====================================================================== EDRi-gram biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe Number 10.20, 24 October 2012 ======================================================================= Contents ======================================================================= 1. A week with EDRi Brussels 2. Google needs to improve its privacy practices 3. EDRi responds to umteenth public Net Neutrality consultation 4. Turkey: Internet Report on digital rights 2012 5. Google threatens to exclude the French online press from its search 6. Dutch proposal to search and destroy foreign computers 7. Details on German State Trojan programme 8. Recommended Action 9. Recommended Reading 10. Agenda 11. About ======================================================================= 1. A week with EDRi Brussels ======================================================================= Now that EDRi has taken up home in its new office in Brussels, we thought that it might be interesting to share a brief insight into what a typical week looks like for us. The truth is that there is no typical week, they are all wonderfully diverse. But just to give you a small taste of what it can be like, here is how EDRi's office agenda looked like last week:: Monday: Following some feverish work over the weekend, the final touches were put to our response to the consultation on net neutrality from the European Commission. We also continued our work on our position paper on the Directive on Collective Rights Management, which is at the start of the legislative process in the European Parliament. Tuesday: At lunchtime, our Executive Director took part in a lively debate organised by the European Telecommunications Networks Operators association (ETNO) and the GSM Association on the lack of consistency between the proposed General Data Protection Regulation and the existing E-Privacy Directive. The event was chaired by the MEP in charge of the dossier in the Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee of the European Parliament (Italian EPP Member, Laura Comi). Other panellists were the European Data Protection Supervisor, Peter Hustinx, Lars Kindervater from Deutsche Telekom, Giuseppe Abbamonte from the European Commission and Cristina Vela from ETNO. On Tuesday evening, we also took part in an event at the Google office on activism. Wednesday: After months of cooperation with EDRi's members, our b protectmydata.eub website dedicated to the review of the European Data Protection framework was launched. The website is the product of months of deliberation with members and observers, with a lot of the hard work being done by our current and former interns, particularly Elena Cantello and Owe Langfeldt. Our attention then turned to providing a comprehensive analysis of Laura Comi's draft Data Protection Opinion, which was communicated to the European Parliament and uploaded to our website today. Despite the number of concerns we have with the draft, we have already had very positive and constructive feedback from Ms Comi. On Wednesday afternoon, we took part in a hearing organised by Bulgarian Socialist MEP Ivalo Kalfin on the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT). The other participants were Amelia Andersdotter (Sweden, Greens/EFA, Pirate Party), Eddy Hertog (European Commission) and Luigi Gambardella (ETNO). Thursday: In the morning, EDRi was one of the speakers at an event organised by the Progressive Group of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament entitled b Copyright: What is broken, how to mend it.b The meeting was opened by Group President Hannes Swoboda and Vice-President Sylvie Guillaume. Other speakers included the Institute for Information Law from the University of Amsterdam, the Association of European Performers' Organisations, the European Digital Media Association, Google, Deezer and the European Consumers' Bureau. On Thursday afternoon, we welcomed a delegation from the Dutch Police Academy. This is the second year where EDRi has participated in the European module of the further education programme of the academy. This year, we discussed the review of the European data protection framework. Friday: We participated in the European Commission's (DG Connect) half-day meeting on b cybersecurity from a societal perspectiveb. The event brought together a small group of cyber-security experts from around Europe to discuss European Commission funding under the Horizon2020 research programme in the security field. Through the week, we continued to receive applications for the post of b senior office managerb. This is a post we need to fill in order to allow our policy staff to focus on policy and to ensure that we can build on our recent growth to defend citizens' rights online even more effectively. EDRi's new office contacts http://www.edri.org/newoffice EDRi website with comments on draft EU data protection legislation http://protectmydata.eu Net neutrality consultation response http://edri.org/files/15102012-EDRi_response_NN_915674309211628912.pdf Video of WCIT meeting http://webcasts.barouhandpartners.com/wcit2012/another_regulatory_threat_to_... Presentation to the copyright event http://edri.org/files/copyright_presentation_20121018.pdf EDRi job vacancy - Office Manager Deadline - 6 November 2012 http://jobs.euractiv.com/node/84224 (Contribution by Joe McNamee - EDRi) ======================================================================= 2. Google needs to improve its