Today, on the margins of the G20, a group of public and private sector leaders launched the Brazil Restoration & Bioeconomy Finance Coalition (BRB

Brazil Restoration & Bioeconomy Finance Coalition Launched to Mobilize $10 Billion for Forest Conservation and Bioeconomy by 2030 | Business Wire

The Cybersecurity Coalition is an organization that brings together a diverse group of stakeholders, including private companies,... Read more.

Cybersecurity Coalition - SDxCentral Directory

The election’s real winner, in third place with nearly 12 percent of the vote, was the new MK Party of former president Jacob Zuma, once an ANC stalwart.

South Africa elections sees poor ANC showing, will need coalition - The Washington Post

Voters appear to have punished the former liberation movement for years of decline.

South Africa heads for coalition as ANC support plunges | Reuters

The ANC&#x27;s free-fall, the return of Jacob Zuma and a new era of coalitions.

ANC seeks coalition partners after South Africa election results

Political parties&#x27; share of the vote will determine the number of seats they get in the National Assembly, which then elects the next president.

South Africa heads for coalition as ANC set for big fall | Nation

Election results from South Africa have left investors swinging between anxiety over the different permutations that coalition may take and lingering hopes that whatever it is will result in a market-friendly government.

In 'no-man's-land': Hope and angst grip SA markets as coalition era dawns | Business

Investors in South Africa had positioned for an election outcome where the ruling African National Congress could comfortably govern in coalition with a smaller party. But projections hinting at a significant erosion in ANC support have rattled those expectations and unleashed a flood of ...

ZAR/USD: Rands Drops as South Africa Election Forecast Shows ANC Decline - Bloomberg

Early figures put former president Jacob Zuma’s new uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party in the lead on the provincial ballot, with the majority of the remainder split between the ANC, the IFP and the DA.

DA's Pappas says early indications point to a coalition in KZN

If the ANC doesn’t win a majority, how it chooses to form a coalition will be key.

South Africa Election: Could the ANC Form a Coalition?

Coalition

coalition

**ZUG, Switzerland, December 17th, 2024/Chainwire/--**Atom Accelerator(AADAO), a governance-mandated DAO of the Cosmos Hub, has announced $250,000 funding support to Confio for the continued development and maintenance of CosmWasm throughout 2025. This funding is being matched by Neutron, the integrated application network in Cosmos, with a further $250,000. CosmWasm, developed by Confio since 2020, powers smart contract functionality for nearly 100 chains, enabling developers to create decentralized applications (dApps) that operate seamlessly across the interchain. In the past 12 months, contracts built with CosmWasm in the Cosmos ecosystem generated over $5.7 million in fees. Despite its widespread adoption, the Interchain Foundation has thus far been the primary funder for the development and maintenance of Cosmwasm. Following organizational restructuring at the Interchain Foundation (ICF), Confio’s funding for the year 2025 has been drastically reduced. “CosmWasm is a critical resource for the Cosmos ecosystem, underpinning many of the applications and chains that drive value to the interchain,” said AADAO contributors. “This proposal represents a collaborative effort to ensure its longevity and continued impact.” The contributions form the foundation of the CosmWasm Coalition initiative aimed at raising the approximately $2 million required to maintain and develop CosmWasm in 2025. The funds will enable Confio’s team to continue delivering on critical functions, including security research and incident response, feature development and performance optimization, documentation and developer support, SDK compatibility maintenance, and testing and developer experience (DevX) tooling improvements. This initiative builds on the Cosmos Hub’s previous support for CosmWasm, including the successful allocation of $1.25 million under Proposal #103 in March 2023. The Cosmos Hub relies on CosmWasm for permissioned smart contract capabilities, making its continued maintenance essential to the Hub’s operations and future upgrades. Many consumer chains utilizing the Hub’s Interchain Security have built their infrastructure on CosmWasm, making the framework vital to sustaining and expanding the ecosystem. By committing to early funding, the Cosmos Hub secures priority consideration for its technical needs and those of its consumer chains in Confio’s development roadmap. By taking the first step in committing funding, AADAO and Neutron hope that their initiative will encourage additional contributions from other ecosystem stakeholders, ensuring the financial stability of CosmWasm and the broader interchain ecosystem. About Atom Accelerator DAO (AADAO) Atom Accelerator DAO (AADAO) is a governance-mandated DAO of the Cosmos Hub. They have been formed and mandated to drive value for the Cosmos Hub & ATOM, supporting initiatives that either directly create economic impact or produce value that can drive its growth. From this, their current primary mandates are public grants & venture grants. Atom Accelerator’s venture arm strategically invests in promising early-stage web3 founders and startups both within and outside of the Cosmos Hub’s ecosystem. As experts within the Cosmos ecosystem, Atom Accelerator offers expertise, guidance, and support while driving value toward ATOM. Website Contact Marketing & Comms Lead Mr. T Atom Accelerator DAO press@atomaccelerator.com This story was distributed as a release by Chainwire under HackerNoon’s Business Blogging Program. Learn more about the program here **ZUG, Switzerland, December 17th, 2024/Chainwire/--**Atom Accelerator(AADAO), a governance-mandated DAO of the Cosmos Hub, has announced $250,000 funding support to Confio for the continued development and maintenance of CosmWasm throughout 2025. This funding is being matched by Neutron, the integrated application network in Cosmos, with a further $250,000. CosmWasm, developed by Confio since 2020, powers smart contract functionality for nearly 100 chains, enabling developers to create decentralized applications (dApps) that operate seamlessly across the interchain. In the past 12 months, contracts built with CosmWasm in the Cosmos ecosystem generated over $5.7 million in fees. Despite its widespread adoption, the Interchain Foundation has thus far been the primary funder for the development and maintenance of Cosmwasm. Following organizational restructuring at the Interchain Foundation (ICF), Confio’s funding for the year 2025 has been drastically reduced. “CosmWasm is a critical resource for the Cosmos ecosystem, underpinning many of the applications and chains that drive value to the interchain,” said AADAO contributors. “This proposal represents a collaborative effort to ensure its longevity and continued impact.” “CosmWasm is a critical resource for the Cosmos ecosystem, underpinning many of the applications and chains that drive value to the interchain,” said AADAO contributors. “This proposal represents a collaborative effort to ensure its longevity and continued impact.” The contributions form the foundation of the CosmWasm Coalition initiative aimed at raising the approximately $2 million required to maintain and develop CosmWasm in 2025. The funds will enable Confio’s team to continue delivering on critical functions, including security research and incident response, feature development and performance optimization, documentation and developer support, SDK compatibility maintenance, and testing and developer experience (DevX) tooling improvements. This initiative builds on the Cosmos Hub’s previous support for CosmWasm, including the successful allocation of $1.25 million under Proposal #103 in March 2023. The Cosmos Hub relies on CosmWasm for permissioned smart contract capabilities, making its continued maintenance essential to the Hub’s operations and future upgrades. Many consumer chains utilizing the Hub’s Interchain Security have built their infrastructure on CosmWasm, making the framework vital to sustaining and expanding the ecosystem. By committing to early funding, the Cosmos Hub secures priority consideration for its technical needs and those of its consumer chains in Confio’s development roadmap. By taking the first step in committing funding, AADAO and Neutron hope that their initiative will encourage additional contributions from other ecosystem stakeholders, ensuring the financial stability of CosmWasm and the broader interchain ecosystem. About Atom Accelerator DAO (AADAO) Atom Accelerator DAO (AADAO) is a governance-mandated DAO of the Cosmos Hub. They have been formed and mandated to drive value for the Cosmos Hub & ATOM, supporting initiatives that either directly create economic impact or produce value that can drive its growth. From this, their current primary mandates are public grants & venture grants. Atom Accelerator’s venture arm strategically invests in promising early-stage web3 founders and startups both within and outside of the Cosmos Hub’s ecosystem. As experts within the Cosmos ecosystem, Atom Accelerator offers expertise, guidance, and support while driving value toward ATOM. Website Website Website Contact Marketing & Comms Lead Mr. T Atom Accelerator DAO press@atomaccelerator.com This story was distributed as a release by Chainwire under HackerNoon’s Business Blogging Program. Learn more about the program here This story was distributed as a release by Chainwire under HackerNoon’s Business Blogging Program. Learn more about the program here here here

