According to a report by the German Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law, Italy and the Netherlands are the wiretap champions of the Western world.
The report entitled 'Rechtswirklichkeit und Effizienz der Überwachung der Telekommunikation' researches the legal and practical situation in Germany regarding police wiretapping. The report also investigates the situation in surrounding countries, notably in Western Europe and the Anglo-Saxon countries.
The report concludes that Italy has the highest number of wiretaps per capita, 76 per 100.000 inhabitants. The Netherlands follow closely on the second place with 62 and Switzerland gets a third place with 32. Austria has the lowest number in Western-Europe with 9 wiretaps per 100.000 inhabitants. The statistics show a remarkable low figure for the Anglo-Saxon countries. The USA apply only 0,5 wiretaps for the given number of inhabitants. The statistics would mean that Italy engages into wiretapping about 140 times more often then the USA when compared to the number of inhabitants. The report does not go into the use of wiretaps by intelligences services and systems like Echelon.
The German report mentions an Italian 1992 law that allows wiretapping for pro-active information gathering on organised crime by order of a prosecutor. This law does not require a court approval. Under the law taps can't be used as evidence but they may be used for the preparation of cases. This might explain the high Italian statistics.
Research from the Dutch ministry of Justice shows that the 10.000 wiretaps per year in the Netherlands rarely lead to evidence that can be used in court. But wiretapping seems to be very heavily used as a tactical instrument during police investigations. Wiretapping gives insight into relations between suspects and their networks and is used as support for surveillance teams, according to the report.
Rechtswirklichkeit und Effizienz der Überwachung der Telekommunikation (..), Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law, international statistics on page 104 (in German, June 2003)
http://www.iuscrim.mpg.de/verlag/online/Band_115.pdf
De telefoontap in grote opsporingsonderzoeken, WODC (in Dutch, June 2004)
http://www.ministerievanjustitie.nl/b_organ/wodc/publicaties/overige/p...
Since the beginning of July, the European Parliament had two weeks to group up fractions and build coalitions. A new pro-EU Centrist and Liberal group has emerged, which will be the third strongest in the European Parliament after the Conservatives and Social Democrats. Due to all the political power game, there was not much time left to discuss digital rights-related issues, even though important decisions were made about the working agenda of the EU institutions for the next months.
The most interesting development was the widespread tendency with national parliaments to make their governments step back from the decision taken on 18 May, adopting the Council Common Position on the patentability of so-called computer-implemented inventions, more accurately known as the the Software Patent Directive. Technically, amendments are still possible to the position taken at that time, because the decision has not yet been translated into all 20 official languages of the EU.
On 1 July, the Dutch Parliament took the so far unique move to make the Minister of Economic Affairs change the five Dutch yes votes into an abstention (see the article below). The withdrawal of these five Dutch votes alone would note change much – it would take 37 no votes or abstentions to block the decision, but only Spain, Austria, Italy and Belgium, totalling 27 votes, have not approved the Common position. But after what seems to have been a tour de force of getting hesitant delegations to agree to the Council's decision on 18 May, other countries, including Germany (10 votes), Poland (8 votes) and Denmark (3 votes) are reiterating their votes on software patents also.
In Denmark, Parliament members claim their minister, who had shown some reservations before, has been pressed into voting yes. The Polish Representative, Mr Pietras of the Committee for European Integration, wrote he was tricked into voting yes by a bogus claim that amendments made up by Germany had reached a qualified majority even without Poland's support. His intention, Pietras said, would have been to abstain. The German delegation has also come under pressure from members of the Bundestag, due to these same amendments, which were changed in the last minute, as it seems. merely strategically without any real intention to pass them, and contrary to the government's intention. If Poland or Germany should change their vote, it would mean the Common Position would have to be re-negotiated in the Council, with the probable result being a more balanced approach, as compared to the present document.
A Common Position before a vote in the EU Parliament is, while by no means a binding document, a very strong incentive for Parliamentarians to vote the same way. It will also be the basis for so-called informal trilogue meetings that will most certainly take place between Council representatives and that Directive's Rapporteur, Mrs McCarthy (Labour, Britain), in the months of September or October. The Council will then be represented by its present Dutch Presidency.
