[governance] What's up on digital civil rights in Europe

[Louis Pouzin (well)]

EDRi-gram newsletter - Number 11.3, 13 February 2013

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: EDRi-gram <edrigram at edri.org>
Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 10:07 PM
Subject: EDRi-gram newsletter - Number 11.3, 13 February 2013


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

EDRi-gram

biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe

Number 11.3, 13 February 2013

==============================**==============================**===========
Contents
==============================**==============================**===========

1. Copyright: challenges of the digital era
2. Most Internet users would use DNT settings if easily available
3. US privacy groups believe US officials lobby to weaken EU privacy
4. Dutch government maintains private copying-exception for downloading
5. Denmark: Government postpones the data retention law evaluation
6. Ancillary copyright law under discussion in Germany
7. Human rights orgs ask OECD to investigate surveillance companies
8. Big Brother Awards 2013 Bulgaria
9. ENDitorial: Licences for Europe and fight club... only one rule
10. Recommended Action: support your privacy rights
11. Recommended Reading
12. Agenda
13. About

==============================**==============================**===========
1. Copyright: challenges of the digital era
==============================**==============================**===========

EDRi has freshly launched a booklet that overviews the challenges that
copyright is facing in the digital environment.

For the past twelve years, the European Union has discussed how to
support, develop and protect creation in the digital environment. Two
months ago, the College of Commissioners recognised the necessity that
copyright “stays fit for purpose” in the digital economy.

Until now, the focus point has been on the enforcement of pre-existing
legislative norms not only within the rule of law but also through
private policing via internet service providers. However, despite all
these efforts, there is still an ubiquitous lack of respect for copyright.

The booklet looks at the reasons for this profound gap that has emerged
between citizens and the law. Following a brief introduction to the
logic behind granting monopoly rights, the booklet lists some reasons
that lead to difficulties in respecting copyright law, ranging from
excessive penalties for breaching the law to legally-protected
restrictions on citizens' rights to use digital products they paid for.
It then focuses on the impact of rigid and outdated copyright law on
legitimate businesses. Finally, it gives a glance at the wide range of
excessive enforcement measures that underline the deterioration of
copyright leading to unreasonable and wrongful practices.

In short, this booklet presents a simplified overview of the
difficulties facing public support for copyright. EDRi hopes that it
will have a positive impact on the current debate regarding the
necessity of reforming copyright law and adapting the current system to
the digital age, allowing the achievement of the digital single market,
removing existing barriers and giving citizens a better access to their
culture.

Copyright: challenges of the digital era (02.2013)
http://www.edri.org/files/**paper07_copyright.pdf<http://www.edri.org/files/paper07_copyright.pdf>

Commission agrees way forward for modernising copyright in the digital
economy (5.12.2012)
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-**release_MEMO-12-950_en.htm<http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-950_en.htm>

Report from the Commission on the application of Directive 2004/48/EC
(22.12.2010)
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/**LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=**
COM:2010:0779:FIN:EN:PDF<http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0779:FIN:EN:PDF>

(Contribution by Marie Humeau - EDRi)

==============================**==============================**===========
2. Most Internet users would use DNT settings if easily available
==============================**==============================**===========

According to a survey by IT service analysts Ovum, 68% of the Internet
users would use “do-not-track” (DNT) settings to restrict the use of
their personal data, if such a tool was "easily available”.

Websites and third-parties, such as advertisers, may record Internet
users’ behaviour in order to serve targeted, personalised ads. Such
user-specific data can be collected by several means, including the use
of cookies. The information thus stored can be passed on by operators to
advertisers for behavioural adverts, based on the users' activity and
declared interests.

Yet, lately, consumers have become more aware of the fact that their
personal information can be used as merchandise. Ovum’s survey has shown
that only 14% of consumers believe Internet firms are honest about the
way they use their consumers' personal data. "Unfortunately, in the gold
rush that is big data, taking the supply of ‘little data’ – personal
data – for granted seems to be an accident waiting to happen," said Mark
Little, principal analyst at Ovum who added: "However, consumers are
being empowered with new tools and services to monitor, control, and
secure their personal data as never before, and it seems they
increasingly have the motivation to use them."