Atom Accelerator Puts Weight Behind CosmWasm Coalition, Offers Matching Funding With Neutron

Atom Accelerator stavlja težinu iza koalicije CosmWasm, nudi finansiranje u skladu sa Neutronom

Atom Accelerator lægger vægt bag CosmWasm Coalition, tilbyder matchende finansiering med neutron

Ο επιταχυντής Atom βάζει βάρος πίσω από το CosmWasm Coalition, προσφέρει αντίστοιχη χρηματοδότηση με νετρόνιο

Atom Accelerator respalda la coalición CosmWasm y ofrece financiación equivalente a la de Neutron

Atom Azeleragailuak pisua jartzen du CosmWasm koalizioaren atzean, eta Neutroiarekin pareko finantzaketa eskaintzen du

L'accélérateur Atom soutient la coalition CosmWasm et propose un financement de contrepartie avec Neutron

O Atom Accelerator pon peso detrás da Coalición CosmWasm e ofrece financiamento equivalente con Neutron

מאיץ האטום שם משקל מאחורי קואליציית CosmWasm, מציע מימון תואם עם ניוטרון

Atom AcceleratorがCosmWasm連合を支援し、Neutronにマッチング資金を提供

Atom Accelerator coloca peso por trás da Coalizão CosmWasm e oferece financiamento correspondente com Neutron

அணு முடுக்கி CosmWasm கூட்டணிக்கு பின்னால் எடை போடுகிறது, நியூட்ரானுடன் பொருந்தக்கூடிய நிதியை வழங்குகிறது

Inilalagay ng Atom Accelerator ang Timbang sa Likod ng CosmWasm Coalition, Nag-aalok ng Pagtutugma ng Pagpopondo Sa Neutron

You can jump to any part of the United States International Cyberspace & Digital Policy Strategy here This part is 25 of 38. ACTION AREA 3: Advance Responsible State Behavior in Cyberspace and Counter Threats to Cyberspace and Critical Infrastructure by Building Coalitions and Engaging Partners At the UN and regional security bodies, the United States, along with its allies and partners, is working to advance responsible state behavior in cyberspace based on a UN General Assembly-endorsed framework, underpinned by the applicability of existing international law, adherence to globally accepted and voluntary norms of state behavior in peacetime, development and implementation of confidence-building measures to reduce the risk of conflict in cyberspace, and a commitment to building states’ capacities to implement the elements of the framework. Despite a global consensus on the framework for responsible behavior in cyberspace, the norms are not self-enforcing. Some states act in ways contrary to it. When a state engages in significant destructive, disruptive, or otherwise destabilizing malicious cyber activity contrary to the framework, responsible states must cooperate to hold that irresponsible state accountable. Digital solidarity in this context is demonstrated by sustained mutual support and coordinated campaigns. The United States and its partners share cyber threat information to help build resilience to and disrupt malicious activities; show solidarity to victims by helping respond to significant incidents, thereby signaling to adversaries they cannot isolate a target country through malicious operations; and ensure accountability for destructive, disruptive, and otherwise destabilizing cyber activities in concert with likeminded countries. The United States and some allies also have affirmed the application to cyberspace of their respective mutual defense treaty obligations. In addition, the Department of State and other federal agencies are working with allies and partners to disrupt ransomware and other criminal networks and safeguard democratic processes and institutions. Looking forward, the United States will continue efforts like these to advance responsible behavior in cyberspace, and counter threats to cyberspace and our critical infrastructure by building coalitions and engaging partners. Continue Reading Here. This post was originally published on May 6, 2024, by the U.S Department of State You can jump to any part of the United States International Cyberspace & Digital Policy Strategy here This part is 25 of 38. You can jump to any part of the United States International Cyberspace & Digital Policy Strategy here This part is 25 of 38. here ACTION AREA 3: Advance Responsible State Behavior in Cyberspace and Counter Threats to Cyberspace and Critical Infrastructure by Building Coalitions and Engaging Partners At the UN and regional security bodies, the United States, along with its allies and partners, is working to advance responsible state behavior in cyberspace based on a UN General Assembly-endorsed framework, underpinned by the applicability of existing international law, adherence to globally accepted and voluntary norms of state behavior in peacetime, development and implementation of confidence-building measures to reduce the risk of conflict in cyberspace, and a commitment to building states’ capacities to implement the elements of the framework. Despite a global consensus on the framework for responsible behavior in cyberspace, the norms are not self-enforcing. Some states act in ways contrary to it. When a state engages in significant destructive, disruptive, or otherwise destabilizing malicious cyber activity contrary to the framework, responsible states must cooperate to hold that irresponsible state accountable. Digital solidarity in this context is demonstrated by sustained mutual support and coordinated campaigns. The United States and its partners share cyber threat information to help build resilience to and disrupt malicious activities; show solidarity to victims by helping respond to significant incidents, thereby signaling to adversaries they cannot isolate a target country through malicious operations; and ensure accountability for destructive, disruptive, and otherwise destabilizing cyber activities in concert with likeminded countries. The United States and some allies also have affirmed the application to cyberspace of their respective mutual defense treaty obligations. In addition, the Department of State and other federal agencies are working with allies and partners to disrupt ransomware and other criminal networks and safeguard democratic processes and institutions. Looking forward, the United States will continue efforts like these to advance responsible behavior in cyberspace, and counter threats to cyberspace and our critical infrastructure by building coalitions and engaging partners. Continue Reading Here. Continue Reading Here . Here This post was originally published on May 6, 2024, by the U.S Department of State This post was originally published on May 6, 2024, by the U.S Department of State by the U.S Department of State

Global Coalition Unites to Combat Cyber Threats and Ensure Responsible State Behavior

FTC v. Amazon Court Filing, retrieved on Sep 26, 2023, is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 80 of 80. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here X. REQUEST FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE Plaintiffs request that this Court, as authorized by 15 U.S.C. § 53(b); 15 U.S.C. § 26; Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 35-32(a) and 42-110m; 10 M.R.S.A. § 1104; Maryland Commercial Law Code Ann. § 11-209; Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.777; Nev. Rev. Stat. §§ 598A.070 and 598A.160; N.J.S.A. 56:8-8, 56:8-11, 56:8-19, 56:9-6, 56:9-7, 56:9-10(a), and 56:9-12; New York Executive Law § 63(12); Oklahoma Statutes §§ 79-203 and 15-756.1; Oregon Revised Statutes 646.760 and 646.770; Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, 73 P.S. § 201-4, Pennsylvania common law antitrust doctrine, and the Commonwealth Attorneys Act, 71 P.S. § 732-204(c); R.I. Gen. Laws § 6-36-10; Wis. Stat. §§ 133.03, 133.16, and 133.17; and its own equitable powers, enter final judgment against Amazon, declaring, ordering, and adjudging: 1. that Amazon’s conduct violates Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a); that Amazon’s conduct violates Section 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2; that Amazon’s conduct violates the Connecticut Antitrust Act, General Statutes § 35-24 et seq., and the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110b et seq.; that Amazon’s conduct violates Section 1102 of the Maine Monopolies and Profiteering Law, 10 M.R.S.A. § 1102; that Amazon’s conduct violates the Maryland Antitrust Act, Maryland Commercial Law Code Ann. § 11-201 et seq.; that Amazon’s conduct violates the Michigan Antitrust Reform Act, Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.771 et seq.; that Amazon’s conduct violates the Nevada Unfair Trade Practices Act, Nev. Rev. Stat. § 598A.060; that Amazon’s conduct violates N.J.S.A. 56:8-1 to –227, and N.J.S.A. 56:9-1 to – 19; that Amazon’s conduct violates New York Executive Law § 63(12); that Amazon’s conduct violates the Oklahoma Antitrust Reform Act, 79 O.S. §§ 201, et seq., and the Oklahoma Consumer Protection Act, 15 O.S. §§ 751, et seq.; that Amazon’s conduct violates the Oregon Antitrust Law, Oregon Revised Statutes 646.705 to 646.836; that Amazon’s conduct violates the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, 73 P.S. § 201-3, and Pennsylvania common law antitrust doctrine; that Amazon’s conduct violates the Rhode Island Antitrust Act, R.I. Gen. Laws § 6-36-1, et seq.; that Amazon’s conduct violates Wis. Stat. § 133.03 et seq.; that Amazon is permanently enjoined from engaging in its unlawful conduct; that Amazon is permanently enjoined from engaging in similar or related conduct, or any conduct with the same or similar purpose and effect; any preliminary or permanent equitable relief, including but not limited to structural relief, necessary to redress and prevent recurrence of Amazon’s violations of the law, as alleged herein; 18. any preliminary or permanent equitable relief, including but not limited to structural relief, necessary to restore fair competition and remedy the harm to competition caused by Amazon’s violations of the law; 19. that the Court grant Plaintiff States equitable monetary relief pursuant to all applicable law; 20. that the Court grant Plaintiff States the costs of suit, including all available fees and costs; and 21. that the Court grant any additional relief the Court finds just and proper. About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 2:23-cv-01495 retrieved on October 2, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. ftc.gov

Multi-State Coalition Seeks Comprehensive Relief Against Amazon for Antitrust Violations 

The United States v. Meta Platforms Court Filing October 24, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 8 of 100. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here VI. DEFENDANTS 22. The Defendants in this action include Meta Platforms, Inc. (Meta Platforms), Instagram, LLC (Instagram), Meta Payments, Inc. (Meta Payments), and Meta Platforms Technologies, LLC (Meta Technologies) (collectively, Meta). 23. Defendant Meta Platforms is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Menlo Park, California. As relevant here, Meta Platforms, through itself or its subsidiaries, develops, markets, and operates Social Media Platforms and other internet-based Platforms and products including Facebook, Instagram, Messenger, and WhatsApp. Meta also develops, markets, and operates the VR Social Media Platform Horizon Worlds. 24. Meta Platforms transacts or has transacted business in this District, the Filing States, and throughout the United States. At all times material to this Complaint, acting alone or in concert with its subsidiaries (identified below), Meta Platforms has advertised, marketed, and distributed its Social Media Platforms to consumers throughout the United States. 25. Meta Platforms was formerly known as Facebook, Inc. until it changed its corporate name in October 2021. In 2004, Mark Zuckerberg founded the Social Media Platform The Facebook, while a student at Harvard University. At that time, Myspace was popular, along with websites like Friendster and Flickr. The Facebook spread among colleges via word of mouth and exclusive invitations and became more popular among young adults. Zuckerberg dropped out of Harvard to develop the Platform into a company, and it became known as Facebook. 26. Facebook’s popularity not only grew—it changed the entire landscape of the internet. In 2004, only 5% of U.S. adults used any social media platform. As of 2021, 69% of U.S. adults used Facebook alone. 27. Following the success of Facebook, Meta Platforms expanded through a series of acquisitions. On April 9, 2012, Meta Platforms purchased Instagram reportedly for $1 billion. Meta Platforms acquired Instagram in part because it believed that if Instagram grew to a large scale, it could be very disruptive to Facebook. 28. More importantly, Instagram was most popular among young users—a market where Meta was seeking to expand as Facebook’s primary audience aged and the Platform lost its “cool” factor. 29. By the end of 2016, Instagram grew to over 600 million users. By 2018, Instagram had revenues surpassing $10 billion, and it has been estimated to be valued at over $100 billion. An estimated 62% of teens in the United States regularly use Instagram. 30. Meta Platforms has also expanded into virtual reality gaming, hardware, and software, since acquiring the virtual reality headset creator Oculus in 2014. 31. In October 2021, Facebook rebranded the company to “Meta,” a move meant to encapsulate that its subsidiaries and products went beyond the Facebook Platform and to emphasize its work on the so-called “metaverse.” 32. As a result of acquisitions such as Instagram and Oculus, Meta Platforms has continued to dominate the market of Social Media Platforms and apps, becoming the largest social media company in the world. As of October 2023, Meta Platforms’ market capitalization— the value of the company—exceeded $800 billion. 33. At all times material to this Complaint, Meta Platforms formulated, directed, controlled, had the authority to control, or participated in the acts and practices set forth in this Complaint. 34. Defendant Meta Platforms currently operates its business primarily through its subsidiaries. Meta Platforms’ key subsidiaries include Instagram, Meta Payments, and Meta Platforms Technologies. 35. Defendant Instagram offers a mobile application that enables users to share content such as photographs and videos online and over social networks. Instagram is a limited liability company formed in Delaware, and shares its principal place of business in Menlo Park, California, with Meta Platforms. Defendant Meta Platforms is the sole member or manager of Instagram. 36. Defendant Meta Payments is incorporated in the State of Florida and shares its principal place of business in Menlo Park, California, with Meta Platforms. Meta Payments processes payments made through Meta’s Social Media Platforms. Meta Platforms directly owns Meta Payments, its subsidiary. 37. Defendant Meta Technologies is a Delaware limited liability company and shares its principal place of business in Menlo Park, California, with Meta Platforms. Previously known as Facebook Technologies, LLC, Meta Technologies has absorbed Meta’s Oculus business segment, which it acquired in 2014. Meta Technologies develops Meta’s virtual reality technology. Defendant Meta Platforms is the sole member or manager of Meta Technologies. 38. As detailed in the allegations below, Meta Platforms, itself and through its Defendant subsidiaries over which it exercises authority and control (collectively, Meta), has engaged in, and continues to engage in, unfair, deceptive, and unlawful activity in the Filing States and in this District. 39. Meta operates as a common enterprise. All Defendants have their principal place of business at Meta Platforms’ corporate headquarters in Menlo Park, California. As discussed below, senior executives at Meta Platforms, including Zuckerberg—Meta Platforms’ CEO, board chair, and controlling shareholder—exercise control over important policy and staffing decisions relating to its Social Media Platforms. 40. Meta also represents itself as a common enterprise. Meta’s financial disclosures describe Facebook, Instagram, Messenger, and WhatsApp, as Meta’s “‘family’ of products,” and report revenue and expenses for the entire “family” together. Instagram’s Terms of Use agreement currently identifies “The Instagram Service” as “one of the Meta Products, provided to you by Meta Platforms, Inc.” Meta’s supplemental terms of service for its “Meta Platforms Technologies Products” is similarly styled as an agreement between Meta Platforms and the user. “Meta Platforms Technologies Products” are defined to include its VR-related products, such as its Meta Quest and Oculus virtual reality headsets, and Meta Horizon Worlds, its virtual reality Social Media Platform. Meta Platforms also reports its revenue from its VR business segment in its financial disclosures. 41. Meta’s corporate website represents the leaders of its subsidiaries as Meta’s “executives” alongside Zuckerberg and other Meta Platforms executives. For example, Adam Mosseri is identified as “Head of Instagram” and is described as having “been at Meta” for more than 11 years. Stephane Kasriel, the CEO of Meta Payments, is identified on Meta’s website as “the head of Commerce and Financial Technologies at Meta” who “oversees all commerce and fintech work across Meta’s technologies and platforms.” 42. [Redacted] 43. In addition to sharing a headquarters, [Redacted] 44. Because Meta operates as a common enterprise, each Defendant is jointly and severally liable for the acts and practices alleged below. Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 4:23-cv-05448 retrieved on October 25, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Washingtonpost.com

Multi-State Coalition Accuses Meta of Harming Youth on Social Media

The United States v. Meta Platforms Court Filing October 24, 2023 is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 7 of 100. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here V. PLAINTIFFS 20. This action is brought by and through a coalition of the Filing States’ Attorneys General. 21. The Filing States bring this action pursuant to the authority conferred on the State Attorneys General by applicable federal and state law. The Attorneys General of the Filing States are authorized by COPPA to bring actions to enforce COPPA’s provisions. 15 U.S.C. § 6504(a)(1). Pursuant to 15 U.S.C § 6504(a)(2), the Filing States notified the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) of this action. The Attorneys General are also authorized by their respective states’ Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Practices statutes (UDAP Statutes) to enforce such statutes.[4] These state laws authorize the states to seek injunctive and other equitable relief, as well as, in some states, restitution, civil penalties, declaratory relief, attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs. [4] Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 44-1521 to -1534; Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17203, 17204, 17205- 17206.1, 17500, 17534.5, 17535, 17536; Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 6-1-103, 107, 110, and 112; Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 42-110m(a) and 42-110o(b); 6 Del. Code Ann. §§ 2513 and 2532; O.C.G.A. §§ 10- 1-397(b)(2) and 10-1-397.1; Haw. Rev. Stat. § 480-20; 815 ILCS 505/3; Ind. Code § 24-5-0.5- 4(c); K.S.A. § 50-623 et seq.; Ky. Rev. Stat. Chapter 367, et seq.; LA. REV. STAT. ANN. §§ 51:1401-1428; ME. REV. STAT. ANN. tit. 5, § 209; Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 445.905 and 445.910; Minn. Stat. §§ 8.01, 8.31, and 325D.44 et seq.; Mo. Rev. Stat. § 407.100; Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 59-1608 et seq; 87-303.02 et seq.; N.J. STAT. ANN. § 56:8-1 to 227; N.Y. Exec. Law § 63(12); N.C.G.S. §§ 75-14 to 75-15.2; N.D. Cent. Code §§ 54-12-01, -17, and §§ 51-15-04, -07, -10, -11; Ohio Rev Code § 1345.02; O.R.S. § 646.632; 73 P.S. § 201-4; R.I. Gen. Laws § 6-13.1- 5(a); S.C. Code Ann. § 39-5-10, et seq.; Va. Code §§ 59.1-201.1 to 203 and 205 to 207; Wash. Rev. Code §§ 19.86.080, .140; Wis. Stat. §§ 100.18(11)(a) and (d); and 165.25(4)(ar). Continue Reading . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case 4:23-cv-05448 retrieved on October 25, 2023, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. Washingtonpost.com Lead image by Dima Solomon on Unsplash

Multi-State Coalition of Attorneys General Puts Meta's Social Media Platforms on Blast 

The Alliance For Creativity and Entertainment has been quietly comandeering more pirate site domains, presumably as part of settlement arrangements with their former owners. One domain relates to a previously announced case but three others, all connected to pirate IPTV, are reported today for the first time. The Alliance for Creativity Entertainment (ACE) is the largest anti-piracy coalition in history. It pools the resources of all the major Hollywood studios plus Netflix, Amazon and dozens of other companies to tackle piracy on a global scale. ACE has made many announcements over the past couple of years celebrating successful conclusions to multiple operations. Most relate to closures of file-hosting services, IPTV providers and other platforms involved in the unlicensed streaming of movies and TV shows. However, for reasons best known to the coalition, not all of its investigations are publicized. Many fly under the radar until visitors to once-active websites find themselves being directed to the ACE anti-piracy portal when they expected to find a ‘pirate’ platform. According to information obtained by TorrentFreak, four new domains have recently begun redirecting to ACE. The first, ausmediastreaming.com.au, comes as no surprise. In early March, ACE revealed that it had secured the closure of the IPTV supplier following a cease-and-desist order. “The closure of Aus Media Streaming is the latest in a series of victories that can protect Australian creators and ensure that legal services can continue to thrive,” said Karyn Temple, Senior Executive Vice President and Global General Counsel of the Motion Picture Association. The second fresh domain under ACE/MPA control is watchmoviesfree.com.au. When it was online, the site asked prospective customers whether they wanted to watch “Every single movie, TV show, sporting event, documentary, kids TV and movie ever made, free?” Concluding that the answer must be “Of course you do”, the site then went on to offer Android-based set-top devices named Octo-Ninja and Ninja-Quad. It’s unclear what was in those devices but either a pre-loaded setup and/or a subscription-based IPTV service seems likely. Before it was taken down, the domain offered an Australian telephone number for people to get in touch. EmpireTV.ca is the third domain. According to its now disappeared website and Facebook pages, it claimed to be the “top streaming service in Canada”, offering over 5,000 channels plus on-demand movies, TV shows, PPV and more from $9.99 per month. Various packages were made available by the site, varying in price according to subscription length and levels of content available. The site was previously targeted in a after supplying German football content without permission. It also had a detailed disclaimer that clearly didn’t cut much ice with ACE. DMCA complaint “We have no association with any of the IP channels shown or any of these products. TV channels and video content of the services are being provided without any liability from us regarding copyrights,” it began. “Per our knowledge all channels provided by the server sellers abide by all relevant countries copyright laws and any copyright issues must be taken up directly with the server owners. EMPIRETV.CA does not take any liability as to what is aired on the servers and EMPIRETV.CA have NO control over the servers or streams.” With EmpireTV.ca now redirecting to the ACE portal, the fourth domain to be placed under the anti-piracy group’s control (or more accurately, that of the MPA) is ZeddIPTV.com. Little is known about this supplier but given that it was previously offered via classified listings in Australia, it may have been focused on that region. Although nothing has been officially confirmed by ACE in respect of ‘seizing’ any of these domains, it seems likely that following pressure from the anti-piracy group, domains were handed over as part of a settlement. ACE has shuttered close to three dozen operations to date but publicized just a few. Originally published as “ ACE Coalition Seizes Four More ‘Pirate’ IPTV Domains ” with the Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC 3.0) license

ACE Coalition Seizes Four More ‘Pirate’ IPTV Domains

Plex has become the latest neutral technology to get slammed for not doing enough to prevent movie and TV show piracy. According to pro-copyright lobby group CreativeFuture, which represents more than 560 companies and organizations, Plex - like Kodi - is a "dangerous digital media player" that has joined the ranks of "internet heavyweights who refuse to take responsibility for the criminal behavior on their platforms." In days gone by, living rooms around the world could be found stacked with video cassette tapes full of films and TV shows. Some bought, others recorded at home, these copies would need to be waded through, to find whatever content the owner fancied watching that day. With the rise of digital technology, however, such physical collections have largely disappeared, replaced by copies that occupy virtually zero space, with thousands of movies, TV shows, music tracks, and photographs effortlessly stored on relatively cheap hard drives. Paper-based indexing systems, for those who cared to maintain them in the analog age, have now been replaced by software that not only does all the hard work but also makes collections a thing of beauty. While there are alternatives, , the clear market leader is Plex. However, the company behind the software is now facing a backlash for failing to control how people interact with its creation. Emby for example According to CreativeFuture, a pro-copyright coalition of more than 560 companies and organizations, Plex – which is basically a pretty media player – is helping to fan the flames of piracy. While there are some exceptions which we’ll come to shortly, people generally need to be in physical possession of movies or TV shows to watch them using Plex, with torrents providing the necessary material. “[T]he problem now finds itself on a dangerous precipice where it could easily slip right back into becoming a crisis again, as it was in the mid-2000s – before streaming was all the rage,” Creative Future writes. “Thanks to a rapidly growing media application called Plex, torrent-based piracy is back in vogue, and better than ever (for criminals who have no problem with profiting from content that doesn’t belong to them, that is).” To set the scene, that Plex is some kind of ‘rogue’ application, CreativeFuture (CF) aligns the media player with another piece of software, one that has also suffered reputational damage as a result of its users’ activities. The choice of adjective to describe both is particularly interesting. “To understand what Plex is and how it functions, it is helpful to look at Kodi – another dangerous digital media player that we have written about repeatedly here at CreativeFuture,” CF . notes The claim that Plex is dangerous is supported by an published in The Verge, which reported on so-called ‘Plex shares’. Without going into the minutiae, ‘shares’ effectively allow Plex users to access content on other users’ Plex servers which, in some cases, could have been obtained illegally. article That some Plex users allow others to access huge libraries of pirated content is a fact, with some by anti-piracy groups such as BREIN. But, in common with so many piracy controversies in recent years, CF feels that if Plex users are doing something illegal, then the company behind the Plex software should be held responsible for their actions. being targeted In this respect, CF claims that like “most” tech platforms, Plex is doing what it can to avoid accountability. “In turning a blind eye to its piracy problem, Plex has joined the ranks of internet heavyweights who refuse to take responsibility for the criminal behavior on their platforms,” the copyright coalition notes. “With heightened scrutiny on the biggest platforms, lawmakers across the country, and abroad, have increasingly demonstrated less tolerance for tech companies that sidestep law and order in their relentless quest for user growth.” Quite what CF believes Plex should do isn’t covered. If we take current industry strategies as a benchmark, we might guess that the organization would encourage the use of some kind of pro-active filtering mechanism, which would prevent Plex users from adding potentially infringing material to their own computers. Of course, that would mean massive implications for end-user privacy, almost impossible calculations to determine who is allowed to add content to a library within the law in multiple jurisdictions, plus an inevitable backlash and migration to other platforms that reject such intrusions. It would also require the company behind Plex to get deeply involved and therefore acquire ‘knowledge’ of infringing user behavior, something that raises all kinds of red flags. The piece, which deserves to be in its own right, also accuses or Reddit of being a “notorious piracy-enabling outlet”. What it fails to mention, and probably should’ve done, however, is that Plex is already making progress with various entertainment industry groups to tackle piracy in the best way possible – providing users with . read easy access to licensed content In 2019, Plex it would begin streaming thousands of free movies, TV shows and music documentaries from within the app, after striking deals with relevant rightsholders. The content is ad-supported and the hope is to expand the offering in the future. announced “Over time, we’ll be adding more stuff from different studios and creators — from Oscar-winning Hollywood movies to the latest from India, Russia, China, Japan, Africa, Latin America, Australia, New Zealand, and Europe to really cool independent movies fresh off the festival circuit,” the company said. That Plex now finds itself in the firing line isn’t really a surprise – if Reddit is a “notorious” enabler of piracy, then any company with end users could find itself tarred with the same brush. TorrentFreak contacted the software developer for its opinion on the latest set of claims but at the time of publication, Plex chose to remain silent. Originally published as “ Plex Slammed By Huge Copyright Coalition For Not Policing Pirates ” with the Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC 3.0) license

Plex Slammed By Huge Copyright Coalition For Not Policing Pirates

As technological use increases, so may the cost of innovation due to the global movement of goods and components. Tariffs have become a large factor in shaping the tech landscape. While their economic intentions are clear, their impact on hardware prices and technological advancements can affect the industry even more. Understanding Tariffs and Their Application in the Tech Sector Tariffs are taxes placed on imported goods. Governments use them to control trade and protect domestic industries. While tariffs aim to encourage local manufacturing and reduce dependency on foreign goods, their effects can be far-reaching. Take the tariffs that Trump has proposed, for example. He promises to place a 60% tariff on imported goods from China, alongside a 25% tariff on imports from Mexico and Canada. Policies like these will pressure trading partners due to the raised costs of foreign products. Because most tech companies purchase raw materials overseas, the sector will likely see a price hike on various products. The Immediate Impact of Tariffs on Hardware Prices When a country applies a tariff to imported goods, businesses must absorb the added costs or pass them on to the customer. In the tech industry, profit margins are tight, and production costs are high. Therefore, passing the cost along is usually the reality. This means higher prices for everyday consumers, making already expensive tech products even more unaffordable. For instance, if the U.S. implements Trump’s proposed tariffs, this would result in significant price increases for popular tech items: Smartphones by 26%
Video game consoles by 40%
Laptops and tablets by 46% To put this in perspective, consider how much consumers are already spending on high-end devices. Samsung’s Galaxy S24 starts at $699, while Apple’s iPhone 16 begins at $799. Adding a tariff-induced price hike on top of these figures could push these devices out of reach for many buyers. For families and individuals struggling to afford these products, such price increases could mean delaying purchases or opting for older, less efficient models. In turn, customers will feel discouraged to upgrade their devices, which slows the adoption of newer technologies. The Broader Effects on the Technology Sector When prices rise, the effects impact nearly every aspect of the tech sector: Reduced profit margins: For many tech companies — especially startups and smaller businesses — tariffs eat into already narrow profit margins. While larger companies may have the resources to weather these challenges, smaller firms often struggle, limiting their ability to invest in growth and innovation.
Stifled innovation: Research and development (R&D) drive the creation of new products and technologies. However, companies burdened with increased costs often redirect funds from R&D to cover operational expenses. Over time, this can slow technological advancement, delaying breakthroughs that could benefit consumers and industries worldwide.
Global competition challenges: Tariffs can weaken a country’s competitiveness in the global tech landscape. Countries with fewer trade barriers become more attractive for manufacturers and tech firms, pulling investment and jobs away from tariff-heavy regions. While this strategy mitigates some business challenges, it often results in a loss of technological leadership. Strategies Companies Use to Mitigate the Impact of Tariffs Rising tariffs force the tech industry to rethink its strategies. Although it burdens many businesses financially, companies can use the following approaches to manage supply chains and production. Shifting Supply Chains to New Regions Companies may diversify their supply chains and source from new suppliers overseas. For instance, Hasbro — a major toy and game company — has moved its supply chain from China to source products from India, Vietnam and Mexico over the last five years.\ Meanwhile, Apple’s largest manufacturing partner, Foxconn, has moved the production of MacBooks from China to Vietnam. These moves help companies sidestep hefty tariffs, leverage lower labor costs and tap into emerging markets. Invest in Local Manufacturing Some companies may invest in local manufacturing and start producing goods domestically. While this strategy requires significant upfront investment in infrastructure and labor, it keeps companies less vulnerable to future trade policy changes. Negotiating Trade Agreements and Advocacy Another strategy involves lobbying and negotiating trade agreements to reduce or eliminate tariffs. Industry coalitions often come together to advocate for policies that support free trade and stress the negative impact of tariffs on innovation and economic growth. This approach doesn’t provide immediate relief but can lead to long-term improvements in trade relations and reduced costs. Managing a Tariff-Driven Tech Market Tariffs on tech goods present multiple challenges, but the tech sector will work against them to keep rising prices at bay. The main way forward is for governments and the tech industry to collaborate to create trade policies that support economic stability and technological advancement. As such, the industry can continue to deliver the latest innovations that shape the future. As technological use increases, so may the cost of innovation due to the global movement of goods and components. Tariffs have become a large factor in shaping the tech landscape. While their economic intentions are clear, their impact on hardware prices and technological advancements can affect the industry even more. Understanding Tariffs and Their Application in the Tech Sector Tariffs are taxes placed on imported goods. Governments use them to control trade and protect domestic industries. While tariffs aim to encourage local manufacturing and reduce dependency on foreign goods, their effects can be far-reaching. Take the tariffs that Trump has proposed, for example. He promises to place a 60% tariff on imported goods from China, alongside a 25% tariff on imports from Mexico and Canada. Policies like these will pressure trading partners due to the raised costs of foreign products. Because most tech companies purchase raw materials overseas, the sector will likely see a price hike on various products. to place a 60% tariff to place a 60% tariff a 25% tariff on imports a 25% tariff on imports The Immediate Impact of Tariffs on Hardware Prices When a country applies a tariff to imported goods, businesses must absorb the added costs or pass them on to the customer. In the tech industry, profit margins are tight, and production costs are high. Therefore, passing the cost along is usually the reality. This means higher prices for everyday consumers, making already expensive tech products even more unaffordable. For instance, if the U.S. implements Trump’s proposed tariffs, this would result in significant price increases for popular tech items: significant price increases significant price increases Smartphones by 26% Video game consoles by 40% Laptops and tablets by 46% Smartphones by 26% Video game consoles by 40% Laptops and tablets by 46% To put this in perspective, consider how much consumers are already spending on high-end devices. Samsung’s Galaxy S24 starts at $699 , while Apple’s iPhone 16 begins at $799. Adding a tariff-induced price hike on top of these figures could push these devices out of reach for many buyers. Galaxy S24 starts at $699 Galaxy S24 starts at $699 For families and individuals struggling to afford these products, such price increases could mean delaying purchases or opting for older, less efficient models. In turn, customers will feel discouraged to upgrade their devices, which slows the adoption of newer technologies. The Broader Effects on the Technology Sector When prices rise, the effects impact nearly every aspect of the tech sector: Reduced profit margins: For many tech companies — especially startups and smaller businesses — tariffs eat into already narrow profit margins. While larger companies may have the resources to weather these challenges, smaller firms often struggle, limiting their ability to invest in growth and innovation. Stifled innovation: Research and development (R&D) drive the creation of new products and technologies. However, companies burdened with increased costs often redirect funds from R&D to cover operational expenses. Over time, this can slow technological advancement, delaying breakthroughs that could benefit consumers and industries worldwide. Global competition challenges: Tariffs can weaken a country’s competitiveness in the global tech landscape. Countries with fewer trade barriers become more attractive for manufacturers and tech firms, pulling investment and jobs away from tariff-heavy regions. While this strategy mitigates some business challenges, it often results in a loss of technological leadership. Reduced profit margins: For many tech companies — especially startups and smaller businesses — tariffs eat into already narrow profit margins. While larger companies may have the resources to weather these challenges, smaller firms often struggle, limiting their ability to invest in growth and innovation. Stifled innovation: Research and development (R&D) drive the creation of new products and technologies. However, companies burdened with increased costs often redirect funds from R&D to cover operational expenses. Over time, this can slow technological advancement, delaying breakthroughs that could benefit consumers and industries worldwide. Global competition challenges: Tariffs can weaken a country’s competitiveness in the global tech landscape. Countries with fewer trade barriers become more attractive for manufacturers and tech firms, pulling investment and jobs away from tariff-heavy regions. While this strategy mitigates some business challenges, it often results in a loss of technological leadership. Strategies Companies Use to Mitigate the Impact of Tariffs Rising tariffs force the tech industry to rethink its strategies. Although it burdens many businesses financially, companies can use the following approaches to manage supply chains and production. Shifting Supply Chains to New Regions Companies may diversify their supply chains and source from new suppliers overseas. For instance, Hasbro — a major toy and game company — has moved its supply chain from China to source products from India, Vietnam and Mexico over the last five years.\ moved its supply chain from China moved its supply chain from China Meanwhile, Apple’s largest manufacturing partner, Foxconn, has moved the production of MacBooks from China to Vietnam. These moves help companies sidestep hefty tariffs, leverage lower labor costs and tap into emerging markets. Invest in Local Manufacturing Some companies may invest in local manufacturing and start producing goods domestically. While this strategy requires significant upfront investment in infrastructure and labor, it keeps companies less vulnerable to future trade policy changes. Negotiating Trade Agreements and Advocacy Another strategy involves lobbying and negotiating trade agreements to reduce or eliminate tariffs. Industry coalitions often come together to advocate for policies that support free trade and stress the negative impact of tariffs on innovation and economic growth. This approach doesn’t provide immediate relief but can lead to long-term improvements in trade relations and reduced costs. Managing a Tariff-Driven Tech Market Tariffs on tech goods present multiple challenges, but the tech sector will work against them to keep rising prices at bay. The main way forward is for governments and the tech industry to collaborate to create trade policies that support economic stability and technological advancement. As such, the industry can continue to deliver the latest innovations that shape the future.

iPhones Could Become More Expensive Under the Trump Presidency

iPhoneovi bi mogli postati skuplji pod Trumpovim predsjedništvom

Τα iPhone θα μπορούσαν να γίνουν πιο ακριβά υπό την Προεδρία Τραμπ

Los iPhones podrían volverse más caros bajo la presidencia de Trump

トランプ大統領の下でiPhoneはより高価になる可能性がある

აიფონები შესაძლოა უფრო ძვირი გახდეს ტრამპის პრეზიდენტობის დროს

Ba iPhones Ekoki Kokoma Talo Na Présidence Ya Trump

iPhone Boleh Menjadi Lebih Mahal Di Bawah Presiden Trump

iPhones Inogona Kuwedzera Kudhura Pasi peHutungamiri hwaTrump

IPhones-ka ayaa noqon kara mid aad qaali u ah marka loo eego madaxweynaha Trump

Ајфони би могли да постану скупљи под Трамповим председништвом

Дар давраи президентии Трамп iPhones метавонад гаронтар шавад

ٹرمپ کی صدارت میں آئی فونز مزید مہنگے ہو سکتے ہیں۔

Unpacking Soft Power Dynamics

Cypherpunks are advocates for privacy who develop and use open cryptographic tools to resist surveillance and censorship globally. Not all of them participated in the first mailing lists in the 90s, but they’re still very much partaking in the same fight, with the same ideals. Eva Galperin, who has been a strong advocate for privacy and freedom of speech online, can be considered one of them. She was born in Latvia to Jewish parents, which was not exactly good news before 1990. Latvia belonged to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) back then, and the state itself practiced antisemitism. Galperin’s family sought political asylum in the US when Jewish people were allowed to freely emigrate, so they relocated to San Francisco, California, around 1980. Her interest in computers began early, inspired by her father, a computer security specialist. At just 12 years old, she received a custom Unix/Solaris desktop and quickly became involved in online communities, discussing science fiction and playing interactive text games. Her cypherpunk-related ideologies would come much later. As she grew older, Galperin balanced her technical interests with academic pursuits. She studied political science and international relations at San Francisco State University while working for several companies as a Unix system administrator in Silicon Valley. Before joining the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) in 2007, Galperin also worked at the Center for US-China Policy Institute. There, she organized conferences and researched Chinese energy policy. At the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is a renowned international non-profit dedicated to digital rights, which was founded in 1990 by another cypherpunk, John Gilmore. It tackles a wide range of issues, from fighting government surveillance and defending encryption to advocating for net neutrality and battling against corporate overreach. Through legal action, policy work, and education, the EFF ensures that the rights of individuals are respected in an increasingly digital world. Galperin has been working for the EFF since 2007, taking on different roles. As she described, she started taking calls from people looking for the legal assistance the EFF provides, but she eventually moved to the activism team. In 2013, she was their International Freedom of Expression Coordinator. By 2015, she launched a whole campaign with Jillian York (current EFF's Director for International Freedom of Expression) to raise awareness about the risks of enforcing real names online, especially for journalists, activists, and individuals in authoritarian regimes who rely on anonymity to stay safe. This has been a common point in all of her career: cybersecurity education and help for vulnerable people. As she called them, ‘those who aren’t in the room’. “The kind of security work I am passionate about starts with the people that I want to protect. It starts with thinking about who is left out of the conversation or who’s not in the room. I also get to use my technical skills, reverse malware, demonstrate harm, or eventually yell at a company but I always start with the people.” She was promoted to Director of Cybersecurity in 2017 and leads the EFF’s Threat Lab since 2019. This group investigates how surveillance technologies target vulnerable communities and individuals. It examines issues like state-sponsored malware, stalkerware, and privacy risks from police data collection, aiming to protect privacy rights. Coalition Against Stalkerware It’s truly alarming how many people would want to spy on their ‘loved ones’ as a form of abusive control, especially in the case of couples. The so-called stalkerware was created exactly for that. This is malicious software designed to secretly monitor and track a person’s activities on their phone or other devices without their knowledge. It’s often used by abusive partners or individuals to spy on victims, accessing private information like messages, calls, location, and browsing history. Typically installed without consent and hidden, it can lead to further harassment or physical abuse. https://youtu.be/zLtfoCw16Z0?feature=shared&embedable=true By April 2019, Galperin managed to convince the cybersecurity company Kaspersky Lab to include stalkerware as a detectable threat in their antivirus products for Android. She also asked Apple to do the same in the App Store for iOS, and even called for the authorities to ban this kind of software and close the companies that produce it. As she said, “It would be nice to see some of these companies shut down. It would be nice to see some people go to jail." Galperin didn’t stop there, though. In November 2019, she co-founded the Coalition Against Stalkerware, supported by several cybersecurity entities and anti-violence organizations. They offer training, technical guidance, and educational resources for victims, advocacy organizations, and security professionals. Additionally, the Coalition works to improve the detection and prevention of stalkerware by setting best practices and enhancing the capacity of support services. Partly thanks to this awareness effort, the US Federal Trade Commission started to pay more attention to stalkerware as a real threat to victims. They banned the spyware maker Support King in 2021 and considered applying criminal sanctions for this type of company and its executives. Galperin considered it a major victory for the cause. Privacy is on us too There are people like Eva Galperin fighting against censorship and surveillance worldwide, creating and providing digital resources for us to preserve our privacy and online freedom. Although, as she’s also commented, the fight should start with ourselves. “I think the growth of the digital rights ‘scene’ is amazing. We’re not alone in this fight — there are so many allies in every corner of the globe…but that also means we have to be strident in standing up for ALL of our rights, and not compromise.” By using the digital resources available to protect our online privacy, we can take control of our personal data and safeguard our freedom. This can be as simple as adopting encrypted communication, using VPNs, or exploring decentralized platforms. These tools help you resist unwanted tracking and censorship, ensuring that your voice and activities remain private and secure. One powerful tool in this space is Obyte, a decentralized platform built on a Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) structure. Unlike blockchains, Obyte offers a censorship-resistant crypto ecosystem where users can move funds and store data safely, without middlemen or restrictions. Its design offers secure transactions in a fully decentralized network, providing an open space for anyone to participate. Besides, developers using Obyte to build new apps can contribute to a more private, secure, and free digital environment. Read more from Cypherpunks Write Code series:

Tim May & Crypto-anarchism
Wei Dai & B-money
Nick Szabo & Smart Contracts
Adam Back & Hashcash
Eric Hughes & Remailer
St Jude & Community Memory
Julian Assange & Wikileaks
Hal Finney & RPOW
John Gilmore & EFF
Satoshi Nakamoto & Bitcoin
Gregory Maxwell & Bitcoin Core
Vinay Gupta & Mattereum
David Chaum & Ecash
Bram Cohen & BitTorrent
David D. Friedman & Machinery of Freedom
Tornado Cash Founders
Len Sassaman & Remailers
Peter Todd & Bitcoin Core Featured Vector Image by Garry Killian / Freepik
Photograph of Eva Galperin by EFF Cypherpunks are advocates for privacy who develop and use open cryptographic tools to resist surveillance and censorship globally. Not all of them participated in the first mailing lists in the 90s, but they’re still very much partaking in the same fight, with the same ideals. Eva Galperin, who has been a strong advocate for privacy and freedom of speech online, can be considered one of them. She was born in Latvia to Jewish parents, which was not exactly good news before 1990. Latvia belonged to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) back then, and the state itself practiced antisemitism . Galperin’s family sought political asylum in the US when Jewish people were allowed to freely emigrate, so they relocated to San Francisco, California, around 1980. practiced antisemitism practiced antisemitism they relocated they relocated Her interest in computers began early, inspired by her father, a computer security specialist. At just 12 years old, she received a custom Unix/Solaris desktop and quickly became involved in online communities , discussing science fiction and playing interactive text games. Her cypherpunk-related ideologies would come much later. Her interest in computers began early, inspired by her father, a computer security specialist. At just 12 years old, she received a custom Unix/Solaris desktop and quickly became involved in online communities cypherpunk-related cypherpunk-related As she grew older, Galperin balanced her technical interests with academic pursuits. She studied political science and international relations at San Francisco State University while working for several companies as a Unix system administrator in Silicon Valley. Before joining the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) in 2007, Galperin also worked at the Center for US-China Policy Institute. There, she organized conferences and researched Chinese energy policy. also worked also worked At the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is a renowned international non-profit dedicated to digital rights, which was founded in 1990 by another cypherpunk, John Gilmore . It tackles a wide range of issues, from fighting government surveillance and defending encryption to advocating for net neutrality and battling against corporate overreach. Through legal action, policy work, and education, the EFF ensures that the rights of individuals are respected in an increasingly digital world. John Gilmore John Gilmore net neutrality Galperin has been working for the EFF since 2007, taking on different roles. As she described , she started taking calls from people looking for the legal assistance the EFF provides, but she eventually moved to the activism team. In 2013, she was their International Freedom of Expression Coordinator. Galperin has been working for the EFF since 2007, taking on different roles. described described By 2015, she launched a whole campaign with Jillian York (current EFF's Director for International Freedom of Expression) to raise awareness about the risks of enforcing real names online, especially for journalists, activists, and individuals in authoritarian regimes who rely on anonymity to stay safe. This has been a common point in all of her career: cybersecurity education and help for vulnerable people. As she called them , ‘those who aren’t in the room’. whole campaign whole campaign called them called them “The kind of security work I am passionate about starts with the people that I want to protect. It starts with thinking about who is left out of the conversation or who’s not in the room. I also get to use my technical skills, reverse malware, demonstrate harm, or eventually yell at a company but I always start with the people.” “The kind of security work I am passionate about starts with the people that I want to protect. It starts with thinking about who is left out of the conversation or who’s not in the room. I also get to use my technical skills, reverse malware, demonstrate harm, or eventually yell at a company but I always start with the people.” She was promoted to Director of Cybersecurity in 2017 and leads the EFF’s Threat Lab since 2019. This group investigates how surveillance technologies target vulnerable communities and individuals. It examines issues like state-sponsored malware, stalkerware, and privacy risks from police data collection, aiming to protect privacy rights. EFF’s Threat Lab EFF’s Threat Lab Coalition Against Stalkerware It’s truly alarming how many people would want to spy on their ‘loved ones’ as a form of abusive control, especially in the case of couples. The so-called stalkerware was created exactly for that. This is malicious software designed to secretly monitor and track a person’s activities on their phone or other devices without their knowledge. It’s often used by abusive partners or individuals to spy on victims, accessing private information like messages, calls, location, and browsing history. Typically installed without consent and hidden, it can lead to further harassment or physical abuse. https://youtu.be/zLtfoCw16Z0?feature=shared&embedable=true https://youtu.be/zLtfoCw16Z0?feature=shared&embedable=true By April 2019, Galperin managed to convince the cybersecurity company Kaspersky Lab to include stalkerware as a detectable threat in their antivirus products for Android. She also asked Apple to do the same in the App Store for iOS, and even called for the authorities to ban this kind of software and close the companies that produce it. As she said, “It would be nice to see some of these companies shut down. It would be nice to see some people go to jail." By April 2019, Galperin managed to convince the cybersecurity company Kaspersky Lab to include stalkerware as a detectable threat in their antivirus products for Android. to convince to convince Galperin didn’t stop there, though. In November 2019, she co-founded the Coalition Against Stalkerware , supported by several cybersecurity entities and anti-violence organizations. They offer training, technical guidance, and educational resources for victims, advocacy organizations, and security professionals. Additionally, the Coalition works to improve the detection and prevention of stalkerware by setting best practices and enhancing the capacity of support services. Coalition Against Stalkerware Coalition Against Stalkerware Partly thanks to this awareness effort, the US Federal Trade Commission started to pay more attention to stalkerware as a real threat to victims. They banned the spyware maker Support King in 2021 and considered applying criminal sanctions for this type of company and its executives. Galperin considered it a major victory for the cause. considered it considered it Privacy is on us too There are people like Eva Galperin fighting against censorship and surveillance worldwide, creating and providing digital resources for us to preserve our privacy and online freedom. Although, as she’s also commented , the fight should start with ourselves. also commented also commented “I think the growth of the digital rights ‘scene’ is amazing. We’re not alone in this fight — there are so many allies in every corner of the globe…but that also means we have to be strident in standing up for ALL of our rights, and not compromise.” “I think the growth of the digital rights ‘scene’ is amazing. We’re not alone in this fight — there are so many allies in every corner of the globe…but that also means we have to be strident in standing up for ALL of our rights, and not compromise.” By using the digital resources available to protect our online privacy, we can take control of our personal data and safeguard our freedom. This can be as simple as adopting encrypted communication, using VPNs, or exploring decentralized platforms. These tools help you resist unwanted tracking and censorship, ensuring that your voice and activities remain private and secure. By using the digital resources available to protect our online privacy, we can take control of our personal data and safeguard our freedom. One powerful tool in this space is Obyte , a decentralized platform built on a Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) structure. Unlike blockchains, Obyte offers a censorship-resistant crypto ecosystem where users can move funds and store data safely, without middlemen or restrictions. Its design offers secure transactions in a fully decentralized network, providing an open space for anyone to participate. Besides, developers using Obyte to build new apps can contribute to a more private, secure, and free digital environment. Obyte Obyte Read more from Cypherpunks Write Code series: Tim May & Crypto-anarchism
Wei Dai & B-money
Nick Szabo & Smart Contracts
Adam Back & Hashcash
Eric Hughes & Remailer
St Jude & Community Memory
Julian Assange & Wikileaks
Hal Finney & RPOW
John Gilmore & EFF
Satoshi Nakamoto & Bitcoin
Gregory Maxwell & Bitcoin Core
Vinay Gupta & Mattereum
David Chaum & Ecash
Bram Cohen & BitTorrent
David D. Friedman & Machinery of Freedom
Tornado Cash Founders
Len Sassaman & Remailers
Peter Todd & Bitcoin Core Read more from Cypherpunks Write Code series: Read more from Cypherpunks Write Code series: Tim May & Crypto-anarchism Wei Dai & B-money Nick Szabo & Smart Contracts Adam Back & Hashcash Eric Hughes & Remailer St Jude & Community Memory Julian Assange & Wikileaks Hal Finney & RPOW John Gilmore & EFF Satoshi Nakamoto & Bitcoin Gregory Maxwell & Bitcoin Core Vinay Gupta & Mattereum David Chaum & Ecash Bram Cohen & BitTorrent David D. Friedman & Machinery of Freedom Tornado Cash Founders Len Sassaman & Remailers Peter Todd & Bitcoin Core Tim May & Crypto-anarchism Tim May & Crypto-anarchism Tim May & Crypto-anarchism Wei Dai & B-money Wei Dai & B-money Wei Dai & B-money Nick Szabo & Smart Contracts Nick Szabo & Smart Contracts Nick Szabo & Smart Contracts Adam Back & Hashcash Adam Back & Hashcash Adam Back & Hashcash Eric Hughes & Remailer Eric Hughes & Remailer Eric Hughes & Remailer St Jude & Community Memory St Jude & Community Memory St Jude & Community Memory Julian Assange & Wikileaks Julian Assange & Wikileaks Julian Assange & Wikileaks Hal Finney & RPOW Hal Finney & RPOW Hal Finney & RPOW John Gilmore & EFF John Gilmore & EFF John Gilmore & EFF Satoshi Nakamoto & Bitcoin Satoshi Nakamoto & Bitcoin Satoshi Nakamoto & Bitcoin Gregory Maxwell & Bitcoin Core Gregory Maxwell & Bitcoin Core Gregory Maxwell & Bitcoin Core Vinay Gupta & Mattereum Vinay Gupta & Mattereum Vinay Gupta & Mattereum David Chaum & Ecash David Chaum & Ecash David Chaum & Ecash Bram Cohen & BitTorrent Bram Cohen & BitTorrent Bram Cohen & BitTorrent David D. Friedman & Machinery of Freedom David D. Friedman & Machinery of Freedom David D. Friedman & Machinery of Freedom Tornado Cash Founders Tornado Cash Founders Tornado Cash Founders Len Sassaman & Remailers Len Sassaman & Remailers Len Sassaman & Remailers Peter Todd & Bitcoin Core Peter Todd & Bitcoin Core Peter Todd & Bitcoin Core Featured Vector Image by Garry Killian / Freepik Photograph of Eva Galperin by EFF Featured Vector Image by Garry Killian / Freepik Featured Vector Image by Garry Killian / Freepik Freepik Freepik Photograph of Eva Galperin by EFF Photograph of Eva Galperin by EFF EFF EFF

Stories, News & Mentions about COALITION

Coalition’s Stories on HackerNoon

Coalition's News & Mentions