privacy practices ======================================================================= On 16 October 2012, a letter signed by the 27 European Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) was sent to Google, asking for better privacy practices of the company, accusing Google of illegality and putting into question the viability of the companybs operations within the European legal environment. Following Googlebs decision to update its privacy policy starting with 1 March 2012 by combining about 60 different policies for its online services (search, Gmail, YouTube, Google+, and others ) into a single user privacy agreement, Article 29 Working Party mandated the French DPA (Commission Nationale de lbInformatique - CNIL) to lead an investigation into the new Google privacy policy. CNIL sent two questionnaires to Google but the company's answers were considered incomplete and approximate, especially on key issues such as the description of its personal data processing operations or the precise list of the product-specific privacy policies merged in the new policy. Based on CNIL findings, Data Protection authorities have drawn their common conclusions and made a series of recommendations. One of the major point of criticism is that "....Googlebs answers have not demonstrated that your company endorses the key data protection principles of purpose limitation, data quality, data minimization, proportionality and right to object. Indeed, the Privacy policy suggests the absence of any limit concerning the scope of the collection and the potential uses of the personal data." The EU DPAs ask Google to publicly commit to these principles. They also recommend that the company provides more clear information to its users on the data collected and purposes of its personal data processing operations, gives a better control over the combination of data across its numerous services and modifies its tools so as to avoid excessive data collection. One example given in CNILbs findings is related to credit card information: "Confidentiality rules do not make difference in treatment between a trivial content search and the number of credit card or telephone user. All these data can be used interchangeably for all the purposes mentioned in rules." The DPAs recommend that Google reinforces the users' consent to the combination of data for the purposes of service improvements, development of new services, advertising and analytics, by letting users choose when their data are combined. Google should have a legal basis to perform data combination of these purposes and data collection must also remain proportionate to the purposes pursued. For the present, for some of these purposes, the processing is not based on consent, Google's legitimate interests, or on the performance of a contract. Moreover, Google refused to provide retention periods for the personal data it processes. Google was given three to four months to comply with the recommendations or face sanctions. Letter from 27 European DPAs to Google (16.10.2012) http://www.cnil.fr/fileadmin/documents/en/20121016-letter_google-article_29-... Appendix - Google Privacy Policy - Main Findings and Recommendations (16.10.2012) http://www.cnil.fr/fileadmin/documents/en/GOOGLE_PRIVACY_POLICY-_RECOMMENDAT... Google's new privacy policy: incomplete information and uncontrolled combination of data across services (16.10.2012) http://www.cnil.fr/english/news-and-events/news/article/googles-new-privacy-... European Data Regulators Slam Google Over Privacy Policy: b Too Largeb And Users Need More Control (But Not Illegal) (16.10.2012) http://techcrunch.com/2012/10/16/eu-data-regulators-slam-google-over-privacy... Europe to Google: respect our laws or face the consequences (16.10.2012) http://www.privacysurgeon.org/blog/incision/europe-to-google-respect-our-law... ======================================================================= 3. EDRi responds to umteenth public Net Neutrality consultation ======================================================================= This might sound like a running gag, but on 15 October 2012 EDRi submitted its umteenth response to the European Commission's umteenth consultation on net neutrality, traffic management, transparency and switching. As explained in the previous EDRi-gram, this is now the sixth consultation since Commissioner Neelie Kroes took office as the European Commissioner for the digital agenda. This new consultation elegantly ignores the European Parliament's resolution from last year in which it asked the Commission to present, within six months of the publication of BEREC's findings (29 May 2012), its views on "whether further regulatory measures are needed in order to ensure freedom of expression, freedom of access to information, freedom of choice for consumers, and media pluralism, to achieve effective competition and innovation." Since then, Commissioner Kroes not only received evidence from BEREC that network operators are indeed implementing blocking, degrading and the throttling of services, applications and content everywhere in Europe, she also managed to ignore the evidence gathered by the respectmynet.eu platform and displayed on netneutralitymap.org. It was therefore no surprise that answering the Commission's questionnaire was quite a challenge: Some of the questions made us worry that the Commission had somehow forgotten how the internet works, while some others clearly suggested that the Commission has since long given up on its initial