legal

Peru has a lot at stake in protecting a key bee for the Amazon. So you have begun to recognize legal rights

by

In Peru the judicial chronicles of 2026 start with an unexpected protagonist, one that usually has little to do with courts and lawsuits: bees. To be more precise, insects gender Meliponafamous above all for lacking a stinger and their important pollinating function. Precisely because of this relevance and to protect them from possible threats, the authorities of Satipo, in Junín (Peru), have recognized to the bees legal rights, which among other issues will allow them to be represented before the law. The decision is more important than it seems. Of laws and bees. that the bees play a key role in environmental balance is nothing new. For years (decades) researchers have been analyzing their role as pollinatorsits usefulness as pollution indicators and his slow decline. However, studies on the species tend to remain in the papers scientists and only occasionally sneak into the political debate. Hence decisions like the one adopted by the Provincial Municipality of Satipo, in Peru, are so relevant. There the authorities have decided neither more nor less than to publish an official ordinance which recognizes the legal rights of stingless bees that inhabit the biosphere reserve Avirei-Vraem. More than words. The decision is important for several reasons. The first, for the clear and resounding message it sends to society. The second transcends the symbolic sphere and part of the content of the ordinance itself. In it, the Provincial Municipality of Satipo not only recognizes stingless bees and their habitat as legal subjects. The text goes further and details the regulatory shield that protects insects, emphasizing their right to live in “healthy, balanced and adequate” habitats. The ordinance even grants them the “right to representation” in case their interests are harmed. Does it say anything else? Yes. The document, signed on October 27 and which can be consulted On the Peruvian Government website, it highlights “the fundamental role” that bees have at an environmental level and the importance of recognizing their “intrinsic rights”, which affects, for example, the use of pesticides. Hence, the Peruvian authorities also want to “promote awareness” about the species. “Nature is a whole (…). The rights recognized in this declaration are not only intended to guarantee the health of stingless bees, but also of the Amazon as a whole,” ditch. Beyond Satipo. There is who considers that, with its decision, Satipo has turned stingless bees into the first insects in the world with explicitly recognized rights. Whether or not this is the case, the undeniable thing is that its October ordinance seems to have paved the way for other similar ones. The diary The Spectator relieved Recently, the provincial municipality of Loreto-Nauta has taken a similar step and has become the second region to opt for the judicial protection of Amazonian bees. Beyond the measure itself, both localities have managed to put the focus on the risks that faces a species on which not only the environmental balance depends, but also the future of crops with a considerable impact economical, like cocoa or coffee. Is the situation so serious? In September the Peruvian Amazon Research Institute (IIAP) echoed from a study that warns that more than 50% of bee habitats Melipona eburnea and Tetragonisca angustula They are located in “high risk of deforestation areas” in the Amazon. Among the causes of this vulnerability, he cited the felling of trees in which the species nests, the illegal extraction of wood and the expansion of agriculture. It is not a minor issue if we take into account that, as remembers the Municipal Council of Satipo90% of the region’s wild plant and flower species depend directly on pollination driven by bees. Images | IIAP, Elena Mozvhilo (Unsplash) and Wikipedia In Xataka | The scientific reason why it is not a good idea to jump into the water to escape from bees (and other tips to avoid getting stung)

