Encryption, Privacy & Free Speech: An April Recap

from the looking-back dept

As part of our funding campaign for our coverage of encryption, we reached out to some companies that care about these issues to ask them to show their support. Today, we're taking a look back at a series of four posts sponsored by Golden Frog, a company dedicated to online privacy, security and freedom.

---

California's Anti-Encryption Bill: At the beginning of April, we called attention to a bill in California that had gone from bad to worse. Originally a ban on smartphone encryption, it was tinkered with until it became a requirement for encryption backdoors, which could have forced manufacturers to create special California versions of their products with weakened security. Though obviously not as high-profile or as far-reaching as the Burr/Feinstein encryption bill in Senate, it was ultimately the same thing: a wrongheaded attack on device security framed as a necessity for law enforcement, despite that being a very unconvincing notion.

Thankfully, California lawmakers seem to have come to their senses on this one. The bill died without a vote a week later, after the Assembly Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection realized what a terrible idea it was.

A Scary Thought Experiment About The NSA: A few weeks ago, Glyn Moody called our attention to a fantastic (if somewhat disturbing) presentation from 2014, breaking down some ways the NSA could infiltrate our digital networks at the most basic and undetectable level. This notion remains hypothetical but all-too-conceivable, especially when there have been plenty of examples of companies cooperating with the government and the intelligence community without being tricked into doing so.

The USTR Comes (Partly) To Its Senses: The USTR's history with internet policy and digital innovation has always been, to put it mildly, discouraging. So we were surprised to see a change of tune in this year's National Trade Estimate report, which called out internet censorship in China and Pakistan as serious barriers to innovation and free expression, and even pointed out the myriad dangers of the EU's Digital Single Market strategy and the problems with a "Google tax". This is still far from a total about-face for the USTR, with the very same report managing to contradict itself when it came to intellectual property issues — but it's a very welcome step in the right direction.

Snowden's Positive Impact On Encryption Adoption: National Intelligence Director James Clapper thought he was decrying Edward Snowden when he pointed out that his actions massively accelerated the adoption of encryption technology, shaving years off the NSA's estimated timeline — but those of us who value data security and internet freedom had a different takeaway, and considered it yet another example of the good Snowden's revelations have done. The whole thing really highlighted the mismatched priorities and values between the intelligence community and the American public (as if that needed any more highlighting).

We'd like to thank Golden Frog for supporting our coverage of these critical issues relating to security, privacy and encryption. As you've likely noticed, their blog is full of great content that also explores these topics. In addition to the links we've featured so far, here are some more posts that may be of interest to Techdirt readers:

---

VyprVPN from Golden Frog is the world's fastest highly-secure VPN.
Get 25% off VyprVPN now »

Filed Under: encryption, free speech, privacy, sponsored post

Thank Snowden, As NSA Estimates He Singlehandedly Sped Up Encryption Adoption By 7 Years

from the thank-you-ed dept

As part of our funding campaign for our coverage of encryption, we reached out to some companies that care about these issues to ask them to show their support. This post is sponsored by Golden Frog, a company dedicated to online privacy, security and freedom.

---

James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, is claiming that, according to NSA estimates the Snowden revelations sped up the adoption rate of encryption by 7 years. Apparently, that's based on NSA estimates of the adoption curve of encryption. As reported by Jenna McLaughlin at the Intercept:

“As a result of the Snowden revelations, the onset of commercial encryption has accelerated by seven years,” James Clapper said during a breakfast for journalists hosted by the Christian Science Monitor.

The shortened timeline has had “a profound effect on our ability to collect, particularly against terrorists,” he said.

When pressed by The Intercept to explain his figure, Clapper said it came from the National Security Agency. “The projected growth maturation and installation of commercially available encryption — what they had forecasted for seven years ahead, three years ago, was accelerated to now, because of the revelation of the leaks.”

Of course, it's worth noting that, in the past few months, it seemed as if the NSA and the intelligence community was moving away from its kneejerk hatred of encryption, pushing back against the FBI's argument that we need to backdoor encryption. But, apparently they're not willing to go quite this far. Basically, the NSA wants strong encryption out there, but it doesn't really want you to use it.

Asked if that was a good thing, leading to better protection for American consumers from the arms race of hackers constantly trying to penetrate software worldwide, Clapper answered no.

“From our standpoint, it’s not … it’s not a good thing,” he said.

