Government & Policy

The era of oil-driven foreign policy is over. Welcome to decarbonization diplomacy • ZebethMedia

By zebethcontrolPosted on November 20, 2022Posted in Climate, diplomacy, EC Food Climate and Sustainability, energy transition, Government & Policy, renewable energyNo Comments

For much of the 20th century, oil dominated foreign policy. Countries spent the better part of the century scrambling to secure supply. Sometimes it happened through negotiations and diplomacy. All too often it resulted in the overthrow of governments or outright invasions. But with fossil fuels on the wane, we’re starting to get a glimpse of foreign relations in the 21st century, and it seems like investment will be the defining characteristic. Decarbonization diplomacy is looking a lot less violent than what preceded it. It took a while to get to this point — probably too long — but the dam appears to be breaking.

The US Securing Open Source Software Act of 2022 is a step in the right direction • ZebethMedia

By zebethcontrolPosted on November 18, 2022Posted in Column, cybersecurity laws, EC Column, EC Cybersecurity, Government & Policy, open source security, SecurityNo Comments

Passionate about technology and open source software, Javier Perez is chief open source evangelist and senior director of product management at Perforce. Cybersecurity continues to be a hot topic. More and more organizations are getting hit by ransomware attacks, critical open software vulnerabilities are making news, and we’re seeing industries and governments coming together to discuss initiatives to improve software security. The U.S. government has been working with the tech industry and open source organizations such as the Linux Foundation and the Open Source Security Foundation to come up with a number of initiatives in the past couple of years. The White House Executive Order on Improving the Nation’s Cybersecurity without a doubt kick-started subsequent initiatives and defined requirements for government agencies to take action on software security and, in particular, open source security. An important White House meeting with tech industry leaders produced active working groups, and only a few weeks later, they issued the Open Source Software Security Mobilization Plan. This plan included 10 streams of work and budget designed to address high-priority security areas in open source software, from training and digital signatures, to code reviews for top open source projects and the issuance of a software bill of materials (SBOM). The Act directly addresses the top three areas of focus to improve open source security: vulnerability detection and disclosure, SBOMs and OSPOs. One recent government initiative regarding open source security is the Securing Open Source Software Act, a bipartisan legislation by U.S. Senators Gary Peters, a Democrat from Michigan, and Rob Portman, a Republican from Ohio. Senators Peters and Portman are chairman and ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, respectively. They were at the Log4j Senate hearings, and subsequently introduced this legislation to improve open source security and best practices in the government by establishing the duties of the director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). This is a turning point in U.S. legislation, because, for the first time, it is specific to open source software security. The legislation acknowledges the importance of open source software and recognizes that “a secure, healthy, vibrant, and resilient open source software ecosystem is crucial for ensuring the national security and economic vitality of the United States.” Finally, it states that the Federal Government should play a supporting role in ensuring the long-term security of open source software.

India proposes permitting cross-border data transfers with certain countries in new privacy bill • ZebethMedia

By zebethcontrolPosted on November 18, 2022Posted in data protection, Government & Policy, indiaNo Comments

