====================================================================== EDRi-gram biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe Number 11.3, 13 February 2013 ======================================================================= Contents ======================================================================= 1. Copyright: challenges of the digital era 2. Most Internet users would use DNT settings if easily available 3. US privacy groups believe US officials lobby to weaken EU privacy 4. Dutch government maintains private copying-exception for downloading 5. Denmark: Government postpones the data retention law evaluation 6. Ancillary copyright law under discussion in Germany 7. Human rights orgs ask OECD to investigate surveillance companies 8. Big Brother Awards 2013 Bulgaria 9. ENDitorial: Licences for Europe and fight club... only one rule 10. Recommended Action: support your privacy rights 11. Recommended Reading 12. Agenda 13. About ======================================================================= 1. Copyright: challenges of the digital era ======================================================================= EDRi has freshly launched a booklet that overviews the challenges that copyright is facing in the digital environment. For the past twelve years, the European Union has discussed how to support, develop and protect creation in the digital environment. Two months ago, the College of Commissioners recognised the necessity that copyright b stays fit for purposeb in the digital economy. Until now, the focus point has been on the enforcement of pre-existing legislative norms not only within the rule of law but also through private policing via internet service providers. However, despite all these efforts, there is still an ubiquitous lack of respect for copyright. The booklet looks at the reasons for this profound gap that has emerged between citizens and the law. Following a brief introduction to the logic behind granting monopoly rights, the booklet lists some reasons that lead to difficulties in respecting copyright law, ranging from excessive penalties for breaching the law to legally-protected restrictions on citizens' rights to use digital products they paid for. It then focuses on the impact of rigid and outdated copyright law on legitimate businesses. Finally, it gives a glance at the wide range of excessive enforcement measures that underline the deterioration of copyright leading to unreasonable and wrongful practices. In short, this booklet presents a simplified overview of the difficulties facing public support for copyright. EDRi hopes that it will have a positive impact on the current debate regarding the necessity of reforming copyright law and adapting the current system to the digital age, allowing the achievement of the digital single market, removing existing barriers and giving citizens a better access to their culture. Copyright: challenges of the digital era (02.2013) http://www.edri.org/files/paper07_copyright.pdf Commission agrees way forward for modernising copyright in the digital economy (5.12.2012) http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-950_en.htm Report from the Commission on the application of Directive 2004/48/EC (22.12.2010) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0779:FIN:EN:P... (Contribution by Marie Humeau - EDRi) ======================================================================= 2. Most Internet users would use DNT settings if easily available ======================================================================= According to a survey by IT service analysts Ovum, 68% of the Internet users would use b do-not-trackb (DNT) settings to restrict the use of their personal data, if such a tool was "easily availableb. Websites and third-parties, such as advertisers, may record Internet usersb behaviour in order to serve targeted, personalised ads. Such user-specific data can be collected by several means, including the use of cookies. The information thus stored can be passed on by operators to advertisers for behavioural adverts, based on the users' activity and declared interests. Yet, lately, consumers have become more aware of the fact that their personal information can be used as merchandise. Ovumbs survey has shown that only 14% of consumers believe Internet firms are honest about the way they use their consumers' personal data. "Unfortunately, in the gold rush that is big data, taking the supply of blittle datab b personal data b for granted seems to be an accident waiting to happen," said Mark Little, principal analyst at Ovum who added: "However, consumers are being empowered with new tools and services to monitor, control, and secure their personal data as never before, and it seems they increasingly have the motivation to use them." In Littlebs opinion, the Internet companies would have to change their attitudes towards their customers. The operators should make privacy tools available to consumers and use b a new set of messages to change consumersb attitudes. These messages must be based on positive direct relationships, engagement with consumers, and the provision of genuine and trustworthy privacy controls.b Although EU Commissioner Neelie Kroes had previously asked for a new DNT standard to enable Internet users to indicate their