EU Council of Ministers Scraps Parliament's Limits on Patentability (18.05.2004)
http://kwiki.ffii.org/?Cons040518En
Europe's software patent policy under siege (07.07.2004)
http://www.iht.com/bin/print.php?file=528268.html
Pietras letter on Polish abstention (20.05.2004)
http://kwiki.ffii.org/?Pietras040520En
Wikipedia: Qualified Majority Voting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_Majority_Voting
(Contribution by Andreas Dietl, EDRI EU affairs director)
On 1 July 2004 the Dutch Lower House adopted a motion directed at Minister Brinkhorst and State Secretary Van Gennip (Economic Affairs) to withdraw the Dutch vote in support of the Council of Ministers' text for the Directive on Software Patents. It was quite a surprise the motion was accepted.
In a letter to MPs, the State Secretary acknowledged that the Ministers initial claim was false that the Dutch agreement with the proposal didn't have any significant meaning. According to the Minister it was only a hammer piece, without any significant difference from earlier proposals. In the debate following the letter, on 24 June, the State Secretary got away with the embarrassing excuse that 'an error was made in the word-processor', somehow changing the crucial 'no' into 'yes!'.
Dutch MPs didn't accept these explanations, initiated a second debate and took a historical step in sending the minister back to the Council with the embarrassing mission of having to withdraw his agreement and convert it into an abstention.
Many leading scientists, small and medium enterprises and concerned citizens have objected against attempts to introduce broad patentability of software in Europe. In September 2003, the European Parliament voted in favour of numerous amendments that limited the patentability of logical algorithms, but the Council of Ministers clearly ignored this wish and put a new proposal on the table that was even worse than the original proposal.
According to Van Uytvanck, spokesman of FFII Netherlands (the Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure), "this political signal reaches much further than just The Netherlands. We hope that other European countries that also have their doubts about the proposal of the Council will also withdraw their support, so that the current proposal no longer has a majority. The historic precedent has been set now."
Summary of the parliamentary debate (in Dutch, 01.07.2004)
http://www.ffii.be/kamerdebat3
Press release FFII Netherlands (01.07.2004)
http://kwiki.ffii.org/NlVote040701En
The Article 29 Working Party that oversees the implementation of the EU privacy directive has released its opinion on the current state of affairs regarding the transfer of passenger data from EU airlines to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
The Working Party notes that the Commission failed to take into account previous demands by the Working Party before authorizing its transfer to the U.S., particularly on the scope of the data, the retention period, and the ways in which the data is used. As the European Parliament is pursuing this case in the Courts, the Working Party is calling for some immediate 'essential' changes to the current practices to minimize the encroachments on passengers' rights.
These 'essential' changes include:
Surprisingly, the report has strong language regarding the Commission's failure to adhere to the Working Party's guidance, but the Working Party's call for action is very weak. The agreement between the European Commission and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security fails on many data protection grounds, and is a clear case of backroom politics, that the European Parliament is trying to rectify. That the Working Party chose to respond in this manner is disappointing.
Opinion Article 29 Working Party 6.2004 (22.06.2004) http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/privacy/docs/wpdocs/2004...
A Failure to Negotiate: European Commission Sells Privacy Law to Lowest Bidder http://www.privacyinternational.org/issues/terrorism/rpt/inadequateade...
Transferring Privacy: The Transfer of Passenger Records and the Abdication of Privacy Protection http://www.privacyinternational.org/issues/terrorism/rpt/transferringp...
(Contribution by Gus Hosein, EDRI-member Privacy International)
The LSM conference has become an institution in France and around the globe. It all began in the year 2000 and has now become a well established meeting place for members and friends of the Free Software movement. Between 6-10 July 2004 about 700 persons gathered to discuss the bright future for users of Libre Software.
There were many very different subjects to choose from, ranging from accessibility to Content Management Systems, from law to music and other arts and from public administration to corporate business solutions.
Another important topic was education. It has always been a very important part of the 'Rencontre Mondial du Logiciel Libre / LSM' both in numbers of presentations and workshops and in numbers of participants. This year the EDU-conference was integrated into the conference - mainly in the big conference room. Some 50 percent of participants came from local French schools. The Abul Edu program is highly popular in all French speaking countries and offers a wide range of programs for learning, everything from spelling to mathematics. This year there were also demonstrations of solutions from Norwegian Skolelinux to LinEx in Extremadura, Spain and an Italian school using the Knoppix distribution.
A free music concert was announced for next year's meeting. In music there has been a lot of fun and progress. The music workshops wanted more possibilities for inter-sector collaboration next year and everybody agreed that the time was really ripe for this and promised to make contacts between the 'string holders' for the different subjects for next years conference.
