Dear All,
we didn't wait long until - after the feedback sought on the Preliminary
Impact Assessment - the European Commission wants to learn more about
how to improve the efforts in fighting illegal content online. The
consultation is open *until June 25th*[1] and it has a form of a concise
questionnaire[2].
I will be working on the questionnaire where it requires a narrative
(short answers) after May 15th and make the responses available on meta.
The questionnaire is partially the same for everyone and partially
customized according to the capacity in which you answer (as an
individual, a digital rights organization, an online hosting service
provider, etc.).
Since the way we will in future implement and encounter illegal content
moderation - whether as a notice and takedown or automated
detection/filtering - is very important for the whole community, I
encourage you to consider sending a separate response, in whichever
capacity you feel it makes sense for you. It is clear that the questions
steer us into the model that has been presented in both the
Communication and the Recommendation for Tackling Illegal Content
Online, and these solutions are not all great. It is important that we
show that we care about this topic.
I am happy to receive any feedback from you on both the general level as
well as on detailed questions. If needed, I will help and share the
approach we will have in Brussels on this in greater detail.
Have a good week!
Anna
[1]https://ec.europa.eu/info/consultations/public-consultation-measures-further-improve-effectiveness-fight-against-illegal-content-online_en
[2]https://ec.europa.eu/eusurvey/runner/illegal_content_online
--
Anna Mazgal
EU Policy Advisor
Wikimedia
anna(a)wikimedia.be
@a2na
mobile: +32 487 222 945
51 Rue du Trône
BE-1050 Brussels
tl;dr
The Council adopted a negotiating mandate on copyright. The European
Parliament is discussed a seventh compromise proposal on “upload filters”
today and is expected to vote on 20 June. After that, the two institutions
will have to agree on a common version.
This and past reports: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy/Monitor
===
Copyright Reform
---
The Council: The Bulgarian Presidency got its negotiating mandate [1] from
the Council last Friday.It lays out the position that the Council
representatives will be defending while trying to agree with the Parliament
on a common final text. The mandate does not mention content recognition
technologies (i.e. “upload filters”) particularly, but requires platforms
to “prevent availability” of content, which amounts to ex-ante filtering of
all user contributions. It also supports a new ancillary copyright on press
publications. Wikipedia and our other projects are excluded from the scope
of the new liability regime and thus the filters, but other online
platforms, including code sharing services like GitHub, aren’t.
---
The Parliament: This week the lead committee [2] held two negotiating
rounds - on the ancillary copyright (Art. 11) and on upload filters (Art.
13). The rapporteur seems keen on using the Council decision to speed up
the process and is likely to push a 20 June vote, with or without
compromises. We feel that a majority against Art. 11 might be possible,
while Art. 13 is moving toward a wording that might defuse its most
dangerous elements, but would still do plenty of harm. The filtering
majority looks razor-thin and relies on the Front National. Not to forget
that we still have “safeguarding the public domain” (with Europeana, IFLA,
Communia) and “Freedom of Panorama” (with EGDF [3] and the German car
industry[4]) provisions to fight for. At this point everything is a toss-up
and could go either way.
---
The trilogue: An interesting nuance is that the Council voted on a
“negotiating mandate” and not a “general approach” to start the trilogue
(i.e. the talks between the Council and Parliament chaperoned by the
Commission). The former is politically less binding and leaves more open
questions, for instance which criteria should be used as a threshold for
the new ancillary copyright (originality or length). Germany, Belgium, the
Netherland, Slovenia, Finland and Hungary voted against the mandate given.
As for the EP, it is an open question whether the rapporteur will try to
enter the trilogue straight after the committee vote or will go to plenary
first (resulting in a more binding Parliament position).
---
Preparing for the trilogue: The process is unlikely to start before
September meaning that it will be lead by the Austrian Presidency on the
Council side. We are preparing several events with Wikimedia Österreich to
flank this in Vienna, firstly a press event with Katherine Maher just
before Austria takes over. [5]
===
Tackling illegal content online:Before the dust had a chance to set on the
feedback on the Inception Impact Assessment[6] the European Commission had
harvested, it is already surveying citizens on how to best regulate illegal
content, which means anything from counterfeit shoes through hate speech to
terrorism. A Techdirt article explains best what is at stake if these bad
ideas that are evident in the biased study come to life, so go straight
there[7] and then visit our meta page [8] to find all the relevant links
and leave comments. It is important that we speak out before June 25th
deadline; the Wikimedia Foundation, WMBXL and WMCZ are working on it. If
you want to also respond, write to us!
===
ePrivacy Regulation: This important file (cookies and privacy of
messengers) is on our radar, but even trying very hard we cannot report
much. It has been an impressive 506 days that the Council hasn't managed
get their act together and adopt a position. Looks like the Austrian
Presidency may well inherit this dossier.
===
Trade Negotiations: The texts of the trade treaties between the EU and
Japan [9] and the EU and Singapore [10] have been finalised. In parallel,
the EU is preparing to finish the Mexico and MERCOSUR negotiations and to
start the process with Australia and New Zealand. All of these have or will
have important implications for the dissemination of free knowledge. The
EU-Japan and Singapore treaties, for instance, fix copyright to at least
lifelong plus 70, thereby internationally binding these sides to terms that
go beyond the Berne Convention. As the EFF have recently announced they
will allocate less resources to trade, the digital civil society seems
uncoordinated and aimless in this sector.
===
Alliance on Disinformation: As part of the European Commission’s ongoing
efforts to tackle disinformation (a.k.a. “fake news”) [11], an Alliance on
Disinformation has been inaugurated this week with the goal to produce a
Code of Practice for platforms and advertisers. Imagine a room full of reps
of known domains (including us) and the large European advertising
associations sprinkled with the odd bureaucrat in between. Expect
commitments around defunding disinformation sources, boosting fact checkers
and dealing with fake accounts/bots/sock puppets. Public results by year’s
end, as the Commission wants to see measures implemented before the
European Parliament elections next year and is threatening regulation if
nothing happens.
===
>From Hungary: A proposed new anti-immigration act in Hungary would make it
a crime, punishable with up to one year in prison, to create or distribute
informational materials with the intent of supporting the asylum request of
someone who "arrived from or through a country where they are not
persecuted for their race, nationality, social group, religion or political
views, or their fears of direct persecution are ungrounded”. Bill in
Hungarian: [12]
===
[1]https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35373/st09134-en18.pdf
[2]
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/ficheprocedure.do?reference=2016/…
[3]
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1B8Eeuo2TymJu_BLJwrVu8D0hHgdnYFdH/view?usp=…
[4]
https://drive.google.com/file/d/18x3BpqqH3_MJs2NIOFfXOycVIxLahfkM/view?usp=…
[5]
https://www.ots.at/presseaussendung/OTS_20180529_OTS0108/pk-mit-k-maher-wik…
[6] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy/Illegal_Content_Feedback_2018
[7]
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20180503/23575539775/eu-commission-asks-p…
[8]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy/Illegal_Content_Consultation_2018
[9]
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1684&serie=1296&langId=…
[10]http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=961
[11]
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/communication-tackling-o…
[12]http://www.parlament.hu/irom41/00333/00333.pdf
Dear all
I wanted to forward a message from our General Counsel Eileen Hershenov
regarding The Wikimedia Foundation's response to a recent statement by the
Turkish Minister of Transport, Maritime, and Communications about the block
of Wikipedia in Turkey.
You can find our letter to Minister Ahmet Arslan here
<https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/05/22/a-letter-to-minister-ahmet-arslan/>.
Best,
Jan
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Eileen Hershenov <ehershenov(a)wikimedia.org>
Date: Wed, May 23, 2018 at 3:22 PM
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Recent statement on the block of Wikipedia in Turkey
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Hello,
Thank you to everyone who participated and supported the #WeMissTurkey
efforts marking the one-year anniversary of the block in Turkey of all
language versions of Wikipedia. The Wikimedia Foundation remains committed
to restoring access to Wikipedia in full, upholding our values and stance
against censorship, and supporting the local Wikimedia community in Turkey.
As part of our ongoing efforts, we have been monitoring discussions and
mentions in the media around Wikipedia in Turkey. Last Friday, May 18, the
Turkish Minister of Transport, Maritime, and Communications, Ahmet Arslan,
made a number of incorrect comments[0] to the press in Turkey about
Wikimedia and the block of Wikipedia. Minister Arslan’s position includes
oversight of the BTK, the Internet Regulatory Agency that sought the block
of Wikipedia.
The Foundation has replied to the Minister’s statements with an open letter
sent to the Minister and shared with the media who covered the Minister's
statements. The statement has also been shared with the local Wikimedia
community in Turkey, and we have posted it on the Wikimedia Blog in both
English[1] and Turkish[2] to address any further public confusion.
We will continue to keep you updated as we work with the local community to
monitor the situation, and take appropriate actions to restore access to
Wikipedia in Turkey.
