EDRI-gram newsletter - Number 4.10, 24 May 2006

[EDRI-gram newsletter]

============================================================

            EDRI-gram

 biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe

    Number 4.10, 24 May 2006

============================================================
Contents
============================================================

1. Draft Audiovisual Media Services Directive under criticism
2. Data Retention faces growing opposition in Germany
3. Set up of the Internet Governance Forum Advisory Group
4. French draft copyright law continues to be criticised
5. German Constitutional Court has outlawed preventive data screening
6. UK Government asks for the encryption keys
7. Big Brother Awards Italy 2006
8. Application of the FOI law in Macedonia
9. PM supports rejected UK ID Cards Act
10. Recommended reading
11. Agenda
12. About

============================================================
1. Draft Audiovisual Media Services Directive under criticism
============================================================

The European Commission proposal to regulate commercial audio and video
broadcasts over the Internet and mobile phones, continues to be strongly
opposed by the supporters of free speech, but also tranditional and new
media providers.

At the meeting of Education, Youth and Culture Council in Brussels (18-19
May 2006) the proposal for a directive amending the Directive on the pursuit
of television broadcasting activities was discussed . The debate covered, in
particular, the following issues in relation with the proposed directive:
the appropriateness and the sustainability of the distinction between linear
and non-linear services; the common rules applying to both categories of
services; the extent of the modernization and simplification of the
television advertising and teleshopping rules.

The draft Audiovisual Media Services Directive - a revision of the 1989
Television without Frontiers Directive - introduces the notion of
audiovisual media services and distinguishes between "linear" services (e.g.
scheduled broadcasting via traditional TV, the internet or mobile phones,
which "push" content to viewers) and "non-linear" services (such as
video-on-demand, which the viewer "pulls" from a network). Only a basic tier
of rules would apply to non-linear services. This draft has already met
oppositions and criticism at the beginning of this year being considered as
unacceptable.

Traditional media as well as new media and technology providers opposed the
directive considering, among other things, that it would shortly be obsolete
due to the fast development of technology, that it discourages innovation
and that it creates a distinction between linear and non-linear broadcasting
when in reality this distinction is more and more blurred by the
technological development.

At the press conference on 18 May, Viviane Reding, EU commissioner for
Information Society and Media, had to answer accusations of censorship
related to the Directive. The Commissioner stated that the directive had
"nothing to do with free speech" and aimed at protecting children and that
the new rules were meant to protect "basic societal values".

Mrs. Reding considers the rules are only intended to apply to commercial
content and that the application of Audiovisual Media Services Directive has
as purpose to prevent certain programmes from being shown to
children. The idea would be to harmonise rules across the whole European
Union so that programme makers don't face bureaucracy every time they try
and sell their products to another member country.

EU regulation attacked as censorship (19.05.2006)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/19/eu_censorship/

EU Internet proposals to protect society (18.05.2006)
http://go.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=internetNews&storyID=12258324

2729th Education, Youth and Culture Council meeting - Brussels, 18-19 May
2006 (provisional version) (18.05.2006)
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/cms3_applications/Applications/newsRoom/LoadDo
cument.asp?directory=en/educ/&filename=89661.pdf

The Television without Frontiers Directive: another "directive too far"?
(5.05.2006)
http://www.it-analysis.com/business/content.php?cid=8476

Legislative Proposal for an Audiovisual Media Services Directive
(13.12.2005)
http://ec.europa.eu/comm/avpolicy/docs/reg/modernisation/proposal_2005/com200
5-646-final-en.pdf

Debates on draft directive on Television without Frontiers Directive
(2.02.2006)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.2/twfdirective

============================================================
2. Data Retention faces growing opposition in Germany
============================================================

The EU directive on mandatory retention of communications traffic data
went into force as an EU law on 3 May 2006, but its transposition into
national laws seems more uncertain than before. 16 of the 25 member states
of the EU have declared that they will delay the retention of Internet
traffic data for an additional period of 18 months. The recent NSA scandal
in the United States also clarified the dangers of access to the data by
intelligence agencies and led a number of civil liberties groups, among
which EDRi member Netzwerk Neue Medien, to protest against data retention in
Europe. A draft data retention law has already been withdrawn in the House
of  Representatives in Washington.

In the German Parliament, the Greens have drafted a resolution that would
ask the Government to challenge the legality of the EU directive before
the European Court of Justice and postpone its implementation on the
national level until the court has made a decision. According to the
not yet published text, of which EDRi was able to obtain a copy, the data
retention decision should have been made in the "Third Pillar" of the
European Union structure, as the sole purpose of retaining the data is the
law enforcement. Therefore, the proper legislative procedure should have
been a framework directive, which gives more power to national Parliaments
and requires an unanimous vote on the EU Council of Ministers. The motion is
so far being supported by 118 parliamentarians from all parties; the vote is
scheduled for 2 June. The period for challenging the directive on these
grounds ('230 of the Treaty on the European Community) will end on 10 July
2006.

Even if the directive is transposed into the German law, several groups and
individuals - among which the former German federal minister of the
interior, Gerhart Baum - have announced that they will challenge it before
the Constitutional Court. After several recent decisions by the courts
against overly intrusive surveillance, retention, and data-screening
practices, there is a growing indication that the court will declare the
directive illegal under the human rights provisions of the German
Constitution.

German Parliament: Draft Resolution, "Richtlinie zur
Vorratsdatenspeicherung vom EuGH pr|fen lassen" (Reviewing the Directive
on Data Retention by the European Court of Justice) (in German only, 18.05
2006)
http://www.edri.org/docs/German-Parliament_Draft-DR-Resolution_18-5-2006.pdf

Press release by EDRi-Member Netzwerk Neue Medien together with AK
Vorratsdatenspeicherung and Stop1984.de: American snooping scandal shows the
need for revision of opinion in Europe (in German only, 15.05.2006)
http://www.nnm-ev.de/show/135496.html

ISP snooping plans take backseat (18.05.2006)
http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-6074070.html

Directive 2006/24/EC on the retention of data, Official Journal of the EU,
(including declarations by EU member state governments
postponing internet data retention) (13.04.2006)
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:105:0054:0063
:EN:PDF

EDRi Data Retention overview page
http://www.edri.org/issues/privacy/dataretention

EDRi Data Retention Wiki
http://wiki.dataretentionisnosolution.com

(Contribution by Ralf Bendrath, EDRi member Netzwerk Neue Medien - Germany)

============================================================
3. Set up of the Internet Governance Forum Advisory Group
============================================================

The Internet Governance Forum Advisory Group (IGF AG) to the UN
Secretary-General, selected by United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan
on 17 May, meets in Geneva on 22-23 May to discuss the agenda and the
programme of the Athens Meeting (31 October - 3 November 2006).

Members of the group and observers had a two-day meeting meeting under the
leadership of Nitin Desai and Markus Kummer.

In an open and transparent discussion, the draft of the program included
main topics for each day of the coming IGF meeting in Athens. These are  :
- Access ( Internet connectivity, policies and costs with following
workshops on: open standards, investment incentives, etc.)
- Security ( building trust online, protecting users from spam, phishing,
viruses, maintain security while protecting privacy and workshops with
people from technologies, ISP, CERT, law enforcement and human rights,
workshops by ITU (cybersecurity) and OECD (spam toolkit) )
- Diversity ( Promoting multilinguism through IDN, and local content and
Respecting geographical diversity)
- Openness ( Free flow of information, ideas and access to knowledge)

The IGF AG consists of 46 people from different countries and cultures and
is a good example of the way the UN opened up during the WSIS process. This
includes 20 representatives from the governmental sector, 10 from the
business sector, 7 representing civil society and 9 from the ICANN system.
All stakeholders are well represented - governments, civil society,
business, and the relevant international organizations, e.g. ITU, ICANN,
ISOC, IETF, International Chamber of Commerce, UNESCO, Internet registries
and registrars, and others.

People involved in the proceedings say that the IGF will be launched this
year in Athens, but will continue in 2007 in Brazil, and in 2008.

IGF website - includes webcast and transcripts of the session
http://www.intgovforum.org/index.htm

EDRI-gram : Consultations on Internet Governance Forum (1.03.2006)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.4/igf

(Contribution by Veni Markovski - EDRi-Member ISOC Bulgaria)

============================================================
4.  French draft copyright law continues to be criticised
============================================================

As a continuation of the "saga" of the French draft law on copyright and
related rights of the information society (DASDVSI), the French Senate
voted this month the law which continues to be severely criticised by the
consumer associations as well as software companies.

The Senators have adopted the law with 164 votes for and 128 against. The
"for" votes came from UMP (Union pour un Mouvement Populaire) and from
the radical part of RDSE (Rassemblement Democratique et Social Europeen).
The socialist group of Verts (Greens) and the PCF (French Communist Party)
voted against it.

The law supported by the Senate has also changed the article 7, that was
adopted by the Deputies and required the DRM vendors and commercial
platforms to open their technology to competitors in order to make it
interoperable. This brought forth the reaction of companies such as Apple
or Microsoft and of the American Minister of Commerce. The senators, guided
by the rapporteur Michel Thiollihre and by Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres,
Minister of Culture, adopted a totally different system based on the
creation of an independent administrative authority.

The current text no longer guaranties the right to the private copy, which
is considered as a serious blow to the consumers. The CLCV (Association
Consommation, logement et cadre de vie) states a "conditioned private copy"
takes away from the consumer the right to privately use a work that was
acquired legally. The association considers the consumer should no longer
pay for the possibility to copy, which is actually refused.

Another measure considered as unrealistic is the one that holds software
companies liable when their software is used for piracy. This measure also
affects companies relying on open- source software.

"It is the nature of open source that there is nothing we can do about a
program once it is distributed," said Gilles Gravier, chief technology
strategist for security at Sun Microsystems. "Also the open-source
licenses are issued on a global basis.

Finally, this law draft has succeeded in raising more criticism after
having been voted by the Senate than after it was passed by the National
Assembly in March 2006.

The DADVSI law will be debated further on in a Mixed Joint Commission
including seven deputies and seven senators, which has the task to
reconcile the disagreements between the texts adopted by the two
Assemblies. According to certain sources, this Commission would be gathered
on 30 May.

French iPod bill moves forward (11.05.2006)
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/05/11/business/apple.php

The draft law on copyright raises vivid critics (only in French, 12.05.2006)
http://www.01net.com/editorial/315533/legislation/le-projet-de-loi-sur-le-dro
it-d-auteur-suscite-de-vives-critiques/

The Senate cancels the forced interoperability (only in French, 10.05.2006)
http://www.ratiatum.com/news3108_Le_Senat_supprime_l_interoperabilite_forcee.
html

EDRI-gram : Update on French EUCD Transposition (29.03.2006)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.6/frencheucd

What's so special about French EUCD transposition? (15.03.2006)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.5/franceeucd

============================================================
5. German Constitutional Court has outlawed preventive data screening
============================================================

On 22 May the German Constitutional Court has declared illegal under the
German Constitution the practice of screening data across several private
and public databases in order to find potential terrorists ("sleepers").
Several federal states will now have to change their police laws. The
decision does not make data screening ("Rasterfahndung", literally: "grid
investigation", usual transliterations: "dragnet investigation" or "data
trawl") completely illegal, but binds it to very narrow conditions. The
measure is still legal for investigations in specific criminal cases, as
it was used against the left-wing guerrilla RAF in the 1970s, when the
"Rasterfahndung" was invented. But for crime prevention purposes, it can
only be done in the presence a concrete danger for the lives or liberties
of persons or for the existence of the Federal Republic of Germany or a
federal state (Land). This requires factual indicators for an imminent
attack. A general threat condition or foreign tensions like after 9/11
2001 are not sufficient.

The Federal Police Agency (Bundeskriminalamt) had coordinated such
screenings, in cooperation with the state-level police authorities after
the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001. Universities, private
companies, private security firms, public transport institutions, facility
providers, municipal authorities, and the Federal Register of Foreign
Residents were required to submit comprehensive information they had on
anybody matching a set of criteria (male, aged between 18 and 40, student
or former student, country of origin mainly Muslim) to the state police
agencies. The latter did a screening run for matches across the different
submitted databases that combined included more than 8 million people. The
31 988 hits were stored in a central file called "sleepers" and again
screened by the Federal Police Agency against a database that included up
to 300 000 persons who held a pilot license, were supposed to be
dangerous, or matched some other criteria. The remaining several thousand
persons (matches) was manually reviewed by the state police agencies. The
whole exercise did not lead to a single terrorist suspect or prosecution.