consent for the use of their personal data in a manner that would comply with the EU's Privacy and Electronic Communications Directive, last year she indicated that she would accept a DNT standard that would only partially meet the requirements under the Directive. Under the EU's amended Privacy and Electronic Communications Directive, storing and accessing information on users' computers is only lawful "on condition that the subscriber or user concerned has given his or her consent, having been provided with clear and comprehensive information b& about the purposes of the processing". The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) has been working on developing a new DNT controls system which, in its opinion, should not be switched on by default but require an explicit instruction to operate. Firefox has already implemented it since 2011. Microsoft, on the other hand, has developed its own DNT tool for its new Internet Explorer 10 web browser. The DNT setting is automatically activated and the users have to change the settings in case they wish to let websites and advertising networks track their online activity. This has obviously crossed advertising companies and the system does not actually guarantee that all companies would respect it. Yahoo! for instance, has stated that it would not "recognise IE10bs default DNT signal". Google introduced the DNT standard in November 2012, with the launching of its Chrome 23, but warned that the results could be variable. "The effectiveness of such requests is dependent on how websites and services respond, so Google is working with others on a common way to respond to these requests in the future," wrote Google engineer Ami Fischman on the companybs blog. Most consumers would activate do-not-track privacy settings if they were 'easily available', according to Ovum survey (6.02.2013) http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2013/february/most-consumers-would-activa... The data black hole that could suck the life out of the internet economy (8.02.2013) http://www.zdnet.com/the-data-black-hole-that-could-suck-the-life-out-of-the... Google's Chrome finally embraces Do Not Track, but with a warning (7.11.2012) http://www.zdnet.com/googles-chrome-finally-embraces-do-not-track-but-with-a... ======================================================================= 3. US privacy groups believe US officials lobby to weaken EU privacy ======================================================================= A coalition of 18 US privacy groups sent a letter on 30 January 2013 to US politicians such as the Attorney General Eric Holder, Secretary of State John Kerry and the Acting Secretary of Commerce Rebecca Blank, asking for assurances that US policy makers in Europe "advance the aim of privacy" and do not hinder the European data law proposals. The European Union is considering the data protection regulation that could give the citizens significant control over the use of their personal data by websites and marketing companies. Several proposals would require companies to obtain permission before collecting personal data and specify exactly what information will be collected and how it will be used. One proposal refers to the so-called b right to be forgottenb that obliges companies like Facebook to delete all information about users who want to do that. The coalition shows concern over the fact that, as the new EU Data Protection Regulation is under discussion and debate, Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) have lately reported that US policy makers are "mounting an unprecedented lobbying campaign to limit the protections that European law would provide." The privacy groups believe that U.S. policymakers, politicians and bureaucrats are undermining the work of the European Parliament. "The U.S. should not stand in the way of Europe's efforts to strengthen and modernize its legal framework," the letter states. Jeff Chester, Executive Director of the Center for Digital Democracy told ZDNet that despite President Obamabs pro-privacy speeches, his administration is "working to protect the U.S. data lobby." He added: "One of the U.S.' few growth areas is stealing other peoples data. So, the U.S. is arguing that the EU should not enact strong baselines rules requiring citizens to provide affirmative consent for such critical uses as profiling, and adopt its weak industry friendly approach based primarily on industry self-regulation." EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding said in 2012 that the lobbying effort had been "absolutely fierce" and unprecedented in scale. On 3 February 2013, the head of a big pan-European industry group revealed "intensifying pressure from U.S. lobbyists on behalf of Google and Facebook," as reported the Financial Times. Jacob Kohnstamm, the chairman of the EU's Article 29 Working Party also said European lawmakers were "fed up" of U.S. lobbying. The letter of the coalition notes that updating the U.S. Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), under which authorities need only a subpoena approved by a federal prosecutor, rather than a judge, to obtain electronically stored messages six months old or older, would be a good start for the U.S. officials to bring the country in compliance with international human rights standards. The US lobby has shown its practical results after several newspapers and websites have pointed out that MEPs in the EP's Internal Market and Consumer Committee (IMCO) have included copy-paste amendments written by Amazon, eBay or the American Chamber of Commerce (AmCham EU). Privacy groups call on U.S. government to stop lobbying against EU data law changes (4.02.2013) http://www.zdnet.com/privacy-groups-call-on-u-s-government-to-stop-lobbying-... The E.U. could approve a new privacy policy later this year. Europe Moves Ahead on Privacy (3.02.2013) http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/04/opinion/europe-moves-ahead-on-privacy-laws... Lobby groups take CTRL+V of data protection proposal (11.02.2013) http://edri.org/lobbyplag-eudatap LobbyPlag http://www.lobbyplag.eu/ ======================================================================= 4. Dutch government maintains private copying-exception for downloading ======================================================================= The Dutch government announced that it wouldn't prohibit the unauthorised downloading of copyrighted material. It did so on 4 February 2013 in a letter to the Parliament, putting an end to a heated debate that lasted for years. As a result, the Netherlands remains one of the few countries in Europe where downloading without permission of the rightsholders is allowed under the private copying-exception. Dutch digital rights organisation Bits of Freedom urged that this should be the first step in a long overdue modernisation of the copyright system. The Dutch government responded to a resolution by the Dutch Parliament earlier this year. In this resolution, the Parliament called on the government to maintain the application of the private copying-exception to downloading. It did so after the government did not respond to a similar resolution one year earlier, instead continuing its plans to abolish the private copying-exception for downloading. Now, however, it admitted defeat in the face of enduring opposition. Bits of Freedom hopes that this decision paves the way for the modernisation of the copyright system. Past political endeavours focused on the criminalisation of sharing by individual internet users. This is counterproductive and does not address the real challenge: ensuring that knowledge and culture is shared as widely as possible while remunerating rightsholders. The Dutch government should start together with the Parliament exploring remuneration models which support this goal. Letter of government to parliament (only in Dutch, 04.02.2013) https://www.bof.nl/live/wp-content/uploads/briefTeeven040213.pdf Resolution of Dutch parliament (only in Dutch, 11.12.2012) https://www.bof.nl/2012/12/11/parlement-spreekt-zich-uit-tegen-downloadverbo... Blog Bits of Freedom: Download Prohibition finally buried (only in Dutch, 05.02.2013) https://www.bof.nl/2013/02/05/downloadverbod-eindelijk-begraven/ (Contribution by Ot van Daalen - EDRi member Bits of Freedom Netherlands) ======================================================================= 5. Denmark: Government postpones the data retention law evaluation ======================================================================= In the coming months, the Danish Parliament will conduct an evaluation and revision of the Danish data retention law which implements directive 2006/24/EC. The review process has been postponed twice on earlier occasions (2010 and 2012), and the Danish government wants another two-year extension, officially in order to coordinate with any changes in the directive at the EU level. The Danish law exceeds the requirements of the data retention directive in several respects, especially as far as Internet logging is concerned. The Danish law contains a requirement for session logging which includes data about every Internet packet being transmitted. Specifically, the following information must be retained: source and destination IP address, source and destination port number, transmission protocol (like TCP and UDP) and timestamps. The contents of the Internet packets are not being logged, but the IP addresses will contain information about visits to websites of political parties (that is, in effect, registration of political preferences) and the online news services that the citizen reads. Last year in the Danish Parliament, there was considerable debate about the Danish over-implementation of the data retention directive, in particular Internet session logging. The Parliament instructed the Danish government to produce an evaluation report with special focus on session logging. The Danish Ministry of Justice published this report in December 2012. The evaluation report contains detailed descriptions of nine police cases where telephone logging was useful, or maybe even critical, to the Danish police. These cases are taken from an earlier report submitted to the EU Commission. All nine cases are about serious and violent crimes such as murder, armed robbery and organized narcotics smuggling. For Internet logging there are only three police cases. Moreover, one of the three cases is really about telephone logging since location data from a mobile device is used by the police. The location registration just happens to be triggered by "data calls" from a