Yup. James Clapper would prefer that the American public be less safe by not using encryption, rather than protecting their digital lives.

Of course, many other people do think it's a very, very good thing. Including Ed Snowden:

Of all the things I've been accused of, this is the one of which I am most proud. https://t.co/1qybuvnmpt https://t.co/yoAF71KFXc

— Edward Snowden (@Snowden) April 25, 2016

So, the guy in the US government is upset that the public is more safe, and the guy that people want to accuse of being a traitor is proud of helping Americans to better protect themselves. Maybe we ought to reverse their roles...

---

VyprVPN from Golden Frog is the world's fastest highly-secure VPN.
Get 25% off VyprVPN now »

Filed Under: edward snowden, encryption, james clapper, nsa, sponsored post

USTR Finally Recognizes That The Internet Matters... And That Censorship, Site Blocking & Link Taxes Are Barriers

from the good-to-see dept

As part of our funding campaign for our coverage of encryption, we reached out to some companies that care about these issues to ask them to show their support. This post is sponsored by Golden Frog, a company dedicated to online privacy, security and freedom.

---

For many, many years we've hit pretty hard at the USTR (United States Trade Rep) for appearing to basically view trade and trade agreements solely through the lens of 20th century industry, without any recognition of the importance of startups and innovation -- especially on the internet. As such, many of the policies that the USTR has promoted through trade agreements seemed almost entirely focused on baking in and protecting potentially obsolete business models, and stifling innovation and competition. Many people have pointed this out over the years, but the USTR tends to spend most of its time with lobbyists and representatives from the big, old industries, rather than startups and innovators that are actually building the businesses of tomorrow. I mean, how else can you explain that the focus on internet related issues doesn't seem to change in trade agreements, despite massive changes in the actual tech ecosystem?

So it was at least marginally encouraging to see that the USTR actually recognizes internet and internet related issues as trade barriers in its new National Trade Estimate report (which clocks in at nearly 500 pages). The big (and important) headline, that was picked up by the press, was that the USTR (FINALLY!) is willing to recognize the Great Firewall of China and other internet censorship regimes as a "barrier to trade."

Over the past decade, China’s filtering of cross-border Internet traffic has posed a significant burden to foreign suppliers, hurting both Internet sites themselves, and users who often depend on them for their businesses. Outright blocking of websites appears to have worsened over the past year, with 8 of the top 25 most trafficked global sites now blocked in China. Much of the blocking appears arbitrary; for example, a major home improvement site in the United States, which would appear wholly innocuous, is typical of sites likely swept up by the Great Firewall.

China has hit back against this claim, arguing that the Great Firewall is not about trade barriers, but "about national security," which is a somewhat laughable claim.

Still, as an article by Matt Schruers at the Disruptive Competition Project notes, the document actually goes much further in calling out other bad internet practices in other countries. For example, it calls out new rules in India that undermine intermediary liability protections and lead to censorship by ISPs:

India’s 2011 Information Technology Rules govern the liability of internet intermediaries (internet service providers (ISPs), hosting services, search engines, social networks, online forums, and other web platforms) for content on their networks. U.S. stakeholders have raised concerns that these rules are vague and inconsistently applied, and do not provide safeguards against abuse of the process. Any citizen can complain that certain content is “disparaging” or “harmful,” and intermediaries must respond by removing that content within 36 hours. Failure to act, even in the absence of a court order, can lead to liability for the intermediary. Such strict rules encourage over-compliance with takedown notices, causing intermediaries to remove content that may not be illegal. Foreign companies providing internet services in India are forced to choose between needlessly censoring their customers and subjecting themselves to the possibility of legal action.

It calls out countries like Pakistan for establishing site-blocking regimes that have resulted in YouTube and WordPress being completely blocked in the country:

Pakistan has blocked access to websites deemed to be blasphemous or immoral, including YouTube, which has been blocked since September 2012, and WordPress, which was temporarily blocked for several days in 2015 with little explanation from the authorities. YouTube reopened in January 2016 after Google created a country specific site which allows the government of Pakistan to request the removal or blockage of content. Pakistan has also intermittently blocked both Facebook and Twitter, while Facebook is routinely asked by the government to censor material deemed to be blasphemous.

