From 1 to 4 May a jury will vote the winners of each category and the three most voted nominations for each category will be made public on 7 May, while

============================================================ EDRI-gram biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe Number 5.7, 12 April 2007 ============================================================ Contents ============================================================ 1. Free-DRM music by iTunes, but EC starts official investigation 2. Monitoring employee's Internet breaches human rights, says ECHR 3. Bulgarian Police ordered ISPs to block US-based torrent tracker 4. CoE to address the impact of technical measures on human rights 5. EC suggests new compromise on an EU patent system 6. France establishes the DRM-regulation authority 7. Free software needs to be considered in Italian public acquisitions 8. Private copy explained by Court of Appeal in Paris 9. Nominations for Big Brother Award Italy 2007 are now open 10. ENDitorial - About EFF Europe 11. Recommended Reading 12. Agenda 13. About ============================================================ 1. Free-DRM music by iTunes, but EC starts official investigation =========================================================== EMI and Apple announced in the beginning of April 2007 that EMI Music's entire digital catalogue of music will be available for purchase without DRM from the iTunes worldwide in May. This is also the result of several complaints from consumer advocates and European Commission (EC) officials on iTunes practices.However, this decision hasn't stop the EC to send Apple and other four record labels a Statement of Objections, considering that their business practices might be restrictive in terms of the EU treaty. The agreement between EMI and iTunes was presented on 2 April 2007 by EMI's CEO Eric Nicoli and Apple's CEO Steve Jobs. Apple announced that the higher quality versions of songs without DRM will be sold for 1.29 USD rather than 0.99 USD. iTunes will also offer the possibility to upgrade the previously purchased EMI content to the DRM-free format for 0.30 USD/song. At the same time the EMI music videos will also be available in DRM-free format with no change in price. The news was welcomed by several consumer organizations that have criticized the iTunes system for a long time, such as the Federation of German Consumer Organizations (vzbv). "An important step has been made towards meeting our demands. Now other music companies need to follow suit," the deputy head of the vzbv Patrick von Braunm|hl. EDRI-member Ian Brown points out that the pressure by the EC, Norwegian, French and German consumer ombudsmen and digital rights activists "has made it extremely difficult for Apple to justify its continued lock-in of iTunes customers." Just one week before the announcement, the consumer protection organizations from Germany, France, Norway and Finland had a common meeting with a delegation of the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) on interoperability and DRM issues. The discussions that were held in Oslo, took place at the request of the IFPI. The consumer NGOs sent an ultimatum to iTunes on selling DRM-free music. This seems to have an effect. Despite the announcement from EMI and Apple, the European Commission sent to Apple and other four record companies statement of objections, which is the first formal step in an European antitrust investigation. The companies have two months to defend themselves in writing. The EC actions were based not on the DRM debate, but on the different prices the company has pushed in Europe. This follows a complaint by Which? about the fact that UK users of iTunes paid for songs about 1.16 Euro, compared with 0.99 Euro/song, which is the price in other EU member states. The Commission explained that the main problem is that "consumers can only buy music from the iTunes' on-line store in their country of residence. Consumers are thus restricted in their choice of where to buy music, and consequently what music is available, and at what price. The Commission alleges in the Statement of Objections that these agreements violate the EC Treaty's rules prohibiting restrictive business practices (Article 81)." Apple strikes deal with EMI but European regulators are not pacified (3.04.2007) http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=7933 Apple Unveils Higher Quality DRM-Free Music on the iTunes Store (2.04.2007) http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/04/02itunes.html EC goes Apple hunting - reports (3.04.2007) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/03/apple_ec_labels/ Consumer advocates welcome DRM-free music (3.04.2007) http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/87820/from/rss09 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 ============================================================ 2. Monitoring employee's Internet breaches human rights, says ECHR ============================================================ The Welsh Government, through Carmarthenshire College, was found in breach of human rights by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) for having monitored one of the college employee's e-mails, internet traffic and telephone calls. As