smartphone. This leaves two police cases to demonstrate the value of internet logging, and only one case uses session logging. Both cases involve economic crimes (fraud) on a relatively minor scale. There is a huge discrepancy between the nature of the police cases involving telephone and Internet logging. The report confirms the EDRi member IT-Pol suspicion that Internet logging, and especially Internet session logging, is rarely used by the Danish police. Quite interestingly, the Ministry of Justice formally states in their own evaluation report that session logging was implemented in a way that made it useless for the police (the implementation is according to the requirements of the law). Before September 2007, the Danish Internet service providers repeatedly warned the Ministry of Justice that session logging would be useless for the police. The Danish Ministry of Justice report (only in Danish, 12.2012) http://www.ft.dk/samling/20121/lovforslag/l142/bilag/2/1213533.pdf Danish government wants to postpone the evaluation of the data retention law for the third time (12.02.2013) http://www.itpol.dk/notater/Danish-data-retention-evaluation-Feb13 EDRi-gram: Key privacy concerns in Denmark 2007 (30.01.2008) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number6.2/privacy-denmark-2007 (Contribution by Jesper Lund, EDRi member IT-Pol Denmark) ======================================================================= 6. Ancillary copyright law under discussion in Germany ======================================================================= The Judiciary Committee of the German Bundestag held on 30 January 2013 an expert hearing on the proposed b Leistungsschutzrechtb (LRS, known also as b ancillary copyrightb) law for news publishers which will require search engines and others to ask permission from news publishers to link to their content or even give summarize news content. The draft law was criticized by civil society groups as well as the German association of Internet economy which pointed out the lack of clarity of the terms used in the text and the negative effects that the law may bring by restricting the diversity of information on the internet. Moreover, the legislation is superfluous as publishers are already protected by copyright provisions. If this bill is enacted as-is, search engines would be allowed to display snippets only after having received permission which may involve or not some payment to the news publishers. In some cases, a press publisher might pay a search engine to be included in its searches. The important issue is that a search engine, and maybe even social networks, will be obliged to ask permission to provide snippets from a news publisher. The law has several unclear areas. For instance, it is not clear whether blogs will be considered as press products due to the vague definition of the term. The expert hearing was not focused on technological expertise but rather on how such a law might fit into the current legal framework. A representative from the publishersb associations asked for a technical language to express conditions such as temporal, topical or size restrictions, payment requirements and other conditions but did not succeed in presenting a proper way of how this could be implemented. All experts in the hearing agreed the law would create a period (estimated at about 5 years) of legal uncertainty, requiring a series of lawsuits before realizing who will actually be within the sights of the LRS. This uncertainty also applies when we talk about Facebook or Twitter. It is not yet clear whether the law will cover only search engines such as Google or it will extend to social networks. MP Siegfried Kauder of the Christian Democrats party stated that in his opinion, after hearing the experts, there seemed to be no reason for the promotion of the law as, it appeared to be unlikely the law would help in actually producing new income for news publishers. In the meantime, in France, Google seems to give in under similar pressure. Eric Schmidt, Executive Chairman of Google made a statement on the company blog on 1 February 2013, in an attempt to point out that the search engine had generated b billions of clicks each monthb for news publishers, b and our advertising solutions (in which we have invested billions of dollars) help them make money from that traffic.b But Schmidt also stated that on the same date, he, together with President Hollande of France, announced two new initiatives b to help stimulate innovation and increase revenues for French publishers.b One was the creation of a 60 million euro Digital Publishing Innovation Fund financed by Google b to help support transformative digital publishing initiatives for French readers.b The second initiative is to increase the partnership with French publishers b to help increase their online revenues using our advertising technology.b German Parliament Hears Experts On Proposed Law To Limit Search Engines (31.01.2013) http://searchengineland.com/german-leistungsschutzrecht-146826 Google creates b,60m Digital Publishing Innovation Fund to support transformative French digital publishing initiatives (1.02.2013) http://googleblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/google-creates-60m-digital-publishi... EDRi-gram: Ancillary copyright madness in Germany and France (26.09.2012) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number10.18/ancillary-copyright-proposal-madnes... ======================================================================= 7. Human rights orgs ask OECD to investigate surveillance companies ======================================================================= In the beginning of February 2013 several human rights organisations, including Privacy International, the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights, Bahrain Watch and Reporters without Borders, filed formal complaints against surveillance software firms Gamma International and Trovicor. The OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) National Contact Point (NCP) in the UK was asked to investigate Gamma International regarding the companybs potential complicity in serious human rights abuses in Bahrain and in Germany, the complaint was directed against Munich-based Trovicor. In the opinion of the complainants, there are grounds to believe that the surveillance products and services provided by the two companies have led to human rights abuses in Bahrain, including arbitrary detention and torture, violations of the right to privacy, freedom of expression and freedom of association. It appears that the information gathered from intercepted phone and internet communications have been used to detain and torture bloggers, political dissidents and activists and to extract confessions from them. If the investigation concludes that the complaints have a real basis, the companies are likely to be found in breach of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises which sets out principles and standards for responsible business conduct. b The failure of governments to properly control exports of surveillance technology has left companies like Gamma and Trovicor regulated exclusively by their own moral compasses. Unfortunately, these compasses seem to have malfunctioned and directed companies towards some of the most dangerous and repressive regimes in the world. We very much hope the OECD process will persuade Gamma and Trovicor to take a long hard look at their current and future clients, and to think carefully about the role their products play in the targeting and torture of activists and the suppression of pro-democracy voices,b stated Eric King, Head of Research at Privacy International. Miriam Saage-MaaC , Vice Legal Director at ECCHR, said: b By maintaining permanent business relations with the state of Bahrain and maintaining their surveillance software, both companies have accepted the risk that they may be accused of abetting torture and other grave human rights violations. If true, such actions would amount to a violation of the OECD Guidelines.b These are not the only companies involved in providing surveillance equipment to countries where freedom of expression is oppressed. Many suppliers, besides the two companies in question, such as Nokia Siemens Networks, Hacking Team and Bull / Amesys have supplied equipment to Libya, Egypt, Syria, Bahrain, Morocco and many more countries that have violated human rights during the last years. Human rights organisations filed formal complaints with the OECD against surveillance companies (4.02.2013) http://en.rsf.org/bahrein-human-rights-organisations-file-04-02-2013,44016.h... Briefing note on OECD Complaints against Gamma International and Trovicor in the UK and Germany (02.2013) http://www.statewatch.org/news/2013/feb/oecd-complaint.pdf Human rights organisations file formal complaints against surveillance firms Gamma International and Trovicor with British and German governments (3.02.2013) https://www.privacyinternational.org/press-releases/human-rights-organisatio... EDRi-gram: Export Controls for Digital Weapons (19.12.2013) http://edri.org/edrigram/number10.24/export-controls-digital-weapons EDRi-gram: German government intends to use FinFisher Spyware (30.01.2013) http://edri.org/edrigram/number11.2/germany-finfisher-spyware ======================================================================= 8. Big Brother Awards 2013 Bulgaria ======================================================================= EDRi member ISOC Bulgaria and the Access to Information Program organized the Big Brother Awards for 2012. This year the "winners" are the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Bulgaria - for lack of action in changing the way special investigative resources (wiretapping) is being used with regards to data traffic, which should ensure high protection of privacy. For private companies, the "winner" is Toplofikatsia (Central Heating) for collecting and processing private data of its customers. The BBA awards have been given in Bulgaria since 2003, and usually the worst governmental institution to deal with privacy is either the Council of Ministers, or the Ministry of Interior. Among private company winners have been also mobile operators, advertising companies and power distributing companies. Details about the Bulgarian Big Brother Awards 2013 (only in Bulgarian, 28.01.2013) http://bg.bigbrotherawards.org (Contribution by Veni Markovski - EDRi member ISOC Bulgaria) ======================================================================= 9. ENDitorial: Licences for Europe and fight