July 2018 - cypherpunks-legacy

USA PATRIOT Act Survives Amendment Attempt
by brian-slashdotnews＠hyperreal.org 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

Link: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/07/09/1145225 Posted by: michael, on 2004-07-09 12:49:00 Topic: us, 90 comments from the i-feel-safer-already dept. crem_d_genes writes "A bill to modify the USA PATRIOT Act that would have blocked part of the legislation's provisions that allow for the investigation of people's reading habits [1]was defeated by a 210-210 vote in the U.S House of Representives. The House leaders kept the roll call open for 23 minutes past the 15 minute deadline to persuade 10 Representatives to change votes. According to the article 'Rep. Zach Wamp, R-Tenn., said he switched his initial "yes" vote to "no" after being shown Justice Department documents asserting that terrorists have communicated over the Internet via public library computers.' On the other hand, 'Critics of the Patriot Act argued that even without it, investigators can get book store and other records simply by obtaining subpoenas or search warrants.'" References 1. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040708/ap_on_go_co/cong… ss_patriot_act ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature]

1 0

Re: [IP] New US/EU passenger name records treaty leaked
by James Cox 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

Dave, Some thoughts on this from a UK/EU citizen perspective: So, there are 36 data points being collected (as opposed to the 19 bandied about). This is bad but it gets worse - All data (including topics such as personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, trade union membership, and data concerning the health or sex life of the individual) is to be transmitted, with the DHS systems filtering this out. But not really, because it's still accessible in cases of peril to the individual. Oh, and the data is kept *active* for 7 years, for analytical purposes (how many times have you been in the US in the past 7 years? Did you like the hotel .... ) further, the data is kept in a *dormant* state for 8 years. Except that the actual manner of deleting the PNR data is yet to be discussed, so it may not actually happen. Plus, in the next 15 years, there will be at least two different presidents, multiple Secretaries of Defence, Homeland Security and State, a possibly entirely different kind of EU. As a country we've restricted the suspension of Habeas Corpus to only 28 days. We have the D. P. A. for managing and restricting access to such personal data. But it's OK if you travel to the US - expect fingerprints, iris scans, and your family history to be stored on accessible and semi accessible databases for 15 years. Our liberties and rights get eroded, just a little bit, every day. Soon we'll be lucky to have a name rather than just an identity. James On 4 Jul 2007, at 18:57, David Farber wrote: > > >Begin forwarded message: > >From: "Erich M." <me(a)quintessenz.org> >Date: July 4, 2007 1:15:54 PM EDT >To: dave(a)farber.net >Subject: FYI: New US/EU passenger name records treaty leaked > >Dave, > >The new passenger name record agreement between the US and the EU has >been leaked. The draft treaty text looks ready for a closing. A >foreign >office spokesperson here in Vienna confirmed that, so this should be >more or less identical to the final version. > >The letter from the EU presidency to COREPER dated june 28 includes >the >draft agreement on PNR plus the US position in ANNEX2. > >Full text [English] > >http://quintessenz.org/d/000100003891 > >Analysis of the new treaty in German [from today] >http://futurezone.orf.at/it/stories/204742/ > >The gist: The new "push" system demands even more data from EU >passenger >databases. What Mr. Frattini told the public about "reduction" is a >blatant swindle: more has been packed into the 19 points of the new >PNR >agreement than the previously equired 34 datafields contained. > >The withdrawal of the US from the Amadeus pnr data base comes at a >dear >price to the Europeans: They have to deliver more and better >pre-structured data, fitting to the technical requirements of the DHS. >So data mining will much easier for DHS, as correct data extraction is >the first critical step to get the results desired. > >Credits go to Tony Bunyan from statewatch.org who dug out that draft >agreement. >cu >Erich > > > >-- >pgp-Key >http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xE386BAA1 >-.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- -.-. --.- > > >------------------------------------------- >Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now >RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/ >Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com -- James Cox, Internet Consultant t: 07968 349990 e: james(a)imaj.es w: http://imaj.es/ ------------------------------------------- Archives: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now RSS Feed: http://v2.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/ Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

[IP] Re: New US/EU passenger name records treaty leaked
by David Farber 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

Begin forwarded message:

1 0

[liberationtech] Tahrir
by Ian Clarke 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

Hi all, just wanted to introduce myself, and share a bit more about Tahrir, which I believe has been discussed here recently. I'm the founder and coordinator of the Freenet project, perhaps the earliest P2P anti-censorship technology, the first version being released in March 2000. Freenet has been under active development ever since, employing one full-time developer for much of the decade since we began. In a recent survey<http://freedomhouse.org/images/File/special_reports/LOtF_China.pdf>of Chinese anti-censorship tool users, Freenet came out on top, so it seems the project is still very relevant today. One of my more recent projects is called Tahrir. Tahrir was inspired by my conversations over the years about the real needs of democracy activists in a variety of countries that lack freedom of speech, and over a decade of experience building anti-censorship tools (and many many mistakes doing so!). I've realized that many anti-censorship tools lean heavily towards attacking the problems their developers find intellectually stimulating, rather than those actually experienced by people in the trenches. We've certainly been guilty of that from time to time with Freenet. One example of this is that bandwidth can be very limited in many of the countries we are interested in helping, particularly China, and yet most P2P systems treat bandwidth like a near-infinite resource. Tahrir aims to tackle this and other problems head-on. It is an ultra-low-bandwidth secure, decentralized microblogging platform. The initial release is intended to have functionality similar to Twitter, but it will be extensible well beyond that. Initially it will be a desktop app that requires a (slow) internet connection, but down the line it can run on mobile phones, and operate in an "ad-hoc" mode relaying over wifi and other short-range connections. I've been working on Tahrir since March, although other pressures on my time have prevented me from making much progress in recent months. My approach has been ground-up and I've attempted to stick closely to modern best-practices for Java coding. So far I've implemented: - A low-level encrypted reliable UDP transport capable of UDP hole-punching - A very space-efficient serialization mechanism to convert POJOs into bytes and back again - A very convenient RPC mechanism built on top of the above two mechanisms (similar to the approach used by GWT) - A convenient set of cryptographic primitives that integrates nicely with the above You can read more about this architecture here: https://github.com/sanity/tahrir/wiki/Architecture I have been keeping relatively quiet about my work on Tahrir so as not to distract too much attention from Freenet, but I really want to move things forward after several months of dormancy. To do this I primarily need smart Java coders, who I will be happy to bring up to speed on the codebase. The top priority is to get to a working prototype ASAP, and then begin iteratively improving from there (in line with the "release early, release often" open source mantra). You can learn a lot more about what I've done to-date here, in addition to checking out the source code: https://github.com/sanity/tahrir/wiki I'm also very happy to answer any questions anyone might have about Tahrir, and I hope that some of you are interested in helping. Ian. -- Ian Clarke Blog: http://blog.locut.us/ _______________________________________________ liberationtech mailing list liberationtech(a)lists.stanford.edu Should you need to change your subscription options, please go to: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech If you would like to receive a daily digest, click "yes" (once you click above) next to "would you like to receive list mail batched in a daily digest?" You will need the user name and password you receive from the list moderator in monthly reminders. Should you need immediate assistance, please contact the list moderator. Please don't forget to follow us on http://twitter.com/#!/Liberationtech ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

EDRi-gram newsletter - Number 8.21, 3 November 2010
by EDRI-gram newsletter 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