It is now legal to bring your own food and drink into festivals

by

It is a battle for consumer rights that is receiving very notable attention, and there is nothing strange about it: it affects some of the most widespread forms of leisure, cinema and concerts, and at stake is the right of customers to bring drinks and food into the venues. FACUA has been filing complaints against cinemas and event organizers for years and today we have a resolution that could set a precedent that changes everything. What has happened? The Court of First Instance number 4 of Valencia has issued the first ruling in Spain declaring null and void the clauses of a festival that prohibited access to the venue with food and drinks purchased abroad. The judicial resolution affects the Madrid Salvaje festival, and considers these restrictions as abusive practices that violate consumer rights as reported by FACUAthe association that filed the lawsuit. The ruling also annuls the charge of three euros as “management expenses” that the organization applied to attendees who wanted to recover the unconsumed balance on the bracelets. cashless. The court expressly prohibits the promoter to reiterate these practices in future events and thus establishes a precedent that could affect future editions of festivals in Spain. Because. The sentence justify your decision in the impossibility of attendees doing without food during the long days that the festivals last. The magistrate emphasizes that requiring users to leave the premises to eat would mean missing part of the scheduled concerts, in addition to generating unnecessary inconvenience. The resolution concludes that this prohibition constitutes in practice a forced imposition of hospitality services that consumers have not requested. That is, preventing entry with food from outside is equivalent to forcing the audience to purchase products exclusively in the festival’s internal establishments, which represents an “unjustified contractual imbalance.” The ruling emphasizes that the fundamental purpose of these events is to offer musical entertainment, with the restoration being a merely accessory element that should not condition the enjoyment of the main show. Repeat offenders. This is not the first time that Madrid Salvaje AIE has faced sanctions for its trade policies. The Community of Madrid has already imposed a fine of 96,000 euros for irregularities committed during the 2023 edition of the Brava Madrid festival. That sanction responded to the imposition of the system cashless as the only form of payment within the premises, without the possibility of paying in cash. In addition, the organization established a period of only seven days to claim outstanding balances. FACUA maintains active complaints against the 2024 and 2025 editions of Brava Madrid. Legal precedents: cinemas. The judicial argument of the case does not arise from nowhere, but is based on precedents established around the film sector. The Superior Court of Justice of Castilla-La Mancha established in a previous resolution that prohibiting the consumption of products according to their origin constitutes an irrational restriction of the consumer’s ability to choose. That ruling introduced the concept of “tied sales”, identifying how establishments use their dominant position to indirectly force the purchase of complementary services. The report prepared in 2016 by the then Spanish Agency for Consumer Affairs, Food Safety and Nutrition (Aecosan, today Aesan) was especially forceful when analyzing these prohibitions in movie theaters, concluding that the viewer was unjustifiably deprived of the main service they had paid for (watching the movie) when they were unilaterally imposed on them to use accessory services that they never requested, with the sale of food and drink being a secondary activity, not the essence of the movie business. The fines. These rulings regarding cinemas led to specific financial sanctions. The Basque Consumer Institute fined Yelmo Cines with 30,001 euros after a complaint from FACUA Euskadi for preventing access with external food. FACUA Galicia filed similar complaints against Cinesa in the Marineda City shopping center in A Coruña, while the Andalusian federation denounced five Yelmo establishments for repeating this policy after having been previously warned by the Junta de Andalucía in 2019. Implications. This court ruling sets a precedent of enormous relevance for the music festival industry in Spain, being the first resolution that specifically addresses these practices in events of this type. The ruling opens the door to possible retrospective claims by attendees who were affected by similar policies in past editions of Madrid Salvaje or other festivals that have maintained similar restrictions. It is an unequivocal warning about the illegality of such measures. The court decision significantly strengthens the position of consumer organizations, which have been fighting these trade policies for years. The court’s express order prohibiting Madrid Salvaje AIE from reiterating any of these clauses in future events also establishes a control mechanism that could be applied to other promoters. The cases pending resolution in courts regarding analogous situations—both in festivals and in other leisure spaces—now have a solid jurisprudential reference that will predictably influence the rulings. From now on, consumers have the right to freely choose where to purchase their food, which takes precedence over the commercial interests of the organizing companies, which redefines the relationship that existed to date between promoters and the public. Header | Colin Lloyd in Unsplash

