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
participants (1)
-
EDRI-gram newsletter