============================================================ EDRI-gram biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe Number 5.4, 28 February 2007 ============================================================ Contents ============================================================ 1. From Schengen to Pr|m: Data Protection under 3rd pillar a prerequisite 2. Censorship in Belarusian Internet cafes 3. EPLA found illegal by the EP Legal Service 4. Russian court dismisses piracy case as "trivial" 5. 24 proposals approved by the WIPO PCDA 6. DRM debate continues in Europe 7. Increased Europol powers need increased data protection policies 8. E-voting in Estonia for parliamentary elections 9. ENDitorial : EU nations scolded by IIPA 10. Recommended reading 11. Agenda 12. About ============================================================ 1. From Schengen to Pr|m: Data Protection under 3rd pillar a prerequisite ============================================================ One of the main priorities of the current German presidency, the inclusion of the Pr|m's Treaty into the EU legal framework, is likely to be achieved before its end in 30 June 2007. During its last meeting on 15 February the EU JHA Council agreed on incorporating into EU legislation most of the Treaty provisions falling into the third pillar. This decision will create the largest pan-European network of police database, including DNA profiles, fingerprints and other personal and non personal data. Originally signed in May 2005 by seven EU countries (Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg, The Netherlands and Spain), later joined by nine others member States (Bulgaria, Finland, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Sweden have announced their intention to adhere), the Treaty has been designed under the lead of French-German cooperation in view of "combating terrorism, cross-border crime, and illegal immigration". The Treaty has been ratified up to now by Austria, Germany, Luxembourg, Spain, while the French Senate adopted on 21 February a draft ratification law. The Treaty provisions have already been used by Germany and Austria to check their national DNA databases against each other. Although the Treaty future incorporation into the EU legal framework would, at least partly, answer the main criticism of creating a hierarchy within the EU and of circumventing the Parliament, major concerns remain, like the assimilation of illegal migrants to terrorists, which - to say the least - questions the principle of proportionality. Another major concern is obviously privacy and data protection. While mutual access to databases and exchange of information to better fight crime and terrorism is not, in principle, illegitimate in a regional space like the EU, making this space a true area of "Justice, Freedom and Security" needs solid prerequisites both at the national and at the EU level. At the national level, police databases are endlessly growing in member States, containing more and more very sensitive information, especially biometric data. They are no more restricted to identifying criminals, but are now extended to the average citizen, allowing the mapping of their daily activities, communications and movements. They are also characterized by high error rates, due to both fault rates intrinsic to the used technologies and to the lack of police database updates, inter alia in accordance with judicial outcomes of the recorded cases. Sharing such files among 27 countries would certainly increase not only massive surveillance but also the risk of flaws endangering innocents. At the EU level, current legislation protecting privacy and personal data protection has little, if any, application at the third pillar level, while EU-level information systems in this field are broadening. Discussions have started on a Commission proposal of a Council Framework Decision on the protection of personal data processed in the framework of police and judicial co-operation in criminal matters (DPFD). However the numerous reports of the Council's Multidisciplinary Group on Organised Crime have seriously lowered the originally proposed level of protection, taking no account of the Parliament and the European Data Protection Supervisor opinions. The DPFD good proceedings have in addition been greatly hampered by the lack of agreement between member States, to the extent that the German presidency asked the Commission to prepare a revised proposal. While the resulting level of protection of European citizens' personal data is subject to future DPFD developments, a bottom line should reasonably be that the DPFD be adopted prior to any further development in cross-border data exchange, most notably before the incorporation of the Pr|m's Treaty provisions into the EU legislation. EU JHA Council Press Release (15.02.2007) http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/jha/92800.p... f Text of the Pr|m's Treaty (27.05.2005) http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/05/st10/st10900.en05.pdf Center for European Policy Studies. "Security and the Two-Level Game: The Treaty of Pr|m, the EU and the Management of