============================================================ EDRi-gram biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe Number 8.21, 3 November 2010 ============================================================ Contents ============================================================ New EDRi members 1. Google admits it was gathering passwords and emails via StreetView 2. ECJ decides private copying levies are not allowed for business use 3. EC refers Austria to ECJ for lack of independence of DPA 4. Is YouTube back online in Turkey? 5. Free Culture 2010 in Barcelona 6. Continuing the battle against data retention 7. Belgian court upholds Creative Commons licence 8. Recommended Action 9. Recommended Reading 10. Agenda 11. About ============================================================ New EDRi members ============================================================ At the EDRi General Assembly of 30 October 2010 in Barcelona, Spain, EDRi welcomed two new members. The Panoptykon Foundation is a Polish organisation focusing on human rights, in particular the right to privacy, in the clash with modern technology used for surveillance purposes. The NGO wants to analyse the risks associated with the operation of modern surveillance systems, monitor the actions of both public and private entities and intervene when human rights or democratic values are threatened. The Liga voor Mensenrechten (Human Rights League) has a focus on human rights in Belgium and a campaigner of privacy, including the organisation of the Big Brother Awards. EDRi now has 29 members that are based or have offices in 18 different European countries, all within the territory of the Council of Europe. Panoptykon Foundation http://www.panoptykon.org/ Liga voor Mensenrechten http://www.mensenrechten.be/ EDRI members and observers http://www.edri.org/about/members ============================================================ 1. Google admits it was gathering passwords and emails via StreetView ============================================================ Google faces further investigation in the UK and Italy, after it has publicly admitted in a blog post on 22 October 2010 that its StreetView service has gathered more data than intended, "in some instances entire emails and URLs were captured, as well as passwords." The UK Data Protection Authority - Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has decided to reopen its investigation on Google over the personal data gathering by its StreetView system. Initially, in July 2010, ICO declared it would not take measures against Google, considering that the company could not have gathered much personal data with its StreetView vehicles while mapping Wi-Fi networks in the areas they covered. However, according to an investigation carried out by Canada's Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart, it appears that Google has gathered, in this way, entire emails, highly sensitive personal information and even passwords. As Google admitted Stoddard's allegations, ICO is now reconsidering its position. "Now that these findings are starting to emerge, we understand that Google has accepted that in some instances entire URLs and emails have been captured. We will be making enquires to see whether this information relates to the data inadvertently captured in the UK, before deciding on the necessary course of action, including a consideration of the need to use our enforcement powers," was ICO's statement. While Google stated that the data was collected by error because of a code being included in the Street View software by mistake, during a two-hour UK parliamentary debate on privacy on 28 October 2010, MPs discussed the issue and accused of Google of having deliberately collected WiFi data for commercial gain. Ed Vaizey, the UK communications minister said that although Google could still be fined for collecting the WiFi data without people's knowledge, as the offence had occurred before the entering into force of the legislation giving ICO the power to levy punishments of up to 575 000 euro, the fine would probably be much lower. He also added that for any future services such as StreetView, Internet companies would be asked to establish "ground rules" together with the ICO, before starting projects that might endanger privacy. Italy also started an investigation against Google for potential invasions of privacy in its Street View online mapping service. "Italian citizens will be informed of the presence of Google cars taking pictures of places and individuals to be posted online via the StreetView service," stated the Italian Data protection authority on 25 October 2010, adding that Google StreetView vehicles would have to be "clearly marked by means of visible stickers or signs to unambiguously signify that pictures are being taken for the purposes of StreetView." The Italian privacy authority also imposed Google to previously list, to the public media, the neighbourhoods its cars would photograph. The non-compliance would bring the company a fine of up to 1 800 euro. In the meantime, in Germany, over 244 000 residents have specifically requested that the images of their households be removed from StreetView. While Google seemed to be happy that just 3% of the population used the opt-out system, the number shows the huge interest in privacy of German citizens. "Going to a website, and entering all this information it takes a hell of