commitment to net neutrality. For instance, the questionnaire started with a brief introduction to traffic management in which the Commission stated that b traffic managementb is b a wide range of technical practicesb and concluded that they can all be treated as if they were just one phenomenon, which is b ab legitimate tool. In our view however, if the Commission believes that anti-competitive traffic management is, from a policy perspective identical to undertaking an urgent security measure then its competence to be running the consultation needs to be called into question. In addition, it was rather shocking to learn that the Commission is apparently not familiar with the European Data Protection Supervisor's opinion on net neutrality, traffic management and the protection of privacy in which he clearly warns that deep packet inspection (DPI) techniques have serious implications in terms of privacy and data protection. Lack of awareness of the EDPS opinion is the only explanation we can imagine for question number 10 of the consultation: "Are there any privacy risks arising from the use of DPI for traffic management purposes?" We cannot find any charitable explanation for the question "Are there alternative techniques for traffic management that do not involve deep packet inspection?". As we already explained in our response to a previous consultation on net neutrality and transparency, it is false and dangerous to assume that transparency and switching are major tools to achieve the regulatory objective of maintaining an open and competitive Internet. We have demonstrated that transparency policies do not provide all the necessary guarantees for a neutral and competitive Internet - which implies the necessity to support immediate regulation and to promote net neutrality as an objective for regulatory authorities. In view of the evidence the Commission's reaction of obfuscation, delay and distraction is simply incomprehensible. EDRi's response to the net neutrality questionnaire (15.10.2012) http://edri.org/files/15102012-EDRi_response_NN_915674309211628912.pdf European Parliament resolution on Net neutrality (17.11.2011) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&reference=P7-TA-2011-0511&language=EN&ring=B7-2011-0572 European Data Protection Supervisor's opinion on net neutrality, traffic management and the protection of privacy (7.11.2011) http://ec.europa.eu/bepa/european-group-ethics/docs/activities/peter_hustinx... (Contribution by Kirsten Fiedler - EDRi) ======================================================================= 4. Turkey: Internet Report on digital rights 2012 ======================================================================= On 28 September 2012, the Turkish Internet Report 2012 was issued by EDRi observer Alternative Informatics Association showing a worrying tendency of Internet censorship and control from Turkish authorities. According to the report, more and more case have been filed against citizens for sharing "illegal content" on social networks. Such sharing on social networks started to be taken as b evidenceb for criminal charges such as membership of a terrorist organization and insults to b values and beliefsb. Astronomic penalties are demanded for very young detainees on the grounds that they make propaganda on social networks. While some States call b hacktivistb groups like Anonymous and LulzSec a b cyber threatb in a pre-cautious manner, Red Hack, which is a group of the same kind, is declared to be a b terroristb organization in a legally disputable way. Moreover, according to some news, a prosecution is likely to be started against several people following Red Hack on Twitter for they are said to be the b sympathizers of a terrorist organizationb. Social media sharing is turned into an offence by the new university discipline legislation; people are being arrested for the things they have posted or shared on social networks. On 8 September 2012, turk.internet.com declared that the Ministry of Health blacklisted about 200 websites because they misinform the public on some health problems such as losing weight, heart diseases and diabetics. The Ministry of Health established cooperation with the High Council for Telecommunication (TIB) for filtering throughout this process. Following this, it was announced on 14 September 2012 that the websites in question that cover some news portals, announcements, promotion campaigns and various digital equipment had been filtered as their content was harmful. However, this process, which poses a threat to the circulation of information and the freedom of expression, also proves that the public is unaware of the technical difference between blocking and filtering a website. TTNET, which owns the Internet backbone in Turkey and is the biggest Internet Service Provider (ISP) of the country, signed a business agreement in 2012 with the company called PHORM. After the experience of UK market, Phorm built an interface in which the userbs permission is asked. However, the system and the interface are still tricky. When the browser is closed without declining, the system opts-in the user as a lame website trick. Right after the beginning of the online campaign on Enphormasyon.org, Phormbs staff in Turkey began PR activities. On the other hand, TTNET that is responsible to its subscribers for providing continuous connection to the Internet and having been redirecting the users to the Phormbs site, has remained silent since 18 September 2012. Alternative