the College is publicly funded, Lynette Copland sued the government for infringing Art.8 of the European Convention on Human Rights that says "everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence". The government argued that the monitoring was carried out in order to establish whether Copland had extensively used college resources for personal communication, but the court ruled that: "The court is not convinced by the government's submission that the college was authorised under its statutory powers to do 'anything necessary or expedient' for the purposes of providing higher and further education, and finds the argument unpersuasive". Copland claimed that her correspondence had been monitored for about 18 months by the headmaster of the college who even contacted some of the people with whom she had communicated to ask for the nature of their communications. The government admitted the monitoring but stated it had lasted only a few months. The Court ruling was that "According to the court's case-law, telephone calls from business premises are prima facie covered by the notions of 'private life' and 'correspondence' " and that "It follows logically that emails sent from work should be similarly protected under article eight, as should information derived from the monitoring of personal internet usage." "The applicant in the present case had been given no warning that her calls would be liable to monitoring, therefore she had a reasonable expectation as to the privacy of calls made from her work telephone. The same expectation should apply in relation to the applicant's e-mail and internet usage." The college had no policy to inform employees they might be monitored and Copland had received no warning on this. "The ruling is important in that it reinforces the need for a statutory basis for any interference with respect to private use of a telecommunications system by an employee... The lawful business practice regulations [part of RIPA] allow an employer to monitor and intercept business communications, so the Court is implying that private use of a telecommunications system, assuming it is authorised via an acceptable use policy, can be protected." said Dr Chris Pounder, a privacy specialist at Pinsent Masons. The Court awarded Copland 3,000 Euros in damages and 6,000 Euros in costs and expenses. European Court of Human Rights - Copland vs. The United Kingdom (3.04.2007) http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2007/253.html EU court rules monitoring of employee breached human rights (5.04.2007) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/05/monitoring_breached_human_rights/ Court of Human Rights protects the private use of the Internet (4.04.2007) http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/87867 Monitoring of employee breached human rights, says European court (4.04.2007) http://www.out-law.com/page-7936 ============================================================ 3. Bulgarian Police ordered ISPs to block US-based torrent tracker ============================================================ On 16 March 2007 the Bulgarian special forces for combating organized crime ordered the major ISPs to filter the access to and from the web site arenabg.com, a torrent tracker hosted in the US, claiming that it was the source of copyright infringement activities. Only three big ISPs accepted to do so while the others considered the action as illegal. The ordinance was withdrawn by the Police after a few days, following a lot of criticism from lawyers that questioned the legality of such an action. EDRI-member ISOC Bulgaria was the only organization of Internet users to publicly criticize these actions. The police also arrested the owner of the web site who was however released by the court as the police had not given any evidence that "the defendant has caused any copyright infringement". One of the biggest points of the discussion was whether the file sharing and web traffic filtering technologies are legally acceptable. In her article "Technology vs Law", Nelly Ognyanova, lecturer in Media Law at the Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski, considers that "there is no liability for the creation and dissemination of technologies, which have a lawful use. There is a liability for breaking the law." The Bulgarian authorities have placed the equality sign between torrents and piracy, while actually torrents are useful ensuring a fast and efficient communication. The fact that copyrighted files could be transmitted through them does not make them illegal as instruments. The file sharing act is the illegal one not the technology used for that. Ognyanova also thinks the protection of privacy is not less important than the protection of intellectual property and that there must be a proportionality between the limitations of one's rights and the gravity of one supposed acts. She also pointed out that " The Internet providers are the least ones to have a responsibility (for Internet content) if they have any at all. Nevertheless, the Bulgarian providers have been ordered to filter the access to the website arenabg.com, hosted in the United States." The Bulgarian Interior Minister wanted to link the Police acts with the fight against piracy and