a lot of time and effort, and I am just staggered by this 200 000 plus (number)," explained Viktor Mayer-Schoenberger, a professor of Internet Governance and Regulation at Oxford University, to Deustche Welle. ICO considers action amidst further Street View data collection revelations (25.10.2010) http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=11486 UK MPs question Google over Street View data breaches (29.10.2010) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11650692 More than 244 000 opt out of Google Street View in Germany (21.10.2010) http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,6133854,00.html Google escapes prosecution over Streetview data (29.10.2010) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/8095954/Google-escapes-prosecut... The Internet and Privacy - UK Parliament debate (28.10.2010) http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmtoday/cmwhall/01.htm#d2e30 EDRi-gram: Google's Street View will not resume its activities in the Czech Republic (22.09.2010) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number8.18/czech-republic-bans-streetview ============================================================ 2. ECJ decides private copying levies are not allowed for business use ============================================================ On 21 October 2010, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) decided that private copying levies on blank CDs, MP3 players and other digital media are allowed under EU copyright law only when charged on goods sold to individuals but not to companies. ECJ ruled that "the application of the 'private copying levy' to reproduction media acquired by undertakings and professionals for purposes other than private copying is not compatible with European Union law. Such a levy may be applied to such media when they are liable to be used by natural persons for their private use". In some European countries the unauthorised copying of works that a person legitimately owns is allowed, on the condition that it is for private use. The European Copyright Directive permits this, provided there is fair compensation to the copyright holders. The compensation can be ensured by charging a levy on the media (such as discs or media players used for copying material) which is then distributed to rights holders through collection societies. ECJ thus ruled against the Spanish collective rights management agency SGAE (Sociedad General de Autores y Editores) which had won a case filed against Padawan, a store distributing discs and other devices, for unpaid copyright levies. Padawan had claimed that the indiscriminate application of the levy was not compatible with EU law and appealed the decision. The appeals court asked the ECJ to rule on this case in relation to European law. "The purpose of fair compensation is to compensate authors adequately for the use made of their protected works without their authorisation. In order to determine the level of that compensation, account must be taken as a 'valuable criterion' - of the 'possible harm' suffered by the author as a result of the act of reproduction concerned, although prejudice which is 'minimal' does not give rise to a payment obligation. The private copying exception must therefore include a system 'to compensate for the prejudice to rightholders'," said the ruling. ECJ considered the level of fair compensation was linked to "the harm resulting for the author from the reproduction for private use of his protected work without his authorisation." And therefore "fair compensation must be regarded as recompense for the harm suffered by the author." A levy was a reasonable mechanism for private individuals who were likely to use material to copy and who should pay for the harm caused to authors, but this should not be applied to other sales because the levy could not be applied indiscriminately. "The indiscriminate application of the private copying levy to all types of digital reproduction equipment, devices and media, including cases in which such equipment is acquired by persons other than natural persons for purposes clearly unrelated to private copying, is incompatible with the directive." Press Release no.106/10 of the EU Court of Justice (21.10.2010) http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2010-10/cp100106en.p... Judgment of the Court - case 467/08 Padawan SL vs SGAE (Third Chamber) (21.10.2010) http://curia.europa.eu/jurisp/cgi-bin/form.pl?lang=EN&Submit=rechercher&numaff=C-467/08 ECJ outlaws private copying levy on sales to businesses (21.10.2010) http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=11471 Brussels smackdown for Spanish media'n'kit copy levy (22.10.2010) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/10/22/court_rules_on_spain_cd_copying_levy... ============================================================ 3. EC refers Austria to ECJ for lack of independence of DPA ============================================================ Since a complaint was filed by the data protection association Arge Daten back in October 2003, the lack of adequate independence of the Austrian Data Protection Authority (DSK - Datenschutzkommission) has been on the European Commission's (EC) agenda. Years later, in 2009, the Commission asked Austria, in a reasoned opinion under EU infringement procedures, to revise the way the authority is organised. However, as the Austrian authorities failed to