The plaintiff, a Morrocan citizen who studied in Germany in 2001, argued
that his right for informational self-determination was breached, that the
screening was an especially severe breach of fundamental rights because it
took place unbeknownst to the people affected, that it was not
proportionate because of the lack of factual indicators for an imminent
terrorist attack in Germany, and that the criteria were discriminating him
and fellow Muslims on the basis of religion. The lower courts had
overturned his arguments.

The official data protection commissioners, the opposition parties Greens,
Liberals and Socialists, and civil liberties groups applauded the court
decision and demanded an immediate stop of plans for similar measures like
communications traffic data retention, license-plate screening, or the
creation of new investigative powers for the Federal Police Agency for the
prevention of crimes. A spokesperson of the federal Ministry of the
Interior said that in international terrorism, there was only a thin line
between a general and a concrete threat condition, making it difficult to
apply the decision. The Bavarian Minister of the Interior, G|nther
Beckstein, called the decision "a black day for the effective fight
against terrorism in Germany." The association of student representatives,
which had supported the plaintiff, demanded a "personal apology" from the
responsible authorities for the illegal and unconstitutional
discrimination of foreign and Muslim students in Germany.

Up to eleven federal states will now have to change their police laws and
criminal procedures acts. The decision will also have an impact on the
discussion about the legality of mandatory communications data retention
in Germany. The Constitutional Court explicitly re-emphasised in the
reasons given for the judgement the "strict prohibition, beyond
statistical purposes, of the storage of personally identifiable data on
stock." ("auf Vorrat"). "Vorratsdatenspeicherung" - literally: "data
storage on stock" - is the German term for data retention.

Decision of the German Constitutional Court, 1 BvR 518/02 (in German only,
22.05.2006)
http://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/entscheidungen/rs20060404_1bvr051802.h
tml

Press Release of the German Constitutional Court (in German only,
23.05.2006)
http://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/pressemitteilungen/bvg06-040.html

Overview of reactions to the decision (in German only)
http://www.netzpolitik.org/2006/reaktionen-auf-das-urteil-zur-rasterfahndung/

Berlin Data Protection and Freedom of Information Commissioner: Special
Report on the Execution of Data Screening in Berlin (in German only,
1.12.2002)
http://www.datenschutz-berlin.de/infomat/sonderbericht/rasterfahndung.pdf

(Contribution by Ralf Bendrath, EDRi member Netzwerk Neue Medien - Germany)

============================================================
6. UK Government asks for the encryption keys
============================================================

The UK Home Office is planning to implement Part 3 of the Regulation of
Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA). That would allow the police forces to ask
for the disclosure of encryption keys, or force suspects to decrypt
encrypted data.

RIPA was promoted in 2000, but until now the officials have not implement
Part 3. There were still voices that considered that parts I and III of the
Act should be reviewed to consider whether the Act was effective in meeting
its aims. However, until now, the Act has remained in its initial form .

Recently, the Home Office started a consultation considering that the
provisions in Part 3 would be needed to fight against an increased use
of encryption by criminals, paedophiles, and terrorists. The officials are
also expecting proposals for amendments to RIPA.

The Home Office minister of state, Liam Byrne, told Parliament last week
that "Encryption products are more widely available and are integrated as
security features in standard operating systems, so the Government has
concluded that it is now right to implement the provisions of Part 3 of
RIPA... which is not presently in force."

This decision has triggered a lot of comments and criticism from experts in
the industry, considering that anyone who refuses to hand over a key to the
police would face up to two years imprisonment. Experts are worried about
the effects of the Act, that might push some businesses outside UK, but also
about the practical solutions related to financial institutions that use
such security devices.

Readers and experts cited by Zdnet UK point out that the law might be
impossible to enforce. The encryption expert Peter Fairbrother underlined:
"It is, as ever, almost impossible to prove 'beyond a reasonable
doubt' that some random-looking data is in fact ciphertext, and then prove
that the accused actually has the key for it, and that he has refused a
proper order to divulge it".

UK Government to force handover of encryption keys (18.05.2006)
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,39020375,39269746,00.htm

Anger over encryption key seizure threat (19.05.2006)
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/security/0,39020375,39270276,00.htm

============================================================
7. Big Brother Awards Italy 2006
============================================================

>From 19 May to 20 May Florence has hosted the E-Privacy 2006 conference,
organized as usual - by the Winston Smith Project with the help of several
volunteers.

This edition saw a much larger participation than 2005: the participants
could hardly fit the hall of Palazzo Vecchio, and several people had to
stand for the whole duration of the event. The number of presentations (19)
and participating organizations (14) saw a marked and unexpected growth.

As usual, the Italian Big Brother Awards were given during the conference.
Although none of the awards' recipients were present, a mock Darth Vader -
prompting hilarity from the public - took the prizes in custody.

The positive prize "Winston Smith  - Privacy Hero", which was assigned in
2005 to Stefano Rodot` (former president of the Italian Privacy Authority)
was won by the No1984.org group, for its relentless information work against
Trusted Computing.

Trusted Computing was indeed one of the central players of the whole event,
as it also won the prize for  "Most Invasive Technology", while the prize
for "Worst Private Group" was assigned to the Trusted Computing Group, the
business association that is developing the technical specs of the Trusted
Computing technology. One can only deduce that the most dangerous enemy for
net-privacy in the coming future has been clearly identified by netizens.

Other BBA winners include Enzo Mazza, president of FIMI  (Federazione
Industria Musicale Italiana - Italian Music Industry Federation) for its
organization's lobbying on ISP's responsibilities in copyright violation,
the Italian Privacy Authority for its power (pursuant to art. 158,
Legislative Decree 196/03) to enter private premises even without a judicial
mandate, and Mauro Masi of the Office of the President of the Council, for
blocking the ongoing reform work on Italian copyright law - which, among
other things, would have moved copyright violation from the criminal to the
civil sphere.

E-Privacy 2006 Conference
http://e-privacy.firenze.linux.it/index-e.html

Big Brother Awards Italy 2006
https://bba.winstonsmith.info/

Winston Smith Project
http://www.winstonsmith.info/

(Contribution by Andrea Glorioso, consultant on digital policies, and Marco
Calamari, founder of the Winston Smith Project)

============================================================
8. Application of the FOI law in Macedonia
============================================================

The Parliament of Macedonia adopted the Law on Free Access to Information of
Public Character in February 2006. NGO activists made some effort to make
some quality changes to the proposed law and as a result some essential
recommendations were accepted and implemented in the law.

Although three months have past since the adoption of the law, the
Commission for protection of the right for free access to information was
established only last week. According to the law, the Commission should
have been appointed by the Parliament of Macedonia a month after the law was
passed. According to government officials, the Commission will become
operational from September this year, when the implementation of the law
itself must start. It means that citizens can refer to the Commission if
they think that their right to have access to information of public
character is violated. On 11 May 2006 the Commission had a constitutive
session and presented its tasks. In this respect, a lot of activities for
raising awareness must be conducted in cooperation with NGOs in order to
promote the new institution and support the successful implementation of the
law.

The most important task of the Commission is to provide guidance and
procedures for a proper implementation of the law. Moreover, the Commission
must publish a list of institutions that represent information holders.
After that, the holders of public information must appoint an official FOI
person in charge of dealing with FOI requests.

Several NGOs are working on the monitoring of the implementation of the FOI
law and conduct raising awareness activities. So far, NGOs articulated and
sustained activities have had results. Hopefully, their efforts will also
speed-up the process of creating an proper environment for an efficient FOI
implementation in Macedonia.

EDRi-gram : Freedom of Information Act in Macedonia (18.01.2006)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.1/macedoniafoia

(Contribution by Bardhyl Jashari, EDRI-member Foundation Metamorphosis -
Macedonia)

============================================================
9. PM supports rejected UK ID Cards Act
============================================================

Tony Blair stated a strong support for the ID card Act that was rejected by
the House of Lords in January this year.

The Government had considered the card as essential in the fight against
crime, illegal immigration, and identity theft. However, the House of Lords
required from the Government to give further clarifications related to
detailed costs for such a system, a higher security in recording and storing
personal data and asked for a change in one of the purposes of the system
from 'securing efficient and effective provision of public services' to
preventing 'illegal and fraudulent access to public services'.

The 'Identity Project' report of the London School of Economics had also
stated that the government proposal lacked defined goals without clearly
showing the impact upon terrorism or identity theft and also considered the
project as underestimated from the point of view of the costs.