The absurd legal battle between Elon Musk and the game “Cards Against Humanity” has ended in a bittersweet ending

by

The creators of the irreverent card game Cards Against Humanity have reached an out-of-court settlement with SpaceX, ending a legal dispute financed by his own fans. Although they promised to distribute the 15 million dollars they would receive from the company if they won the trial, there will be no trial to hold No money to distribute. The origin of the dispute. The story begins in 2017. Cards Against Humanity raised $2.25 million from its fans to buy land in cameron countyTexas. The goal? Legally block the construction of the wall promoted by Donald Trump on the border with Mexico. The purchase of the plot was possible, in addition to the ingenious marketing campaign, thanks to 150,000 donations of $15 each. The problem arose when SpaceX, which has the Starbase launch complex right next door, began using the empty Cards Against Humanity plot to store material. Elon Musk against the card game. In 2024, Cards Against Humanity accused SpaceX of invade your property for at least six months. In addition to starting a new marketing campaign, this time against Elon Musk, the owners of the game sued the company for depositing construction materials, gravel and debris on their plot without permission. Amid insults against Musk, whom they called “a billionaire even richer and more racist than Trump,” Cards Against Humanity promised $100 for each of the 150,000 crowdfunding participants. As? Demanding $15 million from SpaceX as compensation for the crime. Bittersweet ending. Finally, Cards Against Humanity has informed its fans that there will be no trial. SpaceX and the card game have reached an out-of-court agreement whose figure has not been revealed, but which the creators of the game describe like “Musk did the legal equivalent of throwing dust in our eyes and kicking us in the balls.” So why have they accepted it? Cards Against Humanity explained that a trial “would have cost more than we probably would have earned from SpaceX.” “According to Texas law,” they add“we probably wouldn’t have been able to recover our legal costs. We had the truth on our side, but Musk and SpaceX could have easily outspent us.” How will they compensate the fans? This is where the story takes a Cards Against Humanity turn. The 150,000 donors who helped buy the land will not receive cash, but only “comedy.” The company will send all entrants “a new, exclusive mini-pack of cards about Elon Musk,” which they hope to ship in early 2026. In an email to fans, the company summed it up: “Since we can’t give you what you really wanted—cash from Elon Musk—we’re going to make it up to you…with comedy!” The land is empty again. Images | Ministry of Communications of Brazil, Mercado Libre In Xataka | A genius named Tom Mueller designed the engines for the Falcon 9. And now that genius wants to beat SpaceX on its own turf

With Waymo’s self -employed cars we are arriving at a legal absurdity: driverless infractions

by

San Bruno police, a Californian city, He stopped a Waymo Robotaxi after making a prohibited turn at a traffic lightbut he had to let him go without sanction: the Californian law does not contemplate fine vehicles without driver. Why is it important. This episode has revealed a legal vacuum that may seem anecdotal now – a simple illegal turn – but that raises a much more serious issue: who responds to a deadly accident caused by an autonomous car? The context. California allows the circulation of autonomous vehicles for years, but its traffic code has not been updated so fast. Circulation fines require identifying a responsible driver. If there is no driver, there is no possible sanction. The agents contacted Alphabet, the Waymo matrix, but could not issue any citation. “Our fine forms do not have a” robot ‘box “, the police department has recognized in Your Facebook profile. He has said that he is “preparing legislation that will allow agents to issue notices to the company.” It is expected that Between in force in July 2026. Between the lines. The problem is not technical but political and judicial. Technology companies have deployed their robotaxis fleets faster than legislators have been able to adapt the laws. And that gap not only generates absurd situations such as this, but it leaves citizens unprotected against serious accidents. The big question. If a waymo mortally runs over a pedestrian, who is going to trial? The algorithm? The engineer who scheduled it? The CEO of the company? For now, nobody has an answer. However, we must distinguish between criminal responsibility – who goes to jail – and civil liability: In the event of a deadly outrage, the victim’s family would not face a no legal exit. His demand would have a perfectly identified recipient: the company, Waymo, as the final head of the vehicle. The objective in that trial would not be a prison sentence, but a millionaire compensation for the damages caused, based on established concepts such as the responsibility for defective product or business negligence. The real vacuum is not if someone would pay for the damage, but how to adapt a criminal code designed for humans to the autonomous decisions of a machine. In perspective. This legal vacuum is not exclusive to California. As autonomous vehicles extend around the world, the legal systems of dozens of countries will have to solve the same dilemma: how to sanction machines that cannot declare, cannot be imprisoned and technically have no will. Outstanding image | San Bruno Police Department In Xataka | I have tried a totally autonomous taxi. This is traveling without driver