It's also really good -- if fairly surprising -- to see the USTR note that the EU's "Digital Single Market" plans with things like increased intermediary liability could result in serious problems for free expression. Even better, the USTR recognizes that these moves to increase intermediary liability are almost entirely about legacy companies trying to shackle innovators, competitors and upstarts:

The Commission is simultaneously exploring whether to increase online intermediaries’ network and system management responsibilities as they pertain to illegal content and to require some platforms to more proactively monitor and filter such content (i.e., a “duty of care”), despite logistical difficulties and implications for free expression. Consequently, the Commission may eventually introduce a new regulatory regime to more tightly control platforms’ behaviors. The e-Commerce Directive 2000/31/EC currently grants limitations of liability to intermediary service providers.

Both these initiatives appear motivated, at least in part, by legacy businesses struggling to compete against the efficiencies provided by Internet-based commerce. This underscores the risk that even well-intentioned goals can, if implemented through heavy-handed regulation, or even just threat thereof, seriously undermine innovative business development and hurt the EU’s own efforts to inject more dynamism into its markets.

The USTR also calls out the ridiculous "Google tax" concept, also known as "link taxes" or "ancillary copyright" that have been seen in a variety of European countries, that would require sites that aggregate and link to news sites to pay those news sites for the privilege of sending them traffic. As the USTR rightly notes, this is clearly a trade barrier in the free flow of information:

Over the past several years, publishers in Europe have been advocating for the right to impose fees for the right to link to content published online. This effort appears to target in particular news aggregators that index stories and allow users to more conveniently find and access such content by the inclusion in search results of headlines or other extracts of the stories that the underlying publisher typically offers, without charge (e.g., supported by advertising) on its own website. Aggregators, including but not limited to U.S. service suppliers, have pushed back against such requirements, arguing that that they help drive traffic to publishing sites, and therefore help increase viewership and revenue, and should not be required to pay for a valuable service they provide. After Belgium and Germany attempted to impose such requirements, some aggregators simply dropped links to sites seeking additional compensation, causing publishers in those countries to opt out of requiring such payments after they evaluated the economic impact. In late 2014, however, Spain passed a similar measure called “Canon AEDE,” which, unlike in Germany and Belgium, made such payments mandatory (i.e., publishers could not opt out of requiring payments for links). As a result of this new law, many aggregators, including from the United States, simply pulled out of the Spanish market. A 2015 study by the Spanish Association of Publishers of Periodical Publications (AEEP) revealed that publishers’ revenue decreased and that many smaller publishers, which had depended on aggregators, were disproportionately affected. Since parts of the EU publishing industry are advocating adopting similar measures EU-wide, which will likely have a negative effect on many U.S. stakeholders, this issue bears careful monitoring, as well as stepped-up engagement with the EU to ensure that innovative business models are beneficial to EU content suppliers themselves.

Of course, there's lots of other stuff in the report that is quite concerning (I mean, this is the USTR we're talking about). Ridiculously, some of it even contradicts the points we've raised above. For example, the report repeatedly talks about stronger copyright enforcement and encourages more actions against those who link to infringing content. There's obviously a big disconnect here within the USTR -- in that it doesn't seem to realize that whining about intellectual property in these situations just gives various countries exactly the cover they need to leave in place the ideas discussed above. Don't want your Great Firewall to look like it's about censoring dissent? Just claim it's necessary to stop piracy online! Still want to tax links? Just explain how it's an anti-piracy measure to make sure links are tracked and evaluated to make sure their content is not infringing!

So, yes, this is still the same old USTR on the one hand. But, in the past, the USTR just focused on issues like that, not realizing how it was playing into the hands of others who looked to control and censor the internet, and to stifle innovation. At least now, for the first time, at least someone at the USTR is recognizing how important issues like censorship, site blocking, intermediary liability and the free flow of information online may be. Given how long it's taken, it may feel a bit late, but it's at least an encouraging step in the right direction.

Hopefully, it means the attitudes within the USTR are shifting and it may actually start to focus on the issues that are important in keeping the internet open globally.

---

VyprVPN from Golden Frog is the world's fastest highly-secure VPN.
Get 25% off VyprVPN now »

---

Filed Under: censorship, sponsored post, ustr

Maybe The NSA Has Already Broken Every Security System, Not By Hacking Computers, But By Hacking The Entire Industry

from the this-is-just-a-thought-experiment,-right?-right??? dept

As part of our funding campaign for our coverage of encryption, we reached out to some companies that care about these issues to ask them to show their support. This post is sponsored by Golden Frog, a company dedicated to online privacy, security and freedom.