Informatics Association has called the Information and Communications Technologies Authority (ICTA) for inspecting the system of Phorm and made an official complaint to the prosecution office on 17 October 2012. Some recent cases in Turkey have also proven that such events accelerate the production and circulation of hate speech online. The control on the social networks through the instant access denial is justified with sharing on social media. Particularly the Prime Ministerbs statement that b There must be regulations against Islam-phobia in Muslim countriesb ignores the hate speech in different areas (political hate speech, hate speech against women, foreigners, immigrants, sexual identity, belief and sect- oriented hate speech). Given that even the existing laws are not completely and properly applied, is very difficult if not impossible to prevent hate speech through laws. From this perspective, Internet users must be very well informed about hate speech as well as the limits of democracy and freedom of expression. There is also a need to carry out educational activities in this field. b Safe Internetb, which is a filtering application, was carried into effect on 22 November 2011 by ICTA. This filtering is composed of family&child filtering and standard user options and the filtering words designated by ICTA are sent to all ISPs. Therefore, the words and websites to which access is prohibited/denied are determined by the State itself. Moreover, the application is not transparent at all. It narrows the freedom of expression and imposes one single family/child projection on the citizens. Protection of children and family cannot be a justification for the Statebs censorship. The filters in question can absolutely not offer a solution to safety issues. Safe Internet use can be ensured not with filters but through digital literacy. Among the OSCE countries, the only country that allows central filtering is, unfortunately, Turkey. Based on Engelliweb.com information, currently access to 20 792 websites is blocked in Turkey. What has happened on the Internet in Turkey in 2012? b Progress Report"(28.09.2012) https://yenimedya.wordpress.com/2012/10/05/what-has-happened-on-the-internet... 200 websites blocked by the Ministry of Health (only in Turkish, 21.09.2012) http://www.turk.internet.com/portal/yazigoster.php?yaziid=38850, To the attention of all internet users and citizens!...(on PHORM in Turkey) http://www.enphormasyon.org/english.html Complaint against Phorm (only in Turkish) http://www.alternatifbilisim.org/wiki/Phorm_su%C3%A7_duyurusu Using Social Media for Hate Speech is not Freedom of Expression! (31.01.2012) https://yenimedya.wordpress.com/2012/01/31/using-social-media-for-hate-speec... Disabled web: Number of blocked websites in Turkey by category (only in Turkish) http://engelliweb.com/kategoriler EDRi-gram: Turkish plans to use IDs for accessing the Internet (10.10.2012) http://edri.org/edrigram/number10.19/turkey-ids-internet-usage (Contribution by TuD rul Comu - EDRi observer Alternative Informatics Association - Turkey) ======================================================================= 5. Google threatens to exclude the French online press from its search ======================================================================= GESTE, a French group of online editors, has been trying for a few years now to get part of Googlebs revenues generated by its news service with indexed titles. "Google has developed on our contentb said Corinne Denis, President of GESTE who also stated for C dition MultimC)di@: b We have been discussing with them for years on this topic. And if they have kept their promise to never sell advertising on Google News, by including the news on their search engine, they have cleverly avoided the obstacleb. Therefore GESTE supports a new draft law, so-called b lex Googleb (already presented in the last EDRi-gram), that may introduce a fee on hypertext links. A b fair remunerationb would be introduced through a fee applied on hypertext links. The draft law also introduces a three-year prison and a 300 000 Euro fine for reproducing or making available b all or part ofb press contents, without authorisation. Facing the perspective of a fee imposed on hyperlinks, Google threatens with excluding the French online press from its searching index. The company believes it has already done enough by bringing traffic to the sites it references. Google stated that what the draft law was meant for, was actually to interdict unpaid referencing. b According to the draft text that has been circulated since September, a new related right is to be created for a 5-year exclusive period, that would make mandatory the previous authorisation of press bodies for bany reproduction, making available for the public for sale, the exchange or communication to the public, online included, of all or a part of the press contents edited under their responsibilityb.b Last year, Google already excluded several Belgium newspapers from its index following a court decision taken a few months before. The situation was however resolved after a off-court settlement between the parties involved. Google threatens to ban the French press from its searching engine (only in French, 18.10.2012) http://www.numerama.com/magazine/24050-google-menace-de-bannir-la-presse-fra... For GESTE, Google is not a milk cow but it still has to pay (only in French, 13.10.2012) http://www.numerama.com/magazine/24015-pour-le-geste-google-n-est-pas-une-va... The facts about our position on |French copyright proposals (18.10.2012) http://googlepolicyeurope.