<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.edri.org" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>EDRI - Privacy</title>
 <link>http://www.edri.org/taxonomy/term/6/0</link>
 <description></description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Bits of Freedom presents policy package against mass surveillance</title>
 <link>http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.23/bof-policy-package-surveillance</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
On 4 December 2013 the EDRi member Dutch digital rights organisation Bits of Freedom launched a website petitioning the Dutch government to take numerous concrete measures to end mass surveillance. It officially presented the policy package to the Minister of Interior Affairs the day before.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
On the campaign website, bespied-ons-niet.nl (translated as: &#039;don&#039;t
spy on us&#039;), a wide-ranging package of policy measures is set out.
These range from diplomatic measures, to stopping plans to provide the
Dutch secret services with the authority to intercept internet traffic
on a broad scale.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.23/bof-policy-package-surveillance&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <category domain="http://www.edri.org/issues/privacy">Privacy</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2013 18:34:57 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>bogdan</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">3497 at http://www.edri.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>No warrant Internet spying by French authorities</title>
 <link>http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.23/no-warrant-internet-spying-france</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
On 26 November 2013, the French National Assembly discussed the draft of
the military programming law which could give the authorities the power
to collect, without a judge warrant and in real time, telecom users’
data as a result of an amendment introduced by the Senate in first reading.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Presently the internal security code stipulates that the interception of
electronic communications can be authorized in exceptional cases of
investigations related to the national security and other serious crimes.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
The draft proposes to complete the internal security code to explicitly
authorize the gathering, from electronic communications providers, but
also from hosting companies and Internet editors, any information or
documents treated or kept by their electronic communications networ
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.23/no-warrant-internet-spying-france&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <category domain="http://www.edri.org/issues/privacy">Privacy</category>
 <category domain="http://www.edri.org/issues/privacy/wiretapping">Wiretapping</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2013 18:33:00 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>bogdan</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">3496 at http://www.edri.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Ireland: Google ordered to remove Knowledge Graph result</title>
 <link>http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.23/google-knowledge-graph-irish-court</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
On 28 November 2013, Google received an ex-parte interim order from an
Irish court to block the publication of a photo image of convicted
solicitor Thomas Byrne which appears as a search result alongside the
profile of Irish Senator Thomas Byrne, a solicitor himself.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Google considers it cannot be held liable for what comes up in its
search results, as it only creates a snapshot of content that is
elsewhere on the internet and this so-called “caching defence” is
covered by the EU’s e-commerce directive law, allowing ISPs to not be
held liable for being a mere conduit for information.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
However, Google is no longer a mere provider of search results
reflecting the content of websites elsewhere on the internet as it
currently offers a range of products and services that brin
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.23/google-knowledge-graph-irish-court&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <category domain="http://www.edri.org/issues/freedom/takedown">Notice &amp;amp; take-down</category>
 <category domain="http://www.edri.org/issues/privacy">Privacy</category>
 <category domain="http://www.edri.org/issues/freedom">Freedom of speech</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2013 18:31:49 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>bogdan</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">3495 at http://www.edri.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Google in breach of the Dutch data protection act</title>
 <link>http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.23/google-breaches-data-protection-act-nl</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
The Dutch Data Protection Authority has recently issued a report
concluding that Google is in breach of the Dutch Data Protection Act,
with its new privacy policy.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
The report is a result of the investigations carried out at the
initiation of the French data protection authority (CNIL) on behalf of
all European data protection authorities united in the Article 29
Working Party, following the introduction of Google’s new privacy policy
on 1 March 2012.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.23/google-breaches-data-protection-act-nl&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <category domain="http://www.edri.org/issues/privacy">Privacy</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2013 18:29:04 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>bogdan</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">3493 at http://www.edri.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>“Rebuilding Trust in EU – US Data Flows” - some lowlights</title>
 <link>http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.23/lowlights-eu-us-data-trust</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
On 27 November 2013, the European Commission finally published its
Communication on the “Safe Harbor” agreement as part of a broader
package on EU/US data flows.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Perhaps the most disappointing aspect of the Communication was the
statement that the PNR agreement and other data sharing agreements work
without substantiating any of those claims. Simply asking the United
States if they breached the existing rules and blandly stating, in the
absence of any credible evidence, that the agreements on passenger name
records (PNR) and financial data tracking (TFTP)  “meet the common
security interests of the EU and US, whilst providing a high level of
protection of personal data” provides no new information and offers no
new insights.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.23/lowlights-eu-us-data-trust&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <category domain="http://www.edri.org/issues/privacy">Privacy</category>
 <category domain="http://www.edri.org/issues/privacy/pnr">Airline Passenger Data</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 04 Dec 2013 18:25:45 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>bogdan</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">3490 at http://www.edri.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>EDPS: Still a lot of work to be done</title>
 <link>http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.22/edps-lot-of-work</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
In a press release published on 15 November 2013, the European Data
Protection Supervisor (EDPS), criticised the Commission proposal for a
Regulation laying down measures concerning the European single market
for electronic communications. The announced goal of this Regulation is
to ease the requirements for communications providers, standardize
wholesale products,  aiming at harmonising the rights of end-users. In
general, Hustinx approves the idea to include net neutrality, but points
out that the Regulation provides the permission for abuses by the
Internet Service Providers (ISPs) who would be legally allowed to manage
and monitor the internet traffic of their users.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.22/edps-lot-of-work&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <category domain="http://www.edri.org/taxonomy/term/43">Net Neutrality</category>
 <category domain="http://www.edri.org/issues/privacy">Privacy</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 20 Nov 2013 18:29:56 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>bogdan</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">3480 at http://www.edri.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Microsoft and Skype may continue to send Europeans’ data to US</title>
 <link>http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.22/luxembourg-dpa-decision-skype-microsoft</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
On 18 November 2013, Luxembourg’s Data Protection Authority (National
Commission for Data Protection - CNPD) decided that Microsoft and Skype
subsidiaries in Luxembourg have not broken EU privacy law by sending
Europeans’ data to the US, although we all know where this data goes.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
As a response to a complain filed by Europe v Facebook activist group,
CNPD considered that the data transfer was legal under the Safe Harbor
agreement, through which US companies can self-certify they comply with
EU-strength privacy standards, even though their country does not.
Which means that we have to take their word for that.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
“The fact finding operations conducted since July 2013 and the
subsequent detailed analysis did not bring to light any element that the
two Luxembourg-based compan
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.22/luxembourg-dpa-decision-skype-microsoft&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <category domain="http://www.edri.org/issues/privacy">Privacy</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 20 Nov 2013 18:27:43 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>bogdan</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">3478 at http://www.edri.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Europe v Facebook’s Irish complaint again on the table</title>
 <link>http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.21/irish-europe-vs-facebook-decision</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
The Irish High Court has decided to review the lack of reaction of the
Irish Data Protection Commissioner (DPC) in relation to the PRISM scandal.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
This decision is a result of DPC’s reaction to student group Europe v
Facebook (EvF) which had filed a complaint against Facebook Ireland Ltd,
considering that it violated data protection laws by “exporting data” to
its US-based parent company. &amp;quot;If a European subsidiary sends user data
to the American parent company, this is considered an “export” of
personal data. Under EU law, an export of data is only allowed if the
European subsidiary can ensure an “adequate level or protection” in the
foreign country,” stated EvF.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
EvF also alleged that Facebook had cooperated with NSA within PRISM
programme.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.21/irish-europe-vs-facebook-decision&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <category domain="http://www.edri.org/issues/privacy">Privacy</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 06 Nov 2013 18:33:55 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>bogdan</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">3469 at http://www.edri.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>NSA&#039;s long data collection arm reaches everybody</title>
 <link>http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.21/nsa-gives-data-to-ustr</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
The new revelations from Snowden show that NSA seems to spy on
everybody, allies or enemies alike, collecting data form everywhere and
everyone, in order to get a “diplomatic advantage” over allies such as
France and Germany or an “economic advantage” over countries such as
Japan or Brazil. Or even more?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
NY Times explains that not only NSA is demanding the data it gathers,
but also other agency’s “customers” are asking for different data from
NSA.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.21/nsa-gives-data-to-ustr&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <category domain="http://www.edri.org/issues/privacy">Privacy</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 06 Nov 2013 18:29:05 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>bogdan</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">3466 at http://www.edri.org</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>EU Council worries that data protection reform is too fast </title>
 <link>http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.21/dp-regulation-moving-too-fast</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
The recent EU Council allegedly decided to slow down the speed of the reform of data protection arguing that it was moving too fast. Germany, for example, was reportedly worried about &amp;quot;not moving too quickly&amp;quot;. By a strange coincidence, this is exactly the same argument used by the main lobbying groups.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number11.21/dp-regulation-moving-too-fast&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <category domain="http://www.edri.org/issues/privacy">Privacy</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 06 Nov 2013 18:27:00 +0000</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>bogdan</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">3465 at http://www.edri.org</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