Thank you,
Eileen
[0] https://www.ntv.com.tr/teknoloji/bakan-ahmet-arslandan-wikipedia-
aciklamasi,UaPHfIgSq0yDPoVfXo5SOw
<https://www.ntv.com.tr/teknoloji/bakan-ahmet-arslandan-wikipedia-aciklamasi…>
[1] https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/05/22/a-letter-to-
minister-ahmet-arslan/
[2] https://blog.wikimedia.org/tr/2018/05/22/bakan-ahmet-arslan-
vikipedi-dunyadaki-herkes-tarafindan-gelistirilmeye-aciktir-ve-turkiyedeki-
editorler-icin-de-acik-olmalidir/
<https://blog.wikimedia.org/tr/2018/05/22/bakan-ahmet-arslan-vikipedi-dunyad…>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Dear list,
If you have been reading the messages in this channel it won't be news to
you that the European Commission has proposed a revision of the Public
Sector Information Directive. [1]
This legislation basically pushes public bodies to release as much
information under open licenses as possible. And while the revision doesn't
go as far as we wanted, it is one of the rare cases in which the Commission
proposal is OK and we have a shot at improving (rather than having to fix
bad proposals).
Since we are always into finding new ways to involve community, we decided
to test the following: We are looking for volunteers who can see themselves
working with Wikimedia's Brussels team in a structured and durable manner
to advocate for a more progressive PSI Directive reform.
Actions may include:
- Analysing the proposal
- Drafting amendments
- Mapping & contacting stakeholders
- Building coalitions
- Contacting MEPs and Member States to share our amendments
Of course all these are optional, we would get additional help for every
task, and the exact work will depend on the volunteer's skills and
motivation. We are looking for someone willing to dedicate their energy to
this file over a longer period. We'd prefer someone who could invest
several hours per week over a year, rather than someone who can be very
active, but for brief periods of time. Otherwise nothing is set in stone.
If you are interested, please get in touch on or off list.
Cheers,
Dimi
[1]
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/proposal-revision-public-sect…
Dear All,
as promised at our Big Fat BXL Meeting, we created a resource pool on copyright reform <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy/Copyright_Reform_Resource_Pool> - in any case it is first version. It will be populated with more links and information, but for those that attended our meetings this initial batch should suffice for the following week or so.
I am happy to take any suggestions for other types of content (I’d like to add blogs or organisations to follow, which out of brevity will be a highly subjective list ;)) as well as for other examples of resources that are already listed. I will be back on it next week. Please share!
Cheers from sunny Brussels!
Anna
Anna Mazgal
EU Policy Advisor
Wikimedia
anna(a)wikimedia.be
@a2na
mobile: +32 487 222 945
51 Rue du Trône
BE-1050 Brussels
Hello,
Today the Wikimedia Foundation, in cooperation with a number of volunteers
who attended the Wikimedia Conference, have posted on Twitter and Facebook
a video message speaking to the one-year anniversary of the block of
Wikipedia in Turkey.
The video re-enforces our message that this block is a lost opportunity
both for the people of Turkey and the rest of the world. Any assistance
that you all can offer in terms of helping circulate the video amongst your
networks would be greatly appreciated!
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhrsnqvmhxg
Tweet: https://twitter.com/Wikipedia/status/991663606856077312
Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/wikipedia/videos/vb.33138223345/10156176050713346/
Blog post: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/05/02/we-miss-turkey/
We have also made the video available on Wikimedia Commons if you would
like to help us with translating:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:A_year_without_Turkey.webm
This is a part of our ongoing efforts around the block in Turkey, and done
with input from members of the local community in Turkey. We GREATLY
appreciate the help of everyone involved in the development and all of you
who are sharing these messages. If you have any questions, please let us
know.
-greg
--
Gregory Varnum
Communications Strategist
Wikimedia Foundation <http://www.wikimediafoundation.org/>
gvarnum(a)wikimedia.org
Pronouns: He/His/Him
Dear list,
If you are in Germany, you might have noticed, an anti-upload-filters
banner went online on Wikipedia this morning. [1] The anti-filters
copyright reform banner will be delivered until late Friday night to 50% of
impressions from the Germany IP range and leads people to a new blogpost on
this topic, one that inter alias makes suggestions for sharing the message
on social media. [2]
The timing for the banner is intentional, as the German position has a lot
of weight in the Council of the EU, where we are right between two
important meetings. The new German Justice minister Katarina Barley is also
a guest at re:publica. [3]
Cheers,
Dimi
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CentralNotice/Request/Danke,_aber_Nein_Dank…
?
[2]https://blog.wikimedia.de/2018/05/02/danke-aber-das-reicht-n
icht-nouploadfilter/
[3]https://18.re-publica.com/de/member/13921
tl;dr
The Council of the EU failed to reach a decision on copyright reform last
Friday, meaning bickering between Member States will continue well into
May. Meanwhile the Parliament is making timid progress towards a committee
vote still scheduled on 21 June.