club... only one rule ======================================================================= There was a moment in November 2012 when even the most cynical observers of the European Commission were hopeful of an effective reform of copyright. Commissioner Barnier gave a speech where he demonstrated that he understood the problems. He explained that b the digital revolution has not yet lived up to expectations in the European contextb and described some barriers to cross-border access to content as illegitimate. Finally, the problems had been identified. And recognising a problem is a first step to solving it. Then, in December 2012, the Commission was even more explicit. It explained that the following would be addressed: territoriality in the Internal Market; harmonisation, limitations and exceptions to copyright in the digital age; fragmentation of the EU copyright market; and how to improve effectiveness and efficiency of enforcement while underpinning its legitimacy in the wider context of copyright reform. So far, all that has actually happened is the launch of the Commission's b licences for Europeb initiative. Or rather, the Commission's launched industry's initiative... or... well, whoever it is that owns it, was launched. The last line of Commissioner Barnier's speech at the opening event was very telling. b The ball is in your court,b he said. He didn't explain who b youb are b the overwhelming majority of participants (industry lobbyists), the tiny minority of civil society... or society in general? Actually, we know that b youb is not society in general. The first rule of fight club ...blicences for Europeb is... you do not talk about b licences for Europeb. No web streaming of the working groups, b Chatham House Rulesb that forbid the attribution of statements to particular participants or their organisations. The public at large is kept firmly outside of the process. After the lack of transparency that helped bring down ACTA, we now have closed doors and b Chatham House Rulesb for b licences for Europeb. And no problem definition for the working groups to work on. Barnier's subsequent comment that b it is incomprehensible that Europeans are coming up against obstacles online which they have been dismantling in the physical world for more than 50 years,b hovers somewhere between tragedy and comedy. This statement comes from a Commissioner who inherited a demonstrably failed 2001 Copyright Directive but has not acted to fix it. This is the Commissioner that inherited a demonstrably failed 2004 IPR Enforcement Directive, but has not acted to fix it. After four years of inaction on licensing and four years of inaction on exceptions and limitations to copyright, Commissioner Barnier demanded action... by everyone in the room except himself, to b meet together to find fast, specific solutions to problems arising in the here and nowb. Fast? Faster than what? So, what now? Well, we will have months of working group meetings, carefully shielded from the public by the opaque walls of the European Commission, bringing us closer and closer to the end of this legislature, at which time Commissioner Barnier can hand over the dossier to the next incumbent of the b Internal Marketb portfolio. Instead of less red tape and fewer licences, licences b forb Europe are likely to generate new barriers and new bureaucracy. For example, one of the working groups is on b user-generated contentb. User-generated content is... well... how can this be explained...? It is user-generated and should not require licensing. Obviously? In many European countries, users can generate content that avails of exceptions to copyright for parody/pastiche, for incidental use, uses of minor importance etc., without licences. However, none of these exceptions are mandatory, so there is a lack of harmonisation across Europe caused by a European Directive which the Commission has no obvious intention of resolving. So, if harmonisation is not possible by the removal of licensing obligations in those countries which don't have appropriate exceptions... what will the b working groupb be b workingb on? Adding voluntary b licensingb to remove rights that citizens currently have? The speech from Commissioner Kroes was not much more inspiring. She said that she was not b too keen on heavy-handed legislative measures. They aren't always needed.b This is true. The question is: when you've already got heavy-handed legislative measures that are not fit for purpose b do you repeal or reform them, or do you farm the problem out to an ad hoc collection of industry lobbyists in order to make it seem that the problem is being solved? It normally takes at least 9-12 months for the European Parliament to adopt a legislative text. The next elections are in 15 months. Is there no hope for a real reform in the next two years? Licenses for Europe https://ec.europa.eu/licences-for-europe-dialogue/en Commissioner Kroes speech: Digital technology and copyright can fit together (4.02.2013) http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-13-96_en.htm Commissioner Barnier speech: Making European copyright fit for purpose in the age of internet (7.11.2012) http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-785_en.htm Commissioner Barnier speech: Licences for Europe: quality content