protection of the copyrighted works. He also claimed that : "Limiting access to websites is unpopular measure in Bulgaria but widely used in Europe." The Commission on Legal Matters of the European Parliament adopted on 20 March 2007 a draft of the IPRED directive, but the "commercial scale infringement", that previously included the IPRs (Intellectual Property Rights) infringements by private users for personal use was excluded. Nelly Ognyanova - Technology vs. Law (30.03.2007) http://blog.veni.com/?p=205 Nelly Ognyanova - A Global Initiative, Suspicious Methods (30.03.2007) http://blog.veni.com/?p=204 Internet Providers in Bulgaria pushed to limit unlicensed content distribution (16.03.2007) http://www.sofiaecho.com/article/internet-providers-in-bulgaria-pushed-to-li... IPRED2 adopted by the EP Legal Affairs committee (28.03.2007) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number5.6/ipred2 ============================================================ 4.CoE to address the impact of technical measures on human rights ============================================================ With its seventh meeting held on 26-27 March 2007 in Strasbourg, the Council of Europe Group of Specialists on Human Rights in the Information Society (CoE MC-S-IS) is pursuing its mandate for another two-years period, as affirmed in its revised terms of reference. There are little changes in the group composition among voting members (member states of the CoE). EDRI remains a non governmental observer to the MC-S-IS group. For 2007, the group elected as chairman Thomas Schneider (Swiss federal office of communications), who, inter alia, has been active in the Swiss delegation to WSIS and then to IGF, and as vice-chairman Michael Truppe, from the Austrian Federal Chancellery. According to its revised terms of reference, directly derived from the Kyiv Action Plan adopted at the 7th European Ministerial Conference on Mass Media Policy (Kyiv, 10-11 March 2005), an important part of the MC-S-IS group mandate in 2007-2008 deals with technical measures and their impact on human rights. On content regulation, the group is asked to analyse "the use and impact of technical filtering measures for various types of content in the online environment, with particular regard to Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and, if appropriate, make concrete proposals". On intellectual property, the mandate is to "prepare a report on emerging issues and trends in respect of, on the one hand, the protection of intellectual property rights and the use of technical protection measures in the context of the development of new communication and information services (and the Internet) and, on the other hand, the fundamental right to freedom of expression and free flow of information, access to knowledge and education, the promoting of research and scientific development and the protection and promotion of the diversity of cultural expressions and artistic creation and, if appropriate, make concrete proposals for further action in this area". The formulation of these terms of reference is encouraging in itself, especially on IP issues in that it states the context and limits within which IPR should be (re?)considered and implemented. This view is in line with the general CoE background of respect for and upholding of human rights. In the same way, first exchanges during the March 2007 meeting of the MC-S-IS group on the technical filtering of content seem promising, as a large majority of participating member states expressed strong doubts on both the usefulness of technical filtering measures and their compatibility with Article 10 of the ECHR. Here again, this is in line with the general profile of the state representatives, most of them coming from a media/justice/human rights rather than technical/business/ industry background. Thus, in principle, CoE and its MC-S-IS group is likely to be a more "human rights friendly" forum than many other regional or international arenas as regards information society regulation. However, when it comes to practical recommendations or guidelines, the CoE and its MC-S-IS group face the risk to fall into the "multistakeholder governance syndrome" on these matters. Be it the influence of WSIS and its follow-up processes, most notably the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), or be it part of the general neoliberal globalization trend affecting almost any international organisation or forum, and characterized, inter alia, by a shift from binding and accountable public policy making and ex-post legislation to a rather opaque, private interests driven, soft law and ex-ante regulation implemented through technical mechanisms, it remains that the respect for human rights and the promotion of the public interest may become rather thetorical in practice. Here lies the crucial role of observers like EDRI on digital rights issues, or others on more "classical" mainstream medias, to only mention those who actively participate in MC-S-IS meetings. Here also lies the importance of participating in such working groups as MC-S- IS, at the very early stages of policy making, to have any chance of successful - though limited - action. Through its experience as an observer to both CoE CAHSI and MC-S-IS