EDRi-gram newsletter - Number 8.18, 22 September 2010
EDRI-gram newsletter
edrigram at edri.org
Wed Sep 22 11:52:13 PDT 2010
============================================================
EDRi-gram
biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe
Number 8.18, 22 September 2010
============================================================
Contents
============================================================
1. Freedom not Fear 2010 - Stop Surveillance Mania!
2. Dutch internet community protests against censorship proposal
3. European Commission's strategy for Data Protection Directive
4. Blocking websites approved by the French Senate
5. Commissioner Malmstrvm sets out her agenda to the European Parliament
6. Swiss court rules that IP address collecting software is illegal
7. Google's Street View will not resume its activities in the Czech Republic
8. FSFE insists on promoting free PDF readers
9. ENDitorial: Internet blocking in ten weeks and counting
10. Recommended Reading
11. Agenda
12. About
============================================================
1. Freedom not Fear 2010 - Stop Surveillance Mania!
============================================================
For the fourth consecutive time, this year the International Action Day took
place on 11 September under the motto "Freedom not Fear 2010 - Stop
Surveillance Mania".
The events that took place in several European towns such as Berlin,
Stockholm, Warsaw, Helsinki, Paris, Venice, Vienna and Luxembourg were
organised and supported by a coalition of more than 150 organisations,
including political parties, professional associations, trade unions and
freedom activists.
What were the organisers asking for? Mainly, a cutback on surveillance
measures including data retention laws and the collection of biometric data,
"no European wide standardized state run collection of information", no data
exchange with the USA without proper data protection laws, no blank
registration of PNR data, "no systematic surveillance of financial
transactions data or similar mass data analysis in the EU (SWIFT)" and no
secret searches of online or offline PC systems.
In Berlin at the largest action of the Freedom not Fear 2010, about 7500
people demonstrated for better data protection and less intrusion on
privacy. One of the main concerns expressed was related to the
centralization of health, financial, telecommunications and employment data.
The demonstrators were carrying banners such as "Freedom is dying with
security", "I have something to hide: my privacy" or "my data belongs to
me".
During the rally, Frank Bsirske, head of the trade union Verdi, called for
the cancellation of the ELENA database introduced in Germany at the
beginning of 2010 that covers employee income information. He said that
during the last 80 years in Europea many cases have showed that data
collection could be used for "insane purposes." He also called for the
cancellation of data retention laws.
Although in Germany the Constitutional Court decided against data retention
in March 2010, Rosemarie Will, National Chairman of the Humanist Union
stated during the rally that the victory was not complete as the court left
an open back door for a come-back of the law. The court did not annul the
legislation but only suspended it asking for its modification in order to
ensure stricter and safer conditions for the storage and use of the
collected data.
Thilo Weichert, state data protection representative from
Schleswig-Holstein, expressed his opinion that the authorities should act
more professionally when pursuing criminals using the internet. "The
population needs freedom of information and opinion, not total control," he
said.
The demonstrators also criticized systems, such as the SWIFT agreement or
PNR systems, that allow the transfer of personal and bank data to the US
authorities without proper data protection measures.
Protestors take to the street to call for better data protection
(12.09.2010)
http://www.dw-world.de:80/dw/article/0,,5996875,00.html
Thousands in Germany rally for data privacy - PressTV (11.09.2010)
http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=GCZt-OyfDOQ
Large rally on Potsdamer Platz closes successful demonstration (11.09.2010)
http://blog.freiheitstattangst.de/presse/pressemitteilungen/press-release-6-11-09-2010-5-10-pm/
Colourful rally moves through the centre of the German capital (11.09.2010)
http://blog.freiheitstattangst.de/presse/pressemitteilungen/press-release-5-11-09-2010-4-pm/
Demonstration "freedom instead of fear!" (15.09.2010)
http://blog.freiheitstattangst.de/2010/09/das-war-fsa10-2/
Freedom not Fear 2010 in Poland (only in Polish, 9.09.2010)
http://www.panoptykon.org/component/content/article/46-fundacja-panoptykon-news-1/102-qwolno-a-nie-strachq-11-wrzenia-obchodzimy-midzynarodowy-dzie-sprzeciwu-wobec-inwigilacji-
EDRi-gram: German Federal Constitutional Court rejects data retention law
(10.03.2010)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number8.5/german-decision-data-retention-unconstitutional
============================================================
2. Dutch internet community protests against censorship proposal
============================================================
Dutch civil society, companies, academics and bloggers sent a letter on 15
September 2010 to the Dutch Minister of Justice regarding a recently
launched legislative proposal. According to the writers, the proposal could
lead to censorship by the government. The organizations request the change
of the proposal in order to preserve the freedom of press and internet.
The draft proposal of Dutch Minister of Justice Hirsch Ballin has
far-reaching consequences for the freedom of Dutch internet users. For
example, parts of websites but also personal pages on Facebook and Hyves
could, on the basis of this proposal, be shut down without a prior
decision by a court. Currently, a prior judicial ruling is required. In
addition, the proposal would, in short, prohibit the publication of
non-public information and would criminalize the secret recording of
your conversations.
In the letter, the minister is requested to amend the proposal on three
points. Firstly, deleting part of a website should be applied only after a
prior decision by a court. Secondly, the prohibition on the publication of
non-public information should be to re-evaluate in its entirety. Finally,
the minister is requested to clarify the prohibition on recording
conversations.
The letter is an initiative of EDRi-member Bits of Freedom and was signed by
nineteen civil society organisations, twenty experts from the academic
world, in addition to bloggers and internet experts.
The letter (only in Dutch, 15.09.2010)
https://www.bof.nl/live/wp-content/uploads/brandbrief.pdf
Press release: Dutch Internet community protests against state censorship
(only in Dutch, 15.09.2010)
https://www.bof.nl/2010/09/15/persbericht-nederlandse-internetgemeenschap-protesteert-tegen-overheidscensuur/
(Contribution by Ot van Daalen - EDRi-member Bits of Freedom - Netherlands)
============================================================
3. European Commission's strategy for Data Protection Directive
============================================================
During the Conference organised on 16 September 2010 by the Lisbon Council
Brussels on "Unleashing the digital single market", Vivane Reding,
vice-president of the European Commission and Commissioner for justice,
fundamental rights and citizenship, announced, among other things, she would
make a proposal for the future revision of the present Data Protection
Directive.
In her speech, Mrs. Reding reinforced her beliefs expressed in October 2009
that Europe needed a Digital Single Market that would be beneficial for
consumers and businesses alike and vowed to use EU justice policy to
strengthen it. The commissioner identified two main tools that may help in
solving the problems of the digital economy: The Consumer Rights and Data
Protection Directives.
A strong data protection legislation would also be an important element in
boosting business and consumer confidence "to ensure consumers of surfing
and shopping online without worrying about the safety of their personal
information." Therefore, the commissioner announced that an outline for the
revision of the present Data Protection Directive would be presented by the
Commission in October 2010 in order to "strengthen individuals' rights and
enhance the Internal Market dimension of data protection."
The revision would include a more strict application of transparency for
a "full, easily accessible and easy to understand information on how
personal data is being processed." The collection of personal data should
have a legitimate purpose and not exceed the strictly necessary data. "Data
should be collected and processed only under informed consent of a person to
whom they relate."
One measure intended by the Commission is that of enhancing the
responsibility of the data controllers to be able to establish "effective
mechanisms to ensure compliance with data protection rules."
Reding also expressed again the idea that as the Internet is a global tool,
the data transferred through it should be protected and expressed the
intention to improve the current procedures for international data
transfers.
In order to encourage new technologies in an environment in which consumers
know their rights, different solutions could be found such as "privacy by
design." "Data protection compliance should be embedded throughout the
entire life cycle of technologies and procedures."
The Digital Single Market should also be a cyber crime-safe
environment. And for this purpose the Commission will propose criminal
sanctions against people responsible for cyber attacks.
Press Release - Viviane Reding Vice-President of the European Commission
responsible for Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship - Doing the
Single Market justice - Unleashing the digital single market Conference,
organised by the Lisbon Council Brussels (16.09.2010)
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=SPEECH/10/441&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en
EDRi-gram: Reding: EU policy for information society for the next years
(7.10.2010)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number7.19/reding-eu-policy-infosoc
============================================================
4. Blocking websites approved by the French Senate
============================================================
The French Senate adopted on 10 September 2010 the law on known as Loppsi 2
(Original title: loi d'orientation et de programmation pour la performance
de la sicuriti intirieure). This legislation would give the police the
power
to upload malware on PCs without the users' knowledge and without any need
to explain the action.
Another extremely worrying aspect is that the Senate modified the deputies'
version in the sense that article 4 of the text stipulates that the blocking
of Internet sites with child pornographic content will is no longer be
decided by the court but by an administrative authority without the
intervention of a judge.
If the child pornographic content is manifest, the administrative authority
will be able to ask ISPs to block the site address without delay. If that
character is not manifest, the administrative authority may notify the legal
authority in charge with the interdiction of the access to the mentioned
electronic addresses, but is not bound to do so.
One partial victory was obtained in relation to video-surveillance by CNIL
(French Data Protection Authority) which had asked that the control over the
images be given to an independent body and not to an Internal Affairs
Ministerial commission. Still, CNIL will have no autonomy in the matter as
it will be able to intervene only at the request of the commissions that
validates the installation of the video-cameras in public spaces.
The text also includes another article that stipulates a punishment of one
year imprisonment and 15 000 euro fine for identity theft offences, a very
large provision which may lead to punishing the use of pseudonyms or the
use of profiles meant to caricature well known characters.
The text will still have to go through the National Assembly again in order
to be finally adopted by the French Parliament.
Loppsi: filtering sites will be decided by the administration (only in
French, 13.09.2010)
http://www.01net.com/editorial/520854/loppsi-le-filtrage-des-sites-incombera-a-ladministration/
Freedom on the Net victims of the security debate (only in French,
16.09.2010)
http://fr.rsf.org/france-la-liberte-sur-le-net-victime-du-16-09-2010,38373.html
RWF criticises the filtering of the Net stipulated by Loppsi 2 (only in
French, 16.09.2010)
http://www.lemonde.fr/technologies/article/2010/09/16/rsf-critique-le-filtrage-du-net-prevu-par-la-loppsi-2_1411897_651865.html
The senators vote Loppsi 2 and say yes to filtering and police spyware (only
in French, 13.09.2010)
http://www.zdnet.fr/actualites/les-senateurs-votent-la-loppsi-2-et-disent-oui-au-filtrage-et-aux-spywares-policiers-39754536.htm
EDRi-gram: France's Parliament pursues its goal to censor the Internet
(24.02.2010)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number8.4/loppsi-2-adopted-asamblee-nationale
============================================================
5. Commissioner Malmstrvm sets out her agenda to the European Parliament
============================================================
In a Committee meeting last week and in the Parliament's plenary session
this week, Commissioner Malmstrvm has set out her vision on various upcoming
issues in her portfolio.
In the Committee, Malmstrvm drew attention to the Communications on
information sharing instruments and legislative instruments on terrorism and
said that the analysis contained therein can be used for the development of
future policy.
On the exchange of airline passenger name records, she said that a new
Communication would be proposed in the plenary session of the Parliament.
The internal security strategy will be launched in November and will build
on the Stockholm Programme. It will look at cybercrime, organised crime,
terrorism etc. and specify some strategic objectives. Also, a proposal on
attacks against computer systems ("Lisbonising" and updating an existing
Framework Directive) will be proposed this month. Oddly enough, the
Commissioner chose not to mention the problematic review of the data
retention directive in her speech to the Committee.
In the Committee discussion, several insightful interventions were made
by parliamentarians about web blocking, data retention and the
implementation of the TFTP (SWIFT) agreement.
At the plenary session of the Parliament, the Commissioner presented her
Communication on transfer of PNR data to third countries. This consists of
two parts, one on the general principles that must always be followed in
negotiations on this topic. The second part is on procedures in relation to
the three countries that the EU already has agreements with, namely the USA,
Australia and Canada. EU PNR data will be the subject of a legislative
proposal, for which an impact assessment will need to be prepared.
One interesting aspect of this is that the Commission is quite clear that
the data should only be used for "serious international crime" and proposes
that this term should be defined. This, at least, indicates a small step
forward in the coherence of the Commission's approach to such issues. The
data retention Directive is also theoretically limited to "serious crime",
but with no harmonised standard, with some countries having no definition at
all, rendering the "limitation" entirely meaningless.
On the other hand, the headlong rush of the Commission to develop more and
more ways of exporting personal data to third countries remains worrying.
Commissioner Malmstrvm's reference to the need for coherence between the
"usefulness" of keeping the data and legal certainty is particularly
worrying. There is vast potential for exported data to be "useful" for one
reason or another. Whether it is necessary and proportionate and, therefore,
legal, appears to be less of an immediate concern.
Finally, in the press conference, she was asked (see the video linked
below - minute 7.00) about the Amadeus server, where the US Department of
Homeland Security has (according to the FT Deutschland journalist asking the
question) almost unlimited access to EU PNR data. After initially appearing
to be unaware of this issue, Commissioner Malmstrvm said that this would
fall under the new agreement with the USA.
Communication on information sharing: EU information management instruments
(20.07.2010)
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/10/349&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en
Communication on legislative instruments on terrorism (20.07.2010)
http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/malmstrom/archive/Communication%20Counter%20Terrorism%20EN.pdf
PNR Principles (21.09.2010)
http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/malmstrom/archive/COMM_NATIVE_COM_2010_0492_F_EN_COMMUNICATION.pdf
Recording of Commissioner Malmstrvm's press conference (21.09.2010)
http://ec.europa.eu/avservices/player/streaming.cfm?type=ebsvod&sid=165981
(contrubution by Joe McNamee - EDRi)
============================================================
6. Swiss court rules that IP address collecting software is illegal
============================================================
The Swiss Federal Court overturned on 8 September 2010 a previous
court decision and ruled that the software identifying IP addresses of
alleged unauthorised music uploaders was infringing the data protection law.
Switzerland-based anti-piracy company Logistep has used software to collect
IP addresses from P2P users, seeking for alleged copyright infringers and
passing on the addresses to rights holders. The company has thus provided,
in the last years, evidence used in lawsuits against individuals accused of
copyright infringement. Most of these lawsuits took place is Germany and the
UK, but similar techniques have been recently used by rights holders against
BitTorrent downloaders in the US.
Although Switzerland is not part of the EU and therefore not bound to
observe the Data Protection Directive, the Swiss Federal Court considered IP
addresses as personal data. The court backed up the country's data
commissioner who, in 2008, said that Logistep violated Switzerland's Data
Protection Act when it used the software and asked the company to
cease probing peer-to-peer networks without a legal basis.
In its decision, the Federal Supreme Court has established a clear boundary
against the arbitrary probing of personal privacy on the Internet. Logistep
will therefore no longer be able to collect IP addresses without the
authorization of the persons affected by the action and therefore will
be unable to pass on allegedly copyright infringing addresses to rights
holders to sue file sharers.
Richard Schneider of Logistep stated that his company's work was legal in
other European countries and that the company might leave Switzerland.
In his opinion, the Swiss court's decision could lead to "a massive and
uncontrolled illegal distribution of copyright-protected content in
Switzerland, a sort of legal limbo".
In France, CNIL (Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertis-
French Data Protection Authority) has authorised four collective societies
to collect IP data, that will later be used in the application of the three
strikes (HADOPI) law. However CNIL's report notes that there is no
control on the software produced by the French company that collects IP
addresses, which leads to an almost automatic and blind sanction from Hadopi
authority.
Swiss court rules IP address-tracing software breached data protection law
(10.09.2010)
http://www.out-law.com:80//default.aspx?page=11364
Court: Logistep Can't Collect P2P Users' IP Addresses (8.09.2010)
http://newteevee.com/2010/09/08/court-logistep-cant-collect-p2p-users-ip-addresses/
Federal Supreme Court decision regarding Logistep AG (9.09.2010)
http://www.edoeb.admin.ch/aktuell/01688/index.html?lang=en
HADOPI : CNIL denounced the absence of TMG control! (only in French,
20.09.2010)
http://www.numerama.com/magazine/16826-hadopi-la-cnil-avait-denonce-l-absence-de-controle-de-tmg.html
CNIL Report related to Hadopi law (10.06.2010)
http://www.pcinpact.com/media/rapport-sprd-hadopi-pour-transmission.doc
============================================================
7. Google's Street View will not resume its activities in the Czech Republic
============================================================
For the second time, the Czech data protection authority (UOOU) rejected
Google's application to resume its data collection through its Street View
system. The Czech data agency had already rejected a similar request from
Google in December 2009. However, Street View photographs taken prior to
October 2009 will remain online.
Hana Stepankova, a spokesman for UOOU said they had concerns over the
legality of Google's service. "We do not have complete certainty the
information (collected) is being processed according to law," she said.
Google representatives have expressed their disappointment and their belief
that Street View is legal in the Czech Republic. "We have in place robust
procedures to protect privacy, such as face and number plate blurring and a
removals tool. We'll continue to engage in dialogue with the (data
protection authority) to answer any other questions they have," wrote Lena
Wagner, Google spokesperson, in an e-mail to Deutsche Welle.
She expressed Google's confidence that the agency would grant the company
permission to resume data collection, provided the process could be done
legally. Stepankova also confirmed the intention of the Czech authorities to
continue the dialogue with Google in this matter.
In Germany, several hundred thousand people have chosen to opt-out from
Google StreetView's service; the Germans have been given the possibility to
opt-out by 15 October 2010 in case they did not want their homes or
businesses to be included in the service.
In the light of the debate over Google Street View service, the German
government has decided to consider new laws on online data protection. On 20
September, a high-level meeting took place in Berlin, chaired by Interior
Minister Thomas de Maiziere, with representatives of the IT industry to
discuss the chances, risks and restrictions of publishing private data on
the Internet.
In an e-mail sent to Deutsche Welle, Viktor Mayer-Schoenberger, an Austrian
professor and the director of the Information and Innovation Policy Research
Center at the National University of Singapore expressed his opinion that
Google will continue to face problems in several European countries having
in view the different approaches in the implementation and interpretation
of the data protection directive.
"It is conceivable that capturing license plates and building facades
through Street View is legal in the UK, but illegal in the Czech Republic.
Especially nations with a surveillance past (like Eastern and Central
Europe) often have tough privacy laws. It will take a long time and much
effort for Google to navigate this thicket of information privacy laws,"
said the expert.
However, Google has recently been cleared in the UK by the Information
Commissioner, as it has been found that Street View vehicles had
not collected "significant" personal details but the company it is still
under investigation by the Metropolitan police.
In the meantime, the company continues to extend its Street View service
into Europe and stated in August they would send their Street View cars to
Latvia.
Czech Republic stops Google from further Street View photography
(15.09.2010)
http://www.dw-world.de:80/dw/article/0,,6006085,00.html
Czechs halt Google Street View (15.09.2010)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11312390
Strong German opposition to Google Street View: report (19.09.2010)
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5h5h55tBTr1LFxFWc6gkE_2E6tPdw
EDRi-gram: Google Street View faces citizens' reservation in EU (25.08.2010)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number8.16/google-streetview-rejected-germany-france-spain
============================================================
8. FSFE insists on promoting free PDF readers
============================================================
The Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) calls on all Europeans to seek
out advertisements for proprietary PDF readers on their government's
websites, and report them. In addition, FSFE has prepared a petition
demanding an end to such advertising practices, and encourages the public to
sign it.
"Every time that state websites link to non-free applications and encourage
visitors to use them, they needlessly encourage citizens to throw away their
freedom", says Karsten Gerloff, FSFE's President.
As websites such as pdfreaders.org demonstrate, Free Software PDF readers
exist for all major operating systems. Fellows of FSFE launched the project
in 2009 in response to public bodies' habit of advertising a particular
non-free product on their sites.
FSFE's Fellowship Coordinator Matthias Kirschner comments: "What would you
think about a sign on the highway saying 'You need a Volkswagen to drive on
this road. Contact your Volkswagen dealer for a gratis test drive'? When it
comes to PDF readers, governments seem to think that this is acceptable."
Such endorsements give unfair advantage to whichever proprietary product
they recommend, and are often accompanied by inaccurate statements
presenting the application as the only available option.
The hunt begins on 13 September 2010 and will continue until 17 October
2010. Prizes will be awarded at the end of October to the individuals and
groups who report the greatest number of proprietary software advertisements
on government websites.
Free Software PDF Readers
http://www.fsfe.org/campaigns/pdfreaders/pdfreaders.html
Petition For The Removal Of Proprietary Software Advertising On Government
Websites
http://www.fsfe.org/campaigns/pdfreaders/petition.html
Get a Free Software PDF reader!
http://pdfreaders.org/
(Thanks to Free Software Foundation Europe)
============================================================
9. ENDitorial: Internet blocking in ten weeks and counting
============================================================
Within the next ten weeks, the European Parliament will finish its crucial
first reading of the Directive which, if the European Commission has its
way, will impose an EU-wide blocking infrastructure - undermining child
protection, fundamental rights and the EU's voice on freedom and democracy
in the world.
The measure proposed is quite interesting. The text reads as follows:
"Member States shall take the necessary measures to obtain the blocking of
access by Internet users in their territory to Internet pages containing or
disseminating child pornography. The blocking of access shall be subject to
adequate safeguards, in particular to ensure that the blocking is limited to
what is necessary, that users are informed of the reason for the blocking
and that content providers, as far as possible, are informed of the
possibility of challenging it."
The first point to note is that it proposes an undefined approach and not
any form of minimum standard. Any technology that could possibly follow
under the dictionary definition of blocking, no matter how technologically
flawed, no matter how out of date, no matter how damaging to networks would
be acceptable. The
Commission simultaneously feels that the problem is so urgent that blocking
must be proposed, yet the problem is so unimportant that any deficient or
out of date technology is perfectly fine. The supporters of blocking have
been very curiously and very completely silent on this point.
The "safeguards" are also of limited value. Ensuring the blocking is limited
to what a Member State considers "necessary" means little, with countries
like France planning to block sites accused of intellectual property
infringement and Denmark blocking (and thereby boosting traffic by 12%) the
Pirate Bay website. Informing the users about the reasons for the block is
not a safeguard, it is a very limited exercise in transparency. Finally, a
provision whereby the owners of websites depicting serious crimes against
children are politely informed that their website is the subject of a weak,
inadequate blocking system is not a safeguard - unless you are the grateful
criminal being given this valuable information.
So far, many Members of the European Parliament have been convinced that
blocking is an undesirable option. Unfortunately, however mantras being
repeated by a powerful alliance of businesses, Commission-funded NGOs and
the Commission itself are having an effect on parliamentarians. As a result,
the most likely outcome at the moment is a "compromise" that would say
blocking should be a last resort, once everything else has been tried. So,
an obligation would be imposed on Member States to build a blocking
infrastructure, with the request that they not use it, if possible.
Three messages are being pushed particularly hard:
1. This proposal is only about child abuse images, it will not spread into
other policy areas. This message is being pushed even though the Commission
itself is offering funding for blocking of other material, even though the
Council of Ministers has adopted a text supporting blocking to protect
national gambling monopolies and even though blocking is spreading into
other fields in countries such as Belgium (gambling), Bulgaria (gambling),
France (gambling and intellectual property), Italy (gambling, intellectual
property, free online advertising, defamation, cigarette import, steroid
advice) and Lithuania (gambling).
2. Blocking "works in some cases". In no case can leaving a child abuse
website online be considered "working". In no case can leaving criminals
unpunished and victims unprotected be considered working. Yet, somehow, the
impression is being created that the abuse websites are somehow just a
nuisance that will disappear if we can only persuade the whole continent to
look away.
3. Blocking "stops accidental access," yet it has proven completely
impossible for the European Commission to produce evidence from the Internet
hotlines that it funds (on condition that statistics are produced!) showing
that there are any fewer complaints about illegal content being found online
in countries with blocking compared with those without blocking. In any
event, with only approximately one person in every three thousand reporting
illegal content, the numbers involved are miniscule.
Unless something is done now, in a few short years, blocking will have
sapped the political motivation to take real measures to fight online child
abuse. The powerful intellectual property lobby and national gambling
monopolies have had blocking installed for their interests. The
"self-regulatory" blocking so enthusiastically supported by the Commission
will be used by the tabloid media to pressure Internet Service Providers to
block whatever takes their fancy (as can be seen in the USA from the
Craigslist case and the case where T-Mobile allegedly blocked text messages
for a legal medicinal marijuana supplier). One would almost feel sorry for
the Commission in years to come when it tries to explain to China or Iran or
Turkey they are placing too many restrictions on the use of the Internet.
The reason why blocking is never the answer is that "blocking" leaves the
website online - it doesn't block the website at all, it takes down the
signpost, while leaving infinite numbers of roads to the blocked site open.
It leaves the illegal site easily accessible for anyone who wants to see it.
It does nothing to investigate the criminals or the users of the site, it
does nothing to identify and rescue the victims. All it could conceivably do
is stop accidental access and nobody has been able to show that this is a
problem that would require a blocking infrastructure to be developed, which
anyway can be (and already is in several countries) misused for less
important issues, such as protecting national gambling monopolies. Only
about one person in every three thousand , in any one year, reports illegal
child abuse material to a national hotline - the argument that blocking is
necessary as a short term solution to prevent accidental access while
websites are being taken offline simply bears no relationship with reality.
The time is now to protect the Open Internet in Europe. The time is now to
contact parliamentarians and persuade them not to make possibly the biggest
mistake in the history of the Internet in Europe and the world.
EDRi's blocking booklet
http://www.edri.org/files/blocking_booklet.pdf
German Version
http://www.edri.org/files/Booklet_dt_final.pdf
T-Mobile sued for allegedly blocking pot-related texting (18.09.2010)
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20016908-38.html
Censoring Craigslist (8.09.2010)
http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/2010/09/08/censorship-craigslist/
European Commission funding proposal
http://bit.ly/ckWv9F
Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on
combating the sexual abuse, sexual exploitation of children and child
pornography, repealing Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2010&nu_doc=0094
"Impact assessment": Accompanying document to the Proposal for a Council
Framework Decision on combating the sexual abuse, sexual exploitation of
children and child pornography, repealing Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA -
Impact assessment {COM(2009) 135} {SEC(2009) 356
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52009SC0355:EN:NOT
Commission official explains the Commission's research:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpFpoXIdRQc
Cybercriminals thank Commissioner Malmstrvm:
http://www.cybercriminalsociety.eu/index.php
(Contribution by Joe McNamee - EDRi)
============================================================
10. Recommended Reading
============================================================
Charter for the democratic use of video-surveillance
Available in 9 EU languages
http://www.fesu.org/index.php?id=31768&L=lumsppdylqqony
OSCAR or the denial of European citizenship to Roma (only in French,
21.09.2010)
http://www.iris.sgdg.org/info-debat/comm-oscar0910.html
Fringe Special: Overview of all FOI laws: 80 national FOIAs - 184
sub-national FOIAs - & 2 international FOIA compiled by Roger Vleugel
(20.09.2010)
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2010/sep/foia-fringe-special-overview-sep-20-2010.pdf
Internet Governance Forum a beacon of openness
https://press.ffii.org/Press%20releases/Internet%20Governance%20Forum%20a%20beacon%20of%20openness
============================================================
11. Agenda
============================================================
8-9 October 2010, Berlin, Germany
The 3rd Free Culture Research Conference
http://wikis.fu-berlin.de/display/fcrc/Home
25-26 October 2010, Jerusalem, Israel
OECD Conference on "Privacy, Technology and Global Data Flows", celebrating
the 30th anniversary of the OECD Guidelines on the Protection of Privacy and
Transborder Flows of Personal Data
http://www.oecd.org/sti/privacyanniversary
27-29 October 2010, Jerusalem, Israel
The 32nd Annual International Conference of Data Protection and Privacy
Commissioners
http://www.privacyconference2010.org/
28-31 October 2010, Barcelona, Spain
oXcars and Free Culture Forum 2010, the biggest free culture event of all
time
http://exgae.net/oxcars10
http://fcforum.net/10
3-5 November 2010, Barcelona, Spain
The Fifth International Conference on Legal, Security and Privacy Issues in
IT Law.
http://www.lspi.net/
5-7 November 2010, Cologne, Germany
Transparency, Work, Surveillance
Joint Annual Meeting of FIfF and DVD
http://fiff.de/veranstaltungen/fiff-jahrestagungen/JT2010/jt2010_uebersicht
5-7 November 2010, Gothenburg, Sweden
Free Society Conference and Nordic Summit
http://www.fscons.org/
17 November 2010, Gent, Belgium
Big Brother Awards 2010 Belgium
http://www.winuwprivacy.be/kandidaten
25-28 January 2011, Brussels, Belgium
The annual Conference Computers, Privacy & Data Protection CPDP 2011
European Data Protection: In Good Health?
Submission deadline for Full Papers and Position Papers: 16 November 2010
http://www.cpdpconferences.org/
============================================================
12. About
============================================================
EDRI-gram is a biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe.
Currently EDRI has 27 members based or with offices in 17 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/edri/2.html
- EDRI-gram in German
EDRI-gram is also available in German, with delay. Translations are provided
Andreas Krisch from the EDRI-member VIBE!AT - Austrian Association for
Internet Users
http://www.unwatched.org/
- Newsletter archive
Back issues are available at:
http://www.edri.org/edrigram
- Help
Please ask <edrigram 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
More information about the cypherpunks-legacy
mailing list