<p>EDRi? The stole my family name!</p>
<p>- Sent from my mobile device.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Feb 15, 2013 8:58 PM, "Stephen LaPorte" <<a href="mailto:slaporte@wikimedia.org">slaporte@wikimedia.org</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>Many of these topics are probably of interest, especially the discussion on ancillary copyright law in Germany.</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: <b class="gmail_sendername"></b> <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:edri-news-request@mailman.edri.org" target="_blank">edri-news-request@mailman.edri.org</a>></span><br>
Date: Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 4:42 AM<br>Subject: EDRi-news Digest, Vol 119, Issue 1<br>To: <a href="mailto:edri-news@mailman.edri.org" target="_blank">edri-news@mailman.edri.org</a><br><br><br>Send EDRi-news mailing list submissions to<br>
<a href="mailto:edri-news@mailman.edri.org" target="_blank">edri-news@mailman.edri.org</a><br>
<br>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
<a href="http://mailman.edri.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/edri-news" target="_blank">http://mailman.edri.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/edri-news</a><br>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
<a href="mailto:edri-news-request@mailman.edri.org" target="_blank">edri-news-request@mailman.edri.org</a><br>
<br>
You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
<a href="mailto:edri-news-owner@mailman.edri.org" target="_blank">edri-news-owner@mailman.edri.org</a><br>
<br>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
than "Re: Contents of EDRi-news digest..."<br>
<br>
<br>
Today's Topics:<br>
<br>
1. EDRi-gram newsletter - Number 11.3, 13 February 2013 (EDRi-gram)<br>
<br>
<br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 23:07:53 +0200<br>
From: EDRi-gram <<a href="mailto:edrigram@edri.org" target="_blank">edrigram@edri.org</a>><br>
Subject: EDRi-gram newsletter - Number 11.3, 13 February 2013<br>
To: <a href="mailto:edri-news@edri.org" target="_blank">edri-news@edri.org</a><br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:511C00A9.2060702@edri.org" target="_blank">511C00A9.2060702@edri.org</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed<br>
<br>
<br>
======================================================================<br>
<br>
EDRi-gram<br>
<br>
biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe<br>
<br>
Number 11.3, 13 February 2013<br>
<br>
=======================================================================<br>
Contents<br>
=======================================================================<br>
<br>
1. Copyright: challenges of the digital era<br>
2. Most Internet users would use DNT settings if easily available<br>
3. US privacy groups believe US officials lobby to weaken EU privacy<br>
4. Dutch government maintains private copying-exception for downloading<br>
5. Denmark: Government postpones the data retention law evaluation<br>
6. Ancillary copyright law under discussion in Germany<br>
7. Human rights orgs ask OECD to investigate surveillance companies<br>
8. Big Brother Awards 2013 Bulgaria<br>
9. ENDitorial: Licences for Europe and fight club... only one rule<br>
10. Recommended Action: support your privacy rights<br>
11. Recommended Reading<br>
12. Agenda<br>
13. About<br>
<br>
=======================================================================<br>
1. Copyright: challenges of the digital era<br>
=======================================================================<br>
<br>
EDRi has freshly launched a booklet that overviews the challenges that<br>
copyright is facing in the digital environment.<br>
<br>
For the past twelve years, the European Union has discussed how to<br>
support, develop and protect creation in the digital environment. Two<br>
months ago, the College of Commissioners recognised the necessity that<br>
copyright ?stays fit for purpose? in the digital economy.<br>
<br>
Until now, the focus point has been on the enforcement of pre-existing<br>
legislative norms not only within the rule of law but also through<br>
private policing via internet service providers. However, despite all<br>
these efforts, there is still an ubiquitous lack of respect for copyright.<br>
<br>
The booklet looks at the reasons for this profound gap that has emerged<br>
between citizens and the law. Following a brief introduction to the<br>
logic behind granting monopoly rights, the booklet lists some reasons<br>
that lead to difficulties in respecting copyright law, ranging from<br>
excessive penalties for breaching the law to legally-protected<br>
restrictions on citizens' rights to use digital products they paid for.<br>
It then focuses on the impact of rigid and outdated copyright law on<br>
legitimate businesses. Finally, it gives a glance at the wide range of<br>
excessive enforcement measures that underline the deterioration of<br>
copyright leading to unreasonable and wrongful practices.<br>
<br>
In short, this booklet presents a simplified overview of the<br>
difficulties facing public support for copyright. EDRi hopes that it<br>
will have a positive impact on the current debate regarding the<br>
necessity of reforming copyright law and adapting the current system to<br>
the digital age, allowing the achievement of the digital single market,<br>
removing existing barriers and giving citizens a better access to their<br>
culture.<br>
<br>
Copyright: challenges of the digital era (02.2013)<br>
<a href="http://www.edri.org/files/paper07_copyright.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.edri.org/files/paper07_copyright.pdf</a><br>
<br>
Commission agrees way forward for modernising copyright in the digital<br>
economy (5.12.2012)<br>
<a href="http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-950_en.htm" target="_blank">http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-950_en.htm</a><br>
<br>
Report from the Commission on the application of Directive 2004/48/EC<br>
(22.12.2010)<br>
<a href="http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0779:FIN:EN:PDF" target="_blank">http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0779:FIN:EN:PDF</a><br>
<br>
(Contribution by Marie Humeau - EDRi)<br>
<br>
=======================================================================<br>
2. Most Internet users would use DNT settings if easily available<br>
=======================================================================<br>
<br>
According to a survey by IT service analysts Ovum, 68% of the Internet<br>
users would use ?do-not-track? (DNT) settings to restrict the use of<br>
their personal data, if such a tool was "easily available?.<br>
<br>
Websites and third-parties, such as advertisers, may record Internet<br>
users? behaviour in order to serve targeted, personalised ads. Such<br>
user-specific data can be collected by several means, including the use<br>
of cookies. The information thus stored can be passed on by operators to<br>
advertisers for behavioural adverts, based on the users' activity and<br>
declared interests.<br>
<br>
Yet, lately, consumers have become more aware of the fact that their<br>
personal information can be used as merchandise. Ovum?s survey has shown<br>
that only 14% of consumers believe Internet firms are honest about the<br>
way they use their consumers' personal data. "Unfortunately, in the gold<br>
rush that is big data, taking the supply of ?little data? ? personal<br>
data ? for granted seems to be an accident waiting to happen," said Mark<br>
Little, principal analyst at Ovum who added: "However, consumers are<br>
being empowered with new tools and services to monitor, control, and<br>
secure their personal data as never before, and it seems they<br>
increasingly have the motivation to use them."<br>
<br>
In Little?s opinion, the Internet companies would have to change their<br>
attitudes towards their customers. The operators should make privacy<br>
tools available to consumers and use ?a new set of messages to change<br>
consumers? attitudes. These messages must be based on positive direct<br>
relationships, engagement with consumers, and the provision of genuine<br>
and trustworthy privacy controls.? Although EU Commissioner Neelie Kroes<br>
had previously asked for a new DNT standard to enable Internet users to<br>
indicate their consent for the use of their personal data in a manner<br>
that would comply with the EU's Privacy and Electronic Communications<br>
Directive, last year she indicated that she would accept a DNT<br>
standard that would only partially meet the requirements under the<br>
Directive. Under the EU's amended Privacy and Electronic Communications<br>
Directive, storing and accessing information on users' computers is only<br>
lawful "on condition that the subscriber or user concerned has given his<br>
or her consent, having been provided with clear and comprehensive<br>
information ? about the purposes of the processing".<br>
<br>
The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) has been working on developing a new<br>
DNT controls system which, in its opinion, should not be switched on by<br>
default but require an explicit instruction to operate. Firefox has<br>
already implemented it since 2011.<br>
<br>
Microsoft, on the other hand, has developed its own DNT tool for its new<br>
Internet Explorer 10 web browser. The DNT setting is automatically<br>
activated and the users have to change the settings in case they wish to<br>
let websites and advertising networks track their online activity. This<br>
has obviously crossed advertising companies and the system does not<br>
actually guarantee that all companies would respect it. Yahoo! for<br>
instance, has stated that it would not "recognise IE10?s default DNT<br>
signal".<br>
<br>
Google introduced the DNT standard in November 2012, with the launching<br>
of its Chrome 23, but warned that the results could be variable. "The<br>
effectiveness of such requests is dependent on how websites and services<br>
respond, so Google is working with others on a common way to respond to<br>
these requests in the future," wrote Google engineer Ami Fischman on the<br>
company?s blog.<br>
<br>
Most consumers would activate do-not-track privacy settings if they were<br>
'easily available', according to Ovum survey (6.02.2013)<br>
<a href="http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2013/february/most-consumers-would-activate-do-not-track-privacy-settings-if-they-were-easily-available-according-to-ovum-survey/" target="_blank">http://www.out-law.com/en/articles/2013/february/most-consumers-would-activate-do-not-track-privacy-settings-if-they-were-easily-available-according-to-ovum-survey/</a><br>
<br>
The data black hole that could suck the life out of the internet economy<br>
(8.02.2013)<br>
<a href="http://www.zdnet.com/the-data-black-hole-that-could-suck-the-life-out-of-the-internet-economy-7000011002/" target="_blank">http://www.zdnet.com/the-data-black-hole-that-could-suck-the-life-out-of-the-internet-economy-7000011002/</a><br>
<br>
Google's Chrome finally embraces Do Not Track, but with a warning<br>
(7.11.2012)<br>
<a href="http://www.zdnet.com/googles-chrome-finally-embraces-do-not-track-but-with-a-warning-7000007022/" target="_blank">http://www.zdnet.com/googles-chrome-finally-embraces-do-not-track-but-with-a-warning-7000007022/</a><br>
<br>
=======================================================================<br>
3. US privacy groups believe US officials lobby to weaken EU privacy<br>
=======================================================================<br>
<br>
A coalition of 18 US privacy groups sent a letter on 30 January 2013 to<br>
US politicians such as the Attorney General Eric Holder, Secretary<br>
of State John Kerry and the Acting Secretary of Commerce Rebecca Blank,<br>
asking for assurances that US policy makers in Europe "advance the aim<br>
of privacy" and do not hinder the European data law proposals.<br>
<br>
The European Union is considering the data protection regulation that<br>
could give the citizens significant control over the use of their<br>
personal data by websites and marketing companies. Several proposals<br>
would require companies to obtain permission before collecting personal<br>
data and specify exactly what information will be collected and how it<br>
will be used.<br>
<br>
One proposal refers to the so-called ?right to be forgotten? that<br>
obliges companies like Facebook to delete all information about users<br>
who want to do that. The coalition shows concern over the fact that, as<br>
the new EU Data Protection Regulation is under discussion and debate,<br>
Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) have lately reported that US<br>
policy makers are "mounting an unprecedented lobbying campaign to limit<br>
the protections that European law would provide."<br>
<br>
The privacy groups believe that U.S. policymakers, politicians and<br>
bureaucrats are undermining the work of the European Parliament. "The<br>
U.S. should not stand in the way of Europe's efforts to strengthen and<br>
modernize its legal framework," the letter states. Jeff Chester,<br>
Executive Director of the Center for Digital Democracy told ZDNet that<br>
despite President Obama?s pro-privacy speeches, his administration is<br>
"working to protect the U.S. data lobby."<br>
<br>
He added: "One of the U.S.' few growth areas is stealing other peoples<br>
data. So, the U.S. is arguing that the EU should not enact strong<br>
baselines rules requiring citizens to provide affirmative consent for<br>
such critical uses as profiling, and adopt its weak industry friendly<br>
approach based primarily on industry self-regulation."<br>
<br>
EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding said in 2012 that the lobbying<br>
effort had been "absolutely fierce" and unprecedented in scale.<br>
<br>
On 3 February 2013, the head of a big pan-European industry group<br>
revealed "intensifying pressure from U.S. lobbyists on behalf of<br>
Google and Facebook," as reported the Financial Times. Jacob<br>
Kohnstamm, the chairman of the EU's Article 29 Working Party also said<br>
European lawmakers were "fed up" of U.S. lobbying.<br>
<br>
The letter of the coalition notes that updating the U.S. Electronic<br>
Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), under which authorities need only a<br>
subpoena approved by a federal prosecutor, rather than a judge, to<br>
obtain electronically stored messages six months old or older, would be<br>
a good start for the U.S. officials to bring the country in compliance<br>
with international human rights standards.<br>
<br>
The US lobby has shown its practical results after several newspapers<br>
and websites have pointed out that MEPs in the EP's Internal Market and<br>
Consumer Committee (IMCO) have included copy-paste amendments written by<br>
Amazon, eBay or the American Chamber of Commerce (AmCham EU).<br>
<br>
Privacy groups call on U.S. government to stop lobbying against EU data<br>
law changes (4.02.2013)<br>
<a href="http://www.zdnet.com/privacy-groups-call-on-u-s-government-to-stop-lobbying-against-eu-data-law-changes-7000010721/" target="_blank">http://www.zdnet.com/privacy-groups-call-on-u-s-government-to-stop-lobbying-against-eu-data-law-changes-7000010721/</a><br>
<br>
The E.U. could approve a new privacy policy later this year. Europe<br>
Moves Ahead on Privacy (3.02.2013)<br>
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/04/opinion/europe-moves-ahead-on-privacy-laws.html" target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/04/opinion/europe-moves-ahead-on-privacy-laws.html</a><br>
<br>
Lobby groups take CTRL+V of data protection proposal (11.02.2013)<br>
<a href="http://edri.org/lobbyplag-eudatap" target="_blank">http://edri.org/lobbyplag-eudatap</a><br>
<br>
LobbyPlag<br>
<a href="http://www.lobbyplag.eu/" target="_blank">http://www.lobbyplag.eu/</a><br>
<br>
=======================================================================<br>
4. Dutch government maintains private copying-exception for downloading<br>
=======================================================================<br>
<br>
The Dutch government announced that it wouldn't prohibit the<br>
unauthorised downloading of copyrighted material.<br>
<br>
It did so on 4 February 2013 in a letter to the Parliament, putting an<br>
end to a heated debate that lasted for years. As a result, the<br>
Netherlands remains one of the few countries in Europe where downloading<br>
without permission of the rightsholders is allowed under the private<br>
copying-exception. Dutch digital rights organisation Bits of Freedom<br>
urged that this should be the first step in a long overdue modernisation<br>
of the copyright system.<br>
<br>
The Dutch government responded to a resolution by the Dutch Parliament<br>
earlier this year. In this resolution, the Parliament called on the<br>
government to maintain the application of the private copying-exception<br>
to downloading. It did so after the government did not respond to a<br>
similar resolution one year earlier, instead continuing its plans to<br>
abolish the private copying-exception for downloading. Now, however, it<br>
admitted defeat in the face of enduring opposition.<br>
<br>
Bits of Freedom hopes that this decision paves the way for the<br>
modernisation of the copyright system. Past political endeavours focused<br>
on the criminalisation of sharing by individual internet users. This is<br>
counterproductive and does not address the real challenge: ensuring that<br>
knowledge and culture is shared as widely as possible while remunerating<br>
rightsholders. The Dutch government should start together with the<br>
Parliament exploring remuneration models which support this goal.<br>
<br>
Letter of government to parliament (only in Dutch, 04.02.2013)<br>
<a href="https://www.bof.nl/live/wp-content/uploads/briefTeeven040213.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.bof.nl/live/wp-content/uploads/briefTeeven040213.pdf</a><br>
<br>
Resolution of Dutch parliament (only in Dutch, 11.12.2012)<br>
<a href="https://www.bof.nl/2012/12/11/parlement-spreekt-zich-uit-tegen-downloadverbod/" target="_blank">https://www.bof.nl/2012/12/11/parlement-spreekt-zich-uit-tegen-downloadverbod/</a><br>
<br>
Blog Bits of Freedom: Download Prohibition finally buried (only in<br>
Dutch, 05.02.2013)<br>
<a href="https://www.bof.nl/2013/02/05/downloadverbod-eindelijk-begraven/" target="_blank">https://www.bof.nl/2013/02/05/downloadverbod-eindelijk-begraven/</a><br>
<br>
(Contribution by Ot van Daalen - EDRi member Bits of Freedom Netherlands)<br>
<br>
=======================================================================<br>
5. Denmark: Government postpones the data retention law evaluation<br>
=======================================================================<br>
<br>
In the coming months, the Danish Parliament will conduct an evaluation<br>
and revision of the Danish data retention law which implements directive<br>
2006/24/EC. The review process has been postponed twice on earlier<br>
occasions (2010 and 2012), and the Danish government wants another<br>
two-year extension, officially in order to coordinate with any changes<br>
in the directive at the EU level.<br>
<br>
The Danish law exceeds the requirements of the data retention directive<br>
in several respects, especially as far as Internet logging is concerned.<br>
The Danish law contains a requirement for session logging which includes<br>
data about every Internet packet being transmitted.<br>
<br>
Specifically, the following information must be retained: source and<br>
destination IP address, source and destination port number, transmission<br>
protocol (like TCP and UDP) and timestamps. The contents of the<br>
Internet packets are not being logged, but the IP addresses will contain<br>
information about visits to websites of political parties (that is, in<br>
effect, registration of political preferences) and the online news<br>
services that the citizen reads. Last year in the Danish Parliament,<br>
there was considerable debate about the Danish over-implementation of<br>
the data retention directive, in particular Internet session logging.<br>
<br>
The Parliament instructed the Danish government to produce an evaluation<br>
report with special focus on session logging. The Danish Ministry of<br>
Justice published this report in December 2012.<br>
<br>
The evaluation report contains detailed descriptions of nine police<br>
cases where telephone logging was useful, or maybe even critical, to the<br>
Danish police. These cases are taken from an earlier report submitted to<br>
the EU Commission. All nine cases are about serious and violent crimes<br>
such as murder, armed robbery and organized narcotics smuggling.<br>
<br>
For Internet logging there are only three police cases. Moreover, one of<br>
the three cases is really about telephone logging since location data<br>
from a mobile device is used by the police. The location registration<br>
just happens to be triggered by "data calls" from a smartphone. This<br>
leaves two police cases to demonstrate the value of internet logging,<br>
and only one case uses session logging. Both cases involve economic<br>
crimes (fraud) on a relatively minor scale. There is a huge discrepancy<br>
between the nature of the police cases involving telephone and Internet<br>
logging.<br>
<br>
The report confirms the EDRi member IT-Pol suspicion that Internet<br>
logging, and especially Internet session logging, is rarely used by the<br>
Danish police. Quite interestingly, the Ministry of Justice formally<br>
states in their own evaluation report that session logging was<br>
implemented in a way that made it useless for the police (the<br>
implementation is according to the requirements of the law). Before<br>
September 2007, the Danish Internet service providers repeatedly warned<br>
the Ministry of Justice that session logging would be useless for the<br>
police.<br>
<br>
The Danish Ministry of Justice report (only in Danish, 12.2012)<br>
<a href="http://www.ft.dk/samling/20121/lovforslag/l142/bilag/2/1213533.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.ft.dk/samling/20121/lovforslag/l142/bilag/2/1213533.pdf</a><br>
<br>
Danish government wants to postpone the evaluation of the data retention<br>
law for the third time (12.02.2013)<br>
<a href="http://www.itpol.dk/notater/Danish-data-retention-evaluation-Feb13" target="_blank">http://www.itpol.dk/notater/Danish-data-retention-evaluation-Feb13</a><br>
<br>
EDRi-gram: Key privacy concerns in Denmark 2007 (30.01.2008)<br>
<a href="http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number6.2/privacy-denmark-2007" target="_blank">http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number6.2/privacy-denmark-2007</a><br>
<br>
(Contribution by Jesper Lund, EDRi member IT-Pol Denmark)<br>
<br>
=======================================================================<br>
6. Ancillary copyright law under discussion in Germany<br>
=======================================================================<br>
<br>
The Judiciary Committee of the German Bundestag held on 30 January 2013<br>
an expert hearing on the proposed ?Leistungsschutzrecht? (LRS, known<br>
also as ?ancillary copyright?) law for news publishers which will<br>
require search engines and others to ask permission from news publishers<br>
to link to their content or even give summarize news content.<br>
<br>
The draft law was criticized by civil society groups as well as the<br>
German association of Internet economy which pointed out the lack of<br>
clarity of the terms used in the text and the negative effects that the<br>
law may bring by restricting the diversity of information on the<br>
internet. Moreover, the legislation is superfluous as publishers are<br>
already protected by copyright provisions. If this bill is enacted<br>
as-is, search engines would be allowed to display snippets only after<br>
having received permission which may involve or not some payment to the<br>
news publishers.<br>
<br>
In some cases, a press publisher might pay a search engine to be<br>
included in its searches. The important issue is that a search engine,<br>
and maybe even social networks, will be obliged to ask permission to<br>
provide snippets from a news publisher. The law has several unclear<br>
areas. For instance, it is not clear whether blogs will be considered as<br>
press products due to the vague definition of the term. The expert<br>
hearing was not focused on technological expertise but rather<br>
on how such a law might fit into the current legal framework.<br>
<br>
A representative from the publishers? associations asked for a<br>
technical language to express conditions such as temporal, topical or<br>
size restrictions, payment requirements and other conditions but did not<br>
succeed in presenting a proper way of how this could be implemented. All<br>
experts in the hearing agreed the law would create a period (estimated<br>
at about 5 years) of legal uncertainty, requiring a series of lawsuits<br>
before realizing who will actually be within the sights of the LRS. This<br>
uncertainty also applies when we talk about Facebook or Twitter. It is<br>
not yet clear whether the law will cover only search engines such as<br>
Google or it will extend to social networks. MP Siegfried Kauder of the<br>
Christian Democrats party stated that in his opinion, after hearing the<br>
experts, there seemed to be no reason for the promotion of the law as,<br>
it appeared to be unlikely the law would help in actually producing new<br>
income for news publishers.<br>
<br>
In the meantime, in France, Google seems to give in under similar<br>
pressure. Eric Schmidt, Executive Chairman of Google made a statement on<br>
the company blog on 1 February 2013, in an attempt to point out that the<br>
search engine had generated ?billions of clicks each month? for news<br>
publishers, ?and our advertising solutions (in which we have<br>
invested billions of dollars) help them make money from that traffic.?<br>
<br>
But Schmidt also stated that on the same date, he, together<br>
with President Hollande of France, announced two new initiatives ?to<br>
help stimulate innovation and increase revenues for French publishers.?<br>
<br>
One was the creation of a 60 million euro Digital Publishing Innovation<br>
Fund financed by Google ?to help support transformative digital<br>
publishing initiatives for French readers.? The second initiative is to<br>
increase the partnership with French publishers ?to help increase their<br>
online revenues using our advertising technology.?<br>
<br>
German Parliament Hears Experts On Proposed Law To Limit Search Engines<br>
(31.01.2013)<br>
<a href="http://searchengineland.com/german-leistungsschutzrecht-146826" target="_blank">http://searchengineland.com/german-leistungsschutzrecht-146826</a><br>
<br>
Google creates ?60m Digital Publishing Innovation Fund to support<br>
transformative French digital publishing initiatives (1.02.2013)<br>
<a href="http://googleblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/google-creates-60m-digital-publishing.html" target="_blank">http://googleblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/google-creates-60m-digital-publishing.html</a><br>
<br>
EDRi-gram: Ancillary copyright madness in Germany and France (26.09.2012)<br>
<a href="http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number10.18/ancillary-copyright-proposal-madness" target="_blank">http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number10.18/ancillary-copyright-proposal-madness</a><br>
<br>
=======================================================================<br>
7. Human rights orgs ask OECD to investigate surveillance companies<br>
=======================================================================<br>
<br>
In the beginning of February 2013 several human rights organisations,<br>
including Privacy International, the European Center for<br>
Constitutional and Human Rights, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights,<br>
Bahrain Watch and Reporters without Borders, filed formal complaints<br>
against surveillance software firms Gamma International and Trovicor.<br>
<br>
The OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development)<br>
National Contact Point (NCP) in the UK was asked to investigate Gamma<br>
International regarding the company?s potential complicity in serious<br>
human rights abuses in Bahrain and in Germany, the complaint was<br>
directed against Munich-based Trovicor.<br>
<br>
In the opinion of the complainants, there are grounds to believe that<br>
the surveillance products and services provided by the two companies<br>
have led to human rights abuses in Bahrain, including arbitrary<br>
detention and torture, violations of the right to privacy, freedom of<br>
expression and freedom of association. It appears that the information<br>
gathered from intercepted phone and internet communications have been<br>
used to detain and torture bloggers, political dissidents and activists<br>
and to extract confessions from them. If the investigation concludes<br>
that the complaints have a real basis, the companies are likely to be<br>
found in breach of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises<br>
which sets out principles and standards for responsible business conduct.<br>
<br>
?The failure of governments to properly control exports of surveillance<br>
technology has left companies like Gamma and Trovicor regulated<br>
exclusively by their own moral compasses. Unfortunately, these compasses<br>
seem to have malfunctioned and directed companies towards some of the<br>
most dangerous and repressive regimes in the world. We very much hope<br>
the OECD process will persuade Gamma and Trovicor to take a long hard<br>
look at their current and future clients, and to think carefully about<br>
the role their products play in the targeting and torture of activists<br>
and the suppression of pro-democracy voices,? stated Eric King, Head of<br>
Research at Privacy International.<br>
<br>
Miriam Saage-Maa?, Vice Legal Director at ECCHR, said: ?By maintaining<br>
permanent business relations with the state of Bahrain and maintaining<br>
their surveillance software, both companies have accepted the risk that<br>
they may be accused of abetting torture and other grave human rights<br>
violations. If true, such actions would amount to a violation of the<br>
OECD Guidelines.?<br>
<br>
These are not the only companies involved in providing surveillance<br>
equipment to countries where freedom of expression is oppressed. Many<br>
suppliers, besides the two companies in question, such as Nokia Siemens<br>
Networks, Hacking Team and Bull / Amesys have supplied equipment to<br>
Libya, Egypt, Syria, Bahrain, Morocco and many more countries that have<br>
violated human rights during the last years.<br>
<br>
Human rights organisations filed formal complaints with the OECD against<br>
surveillance companies (4.02.2013)<br>
<a href="http://en.rsf.org/bahrein-human-rights-organisations-file-04-02-2013,44016.html" target="_blank">http://en.rsf.org/bahrein-human-rights-organisations-file-04-02-2013,44016.html</a><br>
<br>
Briefing note on OECD Complaints against Gamma International and<br>
Trovicor in the UK and Germany (02.2013)<br>
<a href="http://www.statewatch.org/news/2013/feb/oecd-complaint.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.statewatch.org/news/2013/feb/oecd-complaint.pdf</a><br>
<br>
Human rights organisations file formal complaints against surveillance<br>
firms Gamma International and Trovicor with British and German<br>
governments (3.02.2013)<br>
<a href="https://www.privacyinternational.org/press-releases/human-rights-organisations-file-formal-complaints-against-surveillance-firms-gamma" target="_blank">https://www.privacyinternational.org/press-releases/human-rights-organisations-file-formal-complaints-against-surveillance-firms-gamma</a><br>
<br>
EDRi-gram: Export Controls for Digital Weapons (19.12.2013)<br>
<a href="http://edri.org/edrigram/number10.24/export-controls-digital-weapons" target="_blank">http://edri.org/edrigram/number10.24/export-controls-digital-weapons</a><br>
<br>
EDRi-gram: German government intends to use FinFisher Spyware (30.01.2013)<br>
<a href="http://edri.org/edrigram/number11.2/germany-finfisher-spyware" target="_blank">http://edri.org/edrigram/number11.2/germany-finfisher-spyware</a><br>
<br>
=======================================================================<br>
8. Big Brother Awards 2013 Bulgaria<br>
=======================================================================<br>
<br>
EDRi member ISOC Bulgaria and the Access to Information Program<br>
organized the Big Brother Awards for 2012. This year the "winners" are<br>
the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Bulgaria - for lack of<br>
action in changing the way special investigative resources (wiretapping)<br>
is being used with regards to data traffic, which should ensure high<br>
protection of privacy.<br>
<br>
For private companies, the "winner" is Toplofikatsia (Central Heating)<br>
for collecting and processing private data of its customers.<br>
<br>
The BBA awards have been given in Bulgaria since 2003, and usually the<br>
worst governmental institution to deal with privacy is either the<br>
Council of Ministers, or the Ministry of Interior. Among private company<br>
winners have been also mobile operators, advertising companies and power<br>
distributing companies.<br>
<br>
Details about the Bulgarian Big Brother Awards 2013 (only in Bulgarian,<br>
28.01.2013)<br>
<a href="http://bg.bigbrotherawards.org" target="_blank">http://bg.bigbrotherawards.org</a><br>
<br>
(Contribution by Veni Markovski - EDRi member ISOC Bulgaria)<br>
<br>
=======================================================================<br>
9. ENDitorial: Licences for Europe and fight club... only one rule<br>
=======================================================================<br>
<br>
There was a moment in November 2012 when even the most cynical observers<br>
of the European Commission were hopeful of an effective reform of<br>
copyright. Commissioner Barnier gave a speech where he demonstrated that<br>
he understood the problems. He explained that ?the digital revolution<br>
has not yet lived up to expectations in the European context? and<br>
described some barriers to cross-border access to content as<br>
illegitimate. Finally, the problems had been identified. And recognising<br>
a problem is a first step to solving it.<br>
<br>
Then, in December 2012, the Commission was even more explicit. It<br>
explained that the following would be addressed: territoriality in the<br>
Internal Market; harmonisation, limitations and exceptions to copyright<br>
in the digital age; fragmentation of the EU copyright market; and how to<br>
improve effectiveness and efficiency of enforcement while underpinning<br>
its legitimacy in the wider context of copyright reform.<br>
<br>
So far, all that has actually happened is the launch of the Commission's<br>
?licences for Europe? initiative. Or rather, the Commission's launched<br>
industry's initiative... or... well, whoever it is that owns it, was<br>
launched. The last line of Commissioner Barnier's speech at the opening<br>
event was very telling. ?The ball is in your court,? he said. He didn't<br>
explain who ?you? are ? the overwhelming majority of participants<br>
(industry lobbyists), the tiny minority of civil society... or society<br>
in general?<br>
<br>
Actually, we know that ?you? is not society in general. The first rule<br>
of fight club ...?licences for Europe? is... you do not talk about<br>
?licences for Europe?. No web streaming of the working groups, ?Chatham<br>
House Rules? that forbid the attribution of statements to particular<br>
participants or their organisations. The public at large is kept firmly<br>
outside of the process. After the lack of transparency that helped bring<br>
down ACTA, we now have closed doors and ?Chatham House Rules? for<br>
?licences for Europe?. And no problem definition for the working groups<br>
to work on.<br>
<br>
Barnier's subsequent comment that ?it is incomprehensible that Europeans<br>
are coming up against obstacles online which they have been dismantling<br>
in the physical world for more than 50 years,? hovers somewhere between<br>
tragedy and comedy. This statement comes from a Commissioner who<br>
inherited a demonstrably failed 2001 Copyright Directive but has not<br>
acted to fix it. This is the Commissioner that inherited a demonstrably<br>
failed 2004 IPR Enforcement Directive, but has not acted to fix it.<br>
<br>
After four years of inaction on licensing and four years of inaction on<br>
exceptions and limitations to copyright, Commissioner Barnier demanded<br>
action... by everyone in the room except himself, to ?meet together to<br>
find fast, specific solutions to problems arising in the here and now?.<br>
Fast? Faster than what?<br>
<br>
So, what now? Well, we will have months of working group meetings,<br>
carefully shielded from the public by the opaque walls of the European<br>
Commission, bringing us closer and closer to the end of this<br>
legislature, at which time Commissioner Barnier can hand over the<br>
dossier to the next incumbent of the ?Internal Market? portfolio.<br>
Instead of less red tape and fewer licences, licences ?for? Europe are<br>
likely to generate new barriers and new bureaucracy.<br>
<br>
For example, one of the working groups is on ?user-generated content?.<br>
User-generated content is... well... how can this be explained...? It is<br>
user-generated and should not require licensing. Obviously? In many<br>
European countries, users can generate content that avails of exceptions<br>
to copyright for parody/pastiche, for incidental use, uses of minor<br>
importance etc., without licences. However, none of these exceptions are<br>
mandatory, so there is a lack of harmonisation across Europe caused by a<br>
European Directive which the Commission has no obvious intention of<br>
resolving. So, if harmonisation is not possible by the removal of<br>
licensing obligations in those countries which don't have appropriate<br>
exceptions... what will the ?working group? be ?working? on? Adding<br>
voluntary ?licensing? to remove rights that citizens currently have?<br>
<br>
The speech from Commissioner Kroes was not much more inspiring. She said<br>
that she was not ?too keen on heavy-handed legislative measures. They<br>
aren't always needed.? This is true. The question is: when you've<br>
already got heavy-handed legislative measures that are not fit for<br>
purpose ? do you repeal or reform them, or do you farm the problem out<br>
to an ad hoc collection of industry lobbyists in order to make it seem<br>
that the problem is being solved?<br>
<br>
It normally takes at least 9-12 months for the European Parliament to<br>
adopt a legislative text. The next elections are in 15 months. Is there<br>
no hope for a real reform in the next two years?<br>
<br>
Licenses for Europe<br>
<a href="https://ec.europa.eu/licences-for-europe-dialogue/en" target="_blank">https://ec.europa.eu/licences-for-europe-dialogue/en</a><br>
<br>
Commissioner Kroes speech: Digital technology and copyright can fit<br>
together (4.02.2013)<br>
<a href="http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-13-96_en.htm" target="_blank">http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-13-96_en.htm</a><br>
<br>
Commissioner Barnier speech: Making European copyright fit for purpose<br>
in the age of internet (7.11.2012)<br>
<a href="http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-785_en.htm" target="_blank">http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-785_en.htm</a><br>
<br>
Commissioner Barnier speech: Licences for Europe: quality content and<br>
new opportunities for all Europeans in the digital era (4.02.2013)<br>
<a href="http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-13-97_en.htm" target="_blank">http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-13-97_en.htm</a><br>
<br>
(Contribution by Joe McNamee - EDRi)<br>
<br>
=======================================================================<br>
10. Recommended Action: support your privacy rights<br>
=======================================================================<br>
<br>
EDRi together with other civil rights and data protection organisations<br>
launched on 5 February 2013 the European campaign portal<br>
Privacycampaign.eu in support of better protection for European<br>
citizens' rights to privacy and data protection.<br>
<br>
?This is our one opportunity to develop a strong legal framework,<br>
building trust and removing unnecessary red tape for business. We need a<br>
framework that is guided by clear, predictable legal principles and<br>
strong enforcement. Instead, we have an unprecedented wave of<br>
ill-informed, ill-advised and destructive corporate lobbying. Democracy<br>
needs to be injected back into this debate in order to protect the<br>
rights of European citizens? says Joe McNamee, Executive Director of<br>
European Digital Rights.<br>
<br>
The joint campaign launched by European Digital Rights (representing 32<br>
organisations), Privacy International, The Julia Group, La Quadrature du<br>
Net and Access aims at creating a counterweight to the massive lobbying<br>
by the US government, trade associations and big internet business on<br>
the data protection reform.<br>
<br>
The organisations believe that without a successful reform of the data<br>
protection framework European citizens will be left with a series of<br>
legal loopholes and a range of unpredictable enforcement gaps where<br>
nobody, neither citizens nor business, knows what law will be enforced.<br>
<br>
The action of the European citizens is even more needed after the recent<br>
news that prove that MEPs in the Internal Market and Consumer Committee<br>
(IMCO) have adopted amendments written by Amazon, eBay or the American<br>
Chamber of Commerce (AmCham EU) ? to the detriment of European citizens<br>
and their fundamental rights to privacy and data protection.<br>
<br>
Privacy Campaign - European Campaign Portal for the Data Protection Reform<<br>
<a href="http://www.privacycampaign.eu/" target="_blank">http://www.privacycampaign.eu/</a><br>
<br>
Lobby groups take CTRL+V of data protection proposal (11.02.2013)<br>
<a href="http://edri.org/lobbyplag-eudatap" target="_blank">http://edri.org/lobbyplag-eudatap</a><br>
<br>
LobbyPlag<br>
<a href="http://www.lobbyplag.eu/" target="_blank">http://www.lobbyplag.eu/</a><br>
<br>
=======================================================================<br>
11. Recommended Reading<br>
=======================================================================<br>
<br>
EU: Protection of human rights in the EU "rarely a priority", says<br>
Human Rights Watch (02.2013)<br>
<a href="http://www.statewatch.org/news/2013/feb/03hrw-eu-report.htm" target="_blank">http://www.statewatch.org/news/2013/feb/03hrw-eu-report.htm</a><br>
<br>
EU cyber security directive considered harmful (8.02.2013)<br>
<a href="http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2013/02/08/eu-cyber-security-directive-considered-harmful/" target="_blank">http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2013/02/08/eu-cyber-security-directive-considered-harmful/</a><br>
<br>
=======================================================================<br>
12. Agenda<br>
=======================================================================<br>
<br>
14-15 February 2013, Vienna, Austria<br>
Internet 2013 - Shaping policies to advance media freedom<br>
<a href="http://www.osce.org/event/internet2013" target="_blank">http://www.osce.org/event/internet2013</a><br>
<br>
21-22 February 2013, Washington DC, USA<br>
Intellectual Property and Human Rights Conference and Roundtable Discussion<br>
Webcasted live and archived<br>
<a href="http://www.wcl.american.edu/pijip/go/blog-post/intellectual-property-and-human-rights-conference-and-roundtable-discussion" target="_blank">http://www.wcl.american.edu/pijip/go/blog-post/intellectual-property-and-human-rights-conference-and-roundtable-discussion</a><br>
<br>
22 February 2013, Warsaw, Poland<br>
ePSIplatform Conference: "Gotcha! Getting everyone on board"<br>
<a href="http://epsiplatform.eu/content/save-date-22-february-2013-epsiplatform-conference" target="_blank">http://epsiplatform.eu/content/save-date-22-february-2013-epsiplatform-conference</a><br>
<br>
21-22 March 2013, Malta<br>
Online Privacy: Consenting to your Future<br>
<a href="http://www.onlineprivacyconference.eu/" target="_blank">http://www.onlineprivacyconference.eu/</a><br>
<br>
6-8 May 2013, Berlin, Germany<br>
re:publica 2013<br>
<a href="http://re-publica.de/en/" target="_blank">http://re-publica.de/en/</a><br>
<br>
20-21 June 2013, Lisbon, Portugal<br>
EuroDIG 2013<br>
<a href="http://www.eurodig.org/" target="_blank">http://www.eurodig.org/</a><br>
<br>
25-26 June 2013, Barcelona, Spain<br>
9th International Conference on Internet Law & Politics: Big Data:<br>
Challenges and Opportunities.<br>
<a href="http://edcp.uoc.edu/symposia/idp2013/?lang=en" target="_blank">http://edcp.uoc.edu/symposia/idp2013/?lang=en</a><br>
<br>
25-26 June 2013, Washington, DC, USA<br>
23rd Computers, Freedom and Privacy Conference (CFP)<br>
CfP by 1 March 2013<br>
<a href="http://www.cfp.org/2013" target="_blank">http://www.cfp.org/2013</a><br>
<br>
31 July ? 4 August 2013, Geestmerambacht, Netherlands<br>
Observe. Hack. Make. - OHM2013<br>
CfP by 1 March 2013<br>
<a href="https://ohm2013.org/" target="_blank">https://ohm2013.org/</a><br>
<br>
23-26 September 2013, Warsaw, Poland<br>
Public Voice Conference 2013<br>
35th International Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners conference<br>
<a href="http://www.giodo.gov.pl/259/id_art/762/j/en/" target="_blank">http://www.giodo.gov.pl/259/id_art/762/j/en/</a><br>
<br>
============================================================<br>
13. About<br>
============================================================<br>
<br>
EDRi-gram is a biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe.<br>
Currently EDRi has 32 members based or with offices in 20 different<br>
countries in Europe. European Digital Rights takes an active interest in<br>
developments in the EU accession countries and wants to share knowledge<br>
and awareness through the EDRi-gram.<br>
<br>
All contributions, suggestions for content, corrections or agenda-tips<br>
are most welcome. Errors are corrected as soon as possible and are<br>
visible on the EDRi website.<br>
<br>
Except where otherwise noted, this newsletter is licensed under the<br>
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. See the full text at<br>
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/" target="_blank">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/</a><br>
<br>
Newsletter editor: Bogdan Manolea <<a href="mailto:edrigram@edri.org" target="_blank">edrigram@edri.org</a>><br>
<br>
Information about EDRi and its members:<br>
<a href="http://www.edri.org/" target="_blank">http://www.edri.org/</a><br>
<br>
European Digital Rights needs your help in upholding digital rights in<br>
the EU. If you wish to help us promote digital rights, please consider<br>
making a private donation.<br>
<a href="http://www.edri.org/about/sponsoring" target="_blank">http://www.edri.org/about/sponsoring</a><br>
<a href="http://flattr.com/thing/417077/edri-on-Flattr" target="_blank">http://flattr.com/thing/417077/edri-on-Flattr</a><br>
<br>
- EDRI-gram subscription information<br>
<br>
subscribe by e-mail<br>
To: <a href="mailto:edri-news-request@edri.org" target="_blank">edri-news-request@edri.org</a><br>
Subject: subscribe<br>
<br>
You will receive an automated e-mail asking to confirm your request.<br>
Unsubscribe by e-mail<br>
To: <a href="mailto:edri-news-request@edri.org" target="_blank">edri-news-request@edri.org</a><br>
Subject: unsubscribe<br>
<br>
- EDRI-gram in Macedonian<br>
<br>
EDRI-gram is also available partly in Macedonian, with delay.<br>
Translations are provided by Metamorphosis<br>
<a href="http://www.metamorphosis.org.mk/mk/vesti/edri" target="_blank">http://www.metamorphosis.org.mk/mk/vesti/edri</a><br>
<br>
- EDRI-gram in German<br>
<br>
EDRI-gram is also available in German, with delay. Translations are<br>
provided by Andreas Krisch from the EDRI-member VIBE!AT - Austrian<br>
Association for Internet Users<br>
<a href="http://www.unwatched.org/" target="_blank">http://www.unwatched.org/</a><br>
<br>
- Newsletter archive<br>
<br>
Back issues are available at:<br>
<a href="http://www.edri.org/edrigram" target="_blank">http://www.edri.org/edrigram</a><br>
<br>
- Help<br>
Please ask <<a href="mailto:edrigram@edri.org" target="_blank">edrigram@edri.org</a>> if you have any problems with subscribing<br>
or unsubscribing.<br>
<br>
<br>
End of EDRi-news Digest, Vol 119, Issue 1<br>
*****************************************</div><span><font color="#888888"><br></font></span></div><div><br></div>-- <br><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="background-image:initial"><div>
<span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><span style="background-image:initial">Stephen LaPorte</span></span></div>Legal Counsel</span></span><div><span style><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">
<font face="arial, sans-serif">Wikimedia Foundation</font></div><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><font face="arial, sans-serif"><br></font></div><div><font face="arial, sans-serif"><i>For legal reasons, I may only serve as an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation. This means I may not give legal advice to or serve as a lawyer for community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity.</i></font></div>
</span></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Advocacy_Advisors mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org">Advocacy_Advisors@lists.wikimedia.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors" target="_blank">https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy_advisors</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div>