groups of specialists since 2005, EDRI, while far from entirely satisfied by the group outcomes, may attest that documents (Recommendations, Declarations or Guidelines) on Human Rights in the Information Society, eventually submitted for adoption to the CoE Committee of Ministers, have successfully been deeply modified from initial draft versions which, in many other fora, would have left little expectations to digital rights defenders. CoE MC-S-IS public website http://www.coe.int/t/e/human_rights/media/1_intergovernmental_co-operation/M... EDRI-gram: Council Of Europe Draft Statement On Human Rights And Internet (20.04.2005) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number3.8/CoE EDRI-gram: EDRI Granted Observer Status In CoE HR Group (29.06.2005) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number3.13/EDRI EDRI-gram: CoE Works On New Instrument On Children Empowerment On The Net (15.03.2006) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.5/coe (Contribution by Meryem Marzouki, EDRI-member IRIS - France) ============================================================ 5. EC suggests new compromise on an EU patent system ============================================================ A new communication was published on 3 April 2007 by the European Commission (EC) on enhancing the patent system in Europe, suggesting new ways of creating a Community patent. The communication supports a compromise between the European Patent Litigation Agreement supported by the European Patent Office and the Commission's Community Patent, with its own courts system. The new integrated EU-wide jurisdictional system for patents combing the two elements is aimed to revitalise the debate on a patent system in Europe, in a way which encourages Member States to work towards consensus and real progress on this issue. "Recent discussions with Member States show polarised positions on patent jurisdiction arrangements with, on the one hand, Member States supporting the draft EPLA in the context of the European Patent Convention, and, on the other hand, Member States favouring the establishment of a specific Community jurisdiction for patent litigation on European and Community patents based on the EC Treaty. Under these circumstances, the Commission believes that consensus could be built on the basis of an integrated approach which combines elements of both EPLA and a Community jurisdiction." There are still two big problems faced by any attempt to harmonise patent law: the costs of translation and the difficulties in setting up a legal framework to deal with litigation. As regards the latter, FFII President Pieter Hintjen says that this proposal is based on flawed assumptions and will make it easier for large US companies to sue small European IT firms. He explains, "The EU is following the US down the risky path of a central patent jurisdiction, when this experiment has failed miserably in the US." New studies to be presented at a conference organised by the FFII in Brussels in May, show that in all industries except pharmaceutics, the US patent system has slowed-down, not promoted, innovation. Based on the stakeholder consultations from last year, the new communication will be promoted by the current German EU presidency and the Portuguese presidency beginning in July that seem very eager to move the issue forward. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council - Enhancing the patent system in Europe (29.03.2007) http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/indprop/docs/patent/strategy_en.pdf Patents: Commission sets out vision for improving patent system in Europe (3.04.2007) http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/07/463&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en Commission bids to salvage EU patent law (4.04.2007) http://www.euractiv.com/en/innovation/commission-bids-salvage-eu-patent-law/... Single EU patent law good for US giants, bad for small EU firms (4.04.2007) http://press.ffii.org/Press_releases/Single_EU_patent_law_good_for_US_giants... European Commission compromise on pan-European patent http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=7940 EDRI-gram: ENDitorial - Regulating the Patent Industry (25.10.2006) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.20/patents ============================================================ 6. France establishes the DRM-regulation authority ============================================================ The independent authority foreseen by the new French law on copyright (DADVSI) was created in the last days of the Villepin government. This Authority for Regulations of the DRMs (Autoriti de rigulation des mesures techniques - ARMT) should ensure the interoperability of the DRM systems and allow the private copies. Even though the law has been in force since August 2006, the official normative act creating the authority was published in the Official Journal only on 4 April 2007 and, a few days later, the Ministry of Culture has officially created the new authority. ARMT will be responsible, according to the DADVSI law, with seeing that the DRM systems do not create additional limitations in the use of artistic works to those explicitly expressed by the copyright holders. ARMT is formed