India has proposed a new comprehensive data privacy law that will mandate how companies handle data of its citizens, including permitting cross-border transfer of information with certain nations, three months after it abruptly withdrew the previous proposal amid scrutiny and concerns from privacy advocates and tech giants. The nation’s IT ministry published a draft of the proposed rules (PDF), called the Digital Personal Data Protection Bill 2022, on Friday for public consultation. It will hear views from the public until December 17. “The purpose of this Act is to provide for the processing of digital personal data in a manner that recognizes both the right of individuals to protect their personal data and the need to process personal data for lawful purposes, and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto,” the draft says. The draft permits cross-border interactions of data with “certain notified countries and territories,” in a move that is seen as a win for tech companies. “The Central Government may, after an assessment of such factors as it may consider necessary, notify such countries or territories outside India to which a Data Fiduciary may transfer personal data, in accordance with such terms and conditions as may be specified,” the draft says, without naming the countries. Asia Internet Coalition, a lobby group that represents Meta, Google, Amazon and many other tech firms, had requested New Delhi to permit cross-border transfer of data. “Cross-border transfer decisions should be free from executive or political interference, and should ideally be minimally regulated,” they wrote in a letter to the IT ministry earlier this year. “Placing restrictions on cross-border data flows is likely to result in higher business failure rates, introduce barriers for start-ups, and lead to more expensive product offerings from existing market players. Ultimately, the above mandates will affect digital inclusion and the ability of Indian consumers to access a truly global internet and quality of services,” the group had said. The draft also proposes that companies only use the data they have collected on users for the purpose they obtained them originally. It also seeks accountability from the firms that they ensure that they are processing the personal data for the users for the precise purpose they collected it. It also asks that companies do not store the data perpetually by default. “The storage should be limited to such duration as is necessary for the stated purpose for which personal data was collected,” a note from the ministry said. The draft proposes a penalty of up to $30.6 million in the event a firm fails to provide “reasonable security safeguards to prevent personal data breach.” Another $24.5 million fine if the firm fails to notify the local authority and users for failure to disclose personal data breach. The earlier proposed rules were touted to help protect the citizens’ personal data by categorizing it into different segments based on their nature, such as sensitive or critical. However, the new version does not segregate data as such, according to the draft. Similar to Europe’s GDPR and the CCPA (California Consumer Privacy Act) in the U.S., India’s proposed Digital Personal Data Protection Bill 2022 will apply to businesses operating in the country and to any entities processing the data of Indian citizens. The proposed rules, which are expected to be discussed in the parliament after receiving public consultation, would not bring any changes to select controversial laws in the country that were drafted more than a decade ago. New Delhi is, though, working on updating its two-decade-old IT law that would debut as the Digital India Act. It will segregate intermediaries and come as the endgame, India’s minister of state for IT Rajeev Chandrasekhar told ZebethMedia in a recent interview. In August, the Indian government withdrew its earlier Personal Data Protection Bill that was unveiled in 2019 after much anticipation and judicial pressure. At the time, India’s IT Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw said that the withdrawal was considered to “present a new bill that fits into the comprehensive legal framework.” Meta, Google and Amazon were some of the companies that had expressed concerns about some of the recommendations by the joint parliamentary committee on the proposed bill. The move to bring a data protection law came privacy was declared as a fundamental right by the Supreme Court of India in 2017. However, the country faced strong criticism over its earlier data protection bills due to their intrinsic nature of granting government agencies the power to access citizens’ data. At one of the sessions during the G-20 Summit in Bali earlier this week, Prime Minister Narendra Modi talked about the principle of “Data for development” and said that the country would work with G-20 partners to bring “digital transformation in the life of every human being” during its next year’s presidency for the 19 countries-comprising intergovernmental forum.

Ticketmaster faces antitrust scrutiny after Taylor Swift ticket chaos • ZebethMedia

By zebethcontrolPosted on November 18, 2022Posted in antimonopoly, antitrust, Government & Policy, live-nation, policy, TicketMasterNo Comments