comply with the reasoned opinion and the Commission has decided to refer Austria to the European Court of Justice (ECJ). This decision was officially published on 28 October 2010. The Commission considers that provisions setting up the Austrian data protection authority do not conform to EU rules, which require Member States to establish a completely independent supervisory body to monitor the application of the 1995 Data Protection Directive (Directive 95/46/EC). Although the Austrian data protection legislation (Datenschutzgesetz 2000) spells out that the authority exercises its functions independently and takes no instruction in its performance, the Commission considers that "complete independence," as required under EU data protection rules, is not guaranteed because: - the authority remains under the supervision of the Federal Chancellery as integrated into the Chancellery in terms of organisation and staff: it controls neither its own staffing nor its equipment and it does not have its own budget; - since its creation in 1980, the authority has been run by a senior official of the Chancellery as executive member ("geschdftsf|hrendes Mitglied"), subject to the supervision of the Chancellery; - the right of the Chancellor to be informed at all times by the chair and the executive member on all subjects concerning the daily management of the authority potentially hinders the members of the supervisory authority in the independent performance of their tasks. The Commission's approach to the independence of data protection authorities reflects the case law of the European Court of Justice. In its ruling of 3 March 2010 (C-518/07), in which Germany was declared in breach of EU rules on the independence of the data protection supervisory authority, the Court confirmed that authorities responsible for the supervision of the processing of personal data must remain free from any external influence, including the direct or indirect influence of the state. According to the Court, the mere risk of political influence through state scrutiny is sufficient to hinder the independent performance of the supervisory authority's tasks. Earlier this year, the European Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) has also seriously criticised the status of Austria's data protection authority. The FRA study 'Data Protection in the European Union: the role of National Data Protection Authorities', published in May 2010, casted a damning light on the Austrian DSK. The study detected both a lack of independence from the government and a lack of financial resources and staff of the DSK. The Austrian DSK is not equipped with full powers of investigation and intervention. As a consequence, the supervisory body "cannot enforce its decisions in warning the data processor/controller as to its unlawful conduct" - a serious deficit which occurs only in three of the 27 EU Member States, i.e. Poland, Hungary and Austria. No official statement has been published by the Austrian government since the EC announced it would refer Austria to the Court of Justice in this matter. It remains to be seen whether the Austrian government will stick to its former plans to close down the DSK. According to a draft law promoted in 2007 and reconditioned in 2010, which is aiming at changing various regulations of the Austrian Constitution, the government intends to assign some of the duties of the DSK to nine administrative courts of the "Ldnder" instead. By which organisation(s) the remaining duties of the DSK should be fulfilled, remains unclear till today. In its recently published bi-annual report of the years 2007-2009, the DSK criticised these plans and argued that only 10 % of its tasks were suitable to be carried out by administrative courts. In light of its ruling of 3 March 2010, in which Germany was declared in breach of EU rules on the independence of the data protection supervisory authority, it is more than likely that the ECJ will come to a similar conclusion in the Austrian case. It's also more than likely that neither the EC nor the European Court of Justice will appreciate the further demolition of the Austrian data protection authority by closing down the existing insufficient body and scattering its competencies to regional administration. Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31995L0046:en:HT... Data Protection: Commission to refer Austria to Court for lack of independence of data protection authority: (28.10.2010) http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/10/1430&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en Publications Office Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 9 March 2010 - European Commission v Federal Republic of Germany (1.5.2010) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2010:113:0003:000... Data Protection in the European Union: the role of National Data Protection Authorities (Strengthening the fundamental rights architecture in the EU II) (Fundamental Rights Agency, 7.5.2010) http://fra.europa.eu/fraWebsite/research/publications/publications_per_year/... EDRi-gram 5.19 - The days of the Austrian DPA are numbered (10.8.2007) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number5.19/austrian-dpa EDRi-gram 3.17 - EC: data protection inadequate in Austria and Germany (24.8.2005) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number3.17/DPA Austrian Data Protection Act 2000 (only in