by six members nominated for a 6-year mandate. The first members of the authority are already under scrutiny. Julien Dourgnon from the consumer association UFC-Que Choisir shows that there are significant conflict of interests for some members of the Commission, especially by the nomination of President of the Commission for the private copy levies, Tristan d'Albis. The French Minister of Culture seemed very pleased with the creation of the new authority, even though the debate on interoperability has developed a lot since last year debates. The new decision from EMI and Apple to release DRM-free music for its iTunes service could mean that the new commission will not have too much work on its hands. AMRT should have an essential role in balancing the copyright with consumer rights. It should establish the minimum number of private copies of a work for consumers. The authority can receive complaints from consumers and other target groups of the private copy exception (such as disabled persons or librarians). One of the main actors in the French interoperability debate, UFC-Que Choisir, has contested the way the new commission will work under the adopted copyright law, since the consumers associations do not have the right to complain to the new authority on interoperability issues. Decree no.2007-510 from 4 April 2007 concerning the creation of ARMT (only in French, 6.04.2007) http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/WAspad/UnTexteDeJorf?numjo=MCCB0700270D An arbiter for solving the private copy disputes (only in French, 06.04.2007) http://www.01net.com/article/345814.html The Government didn't really understood anything about Internet (only in French, 6.04.2007) http://www.20minutes.fr/article/150401/20070406-Culture-Le-gouvernement-n-a-... EDRI-gram: New French copyright law gives Apple satisfaction (5.07.2007) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.13/frenchcopyright ============================================================ 7. Free software needs to be considered in Italian public acquisitions ============================================================ Following the case filed by Associazione per il Software Libero (Assoli - Association for Free Software) to the Regional Administrative Tribunal of Lazio-Rome, the Italian Ministry of Work and Social Politics has withdrawn the call for tenders for Microsoft Licences. The Department of Technological Innovation of the Ministry of Work published on 21 February 2006 in the Official Journal of the Italian Republic a call for tenders for the supply of Microsoft licenses in the value of approx. 4 540 000 Euros. Only 11 Italian companies, considered as large Account Resellers by Microsoft were qualified to participate in the tender although the Italian law requires the public administration institutions to compare all acquisition options, including free software. Assoli considers it has won already even before a decision of the court was made as the Ministry of Works has annulled the call. This decision is encouraging Assoli to further act with the goal of promoting free software use in public administration. "In the wake of this achievement, the Associazione is starting two new campaigns with the goal of continuing fight for freedom in information technology: 100 new associates within the 2007 and Assolimprese" said Paolo Didone, president of Assoli. Historic victory of the "Associazione per il Software Libero"! (2.04.2007) http://www.softwarelibero.it/abbiamo_vinto The Ministry retires a call for tenders for proprietary software (only in Italian, 05.04.2007) http://punto-informatico.it/p.aspx?id=1947228 ============================================================ 8. Private copy explained by Court of Appeal in Paris ============================================================ A new decision of the Paris Court of Appeal in the case Mulholland Drive considers that there is no right to the private copy that can forbid the presence of the DRMs, but the private copy can be a good argument for defence in cases of counterfeiting. The case was brought up in 2003 by a consumer joined by the Association UFC-Que Choisir that made a complaint against the producers of the movie Mulholland Drive because the legally acquired DVD was protected by DRMs that did not permit the consumer to make a copy in order to see it on a VHS cassette at his parents' home. The DVD had no clear indication that it could be used only with some specific devices. After a four year legal battle, with ups and downs, the case was returned to the Court of Appeal in Paris that decided on 4 April 2007 that the private copy of a certain work is not a right but "a legal exception to the principle of copying the entire work without the consent of the copyright holder". Therefore a private copy is not a right, but and exception and no one can start a legal action based on an exception. However, the Court of Appeal indicated that this exception can be used as a reasonable defence in the case of alleged counterfeit, if the other legal conditions are fulfilled. The court considered that the lack of the information regarding the impossibility to make a private copy is not an essential feature of such a product, but reminded that the new law in force - DADVSI - would