This article is also available in:
Deutsch: EDRi und BEUC fordern Wahrung der Netzneutralität
A joint letter sent by the European Consumer Organisation (BEUC) and European Digital Rights (EDRi) to the European Commission on 17 April 2013 demanded the end of dangerous experimentations with the functioning of the Internet in Europe and the protection of the principles of openness and neutrality.
BEUC and EDRi fear that the upcoming non-binding Recommendations on net neutrality will be based on meaningless safeguards such as the possibility to switch operators and an obligation for each operator to have at least one full internet offer. This approach would mean that the European Commission will be facilitating the creation of new barriers in the digital "single market" at the same time as it is trying to remove existing ones. A European start-up whose access to its potential market is being restricted will gain no comfort from the blocking being "transparent" or the fact that consumers would be able to use their service if they change providers.
EDRi and BEUC joint letter on Net Neutrality (17.04.2013)
http://edri.org/files/2013-BEUC-EDRi-NN.pdf
Net Neutrality timeline
http://www.tiki-toki.com/timeline/entry/108784/Net-neutrality-in-Europ...
More details on EDRi website (17.04.2013)
http://edri.org/node/3281
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: Deutsche Telekom drosselt das Internet
On 22 April 2013, the biggest German Internet operator Deutsche Telekom
officially confirmed abandoning all contracts that offer flat rates for
fixed Internet connections. Instead of investing in urgently needed
broadband infrastructure in Germany, the operator announced starting
throttling connections and introducing contracts with the following data
caps:
- Rates with a speed up to 16 Mbit/s: 75 GB
- Rates with a speed up to 50 Mbit/s: 200 GB
- Rates with a speed up to 100 Mbit/s: 300 GB
- Rates with a speed up to 200 Mbit/s: 400 GB
As soon as these caps are exceeded, the Internet connection will be slowed down to 384 Kbit/s. However, this will not include Telekom's own streaming services, the so-called "T-Entertain" programs. Moreover, music streaming service Spotify will be favoured ahead of its competitors - limiting the market for legal online music. After years of demanding that ISPs become gatekeepers, the music industry has finally got what it asked for.
Civil society groups in Germany harshly criticised Telekom's decisions and called for a legal protection of network neutrality, which would prohibit any anti-competitive discrimination. EDRi-member Digitale Gesellschaft condemned the decision as a “retrograde move back to the level of the 1990s”.
The decision of Deutsche Telekom confirms that Commission's wait and see approach on net neutrality is increasingly unsustainable. Only a few days earlier, the European Consumers' Organisation (BEUC) and EDRi warned the Commission in a call for action that "reckless experimentation will continue unless the European Commission puts a stop to it."
Call for Action sent to the European Commission (04.2013)
http://edri.org/files/2013-BEUC-EDRi-NN.pdf
Digitale Gesellschaft: Telecom tariff changes: frontal assault on net
neutrality (only in German, 22.04.2013)
https://digitalegesellschaft.de/2013/04/telekom-tarifanderungen-fronta...
Der Spiegel: The Telecom strangled the Internet (only in German, 23.04.2013)
http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/sascha-lobo-ueber-dsl-flatr...
(Contribution by Kirsten Fiedler - EDRi)
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: Meinungsfreiheit: Türkischer Pianist wegen Twitter-Kommentaren verurt...
On 15 April 2013, the Criminal Court of Justice of Istanbul gave Turkish pianist Fazil Say a 10 month suspended jail sentence over comments on Twitter, deciding he was guilty of violating an article of the Turkish Criminal Code that forbids the “denigration of the religious values held by a section of society”.
The pianist was prosecuted in June 2012 by the Istanbul Public Prosecutor's Office after he had posted a series of tweets on Twitter and was accused of insulting Islam, while the pianist argued he had just retweeted a line from a poem and that his comments were politically justified.
It is not clear if Say was convicted for retweeting the poem or actually for his religion-related comments. But the issue is not whether Say is politically correct or polite, but that his right to freedom of expression was limited.