German) http://www.ris.bka.gv.at/Dokumente/Bundesnormen/NOR40113679/NOR40113679.pdf Datenschutzbericht 2009 - 1. Juli 2007 - 31. Dezember 2009, Vsterreichische Datenschutzkommission (only in German) http://www.dsk.gv.at/DocView.axd?CobId=40344 (Contribution by Andreas Krisch, EDRi-member VIBE!AT, Austria) ============================================================ 4. Is YouTube back online in Turkey? ============================================================ After almost three years of blocking, Turkey has finally lifted its ban on YouTube. Google's site was blocked in 2007 for videos considered insulting to Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the country's founder. In 2007, Turkey's parliament adopted a law allowing a court to block any website in case there was "sufficient suspicion" that a crime had occurred. The Appeal Court of Ankara has recently decided to lift the ban on Google's site but the decision is not considered entirely a victory as it came along with the removal of the videos in question. Transport Minister Binali Yildirim said there was no longer any reason to ban the website because the offending videos had been removed. "I hope that they have also learned from this experience and the same thing will not happen again. YouTube will hopefully carry out its operations in Turkey within the limits of law in the future," he added thus implying that the site could always be in danger of suspension in the future in case similar content is posted on it. YouTube wanted to emphasize the fact that the videos had been removed by a third party: "We want to be clear that a third party, not YouTube, have apparently removed some of the videos that have caused the blocking of YouTube in Turkey using our automated copyright complaint process. We are investigating whether this action is valid in accordance with our copyright policy." But the victory may be short-lived, as the Dr. Yaman Akdeniz has pointed out that the videos are back online: "Despite the earlier news that Turkey has lifted its ban on YouTube after almost 2.5 years, YouTube reinstated the four videos that were removed by a licensing agency in Germany. YouTube, in a statement circulated in Turkish late Monday night stated that the four videos did not violate its copyright violation policy and therefore they were put back into the system (...) It remains to be seen how the Turkish authorities will react to this action by YouTube but I strongly suspect that they will issue a new injunction to block access to YouTube." OSCE (the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe) which, in June 2010, expressed the opinion that Internet censorship in Turkey was one of the heaviest in the world by the the law allowing the access blocking to more than 5 000 sites, welcomed the present decision but urged Turkey to continue in this direction "by reforming its Internet law and lift the remaining website bans." Thousands of other websites, especially those related to sensitive topics such as Ataturk, the army and minorities, remain blocked. Turkey lifts two-year ban on YouTube (30.10.2010) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11659816 YouTube accessible soon in Turkey after three years of blocking (only in French, 30.10.2010) http://www.numerama.com/magazine/17214-youtube-bientot-accessible-en-turquie... YouTube Ban is Imminent (again) in Turkey (1.11.2010) http://cyberlaw.org.uk/2010/11/01/youtube-ban-is-imminent-again-in-turkey/ Turkey: Authorities urged to ensure YouTube stays unblocked (3.11.2010) http://en.rsf.org/turkey-authorities-urged-to-ensure-03-11-2010,38742.html EDRI-gram: Turkey extends the censorship of YouTube (16.06.2010) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number8.12/turkey-extends-blocking-youtube ============================================================ 5. Free Culture 2010 in Barcelona ============================================================ Barcelona was the capital of free culture at the end of October 2010, with two events - Oxcars and then the Free Culture Forum (FCF) - organized by Exgae for awarding and promoting free culture concepts across Europe and beyond. The third edition of the Oxcars ceremony took place on 28 October 2010, with 1000 people joining the event on the spot and many more watching it live on the Internet. The event awarded prizes for the Spanish free culture supporters (such as the academic Josi Luis Sampedro) and users (Txaber Allui - an e-cook blogger). Following the ECJ ruling on private copying levies just a few days earlier, the stars of the event were the lawyer Jover Josep and Ana Marma Mindez - the owner of the computer store that started the proceedings against Spanish collective society SGAE. Javier characterized the current situation of the copyright levies by a powerful metaphor: "We are in a country where blind men pay for what they don't see and the deaf for what they can't hear." British filmmaker Kate Madison was another star of the night, following her implication in the minimal budget fan-made film "Born of Hope", which recreated the world from the Tolkien trilogy. The film, available free on the Internet, had over 2 million views in less than one year. The first round of discussions at FCF were related to the political and economic copyright framework. MEP Eva Lichtenberger made an appeal to civil society action in the debate saying that "We have lost the battle on the Gallo resolution, but