In this map we can see the countries in which cannibalism is technically legal. It falls very short

by

He cannibalism It is one of the stars of horror cinema, but also of the most cases Morbose of serial murderers. Some of the most rugged (if you haven’t seen ‘Dahmer‘, in Netflix, it is very good) They have inspired films and series. And although we might think that it is illegal to be associated with serial killers And it may seem to us A prehistoric actwe would be wrong. At least, in much of the world. The act of eating the neighbor. Eate for each other It is something that has been present for millennia. Some societies enemies ate as supremacist actsreligious or simply to obtain nutrients. In other situations, it is the despair that leads us to cannibalism. Currently, we know that it is nonsense because We don’t have too many nutrients. Now, cannibalism continues to exist. It is associated with erotic fantasies that involve eating or being eaten as part of a sex Jeffrey Dahmer either Dorángel Vargas They ate parts of their victims as an act of extreme possession and cannibal acts have also been performed as part of magical rites, such as Red Zwazulu-Natal dismantled in 2017 In South Africa. We have cannibalism stigmatized for a good reason, but a few years ago this Map by Reddit in which it was stated that there were countries in which cannibalism was legal. The image problem? Well, it falls very short. A mess. That cannibalism is technically legal in some places does not imply that it is … legal. And the keyword is “technically.” In them, and in many others, cannibalism is not explicitly prohibited by any specific law. Does not appear in the Criminal Code or in the Constitution and, For example in SpainWhen cannibalism is mentioned, it is done in the context of animal protection against cannibal practices of its species. But of course, although there is no explicit criminalization, the acts to be performed to eat human flesh do constitute a crime. The murder, the damage to the neighbor, the manipulation of human remains or the illegal exhumation are acts pursued by the law. Therefore, although we can think that there is a legal vacuum, if we want to eat the neighbor, we will have to make a crime that, usually, is persecuted. In fact, a Armin Meiwesthe ‘Canibal de Rotiburg’, He was condemned for homicidenot by cannibalism (the victim was supposedly consented, but died in the process). Legal vacuum. We entered an extremely rugged gray area here with two cases that were given in Europe not so long ago. In 2010, the Norwegian artist Alexander Selvik He ate himself. Specifically, he consumed remains of his hip extracted surgically to prepare a dish that ate as part of an artistic project. A year later, in the Netherlands, there were two television presenters who They ate fragments of their own flesh and on the other in a live program. Both cases were investigated, but since cannibalism is not a crime, as was under its will and no other crime were damaged by law, No charges were presented. What there was was a debate about ethics and the limits of art. Requests. Of course, sporadic movements have been given for politicians to study if it would be worth including cannibalism as a crime in itself. In Spain, although some voice has been manifested to legislate, no serious request has been recorded. In the United Kingdom, a citizen petition for cannibalism was included as a specific crime. After six months, the platform record 38 firms of the necessary 10,000. In the petition, they detailed the following: “Canibalism is potentially dangerous and we believe that it is a little ethical act that should constitute a crime, even if the person whose flesh and/or part of the body and/or organ is being consumed has given its consent. There should be a minimum mandatory penalty of five years in prison for committing said crime.” Asterisks. In Papua New Guinea has been mentioned as illegal Sometimes and in the Central African Republic It was missing due to social contexts such as war conflicts. It remains a gray area and that, in some cases, is an implicit activity in others that are considered punishable. For example, in Canada it is not typified as autonomous crime, but the Criminal Code sanctions “Any outrageous interference with a human body or human remains.” And then there is the case of the United States. Although a rule similar to the rest is followed in the country (there is no specific prohibition, but performing cannibalism implies acts that are crime), There is a state in which The law is mentioned cannibalism expressly, penalizing it With up to 14 years in jail. It doesn’t matter if consumed with or without consent and does not only imply direct consumption: in 2024 the law was modified so that it is also punished if another person is supplied. There is only something that would free you if you eat the neighbor in Idaho: that it is a case of extreme survival. It means that what it means (it has not been given the case, until now). Image | The XXVIII terror house of ‘The Simpsons‘ In Xataka | A person has made Media Spain hook the most horrendous crimes: Clara Tiscar and ‘Criminopathy’

