============================================================ EDRi-gram biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe Number 9.6, 23 March 2011 ============================================================ Contents ============================================================ 1. French DPA fines Google for its Street View case with 100k Euro 2. The Privacy Platform Meeting: Reding outlines the way forward 3. French ISPs explain why blocking is wrong 4. Belgian political parties suspend plans for IPR enforcement measures 5. Net Neutrality debate kicks off in UK as ISPs propose transparency code 6. Ireland: Police seek internet blocking from ISPs 7. Using new Internet tools to identify dissidents in Azerbaijan 8. Romania: draft legislation proposing website blocking 9. Loppsi 2 bill passes the French Constitutional Council test 10. Dutch court rules that WiFi hacking is legal 11. Privatised online enforcement series: A. Abandonment of the rule of law 12. Recommended Reading 13. Agenda 14. About ============================================================ 1. French DPA fines Google for its Street View case with 100k Euro ============================================================ CNIL (the French DPA - Data Protection Authority) has recently performed a series of inspections related to the conformity with the French legislation of Google's gathering data from Wi-Fi networks for its Google Maps, Street View and Latitude services on France's territory. The inspections have revealed several infringements of the law, including the collection, through Google's Street View service cars, of WiFi data without the knowledge of the data subjects and of content-related data such as IDs, login details, emails and passwords. In May 2010, CNIL formally notified Google of the infringements and, as the company had not officially replied, on 17 March 2011, issued a 100 000 Euro fine on the company, the highest fine CNIL has applied since it received, in 2004, the power to impose financial sanctions. According to Google, the collection of the respective data was involuntary and a mistake. "As soon as we realised what was going on, we have immediately stopped our Street View cars" said Peter Fleischer, Google's Global Privacy Counsel, who added that all the collected data can now be deleted. CNIL confirmed that Google stopped collecting Wi-Fi data through its "Google cars" and deleted the collected data. However, the DPA believes that the company has not refrained from using the data without the knowledge of the data subjects and, moreover, has continued to gather such kind of data, without informing the data subjects, through users' mobile terminals connecting to the geo-location service, Latitude (smartphones, etc.). "They were not always willing to co-operate with us, they didn't give us all the information we asked for, like the source code of all devices in the Google cars," said Yann Padova, CNIL's executive director who added: "They were not always very transparent." Google may appeal the fine in two months time. Google Street View: CNIL pronounces a fine of 100,000 Euros (21.03.2011) http://www.cnil.fr/english/news-and-events/news/article/google-street-view-c... Cnil sanctions the blunder of +Google cars; (only in French, 21.03.2011) http://www.lefigaro.fr/hightech/2011/03/21/01007-20110321ARTFIG00601-la-cnil... France fines Google over Street View data blunder (21.03.2011) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12809076 EDRi-gram: Google admits it was gathering passwords and emails via StreetView (3.09.2010) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number8.21/street-view-collects-emails ============================================================ 2. The Privacy Platform Meeting: Reding outlines the way forward ============================================================ On 16 March 2011, Sophie In't Veld's Privacy Platform met in the European Parliament to discuss the state of play for the review of the data protection directive. The cross-party meeting was co-chaired by EU Parliament members from the EPP, S&D, ALDE, the Greens and GUE. Speakers at the event included Vice-President of the Commission responsible for justice, fundamental rights and citizenship Viviane Reding and Axel Voss, German EPP member responsible for the Communication on a comprehensive approach to data protection in the EU in the European Parliament. Like most meetings which aim to tackle this massive Directive, it was difficult to narrow discussions and focus on concrete problems or possible solutions. However, there was an emphasis on fundamental rights from many speakers. In her keynote speech, Ms. Reding said that data protection was her "top legislative priority", while still hinting at the idea that a Regulation could replace the existing Directive, at least in part. She plans to enhance control and build individual rights in four pillars: 1. The right to be forgotten. Individuals have the right to withdraw consent to data processing, and it will be up to the data controllers to prove the need to collect or retain personal data. 2. Greater transparency. For data subjects, the use, collection and retention of personal data must be made clear, intelligible, easy to understand and easy to find. She made particular reference to social networking services and children. 3. Privacy by default. The term is different from the vaguely defined but often cited Privacy by Design, which Reding says is more of a technical solution. "Privacy settings often require considerable operational effort in order to be put in place," she said, so these settings are not a reliable indication of true consent, adding that "this needs to be changed". 