make this information obligatory for any product with DRMs. The decision can be attacked, again, at the Cour de Cassation There is no right to the private copy (only in French, 6.04.2007) http://www.ratiatum.com/news4761_Il_n_existe_pas_de_droit_opposable_a_la_cop... The court confirms the validity of the DVD's anti copying mechanisms (only in French, 5.04.2007) http://www.zdnet.fr/actualites/informatique/0,39040745,39368472,00.htm?xtor=... EDRI-gram: French court forbids DVD copy protection (4.05.2005) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number3.9/DVD ============================================================ 9. Nominations for Big Brother Award Italy 2007 are now open ============================================================ The official start of the call for nominations for the Italian Big Brother Award (BBA) 2007 began on 2 April 2007 and will last until 30 April. In a scenario where privacy is all the time attacked by new technologies and doubtful initiatives to protect our "security", the BBA is meant to highlight the worst offenders of privacy, who often can take advantage of the very minor attention by official media. In the best tradition of the Internet, the BBA is also meant as a way to have fun. Privacy is a serious thing, but having a laugh helps protecting it better. For this reason, during the award ceremony - which will take place in Florence (Italy) at the end of May during the E-Privacy 2007 conference, where there will be some surprises. The BBA procedures are simple: everybody - before 30 April - can send one or more nominations for one or more of the categories of the award. A suitable form is available online. People can also vote via e-mail and voting via anonymous re-mailers is of course possible. the winners will be announced during the award ceremony. In order to avoid undue pressures, nominations can be made in partial or total anonymity, and the names of the jurors will be made public only after the end of voting. The BBA 2007 is made possible thanks to the work of the Winston Smith Project, in collaboration with Privacy International and other organizations. Last, not least, the BBA is also meant to highlight those who strive to defend privacy: it is possible to give a "positive" vote to any person or organization that has worked in this direction. Any information on BBA Italy 2007 should be directed at info@winstonsmith.info BBA 2007 Italy (only in Italian) http://bba.winstonsmith.info/ E-Privacy 2007 conference (only in Italian) http://e-privacy.winstonsmith.info/ Form for nominations (only in Italian) http://bba.winstonsmith.info/nomina.html EDRI-gram: Big Brother Awards Italy 2006 (24.05.2006) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.10/bbaitaly (Contribution by Andrea Glorioso - consultant on digital policies) ============================================================ 10. ENDitorial - About EFF Europe ============================================================ As some of our readers already know, the biggest digital civil rights NGO from the United States has opened this year a new office in Brussels to work with EU policy issues. EFF's new European Affairs Coordinator, Erik Josefsson, was previously the president of the Swedish chapter of Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII.se) and has worked in cooperation with EDRI on various digital rights issues. EDRI welcomes EFF Europe in the European digital rights arena and looks forward for a fruitful collaboration on the important subjects for European policy that are debated. We thought it could be useful for our readers to find more info from the main source about what EFF Europe looks into in the near future. Erik has been kind enough to share with you his thoughts on this : I am still very proud of the rejection of the software patents directive. It set a European precedent both in terms of on-line activism and concrete political outcome. I think I'm one among thousands of people who feel a sense of responsibility for that achievement. And I am quite sure everybody involved felt that they were at the centre of the action, no matter if it was a demonstration in Brussels in 2003 or the naval battle in Strasbourg in 2005. That is what dedicated networked communities do to those who participate: it puts everyone at the centre of change. I am convinced that a network of European NGOs that work together can shape the future of the digital world and concretely influence the outcome of the political process. I will just mention three important issues that EFF Europe is working on right now. Most urgent is IPRED2. The directive has been closely monitored by FFII for more than half a year. EFF joined after Christmas with analysis and distribution of voting lists, and is launching a campaign today to raise awareness before the vote in Plenary on 24 April: www.copycrime.eu The core of the directive is a "one size fits all"-philosophy making all intellectual property infringements on a commercial scale a criminal offence. Regardless if the intellectual property is a vague "sui generis database right" or an unexamined "design right" - this regime risks making normal business and consumer behaviour a crime. Another directive that needs attention is the Audiovisual Media Services