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-facts-about-our-position-... The damaging effects of a draft law meant to interdict unpaid references of press articles in France (only in French, 10.1012) https://docs.google.com/viewer?srcid=0B92admnS83NKc3pULU5DZkdzQnM&pid=explorer&efh=false&a=v&chrome=false&embedded=true EDRi-gram: Ancillary copyright madness in Germany and France (26.09.2012) http://edri.org/edrigram/number10.18/ancillary-copyright-proposal-madness ======================================================================= 6. Dutch proposal to search and destroy foreign computers ======================================================================= On 15 October 2012, the Dutch Ministry of Justice and Security proposed powers for the police to break into computers, install spyware, search computers and destroy data. These powers would extend to computers located outside the Netherlands. EDRi member Bits of Freedom warns for the unacceptable risks to cybersecurity and calls on other countries to strongly oppose the proposal. The proposal would grant powers to the Dutch police to break into computers, as well as mobile phones, via the internet in order to: - install spyware, allowing the police to overtake the computer; - search data on the computer, including data on computers located in other countries; and - destroy data on the computer, including data on computers located in other countries. If the location of the computer cannot be determined, for example in the case of Tor-hidden services, the police is not required to submit a request for legal assistance to another country before breaking in. Under the current text, it is uncertain whether a legal assistance request would be legally required, or merely preferred, if the location of the computer is known. The exercise of these powers requires a warrant from a Dutch court. This proposal poses unacceptable risks. If the Dutch government gets the power to break into foreign computers, this gives other governments the basis to break into Dutch computers which infringe the laws of their country. The end result could be less security for all computer users, instead of more. This is even more true with regard to the power to destroy data on foreign computers; it is likely that other governments would be very interested in using such a power against Dutch interests. Furthermore, providing the government the power to break into computers provides a perverse incentive to keep information security weak. Millions of computers could remain badly secured because the government does not have an incentive to publish vulnerabilities quickly because it needs to exploit these vulnerabilities for enforcement purposes. In addition, spyware is difficult to control. Research from the EDRi member Chaos Computer Club demonstrates that, even though spyware from the German police was intended to be used to intercept only Skype calls, it could in practice be extended to take over the entire computer. In addition, the spyware itself could be remotely hacked by criminals as well, allowing them to take over the computer of a suspect. The risks above do not even touch on the privacy-issues yet. Breaking into a computer infringes the privacy not only of the suspect, but of all non-suspects whose data is also on the computer. And, somewhat related to this, the value of evidence gathered via these methods is at the least less obvious and will be harder to assess in court. The digital nature of the investigation makes it harder to prove that evidence was not fabricated or perhaps destroyed by the police. A legislative text implementing the highly controversial proposal will be introduced to the Parliament in the coming months. The law does not only concern the Netherlands: it concerns all countries whose IT-infrastructure may be affected. Bits of Freedom therefore calls on other countries to oppose the proposal. Laws like these make the internet a more dangerous place. Dutch Proposal (only in Dutch, 15.10.2012) http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/bestanden/documenten-en-publicaties/kamerstukken... CCC research on German police spyware (only in German, 26.10.2011) http://www.ccc.de/en/updates/2011/analysiert-aktueller-staatstrojaner EDRi-gram: German police accused of using a Trojan backdoor for interceptions (19.10.2011) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number9.20/german-trojan-backdoor (Contribution by Ot van Daalen - EDRi member Bits of Freedom - Netherlands) ======================================================================= 7. Details on German State Trojan programme ======================================================================= Some documents spotted by the Annalist blog that were issued by the German Government in July 2012, within a parliamentary enquiry about expenditures by the German Federal Ministry of the Interior, clearly show more details about what was revealed a year ago by EDRi member CCC (Chaos Computer Club) - that the German police has been spying and monitoring Skype, Google Mail, MSN Hotmail, Yahoo Mail and Facebook communications. The tool used by the police is a Trojan programme created by Digitask company, the so-called b Staatstrojanerb. The German law allows the police to use data interception tools on computers for eavesdropping, but the Constitutional Court has introduced certain limitations interdicting the use of such tools