“This sentence is in violation of the right to freedom of expression. People are entitled to pass comment, share views and make reference to debates which other people may find offensive, insulting or upsetting. It is vital that people are able to share thoughts and engage in public debates, including on issues concerning religion”, said Agnes Callamard, Executive Director of EDRi member Article 19 who has shown concern over the decision of the Turkish court.
The Turkish law says: “A person who publicly scorns the religious values adopted by a segment of the society, in the case that the act is directed toward disrupting public peace, will be penalized by a six-month to one-year prison term.” (Article 216/3). Even a critic of Say’s comments, such as Taha Akyol, considers that Say’s words, disrespectful or annoying as they may be, do not represent “an open and imminent danger,” or a feature “disruption to social peace.”
NGO Article 19 calls on the Turkish government to take measures to ensure freedom of expression online as well as off-line and overturn Fazil Say’s sentence. The group also calls on a revision of the Turkish Criminal Law (Article 126 based on which Say was convicted) to bring it in line with the international standards on free expression, including the European Convention of Human Rights, of which Turkey it is a signatory.
Turkey: Quash Twitter pianist sentence in honour of free speech (16.04.2013)
http://www.article19.org/resources.php/resource/3699/en/turkey:-quash-
Turkish pianist Fazil Say convicted of insulting Islam (15.04.2013)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22151212
Fazil Say should pay for his deeds, Turkish deputy PM says (19.04.2013)
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/fazil-say-should-pay-for-his-deeds-tu...
The Fazil Say incident (18.04.2013)
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/the-fazil-say-incident.aspx?pageID=23...
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: Facebooks „Kinderschutz“-Veranstaltung führt zur Demontage des Da...
On 11 April 2013, a conference on the global fight against online child sexual abuse content took place at the European Parliament. It was organised by the Internet Watch Foundation, with the support of Facebook. The topic was the rather uncontroversial topic of cooperation in the fight against online child abuse content.
Speakers from Europe, Asia, America and Africa reflected on how to make the Internet a safe place for children, which measures have already been taken and what are the next steps in this fight going to be. Everyone agreed that in order to go further in the global fight against online child sexual abuse an increasing awareness on this problem is needed as well as common (but not harmonised as they assumed it will be impossible) definitions of "minor" and "abuse" and a major international cooperation. The fact that the Internet Watch Foundation (or the vast majority of hotlines funded by the European Commission) has failed to produce useful statistics on the scale of the problem and current trends, appeared to be of little concern.
After all speakers explained their work and achievements in child online protection, a series of questions were asked by both the moderator, the technology reporter Kate Russell, and the audience. Throughout the two questions sessions, data protection and privacy were characterised as a major obstacle to fighting online child abuse. Although there was a complete lack of debate on this question, speakers did make some striking statements. Emma McClarkin MEP said that when online child protection was discussed in the European Parliament and Commission, she was “shocked” about the existence of controversy on this topic as she thought that everyone would agree with the need to protect children and that in order to make the internet a safer place for them every existing tools should be use, “even blocking”.
Without addressing key child protection concerns like effective use of available resources and possible counter-productive effects of knee-jerk reactions, Ms. McClarkin declared that she didn’t understand the opinion of organisations defending data protection and privacy as in this particular issue we need “to forget about the technology tools and think about the victims”. She went further adding that digital protection associations were acting against child protection as they don’t realise how important the problem is and that the focus should not be on data protection but on “the need to protect children from themselves”.
