On 30 March 2013, the consultation on the intellectual property rights enforcement directive (IPRED) will be over. This means that you have three more days to let the European Commission know your thoughts on the current enforcement of copyright in the European Union.
The European Commission now wants to evaluate the efficiency of the current framework and whether or not a revision is necessary. It is the perfect occasion to raise attention to the necessity of a comprehensive copyright reform. Moreover, some questions seem to lead to the conclusion that Internet service providers should be responsible for dealing with alleged infringements online. Such a reasoning puts fundamental rights at risk such as freedom of expression and the right to privacy.
It is very important that the European Commission receives as many answers as possible from citizens and organisations.
To help you answering the consultation, EDRi put together an answering guide. Here are the steps you need to follow:
1. In order to get access to the consultation you need to register, by
providing your name and email address at
http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/ipm/forms/dispatch?form=IPRREGFORM
2. You will receive an email with the subject “IPM Invitation” by the Commission providing you with a unique access link so you can respond to the consultation. Please note that it can take some time before the registration is processed. There are also reports of slowness and time-outs at weekends and of Gmail filtering registration details as “spam”. Therefore, please be patient with the Commission's technology!
3. If you follow the invitation by clicking on the unique access link, you will be able to answer the questionnaire.
4. Our answering guide is here
http://edri.org/files/ipr-guide.pdf
(Contribution by Marie Humeau - EDRi)
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: Zivilgesellschaft gegen Urheberrechtsbestimmungen in TAFTA
More than 45 civil society organisations from US and Europe, including EDRi, ask that the proposed EU-US trade agreement called Transatlantic Free Trade Agreement (TAFTA) should exclude any provisions related to patents, copyright, trademarks, or other forms of so-called "intellectual property".
US President Barack Obama, the European Council President Herman Van Rompuy and the European Commission President José Manuel Barroso announced on 13 February 2013 the official launch of negotiations of the Transatlantic Free Trade Agreement (TAFTA), known also as as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).
The civil society organisations issued a declaration (IP OUT OF TAFTA) in which they insist that TAFTA should have no intellectual property provisions and that the EU and US should release the negotiating texts of the trade agreement. They fear that TAFTA might include the intellectual property provisions that were covered by the rejected ACTA and they believe that such provisions could affect citizens' rights to health, culture, and free expression.
“Trade agreements are not the right forum to discuss intellectual property rights," says FFII analyst Ante Wessels who notes that “the industry already dreams of setting a gold standard in areas such as intellectual property rights protection. Does that sound familiar? Yes, it does. It sounds like ACTA, the agreement overwhelmingly voted down last July in the European Parliament. ACTA was, in almost all aspects, a drama, out of touch with our societies."
The Civil Society Declaration concludes that TAFTA negotiations “must not lead to a rewriting of patent and copyright rules in a way that tilts the balance even further away from the interests of citizens.”
Civil society organisations say no to intellectual property in EU - US
trade agreement (18.03.2013)
http://press.ffii.org/Press%20releases/Civil%20society%20organisations...
IP out of TAFTA - Civil Society Declaration
http://www.citizen.org/IP-out-of-TAFTA
EDRi-gram: Total transparency on ACTA and TAFTA documents (13.03.2013)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.5/total-transparency-acta-tafta
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: Slowenien: Datenschutzbeauftragter stellt Vorratsdatenspeicherung in F...
The Information Commissioner of the Republic of Slovenia challenged on 19 March 2013 the national implementation of data retention directive before the Constitutional Court.
The Information Commissioner holds that the data retention provisions of the Act on Electronic Communications (ZEKom-1), which came into force on 15 January 2013, do not respect the principle of proportionality and that they have been transposed into the national law in contrast with the provisions of the Data Retention Directive 2006/24/EC.
Data retention has been in force in Slovenia since 2007 (telephone data) and 2009 (internet related data) with retention periods of 14 and 8 months respectively (in 2009 retention periods were shortened from previously 24 months). In the new Act on Electronic Communications, adopted to transpose the provisions of the amended telecommunications package, the legislator did not amend the provisions on data retention.
The Information Commissioner reasons that huge amounts of data are stored in advance about the electronic communications of each individual, regardless of whether he or she has fully obeyed the law or not. Whereas the principle of legality was respected, the principle of proportionality was completely neglected by the legislator. Processing of personal data is regulated in a manner that is not compatible with the rule of law since it does not respect the conditions allowing encroachments of human rights. Having taken an absolutist approach to the retention of data, the legislator also affected other rights such as the right to secrecy of communications, freedom of speech and movement. It did so without providing any evidence or analysis that such a measure is necessary and is reflected in a greater (if any) impact on the prosecution of criminal offences. In fact, the government has failed to provide any regulatory impact analysis after years of data retention that would justify its existence.