this is just a resolution - so we will need to continue the battle on the future legislative framework and we need the civil society input." She also underlined that the discussion was more balanced now, a group of MEPs already exist that are not indoctrinated only by the lobby copyright approaches. But the FCF focused this year on a very sensitive topic related to free culture: sustainability. The "flat rate" was the main topic of the discussions, with opinions pro and against a solution that might require users to pay a fixed monthly amount to be distributed to creators, as compensation for the free circulation of works on the Internet. The solution that might be adopted in Brazil has triggered a lot of attention and references from presenters or participants in the debate. But other solutions for sustainability were publicly presented, from individual solutions, such as the crowd funded movie El Cosmonauta, to overall approaches, such as flattr presented by Peter Sunde or the Kick Starter, that had 500 projects funded and over 20 million USD pledged in the first 18 months of the project. Alice Wiegand from Wikimedia Germany correctly underlined that it was not just financial sustainability that needed to be better researched, but also the technical and social sustainability, without which a project like Wikipedia can't last. The debate on FCF was also broadcasted online and now videos of both events are publicly available on the Internet. Six candles for six years to combat digital canon (only in Spanish, 29.10.2010) http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2010/10/29/barcelona/1288347187.html The Free Culture Forum in Barcelona explores the way financial sustainability of free culture and shared (only in Spanish, 2.11.2010) http://www.elcultural.es/noticias/ARTE/1011/Despues_del_Copyright The free culture antiOscar reward Josi Luis Sampedro (only in Spanish, 29.10.2010) http://www.laverdad.es/murcia/v/20101029/cultura/antioscar-cultura-libre-pre... Oxcars 2010 - video recordings http://oxcars10.exgae.net/en/ Free Culture Forum 2010 - Pictures, videos and press http://2010.fcforum.net/day-by-day/ ============================================================ 6. Continuing the battle against data retention ============================================================ During the 32nd Annual Conference of the Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners "Privacy: Generations" that took place on 27 and 28 October 2010, EDRi-member Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) called for the abolition of the European Union's Data Retention Directive. "The Data Retention Directive is highly controversial, if not wildly unpopular throughout the European Union. The directive was strongly opposed by European privacy activists ... as each country in the EU has implemented the Data Retention Directive in their own law, they have faced challenges in state courts," explained Eva Galperin of EFF, in a blog post. "The experience in Europe makes clear that mandatory data retention regimes are disproportionate and unnecessary. We continue to believe that the legitimate needs of law enforcement can be met by a more targeted data preservation regime, without the collateral damage inflicted by the 2006 directive. Rather than fighting the privacy battle across Europe one state at a time, EFF urges European Privacy Authorities to call upon the European Commission to stand up for Internet users' fundamental rights, and repeal the 2006 Data Retention Directive outright", stated the EFF. Indeed, the EU Data Protection Directive has been facing a strong and large opposition for several years now. Even the Roadmap published by the EU is indicating that the national implementation has been more complicated than initially thought. Thus most Member States were late in transposing, and 6 have not yet introduced transposing legislation, whereas in 2 Member States the Constitutional Court annulled the national law transposing the Directive. (Germany and Romania, plus a pending case in Hungary). Also there is already a referral to the ECJ for a preliminary ruling at the behest of the Irish High Court . Also the expert group on data retention that should "unite in a single platform all European stakteholders" seems to be missing the civil society representation or the human rights experts. According to a Commission source, the review report of the directive, which was due on 15 September 2010, has recently been postponed to March 2011. The Commission seems to have difficulties to get data from the member states that proves that data retention is necessary and proportionate in a democratic society. EFF Urges EU Data Protection Authorities to Call for the Repeal of the EU Data Retention Directive (25.10.2010) http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/10/eff-calls-eu-data-protection-and-privac... EFF calls for repeal of Data Retention Directive (29.10.2010) http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=11502 Roadmap - Proposal for a review of the Directive 2006/24/EC (Data Retention) http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/planned_ia/docs/2011_home_006_data_ret... Civil society calls for an end to compulsory telecommunications data retention (28.06.2010) http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/content/view/370/79/lang,en/ EDRi-gram: WP29 criticizes the implementation of the EU data retention