In this attack against digital rights organisations, she was joined by the Senior Specialist with the European Cyber Crime Centre, Jean-Charles Schweitzer, who was completely shocked to hear the "P-word" as “there is no such thing as privacy involved in fighting child abuse”. Simon Milner, Director of Policy in Facebook for the UK and Ireland, was next on this one way conversation explaining that Facebook wants “the world to be safe” and understands the concern on privacy but didn’t really know why his company was receiving criticism from people defending privacy and data protection because it uses data to identify dubious behaviours. Finally, in his intervention, he talked about the efficiency of the Microsoft and Dartmouth College technology, "PhotoDNA", without providing us with any data or concrete achievement. Cornelia Kutterer, director of the EU Institutions Relations at Microsoft then explained that, thanks to this tool, they were convinced that they were protecting privacy as it protects children’s privacy.
Evidence? Effectiveness? Proportionality? All unnecessary? Privacy for children is apparently unnecessary when most abuse is carried out by a caregiver or someone that the child knows and lack of privacy can mean lack of an escape route? The “experts” believe none of this is necessary. Funded by Facebook.
Link to the Conference agenda with the name of all speakers (11.04.2013)
http://www.iwf.org.uk/assets/media/Agenda%20conference%20on%20the%20gl...
(Contribution by Estelle Massé (EDRi Intern) and Joe McNamee - EDRi)
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: CleanIT laut Studie unklar und gefährlich
The University of Tilburg was requested by the Dutch National Coordinator on Counter-Terrorism and Security to comment on the fundamental rights implications of the so-called “Best Practices” that have been developed in the Clean IT project.
This report commented on a final very short document from CleanIT and not the more outlandish proposals leaked by EDRi several months ago.
The Tilburg report argues that, given the lack of clarity on the term “terrorist use of the Internet” and the unpredictability of the practical implementation of these Best Practices, their effects on fundamental rights can potentially be extremely harmful.
For instance, the Tilburg University report detected possible
infringements to the:
- freedom of thought, conscience, and religion;
- freedom of speech;
- freedom of assembly and of association;
- right to privacy and data protection;
- freedom to conduct a business;
- right to education;
- non-discrimination;
- respect for cultural, religious, and linguistic diversity;
- access to services of general economic interest;
- consumer protection;
- right to a good administration;
- right of access to documents;
- right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial;
- presumption of innocence and right to defence;
- principle of legality and proportionality of criminal offences and
penalties;
- right not to be punished twice in criminal proceedings for the same
criminal offence.
The main and most recurrent risk of violation concerns freedom of communication. A significant number of the “Best Practices” would lead to the removal of content which hypothetically falls under ill-defined “terrorist use of the Internet” and thus, directly harm freedom of speech. The lack of clarity on the definition of this term and the lack of transparency involving private parties allowed to report misuse of the Internet could provoke censorship and limit the user’s freedom of communication and expression. Furthermore, Internet providers do not have the expertise to assess whether Internet content is illegal or not. This complex task should be carried by a specific authority.
The Clean IT project raises many concerns on its compliance with fundamental rights as the implementation of several “Best Practices” could harm a large number of them and promote a culture of fear, as Internet users would be constantly reminded of a potential terrorist threat, leading to overemphasising security risks at the detriment of due respect for fundamental rights.
Oddly, while the CleanIT project has always claimed to be open and transparent, the organisers have omitted to provide a link to the analysis from its first page.
Tilburg paper (01.2013)
http://www.cleanitproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/CleanIT-human-...
EDRi leak of CleanIT discussion document (21.09.2012)
http://www.edri.org/cleanIT
CleanIT project
http://www.cleanitproject.eu
(Contribution by Estelle Massé - EDRi Intern)
In February 2013, EDRi wrote to European Commission President José-Manuel Barroso to highlight problems with the very divergent and contradictory approaches being taken by the Commission regarding the role of intermediaries in dealing with allegedly illegal content and to support the evidence-based approach of Commissioner Barnier and DG Internal Market.
The letter was motivated by two different developments in the
Commission. Firstly, we have seen a constant trickle of
“self-regulatory” initiatives proposed and funded by the Commission,
such as the “CEO Coalition to make the Internet a better place for kids”
(child protection, led by Commissioner Kroes) and the “Clean IT Project”
(terrorism, funded by Commissioner Malmström). These initiatives always
have certain characteristics:
- they are never based on any specific problem analysis but the concept
that “something” should be done by “someone”.