Seat has the Seat León and Byd has the “Sealion”. So there is already a legal dispute open due to the similarity of the name

by

What should be an unimportant procedure has become a small controversy. Seat has challenged the Registration of several byd vehicles in the Intellectual Property Office of the European Union (EUIPO) to understand that both names can be confused with models of their brand. Specifically, Seat has filed an appeal against the record of the name of the Byd Seal, Seal U and Sealion, which are already sold in our country. But also of the Byd Seal and and Seal S, names that still do not have a vehicle awarded but that the Chinese company would be trying to register well to block the name or because in the future new models will arrive that will use these denominations. A procedure that has been complicated What Seat maintains in your resource is that any of these names can lead to confusion with their own denominations and, therefore, induce an unfair advantage or damage to your reputation. At least, that’s what It reads in any of the motivations of its resources. Obviously, the possibility of inducing an error is much higher when we jump from Spanish to English or we see both options written. The most obvious is that Seal and Seat are only differentiated by a letter. Secondly, Seat León and Sealion have a very similar pronunciation in English. For our part, we have contacted the Seat Communication Department, who claim not to give importance to the matter. They assure that it is “a usual process” when any brand seeks to register a new vehicle and that, obviously, “it can be dismissed or admitted” but that for them “is an issue that is not very important.” At the moment, what is certain is that Byd will continue to sell its vehicles under this denomination unless it receives the refusal from the relevant institutions. It would be necessary to see if, in case of winning the appeal, the Chinese company scale or not to the courts this dispute since three of those names are already awarded to cars that are in the market. In fact, in what we have been, Byd has enrolled more than 12,000 units In our country, of which half correspond to the Byd Seal U (6,161 units registered). The SUV is fighting with the Toyota C-HR for being the best-selling hybrid in our country at the moment. And, now, Byd is fighting to make the leap to new European markets, once its situation in the initial European markets, such as Spain, has settled. Photo | Byd and Seat In Xataka | Byd has shown us that the 400 kilometers load in five minutes is very real. And they have managed to change their minds

Spain wants to regulate the legal resale of tickets. The risk: Let the "BOLI BIC A 300 euros"

by

The situation with the resale of entries has become so unsustainable that the government has had to take action on the matter and raise a limitation to prices that tickets can reach. The lack of control has given rise to reappearing the ghost of the black market and without control: what can happen if the legal platforms of resale disappear, would the resale disappear? Everything suggests that no … Sustainable consumption law. That is the name that receives the Draft approved this Tuesday In the Council of Ministers, and that raises an important novelty in the ticket market: it will be prohibited to resell them at a higher price than the original, plus the accumulated variation of the consumer price index (CPI). For example, if an entrance cost 100 euros and the CPI has risen 3% since then, the maximum legal price of resale will be 103 euros. The intention is clear: to stop the bubble of the bursts of inputs, which currently move legally on authorized platforms such as the Fan to Fan of Ticketmaster, Stubhub either Ticketswap. By the clouds. The problem that exists with the purchase and sale of tickets in Spain we have spoken on the occasion of events such as the Bad Bunny concerts of 2026: not only to get ticket was, a few weeks ago, a Mission practically impossiblebut resale It finds no limitations. Thus, almost immediate entries reach exorbitant prices in resale platformsreaching quintupply the original amount. In Xataka If you have an entrance for Bad Bunny, you have a treasure: the megaconciertes are already devouring themselves The problem problem. According to ‘El País‘, this artificially swollen market of resale is aggravated by the use of bots, a practice prohibited by law but very difficult to pursue and demonstrate. From consumption confirm to the newspaper that “the great economic incentives generated by this resale hinder the applicability” of this prohibition. Thus this law is born: if prices shoot, “they would turn this activity in illegal, being able to urge the blocking of the web pages where the infraction and the consequent sanction for the offender were producing.” Black market risk. There is an important risk of increasing the black market for the sale of tickets with this new law. If these legal platforms have sink, part of the unsatisfied demand can move to unregulated channels, where prices would continue to shoot and there would be no guarantees for the buyer. In Spain, without going any further, there was already A parallel black market Before the arrival of this law, especially in highly demanded events. Tickets were sold on social networks, messaging groups or unofficial portals, and those roads could be reactivated if there is demand. Would we see that legendary claim of “I sell Boli Bic for 300 euros and gift entrance of Bad Bunny”, mythical code to place tickets without saying that tickets are being sold? {“Videid”: “x8nqtg8”, “Autoplay”: fals, “Title”: “Taylor Swift: You were Tour – Trailer”, “Tag”: “”, “Duration”: “80”} The European case. In countries such as France or the United Kingdom, situations have been experienced that situations could be repeated in Spain. Since 2012, France has One of the strictest laws in Europe against the unauthorized inputs. The law prohibits the resale of tickets for shows without the consent of the organizer, with fines that can reach 15,000 euros (platforms such as Viagogo They have been sanctioned repeatedly for selling tickets at prices far superior to the officer). Despite this, the black market continues to represent Between 10% and 25% of total salesespecially in large concerts and sporting events. The case of the United Kingdom is more similar to Spain today: the secondary market has platforms such as Stubhub, Viago and Getmein!, Which have often dominated the resale with prices well above the nominal value. There are laws that require transparency in information (for example, show the exact seat and the original price) but, as in Spain, speculation and use of bots to monopolize tickets remain an important problem. In 2024, the United Kingdom reported More than 9,800 cases of fraud Related to ticket resale, with losses that exceeded 9.7 million pounds. Header | Photo of Wan San Yip in UNSPLAS In Xataka | The problem of concerts in Spain is not the lack of public, it is the distribution of money. And Wegow is the best example (Function () {Window._js_modules = Window._js_modules || {}; var headelement = document.getelegsbytagname (‘head’) (0); if (_js_modules.instagram) {var instagramscript = Document.Createlement (‘script’); }}) (); – The news Spain wants to regulate the legal resale of tickets. The risk: to return the “BIC BOL to 300 euros” It was originally posted in Xataka by John Tones .

The European Union takes another step to make it legal to charge us for hand luggage

by

It is just one more step but it is very relevant if we take into account the battle that Government and Ryanair are fighting in Spain for this reason. Europe has taken another step for airlines to charge for hand luggage through a modification in the regulations to which travelers accept when they fly inside the European Union. And it is not the only relevant change. What has been approved? The European Union Council, formed in this case by the Ministers of Transportation of the Member Countries, has voted in favor of modifying the regulations with which the airlines have to comply within the European Union. The text is about the collection of the hand suitcase but also compensation in case of delay. According to the Information sent by the Council of Europeit is about defining better “with lighter and more direct rules” the rules to which passengers have to submit. And they emphasize that “they will bring more than 30 new rights to aerial passengers, applicable from the moment they buy the ticket, until they reach their destination, and in some cases even beyond. It is a historical milestone, since an agreement could not have been reached in the last 12 years.” Are all countries agree? No, the proposed text has been approved with the opposite votes of Spain Germany, Portugal and Slovenia. Austria and Estonia have refrained. In eldiario.es They point out that the meeting has extended much more than expected since there was no consensus on some points such as the times that must be overcome before compensating passengers. Click on the image to go to the original post Why does Spain complain? Spain has voted against the proposition because, According to Pablo BustinduyMinister of Consumption, “the Council has adopted a new regulation for aerial passengers that ends with the free of hand luggage that enters the cabin and reduces the right to claim for the delays of airlines.” The new text specifies that “additional rates applied by the transport of billed and not invoiced luggage” can be charged. That “not invoiced” is the key because it reinforces Ryanair’s thesis that there are no maximum required measures in which the size of the handbag is specified and, therefore, they will have a totally free way to maintain their current policy. From the government they point out that it is a mistake and that the measure has been promoted by “the airline lobby.” And Bustinduy emphasizes: “This new text confirms what we already knew: to charge for the hand luggage that enters the cabin or for the companion seat of a dependent person is illegal with the current legislation. That is why airlines have pressed both to legitimize this abusive practice with a new regulation” Not just luggage. In addition to hand luggage, the new text opens a new path for the right of passenger rights in case of delay. If the text is maintained until its final approval, the times that must pass before compensation will also be changed that, until now, was applied when the delay was greater than three hours. So, You want to approve new conditions: Trips of less than 3,500 km and trips within the EU: Compensation for delays of more than 4 hours (€ 300) Trips of more than 3,500 km: Compensation for delays of more than 6 hours (€ 500) Why is it relevant? The Government and Ryanair maintain an intense dispute in Spain. Ryanair only allows Free access to a lump of a maximum of 40x20x25 cm. That barely leaves space for a brief backpack and There are those who are doing business with it. For the Government, this way of acting is illegal because they ensure that it does not meet the minimum taxes by the European Union that talks about companies are obliged to allow the entry of “essential” luggage. This led the government to impose a fine that added 179 million euros to five airlines (Ryanair, Vueling, Easyjet, Norwegian and Volotea). Ryanair, the most punished, took a fine of more than 107 million euros. However, Justice has not shown preference Clara for any of the actors. In Spain, some courts have failed In favor of the user When it comes to claiming the money charged by the hand suitcase but others have proved the right To the Irish company. The Government-Ryanair battle. From the application of the fine, Ryanair and the government live an intense battle that has left us all kinds of scenarios: Remember that Ryanair is the company that greater volume of flights has in Spain And, therefore, its departure from some regional airports has seriously injured the activity that moved there, Like Valladolid’s. Is everything said? No, the text now has to pass the European Parliament Filter and it remains to be seen to what extent there is consensus. The change in the European Union Council has been approved by little (more than 15 countries that represent more than 65% of the population) and explain in eldiario.es that there have been differences when approved the increase in the necessary times before compensating passengers due to delays, this being the most thorny point. Photo | Niels Baars and Anastasiia Nelen In Xataka | Ryanair’s CEO is about to pocket 100 million euros. His merit: Make shareholders join him

The company wants the name of the Pokémon filter and goes with all its legal arsenal

