EDRi-gram newsletter - Number 7.20, 21 October 2009

[EDRI-gram newsletter]

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

           EDRi-gram

biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe

    Number 7.20, 21 October 2009


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

1. EDRI Open Letter to the EP on Amendment 138
2. Romania: Data retention law declared unconstitutional
3. France pushes the introduction of EDVIGE project through the back door
4. Web blocking gets a reality check
5. Buma/Stemra imposes levy for embedding audio and video
6. Copyright in the digital environment
7. The European Commission calls for online privacy protection measures
8. Microsoft tries to comply with EU requirements
9. Finland: Introducing Internet broadband as a universal service
10. Recommended Reading
11. Agenda
12. About

============================================================
1. EDRI Open Letter to the EP on Amendment 138
============================================================

EDRi sent the following open letter to all the members of the European
Parliament (EP) on 19 October 2009 asking for a continuos support for the
citizens' rights by not giving up on Amendment 138 in the Telecoms Package.

To the Members of the European Parliament,

European Digital Rights is an association of 29 privacy and civil rights
organisations based in 18 European countries and active across the European
Union. As an association whose focus is on protecting the civil rights of
online citizens, we have serious concerns about the possible abandonment of
the core meaning of the so-called "Amendment 138" in the Telecoms Package.
We believe that this would not just create lasting damage for the rights of
European citizens, but it would also durably damage the credibility and
institutional power of the European Parliament.

Citizens' Rights

The purpose of Amendment 138 is to protect the fundamental rights of
citizens to freedom of expression and communication, to privacy and to due
process of law. It also protects the development of democratic culture on
the Internet. The fact that the Council is aware of current and planned
activities in Member States that will undermine or do already undermine
these principles should further convince Parliamentarians of the need to
defend the principles in Amendment 138. Even if, and it is far from evident
that this is the case, the Council can argue convincingly that there are
certain exceptional circumstances where communications must be limited for
the purposes and urgency required by the European Convention on Human
Rights, such limitations should remain the exception in a democratic
society, while the rights defended in Amendment 138 must constitute the
rule. This must be reflected in the Telecoms Package.

Furthermore, failure to protect EU citizens will not only undermine their
rights, but will be used in less democratic countries to victimise
individuals, justified with the excuse that this is "EU policy".

Parliament Powers

The Parliament now has the chance to protect citizens' rights and fully
perform its institutional function within the European legislative process.

A capitulation faced with the unacceptably inflexible, legally dubious and
democratically deficient approach of the Council would inflict lasting
damage on the Parliament.

What trust can voters have in an institution that will overwhelmingly
support citizens' rights before an election only to abandon them immediately
afterwards? What credibility will the Parliament have in future
inter-institutional negotiations when it is prepared to abandon a position
it supported twice with such an overwhelming majority? What authority will
be left once the Parliament loses this crucial battle with the Council?
Could there be a worse moment to fail so completely on an issue of such
importance, at the historic moment when the institution is being entrusted
with a greatly increased scope of codecision powers under the Lisbon Treaty?

For the sake of the rule of law, for the sake of European citizens and for
the sake of the only democratically elected European Institution, we urge
you to take whatever actions you can to defend the principles in Amendment
138. In particular, we urge you to support the principle that, unless
exceptional circumstances render this impossible, citizens are entitled to a
prior judgment before any measure is taken to limit their fundamental right
to freedom of communication.

EDRi Open letter to EP on the European Parliament (19.10.2009)
http://www.edri.org/files/edri_open_letter_091019.pdf

French version
http://www.edri.org/files/edri_open_letter_091019fr.pdf

See also
BEUC: Open letter from European Consumers to The Conciliation Committee on
Telecom Package - Maintain the Current Amendment 138: Protect consumers'
fundamental rights on the Internet
http://pierani.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/229wba2009e_beuc_open_letter_on_telecoms_package_beuc_logo2.pdf

EuroISPA: European Parliament should maintain its defence of citizens'
Fundamental Rights (16.10.2009)
http://www.euroispa.org/files/091016_euroispa_telecom_review_am_138.pdf

Greens/EFA call on EU Parliament to stick to its principles (16.10.2009)
http://www.greens-efa.org/cms/pressreleases/dok/309/309517.telecoms_package_negotiations@en.htm

============================================================
2. Romania: Data retention law declared unconstitutional
============================================================

The Romanian Constitutional Court (CCR) announced on 7 October 2009 that it
took the decision to consider unconstitutional the Romanian implementation
of the data retention directive.