---

Recently, there have been plenty of Techdirt stories about the authorities in the US and elsewhere making increasingly strident attacks on encryption, with claims that things are "going dark," and that Silicon Valley is foolishly aiding terrorism thanks to its "obsession" with privacy etc. etc. Against that background, it's easy to get swept up by a narrative that pits us, the freedom fighters, against them, the dark forces of repression, and to celebrate the occasional wins that come our way.

But suppose all this is just for show -- not so much security theater, but as privacy theater to divert our attention from what is really happening. That's one possible conclusion that cynics might draw after watching a brilliant presentation made back in 2014, and highlighted recently by a post on Boing Boing that includes a video of the talk and a link to the slides (pdf):

In 2014, Poul-Henning Kamp, a prolific and respected contributor to many core free/open projects gave the closing keynote at the Free and Open Source Developers' European Meeting (FOSDEM) in Belgium, and he did something incredibly clever: he presented a status report on a fictional NSA project (ORCHESTRA) whose mission was to make it cheaper to spy on the Internet without breaking any laws or getting any warrants.

NSA's fictional operation achieves that by exploiting the way the computing industry works, with different challenges dealt with using completely legal means. For example, the "ABBA" program handles the following situation:

Somebody comes up with an idea that would make [communications intelligence] collection harder and/or more expensive

The novel solution is for the NSA to exploit "raw capitalism," and to "throw money at the problem" by playing the role of a friendly local venture capitalist that wants to turn the idea into a company. At the same time, the NSA finds a relevant patent held by one of its "friends" in the industry, and then asks those friends to send around their patent lawyers to the new startup it is funding, to get it shut down in a perfectly non-suspicious way.

The "QUEEN" program to tame the potentially dangerous world of open source is even more subtle. The NSA takes advantage of the open development process to place its own people within the system, so that they can subvert it using the following:

FUD

Play GPL vs BSD card

"Bikeshed" discussions

Soak mental bandwidth with bogus crypto proposals

A key technique is to exploit the fact that free software is based on trust, and that once a coder is trusted as a result of building up a record of good work, nothing they do thereafter is subject to much scrutiny. That phenomenon potentially allows patches with strategic weaknesses to be included in key projects with massive knock-on effects. Kamp dubs the exploitation of this fact the "BOYS" program, whose "crown jewel" is OpenSSL. The impact of the "Heartbleed" vulnerability discovered in OpenSSL two years ago was so great and convenient that many wondered at the time whether it had been placed there by the NSA. That's just one indication that Kamp's witty re-imagining of recent computer history is not so far-fetched.

Even assuming -- hoping -- that Kamp's talk is largely a thought experiment, it has an importance that goes beyond its undoubted entertainment value. By turning everything on its head, and showing how easy it would be for the NSA -- or other well-funded agencies -- to subvert today's computing industry in perfectly legal ways, it provides an important warning about what's wrong and what we need to do to address it. Unfortunately, as Kamp himself admits in his keynote speech, the problems are so deep and fundamental that fixing them won't be easy. But at least, thanks to him, we have been reminded that they exist, which is a start.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and +glynmoody on Google+

---

VyprVPN from Golden Frog is the world's fastest highly-secure VPN.
Get 25% off VyprVPN now »

Filed Under: nsa, sponsored post

California Lawmakers Manage To Turn Encrypted Phone Ban Legislation Into Encryption Backdoor Legislation

from the your-tax-dollars-malfunctioning dept

As part of our funding campaign for our coverage of encryption, we reached out to some companies that care about these issues to ask them to show their support. This post is sponsored by Golden Frog, a company dedicated to online privacy, security and freedom.

---

The California Assembly has been tinkering with Assemblyman Jim Cooper's smartphone encryption ban… and for the worse. First noticed by EFF Staff Attorney Andrew Crocker, legislators have turned the proposed ban into something that accomplishes the same goals without actually "banning" anything.

Rather than forbid the sale of smartphones that can't be decrypted by their manufacturers, the new wording will direct fines at manufacturers who can't decrypt phones upon receipt of a warrant or other court order. (added/altered wording in bold)

(b) A smartphone manufactured on or after January 1, 2017, that is not capable of being decrypted and unlocked by its manufacturer or its operating system provider shall subject the manufacturer or operating system provider of a smartphone sold or leased in California on or after January 1, 2017, shall be subject to a civil penalty of two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) for each smartphone sold or leased in California if instance in which the manufacturer or operating system provider of the smartphone knew at the time of the sale or lease that the smartphone was not capable of being decrypted and unlocked by the manufacturer or its operating system provider. is unable to decrypt the contents of the smartphone pursuant to a state court order. A manufacturer or operating system provider who pays a civil penalty imposed pursuant to this subdivision shall not pass on any portion of that penalty to purchasers of smartphones. This civil penalty shall not preclude the imposition of any other penalty pursuant to law.