In Little’s opinion, the Internet companies would have to change their
attitudes towards their customers. The operators should make privacy
tools available to consumers and use “a new set of messages to change
consumers’ attitudes. These messages must be based on positive direct
relationships, engagement with consumers, and the provision of genuine
and trustworthy privacy controls.” Although EU Commissioner Neelie Kroes
had previously asked for a new DNT standard to enable Internet users to
indicate their consent for the use of their personal data in a manner
that would comply with the EU's Privacy and Electronic Communications
Directive, last year she indicated that she would accept a DNT
standard that would only partially meet the requirements under the
Directive. Under the EU's amended Privacy and Electronic Communications
Directive, storing and accessing information on users' computers is only
lawful "on condition that the subscriber or user concerned has given his
or her consent, having been provided with clear and comprehensive
information … about the purposes of the processing".

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) has been working on developing a new
DNT controls system which, in its opinion, should not be switched on by
default but require an explicit instruction to operate. Firefox has
already implemented it since 2011.

Microsoft, on the other hand, has developed its own DNT tool for its new
Internet Explorer 10 web browser. The DNT setting is automatically
activated and the users have to change the settings in case they wish to
let websites and advertising networks track their online activity. This
has obviously crossed advertising companies and the system does not
actually guarantee that all companies would respect it. Yahoo! for
instance, has stated that it would not "recognise IE10’s default DNT
signal".

Google introduced the DNT standard in November 2012, with the launching
of its Chrome 23, but warned that the results could be variable. "The
effectiveness of such requests is dependent on how websites and services
respond, so Google is working with others on a common way to respond to
these requests in the future," wrote Google engineer Ami Fischman on the
company’s blog.

Most consumers would activate do-not-track privacy settings if they were
'easily available', according to Ovum survey (6.02.2013)
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/<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/>

The data black hole that could suck the life out of the internet economy
(8.02.2013)
http://www.zdnet.com/the-data-**black-hole-that-could-suck-**
the-life-out-of-the-internet-**economy-7000011002/<http://www.zdnet.com/the-data-black-hole-that-could-suck-the-life-out-of-the-internet-economy-7000011002/>

Google's Chrome finally embraces Do Not Track, but with a warning
(7.11.2012)
http://www.zdnet.com/googles-**chrome-finally-embraces-do-**
not-track-but-with-a-warning-**7000007022/<http://www.zdnet.com/googles-chrome-finally-embraces-do-not-track-but-with-a-warning-7000007022/>

==============================**==============================**===========
3. US privacy groups believe US officials lobby to weaken EU privacy
==============================**==============================**===========

A coalition of 18 US privacy groups sent a letter on 30 January 2013 to
US politicians such as the Attorney General Eric Holder, Secretary
of State John Kerry and the Acting Secretary of Commerce Rebecca Blank,
asking for assurances that US policy makers in Europe "advance the aim
of privacy" and do not hinder the European data law proposals.

The European Union is considering the data protection regulation that
could give the citizens significant control over the use of their
personal data by websites and marketing companies. Several proposals
would require companies to obtain permission before collecting personal
data and specify exactly what information will be collected and how it
will be used.

One proposal refers to the so-called “right to be forgotten” that
obliges companies like Facebook to delete all information about users
who want to do that. The coalition shows concern over the fact that, as
the new EU Data Protection Regulation is under discussion and debate,
Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) have lately reported that US
policy makers are "mounting an unprecedented lobbying campaign to limit
the protections that European law would provide."

The privacy groups believe that U.S. policymakers, politicians and
bureaucrats are undermining the work of the European Parliament. "The
U.S. should not stand in the way of Europe's efforts to strengthen and
modernize its legal framework," the letter states. Jeff Chester,
Executive Director of the Center for Digital Democracy told ZDNet that
despite President Obama’s pro-privacy speeches, his administration is
"working to protect the U.S. data lobby."

He added: "One of the U.S.' few growth areas is stealing other peoples
data. So, the U.S. is arguing that the EU should not enact strong
baselines rules requiring citizens to provide affirmative consent for
such critical uses as profiling, and adopt its weak industry friendly
approach based primarily on industry self-regulation."

EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding said in 2012 that the lobbying
effort had been "absolutely fierce" and unprecedented in scale.

On 3 February 2013, the head of a big pan-European industry group
revealed "intensifying pressure from U.S. lobbyists on behalf of
Google and Facebook," as reported the Financial Times. Jacob
Kohnstamm, the chairman of the EU's Article 29 Working Party also said
European lawmakers were "fed up" of U.S. lobbying.

The letter of the coalition notes that updating the U.S. Electronic
Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), under which authorities need only a
subpoena approved by a federal prosecutor, rather than a judge, to
obtain electronically stored messages six months old or older, would be
a good start for the U.S. officials to bring the country in compliance
with international human rights standards.

The US lobby has shown its practical results after several newspapers
and websites have pointed out that MEPs in the EP's Internal Market and
Consumer Committee (IMCO) have included copy-paste amendments written by
Amazon, eBay or the American Chamber of Commerce (AmCham EU).

Privacy groups call on U.S. government to stop lobbying against EU data
law changes (4.02.2013)
http://www.zdnet.com/privacy-**groups-call-on-u-s-government-**
to-stop-lobbying-against-eu-**data-law-changes-7000010721/<http://www.zdnet.com/privacy-groups-call-on-u-s-government-to-stop-lobbying-against-eu-data-law-changes-7000010721/>

The E.U. could approve a new privacy policy later this year. Europe
Moves Ahead on Privacy (3.02.2013)
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/**02/04/opinion/europe-moves-**
ahead-on-privacy-laws.html<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/04/opinion/europe-moves-ahead-on-privacy-laws.html>

Lobby groups take CTRL+V of data protection proposal (11.02.2013)
http://edri.org/lobbyplag-**eudatap <http://edri.org/lobbyplag-eudatap>

LobbyPlag
http://www.lobbyplag.eu/

==============================**==============================**===========
4. Dutch government maintains private copying-exception for downloading
==============================**==============================**===========

The Dutch government announced that it wouldn't prohibit the
unauthorised downloading of copyrighted material.

It did so on 4 February 2013 in a letter to the Parliament, putting an
end to a heated debate that lasted for years. As a result, the
Netherlands remains one of the few countries in Europe where downloading
without permission of the rightsholders is allowed under the private
copying-exception. Dutch digital rights organisation Bits of Freedom
urged that this should be the first step in a long overdue modernisation
of the copyright system.

The Dutch government responded to a resolution by the Dutch Parliament
earlier this year. In this resolution, the Parliament called on the
government to maintain the application of the private copying-exception
to downloading. It did so after the government did not respond to a
similar resolution one year earlier, instead continuing its plans to
abolish the private copying-exception for downloading. Now, however, it
admitted defeat in the face of enduring opposition.

Bits of Freedom hopes that this decision paves the way for the
modernisation of the copyright system. Past political endeavours focused
on the criminalisation of sharing by individual internet users. This is
counterproductive and does not address the real challenge: ensuring that
knowledge and culture is shared as widely as possible while remunerating
rightsholders. The Dutch government should start together with the
Parliament exploring remuneration models which support this goal.

Letter of government to parliament (only in Dutch, 04.02.2013)
https://www.bof.nl/live/wp-**content/uploads/**briefTeeven040213.pdf<https://www.bof.nl/live/wp-content/uploads/briefTeeven040213.pdf>

Resolution of Dutch parliament (only in Dutch, 11.12.2012)
https://www.bof.nl/2012/12/11/**parlement-spreekt-zich-uit-**
tegen-downloadverbod/<https://www.bof.nl/2012/12/11/parlement-spreekt-zich-uit-tegen-downloadverbod/>

Blog Bits of Freedom: Download Prohibition finally buried (only in
Dutch, 05.02.2013)
https://www.bof.nl/2013/02/05/**downloadverbod-eindelijk-**begraven/<https://www.bof.nl/2013/02/05/downloadverbod-eindelijk-begraven/>

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

==============================**==============================**===========
5. Denmark: Government postpones the data retention law evaluation
==============================**==============================**===========

In the coming months, the Danish Parliament will conduct an evaluation
and revision of the Danish data retention law which implements directive
2006/24/EC. The review process has been postponed twice on earlier
occasions (2010 and 2012), and the Danish government wants another
two-year extension, officially in order to coordinate with any changes
in the directive at the EU level.