The Romanian data retention law has been in force since the beginning of
2009, but it received a lot of bad press reviews, as reported by EDRi-gram
at the beginning of the year. Several NGOs declared that they would contest
the law. An initial appeal of the civil society to the Ombudsman was not
successful, since the Ombudsman did not consider the law as unconstitutional
and therefore he declared that he would not ask the opinion of the
Constitutional Court.

The case that was decided by the Constitutional Court in October 2008 was
initiated by a Romanian NGO, Civil Society Commissariat, which sued its
mobile operator for keeping the traffic data according to the new law on
data retention 298/2008. The lawsuit brought to the Bucharest Tribunal was
just a pretext to raise, during the trial, a motion for the law's
unconstitutionality - so that CCR would give its opinion of the data
retention law.

CCR has accepted the motion for law's unconstitutionality through decision
1258/2009, based on the breach of article 28 of the Romanian Constitution,
which stipulates the secrecy of correspondence. Other articles invoked were
articles 25, 26 and 30 which deal with freedom of movement, privacy and
freedom of expression respectively.

Unfortunately, it could take some time to see the motivation of the CCR and
therefore to asses the real potential of this breakthrough decision. It
might take even one month to get the official text published in the Official
Monitor. In any case, the decision of the CCR is final and can't be
appealed.

The court is the only authority of constitutional jurisdiction in Romania,
independent of any other public authority. It is formed by nine judges,
appointed for a nine-year term. Its members are renewed by one third every
three years. The court is known for its low number of cases admitted as
unconstitutional.  In 2008 there were only 18 cases fully admitted, out of
almost 1400 motions raised in the regular courts.

The Ministry of Communication and Information Society was quick to declare
that it informed the European Commission about the new situation and that
they might re-draft the law in order to avoid the constitutionality issues.
But the problems could be more complicated for the executive if the decision
of the CCR declares unconstitutional the entire law or article 1 which
stipulates the purpose of the law.

The decision also comes in a rather restless political and social period
that might have influenced the CCR outcome and could further on have an
impact on the way in  which the Government will deal with this case. But for
now, there is no stable government in place, with the former one being
repealed by the Parliament on 13 October and a new one under formation these
days.

Romanian constitution
http://www.cdep.ro/pls/dic/site.page?id=371

Romania's Constitutional Court Rules Data Storage Law Unconstitutional
(8.10.2009)
http://www.mediafax.ro/english/romania-s-constitutional-court-rules-data-storage-law-unconstitutional-4972690/

Waw: Constitutional Court declared the law on data retention
unconstitutional (only in Romanian, 8.10.2009)
http://legi-internet.ro/blogs/index.php/2009/10/08/lege-pastrarii-datelor-trafic-neconstitu

Romanian authorities seek solutions for the data retention law (only in
Romanian, 9.10.2009)
http://economie.hotnews.ro/stiri-telecom-6261206-autoritatile-romane-cauta-solutii-pentru-evitarea-unui-avertisment-comisia-europeana-dupa-legea-stocarii-datelor-telefonice-fost-declarata-neconstitutionala.htm

Statistical situation of the Romanian Constitutional Court Acts
http://www.ccr.ro/statistics/pdf/en/sin09_2009.pdf

The Ombudsman will not address the CCR regarding the data retention law
(only in Romanian, 10.02.2009)
http://www.ziare.com/actual/eveniment/02-10-2009/avocatul-poporului-nu-va-sesiza-ccr-cu-privire-la-legea-interceptarilor-668636

EDRi-gram: Romania: Is really privacy a topic in the public debate?
(28.01.2009)
http://www.edri.org/edri-gram/number7.2/romania-privacy-in-public-debate

============================================================
3. France pushes the introduction of EDVIGE project through the back door
============================================================

The French Government produced two new decrees published in the Official
Journal on 18 October 2009 which actually resurrect the rejected EDVIGE plan
to create an intelligence database with personal data.

By-passing the French Parliament, the Minister of Interior Brice Hortefeux
introduced the two new decrees by practically splitting the former EDVIGE
decree which was withdrawn by the Government at the end of 2008, thus
creating two clones of the rejected project, as EDRi-member IRIS (Imaginons
un riseau Internet solidaire) explains.