and new opportunities for all Europeans in the digital era (4.02.2013) http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-13-97_en.htm (Contribution by Joe McNamee - EDRi) ======================================================================= 10. Recommended Action: support your privacy rights ======================================================================= EDRi together with other civil rights and data protection organisations launched on 5 February 2013 the European campaign portal Privacycampaign.eu in support of better protection for European citizens' rights to privacy and data protection. b This is our one opportunity to develop a strong legal framework, building trust and removing unnecessary red tape for business. We need a framework that is guided by clear, predictable legal principles and strong enforcement. Instead, we have an unprecedented wave of ill-informed, ill-advised and destructive corporate lobbying. Democracy needs to be injected back into this debate in order to protect the rights of European citizensb says Joe McNamee, Executive Director of European Digital Rights. The joint campaign launched by European Digital Rights (representing 32 organisations), Privacy International, The Julia Group, La Quadrature du Net and Access aims at creating a counterweight to the massive lobbying by the US government, trade associations and big internet business on the data protection reform. The organisations believe that without a successful reform of the data protection framework European citizens will be left with a series of legal loopholes and a range of unpredictable enforcement gaps where nobody, neither citizens nor business, knows what law will be enforced. The action of the European citizens is even more needed after the recent news that prove that MEPs in the Internal Market and Consumer Committee (IMCO) have adopted amendments written by Amazon, eBay or the American Chamber of Commerce (AmCham EU) b to the detriment of European citizens and their fundamental rights to privacy and data protection. Privacy Campaign - European Campaign Portal for the Data Protection Reform< http://www.privacycampaign.eu/ Lobby groups take CTRL+V of data protection proposal (11.02.2013) http://edri.org/lobbyplag-eudatap LobbyPlag http://www.lobbyplag.eu/ ======================================================================= 11. Recommended Reading ======================================================================= EU: Protection of human rights in the EU "rarely a priority", says Human Rights Watch (02.2013) http://www.statewatch.org/news/2013/feb/03hrw-eu-report.htm EU cyber security directive considered harmful (8.02.2013) http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2013/02/08/eu-cyber-security-directive-co... ======================================================================= 12. Agenda ======================================================================= 14-15 February 2013, Vienna, Austria Internet 2013 - Shaping policies to advance media freedom http://www.osce.org/event/internet2013 21-22 February 2013, Washington DC, USA Intellectual Property and Human Rights Conference and Roundtable Discussion Webcasted live and archived http://www.wcl.american.edu/pijip/go/blog-post/intellectual-property-and-hum... 22 February 2013, Warsaw, Poland ePSIplatform Conference: "Gotcha! Getting everyone on board" http://epsiplatform.eu/content/save-date-22-february-2013-epsiplatform-confe... 21-22 March 2013, Malta Online Privacy: Consenting to your Future http://www.onlineprivacyconference.eu/ 6-8 May 2013, Berlin, Germany re:publica 2013 http://re-publica.de/en/ 20-21 June 2013, Lisbon, Portugal EuroDIG 2013 http://www.eurodig.org/ 25-26 June 2013, Barcelona, Spain 9th International Conference on Internet Law & Politics: Big Data: Challenges and Opportunities. http://edcp.uoc.edu/symposia/idp2013/?lang=en 25-26 June 2013, Washington, DC, USA 23rd Computers, Freedom and Privacy Conference (CFP) CfP by 1 March 2013 http://www.cfp.org/2013 31 July b 4 August 2013, Geestmerambacht, Netherlands Observe. Hack. Make. - OHM2013 CfP by 1 March 2013 https://ohm2013.org/ 23-26 September 2013, Warsaw, Poland Public Voice Conference 2013 35th International Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners conference http://www.giodo.gov.pl/259/id_art/762/j/en/ ============================================================ 13. About ============================================================ EDRi-gram is a biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe. Currently EDRi has 32 members based or with offices in 20 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-gram. 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@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 http://flattr.com/thing/417077/edri-on-Flattr - EDRI-gram subscription information subscribe by e-mail To: edri-news-request@edri.org Subject: subscribe You will receive an automated e-mail asking to confirm your request. Unsubscribe by e-mail To: edri-news-request@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/mk/vesti/edri - EDRI-gram in German EDRI-gram is also available in German, with delay. Translations are provided by 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@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