This and past reports: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy/Monitor
===
Copyright Reform
---
The Council: COREPER I is a body made up of the deputy heads of missions of
EU Member States. [1] A legislative file is usually put forward to this
body when the attachés (technical experts) have reached a compromise and
majority support seems ensured. The Bulgarian Presidency believed it had
such a compromise capable to secure a majority and referred it to COREPER
I. [2] There, it was discussed last Friday only to the rejected. Regardless
of the positive spin the Bulgarian Presidency is trying put on it [3], this
is a pretty embarrassing situation for them.
---
So what? Had the proposal been accepted, the negotiations in Council
between the Member States would have come to a halt waiting for the
Parliament position. The compromise proposal put forward by Bulgaria was
not good, to say the least. It essentially does prescribe ex-ante
take-downs (so potential deletions of content before it even appears on
sites) of user uploaded content that is deemed as infringing by
rightsholders. And while there is a carve-out for an “online encyclopedia”
(Guess who they mean!), the situation with Wikimedia Commons and open
source code sharing platforms remained very unclear. The situation buys us
some time to motivate some Member States, most importantly Germany, to
update their position. Belgium and the Netherlands are the two countries
still vocally standing up for user rights and facing off a large group of
states demanding upload filters, which is lead by France. Big guns would be
needed to stop them.
---
European Parliament: Some bits of the current text in the European
Parliament look better than in the Council, but we still cannot be contempt
with it. It seems that the the rapporteur Axel Voss is prioritising Article
11 (ancillary copyright for press publishers) to Article 13 (upload
filters). We are especially worried the potential for an ex-ante filtering
provision, as in the Council. Other than that, the educational exception
seems to be a done deal, while safeguarding the public domain, freedom of
panorama, text and data mining and out-of-commerce works are still question
marks.
---
Next steps: This week the EP is kicking off a new round of discussions with
a technical meeting (experts and legal advisors working on the Legal
Affairs Committee) on Wednesday. We are bracing for one to two negotiation
rounds each week and daily tactical manoeuvring on all sides until at least
the end of June.
===
Revision of the Public Sector Information Directive proposed
---
First run through: The European Commission proposed a revision of the PSI
Directive last week. [4] The main goal is to broaden the current text by
opening up transportation data (including private companies that run
concession on behalf of public bodies), scientific data and to limit the
situations in which public bodies can demand payment for giving access to
data, documents and information. Skimming the proposal we see some very
positive changes, albeit we would have wished for a more ambitious text.
---
Particularly interesting: Article 5 (4) says “Public sector bodies and
public undertakings shall make dynamic data available for re-use
immediately after collection, via suitable Application Programming
Interfaces (APIs).”, which is a great opportunity and of particular
interest to data applications. The issue with the Directive is the still
many carve-outs and exceptions to the rule. But this is one of the rare
times where we are starting with a “rather OK” Commission proposal and have
the chance to get something positive in the end without risking to worsen
our situation.
===
French Jurisprudence: Chambord vs. Kronenbourg
---
Beer vs. castle: Chambord is a 16 century French castle owned by the
public. Kronenbourg is a popular French beer brand. The brewery used an
image of the former in an advertising campaign. The authority maintaining
the castle claimed that this was unauthorised use of images of the castle
and demanded indemnities. The court disagreed. [5] This is a ruling we
appreciate, as we are of the opinion that public domain works should be
free for re-use by all.
What is allowed in France? The legal situation in France remains
complicated. In 2016 a French law established a new image right on national
cultural heritage sites. [6] Wikimédia France and La Quadrature du Net
petitioned the constitutional court claiming that this image right
unlawfully restricts the public domain. [7] While this was rejected [8], it
seems that the new decision in the Chambord case actually goes in the
direction of the claim made by WMFR and LQDN.
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_of_Permanent_Representatives
[2]
https://www.parlament.gv.at/PAKT/EU/XXVI/EU/01/86/EU_18668/imfname_10803001…
[3]https://twitter.com/zlateea/status/989838220740517888
[4]
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/proposal-revision-direct…
[5]
https://www.lanouvellerepublique.fr/loir-et-cher/commune/chambord/chambord-…
[6]
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loi_relative_%C3%A0_la_libert%C3%A9_de_la_cr%…
[7]
https://www.laquadrature.net/fr/Wikimedia-La-Quadrature-domaine-public-Cons…
[8]
http://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/conseil-constitutionnel/root/bank/dow…