One of the texts is meant as a tool for the police to prevent harm to public
safety, to "collect, store and analyze information concerning persons whose
individual or collective activity indicates that it may jeopardize public
safety." Under the pretext of preventing harms to the
public security, the data collected may include complete personal data
ranging from nationality, profession, address or telephone numbers to
physical signs, travel behaviours or geographic origin. And this is not all
as the database will include also information on people who have come into
contact or relation with persons deemed susceptible of performing a criminal
offence.

The file is related to the public security and has nothing to do with
national security or terrorism. IRIS explains this is just a
disproportionate and illegal mean for the government to deal with petty and
medium delinquency. Moreover the data will be stored for everybody starting
with 13 years old. For minors, the retention period is limited to three
years as compared to a 10-year retention period for all the others.

The other text introduces a file of administrative investigations. It
includes personal data of citizens starting with the age of 16 (the official
age at which one person can be employed) in order to check out whether a
person's behaviour is compatible with the tasks he is entrusted with, for
some sensitive jobs, like those in the security field. Data including
political, religious, philosophical and union information with be stored for
a minimum of 5 years.

Despite the obvious concerns related to the gathering of so many sensitive
data, the main subject of opposition is the so called "geographic origin"
which actually is a masked way of gathering information related to the
ethnic origin. "Replacing the ethnical criterion with that of geographic
origin is to take us as morons" stated Samuel Thomas, Vice-president of SOS
Racisme.

CRAN (The council representing the black associations of France) also
expressed its concern related to the geographic origin reference that they
consider only a way to go round the interdiction of making reference to the
ethnical origin and asked Hortefeux to remove any such reference from the
text.

The only guarantee given by the government is that CNIL (The French Data
Protection Authority), which has already approved the two texts, will have
the control over the two databases but, according to the critics, this is
not very reassuring.

The "humour" of the Ministry of Interior of signing the two texts on 16
October, Saint Edwige's day didn't pass unnoticed. The "No to EDVIGE" group
publicly declared its decision to continue its fight against the two split
variants of EDVIGE project, including by starting mobilizing people against
it and to file appeals to the State Council.

No to EDVIGE, no its these two clones! IRIS release (only in French,
18.10.2009)
http://www.iris.sgdg.org/info-debat/comm-edvigeab1009.html

Two decrees recreate the EDVIGE Decree (20.10.2009)
http://nonaedvige.ras.eu.org/spip.php?article1078

"The Police needs files" (only in French, 18.10.2009)
http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2009/10/18/01011-20091018FILWWW00131-chevenementla-police-a-besoin-de-fichiers.php

Hortefeux creates two new police files (only in French, 18.10.2009)
http://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/2009/10/18/01016-20091018ARTFIG00099-deux-nouveaux-fichiers-policiers-a-la-place-du-conteste-edvige-.php

Brice Hortefeux Hedwig resuscitated with 2 decrees published in OJ
(19.10.2009)
http://space-net1.blogspot.com/2009/10/brice-hortefeux-hedwig-resuscitated.html

A new version of Edvige? Clones of the previous text (only in French,
19.10.2009)
http://www.20minutes.fr/article/356199/Politique-La-nouvelle-version-d-Edvige-Des-clones-du-texte-precedent.php

EDRi-gram: France: No to new EDVIGE! (1.07.2009)
http://www.edri.org/edri-gram/number7.13/no-edvige-3

============================================================
4. Web blocking gets a reality check
============================================================

In the negotiations surrounding the formation of a new conservative-liberal
coalition in Germany following the recent elections, an agreement has been
reached to postpone, for at least a year, the introduction of web blocking.
As the law has already been adopted, the procedure by which the law will be
stopped from entering into force has not yet been decided. Coincidentally,
the UK government decided also not to introduce mandatory blocking to force
the remaining consumer ISPs to follow the "voluntary" blocking already
undertaken by the major ISPs in that country.

In Germany, the plan is to use the existing legislation in order to remove
as much illegal material as possible from the Internet. After an initial
12-month trial, this approach will be reevaluated. It remains very unclear,
however, on what criteria the re-evaluation may take place. The approaches
of the two coalition partners on this issue are very different, with the
liberal FDP steadfastly opposed to blocking during the election campaign,
while the blocking legislation was pushed by the conservative CDU Minister
von der Leyen. By default, therefore, the approaches and interpretations
that will be taken on the "re-evaluation" will also most probably be
divergent.

