Wikimedia and the EU
March Report
tl;dr
Brussels politics is generally calming down ahead of the elections with the notable exception the crucial net neutrality vote this week. Meanwhile the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that web site blocking orders do not have to be specific.
This and past reports: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy/Monitor
ToC
1. CJEU: „UPC Telekabel Wien“ Decision
2. TTIP: EU-US Talks on Web Hosting Liability
3. Net Neutrality: Decision Imminent
4. Big Fat Brussels Meeting vol. 2
-----------------
-----------------
#CJEU #telekabel #blocking
1. European Court of Justice states that website blocking orders do not need to be specific
Why is this relevant?
It funnels into the rules and regulation of how, when and by whom web sites can be blocked. It therefore is important for the internet at-large. If ISPs become more prone to general blocking and filtering, every website would become more susceptible to being “caught in the net”. It is therefore good to follow the developments, as this will also have implications on the Notice and Takedown Directive being currently written.
What happened?
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) was asked by the Austrian Supreme Court for a preliminary ruling on an injunction case (Telekabel Wien had been ordered to block a website providing unlicensed copies of films). So far, the legal status quo in the EU was that web site blocking orders had to be specific, meaning that the court has to define the technical method by which it is to be implemented by the internet service provider (ISP).
The CJEU ruled [1][2] that this does not need to be the case and that blocking orders might be general. In order to ensure balance between all parties rights (ISPs, users, rights holders), stated that ISPs can become exempt of liability if „all reasonable measures“ are taken. Furthermore, users need to be given a legal way to challenge measures taken by ISPs, just like rights holders.
This reading departs from the Advocate-General’s opinion [3], who had written, that in order to balance all fundamental rights, blocking orders had to be specific (i.e. defining the technical blocking method). His position also mirrors previous CJEU decisions against general filtering and blocking practices, like Scarlet vs. Sabam [4].
What comes next?
Obliging the ISPs to take „all reasonable measures“ while looking for an appropriate balance between the rigths of copyright holders and these of users puts them in a very tricky position. More lawsuits seem inevitable.
Fears from civil society groups include, that the relationship between ISPs and users is handled in private contracts. In order to avoid lawsuits, ISPs could simply change their user agreements, meaning a weakened position of internet users, that would prevent the balance seeked for by the court.
Legally, the case will be decided by the Oberster Gerichtshof in Vienna (Austrian Supreme Court), which will have to be in line with the CJEU decision.
-----------------
-----------------
#TTIP #liability
2. Online content liability to play a role in TTIP negotiations
Why is this relevant?
The negotiations between EU and USA on a new trade and investment agreement will seemingly include rules on content liability for internet hosting and service providers.
What happened?
According to a leak [5] published by German newspaper Die Zeit [6], a proposal to discuss liability the exclusion of hosting and service providers from content liability has been tabled by the European Commission.
According to the E-Commerce Directive [7], internet providers in the EU are not liable for the information transmitted. This had previously been an issue while negotiating past international agreements, most notably ACTA.
What comes next?
The leaked document shows that the European Commission is also asking for “co-operation” in these matters, which might indicate a request to exchange information about the implementation of the US Digital Millenium Copyright Act. This is to been seen in direct relation to the Notice and Takedown Directive, currently being drafted at DG MARKT and crucial for how content could be removed off the internet in the future.
We are following both, possible IP and internet implications of TTIP and any development of the future Notice and Takedown directive.
-----------------
-----------------
#netneutrality
3. Crucial network neutrality vote to be held on 3 April
Why is this relevant?
It is a fundamental internet issue. Briefly, the legislation will determine what agreements between content providers and telecoms will be legal in the EU. The current draft of the regulation permits “specialised services” in contrast to the best effort principle. If these are allowed and defined too broadly, it would effectively result in an internet where content providers with more money can secure preferential access to end users. Start-up projects without financial backing (like Wikipedia was some years ago) would hence be disadvantaged. If, on the other hand, “specialised services” are defined too narrowly or even prohibited, it would mean the end to zero-charge projects (like Wikipedia Zero).
What happened?
The Commission proposal on net neutrality [8] officially promotes the concept, but contains many loopholes. The European Parliament report from the ITRE (Industry) Committee failed to close most of them. [9] Now, four parliamentary groups have tabled amendments [10][11] ahead of the final vote that would seriously limit the possible exceptions. The split lines run along Socialists & Democrats, Greens, the Left Group and Liberals proposing the changes and the conservatives (EPP, ECR) endorsing the ITRE version. However, most groups might end up with a split vote, making the outcome hard to predict
What comes next?
The vote will take place on Thursday, 3 April 2014 during the plenary session in Strasbourg. It is most likely to come up in the afternoon. [12]
-----------------
-----------------
#wikimedia #FKAGEU
4. Big Fat Brussels Meeting vol. 2
In order to finetune our strategy, we invite everyone to a second meeting of the Free Knowledge Advocacy Group EU in Brussels [13]
As last year [14], we will hold a two-day “Big Fat Brussels Meeting”. The meeting is open for each and everyone. Prior knowledge of advocacy or internal Wikimedia policies is not required - a good diversity of views can be very productive.
This years meeting is going to be held on a Thursday and Friday (April 24 and 25). We apologise for those of you who can’t take weekdays off, but the meeting coincides with a public event on “Cultural Heritage and Mass Digitisation” on Thursday, co-organised by us and UNESCO. [15]
The two panels of the World Book and Copyright Day debate include speakers from the European Commission, Wikimedia, UNESCO, the British Library and the Federation of European Publishers. We believe tying-in the two events makes very good sense and will give participants an opportunity to engage hands-on in Brussels EU affairs.
Please put your name on the participant list on Meta-Wiki or send me an email if you intend to participate, so we can organise an adequate meeting spaces.
-----------------
-----------------
[1]http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-03/cp140038en.pdf
[4]http://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?language=en&num=C-70/10
[5]http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1030459-eu-kommission-position-in-den.html#document/p1
[6]http://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/2014-02/freihandelsabkommen-eu-sonderrechte-konzerne
[7]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Commerce_Directive_%28EU%29
[9]http://edri.org/bad-leadership-kill-open-internet-europe/
[13]https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_Policy/Big_Fat_Brussels_Meeting_Vol._2
[14]https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_Policy/Big_Fat_Brussels_Meeting
[15]https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EU_policy/World_Book_and_Copyright_Day