So, rather than an encrypted smartphone ban, it's an encryption backdoor mandate. In order to sell phones in California, manufacturers will have to make less secure versions specifically for that market -- ones where they hold the keys and are subject to law enforcement demands for a spare set.

This is bad for Californians looking for more secure phone options and bad for cellphone manufacturers, who have zero interest in acting as encryption key repositories. And the altered wording would allow the state to pursue manufacturers that have never sold a phone directly to Californians. Third-party retailers can still offer encrypted phones to customers without fear of reprisal as doing so would not run afoul of the proposed law. Instead, it would be the manufacturers' fault if phones without encryption backdoors were sold in the state.

The only way for phone manufacturers to ensure they comply with this law would be to stop offering encryption they can't crack, as it's inevitable that California-based retailers will still be able to find customers interested in devices without manufacturer/operating system backdoors.

This is stupid, reactionary lawmaking somehow managing to become even more stupid and reactionary after receiving input from other legislators. If this level of stupidity remains in full force, the end result could be Californians buying their cell phones directly from the state -- much in the way some states handle alcohol sales.

---

VyprVPN from Golden Frog is the world's fastest highly-secure VPN.
Learn more about VyprVPN »

Filed Under: backdoor, california, encryption, sponsored post

Foursquare COO Says Small Businesses 'Take It On the Chin' When It Comes to Patent Trolling

from the trolls-and-tolls dept

Call them patent assertion entities, non-practicing entities, or, in the words of John Oliver, raccoons, but whatever you do, don’t call them small inventors. Patent trolls do not create jobs or products, and their profits certainly are not small. In an effort to clear the air of all the misinformation going around by the patent troll lobby, we spent the day with Jeff Glueck, COO of tech startup Foursquare, as he and other Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) and Engine Advocacy startup members met with members of Congress and their staff to describe his many encounters with patent trolls. A frontrunner in the industry, Glueck has worked in leadership positions at various tech companies, such as mobile software startup Skyfire and now Foursquare. So it should come as no surprise that he needs two hands to count all of his encounters with frivolous patent lawsuits. As he describes it:

The typical troll process is to shake down small companies or startups with the expectation that business owners will settle rather than endure the cost of fighting frivolous claims in court. It's sad when you work hard to create real inventions and a group of lawyers with a vague patent — that never should have been granted in the first place — is able to derail your business with a groundless claim. ... Small businesses take it on the chin. Last year, patent trolls targeted small businesses and tech companies about 80 percent of the time. Now, that number is approaching 90 percent. You may as well call it an all-out assault on the innovation economy.

In fact, 2015 is on track to be a record-breaking year for the patent troll lobby. Comparatively speaking, patent trolls have filled over 11 percent more lawsuits this year than at this point of 2014. Even worse, they are attacking tech startups more than ever before. Patent trolls traditionally have targeted small businesses that are least equipped to defend themselves.

For those select small businesses courageous enough to fight back, the costs are steep financially and the reward is purely ideological. It can take over a million dollars and three years to defend your company going all the way to trial against a troll. Few small businesses or startups have that luxury. And that’s only counting legal fees and legal costs. For small business, a bigger cost can be the time and distraction, or the way that customers and partners may shy away from doing business with you while under a patent assault. As CEO at Skyfire, Jeff saw a baseless patent troll suit against his first major telco customer delay launch of Skyfire’s mobile network software by 15 months. With a deployment on hold, Skyfire couldn’t get paid, and had to keep the company alive at a cost of $15 million dollars until ultimately the troll was defeated in court. Now, in his role at Foursquare, he sees the company dealing with five trolls at any one time, and roughly a million dollars annually in costs dealing with trolls:

That’s nearly ten engineers we would hire tomorrow, but instead that money is going to lawyers. As a country, our leadership in software is a huge potential job growth engine. We can have companies focus on improving their products to grow users and revenues globally, or we can have an economy derailed by everyone suing everyone.