The Danish law exceeds the requirements of the data retention directive
in several respects, especially as far as Internet logging is concerned.
The Danish law contains a requirement for session logging which includes
data about every Internet packet being transmitted.

Specifically, the following information must be retained: source and
destination IP address, source and destination port number, transmission
protocol (like TCP and UDP) and timestamps. The contents of the
Internet packets are not being logged, but the IP addresses will contain
information about visits to websites of political parties (that is, in
effect, registration of political preferences) and the online news
services that the citizen reads. Last year in the Danish Parliament,
there was considerable debate about the Danish over-implementation of
the data retention directive, in particular Internet session logging.

The Parliament instructed the Danish government to produce an evaluation
report with special focus on session logging. The Danish Ministry of
Justice published this report in December 2012.

The evaluation report contains detailed descriptions of nine police
cases where telephone logging was useful, or maybe even critical, to the
Danish police. These cases are taken from an earlier report submitted to
the EU Commission. All nine cases are about serious and violent crimes
such as murder, armed robbery and organized narcotics smuggling.

For Internet logging there are only three police cases. Moreover, one of
the three cases is really about telephone logging since location data
from a mobile device is used by the police. The location registration
just happens to be triggered by "data calls" from a smartphone. This
leaves two police cases to demonstrate the value of internet logging,
and only one case uses session logging. Both cases involve economic
crimes (fraud) on a relatively minor scale. There is a huge discrepancy
between the nature of the police cases involving telephone and Internet
logging.

The report confirms the EDRi member IT-Pol suspicion that Internet
logging, and especially Internet session logging, is rarely used by the
Danish police. Quite interestingly, the Ministry of Justice formally
states in their own evaluation report that session logging was
implemented in a way that made it useless for the police (the
implementation is according to the requirements of the law). Before
September 2007, the Danish Internet service providers repeatedly warned
the Ministry of Justice that session logging would be useless for the
police.

The Danish Ministry of Justice report (only in Danish, 12.2012)
http://www.ft.dk/samling/**20121/lovforslag/l142/bilag/2/**1213533.pdf<http://www.ft.dk/samling/20121/lovforslag/l142/bilag/2/1213533.pdf>

Danish government wants to postpone the evaluation of the data retention
law for the third time (12.02.2013)
http://www.itpol.dk/notater/**Danish-data-retention-**evaluation-Feb13<http://www.itpol.dk/notater/Danish-data-retention-evaluation-Feb13>

EDRi-gram: Key privacy concerns in Denmark 2007 (30.01.2008)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/**number6.2/privacy-denmark-2007<http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number6.2/privacy-denmark-2007>

(Contribution by Jesper Lund, EDRi member IT-Pol Denmark)

==============================**==============================**===========
6. Ancillary copyright law under discussion in Germany
==============================**==============================**===========

The Judiciary Committee of the German Bundestag held on 30 January 2013
an expert hearing on the proposed “Leistungsschutzrecht” (LRS, known
also as “ancillary copyright”) law for news publishers which will
require search engines and others to ask permission from news publishers
to link to their content or even give summarize news content.

The draft law was criticized by civil society groups as well as the
German association of Internet economy which pointed out the lack of
clarity of the terms used in the text and the negative effects that the
law may bring by restricting the diversity of information on the
internet. Moreover, the legislation is superfluous as publishers are
already protected by copyright provisions. If this bill is enacted
as-is, search engines would be allowed to display snippets only after
having received permission which may involve or not some payment to the
news publishers.

In some cases, a press publisher might pay a search engine to be
included in its searches. The important issue is that a search engine,
and maybe even social networks, will be obliged to ask permission to
provide snippets from a news publisher. The law has several unclear
areas. For instance, it is not clear whether blogs will be considered as
press products due to the vague definition of the term. The expert
hearing was not focused on technological expertise but rather
on how such a law might fit into the current legal framework.