4. Data protection regardless of data location. The data subject will enjoy protection, independent of the geographical region where the data is being collected and processed, without exception for third-party providers. On enforcement, she cautioned that the EU would not hesitate to take action against non-EU companies that broke EU rules on the collection and retention of data. She proposed the establishment of national privacy watchdogs to investigate non-EU data controllers. She declared that "a US-based social network company that has millions of active users in Europe needs to comply with EU rules". Mr. Voss and Commissioner Reding seemed to have divergent views on data protection. Where Commissioner Reding understands these rights as fundamental principles each human being is granted under all circumstances, Voss often questions how far data protection laws should stretch. This was particularly apparent when discussing data protection for criminals and anonymity and pseudonymity on the web. Ms. In't Veld brought up the "rubber stamping" of consent, urging that the revised Directive should address this adequately. Commissioner Reding agreed that consent without choice cannot be considered "consent". Ensuring true transparency and choice, she explained, is one of the components of Privacy by Default. A Dutch Pirate from the audience asked the panel how it planed to realistically protect the data of EU citizens regardless of geographical location, citing the request by the US authorities to access the Twitter data of individuals who may be linked to Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks. Ms. In't Veld said there would soon be a meeting in the LIBE Committee to address this issue explicitly. Mr. Voss' working document will be published and presented in the committee on 11 April. The vote in the committee will follow on 24 or 25 May, and the plenary vote on 22 June 2011. In advance of this, the EPP Group in the European Parliament will hold a hearing on 31 March - the invitation explains that "nowadays, the debate seems to be narrowly focussed on the perspective of consumer protection and the safeguarding of a free internet. We think there is more to discuss!" As for the finalised version of the Data Protection Directive, the Commission plans to deliver it sometime in summer of 2011. EU privacy law will extend to US social networks, vows Commissioner (17.03.2011) http://www.out-law.com//default.aspx?page=11824 Commissioner Reding's keynote speech, Your data, your rights: safeguarding your rights in a connected world (16.03.2011) http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=SPEECH/11/183&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en EPP Hearing invitation http://www.edri.org/files/epp_hearing.pdf (contribution by Raegan MacDonald - EDRi) ============================================================ 3. French ISPs explain why blocking is wrong ============================================================ The French ISPs are being brought to court by ARJEL (the French online gambling regulation authority) in its attempt to obtain the blocking of access to the foreign online betting site 5Dimes. On 17 March 2011, the court heard seven French ISPs - Orange, SFR, Numericable, Free, Bouygues Telecom, Darty Telecom and Auchan Telecom - who resisted Arjel's request to block the online gambling site. Arjel was created in 2010 and given the authority to require ISPs to block access to online betting sites alleged infringements of various regulatory and fiscal obligations. However, ISPs are reluctant to answer the authority's request to block 5Dimes, arguing that blocking measures are inefficient. Furthermore, ISPs do not wish to create a dangerous precedent by blocking a site only at the request of Arjel without a judge's decision. 5Dimes, as well as its hosting company, Costa-Rica based Instituto Costarricense de Electricidad y Telecom (ICE), have only recently answered the requests of the authority to apply technical measures to block access to French users. During the hearing at the High Court, the operators criticised Arjel's system and pointed out the inefficiency of the measures by giving the example of Aaargh site which, "continues to be accessible under 12 or 13 addresses", although in 2005, the High Court of Paris ordered its blocking, a ruling supported in appeal by the decision of the Cassation Court. The ISPs also complained about the extremely high penalty requested by Arjel for non-compliance to its requests - 100 000 Euro/day. In their opinion, the authority should first act against the ICE that hosts 5Dimes. For Arjel however, website blocking at the level of ISPs is the easier solution in the case of a site hosted outside the country. Indeed, the ICE announced a day before the ISPs hearing, that, in order to block access to 5Dimes for French users, it would need a decision from a French court. ISPs criticize the efficiency of the blocking of online betting sites (only in French, 18.03.2011) http://www.numerama.com/magazine/18324-les-fai-critiquent-l-efficacite-du-bl... Online betting: the operators resists the blocking requests (only in French, 18.03.2011) http://www.freenews.fr/spip.php?article9977 The Telecom operators rearing against the filtering of the illegal sports betting sites (only in French, 17.03.2011) http://www.latribune.fr/technos-medias/medias/20110317trib000608945/les-oper... ============================================================ 4. Belgian political parties suspend plans for IPR enforcement measures ============================================================ Following a reported flood of calls and e-mails to the parliamentarians involved, a campaign by the digital rights group Belgian Net Users' Rights Protection Association (NURPA) and a series of meetings between the Belgian political parties and ISPA Belgium, the two main parties supporting restrictive solutions for intellectual property enforcement for Belgium have decided to suspend their efforts. Both the Mouvement Reformateur (MR) and Socialist Party (PS) have decided - albeit for an unspecified period - to remove their initiatives from the parliamentary calendar. The MR is proposing Hadopi-like measures while the PS strategy has been to abandon the rule of law and force Internet service providers to block internet websites. The MR and PS now appear to have reached the conclusion that a more defensible methodology will be to organise a comprehensive review of all of the issues at stake, including the issue of lack of access to legal content in the right format and price. This is now seen as preferable to focus solely on repression, in an environment where large sections of the population see the legal framework as illegitimate. The increasing reticence of Belgian politicians on this point may not be hugely surprising. The initial push came from the outlandish promises made for HADOPI in France which seduced politicians into believing that this blunt approach might actually work. In January the Union of Independent French Phonographic Producers issued a statement that HADOPI had no perceptible impact on the French market - with market figures exactly in line with comparable European economies where draconian, repressive measures were not imposed. It is hardly surprising, therefore, that Belgian politicians are increasingly reticent to launch a policy which has no perceptible advantages for anyone and which causes such damage to both fundamental rights and to the perceived legitimacy of the legal framework for intellectual property. The next stages of the process are not yet clear, as it will be heavily influenced by political developments in the world-record breaking attempts to form a government. The entire political process in Belgium is struggling to cope with ongoing political impasse, with two failed elections already and a third one likely to strike the country any time over the next few months. Music: Independant producers want to debate the support measures (only in French, 18.01.2011) http://www.leparisien.fr/flash-actualite-culture/musique-les-producteurs-ind... Belgian Net Users' Rights Protection Association http://www.nurpa.be ISPA Belgium http://www.ispa.be EDRi-gram: Four strikes law returns to Belgium (9.03.2011) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number9.5/belgium-four-strikes-law-returns (Contribution by Joe McNamee - EDRi) ============================================================ 5. Net Neutrality debate kicks off in UK as ISPs propose transparency code ============================================================ Minister Ed Vaizey met with Internet service providers, Internet platforms and citizen groups including the EDRi-member Open Rights Group on 16 March 2011 to discuss network discrimination. The positive outcome is that Tim Berners-Lee, who was at the meeting, will work with the ISPs "Broadband Stakeholders Group" on their new code. The ISPs themselves however did not feel any need to limit their ability to engage in network discrimination, arguing that market forces would prevent any serious problems from emerging. Others emphasised the difficulty in switching services which would limit the ability of the market to correct itself, and that mobile broadband suffered severe problems with little sign that anti-competitive behaviour was about to change. Ed Vaizey's Net neutrality roundtable with Tim Berners Lee (16.03.2011) http://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2011/ed-vaizey%E2%80%99s-net-neutrality-... (Contribution by Jim Killock -EDRi member Open Rights Group - UK) ============================================================ 6. Ireland: Police seek internet blocking from ISPs ============================================================ A leaked letter from the Irish police force to ISPs has revealed demands that Irish ISPs should implement internet blocking. The letter - dated December 2010 but made publicly available only now - shows that Irish police have requested ISPs to implement a system of blocking with no legislative basis or judicial oversight, in which sites alleged to contain child pornography will be designated by the police. In a particularly worrying development, the letter also reveals police demands that the proposed system should be used as a surveillance tool, so that the police "would obtain details of other sites visited by the user, along with other technical details, in order that [they] can identify any new websites that require blocking". Irish ISPs have been critical of this initiative and see it as an attempt to bypass industry bodies such as the ISPAI by putting pressure directly on individual ISPs: "ISPs are concerned that this is a unilateral action by Garda with no legislative basis. At least one ISP has told the Garda that negotiation about the system should be done with a representative body such as telecoms group Alternative Operators in the Communications Market (Alto) or the Internet Service Providers Association of Ireland rather than dealing with individual service providers." Digital Rights Ireland has also criticised the move as promoting a failed model of blocking which has been shown by experience elsewhere to be ineffective, while at the