lychee2345

[lychee2345]

Vendor issues a raft of data protection initiatives to protect hybrid cloud infrastructures

Dell has announced a number of data protection products and services to help organisations better protect business-critical systems, applications, and data either on-premise or in the cloud.

The offerings include Dell Data Protection and Rapid Recovery, three new data de-duplication appliances models, Dell Data Protection and Endpoint Recovery and a new Dell Data Protection and NetVault Backup product.

The firm said this would give customers the choice they need in backup and recovery as they move data and applications to the cloud.

Dell Data Protection and Rapid Recovery integrates features from AppAssure and other Dell products, and the company said this would “eliminate” downtime for customers.

Rapid Snap for Applications technology takes snapshots of entire physical or virtual environments up to every five minutes. This gives users immediate access to data in the event of an incident and the power to restore in real time as if nothing ever happened, the firm claimed.

In addition, Rapid Snap for Virtual technology offers agentless protection of VMware VMs.

As for its Dell DR deduplication appliances, the mid-market DR4300 offers up to 108TB of usable capacity while taking in up to 23TB of data per hour.

The entry-level DR4300e is a smaller scale, low-cost appliance that can scale up to 27TB. The DR63000 is a larger midmarket and small enterprise appliance that delivers up to 360TB of usable capacity while ingesting up to 29TB of data per hour.

Its Dell Data Protection Endpoint Recovery – Free Edition will be available as software to help customers provide endpoint protection and recovery for Windows clients.

Dell NetVault Backup is a cross-platform, enterprise backup and recovery product that offers broad support for different OSes, application, and backup products. Version 11 delivers the increased scalability and improved performance needed to simplify backup in diverse IT environments.

“With the next generation of data protection solutions, Dell is committed to helping companies gain control of their IT environments, and protecting the applications and data that flows across the organisation both on-premises and in the cloud,” said Brett Roscoe, vice president of product management at Dell Systems and Information Management.

“These significant enhancements to the Dell Data Protection portfolio help organisations utilise the opportunities of cloud and build a future-ready infrastructure by ensuring they have instant access to systems, applications and data that run their businesses.

[lychee2345]

https://nixcraft.tumblr.com/post/166637371402/ransomware-of-things

The video below perfectly illustrates these issues regarding the IoT,

What is the Internet of Things (IoT) and how can we secure it?

The IoT and marketing from hell

Source: marketing with virtual assistants

[lychee2345]

Targeted advertising and online privacy: Do you like cookies?

With the advent of the big data era, Internet service providers have become the most important information users and collectors on the Internet. While cookie technology does improve the experience of web users and efficiency in digital marketing, it has aroused great controversy in data and privacy protection. Cookies can not only record personal information such as name and address through the online transaction but the browsing history as well. Thus, based on these digital footprints which reflect user's preference and personal characteristics, online behavioral advertising was rapidly adopted by publishers to push more personalized recommendations. However, accompanied by the huge commercial value of targeted advertising, it can be an invasion of consumer's online privacy and thus must comply with legal regulations. Moreover, put aside these concerns, do these specific advertisements really increase purchase intention?

Personal network trace information is similar to spending and shopping records in real life, which is personally identifiable. If it is manipulated and tracked by others, it may bring unpleasant feelings such as anxiety and panic to the tracked person. In fact, most users surf the internet without realizing that personal data related to what they do online will be collected and used for commercial purposes. And when they do find out by seeing the advertisement that is strongly connected with something they happen to look for, consumers may experience this as privacy intrusion and threat to their autonomy. Therefore, privacy concerned users may show psychological resistance to the targeted advertisements and take protective behaviours which could result in a decrease in purchase intention.

In that case, for publishers that place targeted advertising, they should be soberly aware that there is a bottom-line in users' tolerance. Undoubtedly, such kind of advertisements are more relevant and appealing to consumers and thus can lead to favorable responses. In fact, a study found that 71% of consumers actually prefer personalized ads. However, once people feel that the gains are not enough to offset the intrusion to their privacy and freedom of choice, for example, being exposed to advertisements that are relevant to private information which they are not willing to disclose, then there may be an increase in their avoidance and rejection to the targeted advertisements.

When people are generally concerned about personal privacy issues, businesses should make compromises to meet the consent requirements and more importantly, a step forward to improve the targeting technology. Actually, 95% of users surveyed in one report said that they take actions to avoid seeing or receiving ads altogether. Linking this survey with the one above, it’s not hard to reach the conclusion that people would like cookies to some extent, but they are not satisfied with the current quality of targeted advertisements. In that case, how to step up and control the balance between the invasion of privacy and avoidance of irrelevant advertisements might be the biggest concern for marketers now.

[lychee2345]

Are Emoji Copyrighted?

Emoji, as a kind of emotion icons, is first introduced by Japanese. From the article "Emoji licensing: :cry:", we can learn that the Japanese spelling of emoji is

絵文字: 絵 (e) means ‘picture’ and 文字 (moji) means ‘letter.’ Picture letters. Simple.

Generally, emoji is a fixed-sized image generated based on the code and its size is similar to the text. Because the emoji is presented in the form of a picture and fonts, it can express both people's emotions (e.g. ☺) and the existing objects (e.g. ❀). Therefore, this function of expressing feelings in network communication enables emoji to be categorized as works of applied art or fine art. In other words, emoji are protected by copyright.