The current climate is daunting for tech entrepreneurs, and Glueck is focused on a solution. In this case, it’s legislative — the U.S. House of Representatives Innovation Act, which is slated for a floor vote this month:

We’re fans of H.R. 9. We need to put a stop to the corrupt process of venue shopping – it’s un-American. Overly burdensome upfront discovery is being used as a weapon and fishing expedition to force companies into settling regardless of the merits of the case.  Narrowing early discovery will take away a weapon for trolls. An automatic stay for innocent users will also help to protect innocent small businesses – from restaurants to tech startups – who just simply use a product. They don’t make it.

Ahead of the upcoming crucial vote for the tech community, contact your member of Congress and urge him or her to support innovative startups like Foursquare by reforming America’s patent litigation system. The patent troll lobby is big and its pockets are deep; don’t let these extortionists get away with another cent.

               

Filed Under: innovation act, jeff glueck, patent trolls, sponsored post
Companies: foursquare

Here's Why Everyone is Supporting Patent Reform (And You Should, Too)

from the call-to-action dept

We're just shy of the midway point of 2015, but already this year both the U.S. House and Senate have taken huge steps to end legalized extortion in America. This could be the year we finally drive patent trolls back under the bridge.

Last week, a bi-partisan group of senators introduced S. 1137, the Protecting American Talent and Entrepreneurship (PATENT) Act, to hold these bad actors accountable for their frivolous lawsuits and baseless threats. Patent trolling has become such a problem that this diverse group of Republicans and Democrats — Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, Ranking Member Patrick Leahy, and Sens. John Cornyn, Charles Schumer, Orrin Hatch, Amy Klobuchar and Mike Lee — joined together under the umbrella of a fair, common sense patent reform bill.

So far, the legislation has been publically supported by companies across most sectors of the economy, The New York Times editorial board and President Obama. Even comedy host John Oliver joined the fight against patent trolls, dedicating an entire segment to this critical issue.

According to Julie Samuels, executive director and president of the board for Engine Advocacy:

It's no surprise that patent trolling continues to be a huge problem, and one that disproportionally affects startups, inventors, creators, and the public interest. A very high percentage of startups who have received a demand letter reported 'significant operational impact' in the form of deferred hiring, change in strategy, cost ­cutting, reductions in personnel, decreased valuation or total shutdown. This is not how the patent system is supposed to work.

Today, the Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing on the PATENT Act, with testimonies from Samuels and Mark Chandler of Cisco Systems, Kevin Rhodes of 3M Company, Diane K. Lettelleir of JCPenny Corporation and Henry Hadad of Bristol-Myers Squibb.

The Senate bill comes on the heels of H.R. 9, The Innovation Act, re-introduced in February by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), which currently has a bi-partisan group of more than 20 co-sponsors. Both pieces of legislation will close legal loopholes used by those who abuse the patent system. The only difference this time around is that the Senate is joining the fight against patent trolls. During the last congress in 2013 the same legislation passed in the House by an overwhelming bipartisan majority, but was not taken up by the Senate.

Remember, politics is a "squeaky wheel" process and policymakers will only club the trolls if they hear from voters like you. Join the Innovation Movement — the Consumer Electronics Association's grassroots campaign advocating for public policies spurring the innovation and startup economy — in urging Congress to pass these patent litigation reform bills. By filling out the action box below or by texting the word “trolls” to 52886 you can tell your members of Congress to shut down the patent abuse racket!

Filed Under: patent act, patent reform, patent trolls, sponsored post

It's Move Your Domain Day: Join The AMA, Help Support EFF

from the ask-them-anything dept

As we noted yesterday, today is Move Your Domain Day at Namecheap, long-time supporters of Techdirt and a free and open internet. To kick things off, Namecheap founder and CEO Richard Kirkendall is doing a Reddit AMA starting at 8am PST today. Head on over to check it out and submit your questions — we think you'll agree that they have a great perspective on copyright, free speech, privacy, net neutrality and lots of other topics that we discuss here at Techdirt.

If you want to support the EFF, get yourself a new registrar, or both, then today is the day. Since 2011, Move Your Domain Day has raised nearly $250,000 for EFF, and this year continues the trend. Here's how it works:

• Starting January 27th, you can transfer your .com, .net, .biz, .org or .info domain to Namecheap for only $3.98 (plus $0.18 ICANN fee where applicable), using coupon code NC15MYDD
• When you transfer, they'll add another year to your domain free. Any shared hosting package (Value, Professional or Ultimate) will be 50% off when you use coupon code MYDDHOST15
• For every domain transferred or hosting plan purchased, up to 10,000, Namecheap will donate $0.50 to EFF. The donation amount goes up to $1.00 per domain/hosting plan if they exceed 10,000. And if they exceed 20,000 domains transferred/hosting plans purchased, Namecheap will donate $1.50 for each product purchased.