- while the Commission funds them and even sometimes initiates and
directs them, the Commission accepts no responsibility for their outcomes.
- even though the Commission accepts no responsibility for the outcomes,
it has no hesitation in demanding certain “voluntary” measures to be
implemented by the industry – with the threat of bad publicity or
legislation (or both) if its wishes are not complied with.
The other development is the “Notice and Action” initiative by DG Internal Market of the European Commission. Here, the Commission has taken the opposite approach. It invested significant manpower and resources into bilateral and multilateral meetings with the Internet industry, civil society, copyright and child protection organisations and organised a consultation (which received a record number of responses from citizens). On the basis of the evidence collected, the Commission service in charge came to the conclusion that the Commission had to take responsibility for for problems that it has identified and launch new legislation to provide greater legal certainty for all stakeholders, ensuring adequate protection for citizens' fundamental right to freedom of communication.
While EDRi has not seen the proposed Directive and accompanying documents, we felt that the Commission deserved support for this diligent, evidence-based approach and its apparent willingness to take legal responsibility for fixing the problems that it identified.
Unfortunately, with elections in May 2014 and the end of the current Commission later this year, there is a strong risk that the Commission will not have the courage of its convictions. Despite the fact that the Commission has identified restrictions of freedom of communication that have their origins in existing EU legislation, President Barroso may not feel able to show the necessary leadership to resolve the problem. Instead of legislation to fix the problem, non-binding “recommendations” will probably be the “safe” solution adopted by the Commission.
This would be a sad development, compared with the hopes for fundamental rights that marked the start of the current Commission's term of office. On 3 May 2010, when taking the oath to “respect the treaties and the Charter” President Barroso said “the oath of independence and respect for the EU Treaties is more than a symbolic act. The European Commission is a unique institution and the Commissioners have today made clear that they will uphold all the principles and values enshrined in the Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental rights". Indeed.
Commission Vice-President Viviane Reding, responsible for Fundamental Rights, responded to our letter on behalf of President Barroso. The brevity of the response shows the controversial nature of the topic within the Commission. While the most likely outcome now appears to be that the Commission will back away from its evidence-based approach, the legally dubious, evidence-free approach of “voluntary measures” is now politically a far more risky proposal than it was a few months ago.
EDRi letter (21.02.2013)
http://edri.org/files/130221noticeandaction.pdf
Commission response (11.04.2013)
http://edri.org/files/130411selfreg_response.pdf
CEO Coalition to make the Internet a better place for kids (14.03.2012)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number10.5/ceo-coalition-freedom-of-speec...
CEO Coalition conclusions (2.02.2013)
http://www.edri.org/CEO_Coalition
Clean IT – Leak shows plans for large-scale, undemocratic surveillance
of all communications (21.09.2012)
http://www.edri.org/cleanIT
CleanIT looking for the question that it was seeking an answer to
(21.11.2012)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number10.22/cleanit-question-not-clear
ENDitorial: Clean IT is just a symptom of the pinata politics of
privatised online enforcement (26.09.2012)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number10.18/cleanit-symptom-+privatised-o...
Clean IT
http://cleanitproject.eu
CEO Coalition
http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/better-internet-kids-ceo-co...
(Contribution by Joe McNamee - EDRi)
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: Deutsche Big Brother Awards 2013
On 12 April 2013 the thirteenth German Big Brother Awards gala was held in Bielefeld, Germany. Organised by EDRi member digitalcourage, the awards featured five winners in different categories. No winners showed up to collect their award - in fact, only three BBAs have been collected since the awards started in 2000.