Threats" (2006) http://shop.ceps.be/BookDetail.php?item_id=1292 Statewatch updated observatory of DPFD proceedings http://www.statewatch.eu/eu-dp.htm (Contribution by Meryem Marzouki, EDRI-member IRIS) ============================================================ 2. Censorship in Belarusian Internet cafes ============================================================ The Belarusian Council of Ministers adopted on 10 February 2007 a new act on the Regulations on Functioning of the Computer Clubs and Internet Cafes that will impose new censorship rules on all the persons that use the public Internet access points. According to the new regulations, Internet cafe owners or their authorized agents must keep an electronic registry of the domain names of the sites accessed by users. The electronic log should contain at least a 12-month history of all connections. State Security agents, police or state control inspectors are authorized to review the log in the cases listed by the legislation. In cases of suspicion of infringement of this law, the Internet cafe management should inform the law enforcement bodies about such events. The computer clubs and Internet cafes are not allowed to use programs propagating the cult of violence, cruelty and pornography, or disseminate banned information. The Belarusian Government has very easy ways to regulate the Internet activity within the country, since the only Internet provider is the governmental Beltelecom organization, according to Reporters Without Borders. Belarusian government adopts regulations on computer clubs and internet cafes (15.02.2007) http://www.e-belarus.org/news/200702151.html Byelorussia tightens control over internet (15.02.2007) http://eng.cnews.ru/news/top/indexEn.shtml?2007/02/15/236077 (Thanks to Mikhail Doroshevich - e-belarus.org) ============================================================ 3. EPLA found illegal by the EP Legal Service ============================================================ The Legal Service which advises the European Parliament (EP) on legal issues and acts as its representative in court, found the Patent Litigation Agreement (EPLA) as illegal being in direct contradictions with the European law and several EU treaties. The very controversial EPLA, if adopted, would bind the signatory states to a common legal system for patent disputes, including procedural rules and a European Patent Court that would supersede national courts. The critics of the proposal have expressed concern that such a system would make the patent awarding more expensive and less accountable. In October 2006, MEPs voted to postpone any decision on approving EPLA, and called for "significant improvements" to the text. EP has also asked from its Legal Service to give its advice on the possible overlap between the EPLA and the acquis communautaire. The EP Legal Service concluded that EPLA provisions are in direct conflict with the EC Treaty which says that: "member states undertake not to submit a dispute concerning the interpretation or application of this Treaty to any method of settlement other than those provided for therein," meaning that disputes between EU member states on matters of EU law should be resolved exclusively by the European Court of Justice. In contradiction to this provision, Article 98 of the proposed EPLA says: "any dispute between Contracting States concerning the interpretation or application of this Agreement which is not settled by negotiation shall be submitted, at the request of one of the States concerned, to the Administrative Committee, which shall endeavour to bring about agreements between the states concerned" The Legal Service opinion says that member states are not allowed to make an agreement between themselves concerning issues covered by EU laws and treaties, especially when such agreements could affect relations with countries outside the EU. "Where common rules have been adopted, the member states of the European Community no longer have the right, acting individually or even collectively, to undertake obligations with non-member countries which affect those rules". According to the Legal Service, the EPLA is also in contradiction with IPRED Directive (Directive 2004/48/EC) already dealing with intellectual property. "Not only would EPLA govern matters already dealt with by this Directive, but there are also contradictions between the two instruments on a number of matters". The conclusion of the EP Legal Service is that EPLA is not valid: "The Community's competence is exclusive for the matters governed by EPLA and Member States therefore are not entitled on their own to conclude that Agreement". European Parliament blocks patent agreement (15.02.2007) http://www.out-law.com/page-7771 European Parliament's Legal Service Says EPLA Is Illegal (21.02.07) http://www.tax-news.com/asp/story/story_open.asp?storyname=26443 Rough Weather Ahead For EPLA (11.02.2007) http://www.ipjur.com/2007/02/rough-weather-ahead-for-epla.php3 EDRI-gram: The European Parliament ready to vote on EPLA (11.10.2006) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.19/epla EDRI-gram: ENDitorial - Regulating the Patent Industry (25.10.2006) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.20/patents ============================================================ 4. Russian court dismisses piracy case as "trivial" ============================================================ A Russian court has dismissed a penal case against a Russian teacher, Alexander Ponosov, that bought computers for its school with unauthorized Microsoft programs. The case become well-known when the former Soviet president Gorbachev made a public appeal to Bill Gates, asking to intervene in this case. Ponosov was charged in a penal case by the Russian prosecutors of copyright law violations, considering that it had caused damages of 7 600 euros. The maximum sentence forseen by the Russian copyright law for this major violation is five-year inprisonment. The Russian teacher (but also principal) of a small town in the Ural Mountains was found to have bought 12 computers with unauthorized Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office. The case become notorious in Russia and worldwide when Gorbachev's foundation made a open letter to Bill Gates asking him to intervene in this case : "A teacher, who has dedicated his life to the education of children and who receives a modest salary that does not bear comparison with the salaries of even regular staff in your company, is threatened with detention in Siberian prison camps." The case was condemned also by Vladimir Putin, president of Russia, that said : "To grab someone for buying a computer somewhere and start threatening him with prison is complete nonsense, simply ridiculous. The law recognizes the concept of someone who purchased the product in good faith." However, Microsoft refused to intervene in this case and stated that they were sure that the Russian courts would "make a fair decision. Mr Ponosov's case is a criminal case and as such was initiated and investigated by the public prosecutor's office." The Vereshchaginsky District Court dismissed the case on 15 February 2007 due to the "insignificant degree of the damage" caused to Microsoft, considering it as "trivial". However, the state prosecutors said they might appeal the decision since the term "insignificant degree of damage" does not exist in the Russian Criminal Code. Also, Posonov wanted an appeal since he was not found not guilty. Russia is still listed by BSA in the top 10 of worst offending countries for counterfeit software. The Russian authorities admit they have a problem, but also put part of the blame on the large software vendors for their restrictive and expensive licensing policies. The Russian deputy IT minister, Dmitry Milovantsev, pointed to the Microsoft policy of not allowing partners to sell computers without copies of Windows pre-installed in Russia. Court smack down for Russian piracy epic (15.02.2007) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/02/15/russia_microsoft_piracy/ Russia attacks Microsoft licensing costs (19.02.2007) http://news.zdnet.co.uk/itmanagement/0,1000000308,39285968,00.htm Ponosov case to be reopened ? (26.02.2007) http://eng.cnews.ru/news/top/indexEn.shtml?2007/02/26/237720 ============================================================ 5. 24 proposals approved by the WIPO PCDA ============================================================ During a special session between 19-23 February 2007, the Provisional Committee on Proposals Related to a World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Development Agenda (PCDA) approved some proposals meant to improve the development of the organization. The proposal for a WIPO Development Agenda started in 2004 with Argentina and Brazil which has been formally supported by 13 other Friends of Development since then. Forty proposals of a total of 111 produced during the last two years, gathered on subject matter groupings referred to as "clusters," were negotiated, resulting at the end of the session in 24 agreed proposals. The agreed proposals include technical assistance approaches and assessments, evaluation and impact studies. They support participatory rulemaking within WIPO and a mild reform of WIPO's mandate and governance. Some refer to the expansion of WIPO's involvement in IT&C technologies and access to knowledge and some to the preservation and study of the public domain, one of the most controversial subjects of the session. One of the proposal approved was the approach by WIPO of "intellectual property enforcement in the context of broader societal interests and especially development-oriented concerns", with a view that "the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights should contribute to the promotion of technological innovation and to the transfer and dissemination of technology, to the mutual advantage of producers and users of technological knowledge and in a manner conducive to social and economic welfare, and to a balance of rights and obligations". The next and final PCDA meeting for this year will be held in June 2007 when the rest of 71 proposals will be discussed. Participants consider it will be more difficult to reach an agreement on the remaining proposals as they involve bigger reform issues such as the one related to WIPO's