Welcome:
Login
|
Sign Up
|
About CircleID
Follow:
|
|
|
The hiQ ruling erased legal protections against commercial scraping, leaving infrastructure providers to absorb escalating costs. Without federal action defining data misappropriation, a free-rider AI economy could undermine open networks, investment, and long-term data integrity.
Google's lawsuit against the Lighthouse phishing syndicate exposes the industrial scale of cybercrime, highlighting how criminals exploit easy access to digital infrastructure to scam millions. The broader supply chain enabling such operations demands urgent reform.
As ICANN prepares to expand the domain name space, calls grow for a public-law framework to govern the DNS root, ensuring global equity, transparency, and accountability in managing the Internet's core infrastructure.
Earlier this week, Poland’s new President, Karol Nawrocki, vetoed amendments to the Act on Assistance to Citizens of Ukraine, provoking debate over critical satellite connectivity. Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Digital Affairs Krzysztof Gawkowski warned that the veto “de facto switched off Starlink for Ukraine,” potentially disrupting connectivity for hospitals, schools, and government operations.
AI has revolutionized how we process information, optimize tasks, and conduct research. However, its integration into academia sparks ethical and practical debates. Should we limit its use? How can we assess a student's true knowledge if they employ these tools? This text explores these questions from the perspective of a technology expert who argues that banning AI is as absurd as rejecting calculators or spreadsheets in the past.
The international community has long struggled with the challenge of translating international law into actionable norms and practices in cyberspace. The conclusion of the United Nations Open-Ended Working Group (OEWG) on the security of and in the use of information and communications technologies 2021-2025 marks a vital milestone in that ongoing process.
Two sets of authors sued Anthropic and Meta in San Francisco for copyright infringement, arguing that the companies had pirated their works to train their LLMs. Everyone agreed that a key question was whether fair use allowed it, and in both cases, the courts looked at the fair use issue before dealing with other aspects of the cases. Even though the facts in both cases were very similar, last week, two judges in the same court wrote opinions, coming to very different conclusions. How can that happen? Is fair use broken?
As the global digital order enters an era of intensifying geopolitical tension, debates over digital sovereignty have re-emerged as a defining fault line in Internet governance. At stake is not merely who controls data or infrastructure within national borders but whether the vision of a globally interoperable, open Internet, one of WSIS's founding principles, can be meaningfully sustained.
Today, the Supreme Court will consider a challenge to the universal service subsidy program established soon after the introduction of telephone service by the AT&T Bell System and later officially adopted by the FCC as mandated by a 1996 law.1, 2 Universal service funding supports access to telephone and broadband service by subscribers in rural locales that commercial ventures will not serve absent a subsidy.
On Friday December 13, 2024 at 10:00–12:00 CET (09:00-11:00 AM UTC) the Lodz Cyber Hub at the University of Lodz Law School, an ICANN EURALO ALS, and the United Nations University – Comparative Regional Integration Studies (UNU-CRIS) hosts an online workshop 'International Law of Critical Internet Infrastructure: A Comparative Analysis of Europe and China'.
A World-Renowned Source for Internet Developments. Serving Since 2002.