t have happened were it not for TwitchCon. And if that was the mission of the show — to bolster the Twitch community and invite others in — it worked. I’m a believer. I’m a streamer. And now, I’m a viewer.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership could spell the end of filesharing sites
According to documents leaked by Wikileaks — specifically, the TPP’s finalized chapter on Intellectual Property — the days of filesharing sites could quickly be coming to a close. Per the agreement, which would be enforced across all 12 member states, ISPs would be required to “remove or disable access” as soon as they “become aware” of a court decision that deems a piece of content infringes upon an existing copyright. This is a more extreme version of America’s DMCA takedown notices and would effectively tie domestic ISP actions to another nation’s legal decisions. So if, say, a court in Malaysia says a piece of content infringes on a Malaysian copyright, ISPs in America (really ISPs in all 12 member nations) would be required to remove it — regardless of whether or not it infringes upon any local copyrights.
This is especially worrisome for Canada, which has a rather relaxed “stepped” approach to content takedowns where every involved party must be notified before any action is taken. “The broadly worded provision could force Canadian ISPs to block content on websites after being notified of a foreign court order—without first having to assess whether the site is even legal under Canadian law,” internet law analyst Michael Geist wrote in a recent blog post. This would constitute a significant change to Canadian copyright law and one made without input from Canadian voters.
But don’t freak out just yet. This is just the currently agreed-upon wording. The entire deal still has to be ratified by the member nations, which could see further debate and clarification on this issue. It will be a couple more months until the rest of the agreement will even be publically released — and President Obama has promised the American people ample opportunity to review the documents once they do come out — so just keep your pants unbunched until then.
[Image Credit: LatinContent/Getty Images]
Via: Motherboard
Source: Michael Geist
AIVAnet 