The aim of Directive 2006/24/EC was to establish mandatory data retention of electronic communications in order to ensure that the data are available for the purpose of the investigation, detection and prosecution of serious crime, as defined by each Member State in its national law. The purposes of data retention under ZEKom-1 however differ significantly – not only did the legislator broaden the scope by not limiting data retention only to serious criminal offences and extending it to all criminal offences, but the data may also be used for the purposes of ensuring national security and the constitutional order, and the security, political and economic interests of the state, as stipulated by the law governing the Slovenian Intelligence-Security Agency, and for the purposes of national defence as stipulated by the law governing the defence of the state. The Commissioner’s inspections also revealed that the retained data were also used in civil litigations, labour law disputes and misdemeanour procedures.
The Information Commissioner therefore decided to file a request to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia to assess the constitutionality of data retention provisions. It also proposed that the request be given preferential treatment and that data retention provisions be temporarily suspended.
The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia may temporarily suspend the enforcement of the act in part or fully if the enforcement of the act would result in damaging and possibly irremediable consequences. There is no deadline in which the Court should decide - proposals for temporary suspensions are however usually dealt with in three months. If the Court upholds the proposal for temporary suspension, the decision of the Court takes effect the next day after the decision is published in the official gazette.
The Court’s decision regarding the preferential treatment of the case is based on an analysis on whether the case carries an important legal question. The request itself is assessed in a closed session. Should the Court agree with the reasoning of the Information Commissioner, the case is given preferential treatment, meaning that it will be dealt with, regardless of when it was submitted. It is difficult to estimate when this could happen (depending on the number of pending cases), but according to previous experiences it would most probably take more than a year.
Request to the Constitutional Court (only in Slovenian)
https://www.ip-rs.si/fileadmin/user_upload/Pdf/ocene_ustavnosti/ZEKom_...
Electronic Communication Act (ZEKom-1) (only in Slovenian)
http://www.uradni-list.si/1/objava.jsp?urlid=2012109&stevilka=4315
Information Commissioner of the Republic of Slovenia
https://www.ip-rs.si
Information Commissioner of the Republic of Slovenia challenges data
retention before Constitutional Court (19.03.2012)
http://bit.ly/WLvV7Y
(Contribution by Mr. Andrej Tomšič - Deputy Information Commissioner, Republic of Slovenia)
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: Urheberrecht in Spanien: Neuer Vorstoß für höhere Strafen
The Spanish Council of Ministers approved on 22 March 2013 the draft reform of the Intellectual Property Law, also known as Lassalle law, which is meant to punish more harshly some breaches of intellectual property rights.
According to the draft law, the websites infringing copyright on a large-scale will face fines of up to 300 000 Euro. The law will also oblige payment processors and advertisers not to deal with those websites.
If the bill is passed, the websites will be required to remove wide ranges of infringing content on request, for a particular artist or rightholder, not on a one-by-one case as the status is now. P2P downloads will also be banned by limiting the right to private copy.
Already after in January 2012 the US had threatened Spain to add the country on a black list, Spain introduced the so-called Sinde Law meant to offer alleged greater protections for rightsholders which included a provision to close infringing sites but such measures have not yet been taken.
The Lassalle law is strongly criticized by a large range or organisations - from the Association of Internet Users to the Association for the administration of the audiovisual producers’ copyrights (Asociación de Gestión de Derechos de los Productores Audiovisuales – EGEDA). One of the main concerns expressed is the intention to increase the powers of the Copyright Commission to deal with copyright infringement, allowing it to force companies to remove their advertising from alleged illicit sites and payment processors to withdraw their services from infringing sites.
Another issue is the ambiguity of the text in defining "the file-sharing sites". The text refers to those sites which “have as main activity that of facilitating in a specific and massive manner the localisation of works and performances that are offered without authorisation”. Yet, Google and other such search engines could be excluded from this definition, if they takedown the infringing content.
The status of the private copy will also be dramatically changed. Presently, the downloads of Internet users are covered by a levy on blank media. The new draft stipulates that the right to private copying will only cover legally obtained media, which implies that file-sharers could be prosecuted for their downloads from unauthorized sources. Furthermore, even though the blank media levy will be removed, the compensation will still be paid to rightsholders.
The draft law will be now be submitted to the Autonomous Communities for debates.
The Internet clamours against the reform of the Intellectual property
law (only in Spanish, 23.03.2013)
http://www.elconfidencial.com/tecnologia/2013/03/23/internet-clama-con...
The fines against webs will illegal content will reach 300.000 euro
(only in Spanish, 22.03.2013)
http://cincodias.com/cincodias/2013/03/22/tecnologia/1363962120_821591...
Spain to Crackdown on Pirate Sites and Outlaw File-Sharing (22.03.2013)
http://torrentfreak.com/spain-to-crackdown-on-pirate-sites-and-outlaw-...
The Intellectual Property law will allow going after linking webs (only
in Spanish, 22.03.2013)
http://cultura.elpais.com/cultura/2013/03/22/actualidad/1363938555_684...
EDRi-gram: Spanish Sinde law brings about the first website take down
requests (11.04.2013)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number10.7/sinde-law-takedown-requests
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: Blogger haften nicht für Kommentare Dritter
Bloggers should not be considered liable for third-party comments on their posts in cases when they have not specifically intervened in the content at issue, as doing so would strongly affect freedom of expression.
This is the clear position of the EDRi-member Article 19 that comes in relation to a case now pending with the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in which a Polish municipal councillor was sued because there had been allegedly defamatory comments to one of his posts, addressed to the mayor of the town, during the electoral campaign. Although the blogger removed the respective comments, the Polish courts ruled that he should be held liable for the comments on the basis of an electoral law and argued that running a website that allows such comments should be considered an action that is contrary to public policy and the principles of social coexistence.
On 19 March 2013, Article 19 filed third-party intervention submissions in this ECtHR case considering it significant for the issue of intermediary liability. In its opinion, “bloggers should not be considered responsible for third-party comments as publishers in circumstances where they have not specifically intervened in the content at issue. This is equally true when bloggers put in place a moderation system. To hold otherwise would have a serious chilling effect on freedom of expression.”
ARTICLE 19 to European Court: bloggers should not be liable for
user-generated content (19.03.2013)
http://www.article19.org/resources.php/resource/3670/en/article-19-to-...
Personal interest, case I ACa 1273/11 (3.10.2011)
http://rychlicki.net/en/2011/10/03/6946/
Blogger has won the case. He is not liable for Internet users' comments
(3.02.2012)
http://humanrightshouse.org/Articles/17625.html
The protection of personal data is a trending topic – not only on the political scene in Brussels but also as a result of CryptoParties, which have become a decentralised global movement in past months.
Protecting our data, information and privacy is of vital importance, particularly on the internet. We always try to ensure adequate security for physical objects such as cars, houses and credit cards. But how do we secure our electronic data? How can we ensure that nobody is eavesdropping on our emails or text messages? How can we improve our security while surfing the web? These and other questions are being answered during these “Tupperware parties” for online privacy.
In August 2012, the “CryptoParty” was invented by privacy activist Asher Wolf in response to a controversial Australian Internet surveillance bill proposed in mid-2012. Since then, CryptoParties have been organised all over the world in order to create places where Internet users, security experts and privacy advocates can meet and exchange knowledge, where non-experts can bring their laptops, smartphones or tablets and learn how to install and use basic encryption tools.
On 23 March 2013, the Hacker Space Bxl, NURPA, Access and EDRi organised such a hands-on workshop for the general public in order to promote the use of privacy enhancing tools in Brussels, the political centre of Europe and home of many decision-makers and experts. Especially with regard to the data protection reform, it is necessary to raise awareness in the "Brussels bubble" for privacy as a fundamental human right.
Of course, CryptoParties are only a partial solution to a wider problem. The collection, processing and re-use of citizens’ data has become increasingly important from an economic perspective. This has lead to pressure to weaken this fundamental right and also to change the legislative framework to make legal protections less predictable and robust. We do not only need to individually “defend our own privacy if we expect to have any”, we now need to make sure that the current reform will lead to better data protection for all.
Slides of the introduction to the Brussels CryptoParty (23.03.2013)
https://resources.telecomix.ceops.eu/cryptoparty/20130323_slides_brux....
CyptoParty Wiki
https://cryptoparty.org/wiki/Brussels
EDRi Data protection booklet
http://www.edri.org/files/paper06_datap.pdf
Cypherpunk Manifesto
http://www.activism.net/cypherpunk/manifesto.html
Tools:
Tech Tools for activism
https://techtoolsforactivism.org/booklet
Tor – Anonymity online
https://www.torproject.org/
Email encryption
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
http://www.gnupg.org/
Web browsing
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_Secure
Text messaging
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.thoughtcrime.secures...
(Contributions by Kirsten Fiedler - EDRi)
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: Online-Piraterie nicht schuld an rückläufigen Musikumsätzen
As continuously argued by different IT specialists, digital freedom activists and organisations during the last few years, online piracy does not affect music industry revenues, as it is shown by a new research performed by The Institute for Prospective Technological Studies which is part of European Commission’s Joint Research Centre.
After having examined the browsing habits of 16 000 Europeans, the researchers found there is actually a positive relationship between online piracy and visits to legal music stores.
“It seems that the majority of the music that is consumed illegally by the individuals in our sample would not have been purchased if illegal downloading websites were not available to them,” says the paper in published by the researchers which is entitled “Digital Music Consumption on the Internet: Evidence from Clickstream Data”.
The relationship between online piracy and music stores was established by comparing the users’ visits to allegedly illegal sites and to the legal music stores and the conclusion was that those visiting alleged illegal sites are likely to visit legal stores as well. Online streaming seems to have a stimulating effect on the sales of digital music.
“If this estimate is given a causal interpretation, it means that clicks on legal purchase websites would have been 2 percent lower in the absence of illegal downloading websites,” says the research. While admitting that other external factors might influence these effects, the researchers conclude that, in any case, there is no evidence that online piracy is damaging for the music industry sales. The paper also points out that “digital music piracy does not displace legal music purchases in digital format. This means that although there is trespassing of private property rights, there is unlikely to be much harm done on digital music revenues.”
This paper is very useful in the ongoing copyright enforcement debate in Europe representing good arguments against increased surveillance and policing of copyrighted content.
JRC report - Digital Music Consumption on the Internet: Evidence from
Clickstream Data (2013)
http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC79605.pdf
Online Music Piracy Doesn’t Hurt Sales, European Commission Finds
(18.03.2013)
http://torrentfreak.com/online-piracy-is-not-hurting-music-revenues-eu...
Spotify Is Now Smearing That EU Study on Piracy... (21.03.2013)
http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2013/20130321spotifysmearing
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: Betreibt Facebook Zensur?
On 18 March 2013, the German radio presenter Jürgen Domian accused Facebook of censorship after some of his posts in which he had made some remarks about the new Pope, were deleted without warning by the social network.
Domian said he believed Facebook had taken down the posts after receiving complaints from Catholic users. "Clearly fanatical supporters of the (Catholic) church kicked up such a fuss with Facebook that they buckled," he wrote. He also said that the social network had told him that the respective posts did not meet their guidelines.
Domian had had other posts removed as well in which he debated about gay marriage and emergency contraception for rape victims.
The presenter asked his fans to share his post in which he revealed Facebook’s actions, as much as possible and, probably as a result of a very large response (about 15 000 people liked the post and it was shared about 20 000 times), Facebook apologized.
However, a Facebook spokeswoman described the removal just as a "regrettable error of the reporting system", commenting further: "And we know that this can be frustrating when, as in this case, such an error happens. (...) Excuse me, Jürgen Domian!"
Facebook 'censors' radio host's pope criticism (19.03.2013)
http://www.thelocal.de/sci-tech/20130319-48623.html#.UVCdJVeVjL8
Jürgen Domian is stunned by Facebook deletion (only in German, 20.03.2013)
http://www.t-online.de/unterhaltung/stars/id_62627188/juergen-domian-f...
Jürgen Domian accuses Facebook of censorship (only in German, 19.03.2013)
http://socialmediawatchblog.de/facebook-zensiert-jurgen-domian/
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: ENDitorial: Eine Woche des Schreckens für die deutsche Netzpolitik
In Germany, political developments in the last week have been perceived as a frustrating defeat by the "Internet community", as three legislative measures that had been heavily criticised (and ridiculed) have progressed in the Parliament.
On 20 March 2013, "De-Mail", Germany's standard for "court-proof" electronic communications and document exchange between citizens, authorities and businesses, was discussed in a hearing in the Committee on Internal Affairs of the Bundestag (the "lower house" in Germany's federal Parliament).
The main complaint from experts was that when De-Mail is used "as-is", there will be no end-to-end encryption as key pairs will be kept on servers. The concept is that the server of the recipient's De-Mail provider will decrypt messages, verify signatures and scan the content for malware. Critics said the draft law would whitewash a technically unsound scheme, pronouncing it safe "by legal order".
EDRi member Chaos Computer Club, who had been invited to send a member as expert witness to the hearing, published a statement that called De-Mail's security a "bad joke" and called for the project to be scrapped entirely. But it seems that the Parliament is going ahead with the scheme, with industry experts and politicians saying that stricter cryptographic standards would make De-Mail too complicated for users.
On 21 March 2013, the Bundestag passed an amendment to Germany's telecommunications law, changing the rules on access by law enforcement authorities to identification and access data (user identities, passwords, PINs etc) stored by telecommunication providers. A change to the 2004 law had been mandated in January 2012 by Germany's Federal Constitutional Court, which had partly agreed to a constitutional complaint from EDRi observer AK Vorrat (working group on data retention).
But even after some late changes to the amendment, critics maintain that the law remains a threat to fundamental rights. While access to some types of data will require a judicial decree, this will not apply when the user behind an IP address or telephone number is identified, only when PINs or passwords are accessed. And an obligation to inform individuals if their data is accessed has only been included with significant restrictions.
More fundamentally, access is to be allowed for a practically unrestricted range of reasons, from suspicions of serious criminal activity down to minor offences; the law contains no defining "catalogue" at all. The new bill has yet to pass through the "upper house" - the Bundesrat, which represents the governments of Germany's federal states - but since the main opposition party SPD participated in negotiating the amendment, it is unlikely that they will call for substantial changes later. Most critics believe that the new law will have to be taken to the Constitutional Court yet again.
The most painful defeat came on 22 March 2013 with the adoption of a highly disputed extension to Germany's copyright law. A new "ancillary copyright for press publishers" ("Leistungsschutzrecht für Presseverleger") gives publishers the right to claim copyright fees for links to news stories. This idea had been heavily criticised ever since it had been brought up by news publishers in 2009.
Before the vote in the Bundestag on 1 March, last-minute changes had been made to exempt small snippets from copyright fees, but a lot of uncertainty remains. The new law defines the scope of the fees no further than "commercial publication, unless it contains only single words or smallest excerpts".
A particular disappointment was a change of position by the Social Democrats, who, together with the Green Party, would at least have had the power to delay the passage of the law, possibly until the next federal elections in September. After the Bundestag had approved the bill, leading SPD representatives had promised resistance in the Bundesrat, but the party changed course just a few days before the second chamber's vote. In the end, the opposition only used their Bundesrat majority to pass a resolution calling for a reform of the same law that they had just failed to block.
In their comments, SPD politicians hoped that a new government after the September elections would reform the law, but it is not looking likely that the elections will produce the desired result. And after changing their position so quickly and apparently under the influence of strong lobbying from news publishers, it may seem doubtful if the Social Democrats can be relied upon to make a political difference.
Meanwhile, the only difference made by the new law is expected to be widespread uncertainty, but little new revenue for news publishers. An often heard prognosis is that there will be fewer links on third-party websites, leading to counter-productive losses of traffic on news sites. Some bloggers have already started to depublish large parts of their existing content and may stop their activities completely.
Put together, these events have been seen as a substantial defeat for the German "Internet politics" community that had regarded itself as strong and gradually gaining recognition by mainstream politicians.
A parliamentary commission of inquiry on the Internet and digital society had just finished its deliberations in late January, but the positions and expertise gathered over three years of painstaking work seem to have been largely ignored last week.
At the same time, the German Pirate Party has seen their popularity decline significantly in the last year, making observers wonder if the governing parties are now feeling less threat from this side. Questions are now being asked how the community should make its voice heard better in the future.
De-Mail: CCC calls its security "only a bad joke" (only in German,
19.03.2013)
http://ccc.de/de/updates/2013/stellungnahmedemail
De-Mail: disagreement on suitability for e-government (only in German,
21.03.2013)
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/De-Mail-Uneinigkeit-ueber-Eignu...
Access to user data: Bundestag regulates access to IP addresses and
passwords (only in German, 22.03.2013)
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Bundestag-regelt-Zugriff-auf-IP...
Ancillary copyright: Is the SPD wavering? (only in German, 07.03.2013)
http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/38/38707/1.html
Ancillary copyright: No majority in the Bundesrat against the new law
(only in German, 21.03.2013)
https://netzpolitik.org/2013/keine-mehrheit-im-bundesrat-gegen-das-lei...
Ancillary copyright: A news service for historians suspends all
activities in response (only in German, 09.03.2013)
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Nachrichtendienst-fuer-Historik...
Ancillary copyright: A community blog in Leipzig will stop linking to
news sites and has depublished large parts of their old content (only in
German, 25.03.2013)
http://www.heldenstadt.de/2013/03/25/in-eigener-sache-welche-konsequen...
Reflection: Popcornpiraten (a blog about, not by, the Pirate Party):
Debates about the relationship between the Pirate Party and the
"Internet community", and reasons for the "failure" of Internet politics
(only in German, 26.03.2013)
http://popcornpiraten.de/diskussion-um-verhaltnis-von-piratenpartei-zu...
(Contribution by Sebastian Lisken, EDRi member digitalcourage)
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: Mitmachen!
Today, 27 March 2013, is the Document Freedom Day.
In 30 countries around the world, activists are celebrating Open
Standards on today's Document Freedom Day, an annual campaign to promote
Open Standards. More than 50 groups are hosting events around the world,
from Brussels to Nicaragua to Taiwan.
http://www.documentfreedom.org
UK: Cameron, stop the Dangerous Blogs Bill.
The Leveson regulations are being applied to UK websites – in ways that
could catch more or less anyone who publishes a blog. Ordinary bloggers
could be threatened with exemplary damages and costs. If this happens,
small website publishers will face terrible risks, or burdensome
regulation – and many may simply stop publishing.
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/leveson
UK: Launch of medConfidential, a campaign organisation fighting for
patient privacy
Medical confidentiality in England is under unprecedented threat. New
legislation that comes into force next month will permit the upload of
identifiable patient data directly from family doctors' records to
central systems, from which it will be sold and made available to
researchers and private companies. Other developments include the
creation of online patient records, and a proposal to create shared
record systems across health and social care.
http://medconfidential.org
Digital Agenda: Commission opens consultations on media freedom and
pluralism and audiovisual media regulator independence
Deadline: 14 June 2013
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-267_en.htm
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/public-consultation-independent...
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: Lesestoff
Facebook expands ad targeting system to its newsfeed (26.03.2013)
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/03/26/us-facebook-ads-idUKBRE92P18G...
ACTA: European Court of Justice judgement: Sophie in ‘t Veld MEP v
European Commission (03.2013)
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2013/mar/acta-ecj-veld-judgment.pdf
Sophie in 't Veld (MEP) determined to step up efforts for more
transparency in EU (20.03.2013)
http://site.d66.nl/europa/nieuws/20130320/sophie_in_t_veld_mep_determi...
Parliament Legal Affairs Committee adopts improved position on privacy
legislation (19.03.2013)
http://www.edri.org/juri_eudatap
WP202: Opinion 02/2013 on apps on smart devices (27.02.2013)
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article-29/documentation/o...
Google Further Highlights Wrongful DMCA Takedowns (20.03.2013)
http://torrentfreak.com/google-further-highlights-wrongful-dmca-takedo...
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: Agenda
12 April 2013, Biefeld, Germany
Big Brother Awards Germany
http://www.bigbrotherawards.de/
6-8 May 2013, Berlin, Germany
re:publica 2013
http://re-publica.de/en/
20-21 June 2013, Lisbon, Portugal
EuroDIG 2013
http://www.eurodig.org/
25-26 June 2013, Barcelona, Spain
9th International Conference on Internet Law & Politics: Big Data:
Challenges and Opportunities.
http://edcp.uoc.edu/symposia/idp2013/?lang=en
25-26 June 2013, Washington, DC, USA
23rd Computers, Freedom and Privacy Conference (CFP)
http://www.cfp.org/2013
31 July – 4 August 2013, Geestmerambacht, Netherlands
Observe. Hack. Make. - OHM2013
CfP by 1 May 2013
https://ohm2013.org/
14-15 September 2013, Vienna, Austria
Daten, Netz & Politik 2013 - DNP13
CfC by 15 April 2013
https://dnp13.unwatched.org/
23-26 September 2013, Warsaw, Poland
Public Voice Conference 2013
35th International Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners conference
http://www.giodo.gov.pl/259/id_art/762/j/en/
25-27 October 2013, Siegen, Germany
Cyberpeace - FIfF annual Meeting 2013