The decision to prioritise the removal of child abuse images from the
Internet was criticised by organisations whose purpose is to protect
children, including Unicef. Unicef's press release explains that blocking is
necessary because takedown of illegal sites is "not possible" in "foreign"
countries. However, the organisation does not find it necessary to criticise
or name any of the major countries which leave images of child abuse online
rather than removing them. This is particularly surprising when we consider
that all countries in the world, with the exception of the USA (which has
signed the Optional Protocol on Child Pornography) and Somalia have signed
and ratified the binding UN Child Rights Convention which requires state
parties to take all appropriate national, bilateral and international
measures to prevent the exploitative use of children in pornographic
performances and materials.

No internet censorship in Germany for the next year (18.10.2009)
http://ak-zensur.de/2009/10/access-blocking-germany.html

Home Office backs down on net censorship laws (16.10.2009)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/16/home_office_iwf_legislation/

German Internet Blocking Bill Suspended (18.10.2009)
http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2009/10/18/german-internet-blocking-bill-suspended/

UNICEF: Priority for Child! Access barriers are an important step - Further
action needed (16.10.2009)
http://www.unicef.de/091016vorrang_fuer_k.html

(contribution by Joe McNamee - EDRi)

============================================================
5. Buma/Stemra imposes levy for embedding audio and video
============================================================

Dutch collecting society Buma/Stemra announced that it will impose a
levy on Internet users for embedding audio- and videomaterial on
their website, starting 1 January 2010. The levy starts at EUR 130 for
the first six embedded links per website per year. The rules could
affect small bloggers and users of social network-sites such as
Facebook.

As the rules were legally questionable and did not sufficiently
take into account the interests of internet users and Dutch musicians,
Buma's announcement immediately led to protests in the blogosphere and
on Twitter. Dutch digital rights organisation Bits of Freedom drafted a
letter to Buma/Stemra, assisted by numerous concerned internet users
through text annotation website co-ment.net, calling for a revision
of the rules. Bits of Freedom then handed its letter over to the CEO of
Buma/Stemra. Meanwhile, Dutch politicians further questioned the rules
in Parliament.

Three days later, on 9 october 2009, Buma/Stemra responded to the
criticism by stating that it would for now not apply its rules to
non-commercial use. Bits of Freedom responded the same day, questioning
the definition of non-commercial use by Buma/Stemra. Indeed, on 14
october Buma/Stemra revealed that even one advertisement on a website
would be considered 'commercial use'. Bits of Freedom continues its
efforts to defend communication freedom in relation to these
controversial measures by Buma/Stemra.

Brochure Buma/Stemra Digital Music Licences (only in Dutch
http://www.bumastemra.nl/NR/rdonlyres/DF0B3120-8850-4DF1-ACD6-17F94B0BB18C/0/Brochure_Digitale_Muzieklicenties_2010.pdf

Letter Bits of Freedom to Buma/Stemra (only in Dutch, 6.10.2009)
http://www.bof.nl/briefbuma061009.pdf

NOS eight o'clock news report (only in Dutch, 7.10.2009)
http://player.nos.nl/index.php/media/play/tcmid/tcm:5-576060/

(Contribution by Ot van Daalen - EDRi-member Bits of Freedom - Netherlands)

============================================================
6. Copyright in the digital environment
============================================================

During the 1st European Innovation Summit that was held on 12 - 16 October
2009 at the European Parliament in Brussels, a workshop on the future of
Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) in Europe included a panel to debate the
subject of the IPRs in the new digital environment.

In the introduction it was asserted that national copyright laws are no
longer adapted to the digital environment, that old business models have
failed to produce results, that DRMs have been rejected by the consumers and
that the issue now at stake is how to adapt to new business models.

Professor Hugenholtz (IvIR, University of Amsterdam) said that licensing had
been impacted heavily by the territorial nature of copyright. The only
effective way forward is to create truly harmonising copyright regulation,
as has been done for trademarks already. The problem of exceptions and
limitations also needs to be effectively rethought.

Antoine Aubert (Google) repeated the point that the current exceptions and
limitations regime needed to be reviewed. He explained that the current
70-year copyright terms was too long. Google's priorities have been to
ensure that content can find its audience in the digital world and that
rights owners get value for their contents.