In the law sessions a lot was said about how to handle violations of the GPL and about trademark legislation. Under sessions for Libre Software for the blind, GNOME and KDE agreed to use common user interfaces. They also found that the speech synthesis program 'Festival' was the best choice to elaborate on for the future.
The African delegates talked about sustainable development and announced a 'Free Software Day' during a conference from 28 September - 6 October 2004, with popular demonstrations of programs in a big party atmosphere.
The conference days offered a wide range of old and new topics and a physical atmosphere of well being and possibilities to make contacts with old and new friends. In the main lobby of the university of computer science, ENSEIRB of Bordeaux there were stands for many French organisations and LUG's. This turned the Agora into a lively bazar.
Next year's conference will be held in Dijon.
Program overview (15.06.2004)
http://rencontresmondiales.org/article54.html
Rencontres Mondiales du Logiciel Libre (in French)
http://rencontresmondiales.org/
Presentations in the law track
http://www.foo.be/rmll2004/legal/
General information about the AbulEdu program (in French)
http://www.abuledu.org/
(Contribution by Anne Østergaard, member of the GNOME Foundation and the GUADEC 5th Planning Committee, vice-chairman of IT-Politisk Forening, www.it-pol.dk)
On 28 July, Privacy International will celebrate the 6th annual UK Big Brother Awards ceremony. From about 300 nominees a 'Dirty Dozen' was selected for the shortlist. Award categories for this year are as they have been in past years: Worst Public Servant; Most Invasive Company; Most Appalling Project; Most Heinous Government Organisation and Lifetime Menace (now renamed the 'David Blunkett Lifetime Menace Award').
The number of nominations for Home Secretary Blunkett, the Home Office and the proposed National Identity Card far outweighed all other nominees, but their unpopularity will not be recognised this year because they have received awards in previous years. Among the favourites that are tipped to win is the Rt Hon Margaret Hodge MP, Minister of State for Children for Worst Public Servant. Hodge has received numerous nominations because of her patronage of the controversial tracking provisions in the Children Bill and for her determination to develop a wide spectrum of intrusive databases and information systems.
British Gas is tipped to win the Most Invasive Company Award, for its unfounded and cowardly claim that the Data Protection Act was the reason why an elderly couple died after British Gas had disconnected their gas supply. The hypothermia and absence of any duty of care apparently were secondary factors. The NHS National Programme for IT could be the winner of the Most Appalling Project Award, after already having won a Most Heinous Government Organisation award in 2000 because of its plans to computerise all patient records in a way that is both insecure and dangerous to patient privacy. Its nomination again this year reflects the gravity of concerns over these continuing plans.
Finally the Office of National Statistics risks winning the Most Heinous Government Organisation award, for its development of the 'Citizen Information Project' that will collate and share unprecedented amounts of data on the entire population.
Commenting on the nominations, Simon Davies, Director of Privacy International, said: "The nominations reflect a broad and intensified assault on the right to privacy in the UK. There is a clear hostility within government to privacy and a general antagonism to it from within business. We have seen few instances where privacy has been genuinely respected by large organisations."
On 26 October 2004, the Austrians will celebrate their 6th annual ceremony as well. The call for nominations (in 5 categories, plus a positive price) is open until 16 October 2004.
Shortlist for privacy 'Oscars' announced (05.07.2004) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/07/05/privacy_awards/
The 2004 UK Big Brother Awards http://www.privacyinternational.org/bigbrother/uk2004/
Call for nominations for the Austrian Big Brother Awards http://www.bigbrotherawards.at/2003/nominees/index.php
The German government is promising to finally implement a freedom of information law, according to an article published in Berliner Zeitung from 3 July 2004. After many years of debate within the red-green coalition, a legal proposal will be sent to parliament (Bundestag) after the summer break. Mrs Stokar, an MP for the Green party, is quoted to say that the project could be finalised before the end of the year 2004. "We wish to expand civil rights. That's why the decisions from the ministries must become accessible."
The German e-zine Heise adds that a freedom of information law was already announced in 1998, in the coalition agreement between the Social Democrat Party (SPD) and the Greens. The project was stalled many times, until the national ministry of internal affairs released a discussion draft in the summer of 2001. The legal proposal was rejected in June 2002, according to the Greens because of ministries led by social democrats.
Germany and Switzerland are the only 2 major Western European member states of the Council of Europe (45 countries) without such a law on accessibility of governmental acts and decision making. Within the EU, only Cyprus, Malta and Luxemburg lack this kind of legislation. And there are a few still in SEE (Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia) and Belarus and Russia (pending, also possible soon).
Though Dave Banisar from EDRI-member Privacy International is sceptical about progress in Germany, overall he is positive. "Access to information ebbs and flows in any country but the transformation has begun and it is no longer possible to tell citizens that they have no right to know." According to the excellent survey he updated in May 2004 "over fifty countries have adopted comprehensive laws to facilitate access and over thirty more are in the process. The laws are broadly similar, allowing for a general right by citizens, residents and often anyone else to demand information from government bodies. There are exemptions for withholding critical information and appeals processes and oversight."
Buerger sollen Akteneinsicht erhalten (in German, 03.07.2004)
http://www.berlinonline.de/berliner-zeitung/politik/355256.html
Neuer Anlauf für Informationsfreiheitsgesetz (in German, 04.07.2004)
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/48846
Global survey freedom of information legislation (12.05.2004)
http://www.freedominfo.org/survey.htm
The annual 'New Directions in Copyright' conference was held 29 and 30 June 2004 at University of London, organised jointly by the Arts and Humanities Research Board and the Birckbeck School of Law. The focus was on legal issues pertaining to recent developments in copyright. The flat fee / compulsory licensing was under serious debate and also otherwise the user rights-angle was prominently present. Especially Professor David Vaver's 'User Rights vs. User Exceptions: Reconceptualising the Public Domain' was a very strong presentation about the need to change the language used in copyright debates. Another very interesting presentation was given by Professor Peter Jaszi, who has been fighting for balanced copyright long before the current generation of copyright fighters. He showed how best practices can be used to shape fair use in his presentation 'The Crisis in Fair Use and the Potential of a 'Best Practices' Approach'. Professor Lisa Maruca's 'Cultures of Copying, Cultures of Copyright: Academic Anxiety and the Plagiarism Panic' was also fascinating and scary at the same time, because it demonstrated how companies like TurnItIn can misuse other persons' copyrighted material to fight overly broadly against plagiarism cases.
Earlier in June, the Society for Economic Research on Copyright Issues held its annual conference in Turin, Italy. The focus was (naturally) more economic, although there were also some quite legally-focused presentations. The hottest question was what kind of effects P2P-networks have on music sales. This time professor Stan Liebowitz was ready to claim that it was harming the industry, but some others did not agree. The only general consensus was that there really are no reliable numbers or statistics about P2P-usage. The most interesting keynote was given by professor Paul David, who presented three scenarios in which copyright as it was known before will die.
AHRB 'New directions in copyright' (29-30.06.2004)
http://www.copyright.bbk.ac.uk/contents/conferences/2004/2004conf.shtm...
SERCI annual conference (8-9.06.2004)
http://www.serci.org/congress.html
(Contribution by Ville Oksanen, EDRI-member EFFI)
By verdict of 24 June 2004 the Appeals Court of Amsterdam in the Netherlands has to a large extent limited the freedom of internet users to express their opinion anonimously. The main issue in this principal case was whether internet provider Lycos was required to hand over the personal data of one of its subscribers to a third party. This third party, the Dutch lawyer and stamp trader Pessers, claimed this subscriber had treated him unlawfully. The appeal verdict largely confirms an ealier verdict by a judge at the District Court of Haarlem on 11 September 2003, against which Lycos appealed.
Mr Pessers trades in postage stamps on the auction portal eBay and was accused of fraud by a Lycos subscriber, who published Mr Pesser’s name on his website and provided an e-mail address for anyone to report fraudulent incidents they felt Mr Pessers had committed. After complaints from Mr Pessers, the site was removed and the text replaced with "Site removed to avoid legal actions!!". Subsequently Pessers demanded the personal data from the subscriber, but Lycos refused and was taken to court. After the initial verdict, Lycos did hand over the data, but only to find out the address data were false. Pessers started another procedure, to force Lycos to find other ways to retrieve the correct information, but that demand was declined on 1 April 2004. However, this case instigated a debate in the Netherlands whether internet service providers should be obliged to collect the correct information from their subscribers.
Although the Appeals Court acknowledges that the content on the website was not 'apparent unlawful', the court nevertheless felt that Lycos was required to hand over the data.
Explaining its ruling, the court said that it weighed the interest of the ISP and its subscriber against that of the third-party (Pessers), and also considered whether Pessers had a genuine interest in this information and whether there were other, less-intrusive means of obtaining the information.
"The consequence of this ruling is that ISPs will be less cautious about providing third parties with personal details. After all, the provider can be held liable," said internet lawyer Christiaan Alberdingk Thijm.
Perhaps even more disturbing, this ruling also increases the possibilities for civil rightsholders, such as the music industry to demand personal data from music-file downloaders.
Lycos vs. Pessers appeal verdict (in Dutch, 24.07.2004)
http://tinyurl.com/4pv7y
Amsterdam Appeals Court upholds decision requiring ISP to disclose personal data (12.07.2004)
http://www.dmeurope.com/default.asp?ArticleID=2295
Recommended reading
CELEX is the easiest way of accessing EU documents and is now freely available for any user. The service was launched in 1980 and recently merged with other sources into EUR-Lex, a portal offering integrated access to various EU archives, repositories and databases. Within the framework of this integrated legal information portal, CELEX remains a key product offering advanced search capabilities and features.
Free access to CELEX
http://europa.eu.int/celex/
Username: enlu0000
Password: europe
19-23 July 2004, Kuala Lumpur, MalaysiaWorkshop on the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS): Issues of Relevance to ICANN and Next Steps. All individuals interested in the Internet and management and co-ordination of the domain name system (DNS) are encouraged to attend the Workshop, which will provide information on the United Nation's WSIS process and issues of direct impact to ICANN. Proposed output and next steps for ICANN constituencies / stakeholders regarding WSIS and technical co-ordination and management of the DNS also will be discussed.
http://www.icann.org/meetings/kualalumpur/
28 July 2004, London, UK6th annual Big Brother Awards ceremony organised by Privacy International
http://www.privacyinternational.org/bigbrother/uk2004/
31 August 2004, Deadline for submissions Council of EuropePublic consultation on future Council of Europe activities in the media field, in preparation of the 7th European Ministerial Conference on Mass Media Policy (Kiev, 10-11 March 2005). The main topics of the Conference will be: freedom of expression and information in times of crisis; cultural diversity and media pluralism in times of globalisation and human rights and regulation of the media and new communication services in the information society.The CDMM would like to invite non-governmental organisations working in the media field in Europe and other interested persons to submit their ideas and proposals as regards these future activities. The proposals should not exceed 2 pages and should be sent to the Media Division, in English or French, by 31 August 2004 (mailto:media@coe.int). They will be analysed at a meeting of the Bureau of the CDMM on 7-8 September 2004. The results will be subsequently reviewed by the CDMM on 2-5 November 2004.Call for submissions
http://www.coe.int/T/E/human_rights/media/7_Links/consultation_announc...
10-11 September 2004, Amsterdam, the Netherlands'Guaranteeing Media Freedom on the Internet'Two day conference organised by the OSCE Representative on Freedom of theMedia in the Amsterdam city hall.
http://www.osce.org/events/
13-14 September 2004, Geneva, SwitzerlandThe TransAtlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD) will host a two-day meeting in Geneva on the Future of WIPO. The meeting will bring together leading experts and stakeholders from academia, industry, NGOs, and governments, as well as members of the WIPO secretariat, to discuss the future of this United Nations Agency. To register for this event (no fee), contact:Ben Wallis, Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue Co-ordinator, Consumers International, bwallis@consint.org
14-16 September 2004, Wroclaw, PolandThe 26th International Conference on privacy and personal data protection:'the Right to Privacy - the Right to Dignity'. This annual gathering ofthe world's data protection commissioners will be preceded on 13 June by apublicly accessible conference organised by EPIC, Privacy Internationaland EDRI.
http://www.giodo.gov.pl/168/id_art/175/j/en/
15-17 September 2004, Strasbourg, FranceThe Council of Europe is planning a major international conference on "TheChallenge of Cybercrime", which will bring together senior politicians,computer industry leaders and experts from around the world. No onlineinformation yet.
29-30 September 2004, Paris, France5th Worldwide forum on electronic democracy, organised by Mr André Santini, French Member of Parliament and president of the Global Cities dialogue
http://www.issy.com/statiques/e-democratie/index_EN.htm
30 September-3 October 2004, Berlin, GermanyNew EDRI-member FIfF is organising its 20th annual meeting on critical computer science in the Humboldt university.
http://www.fiff.de/aktuelles/
16 October 2004, Lucerne, SwitzerlandSwiss Big Brother Awards
http://www.bigbrotherawards.ch
26 October 2004, Vienna, AustriaAustrian Big Brother Awards
http://www.bigbrotherawards.at
29 October 2004, Bielefeld, GermanyGerman Big Brother Awards
http://www.bigbrotherawards.de