It is known that copyright is automatically applied after a "work" that originality is created and fixed in a tangible form. While emoji are graphic works in substance, the problem turns to whether the emoji created is original. Emoji that meet the originality requirements are often those emotions or objects which people still have vagueness about and it is the diversified expressions that meet the requirements of copyright protection. In contrast, If the emoji has only small differences in the size of the line or the choice of colour, then its expression has been fixed and there will be no place for innovation. Such expressions do not meet the requirements of originality and thus are not protected by copyright.

Since emoji are unicode, Producers such as Apple and other digital manufacturers may license fonts in their software, which is the reason why those emoji look different on iPhone and Android devices. In that case, though we can use the emoji on our phones to communicate whatever we want, we still couldn't reproduce or use them for commercial purposes without a license. In other words, as Dissolve explains,

As long as you’re not reselling or re-licensing the font, you don’t need explicit permission to use emoji in your designs.

The rapid development of emoji is beyond everyone's imagination in the digital age. At first, emoji was only used to make up for the lack of sentiment in text during network communication. Nowadays, however, the use of emoji has long surpassed the virtual communication between individuals and is applied to all levels of the network. Even beyond the boundaries of the internet, it can be used in real life with growing economic value. For such a new internet product with large potential market, a clear protection mechanism can promote the good development of emoji.

[lychee2345]

What is Article 13 and will it Kill Memes? WIRED Explains

What is Article 13? The EU's divisive new copyright plan explained

By Matt Reynolds

From the article:

This is the part of the Directive on Copyright that has most people worried. This article states that “online content sharing service providers and right holders shall cooperate in good faith in order to ensure that unauthorised protected works or other subject matter are not available on their services.” You can read the full amended text of the entire Directive here.

So what does it mean? Boiled down, all this article is saying is that any websites that host large amounts of user-generated content (think YouTube, Twitter and Facebook) are responsible for taking down that content if it infringes on copyright.

But things aren’t quite that simple. No one can quite agree how these platforms are expected to identify and remove this content. An earlier version of the Directive referred to “proportionate content recognition technologies” which sounds an awful lot like it’s asking platform owners to use automated filters to scan every piece of uploaded content and stop anything that might violate copyright from being uploaded.

YouTube's current Content ID gives copyright owners the right to claim ownership of content already live on YouTube. The system then allows them to either block the video or monetise it by running advertising against it. It's an already unpopular system due to its propensity for false positives and abuse, and this would be heightened if potentially infringing videos could not be uploaded at all.

The final wording of Article 13 sets out exactly which platforms will need upload filters and which ones won't. The only way a site that hosts user-generated content can avoid putting in place a upload filter is if it fulfils all three of the following criteria: it has been available for fewer than three years; it has an annual turnover below €10 million; it had fewer than five million unique monthly visitors. As you can probably guess, this means a huge number of sites – from fishing forums to niche social networks – that will need to install upload filters.

The reason why this article has been dubbed the “meme ban” is that no one is sure whether memes, which are often based on copyrighted images, will fall foul of these laws. Proponents of the legislation argue that memes are protected as parodies and so aren’t required to be removed under this directive, but others argue that filters won’t be able to distinguish between memes and other copyrighted material so they’d end up being caught in the crossfire anyway.

Read more: full text

[lychee2345]

UsedSoft v. Oracle: Digital exhaustion of the distribution right in the second-hand market?

Since Article 4(2) of Directive 2009/24 does not make a tangible or intangible distinction between the definition of a software copy, nor does it stipulate the exhaustion of distribution right is limited to computer program fixed in a tangible medium, there seems no restriction on the form of object to which the exhaustion principle applies. In that case, the question of whether this principle could apply to licensed digital content comes to the reproduction of the copy. Regarding this issue, the court considers the marketability of the copy of a program. Indeed, the resale of digital works may result in a new copy, which can be stored and used for a long time without changing its quality. Such features of digital content may have an impact on the interests of the copyright holder, but the original intent to stipulate the exhaustion of the distribution right is to balance the interests between copyright holder and acquirer by restricting the rights of the owner. Since the copyright holder has already obtained economic returns in the first sale, the provision should be recognized unless the subsequent transfer behavior unduly influences his rights. In other words, if the acquirer or intermediary can ensure that only one copy is left in the hands of the customer after the resale of the work, that is, so long as the copy of the work is still unique, there is no need for legislation to restrict this behavior.

 As for the important difference between digital and traditional second-hand market, that is, the quality of traditional tangible goods, such as books, will be reduced due to wear and tear, while the quality of digital works will not be significantly affected, which is one of the reasons why many scholars do not acknowledge the application of the first-sale doctrine in the digital market. Nevertheless, we can solve this problem by technical means. If the technical conditions can add the specific attributes of the copy under traditional technical conditions to the copy of digital works, such as wear and tear, time limit, thus balancing the interests of the copyright holder and acquirer, then the application of the exhaustion principle should not be a problem. In 2011, IBM filed a patent application that allowed the digital document to age like ordinary paper or photos by setting parameters such as external temperature, aging speed, and type of work carrier. These technologies reduce the barriers to the application of exhaustion under a digital network environment and open the door to the legalization of second-hand markets for digital publications.

 The development of technology will definitely have an impact on the current system, but it is also the technological development that promotes the evolution and improvement of the IP Law. The advent of the Internet era has made the digital copyright market increasingly prominent and the issue of whether the exhaustion principle can be applied to the digital second-hand market needs to be solved urgently.