In endorsing the project, the Prime Minister went as far as stating "we need
identity cards both for foreign nationals and for British nationals. If we
want to track people coming in and out of our country and to know the
identity of people who are here, then that is what we have to do." Foreign
nationals are not presently included in the Act. As a response to the claims
that the ID scheme is a tracking mean, Blair used 'log' or 'identify' as
synonyms for 'track', considered as not a very fortunate choice of words.

The Register's columnist John Lettice considers that the so called "ring of
steel" promoted by Tony Blair has several failing issues. The e-Borders
which is supposed to help the Government know who is coming into the
country, and who is going out, even if implemented at all border entry
points shows a lot of vulnerabilities. EU citizens will be able to come in
and work if they like, and travellers from numerous countries don't require
visas. The identity of these travellers is not certain as false documents
can be obtained in these countries. Blair's plans to solve the immigration
question through the application of IT will meet difficulties on several
levels.

Fortress Blair - PM bets on biometric ring of steel to 'fix' immigration
(22.05.2006)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/22/blair_biometric_migration_fix/

EDRI-gram: UK ID card scheme - defeated in the House of Lords (18.01.2006)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.1/ukidcard

London School of Economics 'Identity Project'
http://is.lse.ac.uk/idcard/

============================================================
10. Recommending Reading
============================================================

>From 15 to 17 May the University of Illinois Chicago (USA) hosted the
conference "FM10 Openness: Code, Science and Content".  The occasion
was the tenth anniversary of "First Monday", the first peer-reviewer
journal born on the Internet. The final day of the conference gathered a
group that brainstormed over the first draft of the "Chicago Manifesto".

Chicago Manifesto on Openness (17.05.2006)
http://blogger.uic.edu:16080/weblog/nrj/FM10/?permalink=ChicagoManifesto.html
&page=trackback
Website of the conference (with abstracts and papers)
http://numenor.lib.uic.edu/fmconference/
First Monday
http://www.firstmonday.org/

============================================================
11. Agenda
============================================================

14-18 June, Rathen, Germany
ICA-IAMCR Symposium on Internet Governance
http://www.ntu.edu.sg/sci/sirc/icapreconf.html

19-20 June 2006, Paris, France
New relations between creative individuals and communities, consumers and
citizens. Hosted by the TransAtlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD)
http://www.tacd.org/docs/?id=296

19-23 June, Singapore
Euro-Southeast Asia ICT Forum (EUSEA2006) (with the EU Commission as
co-host)
http://www.eusea2006.org

21 June 2006, Luxembourg
Safer Internet Forum 2006 Focus on two topics: "Children's use of new media"
and "Blocking access to illegal content: child sexual abuse images"
http://europa.eu.int/information_society/activities/sip/si_forum/forum...

26-27 June 2006, Berlin, Germany
The Rising Power of Search-Engines on the Internet: Impacts on Users, Media
Policy, and Media Business
http://www.uni-leipzig.de/journalistik/suma/home_e.html

3-5 July, Cambridge, UK
Privacy Laws & Business, 19th Annual International Conference
"Privacy Crisis Ahead? Investing enough in data protection to strengthen
and defend your reputation"
http://www.privacylaws.com/conferences.annual.html

16 - 28 July 2006, Oxford, UK
Annenberg/Oxford Summer Institute: Global Media Policy: Technology and New
Themes in Media Regulation
http://www.pgcs.asc.upenn.edu/events/ox06/index.php

2-4 August 2006, Bregenz, Austria
2nd International Workshop on Electronic Voting 2006 Students may apply for
funds to attend the workshop until 30 June 2006.
http://www.e-voting.cc/stories/1246056/

14-16 September 2006, Berlin, Germany
Wizards of OS 4 Information Freedom Rules
http://wizards-of-os.org/

===========================================================
12. About
===========================================================

EDRI-gram is a biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe.
Currently EDRI has 21 members from 14 European countries and 5 observers
from 5 more countries (Italy, Ireland, Poland, Portugal and Slovenia).
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 at edri.org>

Information about EDRI and its members:
http://www.edri.org/

- EDRI-gram subscription information

subscribe by e-mail
To: edri-news-request at edri.org
Subject: subscribe

You will receive an automated e-mail asking to confirm your request.

unsubscribe by e-mail
To: edri-news-request at 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/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=626
&Itemid=4&lang=mk

- Newsletter archive

Back issues are available at:
http://www.edri.org/edrigram

- Help
Please ask <edrigram at 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
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

[demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]