============================================================ EDRi-gram biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe Number 8.21, 3 November 2010 ============================================================ Contents ============================================================ New EDRi members 1. Google admits it was gathering passwords and emails via StreetView 2. ECJ decides private copying levies are not allowed for business use 3. EC refers Austria to ECJ for lack of independence of DPA 4. Is YouTube back online in Turkey? 5. Free Culture 2010 in Barcelona 6. Continuing the battle against data retention 7. Belgian court upholds Creative Commons licence 8. Recommended Action 9. Recommended Reading 10. Agenda 11. About ============================================================ New EDRi members ============================================================ At the EDRi General Assembly of 30 October 2010 in Barcelona, Spain, EDRi welcomed two new members. The Panoptykon Foundation is a Polish organisation focusing on human rights, in particular the right to privacy, in the clash with modern technology used for surveillance purposes. The NGO wants to analyse the risks associated with the operation of modern surveillance systems, monitor the actions of both public and private entities and intervene when human rights or democratic values are threatened. The Liga voor Mensenrechten (Human Rights League) has a focus on human rights in Belgium and a campaigner of privacy, including the organisation of the Big Brother Awards. EDRi now has 29 members that are based or have offices in 18 different European countries, all within the territory of the Council of Europe. Panoptykon Foundation http://www.panoptykon.org/ Liga voor Mensenrechten http://www.mensenrechten.be/ EDRI members and observers http://www.edri.org/about/members ============================================================ 1. Google admits it was gathering passwords and emails via StreetView ============================================================ Google faces further investigation in the UK and Italy, after it has publicly admitted in a blog post on 22 October 2010 that its StreetView service has gathered more data than intended, "in some instances entire emails and URLs were captured, as well as passwords." The UK Data Protection Authority - Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has decided to reopen its investigation on Google over the personal data gathering by its StreetView system. Initially, in July 2010, ICO declared it would not take measures against Google, considering that the company could not have gathered much personal data with its StreetView vehicles while mapping Wi-Fi networks in the areas they covered. However, according to an investigation carried out by Canada's Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart, it appears that Google has gathered, in this way, entire emails, highly sensitive personal information and even passwords. As Google admitted Stoddard's allegations, ICO is now reconsidering its position. "Now that these findings are starting to emerge, we understand that Google has accepted that in some instances entire URLs and emails have been captured. We will be making enquires to see whether this information relates to the data inadvertently captured in the UK, before deciding on the necessary course of action, including a consideration of the need to use our enforcement powers," was ICO's statement. While Google stated that the data was collected by error because of a code being included in the Street View software by mistake, during a two-hour UK parliamentary debate on privacy on 28 October 2010, MPs discussed the issue and accused of Google of having deliberately collected WiFi data for commercial gain. Ed Vaizey, the UK communications minister said that although Google could still be fined for collecting the WiFi data without people's knowledge, as the offence had occurred before the entering into force of the legislation giving ICO the power to levy punishments of up to 575 000 euro, the fine would probably be much lower. He also added that for any future services such as StreetView, Internet companies would be asked to establish "ground rules" together with the ICO, before starting projects that might endanger privacy. Italy also started an investigation against Google for potential invasions of privacy in its Street View online mapping service. "Italian citizens will be informed of the presence of Google cars taking pictures of places and individuals to be posted online via the StreetView service," stated the Italian Data protection authority on 25 October 2010, adding that Google StreetView vehicles would have to be "clearly marked by means of visible stickers or signs to unambiguously signify that pictures are being taken for the purposes of StreetView." The Italian privacy authority also imposed Google to previously list, to the public media, the neighbourhoods its cars would photograph. The non-compliance would bring the company a fine of up to 1 800 euro. In the meantime, in Germany, over 244 000 residents have specifically requested that the images of their households be removed from StreetView. While Google seemed to be happy that just 3% of the population used the opt-out system, the number shows the huge interest in privacy of German citizens. "Going to a website, and entering all this information it takes a hell of a lot of time and effort, and I am just staggered by this 200 000 plus (number)," explained Viktor Mayer-Schoenberger, a professor of Internet Governance and Regulation at Oxford University, to Deustche Welle. ICO considers action amidst further Street View data collection revelations (25.10.2010) http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=11486 UK MPs question Google over Street View data breaches (29.10.2010) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11650692 More than 244 000 opt out of Google Street View in Germany (21.10.2010) http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,6133854,00.html Google escapes prosecution over Streetview data (29.10.2010) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/8095954/Google-escapes-prosecu… The Internet and Privacy - UK Parliament debate (28.10.2010) http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmtoday/cmwhall/01.htm#d2e30 EDRi-gram: Google's Street View will not resume its activities in the Czech Republic (22.09.2010) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number8.18/czech-republic-bans-streetview ============================================================ 2. ECJ decides private copying levies are not allowed for business use ============================================================ On 21 October 2010, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) decided that private copying levies on blank CDs, MP3 players and other digital media are allowed under EU copyright law only when charged on goods sold to individuals but not to companies. ECJ ruled that "the application of the 'private copying levy' to reproduction media acquired by undertakings and professionals for purposes other than private copying is not compatible with European Union law. Such a levy may be applied to such media when they are liable to be used by natural persons for their private use". In some European countries the unauthorised copying of works that a person legitimately owns is allowed, on the condition that it is for private use. The European Copyright Directive permits this, provided there is fair compensation to the copyright holders. The compensation can be ensured by charging a levy on the media (such as discs or media players used for copying material) which is then distributed to rights holders through collection societies. ECJ thus ruled against the Spanish collective rights management agency SGAE (Sociedad General de Autores y Editores) which had won a case filed against Padawan, a store distributing discs and other devices, for unpaid copyright levies. Padawan had claimed that the indiscriminate application of the levy was not compatible with EU law and appealed the decision. The appeals court asked the ECJ to rule on this case in relation to European law. "The purpose of fair compensation is to compensate authors adequately for the use made of their protected works without their authorisation. In order to determine the level of that compensation, account must be taken as a 'valuable criterion' - of the 'possible harm' suffered by the author as a result of the act of reproduction concerned, although prejudice which is 'minimal' does not give rise to a payment obligation. The private copying exception must therefore include a system 'to compensate for the prejudice to rightholders'," said the ruling. ECJ considered the level of fair compensation was linked to "the harm resulting for the author from the reproduction for private use of his protected work without his authorisation." And therefore "fair compensation must be regarded as recompense for the harm suffered by the author." A levy was a reasonable mechanism for private individuals who were likely to use material to copy and who should pay for the harm caused to authors, but this should not be applied to other sales because the levy could not be applied indiscriminately. "The indiscriminate application of the private copying levy to all types of digital reproduction equipment, devices and media, including cases in which such equipment is acquired by persons other than natural persons for purposes clearly unrelated to private copying, is incompatible with the directive." Press Release no.106/10 of the EU Court of Justice (21.10.2010) http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2010-10/cp100106en.… Judgment of the Court - case 467/08 Padawan SL vs SGAE (Third Chamber) (21.10.2010) http://curia.europa.eu/jurisp/cgi-bin/form.pl?lang=EN&Submit=rechercher&num… ECJ outlaws private copying levy on sales to businesses (21.10.2010) http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=11471 Brussels smackdown for Spanish media'n'kit copy levy (22.10.2010) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/10/22/court_rules_on_spain_cd_copying_lev… ============================================================ 3. EC refers Austria to ECJ for lack of independence of DPA ============================================================ Since a complaint was filed by the data protection association Arge Daten back in October 2003, the lack of adequate independence of the Austrian Data Protection Authority (DSK - Datenschutzkommission) has been on the European Commission's (EC) agenda. Years later, in 2009, the Commission asked Austria, in a reasoned opinion under EU infringement procedures, to revise the way the authority is organised. However, as the Austrian authorities failed to comply with the reasoned opinion and the Commission has decided to refer Austria to the European Court of Justice (ECJ). This decision was officially published on 28 October 2010. The Commission considers that provisions setting up the Austrian data protection authority do not conform to EU rules, which require Member States to establish a completely independent supervisory body to monitor the application of the 1995 Data Protection Directive (Directive 95/46/EC). Although the Austrian data protection legislation (Datenschutzgesetz 2000) spells out that the authority exercises its functions independently and takes no instruction in its performance, the Commission considers that "complete independence," as required under EU data protection rules, is not guaranteed because: - the authority remains under the supervision of the Federal Chancellery as integrated into the Chancellery in terms of organisation and staff: it controls neither its own staffing nor its equipment and it does not have its own budget; - since its creation in 1980, the authority has been run by a senior official of the Chancellery as executive member ("geschdftsf|hrendes Mitglied"), subject to the supervision of the Chancellery; - the right of the Chancellor to be informed at all times by the chair and the executive member on all subjects concerning the daily management of the authority potentially hinders the members of the supervisory authority in the independent performance of their tasks. The Commission's approach to the independence of data protection authorities reflects the case law of the European Court of Justice. In its ruling of 3 March 2010 (C-518/07), in which Germany was declared in breach of EU rules on the independence of the data protection supervisory authority, the Court confirmed that authorities responsible for the supervision of the processing of personal data must remain free from any external influence, including the direct or indirect influence of the state. According to the Court, the mere risk of political influence through state scrutiny is sufficient to hinder the independent performance of the supervisory authority's tasks. Earlier this year, the European Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) has also seriously criticised the status of Austria's data protection authority. The FRA study 'Data Protection in the European Union: the role of National Data Protection Authorities', published in May 2010, casted a damning light on the Austrian DSK. The study detected both a lack of independence from the government and a lack of financial resources and staff of the DSK. The Austrian DSK is not equipped with full powers of investigation and intervention. As a consequence, the supervisory body "cannot enforce its decisions in warning the data processor/controller as to its unlawful conduct" - a serious deficit which occurs only in three of the 27 EU Member States, i.e. Poland, Hungary and Austria. No official statement has been published by the Austrian government since the EC announced it would refer Austria to the Court of Justice in this matter. It remains to be seen whether the Austrian government will stick to its former plans to close down the DSK. According to a draft law promoted in 2007 and reconditioned in 2010, which is aiming at changing various regulations of the Austrian Constitution, the government intends to assign some of the duties of the DSK to nine administrative courts of the "Ldnder" instead. By which organisation(s) the remaining duties of the DSK should be fulfilled, remains unclear till today. In its recently published bi-annual report of the years 2007-2009, the DSK criticised these plans and argued that only 10 % of its tasks were suitable to be carried out by administrative courts. In light of its ruling of 3 March 2010, in which Germany was declared in breach of EU rules on the independence of the data protection supervisory authority, it is more than likely that the ECJ will come to a similar conclusion in the Austrian case. It's also more than likely that neither the EC nor the European Court of Justice will appreciate the further demolition of the Austrian data protection authority by closing down the existing insufficient body and scattering its competencies to regional administration. Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31995L0046:en:H… Data Protection: Commission to refer Austria to Court for lack of independence of data protection authority: (28.10.2010) http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/10/1430&format=H… Publications Office Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 9 March 2010 - European Commission v Federal Republic of Germany (1.5.2010) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2010:113:0003:00… Data Protection in the European Union: the role of National Data Protection Authorities (Strengthening the fundamental rights architecture in the EU II) (Fundamental Rights Agency, 7.5.2010) http://fra.europa.eu/fraWebsite/research/publications/publications_per_year… EDRi-gram 5.19 - The days of the Austrian DPA are numbered (10.8.2007) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number5.19/austrian-dpa EDRi-gram 3.17 - EC: data protection inadequate in Austria and Germany (24.8.2005) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number3.17/DPA Austrian Data Protection Act 2000 (only in German) http://www.ris.bka.gv.at/Dokumente/Bundesnormen/NOR40113679/NOR40113679.pdf Datenschutzbericht 2009 - 1. Juli 2007 - 31. Dezember 2009, Vsterreichische Datenschutzkommission (only in German) http://www.dsk.gv.at/DocView.axd?CobId=40344 (Contribution by Andreas Krisch, EDRi-member VIBE!AT, Austria) ============================================================ 4. Is YouTube back online in Turkey? ============================================================ After almost three years of blocking, Turkey has finally lifted its ban on YouTube. Google's site was blocked in 2007 for videos considered insulting to Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the country's founder. In 2007, Turkey's parliament adopted a law allowing a court to block any website in case there was "sufficient suspicion" that a crime had occurred. The Appeal Court of Ankara has recently decided to lift the ban on Google's site but the decision is not considered entirely a victory as it came along with the removal of the videos in question. Transport Minister Binali Yildirim said there was no longer any reason to ban the website because the offending videos had been removed. "I hope that they have also learned from this experience and the same thing will not happen again. YouTube will hopefully carry out its operations in Turkey within the limits of law in the future," he added thus implying that the site could always be in danger of suspension in the future in case similar content is posted on it. YouTube wanted to emphasize the fact that the videos had been removed by a third party: "We want to be clear that a third party, not YouTube, have apparently removed some of the videos that have caused the blocking of YouTube in Turkey using our automated copyright complaint process. We are investigating whether this action is valid in accordance with our copyright policy." But the victory may be short-lived, as the Dr. Yaman Akdeniz has pointed out that the videos are back online: "Despite the earlier news that Turkey has lifted its ban on YouTube after almost 2.5 years, YouTube reinstated the four videos that were removed by a licensing agency in Germany. YouTube, in a statement circulated in Turkish late Monday night stated that the four videos did not violate its copyright violation policy and therefore they were put back into the system (...) It remains to be seen how the Turkish authorities will react to this action by YouTube but I strongly suspect that they will issue a new injunction to block access to YouTube." OSCE (the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe) which, in June 2010, expressed the opinion that Internet censorship in Turkey was one of the heaviest in the world by the the law allowing the access blocking to more than 5 000 sites, welcomed the present decision but urged Turkey to continue in this direction "by reforming its Internet law and lift the remaining website bans." Thousands of other websites, especially those related to sensitive topics such as Ataturk, the army and minorities, remain blocked. Turkey lifts two-year ban on YouTube (30.10.2010) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11659816 YouTube accessible soon in Turkey after three years of blocking (only in French, 30.10.2010) http://www.numerama.com/magazine/17214-youtube-bientot-accessible-en-turqui… YouTube Ban is Imminent (again) in Turkey (1.11.2010) http://cyberlaw.org.uk/2010/11/01/youtube-ban-is-imminent-again-in-turkey/ Turkey: Authorities urged to ensure YouTube stays unblocked (3.11.2010) http://en.rsf.org/turkey-authorities-urged-to-ensure-03-11-2010,38742.html EDRI-gram: Turkey extends the censorship of YouTube (16.06.2010) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number8.12/turkey-extends-blocking-youtube ============================================================ 5. Free Culture 2010 in Barcelona ============================================================ Barcelona was the capital of free culture at the end of October 2010, with two events - Oxcars and then the Free Culture Forum (FCF) - organized by Exgae for awarding and promoting free culture concepts across Europe and beyond. The third edition of the Oxcars ceremony took place on 28 October 2010, with 1000 people joining the event on the spot and many more watching it live on the Internet. The event awarded prizes for the Spanish free culture supporters (such as the academic Josi Luis Sampedro) and users (Txaber Allui - an e-cook blogger). Following the ECJ ruling on private copying levies just a few days earlier, the stars of the event were the lawyer Jover Josep and Ana Marma Mindez - the owner of the computer store that started the proceedings against Spanish collective society SGAE. Javier characterized the current situation of the copyright levies by a powerful metaphor: "We are in a country where blind men pay for what they don't see and the deaf for what they can't hear." British filmmaker Kate Madison was another star of the night, following her implication in the minimal budget fan-made film "Born of Hope", which recreated the world from the Tolkien trilogy. The film, available free on the Internet, had over 2 million views in less than one year. The first round of discussions at FCF were related to the political and economic copyright framework. MEP Eva Lichtenberger made an appeal to civil society action in the debate saying that "We have lost the battle on the Gallo resolution, but this is just a resolution - so we will need to continue the battle on the future legislative framework and we need the civil society input." She also underlined that the discussion was more balanced now, a group of MEPs already exist that are not indoctrinated only by the lobby copyright approaches. But the FCF focused this year on a very sensitive topic related to free culture: sustainability. The "flat rate" was the main topic of the discussions, with opinions pro and against a solution that might require users to pay a fixed monthly amount to be distributed to creators, as compensation for the free circulation of works on the Internet. The solution that might be adopted in Brazil has triggered a lot of attention and references from presenters or participants in the debate. But other solutions for sustainability were publicly presented, from individual solutions, such as the crowd funded movie El Cosmonauta, to overall approaches, such as flattr presented by Peter Sunde or the Kick Starter, that had 500 projects funded and over 20 million USD pledged in the first 18 months of the project. Alice Wiegand from Wikimedia Germany correctly underlined that it was not just financial sustainability that needed to be better researched, but also the technical and social sustainability, without which a project like Wikipedia can't last. The debate on FCF was also broadcasted online and now videos of both events are publicly available on the Internet. Six candles for six years to combat digital canon (only in Spanish, 29.10.2010) http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2010/10/29/barcelona/1288347187.html The Free Culture Forum in Barcelona explores the way financial sustainability of free culture and shared (only in Spanish, 2.11.2010) http://www.elcultural.es/noticias/ARTE/1011/Despues_del_Copyright The free culture antiOscar reward Josi Luis Sampedro (only in Spanish, 29.10.2010) http://www.laverdad.es/murcia/v/20101029/cultura/antioscar-cultura-libre-pr… Oxcars 2010 - video recordings http://oxcars10.exgae.net/en/ Free Culture Forum 2010 - Pictures, videos and press http://2010.fcforum.net/day-by-day/ ============================================================ 6. Continuing the battle against data retention ============================================================ During the 32nd Annual Conference of the Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners "Privacy: Generations" that took place on 27 and 28 October 2010, EDRi-member Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) called for the abolition of the European Union's Data Retention Directive. "The Data Retention Directive is highly controversial, if not wildly unpopular throughout the European Union. The directive was strongly opposed by European privacy activists ... as each country in the EU has implemented the Data Retention Directive in their own law, they have faced challenges in state courts," explained Eva Galperin of EFF, in a blog post. "The experience in Europe makes clear that mandatory data retention regimes are disproportionate and unnecessary. We continue to believe that the legitimate needs of law enforcement can be met by a more targeted data preservation regime, without the collateral damage inflicted by the 2006 directive. Rather than fighting the privacy battle across Europe one state at a time, EFF urges European Privacy Authorities to call upon the European Commission to stand up for Internet users' fundamental rights, and repeal the 2006 Data Retention Directive outright", stated the EFF. Indeed, the EU Data Protection Directive has been facing a strong and large opposition for several years now. Even the Roadmap published by the EU is indicating that the national implementation has been more complicated than initially thought. Thus most Member States were late in transposing, and 6 have not yet introduced transposing legislation, whereas in 2 Member States the Constitutional Court annulled the national law transposing the Directive. (Germany and Romania, plus a pending case in Hungary). Also there is already a referral to the ECJ for a preliminary ruling at the behest of the Irish High Court . Also the expert group on data retention that should "unite in a single platform all European stakteholders" seems to be missing the civil society representation or the human rights experts. According to a Commission source, the review report of the directive, which was due on 15 September 2010, has recently been postponed to March 2011. The Commission seems to have difficulties to get data from the member states that proves that data retention is necessary and proportionate in a democratic society. EFF Urges EU Data Protection Authorities to Call for the Repeal of the EU Data Retention Directive (25.10.2010) http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/10/eff-calls-eu-data-protection-and-priva… EFF calls for repeal of Data Retention Directive (29.10.2010) http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=11502 Roadmap - Proposal for a review of the Directive 2006/24/EC (Data Retention) http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/planned_ia/docs/2011_home_006_data_re… Civil society calls for an end to compulsory telecommunications data retention (28.06.2010) http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/content/view/370/79/lang,en/ EDRi-gram: WP29 criticizes the implementation of the EU data retention directive (28.07.2010) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number8.15/article-29-working-party-opinion-da… ============================================================ 7. Belgian Court upholds Creative Commons licence ============================================================ A local court in Nivelles, Belgium upheld in a case decided 26 October 2010 on the validity of the Creative Commons licence in a copyright infringement case when a music group published its music under CC BY-NC-SA. In this case reported by Professor Siverine Dussollier of the University of Namur, a theatre adapted the music published by the band to make an advertisement for their theatrical season. The ad was broadcast on the national radio several times (with no attribution). The band refused the damages of 1500 euro that the theatre proposed and decided to sue for copyright infringement. In its decision, the court recognized the CC licence as a valid permissive copyright licence that has already been accepted by Dutch, Spanish and US courts. The decision also noted that the conditions of the decisions were breached by not attributing the song to its creators and using it for commercial purposes, which was prohibited by the CC licence used. The court decided to award damages of 4500 euro to the complainants. Decision Tribunal Nivelles - Lichtdmapwa (only in French, 26.10.2010) http://www.scribd.com/doc/40732194/2010-10-26-Decision-trib-Nivelles-Lichod… Belgian Court recognises CC licences (2.11.2010) http://www.technollama.co.uk/belgian-court-recognises-cc-licences EDRi-gram: Creative Commons license upheld in Dutch and Spanish courts (29.03.2006) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.6/jurisprudence-creative-commons-europe ============================================================ 8. Recommended Action ============================================================ Public consultation on the future of electronic commerce in the internal market and the implementation of the Directive on electronic commerce (2000/31/EC). Deadline: 5 November 2010 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/2010/e-commerce_en.htm Defend Councillor Kitcat from suspension for posting YouTube videos http://action.openrightsgroup.org/ea-campaign/clientcampaign.do?ea.campaign… ============================================================ 9. Recommended Reading ============================================================ UK: Minister proposes privacy mediation service and good-privacy kitemark http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=11511 http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm101028/halltex… ============================================================ 10. Agenda ============================================================ 5-7 November 2010, Cologne, Germany Transparency, Work, Surveillance Joint Annual Meeting of FIfF and DVD http://fiff.de/veranstaltungen/fiff-jahrestagungen/JT2010/jt2010_uebersicht 5-7 November 2010, Gothenburg, Sweden Free Society Conference and Nordic Summit http://www.fscons.org/ 12-13 November 2010, Amsterdam, Netherlands Economies of the Commons 2 - Paying the costs of making things free http://www.ecommons.eu 17 November 2010, Gent, Belgium Big Brother Awards 2010 Belgium http://www.winuwprivacy.be/kandidaten 18-19 November 2010, London, UK Open Government Data Camp http://opengovernmentdata.org/camp2010/ 27-30 December 2010, Berlin, Germany 27th Chaos Communication Congress (27C3) http://events.ccc.de/congress/2010 25-28 January 2011, Brussels, Belgium The annual Conference Computers, Privacy & Data Protection CPDP 2011 European Data Protection: In Good Health? Submission deadline for Full Papers and Position Papers: 16 November 2010 http://www.cpdpconferences.org/ ============================================================ 11. About ============================================================ EDRI-gram is a biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe. Currently EDRI has 27 members based or with offices in 17 different countries in Europe. European Digital Rights takes an active interest in developments in the EU accession countries and wants to share knowledge and awareness through the EDRI-grams. All contributions, suggestions for content, corrections or agenda-tips are most welcome. Errors are corrected as soon as possible and are visible on the EDRI website. Except where otherwise noted, this newsletter is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. See the full text at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ Newsletter editor: Bogdan Manolea <edrigram(a)edri.org> Information about EDRI and its members: http://www.edri.org/ European Digital Rights needs your help in upholding digital rights in the EU. If you wish to help us promote digital rights, please consider making a private donation. http://www.edri.org/about/sponsoring - EDRI-gram subscription information subscribe by e-mail To: edri-news-request(a)edri.org Subject: subscribe You will receive an automated e-mail asking to confirm your request. Unsubscribe by e-mail To: edri-news-request(a)edri.org Subject: unsubscribe - EDRI-gram in Macedonian EDRI-gram is also available partly in Macedonian, with delay. Translations are provided by Metamorphosis http://www.metamorphosis.org.mk/edri/2.html - EDRI-gram in German EDRI-gram is also available in German, with delay. Translations are provided Andreas Krisch from the EDRI-member VIBE!AT - Austrian Association for Internet Users http://www.unwatched.org/ - Newsletter archive Back issues are available at: http://www.edri.org/edrigram - Help Please ask <edrigram(a)edri.org> if you have any problems with subscribing or unsubscribing. ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

EDRi-gram newsletter - Number 8.21, 3 November 2010
by EDRI-gram newsletter 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

============================================================ EDRi-gram biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe Number 8.21, 3 November 2010 ============================================================ Contents ============================================================ New EDRi members 1. Google admits it was gathering passwords and emails via StreetView 2. ECJ decides private copying levies are not allowed for business use 3. EC refers Austria to ECJ for lack of independence of DPA 4. Is YouTube back online in Turkey? 5. Free Culture 2010 in Barcelona 6. Continuing the battle against data retention 7. Belgian court upholds Creative Commons licence 8. Recommended Action 9. Recommended Reading 10. Agenda 11. About ============================================================ New EDRi members ============================================================ At the EDRi General Assembly of 30 October 2010 in Barcelona, Spain, EDRi welcomed two new members. The Panoptykon Foundation is a Polish organisation focusing on human rights, in particular the right to privacy, in the clash with modern technology used for surveillance purposes. The NGO wants to analyse the risks associated with the operation of modern surveillance systems, monitor the actions of both public and private entities and intervene when human rights or democratic values are threatened. The Liga voor Mensenrechten (Human Rights League) has a focus on human rights in Belgium and a campaigner of privacy, including the organisation of the Big Brother Awards. EDRi now has 29 members that are based or have offices in 18 different European countries, all within the territory of the Council of Europe. Panoptykon Foundation http://www.panoptykon.org/ Liga voor Mensenrechten http://www.mensenrechten.be/ EDRI members and observers http://www.edri.org/about/members ============================================================ 1. Google admits it was gathering passwords and emails via StreetView ============================================================ Google faces further investigation in the UK and Italy, after it has publicly admitted in a blog post on 22 October 2010 that its StreetView service has gathered more data than intended, "in some instances entire emails and URLs were captured, as well as passwords." The UK Data Protection Authority - Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has decided to reopen its investigation on Google over the personal data gathering by its StreetView system. Initially, in July 2010, ICO declared it would not take measures against Google, considering that the company could not have gathered much personal data with its StreetView vehicles while mapping Wi-Fi networks in the areas they covered. However, according to an investigation carried out by Canada's Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart, it appears that Google has gathered, in this way, entire emails, highly sensitive personal information and even passwords. As Google admitted Stoddard's allegations, ICO is now reconsidering its position. "Now that these findings are starting to emerge, we understand that Google has accepted that in some instances entire URLs and emails have been captured. We will be making enquires to see whether this information relates to the data inadvertently captured in the UK, before deciding on the necessary course of action, including a consideration of the need to use our enforcement powers," was ICO's statement. While Google stated that the data was collected by error because of a code being included in the Street View software by mistake, during a two-hour UK parliamentary debate on privacy on 28 October 2010, MPs discussed the issue and accused of Google of having deliberately collected WiFi data for commercial gain. Ed Vaizey, the UK communications minister said that although Google could still be fined for collecting the WiFi data without people's knowledge, as the offence had occurred before the entering into force of the legislation giving ICO the power to levy punishments of up to 575 000 euro, the fine would probably be much lower. He also added that for any future services such as StreetView, Internet companies would be asked to establish "ground rules" together with the ICO, before starting projects that might endanger privacy. Italy also started an investigation against Google for potential invasions of privacy in its Street View online mapping service. "Italian citizens will be informed of the presence of Google cars taking pictures of places and individuals to be posted online via the StreetView service," stated the Italian Data protection authority on 25 October 2010, adding that Google StreetView vehicles would have to be "clearly marked by means of visible stickers or signs to unambiguously signify that pictures are being taken for the purposes of StreetView." The Italian privacy authority also imposed Google to previously list, to the public media, the neighbourhoods its cars would photograph. The non-compliance would bring the company a fine of up to 1 800 euro. In the meantime, in Germany, over 244 000 residents have specifically requested that the images of their households be removed from StreetView. While Google seemed to be happy that just 3% of the population used the opt-out system, the number shows the huge interest in privacy of German citizens. "Going to a website, and entering all this information it takes a hell of a lot of time and effort, and I am just staggered by this 200 000 plus (number)," explained Viktor Mayer-Schoenberger, a professor of Internet Governance and Regulation at Oxford University, to Deustche Welle. ICO considers action amidst further Street View data collection revelations (25.10.2010) http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=11486 UK MPs question Google over Street View data breaches (29.10.2010) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11650692 More than 244 000 opt out of Google Street View in Germany (21.10.2010) http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,6133854,00.html Google escapes prosecution over Streetview data (29.10.2010) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/8095954/Google-escapes-prosecu… The Internet and Privacy - UK Parliament debate (28.10.2010) http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmtoday/cmwhall/01.htm#d2e30 EDRi-gram: Google's Street View will not resume its activities in the Czech Republic (22.09.2010) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number8.18/czech-republic-bans-streetview ============================================================ 2. ECJ decides private copying levies are not allowed for business use ============================================================ On 21 October 2010, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) decided that private copying levies on blank CDs, MP3 players and other digital media are allowed under EU copyright law only when charged on goods sold to individuals but not to companies. ECJ ruled that "the application of the 'private copying levy' to reproduction media acquired by undertakings and professionals for purposes other than private copying is not compatible with European Union law. Such a levy may be applied to such media when they are liable to be used by natural persons for their private use". In some European countries the unauthorised copying of works that a person legitimately owns is allowed, on the condition that it is for private use. The European Copyright Directive permits this, provided there is fair compensation to the copyright holders. The compensation can be ensured by charging a levy on the media (such as discs or media players used for copying material) which is then distributed to rights holders through collection societies. ECJ thus ruled against the Spanish collective rights management agency SGAE (Sociedad General de Autores y Editores) which had won a case filed against Padawan, a store distributing discs and other devices, for unpaid copyright levies. Padawan had claimed that the indiscriminate application of the levy was not compatible with EU law and appealed the decision. The appeals court asked the ECJ to rule on this case in relation to European law. "The purpose of fair compensation is to compensate authors adequately for the use made of their protected works without their authorisation. In order to determine the level of that compensation, account must be taken as a 'valuable criterion' - of the 'possible harm' suffered by the author as a result of the act of reproduction concerned, although prejudice which is 'minimal' does not give rise to a payment obligation. The private copying exception must therefore include a system 'to compensate for the prejudice to rightholders'," said the ruling. ECJ considered the level of fair compensation was linked to "the harm resulting for the author from the reproduction for private use of his protected work without his authorisation." And therefore "fair compensation must be regarded as recompense for the harm suffered by the author." A levy was a reasonable mechanism for private individuals who were likely to use material to copy and who should pay for the harm caused to authors, but this should not be applied to other sales because the levy could not be applied indiscriminately. "The indiscriminate application of the private copying levy to all types of digital reproduction equipment, devices and media, including cases in which such equipment is acquired by persons other than natural persons for purposes clearly unrelated to private copying, is incompatible with the directive." Press Release no.106/10 of the EU Court of Justice (21.10.2010) http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2010-10/cp100106en.… Judgment of the Court - case 467/08 Padawan SL vs SGAE (Third Chamber) (21.10.2010) http://curia.europa.eu/jurisp/cgi-bin/form.pl?lang=EN&Submit=rechercher&num… ECJ outlaws private copying levy on sales to businesses (21.10.2010) http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=11471 Brussels smackdown for Spanish media'n'kit copy levy (22.10.2010) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/10/22/court_rules_on_spain_cd_copying_lev… ============================================================ 3. EC refers Austria to ECJ for lack of independence of DPA ============================================================ Since a complaint was filed by the data protection association Arge Daten back in October 2003, the lack of adequate independence of the Austrian Data Protection Authority (DSK - Datenschutzkommission) has been on the European Commission's (EC) agenda. Years later, in 2009, the Commission asked Austria, in a reasoned opinion under EU infringement procedures, to revise the way the authority is organised. However, as the Austrian authorities failed to comply with the reasoned opinion and the Commission has decided to refer Austria to the European Court of Justice (ECJ). This decision was officially published on 28 October 2010. The Commission considers that provisions setting up the Austrian data protection authority do not conform to EU rules, which require Member States to establish a completely independent supervisory body to monitor the application of the 1995 Data Protection Directive (Directive 95/46/EC). Although the Austrian data protection legislation (Datenschutzgesetz 2000) spells out that the authority exercises its functions independently and takes no instruction in its performance, the Commission considers that "complete independence," as required under EU data protection rules, is not guaranteed because: - the authority remains under the supervision of the Federal Chancellery as integrated into the Chancellery in terms of organisation and staff: it controls neither its own staffing nor its equipment and it does not have its own budget; - since its creation in 1980, the authority has been run by a senior official of the Chancellery as executive member ("geschdftsf|hrendes Mitglied"), subject to the supervision of the Chancellery; - the right of the Chancellor to be informed at all times by the chair and the executive member on all subjects concerning the daily management of the authority potentially hinders the members of the supervisory authority in the independent performance of their tasks. The Commission's approach to the independence of data protection authorities reflects the case law of the European Court of Justice. In its ruling of 3 March 2010 (C-518/07), in which Germany was declared in breach of EU rules on the independence of the data protection supervisory authority, the Court confirmed that authorities responsible for the supervision of the processing of personal data must remain free from any external influence, including the direct or indirect influence of the state. According to the Court, the mere risk of political influence through state scrutiny is sufficient to hinder the independent performance of the supervisory authority's tasks. Earlier this year, the European Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) has also seriously criticised the status of Austria's data protection authority. The FRA study 'Data Protection in the European Union: the role of National Data Protection Authorities', published in May 2010, casted a damning light on the Austrian DSK. The study detected both a lack of independence from the government and a lack of financial resources and staff of the DSK. The Austrian DSK is not equipped with full powers of investigation and intervention. As a consequence, the supervisory body "cannot enforce its decisions in warning the data processor/controller as to its unlawful conduct" - a serious deficit which occurs only in three of the 27 EU Member States, i.e. Poland, Hungary and Austria. No official statement has been published by the Austrian government since the EC announced it would refer Austria to the Court of Justice in this matter. It remains to be seen whether the Austrian government will stick to its former plans to close down the DSK. According to a draft law promoted in 2007 and reconditioned in 2010, which is aiming at changing various regulations of the Austrian Constitution, the government intends to assign some of the duties of the DSK to nine administrative courts of the "Ldnder" instead. By which organisation(s) the remaining duties of the DSK should be fulfilled, remains unclear till today. In its recently published bi-annual report of the years 2007-2009, the DSK criticised these plans and argued that only 10 % of its tasks were suitable to be carried out by administrative courts. In light of its ruling of 3 March 2010, in which Germany was declared in breach of EU rules on the independence of the data protection supervisory authority, it is more than likely that the ECJ will come to a similar conclusion in the Austrian case. It's also more than likely that neither the EC nor the European Court of Justice will appreciate the further demolition of the Austrian data protection authority by closing down the existing insufficient body and scattering its competencies to regional administration. Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31995L0046:en:H… Data Protection: Commission to refer Austria to Court for lack of independence of data protection authority: (28.10.2010) http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/10/1430&format=H… Publications Office Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 9 March 2010 - European Commission v Federal Republic of Germany (1.5.2010) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2010:113:0003:00… Data Protection in the European Union: the role of National Data Protection Authorities (Strengthening the fundamental rights architecture in the EU II) (Fundamental Rights Agency, 7.5.2010) http://fra.europa.eu/fraWebsite/research/publications/publications_per_year… EDRi-gram 5.19 - The days of the Austrian DPA are numbered (10.8.2007) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number5.19/austrian-dpa EDRi-gram 3.17 - EC: data protection inadequate in Austria and Germany (24.8.2005) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number3.17/DPA Austrian Data Protection Act 2000 (only in German) http://www.ris.bka.gv.at/Dokumente/Bundesnormen/NOR40113679/NOR40113679.pdf Datenschutzbericht 2009 - 1. Juli 2007 - 31. Dezember 2009, Vsterreichische Datenschutzkommission (only in German) http://www.dsk.gv.at/DocView.axd?CobId=40344 (Contribution by Andreas Krisch, EDRi-member VIBE!AT, Austria) ============================================================ 4. Is YouTube back online in Turkey? ============================================================ After almost three years of blocking, Turkey has finally lifted its ban on YouTube. Google's site was blocked in 2007 for videos considered insulting to Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the country's founder. In 2007, Turkey's parliament adopted a law allowing a court to block any website in case there was "sufficient suspicion" that a crime had occurred. The Appeal Court of Ankara has recently decided to lift the ban on Google's site but the decision is not considered entirely a victory as it came along with the removal of the videos in question. Transport Minister Binali Yildirim said there was no longer any reason to ban the website because the offending videos had been removed. "I hope that they have also learned from this experience and the same thing will not happen again. YouTube will hopefully carry out its operations in Turkey within the limits of law in the future," he added thus implying that the site could always be in danger of suspension in the future in case similar content is posted on it. YouTube wanted to emphasize the fact that the videos had been removed by a third party: "We want to be clear that a third party, not YouTube, have apparently removed some of the videos that have caused the blocking of YouTube in Turkey using our automated copyright complaint process. We are investigating whether this action is valid in accordance with our copyright policy." But the victory may be short-lived, as the Dr. Yaman Akdeniz has pointed out that the videos are back online: "Despite the earlier news that Turkey has lifted its ban on YouTube after almost 2.5 years, YouTube reinstated the four videos that were removed by a licensing agency in Germany. YouTube, in a statement circulated in Turkish late Monday night stated that the four videos did not violate its copyright violation policy and therefore they were put back into the system (...) It remains to be seen how the Turkish authorities will react to this action by YouTube but I strongly suspect that they will issue a new injunction to block access to YouTube." OSCE (the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe) which, in June 2010, expressed the opinion that Internet censorship in Turkey was one of the heaviest in the world by the the law allowing the access blocking to more than 5 000 sites, welcomed the present decision but urged Turkey to continue in this direction "by reforming its Internet law and lift the remaining website bans." Thousands of other websites, especially those related to sensitive topics such as Ataturk, the army and minorities, remain blocked. Turkey lifts two-year ban on YouTube (30.10.2010) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11659816 YouTube accessible soon in Turkey after three years of blocking (only in French, 30.10.2010) http://www.numerama.com/magazine/17214-youtube-bientot-accessible-en-turqui… YouTube Ban is Imminent (again) in Turkey (1.11.2010) http://cyberlaw.org.uk/2010/11/01/youtube-ban-is-imminent-again-in-turkey/ Turkey: Authorities urged to ensure YouTube stays unblocked (3.11.2010) http://en.rsf.org/turkey-authorities-urged-to-ensure-03-11-2010,38742.html EDRI-gram: Turkey extends the censorship of YouTube (16.06.2010) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number8.12/turkey-extends-blocking-youtube ============================================================ 5. Free Culture 2010 in Barcelona ============================================================ Barcelona was the capital of free culture at the end of October 2010, with two events - Oxcars and then the Free Culture Forum (FCF) - organized by Exgae for awarding and promoting free culture concepts across Europe and beyond. The third edition of the Oxcars ceremony took place on 28 October 2010, with 1000 people joining the event on the spot and many more watching it live on the Internet. The event awarded prizes for the Spanish free culture supporters (such as the academic Josi Luis Sampedro) and users (Txaber Allui - an e-cook blogger). Following the ECJ ruling on private copying levies just a few days earlier, the stars of the event were the lawyer Jover Josep and Ana Marma Mindez - the owner of the computer store that started the proceedings against Spanish collective society SGAE. Javier characterized the current situation of the copyright levies by a powerful metaphor: "We are in a country where blind men pay for what they don't see and the deaf for what they can't hear." British filmmaker Kate Madison was another star of the night, following her implication in the minimal budget fan-made film "Born of Hope", which recreated the world from the Tolkien trilogy. The film, available free on the Internet, had over 2 million views in less than one year. The first round of discussions at FCF were related to the political and economic copyright framework. MEP Eva Lichtenberger made an appeal to civil society action in the debate saying that "We have lost the battle on the Gallo resolution, but this is just a resolution - so we will need to continue the battle on the future legislative framework and we need the civil society input." She also underlined that the discussion was more balanced now, a group of MEPs already exist that are not indoctrinated only by the lobby copyright approaches. But the FCF focused this year on a very sensitive topic related to free culture: sustainability. The "flat rate" was the main topic of the discussions, with opinions pro and against a solution that might require users to pay a fixed monthly amount to be distributed to creators, as compensation for the free circulation of works on the Internet. The solution that might be adopted in Brazil has triggered a lot of attention and references from presenters or participants in the debate. But other solutions for sustainability were publicly presented, from individual solutions, such as the crowd funded movie El Cosmonauta, to overall approaches, such as flattr presented by Peter Sunde or the Kick Starter, that had 500 projects funded and over 20 million USD pledged in the first 18 months of the project. Alice Wiegand from Wikimedia Germany correctly underlined that it was not just financial sustainability that needed to be better researched, but also the technical and social sustainability, without which a project like Wikipedia can't last. The debate on FCF was also broadcasted online and now videos of both events are publicly available on the Internet. Six candles for six years to combat digital canon (only in Spanish, 29.10.2010) http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2010/10/29/barcelona/1288347187.html The Free Culture Forum in Barcelona explores the way financial sustainability of free culture and shared (only in Spanish, 2.11.2010) http://www.elcultural.es/noticias/ARTE/1011/Despues_del_Copyright The free culture antiOscar reward Josi Luis Sampedro (only in Spanish, 29.10.2010) http://www.laverdad.es/murcia/v/20101029/cultura/antioscar-cultura-libre-pr… Oxcars 2010 - video recordings http://oxcars10.exgae.net/en/ Free Culture Forum 2010 - Pictures, videos and press http://2010.fcforum.net/day-by-day/ ============================================================ 6. Continuing the battle against data retention ============================================================ During the 32nd Annual Conference of the Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners "Privacy: Generations" that took place on 27 and 28 October 2010, EDRi-member Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) called for the abolition of the European Union's Data Retention Directive. "The Data Retention Directive is highly controversial, if not wildly unpopular throughout the European Union. The directive was strongly opposed by European privacy activists ... as each country in the EU has implemented the Data Retention Directive in their own law, they have faced challenges in state courts," explained Eva Galperin of EFF, in a blog post. "The experience in Europe makes clear that mandatory data retention regimes are disproportionate and unnecessary. We continue to believe that the legitimate needs of law enforcement can be met by a more targeted data preservation regime, without the collateral damage inflicted by the 2006 directive. Rather than fighting the privacy battle across Europe one state at a time, EFF urges European Privacy Authorities to call upon the European Commission to stand up for Internet users' fundamental rights, and repeal the 2006 Data Retention Directive outright", stated the EFF. Indeed, the EU Data Protection Directive has been facing a strong and large opposition for several years now. Even the Roadmap published by the EU is indicating that the national implementation has been more complicated than initially thought. Thus most Member States were late in transposing, and 6 have not yet introduced transposing legislation, whereas in 2 Member States the Constitutional Court annulled the national law transposing the Directive. (Germany and Romania, plus a pending case in Hungary). Also there is already a referral to the ECJ for a preliminary ruling at the behest of the Irish High Court . Also the expert group on data retention that should "unite in a single platform all European stakteholders" seems to be missing the civil society representation or the human rights experts. According to a Commission source, the review report of the directive, which was due on 15 September 2010, has recently been postponed to March 2011. The Commission seems to have difficulties to get data from the member states that proves that data retention is necessary and proportionate in a democratic society. EFF Urges EU Data Protection Authorities to Call for the Repeal of the EU Data Retention Directive (25.10.2010) http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/10/eff-calls-eu-data-protection-and-priva… EFF calls for repeal of Data Retention Directive (29.10.2010) http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=11502 Roadmap - Proposal for a review of the Directive 2006/24/EC (Data Retention) http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/planned_ia/docs/2011_home_006_data_re… Civil society calls for an end to compulsory telecommunications data retention (28.06.2010) http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/content/view/370/79/lang,en/ EDRi-gram: WP29 criticizes the implementation of the EU data retention directive (28.07.2010) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number8.15/article-29-working-party-opinion-da… ============================================================ 7. Belgian Court upholds Creative Commons licence ============================================================ A local court in Nivelles, Belgium upheld in a case decided 26 October 2010 on the validity of the Creative Commons licence in a copyright infringement case when a music group published its music under CC BY-NC-SA. In this case reported by Professor Siverine Dussollier of the University of Namur, a theatre adapted the music published by the band to make an advertisement for their theatrical season. The ad was broadcast on the national radio several times (with no attribution). The band refused the damages of 1500 euro that the theatre proposed and decided to sue for copyright infringement. In its decision, the court recognized the CC licence as a valid permissive copyright licence that has already been accepted by Dutch, Spanish and US courts. The decision also noted that the conditions of the decisions were breached by not attributing the song to its creators and using it for commercial purposes, which was prohibited by the CC licence used. The court decided to award damages of 4500 euro to the complainants. Decision Tribunal Nivelles - Lichtdmapwa (only in French, 26.10.2010) http://www.scribd.com/doc/40732194/2010-10-26-Decision-trib-Nivelles-Lichod… Belgian Court recognises CC licences (2.11.2010) http://www.technollama.co.uk/belgian-court-recognises-cc-licences EDRi-gram: Creative Commons license upheld in Dutch and Spanish courts (29.03.2006) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.6/jurisprudence-creative-commons-europe ============================================================ 8. Recommended Action ============================================================ Public consultation on the future of electronic commerce in the internal market and the implementation of the Directive on electronic commerce (2000/31/EC). Deadline: 5 November 2010 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/2010/e-commerce_en.htm Defend Councillor Kitcat from suspension for posting YouTube videos http://action.openrightsgroup.org/ea-campaign/clientcampaign.do?ea.campaign… ============================================================ 9. Recommended Reading ============================================================ UK: Minister proposes privacy mediation service and good-privacy kitemark http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=11511 http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm101028/halltex… ============================================================ 10. Agenda ============================================================ 5-7 November 2010, Cologne, Germany Transparency, Work, Surveillance Joint Annual Meeting of FIfF and DVD http://fiff.de/veranstaltungen/fiff-jahrestagungen/JT2010/jt2010_uebersicht 5-7 November 2010, Gothenburg, Sweden Free Society Conference and Nordic Summit http://www.fscons.org/ 12-13 November 2010, Amsterdam, Netherlands Economies of the Commons 2 - Paying the costs of making things free http://www.ecommons.eu 17 November 2010, Gent, Belgium Big Brother Awards 2010 Belgium http://www.winuwprivacy.be/kandidaten 18-19 November 2010, London, UK Open Government Data Camp http://opengovernmentdata.org/camp2010/ 27-30 December 2010, Berlin, Germany 27th Chaos Communication Congress (27C3) http://events.ccc.de/congress/2010 25-28 January 2011, Brussels, Belgium The annual Conference Computers, Privacy & Data Protection CPDP 2011 European Data Protection: In Good Health? Submission deadline for Full Papers and Position Papers: 16 November 2010 http://www.cpdpconferences.org/ ============================================================ 11. About ============================================================ EDRI-gram is a biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe. Currently EDRI has 27 members based or with offices in 17 different countries in Europe. European Digital Rights takes an active interest in developments in the EU accession countries and wants to share knowledge and awareness through the EDRI-grams. All contributions, suggestions for content, corrections or agenda-tips are most welcome. Errors are corrected as soon as possible and are visible on the EDRI website. Except where otherwise noted, this newsletter is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. See the full text at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ Newsletter editor: Bogdan Manolea <edrigram(a)edri.org> Information about EDRI and its members: http://www.edri.org/ European Digital Rights needs your help in upholding digital rights in the EU. If you wish to help us promote digital rights, please consider making a private donation. http://www.edri.org/about/sponsoring - EDRI-gram subscription information subscribe by e-mail To: edri-news-request(a)edri.org Subject: subscribe You will receive an automated e-mail asking to confirm your request. Unsubscribe by e-mail To: edri-news-request(a)edri.org Subject: unsubscribe - EDRI-gram in Macedonian EDRI-gram is also available partly in Macedonian, with delay. Translations are provided by Metamorphosis http://www.metamorphosis.org.mk/edri/2.html - EDRI-gram in German EDRI-gram is also available in German, with delay. Translations are provided Andreas Krisch from the EDRI-member VIBE!AT - Austrian Association for Internet Users http://www.unwatched.org/ - Newsletter archive Back issues are available at: http://www.edri.org/edrigram - Help Please ask <edrigram(a)edri.org> if you have any problems with subscribing or unsubscribing. ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

(no subject)
by 100posko 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

1 0

[EPIC_IDOF] National Security Letters
by Bruce Schneier 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

An Enemy of The State By DOUG THOMPSON Nov 7, 2005, 08:14 http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7624.shtml According to a printout from a computer controlled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Department of Justice, I am an enemy of the state. The printout, shown to me recently by a friend who works for Justice, identifies me by a long, multi-digit number, lists my date of birth, place of birth, social security number and contains more than 100 pages documenting what the Bureau and the Bush Administration consider to be my threats to the security of the United States of America. It lists where I sent to school, the name and address of the first wife that I had been told was dead but who is alive and well and living in Montana, background information on my current wife and details on my service to my country that I haven?t even revealed to my wife or my family. Although the file finds no criminal activity by me or members of my immediate family, it remains open because I am a ?person of interest? who has ?written and promoted opinions that are contrary to the government of the United States of America.? And it will remain active because the government of the United States, under the far-reaching provisions of the USA Patriot Act, can compile and retain such information on any American citizen. That act gives the FBI the authority to collect intimate details about anyone, even those not suspected of any wrongdoing. My file begins on September 11, 2001, the day of the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. A Marine guard standing post at the Navy Yard in Washington jotted down the license number of my Jeep Wrangler after I was spotted taking pictures of armed guards at the locked-down military facility. That night, I found a card stuffed under my door from Agent John Ryan of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service. I chuckled at the time because the lead character in Tom Clancy?s novels is named John P. Ryan. I called Agent Ryan the next day. He wanted to know what the hell I was doing taking photos of a military facility. I explained that I was a journalist and taking pictures was what I did for a living. I directed him to a web site where he could find some of the photos I shot of the Navy Yard?s side gate on that day. He asked for additional information, including date of birth and social security number, which I provided, and then hung up. I thought the matter was dead until a few weeks ago when an old friend from Washington called, said he was in the area, and suggested lunch. At lunch, he showed me the 100-plus pages of the file on me that grew out of that first encounter with Agent Ryan of NCIS. ?Much of this information was gathered through what we call Rnational security letters,?? he said. ?It allows us to gather information from a variety of sources.? A ?national security letter? it turns out, can be issued by any FBI supervisor, without court order or judicial review, to compel libraries, banks, employers and other sources to turn over any and all information they have on American citizens. The FBI issues more than 30,000 national security letters a year. When one is delivered to a bank, library, employer or other entity, the same federal law that authorizes such letters also prohibits your bank, employer or anyone else from telling you that they received such a letter and were forced to turn over all information on you. According to my file, the banks where I have both business and checking accounts have been forced to turn over all records of my transactions, as have every company where I have a charge account or credit card. They?ve perused my book borrowing habits from libraries in Arlington and Floyd Counties as well as studied what television shows I watch on the Tivos in my house. They know I belong to the National Rifle Association, the National Press Photographers Association and other professional groups. They know I attend meetings of Alcoholic Anonymous on a regular basis and the file notes that my ?pattern of spending? shows no purchase of ?alcohol-related products? since the file was opened in 2001. In the past, when information collected on an American citizen failed to turn up any criminal activity, FBI policy called for such information to be destroyed. But President George W. Bush in 2003 reversed that long-standing policy and ordered the bureau and other federal agencies to not only keep that information but place it in government databases that can be accessed by local, state and federal law enforcement agencies. In October, Bush also signed Executive Order 13388 which expands access to those databases to ?appropriate private sector entities? although the order does not explain what those entities might be. In addition, the Bush Administration has successfully blocked legislation and legal actions that have tried to stop the expansion of spying and gathering of information on Americans. FBI spokesmen defend the national security letters as a ?necessary tool? on the so-called ?war on terror.? "Congress has given us this tool to obtain basic telephone data, basic banking data, basic credit reports," Valarie E. Caproni, the FBI general counsel, told The Washington Post. "The fact that a national security letter is a routine tool used, that doesn't bother me." Obviously it doesn?t. Carponi signed at least one of the letters used to gather information for my file. When I asked to keep the copy of the file, my friend said ?no.? I promised to keep it and the source confidential. ?You can?t,? he said. ?You can?t keep anything hidden. Your life is an open book with us and it will be to the day you die.? After we left lunch and went our separate ways, I wondered how, if my life was under such scrutiny from Uncle Sam, he could meet me for lunch in a public restaurant and not be discovered? So the next day I went to a public phone in an out-of-the-way location and dialed his direct number. It was disconnected. So I called the central number and asked to speak to him. The woman who answered the phone wanted my name and phone number so he could return the call. I hung up. Then I drove home with one eye glued to the rearview mirror. Didn?t see anything suspicious but if I turn up missing one day, just forward my mail to General Delivery, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. ? Copyright 2005 by Capitol Hill Blue _______________________________________________ EPIC_IDOF mailing list EPIC_IDOF(a)mailman.epic.org https://mailman.epic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/epic_idof ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as eugen(a)leitl.org To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/ ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]

1 0

[IP] National Security Letters
by David Farber 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

Begin forwarded message:

1 0

[Politech] Internet fuels rise in number of jailed journalists: 1 in 3 are Web-based [fs]
by Declan McCullagh 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: CPJ: Internet fuels rise in number of jailed journalists Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2006 10:26:34 -0500 From: CPJ_Asia <CPJ_Asia(a)cpj.org> NEWS Committee to Protect Journalists 330 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001 USA Phone: (212) 465b1004 Fax: (212) 465b9568 Web: www.cpj.org E-Mail: media(a)cpj.org Contact: Abi Wright Telephone: (212) 465-1004 ext. 105 http://www.cpj.org <http://www.cpj.org/> e-mail: info(a)cpj.org <mailto:info@cpj.org> Internet fuels rise in number of jailed journalists More held without charge or due process, CPJ census also finds New York, December 7, 2006bThe number of journalists jailed worldwide for their work increased for the second consecutive year, and one in three is now an Internet blogger, online editor, or Web-based reporter, according to a new analysis by the Committee to Protect Journalists. CPJ's annual worldwide census found 134 journalists imprisoned on December 1, an increase of nine from the 2005 tally. China, Cuba, Eritrea, and Ethiopia are the top four jailers among the 24 nations who imprison journalists. Detailed accounts of each imprisoned journalist <http://www.cpj.org/attacks06/pages06/imprison_06.html> are posted on CPJbs Web site. Print reporters, editors, and photographers continue to make up the largest professional category, with 67 cases in 2006, but Internet journalists are a growing segment of the census and now constitute the second largest category, with 49 cases. The number of imprisoned journalists whose work appeared primarily on the Web, via e-mail, or in another electronic form has increased each year since CPJ recorded the first jailed Internet writer in its 1997 census. The 2006 figure is the highest number of Internet journalists CPJ has ever tallied in its annual survey. The roster of jailed Internet journalists includes Chinabs b citizenb reporters, the independent Cuban writers who file reports for overseas Web sites, <http://www.cpj.org/Briefings/2006/DA_fall_06/prisoner/watson.html> and the U.S. video blogger Joshua Wolf who refused to hand over footage to a grand jury. b Webre at a crucial juncture in the fight for press freedom because authoritarian states have made the Internet a major front in their effort to control information,b CPJ Executive Director Joel Simon said. b China is challenging the notion that the Internet is impossible to control or censor, and if it succeeds there will be far-ranging implications, not only for the medium but for press freedom all over the world.b Over all, b antistateb allegations such as subversion, divulging state secrets, and acting against the interests of the state are the most common charges used to imprison journalists worldwide. Eighty-four journalists are jailed under these charges, many by the Chinese, Cuban, and Ethiopian governments. But CPJ also found an increasing number of journalists held without any charge or trial at all. Twenty imprisoned journalists, or 15 percent, have been denied even the most basic elements of due process, CPJ found. Eritrea, which accounts for more than half of these cases, keeps journalists in secret locations and withholds basic information about their well-being. The United States has imprisoned two journalists without charge or trial: Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein, <http://www.cpj.org/protests/06ltrs/americas/usa07nov06pl.html> now held for eight months in Iraq without due process; and Al-Jazeera cameraman Sami al-Haj, <http://www.cpj.org/Briefings/2006/DA_fall_06/prisoner/prisoner.html> jailed five years and now held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. b In Cuba and in China, journalists are often jailed after summary trials and held in miserable conditions far from their families. But the cruelty and injustice of imprisonment is compounded where there is zero due process and journalists slip into oblivion. In Eritrea, the worst abuser in this regard, there is no check on authority and it is unclear whether some jailed journalists are even alive,b Simon added. For the eighth consecutive year, China is the world's leading jailer of journalists, with 31 imprisoned. About three-quarters of the cases in China were brought under vague b antistateb laws; 19 cases involve Internet journalists. Chinabs list includes Shi Tao, an internationally recognized journalist <http://www.cpj.org/awards05/shi_tao.html> serving a 10-year sentence for posting notes online detailing propaganda department instructions on how to cover the anniversary of the Tiananmen Square crackdown. The government declared the instructions a b state secret.b Cuba ranked second, with 24 reporters, writers, and editors behind bars, most of them jailed in the country's massive March 2003 crackdown on dissidents and the independent press. Nearly all of those on Cubabs list had filed news and commentary to overseas Web sites. These journalists used phone lines and faxes, not computers, to transmit their reports; once posted, their articles were seen across the world but almost never in Cuba, where the government heavily restricts Internet access. Eritrea is the leader among African countries, with 23 journalists in prison. These prisoners are being held incommunicado, and their well-being is a growing source of concern. A non-bylined report, circulated on several Web sites in August and deemed by CPJ sources to be generally credible, claimed that three of the journalists may have died. CPJ and other international organizations have urgently sought information from Asmara, <http://www.cpj.org/news/2006/africa/eritrea15sept06na.html> but the government has refused to provide basic facts about the journalistsb whereabouts, their health, or whether they are still alive. Neighboring Ethiopia has imprisoned 18 journalists, most of whom are being tried for treason after being swept up by authorities in a November 2005 crackdown on dissent. A CPJ investigation in April <http://www.cpj.org/Briefings/2006/DA_spring_06/ethiopia/ethiopia_DA_spring_0 6.html> found no basis for the governmentbs treason charges. Burma, which is holding seven journalists, is fifth among nations, followed by Uzbekistan, which is holding five journalists. The United States, Azerbaijan, and Burundi are seventh on the list of nations, each having jailed three journalists. Here are other trends and details that emerged in CPJ's analysis: * In about 10 percent of cases, governments used a variety of charges unrelated to journalism to retaliate against critical writers, editors, and photojournalists. Such charges ranged from property damage and regulatory violations to drug possession and association with extremists. In the cases included in this census, CPJ has determined that the charges were most likely lodged in reprisal for the journalistbs work. * Spreading ethnic or religious b hatredb was the next most common charge used to imprison journalists worldwide. Such charges were lodged in about four percent of cases. * Criminal defamation charges were filed in about three percent of cases, a slight decline from the rate recorded in recent years. A growing number of nations, particularly in Western Europe, have moved to decriminalize defamation and insult. * Violations of censorship rules account for another three percent of cases. Burma, for example, jailed two journalists in March for violating prohibitions on photographing or filming the countrybs new capital, Pyinmana. * The longest-serving journalists in CPJ's census were Chen Renjie and Lin Youping, who were jailed in China in July 1983 for publishing a pamphlet titled Ziyou Bao (Freedom Report). Codefendant Chen Biling was later executed. CPJ believes that journalists should not be imprisoned for doing their jobs. The organization has sent letters expressing its serious concerns to each country that has imprisoned a journalist. In addition, CPJ sent requests during the year to Eritrean and U.S. officials seeking details in the cases in which journalists were held without publicly disclosed charges. CPJ's list is a snapshot of those incarcerated at midnight on December 1, 2006. It does not include the many journalists imprisoned and released throughout the year; accounts of those cases can be found at www.cpj.org <http://www.cpj.org/> . Journalists remain on CPJbs list until the organization determines with reasonable certainty that they have been released or have died in custody. Journalists who either disappear or are abducted by nonstate entities, including criminal gangs, rebels, or militant groups, are not included on the imprisoned list. Their cases are classified as "missing" or "abducted." Details of these cases are also available on CPJ's Web site. <http://www.cpj.org/Briefings/missing_list.html> CPJ is a New Yorkbbased, independent, nonprofit organization that works to safeguard press freedom worldwide. For more information, visit www.cpj.org <http://www.cpj.org/> . _______________________________________________ Politech mailing list Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/) ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]

1 0