to access private data or take control of a suspectbs computer. In 2011, the Ministry of Justice promised to give up the initial Trojan virus and have new software created internally: b The software by DigiTask GmbH that was used in the past for computer surveillance (lawful interception) is not currently being used by federal public authorities any more. The software that will be used for computer surveillance will be developed by a competence centre established within the Federal Criminal Police Office. It will be safeguarded that the source code will be audited regarding its range of functions by qualified experts. It will also be accessible for the relevant authorities for data protection (among others the Federal Commissioner for Data Protection).b But the recent governmental expenditure documents show also that the German Government is far from being able to produce software for lawful interception that complies with the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court. b The development of software by the Federal Criminal Office is presumably going to take months if not years. We may even have to ruefully admit that we lack the capability completely,b stated the spokesman on domestic policy of the Conservative Party. In France as well, since Loppsi2 legislation has come into force in 2011, the police is allowed to place spyware on the computers of people suspected by various crimes. This surveillance is however carried out under the authority of a judge who needs to explain why its usage was needed in that respective case. Hacker News Puzzle (17.10.2012) http://annalist.noblogs.org/post/2012/10/17/hacker-news-puzzle/ One year later:German police unable to develop bstate trojanb (12.10.2012) http://annalist.noblogs.org/post/2012/10/12/one-year-later-german-police-una... German police monitors Skype, GoogleMail and Facebook chats (3.10.2012) http://annalist.noblogs.org/post/2012/10/03/german-police-monitors-skype-goo... German Gov't Inadvertently Reveals Police Monitor Gmail, Skype, Facebook & Use Snooping Malware (10.10.2012) https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121009/08281520662/german-govt-inadverte... German police spyware is also targeting Skype, Gmail, Facebook...(only in French, 10.10.2012) http://www.numerama.com/magazine/23989-le-mouchard-de-la-police-allemande-vi... ======================================================================= 8. Recommended Action ======================================================================= Islands of Resilience Comparative Model for Energy, Connectivity and Jurisdiction Realizing European ICT possibilities through a case study of Iceland Request for comments will remain open until 1 November 2012 http://www.islandsofresilience.eu ======================================================================= 9. Recommended Reading ======================================================================= EuroISPA reacts on the controversial CleanIT Project (23.10.2012) http://www.euroispa.org/component/content/article?id=76 Article 29 Working Party - Opinion 08/2012 providing further input on the data protection reform discussions (5.10.2012) http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article-29/documentation/opinion... Neelie Kroes Vice-President of the European Commission responsible for the Digital Agenda Online privacy and online business: An update on Do Not Track The Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS)/Brussels (11.10.2012) http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-716_en.htm Slovakia Adopts FOI Act Amendments on Re-use (22.10.2012) http://epsiplatform.eu/content/slovakia-adopts-foi-act-amendments-re-use ======================================================================= 10. Agenda ======================================================================= 25-28 October 2012, Barcelona, Spain Free Culture Forum 2012 http://fcforum.net/ 3-4 November 2012, Baku, Azerbaijan Best Bits b a strategic gathering of NGOs around Internet governance and Internet principles http://igf-online.net/bestbits.pdf 6-9 November 2012, Baku, Azerbaijan Seventh Annual IGF Meeting: "Internet Governance for Sustainable Human, Economic and Social Development" http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/ 9-11 November 2012, Fulda, Germany Digitalisierte Gesellschaft - Wege und Irrwege FIfF Annual Conference in cooperation with Fuldaer Informatik Kollquium http://www.fiff.de/2012 29-30 November 2012, Brussels, Belgium For Your Eyes Only: Privacy, Empowerment and Technology in the context of Social Networks http://www.foryoureyesonly.be 4 December 2012, Brussels, Belgium 3rd Annual European Data Protection and Privacy Conference http://www.eu-ems.com/summary.asp?event_id=123&page_id=983 27-30 December 2012, Hamburg, Germany 29C3 - Chaos Communication Congress http://events.ccc.de/category/29c3/ 23-25 January 2013, Brussels, Belgium CPDP 2013 Conference - Reloading data protection CfP by 2 November 2012 http://www.cpdpconferences.org/callforpapers.html 21-22 March 2013, Malta Online Privacy: Consenting to your Future CfP by 3 December 2012 http://www.onlineprivacyconference.eu/ 6-8 May 2013, Berlin, Germany re:publica 2013 http://re-publica.de/12/2012/08/28/der-termin-steht-vom-06-08-mai-2013-geht-... 31 July b 4 August 2013, Geestmerambacht, Netherlands Observe. Hack. Make. - OHM2013 https://ohm2013.org/ ============================================================ 11. 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