by

On the video game industry board, few pieces move as forceful as those of Nintendo when it comes to protecting what you consider. This time, the Japanese firm responsible for icons such as Mario, Zelda and Pikachu has launched a legal operation of surgical precision. Its objective is not a competitor, but an anonymous user of discord, indicated for having filtered Pokémon confidential content last summer. The episode of “Teraleak”. Baptized by the community as “Teraleak”, the incident meant one of the greatest content leaks in the saga in recent years. We do not talk only about loose data or minor details: among the filtered files there were preliminary versions of titles in developing and unpublished conceptual art, all related to the Pokémon franchise. An extremely sensitive material that, once outside, spread as a gunpowder in an environment where virality is the norm. The Nintendo Judicial Movement. According to documents published by Polygonon April 18, Nintendo submitted a citation request before the Federal Court of the Northern District of California. In it, he requires Discord to provide the user’s personal data identified as “Gamefreakout”: full name, physical address, telephone number and email address. The legal documentation also includes a capture of the “Freakleak” server, where that user shared the file in question. According to the company, after that initial publication there was a rapid diffusion of the content, although Discord received multiple DMCA applications for withdrawal. The damage was already done. A known strategy, a clear message. It is not the first time that Nintendo resorts to the courts to defend their intellectual property. In recent years He has managed to close portals like Romuniverse and Loveroms or Loveretro; And, in 2024, reached an extrajudicial agreement of 2.4 million dollars which forced the developers of emulators Yuzu and Citra to cease their activity. Github also withdrew 8 535 forks related to Yuzu. Each of those movements has left a trail: immediate closures, millionaire compensation and a warning that now resonates with renewed force. Filtering Nintendo material is not just risky: it is legally dangerous. Game Freak, the true target of the attack. Paradoxically, the gap did not open in Nintendo systems, but in those of Game Freak, the Japanese study responsible for the development of Pokémon games. As they recognized in a statementfiltration was the result of unauthorized access that left more than 2,600 personal records exposed. Game Freak claims to have rebuilt the affected and reinforced server its security measures, although the episode showed the fragility of certain infrastructure in the middle of 2024. The immediate future: And now what? The next play depends on the court. If he grants the citation and discord cooperates, Nintendo will be in a position to act with names and surnames. From there, the legal path could include different types of demands, although there is still no concrete information about the steps to follow by the company. For the user after “Gamefreakout”, anonymity could have the days counted. An industry on alert. What is at stake is not only an identity, but a precedent. Nintendo, with its relentless history, re -marks the path that other giants in the sector could follow. At a time when leaks are gestated and spread on community servers and social networks, the question is not whether it will happen again, but how those who have something to lose will answer. Images | Roger CE | Eesofuffzich + Photoshop | Pokémon In Xataka | The new ‘Balatro’ is an addictive mystery with thousands of fans worldwide: its creator has taken eight years to finish it

Cloudflare begins legal actions against LaLiga for its IPS blockages. They are “clumsy and ineffective”

by

The open war between LaLiga and Cloudflare It is intensified. Since the beginning of February LaLiga has been ordering operators The temporary block of a series of shared IPS that belong to Cloudflare. The goal is to avoid illegal soccer matches, but those indiscriminate blockages are causing damage to third parties. There are many affected by blockages that are causing millions of users to not access thousands of websites during sports broadcasts. Not only users, but also companies that have lost operation and sales During those periods. IP blocks that affect Cloudflare are a measure that has been used in the past by other rights holders In other countries. Italy It is the closest case ours, but it is not clear that the way in which LaLiga is acting Have legal support. In fact, in Spain those affected are now raising possible legal actions against LaLiga. And precisely in Xataka we have received a statement in which it is officially announced that Cloudflare has taken legal actions against LaLiga claiming that their “disproportionate block efforts” are illegal. This is the full text of the statement: “As an open Internet defender for a long time, Cloudflare offers security and reliability services that protect millions of cyber attack sites and reinforce the infrastructure of the Internet. In recent weeks, LaLiga and Spanish ISPs have tried in a mistake address the problem of illegal broadcasts, on the alleged base of a recently issued sentence that would order IP addresses Cloudflare and other cloud service providers, a clumsy and ineffective approach that has prevented millions of users from accessing thousands of websites without any relationship with these activities. Cloudhiding the Court from the foreseeable damage to third parties and the public interest. LaLiga’s actions are a clear threat to the open internet. Cloudflare today presented an incident of nullity against that sentence, in order to establish that the disproportionate wool block measures are illegal. Cloudflare usually collaborates with rights holders to help solve problems such as illegal broadcasts, but LaLiga has not left Cloudflare another option to undertake this legal route. Instead of responding to the concerns of Spanish users about the over-lock of content, LaLiga has tried to divert attention with unfounded accusations against Cloudflare, while intensifying their illegal blockage practices. Cloudflare expects this judicial action to help prevent future indiscriminate blocking measures and make it clear that rights holders cannot put their commercial interests on the fundamental right of millions of consumers to access an open internet. “ In Xataka | This is how Ech works, the Technological Shield of Cloudflare that has put the operators between the sword and the wall

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.