Objections from Google have forced the removal of the word 'ungoogleable' [ogooglebar in Swedish] from a list of new Swedish words, the Language
Council of Sweden says. The word means something that cannot be found with a search engine.
But Google wanted the meaning to relate only to Google searches, according to the council, saying it was protecting its trademark.
Every year, the Language Council publishes its top 10 new words which have become popular in Sweden to show how society and language are changing.
Council head Ann Cederberg told the BBC she received an email from Google soon after publication of the list in December 2012, citing brand protection. It called for changes to the Language Council of Sweden's definition and asked for a disclaimer
stressing that Google is a trademark.
The council, worried at the prospect of a lengthy legal battle and balking at the idea of changing the word's definition, removed it from the list. A statement on the Language Council of Sweden's website, asks:
Who decides language? We do, language users. We decide together which words should be and how they are defined, used and spelled.
Unmarried couples caught having sex could be sent to prison under a proposed revision of Indonesia's criminal code.
An amendment to the penal code was submitted to lawmakers on March 6 and must pass through the House of Representatives before it becomes law.
A Jakarta Globe report claimed that jail sentences of up to five years would be handed out to couples engaged in a sexual relationship outside wedlock.
Wahiduddin Adams, director general for legislation at the Injustice and 'Human Rights' Ministry explained that non-married couples were included in the proposed revision to reflect prevailing norms in Indonesia. He added that the law would only be
enacted if a report against an individual was made by others who felt they have been disadvantaged because of the action. He claimed that: Therefore, it cannot [be used] in a sweeping operation in the field .
A blackmailer's charter then, especially useful for settling personal grudges.
It seems that miniskirts will be banned in South Korea as a repressive overexposure law comes into effect this week. Those deemed to be overexposed in public will face a fine of 50,000 KRW (£30) under the new law.
The nasty law has been passed by new president President Park Geun-hye at her first Cabinet meeting. It echoes the equally repressive regime of her late father Park Chung-hee, who was in charge of the country between 1963 and 1979. Under his leadership,
skirts that ended 20 centimetres or more above the knee were banned.
Celebrities from the Asian country have posted pictures of themselves wearing provocative clothing online. Opposition leaders also criticised the move, describing it as curtailing freedom of expression. Democratic United Party member Ki Sik Kim wrote on
Why does the state interfere with how citizens dress? Park Geun-hye's government gives cause for concern that we are returning to the era when hair length and skirt length were regulated.
The widespread criticism seems to have registered its point. Police now say that the law relates to nudity and public indecency and does not involve clothing. The National Police Agency's Inspector Ko Jun-ho told CNN:
Any reports that we will be regulating what people are wearing are completely false.
The Government said that it is promising to publicise the exact nature of the law and how it will be implemented.
Australia's easily offended advert censors of the Advertising Standards Bureau are seeking police assistance in
forcing Wicked Campers, to remove amusing slogans that it has deemed somehow obscene, discriminatory and derogatory in decisions dating back to 2008.
It is also pursuing the company over an internet promotion offering discounts to customers who identify as marijuana smokers or massive pot heads .
ASB Chief bully Fiona Jolly said Wicked Campers, whose controversial graffitti-style painted vans have been the subject of 39 advertising complaints since 2008, was Australia's biggest serial offender when it came to ignoring the censor's rulings.
Jolly said the company was refusing to comply with ASB decisions to remove three slogans with supposedly obscene language.
Jolly said she had this week written to Queensland Police Minister Jack Dempsey to seek police and government assistance in having the vans painted over.
Wicked Campers are our one and only problem advertiser in terms of compliance.
Ninety-eight per cent of advertisers will withdraw their ad immediately after a board decision, in other cases if an ad is on TV or on a billboard or on radio we have an arrangement so the actual media company or network will withdraw the ad.
But Wicked are in the very small category of an advertiser who a) doesn't want to comply and b) their marketing is their own van, so there's no broadcaster or publisher that can help.
A Queensland Police spokesperson said the van slogans might constitute a public nuisance offence under state laws, and it would consider any complaint made on its merits .
Wicked Campers spokesperson Ross Dudgeon, whose witty official title is junior executive vice president of awesomeness , declined to comment.
A new ad campaign for Fresh + Sexy intimate wipes has the aim to help you freshen up before and after sex, so you're ready for whatever comes next, according to the campaign's website.
The ads range from tacky to vulgar and have caused a backlash from not so liberal websites such as Jezebel, The Huffington Post, and Buzzfeed.
Each of the ads features an animal or object with a double entendre joke as the headline. Some of the gems include a beaver with the text, A clean beaver always finds more wood , a woodpecker with A clean pecker always taps it and a peach
with the line A clean peach always gets picked.
The creative director for the ad claimed that, We wanted to be fun and playful and bold all at the same time. And the campaign lets us be all those things.
Jezebel claimed that the ads to be demeaning of women; while Buzzfeed and Huff Po focused on the ad's humour. Jezebel made a cynical retort to the ads with their headline: Unless Your Vagina Smells Like Windex, You Will Die Alone.
New technology has been developed enabling governments to snoop on people using social networking websites and apps.
The sophisticated technology relies on websites such as Facebook and Twitter to build a detailed picture of people's lives in a move that raises concerns over breach of privacy and civil liberties.
The system has been created by Raytheon, the US giant defence contractor. It is name Riot or Rapid Information Overlay Technology
It was claimed that the technology could be transformed into a Google for spies and used by governments as a means of monitoring and controlling people online.
A video obtained by the Guardian newspaper reveals how the software system can gather personal information about people, including their friends, interests and the places they visit, from social networking websites including Foursquare, Facebook and
In the video, the software analyses the behaviour of a Raytheon employee Nick to show the places he has used his smartphone, the day or time of most internet activity and the location of photos posted online. We know where Nick's going, we know what
Nick looks like, now we want to try to predict where he may be in the future, says the video.