A representative from the publishers’ associations asked for a
technical language to express conditions such as temporal, topical or
size restrictions, payment requirements and other conditions but did not
succeed in presenting a proper way of how this could be implemented. All
experts in the hearing agreed the law would create a period (estimated
at about 5 years) of legal uncertainty, requiring a series of lawsuits
before realizing who will actually be within the sights of the LRS. This
uncertainty also applies when we talk about Facebook or Twitter. It is
not yet clear whether the law will cover only search engines such as
Google or it will extend to social networks. MP Siegfried Kauder of the
Christian Democrats party stated that in his opinion, after hearing the
experts, there seemed to be no reason for the promotion of the law as,
it appeared to be unlikely the law would help in actually producing new
income for news publishers.

In the meantime, in France, Google seems to give in under similar
pressure. Eric Schmidt, Executive Chairman of Google made a statement on
the company blog on 1 February 2013, in an attempt to point out that the
search engine had generated “billions of clicks each month” for news
publishers, “and our advertising solutions (in which we have
invested billions of dollars) help them make money from that traffic.”

But Schmidt also stated that on the same date, he, together
with President Hollande of France, announced two new initiatives “to
help stimulate innovation and increase revenues for French publishers.”

One was the creation of a 60 million euro Digital Publishing Innovation
Fund financed by Google “to help support transformative digital
publishing initiatives for French readers.” The second initiative is to
increase the partnership with French publishers “to help increase their
online revenues using our advertising technology.”

German Parliament Hears Experts On Proposed Law To Limit Search Engines
(31.01.2013)
http://searchengineland.com/**german-leistungsschutzrecht-**146826<http://searchengineland.com/german-leistungsschutzrecht-146826>

Google creates €60m Digital Publishing Innovation Fund to support
transformative French digital publishing initiatives (1.02.2013)
http://googleblog.blogspot.co.**uk/2013/02/google-creates-60m-**
digital-publishing.html<http://googleblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/google-creates-60m-digital-publishing.html>

EDRi-gram: Ancillary copyright madness in Germany and France (26.09.2012)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/**number10.18/ancillary-**
copyright-proposal-madness<http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number10.18/ancillary-copyright-proposal-madness>

==============================**==============================**===========
7. Human rights orgs ask OECD to investigate surveillance companies
==============================**==============================**===========

In the beginning of February 2013 several human rights organisations,
including Privacy International, the European Center for
Constitutional and Human Rights, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights,
Bahrain Watch and Reporters without Borders, filed formal complaints
against surveillance software firms Gamma International and Trovicor.

The OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development)
National Contact Point (NCP) in the UK was asked to investigate Gamma
International regarding the company’s potential complicity in serious
human rights abuses in Bahrain and in Germany, the complaint was
directed against Munich-based Trovicor.

In the opinion of the complainants, there are grounds to believe that
the surveillance products and services provided by the two companies
have led to human rights abuses in Bahrain, including arbitrary
detention and torture, violations of the right to privacy, freedom of
expression and freedom of association. It appears that the information
gathered from intercepted phone and internet communications have been
used to detain and torture bloggers, political dissidents and activists
and to extract confessions from them. If the investigation concludes
that the complaints have a real basis, the companies are likely to be
found in breach of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises
which sets out principles and standards for responsible business conduct.

“The failure of governments to properly control exports of surveillance
technology has left companies like Gamma and Trovicor regulated
exclusively by their own moral compasses. Unfortunately, these compasses
seem to have malfunctioned and directed companies towards some of the
most dangerous and repressive regimes in the world. We very much hope
the OECD process will persuade Gamma and Trovicor to take a long hard
look at their current and future clients, and to think carefully about
the role their products play in the targeting and torture of activists
and the suppression of pro-democracy voices,” stated Eric King, Head of
Research at Privacy International.

Miriam Saage-Maaß, Vice Legal Director at ECCHR, said: “By maintaining
permanent business relations with the state of Bahrain and maintaining
their surveillance software, both companies have accepted the risk that
they may be accused of abetting torture and other grave human rights
violations. If true, such actions would amount to a violation of the
OECD Guidelines.”

These are not the only companies involved in providing surveillance
equipment to countries where freedom of expression is oppressed. Many
suppliers, besides the two companies in question, such as Nokia Siemens
Networks, Hacking Team and Bull / Amesys have supplied equipment to
Libya, Egypt, Syria, Bahrain, Morocco and many more countries that have
violated human rights during the last years.

Human rights organisations filed formal complaints with the OECD against
surveillance companies (4.02.2013)
http://en.rsf.org/bahrein-**human-rights-organisations-**
file-04-02-2013,44016.html<http://en.rsf.org/bahrein-human-rights-organisations-file-04-02-2013,44016.html>

Briefing note on OECD Complaints against Gamma International and
Trovicor in the UK and Germany (02.2013)
http://www.statewatch.org/**news/2013/feb/oecd-complaint.**pdf<http://www.statewatch.org/news/2013/feb/oecd-complaint.pdf>

Human rights organisations file formal complaints against surveillance
firms Gamma International and Trovicor with British and German
governments (3.02.2013)
https://www.**privacyinternational.org/**press-releases/human-rights-**
organisations-file-formal-**complaints-against-**surveillance-firms-gamma<https://www.privacyinternational.org/press-releases/human-rights-organisations-file-formal-complaints-against-surveillance-firms-gamma>

EDRi-gram: Export Controls for Digital Weapons (19.12.2013)
http://edri.org/edrigram/**number10.24/export-controls-**digital-weapons<http://edri.org/edrigram/number10.24/export-controls-digital-weapons>

EDRi-gram: German government intends to use FinFisher Spyware (30.01.2013)
http://edri.org/edrigram/**number11.2/germany-finfisher-**spyware<http://edri.org/edrigram/number11.2/germany-finfisher-spyware>

==============================**==============================**===========
8. Big Brother Awards 2013 Bulgaria
==============================**==============================**===========

EDRi member ISOC Bulgaria and the Access to Information Program organized
the Big Brother Awards for 2012. This year the "winners" are the Council of
Ministers of the Republic of Bulgaria - for lack of action in changing the
way special investigative resources (wiretapping) is being used with
regards to data traffic, which should ensure high protection of privacy.

For private companies, the "winner" is Toplofikatsia (Central Heating) for
collecting and processing private data of its customers.

The BBA awards have been given in Bulgaria since 2003, and usually the
worst governmental institution to deal with privacy is either the Council
of Ministers, or the Ministry of Interior. Among private company winners
have been also mobile operators, advertising companies and power
distributing companies.

Details about the Bulgarian Big Brother Awards 2013 (only in Bulgarian,
28.01.2013)
http://bg.bigbrotherawards.org

(Contribution by Veni Markovski - EDRi member ISOC Bulgaria)

==============================**==============================**===========
9. ENDitorial: Licences for Europe and fight club... only one rule
==============================**==============================**===========

There was a moment in November 2012 when even the most cynical observers
of the European Commission were hopeful of an effective reform of
copyright. Commissioner Barnier gave a speech where he demonstrated that
he understood the problems. He explained that “the digital revolution
has not yet lived up to expectations in the European context” and
described some barriers to cross-border access to content as
illegitimate. Finally, the problems had been identified. And recognising
a problem is a first step to solving it.

Then, in December 2012, the Commission was even more explicit. It
explained that the following would be addressed: territoriality in the
Internal Market; harmonisation, limitations and exceptions to copyright
in the digital age; fragmentation of the EU copyright market; and how to
improve effectiveness and efficiency of enforcement while underpinning
its legitimacy in the wider context of copyright reform.

So far, all that has actually happened is the launch of the Commission's
“licences for Europe” initiative. Or rather, the Commission's launched
industry's initiative... or... well, whoever it is that owns it, was
launched. The last line of Commissioner Barnier's speech at the opening
event was very telling. “The ball is in your court,” he said. He didn't
explain who “you” are – the overwhelming majority of participants
(industry lobbyists), the tiny minority of civil society... or society
in general?

Actually, we know that “you” is not society in general. The first rule
of fight club ...”licences for Europe” is... you do not talk about
“licences for Europe”. No web streaming of the working groups, “Chatham
House Rules” that forbid the attribution of statements to particular
participants or their organisations. The public at large is kept firmly
outside of the process. After the lack of transparency that helped bring
down ACTA, we now have closed doors and “Chatham House Rules” for
“licences for Europe”. And no problem definition for the working groups
to work on.

Barnier's subsequent comment that “it is incomprehensible that Europeans
are coming up against obstacles online which they have been dismantling
in the physical world for more than 50 years,” hovers somewhere between
tragedy and comedy. This statement comes from a Commissioner who
inherited a demonstrably failed 2001 Copyright Directive but has not
acted to fix it. This is the Commissioner that inherited a demonstrably
failed 2004 IPR Enforcement Directive, but has not acted to fix it.

After four years of inaction on licensing and four years of inaction on
exceptions and limitations to copyright, Commissioner Barnier demanded
action... by everyone in the room except himself, to “meet together to
find fast, specific solutions to problems arising in the here and now”.
Fast? Faster than what?

So, what now? Well, we will have months of working group meetings,
carefully shielded from the public by the opaque walls of the European
Commission, bringing us closer and closer to the end of this
legislature, at which time Commissioner Barnier can hand over the
dossier to the next incumbent of the “Internal Market” portfolio.
Instead of less red tape and fewer licences, licences “for” Europe are
likely to generate new barriers and new bureaucracy.

For example, one of the working groups is on “user-generated content”.
User-generated content is... well... how can this be explained...? It is
user-generated and should not require licensing. Obviously? In many
European countries, users can generate content that avails of exceptions
to copyright for parody/pastiche, for incidental use, uses of minor
importance etc., without licences. However, none of these exceptions are
mandatory, so there is a lack of harmonisation across Europe caused by a
European Directive which the Commission has no obvious intention of
resolving. So, if harmonisation is not possible by the removal of
licensing obligations in those countries which don't have appropriate
exceptions... what will the “working group” be “working” on? Adding
voluntary “licensing” to remove rights that citizens currently have?

The speech from Commissioner Kroes was not much more inspiring. She said
that she was not “too keen on heavy-handed legislative measures. They
aren't always needed.” This is true. The question is: when you've
already got heavy-handed legislative measures that are not fit for
purpose – do you repeal or reform them, or do you farm the problem out
to an ad hoc collection of industry lobbyists in order to make it seem
that the problem is being solved?

It normally takes at least 9-12 months for the European Parliament to
adopt a legislative text. The next elections are in 15 months. Is there
no hope for a real reform in the next two years?

Licenses for Europe
https://ec.europa.eu/licences-**for-europe-dialogue/en<https://ec.europa.eu/licences-for-europe-dialogue/en>

Commissioner Kroes speech: Digital technology and copyright can fit
together (4.02.2013)
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-**release_SPEECH-13-96_en.htm<http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-13-96_en.htm>

Commissioner Barnier speech: Making European copyright fit for purpose
in the age of internet (7.11.2012)
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-**release_SPEECH-12-785_en.htm<http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-785_en.htm>

Commissioner Barnier speech: Licences for Europe: quality content and
new opportunities for all Europeans in the digital era (4.02.2013)
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-**release_SPEECH-13-97_en.htm<http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-13-97_en.htm>

(Contribution by Joe McNamee - EDRi)

==============================**==============================**===========
10. Recommended Action: support your privacy rights
==============================**==============================**===========

EDRi together with other civil rights and data protection organisations
launched on 5 February 2013 the European campaign portal
Privacycampaign.eu in support of better protection for European
citizens' rights to privacy and data protection.

“This is our one opportunity to develop a strong legal framework,
building trust and removing unnecessary red tape for business. We need a
framework that is guided by clear, predictable legal principles and
strong enforcement. Instead, we have an unprecedented wave of
ill-informed, ill-advised and destructive corporate lobbying. Democracy
needs to be injected back into this debate in order to protect the
rights of European citizens” says Joe McNamee, Executive Director of
European Digital Rights.

The joint campaign launched by European Digital Rights (representing 32
organisations), Privacy International, The Julia Group, La Quadrature du
Net and Access aims at creating a counterweight to the massive lobbying
by the US government, trade associations and big internet business on
the data protection reform.

The organisations believe that without a successful reform of the data
protection framework European citizens will be left with a series of
legal loopholes and a range of unpredictable enforcement gaps where
nobody, neither citizens nor business, knows what law will be enforced.

The action of the European citizens is even more needed after the recent
news that prove that MEPs in the Internal Market and Consumer Committee
(IMCO) have adopted amendments written by Amazon, eBay or the American
Chamber of Commerce (AmCham EU) – to the detriment of European citizens
and their fundamental rights to privacy and data protection.

Privacy Campaign - European Campaign Portal for the Data Protection Reform<
http://www.privacycampaign.eu/

Lobby groups take CTRL+V of data protection proposal (11.02.2013)
http://edri.org/lobbyplag-**eudatap <http://edri.org/lobbyplag-eudatap>

LobbyPlag
http://www.lobbyplag.eu/

==============================**==============================**===========
11. Recommended Reading
==============================**==============================**===========

EU: Protection of human rights in the EU "rarely a priority", says
Human Rights Watch (02.2013)
http://www.statewatch.org/**news/2013/feb/03hrw-eu-report.**htm<http://www.statewatch.org/news/2013/feb/03hrw-eu-report.htm>

EU cyber security directive considered harmful (8.02.2013)
http://www.**lightbluetouchpaper.org/2013/**02/08/eu-cyber-security-**
directive-considered-harmful/<http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2013/02/08/eu-cyber-security-directive-considered-harmful/>

==============================**==============================**===========
12. Agenda
==============================**==============================**===========

14-15 February 2013, Vienna, Austria
Internet 2013 - Shaping policies to advance media freedom
http://www.osce.org/event/**internet2013<http://www.osce.org/event/internet2013>

21-22 February 2013, Washington DC, USA
Intellectual Property and Human Rights Conference and Roundtable Discussion
Webcasted live and archived
http://www.wcl.american.edu/**pijip/go/blog-post/**
intellectual-property-and-**human-rights-conference-and-**
roundtable-discussion<http://www.wcl.american.edu/pijip/go/blog-post/intellectual-property-and-human-rights-conference-and-roundtable-discussion>

22 February 2013, Warsaw, Poland
ePSIplatform Conference: "Gotcha! Getting everyone on board"
http://epsiplatform.eu/**content/save-date-22-february-**
2013-epsiplatform-conference<http://epsiplatform.eu/content/save-date-22-february-2013-epsiplatform-conference>

21-22 March 2013, Malta
Online Privacy: Consenting to your Future
http://www.**onlineprivacyconference.eu/<http://www.onlineprivacyconference.eu/>

6-8 May 2013, Berlin, Germany
re:publica 2013
http://re-publica.de/en/

20-21 June 2013, Lisbon, Portugal
EuroDIG 2013
http://www.eurodig.org/

25-26 June 2013, Barcelona, Spain
9th International Conference on Internet Law & Politics: Big Data:
Challenges and Opportunities.
http://edcp.uoc.edu/symposia/**idp2013/?lang=en<http://edcp.uoc.edu/symposia/idp2013/?lang=en>

25-26 June 2013, Washington, DC, USA
23rd Computers, Freedom and Privacy Conference (CFP)
CfP by 1 March 2013
http://www.cfp.org/2013

31 July – 4 August 2013, Geestmerambacht, Netherlands
Observe. Hack. Make. - OHM2013
CfP by 1 March 2013
https://ohm2013.org/

23-26 September 2013, Warsaw, Poland
Public Voice Conference 2013
35th International Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners conference
http://www.giodo.gov.pl/259/**id_art/762/j/en/<http://www.giodo.gov.pl/259/id_art/762/j/en/>

==============================**==============================
13. About
==============================**==============================

EDRi-gram is a biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe.
Currently EDRi has 32 members based or with offices in 20 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-gram.

All contributions, suggestions for content, corrections or agenda-tips
are most welcome. Errors are corrected as soon as possible and are
visible 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/<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<http://www.edri.org/about/sponsoring>
http://flattr.com/thing/**417077/edri-on-Flattr<http://flattr.com/thing/417077/edri-on-Flattr>

- 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/mk/vesti/edri<http://www.metamorphosis.org.mk/mk/vesti/edri>

- EDRI-gram in German

EDRI-gram is also available in German, with delay. Translations are
provided by 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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130215/41742049/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t