directive (28.07.2010) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number8.15/article-29-working-party-opinion-dat... ============================================================ 7. Belgian Court upholds Creative Commons licence ============================================================ A local court in Nivelles, Belgium upheld in a case decided 26 October 2010 on the validity of the Creative Commons licence in a copyright infringement case when a music group published its music under CC BY-NC-SA. In this case reported by Professor Siverine Dussollier of the University of Namur, a theatre adapted the music published by the band to make an advertisement for their theatrical season. The ad was broadcast on the national radio several times (with no attribution). The band refused the damages of 1500 euro that the theatre proposed and decided to sue for copyright infringement. In its decision, the court recognized the CC licence as a valid permissive copyright licence that has already been accepted by Dutch, Spanish and US courts. The decision also noted that the conditions of the decisions were breached by not attributing the song to its creators and using it for commercial purposes, which was prohibited by the CC licence used. The court decided to award damages of 4500 euro to the complainants. Decision Tribunal Nivelles - Lichtdmapwa (only in French, 26.10.2010) http://www.scribd.com/doc/40732194/2010-10-26-Decision-trib-Nivelles-Lichodm... Belgian Court recognises CC licences (2.11.2010) http://www.technollama.co.uk/belgian-court-recognises-cc-licences EDRi-gram: Creative Commons license upheld in Dutch and Spanish courts (29.03.2006) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.6/jurisprudence-creative-commons-europe ============================================================ 8. Recommended Action ============================================================ Public consultation on the future of electronic commerce in the internal market and the implementation of the Directive on electronic commerce (2000/31/EC). Deadline: 5 November 2010 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/2010/e-commerce_en.htm Defend Councillor Kitcat from suspension for posting YouTube videos http://action.openrightsgroup.org/ea-campaign/clientcampaign.do?ea.campaign.id=8315&ea.client.id=1422 ============================================================ 9. Recommended Reading ============================================================ UK: Minister proposes privacy mediation service and good-privacy kitemark http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=11511 http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm101028/halltext... ============================================================ 10. Agenda ============================================================ 5-7 November 2010, Cologne, Germany Transparency, Work, Surveillance Joint Annual Meeting of FIfF and DVD http://fiff.de/veranstaltungen/fiff-jahrestagungen/JT2010/jt2010_uebersicht 5-7 November 2010, Gothenburg, Sweden Free Society Conference and Nordic Summit http://www.fscons.org/ 12-13 November 2010, Amsterdam, Netherlands Economies of the Commons 2 - Paying the costs of making things free http://www.ecommons.eu 17 November 2010, Gent, Belgium Big Brother Awards 2010 Belgium http://www.winuwprivacy.be/kandidaten 18-19 November 2010, London, UK Open Government Data Camp http://opengovernmentdata.org/camp2010/ 27-30 December 2010, Berlin, Germany 27th Chaos Communication Congress (27C3) http://events.ccc.de/congress/2010 25-28 January 2011, Brussels, Belgium The annual Conference Computers, Privacy & Data Protection CPDP 2011 European Data Protection: In Good Health? Submission deadline for Full Papers and Position Papers: 16 November 2010 http://www.cpdpconferences.org/ ============================================================ 11. About ============================================================ EDRI-gram is a biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe. Currently EDRI has 27 members based or with offices in 17 different countries in Europe. European Digital Rights takes an active interest in developments in the EU accession countries and wants to share knowledge and awareness through the EDRI-grams. All contributions, suggestions for content, corrections or agenda-tips are most welcome. Errors are corrected as soon as possible and are visible on the EDRI website. Except where otherwise noted, this newsletter is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. See the full text at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ Newsletter editor: Bogdan Manolea <edrigram@edri.org> Information about EDRI and its members: http://www.edri.org/ European Digital Rights needs your help in upholding digital rights in the EU. If you wish to help us promote digital rights, please consider making a private donation. http://www.edri.org/about/sponsoring - EDRI-gram subscription information subscribe by e-mail To: edri-news-request@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/edri/2.html - EDRI-gram in German EDRI-gram is also available in German, with delay. Translations are provided Andreas Krisch from the EDRI-member VIBE!AT - Austrian Association for Internet Users http://www.unwatched.org/ - Newsletter archive Back issues are available at: http://www.edri.org/edrigram - Help Please ask <edrigram@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