[Governance] PL 2630 in Brazil

[sivasubramanian muthusamy]

Carlos,

It is particularly disturbing to see the condition to use mobile telephony
as an element for registering and authenticating users. It attempts to get
the State to accord undue importance to an industrial sector.

Sivasubramanian M <https://www.linkedin.com/in/sivasubramanianmuthusamy/>
6.Internet at gmail.com
twitter.com/shivaindia


On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 12:45 AM Carlos Afonso via Governance <
governance at lists.igcaucus.org> wrote:

> Dear people, as some of you probably know, the Brazilian Congress is
> discussing a crucial bill of law on fake news. A version of the bill has
> been approved by the Senate (where the proposal originated) and is now
> under discussion in the Chamber of Deputies. Below is a precise review of
> the situation, by the Brazilian chapter of the Internet Society).
>
> The text refers to the statement on the bill of law published by the
> Brazilian chapter, which can be read here in Portuguese and English:
>
>
> https://isoc.org.br/noticia/capitulos-da-isoc-apoiam-nota-tecnica-da-isoc-brasil-contra-o-pl-das-fake-news
>
> fraternal regards
>
> --c.a.
>
> =============================
>
> This is a brief report on the recent developments in the Brazilian
> Congress regarding the Bill on Fake News.
>
> Despite strong opposition from civil society organizations and tech
> companies, which asked for a postponing of the voting so that a more
> informed discussion could take place, the Bill has been voted and approved
> by the Senate on June 30. Voting result was 45 in favor, 32 against the
> Bill (1 abstention + the President), from a total of 89 senators.
>
> The Bill now goes to the House of Representatives, where it can be amended
> or even rejected. If amended, it must come back to the Senate for another
> round of discussion and voting. Forecast is that it might take up to 3
> months for the matter to return to the Senate. *But recent press coverage
> indicates that things might be expedited in the House in a response to
> Bolsonaro's announced willingness to veto some parts of the project that
> might affect "freedom of expression".* If finally approved by the Senate,
> it must be sanctioned by the President, who can interpose his veto to
> specific parts of the text. So we still have many opportunities to fight
> for a much better version of the Bill.
>
> Some important highlights on the version that has been approved, both
> positive and negative ones:
>
>
>    - End-to-end encryption was recognized as legal. But traceability
>    through "forwarding metadata" was kept, and this was the hardest fight
>    so far. Several organizations are threatening to take the matter to the
>    Supreme Court, because of the threat to privacy.
>    - Facial recognition was not inserted as means to identify users (as
>    promised by the Rapporteur the weekend before the vote). Providers are
>    required to develop measures to "identify users" accused of "inauthentic
>    behavior". Collection of phone numbers is not mandatory anymore. The
>    Bill now states that "those apps that rely on phone numbers to function are
>    obliged to suspend services to those phone lines that are cancelled by the
>    operator".
>    - A last-minute copyright rule was suppressed from the Bill in the
>    final round of deliberations.
>    - Data localization was suppressed from the Bill. A CLOUD Act-inspired rule
>    was adopted to oblige companies to provide access from Brazil to data
>    stored abroad.
>    - Mandatory arbitration for Terms of Service was suppressed. The
>    Intermediary Liability regime from the “Marco Civil” stands untouched. But
>    complicated rules related to authorization for providers to remove content
>    immediately remain, in cases of "harmful consequences, information security
>    or user security, threats to the functionality of the service, hate speech,
>    child pornography, support to suicide and self-mutilation", "defamation and
>    slander" against politicians, trademarks, individuals and legal entities,
>    as well as "content that lead to error or confusion, including through deep
>    fakes" (which is very broad). There is a need to ensure that all those
>    reached by the content are also reached by a 'right of reply' in cases of
>    defamation and slander.
>    - The issue of TCP/IP ports in CG-NATed connections still remains.
>
> We thank the support from other Chapters to the statements we published.
> They were collected here
> <https://isoc.org.br/noticia/capitulos-da-isoc-apoiam-nota-tecnica-da-isoc-brasil-contra-o-pl-das-fake-news>
> and also resonated on Twitter.
>
> for ISOC-BR
>
> Flavio Wagner, chair
>
>
> --
> Governance mailing list
> Governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> https://lists.igcaucus.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20200708/a5d3ca39/attachment.htm>