legislative advice to developing and least-developed countries. The outcomes from both sessions will be correlated and passed on to the WIPO General Assembly which will decide on how to proceed at its annual meeting in September 2007. Text-Based Negotiations On A WIPO Development Agenda Pick Up Pace (22.02.2007) http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=549&res=1024_ff&print=0 Provisional Committee on Proposals Related to a WIPO Development Agenda Third Session, February 19-23, 2007, Geneva, Switzerland http://www.cptech.org/ip/wipo/pcda/ WIPO Committee Approves Proposals For Development Agenda (23.02.2007) http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=550&res=1024_ff&print=0 Member States make significant headway in work on a WIPO Development Agenda (26.02.2007) http://www.wipo.int/edocs/prdocs/en/2007/wipo_pr_2007_478.html ============================================================ 6. DRM debate continues in Europe ============================================================ On 19 February 2007, the UK Government rejected an online petition initiated by blogger Neil Holmes and signed by 1,414 people asking for the interdiction of DRM (Digital Rights Management), arguing DRM systems deprive the consumers of their freedom of choice between competing products for CDs or digital download. The UK government rejected the petition answering that DRM could bring value to consumers as it did not only act as a protection system but "also enables content companies to offer the consumer unprecedented choice in terms of how they consume content, and the corresponding price they wish to pay". As regarding the rights of the consumers, the UK government considers that "It is reasonable for consumers to be informed what is actually being offered for sale, for example, and how and where the purchaser will be able to use the product, and any restrictions applied". The DRM question continues to be a hot debate in Europe. Becky Hogge, executive director at the UK Open Rights Group, thinks "DRM had been seen in the past as a niche technology issue, but there is now rising consumer awareness about it". She also stated that some DRM technologies place restrictions that infringe the users' rights according to the U.K. copyright law. "DRM attempts to enforce copyright, but it does it badly," said Hogge. Germany's Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection, together with consumer organizations have drawn up a "Charter for Consumer Sovereignty in the Digital World," calling on operators of Web music shops such as Apple to open up their closed systems. The charter draft is said to be presented in March 2007 at a conference of European consumer protection ministers. The earlier plans of some music labels to provide music without DRM could be with no real consequences since recently EMI broken off talks about offering DRM-free music via the downloading services. One of the reasons was apparently the large upfront payments requested by EMO from the online stores. U.K. government rejects calls for DRM ban (20.02.2007) http://news.zdnet.co.uk/itmanagement/0,1000000308,39285993,00.htm Apple & Co. threatened with opening clauses for online music shop DRM (19.02.2007) http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/85515 EMI: DRM stays (26.02.2007) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/02/26/emi_drm_talks_breakup/ EDRI-gram: iTunes under continuous attack in Europe (31.01.2007) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number5.2/itunes EDRI-gram : Is DRM fading out ? (17.01.2007) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number5.1/drm ============================================================ 7. Increased Europol powers need increased data protection policies ============================================================ Peter Hustinx, the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) considers that the changes on the legal basis of Europe's police (Europol) proposed by the European Parliament meant to increase its powers have to be accompanied by proper data protection rules. The European Parliament has proposed changes that would increase Europol powers in order to fight radical Islamic terrorism, considered as the highest threat to the security in Europe. The EDPS thinks that, before increasing these powers, Europol data protection policies and data exchange rules should be more consistent and fair. "We have to make sure that exchange with other EU bodies, such as OLAF (the European Anti Fraud Agency), will be based on a consistent level of data protection and good co-operation in supervision," said Hustinx. Some of his recommendations were that specific conditions and limitations should be included in the decision regarding information obtained from private parties, to ensure the accuracy of these data. Strict conditions and guarantees should be applied in cases of interoperability with other processing systems. He also recommended that data processing should be limited to the relevance assessment for personal data for which the relevance has not been assessed and that safeguards should be provided for the access to data of people with no criminal records. "Computerised access and retrieval of data from other national and international information systems should be allowed only on a case by case basis, under strict conditions." Hustinx advised. He also believes that if Europol gets involved in pan-European data sharing, guarantees must be provided on the independence of its data protection officer who is responsible for Europol's lawful data processing. The EDPS ended his statement by stating he would himself "oversee any information transfer to Europol from European Commission institutions". New Europol powers need new protection, says watchdog (22.02.2007) http://www.out-law.com/page-7798 Opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the Proposal for a Council Decision establishing the European Police Office (16.02.2007) http://www.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/site/mySite/shared/Documents/Consul... ation/Opinions/2007/07-02-16_Europol_EN.pdf ============================================================ 8. E-voting in Estonia for parliamentary elections ============================================================ Estonia is the first nation in the world that will allow voting via the Internet during its elections for the Parliament (Riigikogu). The voting will take place on 4 March 2007, but the electronic vote will be cast from 26 February at 9 AM until 28 February 8 PM. The system was tested first in the limited local elections in October 2005, when almost 10 000 people voted via the Internet. The number of Internet voters for these elections is estimated to increase to 20-40 000 voters, out of the 940 000. The system for Internet voting is based on the mandatory state-issued ID card, that includes an electronic chip. The ID card can be used by introducing it in a reader attached to a computer and using 2 passwords. The reader is commercially available for prices from 6.37 to 12.73 euros. The Estonian people already use their ID cards to sign electronic documents or access online banking solutions. It is estimated that almost one million ID cards with electronic chips are in use, in a country with 1.3 million inhabitants. The ballot will be scrutinized by an OSCE election assessment mission, that includes several Internet voting experts that will follow the e-voting process. Surprisingly, the OSCE mission includes an expert from the Netherlands that might have links with SDU, the e-voting system of which was banned from the last Dutch election. Estonians will be first to allow Internet votes in national election (22.02.2007) http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/02/22/business/evote.php Assessment of parliamentary elections in Estonia http://www.osce.org/odihr-elections/item_12_23355.html Estonian National Electoral Committee http://www.vvk.ee/engindex.html Page for Electronic Voting for Estonian Parliamentary elections http://www.valimised.ee/index_eng.html Electronic voting in Estonia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_voting_in_Estonia EDRI-gram: European e-voting machines cracked by Dutch group (11.10.2006) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.19/e-voting ============================================================ 9. ENDitorial : EU nations scolded by IIPA ============================================================ The International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA), a lobby group representing the American publishing, software, recording and movie industries, has been busy. On 12 February IIPA published its recommendations to the US Trade Representative's 2007 review of global copyright laws. This "Special 301" procedure can lead to significant trade sanctions against countries that are judged to be uncooperative in the US drive for ever stronger intellectual property rights. It has been used over the last two decades to bully developing nations into signing quite inappropriate IP agreements such as the World Trade Organisation's TRIPS and "TRIPS plus" Free Trade Agreements with the US. IIPA identifies a long list of nations that it considers to be placing social goals such as fighting major crime, improving education and protecting privacy above the profits of its members. As Michael Geist points out, they include 23 of the world's 30 most populous nations. Embarrassingly, while the list includes many leading economies such as Canada and Japan, it leaves out EU nations including the UK, France and Germany. To their credit, ten EU nations are included in IIPA's hit list, which makes some extraordinary demands. Greece is told that immigrant street vendors involved in copyright infringement should be deported and that tax authorities should audit software licences for all firms. Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania are scolded for concentrating police, prosecutor and judicial attention on their societies' most pressing problems rather than on cases of copyright infringement, while Latvia is warned that it must fully staff its new IPR enforcement police division. Lithuania and Poland are also instructed to increase Customs operations against the import of infringing goods. Italy, Greece, Poland and Sweden are criticised for privacy laws that prevent ISPs disclosing the identity of their customers to right holders based upon an Internet Protocol address. Sweden is admonished for "society's high acceptance of filesharing" and its "notoriety as a piracy safe haven" - and yet right holders are "deeply concerned" about discussion of a compulsory licence to provide artists with compensation for filesharing. Poland's universities and lecturers are instructed to "cultivate a climate of respect for copyright" amongst their students, and Hungary told to "closely monitor" its high-speed academic network for copyright infringement. Spain's prosecutors, judges and law students apparently need some re-education in the value of intellectual property rights, while the Spanish government is ordered to reverse the "stunning" decision of the General Public Prosecutor that his staff have more pressing concerns than the criminal prosecution of peer-to-peer downloaders. One of IIPA's most consistent complaints is about the protection given by European countries to anti-copying Digital Rights Management technology. IIPA wrongly claims that the World Intellectual Property Organisation's Internet treaties require countries to implement US- style rigid protection of DRM . They criticise countries including Italy, Romania, Sweden and Poland for implementing the EU Copyright Directive in a way that gives their citizens some flexibility over breaking these locks when copyright law allows. Canada, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Switzerland and South Korea are also criticised for their DRM laws. It is not surprising that US companies lobby to change global laws that would increase their profits. On past performance, the US government is likely to take careful note of their recommendations. But European nations should robustly defend their right to shape copyright policy to meet the needs of their own citizens, and not just those of large copyright holders. IIPA - Recommendations on 60 countries to USTR in the 2007 Special 301 review on copyright piracy and market access problems (12.02.2007) http://www.iipa.com/2007_SPEC301_TOC.htm Peter Drahos and John Braithwaite, "Information Feudalism" -New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 2002. Michael Geist - "In Good Company'" (14.02.2007) http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/1679/125/ Ian Brown - "The evolution of anti-circumvention law" - International Review of Law, Computers and Technology 20(3), 239-260. http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/I.Brown/anti-circ.pdf Urs Gasser and Silke Ernst, "Best Practice Guide: Implementing the EU Copyright Directive in the Digital Age" (12.2006) http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/home/uploads/1112/EUCD_Best_Practice_Guide_Dece... ber_2006.pdf (contribution by Ian Brown - EDRI-member Open Rights Group) ============================================================ 10. Recommended reading ============================================================ Ross Anderson - "The Economics of Information Security: A Survey and Open Questions" http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/Papers/toulouse-summary.pdf http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/Presentations/econsec_toulouse.ppt http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~twm29/science-econ.pdf Statewatch analysis: The dream of total data collection - status quo and future plans for EU information systems http://www.statewatch.org/news/2007/feb/eu-databases.pdf ============================================================ 11. Agenda ============================================================ 13-14 March 2007 Brussels, Belgium The EU RFID Forum 2007 http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/rfid/conference2007_reg/index... en.htm 16 March 2007, Hannover, Germany European Commission conference on Mobile TV at CeBIT http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/events/cebit_07/index_en.htm 1-4 May 2007, Montreal, Canada 7th Conference on Computers, Freedom, and Privacy (CFP2007) http://www.cfp2007.org/live/ 18-19 May 2007, Brasov, Romania eLiberatica - The Benefits of Open and Free Technologies - Romanian IT Open Source and Free Software Conference http://www.eliberatica.ro/ ============================================================ 12. About ============================================================ EDRI-gram is a biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe. Currently EDRI has 25 members from 16 European countries. 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 visibly on the EDRI website. Except where otherwise noted, this newsletter is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 License. See the full text at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Newsletter editor: Bogdan Manolea <edrigram@edri.org> Information about EDRI and its members: http://www.edri.org/ - 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/edrigram-mk.php - 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@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 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]