Ginger McCall, from the US-based Electronic Privacy Information Centre said:.
Social networking sites are often not transparent about what information is shared and how it is shared.
Users may be posting information that they believe will be viewed only by their friends, but instead, it is being viewed by government officials or pulled in by data collection services like the Riot search.
Offsite Comment: Why we should all worry about being tracked online
After the Arab springs and other protest movements that prompted many rises and falls in last year's index, the 2013 Reporters Without Borders World Press Freedom Index marks a return to a more usual configuration. The ranking of most countries is no
longer attributable to dramatic political developments. This year's index is a better reflection of the attitudes and intentions of governments towards media freedom in the medium or long term.
The same three European countries that headed the index last year hold the top three positions again this year. For the third year running, Finland has distinguished itself as the country that most respects media freedom. It is followed by the Netherlands
and Norway. Although many criteria are considered, ranging from legislation to violence against journalists, democratic countries occupy the top of the index while dictatorial countries occupy the last three positions. Again it is the same three as
last year -- Turkmenistan, North Korea and Eritrea .
For the second year running, the bottom three countries are immediately preceded by Syria (176th, 0), where a deadly information war is being waged, and Somalia (175th, -11), which has had a deadly year for journalists. Iran (174th,
+1), China (173rd, +1), Vietnam (unchanged at 172nd), Cuba (171st, -4), Sudan (170th, 0) and Yemen (169th, +2) complete the list of the ten countries that respect media freedom least.
The high number of journalists and netizens killed in the course of their work in 2012 (the deadliest year ever registered by Reporters Without Borders in its annual roundup), naturally had a significant impact on the ranking of the countries where these
murders took place, above all Somalia (175th, -11), Syria (176th, 0), Mexico (153rd, -4) and Pakistan (159th, -8).
Malawi (75th, +71) registered the biggest leap in the index, almost returning to the position it held before the excesses at the end of the Mutharika administration. Cote d'Ivoire (96th, +63), which is emerging from the post-electoral
crisis between the supporters of Laurent Gbagbo and Alassane Ouattara, has also soared, attaining its best position since 2003. Burma (151st, +18) continued the ascent begun in last year's index. Previously, it had been in the bottom 15 every year
since 2002 but now, thanks to the Burmese spring's unprecedented reforms, it has reached its best-ever position. Afghanistan (128th, +22) also registered a significant rise thanks to the fact that no journalists are in prison. It is nonetheless
facing many challenges, especially with the withdrawal of foreign troops.
Mali (99th, -74) registered the biggest fall in the index as a result of all the turmoil in 2012. The military coup in Bamako on 22 March and the north's takeover by armed Islamists and Tuareg separatists exposed the media in the north to
censorship and violence. Tanzania (70th, -36) sank more than 30 places because, in the space of four months, a journalist was killed while covering a demonstration and another was murdered.
Buffeted by social and economic protests, the Sultanate of Oman (141st) sank 24 places, the biggest fall in the Middle East and North Africa in 2012. Some 50 netizens and bloggers were prosecuted on lese majeste or cyber-crime charges in 2012. No
fewer than 28 were convicted in December alone, in trials that trampled on defence rights.
Journalists in Israel (112th, -20) enjoy real freedom of expression despite the existence of military censorship but the country fell in the index because of the Israeli military's targeting of journalists in the Palestinian Territories. Regional models
Democracies that stall or go into reverse
The situation is unchanged for much of the European Union. Sixteen of its members are still in the top 30. But the European model is unravelling. The bad legislation seen in 2011 continued, especially in Italy (57th, +4), where defamation has yet
to be decriminalized and state agencies make dangerous use of gag laws. Hungary (56th, -16) is still paying the price of its repressive legislative reforms, which had a major impact on the way journalists work. But Greece's dramatic fall
(84th, -14) is even more disturbing. The social and professional environment for its journalists, who are exposed to public condemnation and violence from both extremist groups and the police, is disastrous.
Japan (53rd, -31) plummeted because of censorship of nuclear industry coverage and its failure to reform the kisha club system. This is an alarming fall for a country that usually has a good ranking. Argentina (54th, -7) fell amid
growing tension between the government and certain privately-owned media about a new law regulating the broadcast media.
The Citizen Lab Internet research group, based at the Munk School of Global Affairs at the University of Toronto, used computer servers
to scan for the distinctive signature of gear made by Blue Coat Systems of Sunnyvale, Calif.
It determined that Egypt, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates employed a Blue Coat system that could be used for digital censorship.
The group also determined that Bahrain, China, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Nigeria, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Singapore, Thailand, Turkey and Venezuela used equipment that could be used for surveillance and
The authors said they wanted to alert the public that there was a growing amount of surveillance and content-filtering technology distributed throughout the Internet. The technology is not restricted from export by the State Department, except to
countries that are on embargo lists, like Syria, Iran and North Korea. The group noted:
Our findings support the need for national and international scrutiny of the country Blue Coat implementations we have identified, and a closer look at the global proliferation of dual-use information and communications technology. We hope Blue Coat will
take this as an opportunity to explain their due diligence process to ensure that their devices are not used in ways that violate human rights.
Many businesses complain when they get bad reviews on Yelp. On Wednesday there was a court ruling on whether they can censor
The Virginia Supreme Court ruled that merchants have no right to automatically censor a bad review on Yelp. They must first prove the statements are false.
In the Virginia case, a business claimed that a customer falsely accused him of theft via a review. A lower court judge ordered the customer to take the statements off Yelp, but now the high court said that violates free speech. The business must first
prove the reviewer's statements are libelous