Ticketmaster is facing more scrutiny from politicians after its chaotic presales for tickets to Taylor Swift’s tour. Tennessee attorney general Jonathan Skrmetti said he is looking into whether Ticketmaster violated consumer’s rights and antitrust regulations. Skrmetti is the latest politician who has called attention to Ticketmaster and Live Nation’s hold on the ticketing market. This comes as Ticketmaster cancelled its public sales for Swift’s tour, called Eras. In a tweet, Ticketmaster said the cancellation was due to “extraordinarily high demands on ticketing systems and insufficient remaining ticket inventory to meet that demand.” The public sale would have been for tickets left over from the site’s troubled presales, which started on Tuesday for members of its Verified Fan program. Many fans experienced technical glitches and hours-long wait times, with many ultimately unable to buy a ticket. According to the New York Times, Ticketmaster said in a now-deleted post that 3.5 million people registered for the Verified Fan program. Around 1.5 million were given a special access code, and the rest were put on a waiting list. “Never before has a Verified Fan on sale sparked so much attention—or uninvited volume,” Ticketmaster said. Skrmetti said he had received complaints from fans who tried to purchase tickets for Eras. In a tweet on Thursday, the attorney general said that other state attorney generals are also looking into the matter: “Ticketmaster’s decision to cancel sales underscores the important need for accountability. Fans deserve a fair chance to buy a ticket. I’m encouraged by other state AGs who are taking this issue serious as well.” The Washington Post reports that Skrmetti said Ticketmaster should have been better prepared for the high demand and questioned whether “because they have such a dominant market position, they felt like they didn’t need to worry about that.” In another tweet before the sale was cancelled, the attorney general’s office said Skrmetti “is concerned about consumer complaints related to @Ticketmaster’s pre-sale of @taylorswift13 concert tickets. He and his Consumer Protection team will use every available tool to ensure that no consumer protection laws were violated.” ZebethMedia has contacted Ticketmaster and the Skrmetti’s office for comment. Eras is Swift’s first tour in four years and comes after the release of her new album “Midnights.” Other politicians who have raised concerns over the combined company of Ticketmaster and Live Nation, which merged in 2010, including Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Representative David N. Cicilline and Representative Bill Pascrell, Jr. On Tuesday, Representative Ocasio-Cortez said in a tweet on Tuesday that “Ticketmaster is a monopoly, its merger with LiveNation should never have been approved, and they needed to be reigned in. Break them up.” Representative Cicilline tweeted on Wednesday that Ticketmaster’s “excessive wait times and fees are completely unacceptable, as seen with today’s @taylorswift13 tickets, and are a symptom of a larger problem. It’s no secret that Live Nation-Ticketmaster is an unchecked monopoly.” And Representative Pascrell, Jr., who was among the millions of fans put on a waitlist for Swift tickets, tweeted that Ticketmaster “The Ticketmaster-Live Nation monopoly should never have been allowed to merge and must be broken up.” Consumers are also pushing for a break up of Ticketmaster and Live Nation. An alliance of consumer rights groups, including antitrust nonprofit American Economic Liberties Project, launched a campaign last month called Break Up Ticketmaster, saying that Ticketmaster’s “market power over live events is ripping off sports and music fans and undermining the vibrancy and independence of the music industry.”

FCC orders ISPs to show broadband ‘nutrition labels’ with all fees and limits • ZebethMedia

By zebethcontrolPosted on November 17, 2022Posted in broadband, FCC, Government & PolicyNo Comments

Hidden fees and unexpected rate hikes have become an expected part of Americans’ internet, cable, and phone bills, but the FCC just passed a rule that may make this a lot less common. Broadband providers will now have to “prominently” display a “nutrition label” with all fees, catches, and caps clearly stated for any plan you’re considering. “Our rules will require that broadband nutrition labels are fully displayed when a consumer is making a purchasing decision. That means consumers will have simple, easy-to-read facts about price, speed, data allowances, and other aspects of high-speed internet service up front,” said Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel in a statement accompanying the decision. The labels look like the familiar food labels, and for good reason (beyond being “iconic”). With broadband providers, if you give them an inch, they’ll take a mile and then slow-roll it all the way to the supreme court if they think it’ll be more profitable that way. So the labels must be completely standard, machine-readable, and displayed “on the main purchasing pages that providers have online. That means they cannot be buried in multiple clicks or reduced to a link or icon that a consumer might miss.” They also must be easily available on request after someone signs up. Example of a broadband “nutrition label” with important statistics on it. On the label, which you can see an example of above, are all the vital statistics you need to know about your potential internet connection: Monthly price and contract length Whether that price will change after a certain period and what it will change to Complete list of monthly and one-time fees, and early termination fee Whether the company participates in the Affordable Connectivity Program and link to check if one qualifies “Typical” download and upload speeds, and latency Data cap and price beyond that cap Links to network management (e.g. zero rating and content blocking) and privacy policies With all this posted clearly and in the same format between providers, anyone can look at two of these labels and, like comparing two brands of cereal, decide which one is right for them. Not because of flashy advertising or a misleading promo price, but because they can see the right numbers are higher or lower than the competition. The idea has been bouncing around for a while, but the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act made it possible to take it over the finish line. It’ll be a bit before these will be required by law, though: an FCC spokesperson explained that the rules must first be reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget, after which they will be published in the federal register, and from that point broadband providers will have six months to comply, or a year if they’re on the small side. It’s a lot of red tape, to be sure, but chances are the ISPs will jump on this early rather than take it down to the wire. There’s been a trend in that direction after a lot of blowback a decade or so ago. The labels themselves may change slightly over time, just as nutrition labels have (separating out types of fats and sugars, for instance). More and better information will find a place on the labels depending on what the FCC hears from customers and the industry: “That’s why the agency also kicks off a further rulemaking today that asks about how to incorporate more pricing and discount data on the label itself, how to measure service reliability, and how to make broadband nutrition labels even more accessible,” she concluded.

Beam raises $6.4M to help citizens access safety net funds • ZebethMedia

By zebethcontrolPosted on November 17, 2022Posted in beam, government, Government & PolicyNo Comments

Beam, a startup that helps citizens access government financial aid, has raised $6.4 million in Series A funding. The company, previously known as Edquity, helps deliver funds across a wide array of programs, like emergency cash assistance, rental relief and public utility benefits. “We fundamentally work to transmit critical services and resources to those in need,” said David Helene, CEO of Beam. The company’s Series A funding comes as the company said it saw a greater need to provide disadvantaged communities with financial support following the COVID-19 pandemic. Beam said the funds will be used to expand its headcount and further develop its platforms. The round was led by Potencia Ventures, with participation from Spring Point Partners, American Family Insurance Institute for Corporate and Social Impact, Imaginable Futures, Lumina Impact Ventures, Michelson Runway, and Schmidt Futures. Beam, when partnered with governments, operates as the end-to-end cash assistance administration system, which handles applications, ID verification, case decisions, and payments. “Our system has a single system of records,” said Helene. “Our intent is to create the least amount of friction and the most dignity for those that are interacting with applications in the system.” Beam said it allows applicants to receive funds by bank account, a prepaid card, or online services like Zelle to serve communities equitably. Beam says it has helped process over $180 million to about 300,000 households. The company currently has operations in 16 states with 57 governments.

My co-founder’s a green card applicant who just got laid off. Now what? • ZebethMedia

By zebethcontrolPosted on November 16, 2022Posted in Column, Dear Sophie, EC Column, Government & Policy, O-1A visa, Sophie Alcorn, Startups, tech layoffs, VentureNo Comments

Sophie Alcorn Contributor Sophie Alcorn is the founder of Alcorn Immigration Law in Silicon Valley and 2019 Global Law Experts Awards’ “Law Firm of the Year in California for Entrepreneur Immigration Services.” She connects people with the businesses and opportunities that expand their lives. More posts by this contributor Dear Sophie: How can I stay in the US if I’ve been laid off? Dear Sophie: How can students work or launch a startup while maintaining their immigration status? Here’s another edition of “Dear Sophie,” the advice column that answers immigration-related questions about working at technology companies. “Your questions are vital to the spread of knowledge that allows people all over the world to rise above borders and pursue their dreams,” says Sophie Alcorn, a Silicon Valley immigration attorney. “Whether you’re in people ops, a founder or seeking a job in Silicon Valley, I would love to answer your questions in my next column.” ZebethMedia+ members receive access to weekly “Dear Sophie” columns; use promo code ALCORN to purchase a one- or two-year subscription for 50% off. Dear Sophie, My co-founder and I were both laid off from Big Tech last week, and it’s the kick we needed to go all-in on our startup. We’re both first-time founders, but my co-founder needs immigration sponsorship to maintain status with our startup. Do we look at an O-1A in the 60-day grace period? Thanks! — Newbie in Newark Dear Newbie, It’s been a crazy couple of weeks and we have more Big Tech (and startup) layoffs coming. We have lots of educational resources for what to do if you were laid off and you need non-immigrant visa sponsorship or a green card. As explained in last week’s article, there are ways for laid-off immigrants to seek additional time in the U.S. to make their next move. Apparently, almost 25% of laid-off tech workers start their own companies, but I am sure the number has historically been lower for international folks because the ball and chain of the U.S. immigration system can feel weighty. However, there are a lot of ways that you and your co-founder can take to successfully navigate the layoff, the grace period and sponsorship at the new startup. Here’s how: Deadlines and pathways The 60-day grace period is discretionary. We advise conservatively that the grace period begins from the date of termination, although some laid-off individuals will continue to get paychecks for many months. Many of the layoffs are public and WARN Act notices are issued, so the Department of Homeland Security is on notice. That said, if you need more time to set things up properly for your new startup to exist and sponsor your co-founder’s immigration, your co-founder can apply for a change of status to B visitor. As a B-1 business visitor, your co-founder can engage in certain activities legally, such as business formation and fundraising meetings, and request an additional six months of time beyond the 60-day grace period. This application process can run in parallel with immigration sponsorship by a new company. Image Credits: Joanna Buniak / Sophie Alcorn (opens in a new window) Sometimes, you can qualify to sponsor a co-founder for an H-1B transfer so they can work at your startup if you meet the requirements. Additionally, many individuals will use the runway provided by the six months of B-1 status to build their portfolio of accomplishments to qualify for an O-1A visa for extraordinary ability. The O-1 status is available to many professionals, including founders who can demonstrate they are at the top of their field. An O-1A is particularly advantageous for startup founders, because it can be sponsored by an agent for an itinerary of services, including advising other startups for equity, being a venture scout for a VC firm and getting paid as a contractor for speaking engagements in your field. Founders born in India or China are subject to the green card backlogs for individuals, and the O-1A can be a great stepping stone to qualify for and self-sponsor the faster EB-1A green card pathway. Incorporate For either an H-1B, TN, E-3 change of employer or a change of status to O-1A, you should be aware of the importance of setting up your company to successfully sponsor your co-founder and other hires for visas and green cards while also attracting funding from investors.