same time acting as a distraction from attempts to remove material at source. It has also argued that any attempt to introduce such a model in Ireland would require - at a minimum - primary legislation and judicial oversight. Garda bid to block sites raises concerns (18.03.2011) http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2011/0318/1224292505133.html Leaked letter from Gardai (police) to Irish ISPs (28.12.2010) http://www.scribd.com/doc/51018185/Garda-Letter-to-ISPs-Requesting-Blocking EDRi-gram: Internet blocking plans in Ireland (21.04.2010) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number8.8/internet-blocking-ireland-plans (Contribution by TJ McIntyre EDRi-member Digital Rights Ireland) ============================================================ 7. Using new Internet tools to identify dissidents in Azerbaijan ============================================================ As freedom activists have increased their activity on Facebook, the Azeri government has also increased its attention and surveillance of social networks. According to Azadliq newspaper, for instance, in June 2010, pro-government youth were encouraged to join Facebook with the purpose to expose those with online links to contacts in "enemy" nations. According to the international hacking group Anonymous, Virginia-based consulting company Booz Allen Hamilton is developing software that is used against dissidents in several countries, including Azerbaijan. The group, which claims it holds documents and e-mails to prove its allegations, states the respective software, which has led to the arrest of pro-democracy dissidents in Azerbaijan, creates "armies of fake people" through social networks like Facebook, identifying dissidents with anonymous profiles. "We know the U.S. Air Force and the Pentagon asked for it, we do know that Booz Allen and Aaron Barr (of HBGary) bid for the contract, we've got confirmation from Booz Allen themselves that the software exists" stated one member of Anonymous. The software has at its basis a proposal from the Office of Air Mobility Command of the U.S. Air Force, asking for 50 user licenses for software that would allow 10 personas per user. The US Central Command (Centcom), which oversees US armed operations in the Middle East and Central Asia, has contracted such software. The contract stipulates that each fake online persona must have a convincing background, history and supporting details, and that the 50 US-based controllers should be able to operate false identities from their workstations "without fear of being discovered by sophisticated adversaries". "The technology supports classified blogging activities on foreign-language websites to enable Centcom to counter violent extremist and enemy propaganda outside the US," stated Centcom spokesman Commander Bill Speaks who added that the interventions would not be in English but in Arabic, Farsi, Urdu and Pashto. Further, the project was not targeting any US-based web sites, in English or any other language, and most specifically, was not targeting Facebook or Twitter. Whether Anonymous' allegations related to software used to track down dissidents in various countries is true or not, the fact that the US military is developing false online personalities is extremely disturbing and could create a dangerous precedent. Other governments, private companies and non-government organisations might wish to do the same. And, while in the US persona management is illegal, there are other countries where such procedures might not be forbidden by the law. Azerbaijan: Anonymous says Big Brother might be watching you (19.03.2011) http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/2011/03/19/azerbaijan-anonymous-says-... Anonymous To Release Documents Showing 'Virtual Armies' Used To Identify Dissidents (16.03.2011) http://blogs.forbes.com/parmyolson/2011/03/16/anonymous-to-release-documents... Revealed: US spy operation that manipulates social media (17.03.2011) http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-net... ============================================================ 8. Romania: draft legislation proposing website blocking ============================================================ Some ministries in the Romanian government seem to ignore or not even consider the arguments against Internet blocking, as they are proposing new legislation meant to allow enforcement authorities to impose blocking obligations on Internet service providers. One draft law initiated by the Government and currently debated within the Parliament is aimed at reviewing the existing legislation on pornography. While the law in force stipulates that the persons creating pornographic websites may allow access to these websites only after users pay "a tax per minute of usage" (while in reality there is no such a tax foreseen by fiscal authorities), the draft law introduces new obligations: a warning regarding the content must be placed on the website's home page or a verification of the age of the potential users. The draft law gives the competent authority (the Ministry of Communications and Information Society) the mandate to control the enforcement of the obligations imposed by law, and, in case of non-compliance, to require service providers to block access to the websites or content for a period of up to 30 days. Providers would have to implement the blocking measure within two days following the request of the authority. The Ministry that initiated the project did not reply to any comments on the draft law and refused to take into consideration the only implementation of the law in force, when in December 2008, ISPs were asked to block 40 allegedly illegal websites. The blocking order was sent to only 5-6 ISPs out of the almost 1000 on the market, where the authority implementing the law by claiming that they had already covered 90% of the Internet access market. Besides the fact that the idea of a tax per minute of usage is practically irrelevant for any Internet service, the draft law contains many other flaws. Firstly, it is not clear to what type of service providers the blocking obligation would apply to, since there are many similar terms used in the law: "service providers as defined by the Romanian law on electronic commerce" (i.e. information society service providers), "providers of services for Internet", "service provider". Secondly, although the competent authority is able to request providers to block access to websites or to content, sanctions would be imposed only if they do not comply with the request to block access to websites. Thirdly, there is a provision according to which service providers would be held responsible if they offer links to pornographic websites. This provision is not only confusing, since it does not specify the type of service providers it refers to, but also redundant since a similar provision already exists in the E-commerce law. The "web blocking solution" is also included in another draft law, a Governmental decision regarding the organisation and operation of gambling websites. According to this draft decision, the competent bodies would be able to require Internet providers to block websites identified as being used to provide access to unlicensed gambling sites or to market activities regarding gambling sites or related activities and services that are not authorized under Romanian law. However the law does not provide any obligation (or sanction) for the ISPs to comply with that decision. This draft decision, which was never discussed with the ISPs, is only a secondary legislation that should only implement a law (OUG 77/2009), which, again, does not foresee blocking as a possible measure or any obligations for ISPs. What the two draft legal acts have in common is a misunderstanding while the Internet industry and human rights organisations were never consulted on the matter- that website blocking is either the only, or the most efficient solution for dealing with problems related to the illegal activities undertaken via websites. The measure to block websites is even more ludicrous when Romania has no legal or practical system in place for blocking illegal content (i.e. child pornography) and the Ministry of Justice representatives rejected this measure in the European Council. However the measure could be adopted for legal, but harmful content (such as pornography). Websites blocking measures to be adopted in Romania (only in Romanian,18.03.2011) http://www.apti.ro/blocare-site-uri-web EDRi-gram: Romanian Authority asks ISPs to block 40 pornographic websites (17.12.2008) http://www.edri.org/edri-gram/number6.24/anc-blocks-isp-pornography-romania Stop(ped) web blocking (14.02.2011) http://www.edri.org/stop_web_blocking (Contribution by Sorina Teleanu - EDRi-member ApTI - Romania) ============================================================ 9. Loppsi 2 bill passes the French Constitutional Council test ============================================================ On 10 March 2011, the French Constitutional Council issued its decision on the LOPPSI 2 law considering 13 of its articles as unconstitutional but ruling that the controversial article 4, allowing the censoring of the Internet under the pretext of fighting child pornography, was not in contradiction with the Constitution. The court failed to protect freedom of expression by not striking out the infamous article 4 presented in the noble light of the fight against online child pornography: "This decision about article 4 is a great disappointment. It is obvious that Internet censorship will not help solve the child pornography problem in any way, as experiments in other countries have shown. After HADOPI's Internet access suspension measures, calls to ban WikiLeaks hosting and recent talks against Net Neutrality, France is siding ever more within the group of countries hostile to a free Internet by adopting administrative filtering of the Internet", stated Jirimie Zimmermann, co-founder and spokesperson for La Quadrature du Net. According to Filix Triguer, policy and legal analyst of La Quadrature du Net, the hope now lies in the hands of the European institutions. "The EU Parliament is currently trying to supervise blocking measures adopted at the national level, which could impede their implementation in France. Moreover, administrative Net filtering seems contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights, and one can expect an appeal before European judges" Having in view the censoring legislation it has lately adopted, such as Hadopi and Loppsi 2 laws which introduce Internet blocking and excessive surveillance measures, France has found its place on the list of countries with a high level of surveillance, as determined by Reporters without Borders. The Loppsi 2 law was promulgated by the French President and published in the Official Journal on 15 March 2011. Loppsi 2 promulgated (only in French, 15.03.2011) http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2011/03/15/97001-20110315FILWWW00311-loise... Decision no. 2011-625 DC of the Constitutional Council on the Law of orientation and programming for the interior security performance (only in French, 10.03.2011) http://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/conseil-constitutionnel/francais/les-d... Text of the Loppsi 2 (only in French, 15.03.2011) http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000023707312&fastPos=1&fastReqId=1447818568&categorieLien=id&oldAction=rechTexte French Constitutional Council Validates Internet Censorship (11.03.2011) http://www.laquadrature.net/en/french-constitutional-council-validates-inter... France the enemy of the Internet? No, but a country to survey according to RSF (only in France, 14.03.2011) http://www.zdnet.fr/actualites/la-france-ennemie-d-internet-non-mais-pays-a-... World day against cyber-censorship (12.03.2011) http://march12.rsf.org/en/ France: Loppsi 2 adopted - Internet filtering without court order (23.02.2011) http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number9.4/web-blocking-adopted-france-loppsi-2 ============================================================ 10. Dutch court rules that WiFi hacking is legal ============================================================ A Dutch court in The Hague has recently ruled that by-passing an encrypted router and using its WiFi connection does not infringe Dutch law. The decision of the court comes in relation to the case of a young man having posted a threat on an Internet message board by using a WiFi connection he had hacked into. Although the student was convicted for posting the threatening message and sentenced to 20 hours of community service, he was acquitted of the WiFi hacking charges. The court considered that the student had not obtained access to the computer connected to the router, but only used the router which, in the terms of Dutch legislation, is legal as only breaking into a computer is forbidden. In The Netherlands, a computer is defined as a machine that is used for data storage, processing and transmission. Therefore, a router cannot be considered a computer because it is only used for data transferring or processing and not storing. Hence, hacking a device that is not a computer is legal and cannot be prosecuted in the court of law.. Therefore, actions such as piggybacking on open Wi-Fi networks in places such as bars and hotels, which in some countries is considered illegal and can be fined, cannot, according to the Dutch court decision, be prosecuted in The Netherlands. The Dutch Attorney General has appealed the verdict and the High Court of The Netherlands will review the case within two years to rule on whether a router can be defined as a computer under Dutch law. It is also possible that the law might be updated in the meantime. Dutch Court Rules WiFi Hacking Is Now Legal (19.03.2011) http://www.pcworld.com/article/222589/dutch_court_rules_wifi_hacking_is_now_... Judge: wifi hacking network of neighbors may be done (only in Dutch, 14.03.2011) http://webwereld.nl/nieuws/106024/rechter--wifi-netwerk-van-de-buren-hacken-... ============================================================ 11. Privatised online enforcement series: A. Abandonment of the rule of law ============================================================ This is the first in a series of articles looking at the development of processes for cajoling, obliging or coercing online economic operators to police the Internet. This first article examines the scale of this trend. Most western democracies either actively or passively recognise that they are based on the "rule of law" and protection of fundamental rights is normally provided within this framework. In the EU, for example, the rule of law is affirmed four times in the Treaty on European Union. It is "confirmed" in the preamble of the Treaty and restated in Article 6. The EU also places an obligation on itself to contribute to the objective of consolidating "democracy and the rule of law" in its development policy (Article 177) and common foreign and security policy (Article 11). Furthermore, the European Convention on Fundamental Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights place obligations on EU Member States and on the Commission (ratification of the ECHR is pending) that restrictions to freedoms must be based on law. The 2003 Interinstitutional Agreement on better lawmaking which was agreed between the Commission, Parliament and Council further requires in Article 17 that self-regulation must respect criteria of representativeness of the parties involved and "will not be applicable where fundamental rights or important political options are at stake". All of these obligations have not prevented the European Commission from: - Launching a "dialogue" with industry on filesharing, which included proposals from the European Commission on "voluntary" mass filtering of networks by ISPs; - Launching a "dialogue" with industry on "voluntary" deletion of websites accused of containing unlawful material (unless the Internet provider is convinced the site is legal); - Launching a dialogue on punishments to be meted out by online trading platforms against traders accused of counterfeiting; - Launching a funding proposal for "self-regulatory" blocking of websites accused of containing illegal content; - Agreeing on a text promoting online policing of copyright by Internet providers in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement; - Launching a dialogue with the US Federal Bureau of Investigations on "voluntary" deletion of websites and removal of IP address from ISPs abroad; - Promoting a reduction in privacy in favour of intellectual property rights in the Commission Communication on enforcement of intellectual property rights; - Agreeing on a global filtering of mobile Internet access with European GSM Operators, in the absence of an identified problem and, in the three years since the agreement was reached, any assessment of its impact; - Agreeing on a text in the EU/Korea Free Trade Agreement which risks removing core aspects of ISP liability safe harbours, increasing the liklihood of ISPs feeling the need to take pre-emptive punitive measures against consumers suspected of illegal activity; - Financially supporting an initiative to block funding to websites accused of illegal activity (the model used by Mastercard to block funding to Wikileaks and by Visa to block funding to websites accused of facilitating copyright infringement). In addition, there are other projects elsewhere in the world and globally, such as the US-led "trans-pacific partnership" and the OECD project on the role of ISPs in achieving public policy objectives. In the next instalment of this series, we will look at some case studies of existing privatised enforcement measures to assess the dangers of these projects. 2003 Interinstitutional Agreement: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2003:321:0001:000... Treaty on European Union: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2006:321E:0001:03... European Convention on Human Rights: http://www.hri.org/docs/ECHR50.html Charter of Fundamental Rights: http://www.hri.org/docs/ECHR50.html Dialogue on dissemination of illegal online content: http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number8.15/edri-euroispa-notice-takedown-comiss... Filesharing project: http://www.euractiv.com/en/infosociety/eu-secret-talks-illegal-downloads-new... ACTA consolidated text: http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/economy/i_property/acta_consolidated_text_10100... Commission funding proposal: http://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/funding/isec/call_10132/tc2_call_2010_en.pd... IPR Enforcement Directive Communication: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52010DC0779:EN:N... Mobile blocking of allegedly illegal content: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/sip/events/forum/forum_ju... OECD project on ISPs and public policy objectives: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/8/59/45997042.pdf Charter of fundamental rights: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf EDRi study on "self-regulation": http://www.edri.org/files/EDRI_selfreg_final_20110124.pdf Trans-pacific partnership: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/03/son-of-acta-meet-the-next-se... OECD project: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/8/59/45997042.pdf Blocking of payments: http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/09/342 EU/Korea Free Trade Agreement: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=443 (Contributon by Joe McNamee - EDRi) ============================================================ 12. Recommended Reading ============================================================ Media Piracy in Emerging Economies is the first independent, large-scale study of music, film and software piracy in emerging economies, with a focus on Brazil, India, Russia, South Africa, Mexico and Bolivia. http://piracy.ssrc.org/about-the-report/ German statistics prove telecommunications data retention superfluous (21.03.2011) http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/content/view/435/79/lang,en/ ============================================================ 13. Agenda ============================================================ 27-29 March 2011, Ghent, Belgium Online content: policy and regulation for a global market http://www.eurocpr.org/ 28 March 2011, Paris, France 5th European eAccessbility Forum: Benefits and costs of e-accessibility http://inova.snv.jussieu.fr/evenements/colloques/colloques/70_index_en.html 1 April 2011, Bielefeld, Germany Big Brother Awards Germany http://www.bigbrotherawards.de/index_html-en 7-8 April 2011, Amsterdam, Netherlands European Legal Network Conference "Free Software law for the next ten years" http://fsfe.org/projects/ftf/legal-conference.en.html 15-17 April 2011, Berlin, Germany Re:publica XI: Conference about blogs, social media and the digital society http://re-publica.de/11/en/ 5-6 May 2011, Milano, Italy The European Thematic Network on Legal Aspects of Public Sector Information - public conference http://www.lapsi-project.eu/milan 17-18 May 2011, Berlin Germany European Data Protection Reform & International Data Protection Compliance http://www.edpd-conference.com 30-31 May 2011, Belgrade, Serbia Pan-European dialogue on Internet governance (EuroDIG) http://www.eurodig.org/ 2-3 June 2011, Krakow, Poland 4th International Conference on Multimedia, Communication, Services and Security organized by AGH in the scope of and under the auspices of INDECT project http://mcss2011.indect-project.eu/ 12-15 June 2011, Bled, Slovenia 24th Bled eConference, eFuture: Creating Solutions for the Individual, Organisations and Society http://www.bledconference.org/index.php/eConference/2011 14-16 June 2011, Washington DC, USA CFP 2011 - Computers, Freedom & Privacy "The Future is Now" http://www.cfp.org/2011/wiki/index.php/Main_Page 11-12 July 2011, Barcelona, Spain 7th International Conference on Internet, Law & Politics (IDP 2011): Net Neutrality and other challenges for the future of the Internet http://edcp.uoc.edu/symposia/lang/en/idp2011/?lang=en ============================================================ 14. About ============================================================ EDRi-gram is a biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe. Currently EDRi has 29 members based or with offices in 18 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