Malte Behrmann (European Gaming Developers Federation) described how games
developers had profited from the Internet to reduce the number of
intermediaries in their path to the market. The online games industry has
quickly adapted to the digital challenges and has developed a variety of
business models. As a result, piracy is not an important issue and the games
industry therefore does not support extreme solutions for copyright
enforcement. He encouraged the film and music industry to follow the example
of his industry.

Giancarlo Miglioro (MrGoodIDEA) said that the issue of finance was missing
in the debate on the future of IPR. He said that major companies saw
intellectual property as a major asset and trade in it.

Francisco Mingorance (Business Software Alliance) said that the adoption of
the Hadopi law in France had demonstrated that technology was neutral and
can be used efficiently to enforce copyright without any risk to people's
privacy. There should be a focus on adopting codes of conduct for IPR
enforcement, with ISPs responsible for monitoring and enforcement.

Christian Engstrom, MEP (Greens/EFA (Pirate Party), Sweden) said that his
party was pro-copyright but also pro-reform and pro-adaptation to the
digital age. He argued for a 5-year term of protection and that all
non-commercial uses should be free of copyright.

Professor Hugenholz reminded participants that adjustments to the copyright
term should comply with the international treaties and five years could not
be acceptable. However, the recent proposal of the Commission to nearly
double the term of protection for related rights has failed to provide
evidence as to the need for such a long term.

Margot Froehlinger defended that proposal by pointing out that it had been
accompanied with an impact assessment and that the Commission's aim had been
to help performers. She warned against the criterion of "commercial
infringement" and gave the example of somebody copying a film and putting it
online without wanting to make a profit but doing so simply as a hobby.

1st European Innovation Summit
http://www.knowledge4innovation.eu/k4i/default.aspx

(contribution by Joe McNamee - EDRi)

============================================================
7. The European Commission calls for online privacy protection measures
============================================================

On 8 October 2009 the European Commission (EC) repeated its call to all EU
member states to increase their efforts in dealing with online privacy
threats to the public, such as spam, spyware and malware, based on findings
from a study required by the Commission.

The study performed by time.lex "Study on activities undertaken to address
threats that undermine the confidence in the Information Society, such as
spam, spyware and malicious software", which includes assessments of
progress in each EU country, shows the need of legislative improvements,
more consistent enforcement rules and sanctions and better cross-border
cooperation in the domain.

"Today's figures show that several EU countries are doing more to enforce
online privacy rules. However, spam is an area where we can and must improve
for the benefit of internet users in the EU ," said Viviane Reding, EU
Commissioner for Information Society and Media who added that "Although
since 2002, European law has prohibited spam and spyware, on average 65% of
EU citizens are still affected by spam on a regular basis. We need to step
up our fight against spammers and make sure that the EU adopts legislation
that provides for strong civil and criminal sanctions against spammers. I
call on EU countries to reinforce their national efforts to fight on-line
privacy threats such as spam, spyware and malicious software."

The study reveals that there are large differences in the way the member
states enforce regulations and apply sanctions for spammers and recommends a
more successful approach in fighting online threats that should involve a
combination of prevention, enforcement and raising public awareness (as
proposed also by Critical Information Infrastructure Protection policy).
"Public authorities (such as telecoms regulators, data protection and
consumer agencies and law enforcement
bodies) must have clear responsibilities and cooperation procedures between
themselves; while public and private sector must also work together." In
order to achieve that, EU countries should provide sufficient resources to
national authorities so that they may gather evidence, carry out
investigations and built prosecution in this field.

The findings also show that the level of cooperation also differs between EU
countries and indicates that as spam is a global problem, there is the need
for a closer cooperation with the EU as well as worldwide.

More action needed to fight spammers and protect online privacy, says
Commission report (8.10.2009)
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/09/1487

Study on activities undertaken to address threats that undermine confidence
in the Information Society, such as spam, spyware and malicious software -
Spam and spyware study SMART 2008/0013 Final Report - (2.10.2009)
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/ecomm/doc/library/ext_studies/privacy_trust_policies/spam_spyware_legal_study2009final.pdf

Critical Information Infrastructure Protection - a new initiative in 2009
(29.05.2009)
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/nis/strategy/activities/ciip/index_en.htm

============================================================
8. Microsoft tries to comply with EU requirements
============================================================

After having long criticised and penalised Microsoft for its
anti-competitive practices, the European Union seems to be now at the point
of trying to close up the battle with the company after Microsoft has made a
new offer to give its customers access to a wider range of web browsers
through its Windows operating system and to share information with its
competitors.