The Workplace award went to Apple Retail GmbH in Munich, which runs Apple Stores in Germany. The company uses blanket video surveillance in its showrooms, and has recently had a run-in with data protection authorities over the placement and size of signs informing customers about the cameras. That has now been changed, but the signs are still rather difficult to spot, with Apple's design guidelines cited as the reason. But the story goes further: according to inside sources, video and audio monitoring also extends to store rooms and even break rooms and to the spaces in front of lavatory doors. Also, the legally required collection of consent from staff is apparently conducted via a document that new employees are given as they sign their work contracts, which hardly constitutes the voluntary consent demanded by German law. Further details that question the legality of Apple Retail's monitoring are that the data seems to be processed abroad (in the UK), and stored for excessive periods of time.
A new category "Global Data Hoarding" was created for the evening's longest award speech, which "honoured" Google - not any particular violation of privacy or oppressive passage in its Terms and Conditions, but Google's ubiquitous nature and its dangerous business model. The company strives to collect as much data about its users - which means all Internet users - as it possibly can, following surfers around the net wherever they go, whether they are logged into a Google service or not. Google's main business is of course advertising, and its many other services serve to elicit more specific information about user interests in order to target these ads better. Google's stated vision to "organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful" was interpreted as a "claim to power" that even extends beyond the Internet with Google Street View and the latest buzz, Google Glass. This philosophy culminates in a creepy statement by Google's Executive Chairman, Eric Schmidt: "I actually think most people don’t want Google to answer their questions ... They want Google to tell them what they should be doing next." The award's response to all of this is: "Google must be broken up." It calls on European data protection officials to close ranks on Google to reign in this global monopoly.
A funny side story to Google's award is that the organisers were unable to contact the winner and extend the customary invitation to the gala. Mail to Google's address in Hamburg was returned as undeliverable, despite Street View showing a crowd of Google employees in front of the building. Emails and faxes also failed. German consumer protection association vzbv issued a formal warning against Google a few days after the awards, deeming the company's "dead letter box" a violation of Germany's Tele-Media Act.
The winner in the Economy category was Deutsche Post Adress GmbH, a joint venture of Germany's former state postal service and Bertelsmann, a multinational mass media corporation with subsidiaries in address data services. The award was for what is probably the largest family of address databases in Germany, and the company's portfolio of services (including address-based credit scoring) and inquisitive methods of keeping its data current (using data supplied to Deutsche Post for mail redirection, delivery workers' observations, and even follow-up telephone calls).
The Government and Administration award was given to the German Federal Police (tasked with border controls and patrols on trains and railway stations, and separate from Germany's regular police forces which are organised by Federal State), for discriminatory and racist searches without any concrete suspicion. A recent court case was cited in which it was ruled on appeal that the Federal Police had violated the Constitution. This happened against a background of failures in the investigation of a right-wing terrorist group murdering immigrants over several years (where the victims' families had been wrongly placed under suspicion), discrimination in anti-terrorist operations, inquisitive questions to bi-national married couples, and last not least the winner itself taking part in a "respect" campaign that seems little more than a whitewashing gesture. This category also won the vote for the audience award, in which guests at the gala were asked which winner they found particularly outrageous.
In the Politics category, the new system for collecting the public broadcasting licence fee was recognised, with the award going to the premiers of Germany's 16 Federal States who signed the changes in an Inter-State Agreement on Media Services. The licence fee no longer depends on the presence of a receiving device, which could pave the way for a collection system that no longer depends on snooping in neighbourhoods and collecting data even beyond the information stored with German registration authorities. But that is exactly what the new Licence Fee Service does collect from several sources, including the data hoarded by the previous Fee Collection Centre which had received a Lifetime BBA in 2003. Added to this is a dubious distribution of legal responsibilities, making checks by data protection officials or inquiries by citizens about their data almost impossible.
The gala also featured an impressive and topical performance by Pit Hartling, one of Germany's leading stage magicians, a "new-speak" award for the German word "Übersichtsaufnahme" (overview recording) as a euphemism for police video surveillance at demonstrations, and an informative talk about the current state of play with the EU's Data Protection Regulation.
Big Brother Awards Germany 2013 (English coverage)
http://www.bigbrotherawards.de/2013-en?set_language=en
digitalcourage news item about its mail to Google being returned (only
in German, 20.04.2013)
https://www.foebud.org/datenschutz-buergerrechte/vzbv-mahnt-google-weg...
(Contribution by Sebastian Lisken, EDRi member digitalcourage)
In an action that has become known as “A Monster from Rome”, the Italian Public Prosecutor of Rome ordered on 15 April 2013 the blocking of 27 file-sharing related sites at the request of Sunshine Pictures, the Italian distributor of the French animated film “A Monster in Paris”.
The list which has been made public includes mainly storage and streaming sites such as Rapidgator, one of the world’s largest file-hosting sites, Uploaded, BitShare, NowVideo, NowDownload, VideoPremium, QueenShare and ClipsHouse. The prosecutor has already warned that he intends to extend the action internationally to properly seize the respective domains.
“I think that operations like this one could jeopardize freedom of speech, and endanger legitimate web sites, being also a risk for the civil liberties. Copyright cannot be considered as a more essential right than freedom of expression, or a more important matter than a free and open internet,” stated Fulvio Sarzana, a lawyer with the Sarzana and Partners law firm specializing in Internet and copyright disputes, which has been hired by Rapidgator to fight back.
The action also seems extremely disproportionate considering that such a large-scale operation was triggered by the complaint of a small film distributor for just a single cartoon movie which cannot possibly justify the seizure of so many big sites which also contain legal files.
According to Suzana, a number of ISPs have already filed appeals against the current blocking order.
For the time being the list of blocked sites does not include BitTorrent sites and the domains are blocked only on the DNS level which means that the sites can be accessible if users switch to OpenDNS or Google DNS.
Massive BitTorrent and Cyberlocker Domain Crackdown Underway (Updated)
(15.04.2013)
http://torrentfreak.com/massive-bittorrent-and-cyberlocker-domain-crac...
Crackdown on File sharing. Rapidgator and ISPs Appeal Domain Name
Blockade and Seizure (19.04.2013)
http://www.fulviosarzana.it/en/
Domain names blocking measures of the Italian Authorities (only in Italian)
http://censura.bofh.it/elenchi.html
Italy, maxi-sequester of sharing, in progress (only in Italian, 15.04.2013)
http://punto-informatico.it/3768010/PI/News/italia-maxisequestro-dello...
Rapidgator, appeal against the seizure (18.04.2013)
http://punto-informatico.it/3770121/PI/News/rapidgator-ricorso-contro-...
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: Finnland: Gesunder Menschenverstand im Urheberrecht
The Finnish campaign "Common Sense in Copyright Law" organized a blackout day 23 April 2013 to market the citizens' initiative, which would strip the worst parts out of the Finnish copyright law and add German-style fairness-requirement to the copyright contracts. More than 50 websites participated to the event, which was also widely published in the Finnish media.
The initiative has to collect 50 000 signatures before 23 July to get submitted to the Finnish parliament. It has currently 27 600 collected signatures, which is 55% of the required names.
Finnish copyright initiative (only in Finnish)
https://www.kansalaisaloite.fi/fi/aloite/70
Finnish Websites Go Dark to Support a Fair Copyright Law (23.04.2013)
http://torrentfreak.com/finnish-websites-go-dark-to-support-copyright-...
(Contribution by Ville Oksanen - EDRi member EFFi)
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: ENDitorial: Abgeordnete schlagen schon wieder einmal Netzsperren vor
It seems that some Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) simply think that Internet gambling & web blocking must be added to all relevant documents. There have been blocking proposals under discussion at least three times in three years, after the previous proposals had been overwhelmingly rejected. Now, for the second time in three years, the Parliament has decided to launch a report on online gambling, with web blocking as one of the (non-binding) options being considered.
Having spent six months in 2011 preparing a report on “online gambling in the Internal Market,” in response to a Commission Communication on online gambling, the Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee (IMCO) of the European Parliament has decided to do another report on online gambling to respond to a new Commission Communication.
Ultimately, the main issue is that cross-border gambling services cause a reduction in tax receipts in countries with uncompetitive markets or national monopolies. Under the flimsy guise of “consumer protection” several EU member states seek to find ways of restricting competition, with the aim of forcing consumers to use local services (often with lower average payouts) instead of more efficient and compelling services elsewhere in Europe.
In 2011, there was extensive discussion about the blocking of “illegal” websites ("illegal" either due to not being registered and paying tax in the country doing the blocking or illegal in a more conventional sense). The result was a rather ham-fisted compromise, with nebulous meaning. Being non-legislative, this lack of meaning is unimportant, except to the Parliament's credibility
When the Commission launched its most recent Communication, it was as critical as diplomatic possible about blocking, bearing in mind that this is a policy currently in force in several EU Member States. The Commission explained that “blocking access to websites does not work as an isolated enforcement tool and can be easily circumvented” and that “website blocking can impact on legitimate businesses”.
This expert analysis of the European Commission, based on an extensive consultation, appears to be of no interest at all to certain Parliamentarians. Remarkably, in a Committee that is supposed to be devoted to supporting the European single market and protecting consumers, ill-informed MEPs are lining up to promote blocking – a policy which is destructive both for the European Single Market and consumer interests.
A group of Finnish MEPs from the EPP, S&D and Liberal groups (Sari Essayah, Eija-Riitta Korhola, Liisa Jaakonsaari and Hannu Takkula) tabled an amendment calling for measures such as the blacklisting and the “banning of illegal websites”. And here is a funny coincidence: Finland has a national gambling monopoly. Similar amendments were also tabled by Spanish and French parliamentarians.
Ignoring the logical incoherence of seeking to ban sites carrying out illegal activities (one has to wonder what Parliamentarians think the practical effect will be of banning something that is already illegal – maybe they think it will make them very illegal or maybe really, really illegal), it is remarkable that the MEPs who tabled the pro-blocking amendments have one thing in common – all of those who were present for the vote on the child exploitation Directive voted against mandatory web blocking for child abuse websites. Now, after the confirmation of the pointlessness of blocking by the European Commission, they have somehow come to the conclusion that, for economic purposes, it is a good idea.
Next step : IMCO will be voting on the draft report on 29-30 May 2013.
Commission Communication 2011
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commis...
Parliament resolution 2011
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&...
P7-TA-2011-492
Commission Communication 2012
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/docs/gambling/comm_121023...
Draft Parliament report
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fNO...
Amendments
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fNO...
(Contribution by Joe McNamee - EDRi)
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: Lesestoff
German Parliament says: Stop Granting Software Patents (22.04.2013)
http://fsfe.org/news/2013/news-20130422-01.en.html
UK: Browsing the Internet is a legitimate exception to copyright
(19.04.2013)
http://www.article19.org/resources.php/resource/3707/en/uk:-browsing-t...
Travel Surveillance, Traveler Intrusion (televised forum on naked
scanners and use of PNR data in Washington, DC, 2.04.2013)
Video
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/311862-1
Slides
http://hasbrouck.org/articles/Hasbrouck-Cato-2APR2013.pdf
This article is also available in:
Deutsch: Agenda
25 April 2013, Brussels, Belgium
Press conference on a report which shows the current danger to EU data
protection
http://edri.org/eudatap-conference
6-8 May 2013, Berlin, Germany
re:publica 2013
http://re-publica.de/en/
13-15 May 2013, Brussels, Belgium
Privacy Barcamp
soon on http://www.edri.org
30 May 2013, Gent, Belgium
BBA Belgium 2013
http://www.bigbrotherawards.be
8 June 2013, London, UK
ORGCon 2013
http://orgcon.openrightsgroup.org
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
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
http://www.fiff.de/