Visit the website to move your domain and help spread the word.

Filed Under: ama, eff, move your domain day, sponsored post
Companies: namecheap

Tomorrow Is Move Your Domain Day: Support The EFF And Get A Year For Free

from the good-deal-for-a-good-cause dept

If you've been a Techdirt reader since the days of SOPA/PIPA, you probably know that Namecheap is a big supporter of a free and open internet, and was one of the first registrars to speak out against the bills. More recently, they've been big supporters of Techdirt directly, providing matching funds to our crowdfunding campaign for net neutrality reporting and sponsoring our sitewide switch to HTTPS. In October, they were one of only two companies that got a perfect score on the EFF's ranking of service providers that stand up to copyright and trademark bullies, and many of us here at Techdirt use them for all our personal domain registration needs.

Now we're happy to team up with Namecheap and promote their latest campaign: Move Your Domain Day, happening tomorrow. It's a continuation of something they started with Reddit users in 2011, which so far has raised nearly $250,000 for the EFF. Here's how it works:

• Starting January 27th, you can transfer your .com, .net, .biz, .org or .info domain to Namecheap for only $3.98 (plus $0.18 ICANN fee where applicable), using coupon code NC15MYDD
• When you transfer, they'll add another year to your domain free. Any shared hosting package (Value, Professional or Ultimate) will be 50% off when you use coupon code MYDDHOST15
• For every domain transferred or hosting plan purchased, up to 10,000, Namecheap will donate $0.50 to EFF. The donation amount goes up to $1.00 per domain/hosting plan if they exceed 10,000. And if they exceed 20,000 domains transferred/hosting plans purchased, Namecheap will donate $1.50 for each product purchased.

Visit the website to learn more and help spread the word. Also, stay tuned for a Reddit AMA with Namecheap tomorrow at 8am PST.

Filed Under: eff, move your domain day, sponsored post
Companies: namecheap

13 People Tweeting To Urge The Senate To #FixPatents

from the enough-with-the-trolls dept

This post originally appeared on the CEA Blog.

Following the recent one year anniversary of the House passage of the Innovation Act — a bill that would have stopped patent trolls from suing tech entrepreneurs but was ultimately blocked in the Senate — CEA highlights the top Twitter accounts covering the issue and the harm that patent trolls have on small businesses across the U.S.
 
1.      @juliepsamuels
 
Previously with the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Executive Director of Engine Advocacy, Julie is arguably the top voice covering patent reform inside and outside the social media realm. Her blend of legal analysis and witty commentary breaks down the patent troll issue in a comprehensive, digestible form.

Alice v CLS & following cases are incredibly promising, but we still need legislation to #fixpatents. Thoughts: http://t.co/ws5YNuexdq

— Julie Samuels (@juliepsamuels) October 22, 2014

2.      @mainstpatents
 
The Main Street Patent Coalition is a non-partisan group of organizations dedicated to clubbing patent trolls. With members ranging from the National Retail Federation to the American Gaming Association, their tweets highlight why common sense reform is critical to stopping patent abuse.

If trolls continue to shake down small businesses w/o consequences or costs, these scams will continue. We must #FixPatents.

— Main St. Patents (@MainStPatents) October 3, 2014

3.      @Charles_Duan
 
As the Director of Patent Reform at Public Knowledge, Charles knows a thing or two about how patent trolls have used the current legal system to their advantage.

Patents should be written for people, not for lawyers https://t.co/z8SAV2RyhA #patentreform #fixpatents

— Charles Duan (@charles_duan) September 30, 2014

4.      @Nafierce
 
CEA’s Innovation Movement is keeping the pressure on the Senate by reaching out to tech enthusiasts across the country to tell their Senators to take action – since trolls cost the U.S. economy $1.5 billion every week! NYC’s Nafees is a top advocate helping to tackle this issue.

Tell the Senate to focus on patent reform during the lame duck: http://t.co/szqyuKoBF1 Sign the petition. #fixpatents

— Nafees Nuruddin (@Nafierce) October 22, 2014

5.      @leechcheng
 
Lee, Newegg’s Chief Legal Officer, vowed to never settle with a patent troll – and so far, he has a perfect record fighting them in court. Because getting the Senate to #FixPatents is something Lee is passionate about, he uses Twitter as tool to spread that message.

Tell the Senate to #ClubtheTrolls and pass patent litigation reform http://t.co/p3ybA5LNGA #fixpatents. Text 52886.

— Lee Cheng (@leechcheng) April 29, 2014

6.      @PatentProgress
 
Patent Progress, off-shoot of the Computer and Communications Industry Association, advocates for smart laws regulating the digital economy. When not trying to save the U.S. economy from patent trolls, this Twitter account often features comics and videos finding humor in the legalized extortion that is patent trolling.

[COMIC] A Patent Troll Explains the Drop in Suits (featuring the @CEA troll!) http://t.co/If2qTk5CDa #fixpatents pic.twitter.com/cdeVN7jycG

— Patent Progress (@PatentProgress) October 29, 2014

7.      @HouseJudiciary
 
If you’re looking for insight about the Innovation Act in 140 characters, go straight to the source. Representative Bob Goodlatte, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, sponsored the Innovation Act and helped to lead its charge out of committee in 2013.

#OTD: 1908 - Henry Ford intro'd Model T; sued by #patenttroll! #InnovationAct helps reduce frivolous lawsuits. https://t.co/99A06QUNPB

— House Judiciary Cmte (@HouseJudiciary) October 1, 2014

8.      @jeffjohnroberts
 
Both a lawyer and policy reporter, Jeff offers great insight on the legal loopholes that enable patent trolls to extort tech entrepreneurs.

Want to invest in wearables or online video? Get ready to pay Intellectual Ventures' patent troll tax: https://t.co/7vXHYmvkki

— Jeff Roberts (@jeffjohnroberts) November 4, 2014

9.      @toddmoore
 
Todd founded the White Noise app and quickly learned what it means to fight a patent troll when his innovative product began to receive recognition. Patent trolls go after successful startups that are least able to defend themselves, and Todd has taken on a personal crusade to see their racket put to a stop.

Tell the Senate to actually do something this time w/ patent reform: http://t.co/jK6lOY5Bzr Sign the petition. #fixpatents

— Todd Moore (@toddmoore) October 22, 2014

10.  @techdirt
 
Techdirt's own Mike Masnick consistently provides timely coverage of extortionist patent troll lawsuits.

Rackspace Helps Kill A Patent Troll: Rotating Your Smartphone Is No Longer Infringing http://t.co/k9Cihy9GKr

— techdirt (@techdirt) September 25, 2014

11.  @binarybits
 
Timothy has a knack for explaining complex issues affecting the tech community in a short, concise manner – so it should come as no surprise that he is now serving as the senior editor of Vox.com and uses Twitter to succinctly breakdown the issue of patent litigation reform.

A lot of businesses targeted by patent trolls are so small that the costs of mounting a defense can bankrupt them.

— Timothy B. Lee (@binarybits) October 9, 2014

12.  @AppsAlliance
 
With members ranging from Intel to Lyft, the App Developers Alliance supports entrepreneurs by advocating for smart public policies. Their Twitter account is a great resource for all things tech policy, especially the importance of patent litigation reform.

It’s the shadiest business I've ever seen & they’re picking on the small guys, says @ToddMoore who was sued by a #PatentTroll. #FTCHangout

— Apps Alliance (@AppsAlliance) September 24, 2014

13.  @ArsLaw
 
Last, but certainly not least, Ars Technica’s Twitter account dedicated to covering the intersection of technology, law and policy features the latest articles from Joe Mullin, whom we dub “patent troll editor-in-chief.”
 

NetApp sticks biggest “patent troll” with $1.4M fee sanction http://t.co/tiZl98StqR by @joemullin

— Ars Tech Policy (@ArsLaw) October 2, 2014

---

The Innovation Movement, sponsored by the Consumer Electronics Association, unites those who believe innovation is critical to American global leadership and economic growth. The Innovation Movement uses grassroots advocacy tools to support smart public policies, like patent litigation reform, that foster startups and innovation. To learn more about the Innovation Movement’s work fighting patent trolls, visit trollticker.com, follow on Twitter @imovement and like Innovation Movement on Facebook.

Filed Under: innovation act, patent reform, patents, sponsored post