"The commission will formally market test proposals made by Microsoft to
address concerns regarding the tying of Internet Explorer to the Windows PC
operating system," said the EU's competition commissioner Neelie Kroes who
also expressed the idea that a at a preliminary view it appears that
"Microsoft's commitments would indeed address our concerns."

Microsoft's last proposal in July to give a choice screen that would allow
consumers to pick from several browsers was not considered good enough and
the European Commission (EC) asked for improvements. After intense
discussions with the EC and with feedback from the industry, the present
proposal gives a choice of 12 browsers and also addresses the other topic of
concern, interoperability, by offering an exchange of information with other
software companies.

However, the new proposal is not considered as good by everybody. FSFE (Free
Software Foundation Europe) believes that, being close to the end of her
mandate, Ms Kroes is rushing in closing up a deal with Microsoft that serves
the company and not the EU.

FSFE argues that the solution proposed by Microsoft is tricky as the
browsers offered as alternative are not pre-installed but must be
downloaded. As many time downloading may be slow or even failing, depending
on the connection, many people will prefer to just use Microsoft Internet
Explorer (IE) as it will be much easier. In the foundation's opinion,
Microsoft should pre-install alternative browsers and "any browser that the
user chooses needs to be integrated into the Windows operating system to the
same degree that IE is integrated today." FSFE also believes that the
settlement between the EC and Microsoft should not be limited to Europe, as
the company proposed, but apply globally.

As regarding the interoperability, the foundation argues that what is
Microsoft offering now is only the interoperability information that is
impossible to use in Free Software. What FSFE considers necessary is "a
binding commitment from Microsoft to provide and update interoperability
information on terms that are compatible with Free Software. This has to be
a legally binding document, and needs to include guarantees as well as clear
remedies if Microsoft fails to comply."

The European Committee for Interoperable Systems also consider the
settlement "does not appear to deal with the inadequacies of Microsoft's
standards compliance, unfair pricing practices or other concerns related to
patent abuse or standards manipulation".

Microsoft's present proposal will be marked tested for one month period
during which the industry and consumers may submit suggestions for further
changes. Following the trial month, the Commission may decide to make
Microsoft's commitment legally binding for five years and in that case,
during this period, no action will be brought against Microsoft related to
browsers.

In the meantime, the company is close to releasing in Europe its new
browser - Windows 7 - that launches on 22 October worldwide. But not without
concerns.
In a recent press release, FSFE warns that "Microsoft's latest operating
system, Windows 7, is currently shipping with a potentially serious defect.
Ahead of the product's global launch on Thursday, Germany's federal IT
security agency (BSI) has issued a warning about a high-risk vulnerability
in the SMB2 protocol. This can be exploited over the network to shut down a
computer with a Denial of Service (DoS) attack."

EU approves new Microsoft pledges (7.10.2009)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8294587.stm

FSFE to EC: Don't waste an opportunity with a hasty deal (28.09.2009)
http://blogs.fsfe.org/gerloff/?p=263

Antitrust: Commission welcomes new Microsoft proposals on Microsoft Internet
Explorer and Interoperability (24.07.2009)
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/09/352

Microsoft browser battle draws to a close (8.10.2009)
http://euobserver.com/9/28798/?rk=1

Microsoft and Europe Near Browser Truce (8.10.2009)
http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/oct2009/gb2009108_963950.htm

Windows 7 to hit consumers with known security problem (19.10.2009)
http://www.fsfe.org/news/2009/news-20091019-01.en.html

EDRi-gram: Windows 7 is launched without IE, but the Commission is not
pleased (17.06.2009)
http://www.edri.org/edri-gram/number7.12/microsoft-europe-ie-windows7

============================================================
9. Finland: Introducing Internet broadband as a universal service
============================================================

According to a decree issued by the Finish Ministry of Transport and
Communications, starting with 1 July 2010, a 1 Mbit Internet connection will
be defined as a requirement of the Universal Service. Thus, Finland becomes
the first country in the world to make access to broadband Internet a legal
right.