EU’s Digital Services Act enters into force — but no confirm if Twitter will feel its full force yet • ZebethMedia

By zebethcontrolPosted on November 16, 2022Posted in Digital Services Act, Government & Policy, Social, Twitter, VLOPsNo Comments

The European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA) enters into force today — setting the clock ticking on designations that will determine which larger Internet platforms face an extra layer of rules in areas likes algorithmic transparency and risk assessment. Larger platforms will also face centralized oversight by the European Commission in a marked change to the bloc’s decentralized (and much criticized) enforcement of data protection rules. Platforms have three months to report their active user numbers to the Commission (by February 17, 2023) so it can make these designations. The EU’s executive will use reported figures to determine which platforms are named VLOPs (very large online platforms) or VLOSEs (very large online search engines) under the DSA — and therefore subject to the tougher oversight. The main criteria for the special regime to apply is a platform or search engine reaches more than 10% of the EU population or has more than 45 million users. Although the DSA allows the Commission some discretion in the information it can use to inform designations. Likely candidates are platforms operated by the usual US Big Tech ‘FAANG’ giants — but some larger European tech firms should also fall into the category. VLOPs and VLOSEs face an accelerated compliance timetable for the DSA as it provides them with just four months for this once a designation is made by the Commission — after which the bloc will be able to start enforcements against rule breakers. This means the DSA regime is likely to be up and running in 2023 for these larger entities, assuming the Commission doesn’t delay making designations. The flagship reboot of the EU’s ecommerce rulebook will also apply to smaller platforms and digital services but they have longer to comply — until 17 February 2024. To support its supervision of VLOPs/VLOSEs, the Commission is setting up a European Centre for Algorithmic Transparency (ECAT) — to provide in-house and external multidisciplinary knowledge to help with algorithmic auditing. “The Centre will provide support with assessments as to whether the functioning of algorithmic systems are in line with the risk management obligations that the DSA establishes for VLOPs and VLOSEs to ensure a safe, predictable and trusted online environment,” it said today. Will Twitter be designated a VLOP? One very pressing question for European regulators (and citizens) is whether Twitter will be designated a VLOP under the DSA or not? The (relatively small) social networking firm is not expected to meet the bar for regulation under the DSA’s sister regime, the Digital Markets Act — an ex ante competition reform which will only apply to intermediaries with gatekeeper levels of market power. So the DSA is the main instrument the EU can use to clip Twitter’s wings. And given drastic changes to how the microblogging platform is operating under new owner, Elon Musk, the Commission is already facing pressure to ensure the fullest force of the DSA regime is brought to bear on it and soon. A report in today’s Financial Times couches the bloc’s regulators as being on a “collision course” with Musk’s chaotic piloting of the platform — citing sources familiar with EU regulators’ thinking saying there is concern in Brussels over the company’s ability to comply with the DSA, including in light of the mass sacking of 50% of its staff soon after he took over. MEP, Christel Schaldemose, who will chair a group on the implementation of the DSA, told the newspaper that Twitter could “very well be the case to test DSA for the first time” — and urged the EU to make sure the DSA rules apply for Twitter, warning that if it does not do this the regulation “would be a failure”, adding: “I hope and expect the EU commission to act fast and firmly.” ZebethMedia has also heard concerns about Twitter’s ability to comply with the DSA from another direction. A source familiar with how Twitter was preparing for dialled up EU regulation — pre-Musk takeover — told us “lots” of work had been done but said it’s all been “stymied” by the transition. We reached out to the Commission to raise concerns we’ve heard and ask about the question of Twitter’s compliance with the DSA. A Commission spokesman declined to confirm whether the company will be designated a VLOP — saying the list and number of VLOPs will only be provided after the designation step has been completed. But they added: “The designation is relatively straightforward. If a company is around the threshold, it’s a good decision to go for compliance rather than to hover in an area where they are not complying.” Despite the official EU line on whether Twitter will be a VLOP remaining ‘wait and see’, it’s notable that immediately Musk took over the company last month the bloc’s internal market commissioner, Thierry Breton, tweeted to put him on public notice — warning that Twitter must “fly by” the EU’s rules. Which — at the least — demands that a meaningful set of rules gets applied. (And today Breton has doubled down with a Twitter subtweet in a DSA thread — writing: “Social media platforms will no longer behave like they are ‘too big to care’. Whether they have feathers or not 🐦”) Since then, plenty more has happened to increase regulatory concern over Twitter’s direction of travel under Musk — including the resignation last week of a number of senior privacy and security Twitter staffers who had held key compliance-facing roles. These departures included Twitter’s first (and until then only) data protection officer (DPO) — a role that’s required under long-standing EU data protection law. And yesterday we reported a further development: Twitter had informed its data supervisor in Ireland of the details of a replacement DPO. However it had only named an existing staffer as “acting” DPO. That’s notable since, under the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation, the DPO role is required to be quasi-independent — so the conditionality and precariousness of Musk-Twitter naming an “acting” appointee could raise

Boston Dynamics sues Ghost Robotics over robot dog patent infringements • ZebethMedia

By zebethcontrolPosted on November 15, 2022Posted in boston dynamics, ghost robotics, Government & Policy, Hardware, military, patent litigation, Robotics & AINo Comments

If you know anything about Ghost Robotics, it’s likely one of two things: 1) They make robot dogs. 2) Sniper rifles can be mounted to those robots. A majority of the Philadelphia firm’s press coverage has revolved around these facts, along with some coverage of its systems being used to patrol the U.S. border. That last bit was enough to grab the attention of Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who tweeted: It’s shameful how both parties fight tooth + nail to defend their ability to pump endless public money into militarization. From tanks in police depts to corrupt military contracts, funding this violence is bipartisan + non-controversial, yet healthcare + housing isn’t. It’s BS. Ghost has thus far not demonstrated any manner of ethical qualms when it comes to its work with military and law enforcement — but it’s the company’s product design that could ultimately get it in hot water. Boston Dynamics filed a suit in the Delaware court system on November 11, alleging Ghost of infringing on multiple patents. “Boston Dynamics’ early success with the Spot robot did not go unnoticed by competitors in the robotics industry, including Ghost Robotics,” the suit notes. It goes on to call out two specific models, Vision 60 and Spirit 40, both “dog”-style quadrupeds. While Boston Dynamics tells ZebethMedia it doesn’t comment on pending legislation (understandable), it adds: Innovation is the lifeblood of Boston Dynamics, and our roboticists have successfully filed approximately 500 patents and patent applications worldwide. We welcome competition in the emerging mobile robotics market, but we expect all companies to respect intellectual property rights, and we will take action when those rights are violated. The suit notes that Boston Dynamics sent Ghost a letter on July 20, asking the company to review its patents. This was followed by multiple cease and desist letters. The filing then goes on to offer a fairly comprehensive catalog of alleged infringements. While Boston Dynamics’ Spot robot has been deployed by law enforcement agencies like the NYPD, the company has been vocal in its opposition to weaponizing robots. Last month, it joined Agility, ANYbotics, Clearpath Robotics and Open Robotics in penning an open letter condemning the practice. It noted, in part: We believe that adding weapons to robots that are remotely or autonomously operated, widely available to the public, and capable of navigating to previously inaccessible locations where people live and work, raises new risks of harm and serious ethical issues. Weaponized applications of these newly-capable robots will also harm public trust in the technology in ways that damage the tremendous benefits they will bring to society. Contracts with agencies have — of course — played a major role in the growth of robotics firms, including Boston Dynamics, which relied on DARPA as a major source of funding in its early days (though deals were sunset when the company was acquired by Google). Any firm willing to build the machinery for autonomous warfare stands to make a lot of money, assuming they’re not sidelined by ethical misgivings. Ghost gained prominence late last year when images emerged from a trade show featuring one of its robots with a SWORD Defense Systems Special Purpose Unmanned Rifle (SPUR) mounted to its back. The firm’s then-CEO Jiren Parikh told me at the time: We don’t make the payloads. Are we going to promote and advertise any of these weapon systems? Probably not. That’s a tough one to answer. Because we’re selling to the military, we don’t know what they do with them. We’re not going to dictate to our government customers how they use the robots. We do draw the line on where they’re sold. We only sell to U.S. and allied governments. We don’t even sell our robots to enterprise customers in adversarial markets. We get lots of inquiries about our robots in Russia and China. We don’t ship there, even for our enterprise customers. The suit asks the court to award unspecified damages for the alleged infringements. We’ve reached out to Ghost Robotics about Boston Dynamics’ filing and will update the story accordingly as we hear back.

Startup founders go to war with UK government over its moves to appoint bank into key ecosystem role • ZebethMedia

By zebethcontrolPosted on November 15, 2022Posted in Government & Policy, United KingdomNo Comments

Nothing less than a war has broken out between an influential swathe of the UK tech startup community and the British government, after the latter has allegedly sought to hand the curation and promotion of British startups – both inside the UK and abroad – over to a single UK bank. As we covered previously, Tech Nation – a ‘QUANGO’ which has for many years been charged with the task of being the UK’s government-backed ‘startup champion’ – had been bidding for a continuing £12 million contract, starting from March 2023. But this was put out to tender by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and, sources allege, the contract was poised to be granted to banking giant Barclays Bank for the sole operation of the role. The move was branded “insane” and “mad” by some key U.K. industry players ZebethMedia spoke to. Now, an open letter, signed by over 60 startup founders and other key players, has been published by the Coalition for a Digital Economy (Coadec), an independent non-profit that campaigns for policies to support digital startups in the UK. The letter calls on the Government to commit to retaining Tech Nation in its role, a role which it has filled in various guises since September 2011. Should the move go through, claims the 60+ group, Barclays would be in charge of a number of critical services for startups, such as visa sponsorship and applications for staff hired from abroad, as well as the external promotion of the UK’s startup ecosystem globally. Coadec argues this could put it into a conflict of interest on a number of fronts. Signatories to the letter are highly influential in the UK tech scene. They include Brent Hoberman (Co-Founder and Chairman of Founders Forum), Taavet Hinrikus (Co-Founder and Chairman of Wise), Tessa Clarke (Co-Founder and CEO of OLIO), Aron Gelbard (Co-Founder and CEO of Bloom & Wild), Alex Depledge (Founder and CEO of Resi), and Ali Parsa (Co-Founder and CEO of Babylon Health). Because of the alleged moves to hand the contract over to Barclays, the group contends that this might put at risk current services to startups overall (including the visa system and promotional work); would hand a key aspect of government support over to a bank which has bot had the long history of Tech Nation in the ecosystem; and argues that any new arrangements should “add support to the startup ecosystem, not subtract from it”.  In a statement, Dom Hallas, Coadec Executive Director, said the government’s move would mean it would be “pulling away” from the tech startup ecosystem rather than retaining a close interest. This would also be in marked contrast to the ruling Conservative party’s oft-repeated phrase that it is ‘pro-business’. “Amid economic turbulence, startup founders need help more than ever. This means Government backing the ecosystem more – not pulling away. We want to ensure that if changes to support do occur, the things startups value most, including the special visa system for tech, are protected,” said Hallas in a statement. ZebethMedia has reached out to the DCMS for comment and will update this story with their response. • Declaration of interest: Coadec was founded in 2010 by Jeff Lynn, Executive Chairman and Co-Founder of online investment platform Seedrs, and myself (Mike Butcher, Editor-at-Large of ZebethMedia, though I no longer have any formal or informal involvement).