Mediaboss Marketing

BRUSSELS (AP) — A European Union court ruled Thursday that social networking sites cannot be compelled to install general filters to prevent the illegal trading of music and other copyrighted material.

The decision is a victory for operators of social networking sites in the EU, but a setback for those who seek to protect copyrighted material from being distributed without payment or permission.

It also comes as protests are growing in Europe against ACTA, the proposed international Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, which is meant to protect intellectual property rights.

In Thursday's decision, the EU Court of Justice, which is based in Luxembourg, ruled that requiring general filters that would cover all the site's users would not sufficiently protect personal data or the freedom to receive and impart information.

SABAM, a Belgian company that represents authors, composers and music publishers, filed the lawsuit leading to Thursday's ruling. In it, the company objected to the practices of Netlog NV, a social networking site, saying users' profiles allowed protected works to be shared illegally.

Michael Gardner, head of the intellectual property practice at London law firm Wedlake Bell, called the ruling a further blow to copyright owners because it appears to rule out forcing operators of social network sites and Internet service providers — at their own expense — to impose blanket monitoring and filtering aimed at stopping infringements.

In November, SABAM lost a separate case in which it sought to require Internet service providers to install filters that would prevent the illegal downloading of files.

Gardner said the ruling would not stop copyright owners from seeking more limited injunctions against social networking sites or Internet service providers, but he said the injunctions would have to be more "proportionate" in scope and effect.

"Under EU law, there has to be a balance between the interests of copyright owners and the rights of privacy and freedom of expression," he said. "So far, the courts seem to have rejected the draconian solutions urged on them by the rights owners."

Mark Owen, head of the intellectual property practice at London law firm Harbottle & Lewis, said the new ruling shows how difficult it can be to protect intellectual property.

"As clouds continue to gather around Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement and other attempts to control online use of copyright works, today's ruling from the European Court provides a useful illustration of the practical challenges enforcement poses," Owen said.

____

Satter reported from London. Follow Don Melvin at http://twitter.com/Don_Melvin

Read this article:
EU court: Web sites need not check for IP breaches

Copyright holders cannot force social networking sites to install filters to prevent illegal file-sharing, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled on Thursday.

"The owner of an online social network cannot be obliged to install a general filtering system, covering all its users, in order to prevent the unlawful use of musical and audio-visual work," ruled the judge in the case of SABAM versus Netlog.

The court decided that forcing websites to introduce such filters would breach users' right to protection of personal data and the freedom to receive or impart information.

SABAM, a Belgian music management company that represents authors, composers and publishers, took Netlog, an online social networking platform, to court for allowing its users to share music and video clips on its website.

According to SABAM, Netlog's social network enables users to make copyrighted works available to the public without SABAM's consent and without Netlog paying it any fee. In June 2009, SABAM asked the Court of First Instance of Brussels to order Netlog to block the sharing of musical or audio-visual works from SABAM's repertoire and to pay a penalty of €1000 for each day of delay in complying with that order. But Netlog said that such an order would be tantamount to an obligation to monitor all its users, which is prohibited by the E-Commerce Directive.

The Court of First Instance referred the matter to the ECJ, which decided that in order to comply with SABAM's request, Netlog would have to install a filtering system that would examine all of the files stored on its servers by all its users, identify the files likely to contain copyrighted works, determine which of those files are unlawful and then stop them being made available.

Such preventive monitoring could potentially undermine freedom of information, said the court. Moreover, that monitoring would have no time limit, be directed at all future infringements and be intended to protect not only existing works, but also works in the future. This would require Netlog to install a complicated, costly, permanent computer system at its own expense, which said the court, would be an infringement of Netlog's freedom to conduct its business.

European digital rights group EDRI welcomed the ruling: "The European judges have re-emphasized the importance of not overburdening communication tools with restrictive technologies. This is crucial to protect the fundamental rights value of the Internet as well as its economic significance."

In November, SABAM lost a similar case against Internet service providers.

Follow Jennifer on Twitter at @BrusselsGeek or email tips and comments to jennifer_baker@idg.com.

See the original post here:
Copyright Holders Dealt Blow in EU Social Networking Case

ScienceDaily (Feb. 15, 2012) — A team of scientists from the Charité and German Rheumatism Research Center Berlin and the University of Geneva has found a fundamentally new mechanism how our defense system is ramped up when facing a viral intruder. Exploitation of this mechanism in vaccines sparks new hope for better prevention and therapy of infectious diseases and cancer.

"T killer cells" (CD8 T cells) represent an important element of our body's defense system. They have the capacity to specifically identify and kill cells, which harbor viruses and bacteria or form a cancer. T killer cells would therefore represent an important component of yet unavailable vaccines against infections like HIV/AIDS, hepatitis C virus and malaria, and also for the treatment of cancer.

It has been a longstanding observation that there is no match to the overwhelming T killer cell armada, which is triggered when a viral infection invades our body. Scientists had generally accredited this observation to "pathogen-associated molecular patterns" (PAMPs) on viruses and other microbes. PAMPs, i.e. the "foreign look" of viruses, alert so-called "dendritic cells," which serve as policemen coordinating the T killer cell response.

In a report now published in the journal Science, researchers led by Prof. Max Löhning (Charité-University Medicine & DRFZ Berlin) and Prof. Daniel Pinschewer (University of Geneva) describe an additional general mechanism by which viral infection triggers potent T killer cells: "Dying virus-infected cells themselves ring the alarm bells to T killer cells.," Löhning says. Viruses cause infected cells to die, resulting in the release of cell components, which normally are not be visible to the outside -- analogous to an injured individual loosing blood. Such substances, heralding injury when released, are referred to as "alarmins." The scientists found that T killer cells can sense an alarmin called "interleukin 33" (IL-33). IL-33 is contained in cells, which form the scaffold of the T killer cells' home, the spleen and lymph nodes, and is released when such scaffold cells die.

Mice lacking the gene encoding IL-33 failed to form a large T killer cell army upon viral infection. The few remaining cells had very poor fighting skills. Such mice were therefore exquisitely sensitive to several types of viral infections. Conversely, IL-33 could be used to artificially increase the T killer cell army, which was generated in response to vaccination. As Max Löhning and Daniel Pinschewer explain, PAMPs and alarmins apparently have complementary and non-redundant functions in shaping our T killer cell defense: "The "foreign look" of viruses (PAMPs) activates the "dendritic cell" policemen to engage T killer cells. T killer cells, however, remain lousy fighters unless alerted by a cell death in their neighborhood (alarmins)." These new findings could provide a key to effective vaccination against infectious diseases and cancer.

Recommend this story on Facebook, Twitter,
and Google +1:

Other bookmarking and sharing tools:

Story Source:

The above story is reprinted from materials provided by Deutsches Rheuma-Forschungszentrum Berlin, via AlphaGalileo.

Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.

Journal Reference:

W. V. Bonilla, A. Frohlich, K. Senn, S. Kallert, M. Fernandez, S. Johnson, M. Kreutzfeldt, A. N. Hegazy, C. Schrick, P. G. Fallon, R. Klemenz, S. Nakae, H. Adler, D. Merkler, M. Lohning, D. D. Pinschewer. The Alarmin Interleukin-33 Drives Protective Antiviral CD8 T Cell Responses. Science, 2012; DOI: 10.1126/science.1215418

Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of ScienceDaily or its staff.

Read more here:
New defense mechanism against viruses and cancer identified

Though Prototype 2 explains why its main character gains the ability to shoot tendrils from his arms, it never touches on why the virus that gives him super powers also turns him into an unrelatable hypocrite, while removing all semblance of morality. All of it. Just wrings it on out. Every drop.

It made more sense in the original game. Beyond being the scapegoat for a massive chemical weapon cover-up, Alex Mercer was also sort of a jerk. He amorally killed thousands of civilians on his rampaging quest for the truth, becoming the monster the government made him out to be. It made sense and happened somewhat organically, as he felt like the entire world had turned against him. It also makes sense that, at least for the opening minutes of Prototype 2, he would be the villain – he sort of already was.

Above: Flying between buildings is always fun

James Heller, the protagonist of the sequel, starts off with the best of intentions: to kill Alex Mercer. He believes Mercer responsible for the virus that destroyed New York City (now called New York Zero for some reason), among the casualties being his daughter and wife.

But it didn’t take long for the new hero to find out the truth about the virus and its origins, and within a few minutes of the game’s opening, he’d already tried to kill Mercer, failed, been injected with the virus, transformed into a powerful super-mutant, and dropped his vendetta almost entirely. In under an hour, Heller had gone from trying to kill Mercer to joining him in an uneasy alliance against the mercenary group responsible for the outbreak.

Above: He could cut Wolverine clean in half with those

And when we say he was given powers, boy do we mean it. Your character in Prototype 2 starts off 10 times stronger than your character ends up in nearly any other game. Right away, we were running up walls, throwing dumpsters at helicopters and slashing apart waves of enemies. Seriously. Spider-Man? Hulk? They’ve got nothing on Heller. Even Infamous's Cole MacGrath looks weak next to Heller an hour into the game.

In fact, we were so powerful right out of the gate that we had problems picking out which skills were new and which ones Mercer flaunted around in the original.  Some stood out – like being able to infect an enemy with the virus and throw him like a grenade (called the bio bomb), and the addition of deadly tendrils, which work like Spider-Man’s webs to let us zip to locations – but it’s hard to figure out what is and isn’t new when you’re so damn powerful. Could we flying kick a helicopter to death in the original game? Could Alex Mercer slam the ground and destroy everything around him with powerful spikes? We just couldn't remember.

Above: We could turn him into a bio-bomb and throw him for hilarious effect

While that might sound negative, it’s actually a compliment to how well the developers weaved the new powers and abilities into the already successful Prototype mold. Controlling Heller is an absolute blast. The sense of power is damn near unparalleled, and the abilities the game threw our way made for a tremendously fun time. He might not feel all that different from Mercer right away, but he feels different enough to make things feel fresh. It even makes sense within the game’s canon. Both characters are infected with the same virus, and viruses mutate. That explains why Mercer’s powers manifested the way they did, while Heller’s gave him tendrils and “viral sonar,” which… well, lets him send out a sonar pulse that points him in the direction of guys he needs to kill.

One thing that confuses us, however, is that shortly after the game began, we felt like Heller had become an insane killer. In Mercer’s case we bought it, as he was sort of an enemy of the state, so we didn’t mind when we were able to slaughter civilians. With Heller… we just don’t get it. He’s a father, a husband, and once he finds out who is responsible for the death of his loved ones ,he sets off on a quest to avenge his wife and daughter by… killing thousands of wives, daughters, sons, and husbands? 

Above: If you don't feel like using powers you can just punch dudes in the jaw

Sure, the game doesn’t “make” you do it, but it’s impossible to fight a battle in Prototype 2 without insane collateral damage. Throwing a car at a helicopter will usually end with that helicopter landing on a pile of meaty humans. In the hour we played we really couldn’t identify with him because his actions didn’t make much sense to us. Maybe the finished product will fix this by providing additional context, or explaining why he doesn't see this as being an issue.

Or maybe the Prototype formula dictates that the hero needs to be a jerk. We don't know. We didn't really think we'd end up liking Mercer all that much, and here we are pining over him.

Then again, as long as we’re still playing a super-human mutant with the ability to slaughter thousands of people at a time ,we doubt we’ll be complaining. Not so long as we’re having fun, at least.

The rest is here:
Prototype 2’s hypocritical protagonist almost gets in the way of our bloody, murderous fun

comdirect: record pre-tax profit of EUR 108.1m -  over 2.6 million
customers - dividend proposal of 56 cents per share

Quickborn/Frankfurt/Main, 16 February 2012. The comdirect group closed
financial year 2011 with pre-tax profit of EUR 108.1m. This surpassed the
previous year´s figure of EUR 80.9m by a good third, making it the best
result in the company´s history. ´The high level of profitability confirms
the comdirect group´s sound business model and shows that following growth
in recent years it is able to extensively benefit from developments in the
market, ´ says Dr. Thorsten Reitmeyer, CEO of comdirect bank. After-tax
profit stands at EUR 111.8m and reflects a tax refund amounting to some EUR
37m, which relates to appeal proceedings dating back several years.

Shareholders are set to benefit from this positive development and a
dividend of 56 cents per share (previous year: 42 cents) will be proposed
to the annual general meeting. This constitutes a full distribution based
on the operating profit including the interest payments on the tax refund.
The tax refund itself will be partially retained to strengthen equity with
a view to further growth.

The comdirect group generated income of EUR 340.2m (previous year: EUR
290.9m) in financial year 2011. This record figure stems from the increased
number of trades by customers in a volatile market environment as well as
higher market interest rates compared with the previous year. Consequently,
at EUR 182.6m net commission income was up 6% on the previous year (EUR
172.8m) and net interest income before provisions rose by 48% to EUR 150.8m
(previous year: EUR 102.1m). Other income included interest payments of
around EUR 9m on the tax refund.

The increase in total income of 17% was countered by a disproportionately
lower rise in administrative expenses of 11% to EUR 232.1m (previous year:
EUR 210.0m) resulting in part from intensified marketing activities.

At the year-end, the total number of customers in the comdirect group stood
at 2,630,525 and total assets under custody amounted to EUR 41.59bn. In the
B2C business line (comdirect bank AG) the number of customers has increased
by 73 thousand to 1,632,467 since the start of the year. At EUR 24.90bn at
the end of 2011, assets under custody were down on the level at the end of
2010 (EUR 26.32bn). This was due to the decline in the portfolio volume as
a result of price slides on the stock exchanges, particularly in the third
quarter. 1,235,770 customers had a Tagesgeld PLUS (´call money plus´)
account, which is a rise of 105 thousand. The number of current accounts
increased by 127 thousand to 774,518 and the number of custody accounts by
35 thousand to 783,616.

In the B2B business line (ebase GmbH), the number of customers serviced
climbed by 261 thousand to 998,058 compared with the end of 2010 (737,054).
This rise was attributable to the takeover of customers of renowned
partners in the insurance and investment sectors. Furthermore, around 195
thousand Commerzbank customers have been included following implementation
of a partner-specific white label variant in the second quarter. Assets
under custody rose to EUR 16.69bn (year-end 2010: EUR 16.22bn).

The full annual report 2011 will be published on 27 March 2012. The figures
in this press release are unaudited.

Overview

EUR´000                                  2010    Q1/11    Q2/11    Q3/11
Net interest income before            102,074   33,262   37,624   39,352
provisions
Provisions for possible loan losses      -255     -148     -419     -474
Net commission income                 172,772   50,144   40,308   50,262
Other income                           16,311      324      374   -1,852
Administrative expenses               210,028   58,724   52,322   59,092
Pre-tax profit                         80,874   24,858   25,565   28,196
After-tax profit                       59,634   18,235   18,856   20,458

EUR´000                                  Q4/11      2011   2011 vs. 2010
Net interest income before provisions   40,609   150,847           47.8%
Provisions for possible loan losses       -290    -1,331            n.a.
Net commission income                   41,871   182,585            5.7%
Other income                             9,203     8,049          -50,7%
Administrative expenses                 61,936   232,074           10.5%
Pre-tax profit                          29,457   108,076           33.6%
After-tax profit                        54,214   111,763           87.4%

Length:  3,154 characters including spaces, excluding table

All images for the press and analysts´ conference on 16 February will be
available as of 15.00 hrs at http://www.comdirect.de/bildmaterial
All press releases are available at http://www.comdirect.de/pr

If you no longer wish to receive these press releases, please send an
e-mail to presse@comdirect.de.

End of Corporate News

Read the original:
DGAP-News: comdirect bank AG: record pre-tax profit of EUR 108.1m - over 2.6 million customers - dividend proposal of ...