The decree states that by the end of 2009, the Finnish Communications
Regulatory Authority will establish which of the telecom operators will be
imposed this universal service obligation. The designated universal service
providers will have to be able to provide access for all residential or
business users, at a reasonable price, to a high-quality connection of at
least 1 Mbit/s. The providers may choose themselves the technology used to
provide the service. The average speed of downstream traffic must be at
least 75 per cent of the required speed in a 24 hour period. While in a four
hour measuring period the average speed must be at least 59 per cent of the
required speed.

Ms Suvi Lindin, Finland's Minister of Communications, believes that high
speed access to everybody will improve people's quality of life especially
in the less populated areas, will boost business, enable electronic
communications and encourage online banking.

Finland is already amongst the first countries in the world from the point
of view of access to Internet connection. According to Laura Vilkkonen, the
legislative counselor for the Ministry of Transport and Communications,
about 95 percent of the population have some sort of Internet access. She
also stated that the one-megabit requirement is only an intermediary step as
the target is to reach speeds of up to 100 megabit per second for all by
2015.

"We think it's something you cannot live without in modern society. Like
banking services or water or electricity, you need Internet connection,"
Vilkkonen said.

Access to a minimum of 1 Mbit Internet connection available to everyone in
Finland by July 2010 (16.10.2009)
http://www.lvm.fi/web/en/pressreleases/view/920100

Finland makes broadband access a legal right (14.10.2009)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/oct/14/finland-broadband

Fast Internet access becomes a legal right in Finland (15.10.2009)
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/10/15/finland.internet.rights/index.html

============================================================
10. Recommended Reading
============================================================

Law enforcement access to EURODAC: EDPS expresses serious doubts about the
legitimacy and necessity of proposed measures  (7.10.2009)
Press release
http://www.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/site/mySite/shared/Documents/EDPS/PressNews/Press/2009/EDPS-2009-11_Eurodac_access_EN.pdf
Opinion on Eurodac
http://www.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/site/mySite/shared/Documents/Consultation/Opinions/2009/09-10-07_Access_Eurodac_EN.pdf

Communication on Copyright in the Knowledge Economy (19/10/2009)
Press release
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/09/1544&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en
Citizens Summary
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/copyright/docs/copyright-infso/citizens_summary16102009_en.pdf
Communication
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/copyright/docs/copyright-infso/20091019_532_en.pdf

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

24 October 2009, Zurich, Switzerland
Big Brother Awards Switzerland
http://www.bigbrotherawards.ch/2009/

25 October 2009, Vienna, Austria
Austrian Big Brother Awards
http://www.bigbrotherawards.at/

26-27 October 2009, Vienna, Austria
3rd European Privacy Open Space
http://www.privacyos.eu

26 October 2009, Brussels, Belgium
European Commission - Public hearing on orphan works
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/copyright/copyright-infso/copyright-infso_en.htm#publichearing

29 October 2009, Barcelona, Spain
oXcars, the biggest free culture event of all times, 2nd edition
http://oxcars09.exgae.net

29 October - 1 November 2009, Barcelona, Spain
Free Culture Forum: Organization and Action
http://fcforum.net/

3 November 2009, Madrid, Spain
Civil Society Conference: "Global Privacy Standards in a Global World"
Organized by "The Public Voice" coalition
http://thepublicvoice.org/events/madrid09

4-6 November 2009, Madrid, Spain
31st International Conference of Data Protection and Privacy
http://www.privacyconference2009.org

10-11 November 2009, Cambridge, UK
Public Domain Calculators Meeting
http://wiki.okfn.org/PublicDomainCalculators/Meeting

13-15 November 2009, Gothenburg, Sweden
Free Society Conference and Nordic Summit
http://www.fscons.org/

15-18 November 2009, Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt
UN Internet Governance Forum
http://www.intgovforum.org/

19-20 November 2009, Malmv, Sweden
First popular European e-government conference
http://malmo09.org/

27-30 December 2009, Berlin, Germany
26th Chaos Communication Congress
http://events.ccc.de/congress/2009/

============================================================
12. 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 visibly 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 at 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 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/edrigram-mk.php

- EDRI-gram in German

EDRI-gram is also available in German, with delay. Translations are provided
Andreas Krisch from the EDRI-member VIBE!AT - Austrian Association for
Internet Users
http://www.unwatched.org/

- Newsletter archive

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

- Help
Please ask <edrigram 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 http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE