An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: The U.K. government is pushing forward with plans to attract more AI companies to the region through changes to copyright law that would allow developers to train AI models on artists’ content on the internet — without permission or payment — unless creators proactively “opt out.” Not everyone is marching to the same beat, though. On Monday, a group of 1,000 musicians released a “silent album,” protesting the planned changes. The album — titled “Is This What We Want?” — features tracks from Kate Bush, Imogen Heap, and contemporary classical composers Max Richter and Thomas Hewitt Jones, among others. It also features co-writing credits from hundreds more, including big names like Annie Lennox, Damon Albarn, Billy Ocean, The Clash, Mystery Jets, Yusuf / Cat Stevens, Riz Ahmed, Tori Amos, and Hans Zimmer.

But this is not Band Aid part 2. And it’s not a collection of music. Instead, the artists have put together recordings of empty studios and performance spaces — a symbolic representation of what they believe will be the impact of the planned copyright law changes. “You can hear my cats moving around,” is how Hewitt Jones described his contribution to the album. “I have two cats in my studio who bother me all day when I’m working.” To put an even more blunt point on it, the titles of the 12 tracks that make up the album spell out a message: “The British government must not legalize music theft to benefit AI companies.” […] The solution, say the artists, is to produce work in other markets where there might be better protections for it. Hewitt Jones — who threw a working keyboard into a harbor in Kent at an in-person protest not long ago (he fished it out, broken, afterwards) — said he’s considering markets like Switzerland for distributing his music in the future.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

All 50 U.S. states have now introduced some form of right to repair legislation, marking a significant milestone that “shows the power of the grassroots political movement,” reports 404 Media. From the report: Thursday, Wisconsin became the final state in the country to introduce a right to repair bill. So far, right to repair laws have been passed in Massachusetts, New York, Minnesota, Colorado, California, and Oregon. Another 20 states are formally considering right to repair bills during this current legislative session. The rest have previously introduced bills that have not passed; so far we have seen that many states take several years to move a given right to repair bill through the legislative process. iFixit’s Kyle Wiens said covering the entire map is a “tipping point” for the movement: “We’ve gone from a handful of passionate advocates to a nationwide call for repair autonomy. People are fed up with disposable products and locked-down devices. Repair is the future, and this moment proves it.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TorrentFreak: In France, rightsholders have taken legal action to compel large VPN providers to support their pirate site blocking program. The aim is to reinforce existing blocking measures, but VPN providers see this as a dangerous move, leading to potential security issues and overblocking. As a result, some are considering leaving France altogether if push comes to shove. […] Earlier this month, sports rightsholders Canal+ and LFP requested blocking injunctions that would require popular VPNs to start blocking pirate sites and services. The full requests are not public, but the details available show that Cyberghost, ExpressVPN, NordVPN, ProtonVPN, and Surfshark are listed as respondents. […]

The blocking request has yet to be approved and several of the targeted VPN providers have reserved detailed commentary, for now. That said, the VPN Trust Initiative (VTI), which includes ExpressVPN, NordVPN and Surfshark as members, has been vocal in its opposition. VTI is part of the i2Coalition and while it doesn’t speak directly for any of the members, the coalition’s Executive Director Christian Dawson has been in regular discussions with VPN providers. From this, it became clear that VPN providers face difficult decisions. If VPN providers are ordered to block pirate sites, some are considering whether to follow in the footsteps of Cisco, which discontinued its OpenDNS service in the country, to avoid meddling with its DNS resolver.

Speaking with TorrentFreak, VTI’s Dawson says that VPNs have previously left markets like India and Pakistan in response to restrictive requirements. This typically happens when privacy or security principles are at risk, or if the technical implementation of blocking measures is infeasible. VTI does not rule out that some members may choose to exit France for similar reasons, if required to comply with blocking measures. “We’ve seen this before in markets like India and Pakistan, where regulatory requirements forced some VPN services to withdraw rather than compromise on encryption standards or log-keeping policies,” Dawson says. “France’s potential move to force VPN providers to block content could put companies in a similar position — where they either comply with measures that contradict their purpose or leave the market altogether.” “This case in France is part of a broader global trend of regulatory overreach, where governments attempt to control encrypted services under the guise of content regulation. We’ve already seen how China, Russia, Myanmar, and Iran have imposed VPN restrictions as part of broader censorship efforts.”

“The best path forward is for policymakers to focus on targeted enforcement measures that don’t undermine Internet security or create a precedent for global Internet fragmentation,” concludes Dawson. “As seen in other cases, blanket blocking measures do not effectively combat piracy but instead create far-reaching consequences that disrupt the open Internet.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Microsoft has updated its CPU compatibility list for Windows 11 24H2, excluding pre-11th-generation Intel processors for OEMs building new PCs. The Register reports: Windows 11 24H2 has been available to customers for months, yet Microsoft felt compelled in its February update to confirm that builders, specifically, must use Intel’s 11th-generation or later silicon when building brand new PCs to run its most recent OS iteration. “These processors meet the design principles around security, reliability, and the minimum system requirements for Windows 11,” Microsoft says.

Intel’s 11th-generation chips arrived in 2020 and were discontinued last year. It would be surprising, if not unheard of, for OEMs to build machines with unsupported chips. Intel has already transitioned many pre-11th generation chips to “a legacy software support model,” so Microsoft’s decision to omit the chips from the OEM list is understandable. However, this could be seen as a creeping problem. Chips made earlier than that were present very recently, in the list of supported Intel processors for Windows 11 22H2 and 23H2.

This new OEM list may add to worries of some users looking at the general hardware compatibility specs for Windows 11 and wondering if the latest information means that even the slightly newer hardware in their org’s fleet will soon no longer meet the requirements of Microsoft’s flagship operating system. It’s a good question, and the answer — currently — appears to be that those “old” CPUs are still suitable. Microsoft has a list of hardware compatibility requirements that customers can check, and they have not changed much since the outcry when they were first published.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.