Directive. Formerly known as "Television Without Frontiers", much of the debate was only about television and not so much about the extension of television regulations to the Internet. There is a high risk that interactive and user generated Internet-based services like YouTube will be covered by the directive and face serious liability for programming that might "offend against human dignity". Outside the EU, non-democracies employ these kinds of vague edicts to shut down dissidents' use of the Internet. Such tactics should not be legitimized in Europe. Finally, EFF has been working behind the scenes for several years in the Digital Video Broadcasting Project (DVB). DVB is a standard-setting body for broadcasting signals, and it has been developing a very advanced DRM scheme that would restrict consumer behaviour like never before. Consumer electronics devices like televisions and set top boxes that obey the DRM schemes would basically hand over control of the device to content companies and broadcasters. Unless checked, the DRM scheme is anticipated to receive legal protection through tech mandate laws on a national level. This ENDitorial is written on the fly, in between meetings and mail backlogs, so I'd just like to add some words about the EFF Brussels office. It's not only a workspace, but also a place with the purpose to host activists who need a place to stay a night or two. It is not first class, but the sofa is famous, and you should feel free to contact me if you are planning to go to Brussels to meet your MEPs. Finally, I'd just like to encourage as many as possible to support the German initiative Vorratsdatenspeicherung.de and join the demonstration in Frankfurt am Main on 14 April. EFF Europe campaign - IPRED2: Will it Make You a Copy Criminal? http://www.copycrime.eu/ AVMS Directive - EU Commission webpage http://ec.europa.eu/comm/avpolicy/reg/tvwf/modernisation/proposal_2005/index... Who Controls Your Television? How the Digital Video Broadcasting Project's DRM Standards Jeopardize Innovation, Competition, and Consumer Rights (03.2007) http://www.eff.org/IP/DVB/ EFF Europe http://www.eff.org/global/europe/ (Contribution by Erik Josefsson - European Affairs Coordinator - Electronic Frontier Foundation) ============================================================ 11. Recommended Reading ============================================================ Opinion of the EDPS: Making the Treaty of Pr|m applicable to the whole EU requires a proper general data protection framework (4.04.2007) http://www.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/site/mySite/shared/Documents/Consul... Press realease (11.04.2007) http://www.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/site/mySite/shared/Documents/EDPS/P... ============================================================ 12. Agenda ============================================================ 11-13 April 2007, Berlin, Germany re:publica 2007 - Leben im Netz http://www.re-publica.de 14 April 2007, Frankfurt/Main, Germany Demonstration "Freiheit statt Angst" (Freedom instead of Fear) against growing surveillance, organized by the Working Group against Data Retention and supported by EDRi-Members CCC, FIFF, FITUG, FOEBUD, NNM, and others. Start: Main Station, End: Paulskirche http://www.freiheitstattangst.de/ 19 April 2008, Brussels, Belgium Should there be an EU Freedom of Information Act? http://www.statewatch.org/news/2007/mar/eu-foi-seminar-brussels.pdf 23-24 April 2007, Strasbourg, France Council of Europe Symposium on e-democracy http://www.coe.int/t/e/integrated_projects/democracy/ 27-29 April 2007, Yale Law School, USA Access To Knowledge Conference (A2K2), Information Society Project http://research.yale.edu/isp/eventsa2k2.html 1-4 May 2007, Montreal, Canada 7th Conference on Computers, Freedom, and Privacy (CFP2007) http://www.cfp2007.org/live/ 15-16 May 2007, Brussels, Belgium The European Patent Conference - EUROPACO-2 http://www.eupaco.org/eupaco2 18 May 2007, Oxford, UK Global Internet Filtering Conference 2007 The OpenNet Initiative is holding its first public conference to discuss the current state of play of Internet filtering worldwide. http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/oniconference07/Main_Page 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/ 11-15 June 2007, Geneva, Switzerland Provisional Committee on Proposals Related to a WIPO Development Agenda: Fourth Session http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/details.jsp?meeting_id=11927 14 June 2007, Paris, France ENISA/EEMA European eIdentity conference - Next Generation Electronic Identity - eID beyond PKI http://enisa.europa.eu/pages/eID/eID_ws2007.htm 15-17 June 2007, Dubrovnik, Croatia Creative Commons iSummit 2007 http://wiki.icommons.org/index.php/ISummit_2007 17-22 June 2007 Seville, Spain 19th Annual FIRST Conference, "Private Lives and Corporate Risk" http://www.first.org/conference/2007/ 18-22 June 2007, Geneva, Switzerland Second Special Session of the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/details.jsp?meeting_id=12744 ============================================================ 13. 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 http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE