20 Dec 2016

EDRi’s Press Review 2016

By EDRi

During the past year, our work to defend citizens’ rights and freedoms online has gained an impressive visibility – we counted nearly four hundred mentions! – in European and international media. Below, you can find our press review 2016.

pressreview2016


JANUARY

07/01 32C3 zum Nachschauen: Safe Harbor, Netzneutralität & EU-Fails (Netzpolitik)
08/01 Netzpolitischer Wochenrückblick KW 1: Jahreswechsel (Netzpolitik)
12/01 EFA signs open letter demanding governments enshrine encryption (ZD Net)
14/01 Tiden rinner ut för Safe Harbor – vad händer nu? (LegalTech)
18/01 Facebook’s Free Basics: Is there no internet access alternative? (CBR)
29/01 Security exemptions cloud EU-US data talks (EU Observer)
29/01Security exemptions cloud EU-US data talks (Europa Nu)


FEBRUARY

02/02 New European, U.S. data transfer pact agreed (Reuters)
02/02 European Parliament will vote on TISA, the evil global services sibling of TTIP(ArsTechnica)
02/02 U.S., EU reach agreement on Safe Harbor alternative(CIO)
02/02 New European, U.S. data transfer pact agreed (Reuters)
02/02 U.S., EU Reach Deal on New Data-Transfer Framework (Dow Jones Business News)
02/02 ‘This is a Joke’: Snowden, Others Slam New EU-US Data Sharing Deal (Common Dreams)
02/02 New European, U.S. data transfer pact agreed (Daily Mail)
02/02 ‘This is a Joke’: Snowden, Others Slam New EU-US Data Sharing Deal (Oximity)
02/02 U.S., EU reach agreement on Safe Harbor alternative (PC World)
02/02 ‘Privacy Shield’ Agreement Between EU And U.S. Looks Inadequate, Could Be Challenged At CJEU (Tom’s Hardware)
02/02 ‘Privacy Shield’ moet transatlantische gegevensstromen veiligstellen (IT-Executive)
02/02 New Safe Harbor Agreement may be massive criticism direct – “a joke” (Techsite)
02/02 Logo ist vor Einigung fertig! Safe Harbour 2.0 heißt jetzt Privacy Shield! (Netzpolitik)
02/02 U.S., EU Reach Deal on New Data-Transfer Framework (Wall Street Journal)
03/02 ‘This is a Joke’: Snowden, Others Slam New EU-US Data Sharing Deal (Raging Bull-shit)
03/02 Safe Harbor, cosa nasconde il nuovo Scudo? (Punto Informatico)
03/02 Ein Sieb als Schutzschild (Die Zeit)
03/02 “Privacy Shield” Datenschutzschild mit Löchern (Der Tagesspiegel)
03/02 Ist das EU-US Privacy Shield nur Bullshitbingo? (ComputerWoche)
03/02 Commission, Department of Commerce will do an annual joint preview to substantiate the commitments made (New Europe)
03/02 European Union Deal Lifts Amazon, Google, Facebook From Legal Limbo (Investor’s Business Daily)
03/02 Per Mausklick für mehr Datenschutz (Neues Deutschland)
03/02 European Commission defence of European rights sinks in an unsafe harbour(Vita International)
03/02 Privacy Shield Agreement Amongst EU And U.S. Seems to be Inadequate, Could Be Challenged At CJEU (Technology 2015)
03/02 New Safe Harbor Data “Deal” May Be More Politicking Than Surveillance Reform (The Intercept)
03/02 Goodbye Safe Harbour, hello Privacy Shield (Europrivacy.info)
03/02 EU and US reach data transfer agreement (Pan European Networks)
04/02 U.S. and E.U. agree on a Safe Harbor substitute (Articles.Informer)
08/02 Indiase telecomwaakhond verbiedt Facebooks gratis internet (RTLZ)
10/02 Entrevista a Diego Naranjo(Críptica)
11/02  EU internet freedom programme endangered by Commission muddle (EurActiv)
11/02  UE-USA.Krytycy nie zostawiaj? suchej nitki na “tarczy prywatno?ci” (Gazeta Wyborcza)
12/02 Dänemark plant Ausweitung von Vorratsdatenspeicherung (Netzpolitik)
15/02 Netzneutralität: Wie es jetzt weitergeht (Netzpolitik)
16/02 Una nueva doctrina jurídica al acecho: la protección absoluta del Secreto Comercial (El Confidencial)
18/02 Village Roadshow Starts Game of Whack-a-Mole (MySunshineCoast)
19/02 Here’s How the Ad-Blocking Debate Just Collided With Net Neutrality in Europe (Fortune)
22/02 Mozilla, EFF, and Creative Commons call for more openness in trade negotiations (Ars Technica)
22/02 TTIP Opponents Hold Three-Day Strategy Session On How To Defeat Deal (Inside US Trade’s Newsstand)
23/02 TTIP & Co.: Bürgerrechtsallianz fordert “offene” Handelsabkommen (Heise)
24/02 Rights must not be abandoned in trade negotiations (Department of Homeland Security News)
29/02 Commission wants EU-US ‘Privacy Shield’ by end of June (EurActiv)
29/02 Privacy Shield is the same unsafe harbour (EU business)
29/02 EU-Kommission wirbt für neue Datentransfer-Vereinbarung mit USA (Focus)


MARCH

01/03 Privacy Shield: Who is it there to protect? (SiliconRepublic)
01/03 Ue pubblica i dettagli del Privacy shield, che non convince tutti (EUnews)
01/03 Dokumente zu Privacy Shield veröffentlicht: Safe Harbor in neuem Anstrich (Netzpolitik)
02/03 FBI Request to Unlock iPhone in Terrorism Probe ‘Undermines US Security’> (Sputnik News)
02/03 Kritik am “Safe Habor”-Nachfolger “Privacy Shield” (Der Tagesspiegel)
03/03 Pourquoi le privacy shield est un bouclier bien trop frele pour la vie-privee (Le Soir)
03/03 «Respect My Net» : la neutralité du Net sous surveillance citoyenne (Libération)
03/03 RespectMyNet established to catalogue European net neutrality violations (TelecomTV)
03/03 Xnet y varias organizaciones europeas lanzan “Respect My Net”: plataforma para denuncia de violaciones de la neutralidad de la red (Tercera Informacion)
03/03 Nace Respect My Net, una iniciativa destinada a proteger la neutralidad en la red (Diagonal)
03/03 Entra en funcionamiento la plataforma por la neutralidad de la red Respect My Net (InfoLibre)
04/03 NGOs starten Meldestelle für Verletzungen der Netzneutralität (DerStandard)
04/03 Lehrer warnen vor Spick-Smartwatches (Neue Buercher Zeitung)
04/03 Nace Respect My Net, una iniciativa destinada a proteger la neutralidad en la red (Iniciativa Debate)
04/03 Facebook, tra dati e responsabilità (AltraEconomia)
04/03 Respect My Net: Website zu Netzneutralitätsverstößen in der EU gestartet (ZDNet)
04/03 Respect my Net: Verstöße gegen Netzneutralität online melden (Heise)
04/03
Netzneutralität: Europaweite Meldestelle gestartet
(Tiroler Tageszeitung)
05/03 Webseite zu Veröffentlichung von Verletzungen der Netzneutralität in Europa online (Telecom-Presse)
07/03: Meldestelle für Verstöße gegen Netzneutralität gestartet (Netzpolitik)
10/03 European Union (EU): Counter-terrorism: The EU and its Member States must respect and protect human rights and the rule of law (OMCT)
16/03 Transatlantischer Datenfluss: Bürgerrechtler lehnen Privacy Shield ab (Heise)
16/03
‘Privacy Shield’ Data Transfer Deal Needs More Work, EU Told’
(Law360)
17/03 Zivilgesellschaftliche Koalition fordert Nachbesserungen am „Privacy Shield“ (Netzpolitik)
17/03 Privacyorganisaties vinden datadeal VS-EU veel te slap (RTLZ)
17/03 Párte thési stin diavoúlefsi tis EE gia tin efarmogí ton kanónon perí pnevmatikís idioktisías (Creative Commons Greece)
22/03 EU-Kommission bittet um Meinung zu geistigem Eigentum (Netzpolitik)
23/03 Flight data deal is a reason for UK to stay in the EU, says Tory MEP (Euractiv)
23/03 ‘Europe’s defenders must share data to fight terror’ (The Local)
29/03 ‘Privacy piñata not a serious analysis: Opposing view’ (USA Today)
31/03 https://netzpolitik.org/2016/neustart-bei-savetheinterneteu-eu-konsultation-zur-netzneutralitaet/ (Netzpolitik)


APRIL

04/04 La lucha por el control da la informaciòn: el FBI contra las filtraciones (Diagonal)
08/04 Online-Inhalte: EU-Ratsspitze will Geoblocking europaweit festschreiben (Heise)
12/04 A Strasbourg, l’ombre du groupe Safran plane sur les fichiers de passagers aériens (Mediapart)
13/04 Polnische Geheimdienste: Kommunikationsüberwachung ohne Kontrolle (Netzpolitik)
13/04 Passenger Name Record: EU to harvest more data to stop crime (BBC)
14/04 EU gives companies two years to comply with sweeping new privacy laws (PCworld.com)
14/04 MEPs concerned that amendments could ‘kill’ PNR directive (Euractiv.com)
14/04 El PNR: Así es como las compañías aéreas tendrán derecho a saber todo sobre ti (Publico.es)
14/04 EU gives companies two years to comply with sweeping new privacy laws (CIO)
14/04 EU plan to collect, not share, air traveler data is ‘absurd’ (CIO)
15/04 Europe’s plan to collect airline passenger data raises privacy concerns (The Verge)
17/04 New passenger regulation spells end of data privacy (Times of Malta)
28/04 Facebook Censorships Nearly Tripled in Six Months Because of Photo from Paris Attacks (Newsweek)
28/04 Bund und Länder: Online-Plattformen sollen Algorithmen transparent machen (Heise.de)


MAY

01/05 Europese burgerrechtenorganisatie waarschuwt voor inhoud uitgelekt TTIP-verdrag (PChulp-noord)
02/05 Déclaration collective concernant la neutralité du Net en Europe (Intrusio.fr)
02/05 Commission lashes out at TTIP leaks as ‘storm in a teacup’ (Euractiv.com)
03/05 TTIP expected to fail after US demands revealed in unprecedented leake (Ars Technica)
03/05 Alleged Leaked TTIP Report Reveals Differences, Convergence On IP Issues (Intellectual Property Watch)
06/05 Commission’s digital single market turns one and has a big seven months ahead (Euractiv.com)
06/05 TTIP May Be Doomed by French Resistance (BestVPN blog)
06/05 TTIP leaks: telecoms proposals threaten net neutrality & citizens rights (IPtegrity.com)
06/05 A Tale of Shields & Swords or Are Data Transfers between the EU and the US legal once again? (Hirschfeld Kraemer LLP)
09/05 Crunch time for net neutrality rules, says EU digital rights warrior (Ars Technica)
17/05 Zivilgesellschaft wettert gegen EU-Initiative für Geschäftsgeheimnisse (Heise)
18/05 Net neutrality: Zero-rated services to be nixed by Dutch government (Ars Technica)
26/05 Privacy Shield must be Schremsproof, says one MEP—others wave it through (Ars Technica)
29/05 Privacy piñata not a serious analysis: Opposing view (USA Today)
31/05 Rights groups are outraged at the European Commission-brokered deal (Fortuna.com)
31/05 Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft and YouTube adopt EU hate speech rules (RT.com)
31/05 Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Microsoft Pledge to Remove Hate Speech Within 24 Hours (WCCFtech.com)
31/05 Facebook, Twitter, Google, and Microsoft agree to EU hate speech rules (The Verge)
31/05 Facebook And Others Agree To Enforce EU Hate Speech Laws (ValueWalk)
31/05 Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Twitter crack down on online hate speech in EU (PCWorld)
31/05 Microsoft, Facebook, Google, Twitter are moving towards a zero-tolerance attitude towards hate speech (SiliconANGLE)
31/05 Rights Groups Outraged As US Tech Giants Sign Up To EU Hate Speech Rules (Forbes)
31/05 Facebook, Twitter, Google, and Microsoft agree to EU hate speech rules (Discussionist)
31/05 Facebook Signs European Union Pledge To Suppress Loosely Defined ‘Hate Speech’ And Promote ‘Counter Narratives’ (Breitbart.com)
31/05 YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft Agree To Censor EU “Hate Speech” (Web Pro News)
31/05 EU hate speech ruling could further undermine our online privacy (WhatMobile.net)
31/05 Title (DigitalJournal.com)
31/05 TERRORISM : EDRI RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE EP REPORT ON TERRORISM (Free-Group.eu)
31/05 Google, Microsoft, Twitter and Facebook agree to remove hate speech online (EurActiv)
31/05 YouTube, Facebook and Twitter Commit to Shutting Down Hate Speech in EU Pact (Variety US)
31/05 In Europa codice di condotta contro l’odio online (Virgolette blog)
31/05 YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft Agree To Censor EU “Hate Speech” (FullAct.com)
31/05 EU og IT-gigantene skal sensurere sosiale medier (Steigan, blogger)
31/05 Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Twitter crack down on online hate speech in EU (CIO)
31/05 Les géants du web luttent contre les propos haineux en Europe (Le Monde Informatique)
31/05 In Europa codice di condotta contro l’odio online (La Stampa)
31/05 Empresas de tecnologia aprovam novas regras para inibir discurso de ódio na UE (CanalTech)
31/05 Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Twitter crack down on online hate speech in EU (ComputerWorld.com)
31/05 Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Twitter crack down on online hate speech in EU (IT World)
31/05 Tech giants join the European Commission’s code of conduct (Pulse Headlines)
31/05 Europese gedragscode tegen haatzaaien op internet (Techzine)
31/05 Facebook en co bannen online haatyaairij binnen de 24 uur (Metro BE)
31/05 In Europa codice di condotta contro l’odio online (La Stampa)
31/05 Should We Let Internet Companies Define How We Express Ourselves? (MIT Technology Review)
31/05 Soziale Netzwerke wollen Hetze europaweit schnell nachgehen (Augsburger Allgemeine)


JUNE

01/06 Google, Microsoft, Twitter And Facebook Agree To Remove Hate Speech Online (Eurasia Review)
01/06 DEATH OF FREE SPEECH: EU blasted for ‘Orwellian’ crackdown on online criticism (Express UK)
01/06 EU wil haatberichten binnen 24 uur van internet af (DeMorgen)
01/06 IT-Riesen und EU: Verhaltenskodex zur Bekämpfung von Online-Hetze (Internet World Business)
01/06 Sì delle compagnie al codice EU sull’hate speech (Web News Italy)
01/06 Accordo tra UE e colossi tech per contrastare l’odio sul web con un “codice di condotta” (FanPage)
01/06 Facebook, Google, Microsoft e Twitter unite contro le espressioni di odio online (Computer World)
01/06 Da Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Microsoft ok a Ue su regole anti-odio (Stadio24)
01/06 Discursul urii: Comisia Europeana si mai multi giganti globali de media si tehnologie anunta un cod de conduita impotriva incitarii la ura in online. Acuzatii de cenzura (HotNews.ro)
01/06 Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft and YouTube will remove hate speech (Title translated from Bulgarian (Dnevnik.bg)
01/06 It-jättarna säger ja till EU:s kod mot näthat – men upplägget får skarp kritik (idg.se)
01/06 Gemeinsam gegen den Hass im Internet (Die Welt)
01/06 Soziale Netzwerke wollen Internet-Hetze europaweit schnell nachgehen (Horizont.net)
01/06 Google, Twitter, Facebook hate speech deal with EU is rash, say digi warriors (ArsTechnica)
01/06 Privacy advocates reject Europe’s ‘code of conduct’ for online speech (Christian Science Monitor)
01/06 Microsoft, Google, Twitter, Facebook Agree To EU Hate Speech Rules (InformationWeek)
01/06 Twitter, Facebook and YouTube sign EU code of conduct to help combat online hate speech (International Business Times)
01/06 Top Internet Companies Agree To Vague Notice & Takedown Rules For ‘Hate Speech’ In The EU (TechDirt)
01/06 EU’s Online Hate Speech Deal Prompts Fears Of Censorship (BuzzFeed News)
01/06 Hatespeech-Verabredung zwischen EU-Kommission und Internetfirmen: NGOs kritisieren Willkür (Netzpolitik)
01/06 Haine sur Internet – Quid de la bonne conduite de Facebook, Twitter, YouTube et Microsoft ? (ZDNet)
01/06 EU aftaler ‘code of conduct‘ på nettet med Facebook, Google og Twitter (Information.dk)
01/06 Internetoví giganti v ?ele s Facebookem cht?jí s EU bojovat proti nenávisti online (EurActiv CZ)
01/06 El Brief: Políptico de las crisis europeas (Actuall)
01/06 Facebook, Twitter, YouTube e Microsoft: nuova alleanza per la pace (ictBusiness.it)
01/06 UE, Facebook, Microsoft, Google: uniti contro razzismo online (Molisedoc.com)
01/06 EU’s Online Hate Speech Deal Prompts Fears Of Censorship Viral (Webeviews.eu)
01/06 EU’s Online Hate Speech Deal Prompts Fears Of Censorship (Omaha Sun Times)
01/06 EU’s Online Hate Speech Deal Prompts Fears Of Censorship (Update News)
01/06 Privacy advocates reject Europe’s ‘code of conduct’ for online speech (Yahoo News Tech)
02/06 Soziale Netzwerke: Internet-Hetze europaweit nachgehen (Sueddeutsche Zeitung)
02/06 Was Facebook über seine Nutzer wirklich weiß (FutureZone.at)
02/06 Standing up for hate (BBC)
02/06 Rights Advocates Blast EU and Tech Firms’ Hate Speech Code (E-Commerce Times)
02/06 Ustal? które wpisy s? „nienawistne”. Giganci komputerowi dogadali si? z eurokratami (PCh24.pl)
02/06 Twitter y Facebook borrarán contenidos violentos y abusivos pero no los definen (MIT Technology Review ES)
02/06 Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Microsoft Join Forces With EU to Crack down Online Hate Speech (News Everyday)
03/06 European Commission’s Hate Speech Deal With Companies Will Chill Speech (EFF)
03/06 European Union Declares War on Internet Free Speech (Gatestone Institute)
03/06 Security News You Might Have Missed: Dystopian Edition (Forbes)
04/06 Weiche Regeln gegen harte Worte (Deutschlandfunk)
05/06 Facebook, YouTube, Twitter… zajedno protiv govora mržnje (Vijesti)
05/06 Soziale Netzwerke wollen verstärkt gegen Hetze vorgehen (N24.de)
05/06 Soziale Netzwerke wollen verstärkt gegen Hetze vorgehen (N24.de)
06/06 L’Ue dà il via a una consultazione pubblica sulla neutralità di internet (EU News)
06/06 EU net neutrality draft guidelines split the crowd—public told to wade in (ArsTechnica)
06/06 Netzneutralität: Europäische Regulierer lassen Leitlinien diskutieren (Heise)
06/06 EU telecom regulators see free Internet services as next battle (Reuters)
06/06 Regulador europeu propõe veto ao zero-rating (TeleSintese)
06/06 Neutralité du net : les opérateurs jugent les recommandations du Berec trop restrictives (Contexte)
07/06 Das sind die neuen Regeln zur Netzneutralität in Europa (FutureZone.at)
08/06 BEREC gives its view on net neutrality rules (Agence Europe)
09/06 Do not take a glimpse (Calcalist, The Economist Israel)
09/06 Mowa nienawi?ci, czyli ?egnajcie, Rzymianie (Wyborcza)
11/06 “Orwell 2.0”. Jan Wójcik krytykuje nowy projekt UE, Facebooka, YouTube’a i Twittera (WP Wiadomosci)
13/06 Mobilisation for digital rights (OpenDemocracy.net)
13/06 Offener Brief an EU-Kommissarin Malmström: Datenschutz nicht durch Freihandelsabkommen untergraben (Netzpolitik)
13/06 EU public interest groups reject treasury financial data fix (POLITICO Pro)
13/06 EU Consumer, Digital Rights Groups Call For EU To Reject U.S. Data Fix In TISA, TTIP (World Trade Online)
13/06 Yes stitching the mouth of Europe (Title translated from English) (WebCafe.bg)
14/06 Facebook, Twitter, YouTube e Microsoft insieme contro odio sul web (RosaRossa)
14/06 Ag’s big chance to boost TPP (POLITICO US)
15/06 Kaja Kallas: kõik Eesti poliitikud peaksid suutma digitaalsetel teemadel kaasa rääkida (Eesti Päevaleht)
15/06 Kaja Kallas: kõik Eesti poliitikud peaksid suutma digitaalsetel teemadel kaasa rääkida (delfi.ee)
17/06 Web content blocking squeezed into draft EU anti-terrorism law (ArsTechnica)
20/06 Paris Terrorist’s Video Underscores Live-Streaming Challenges For Social Media (Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty)
20/06 Brexit and technology: How network effects will damage UK IT industry (Computer Weekly)
21/06 Netzsperren als Maßnahme gegen terroristische Inhalte (ComputerBase)
21/06 TTIP: más condiciones de entorno para el Mercado Único Digital (Huffington Post ES)
24/06 Democracy – a call to arms (Open Democracy)
25/06 EU-Parlament plant Anti-Terror-Netzsperren (Deutschlandfunk)
25/06 Elusive privacy shield deal makes a choppy landing (POLITICO)
27/06 EU-Parlament: Vorabstimmung über Netzsperren ist am Mittwoch (Netzpolitik)
29/06 A complete guide to all the things Facebook censors hate most (QUARTZ)
29/06 EU researchers and policymakers debate European human rights challenges (Cordis News)


JULY

04/07 EU-Terrorismusrichtline mit Netzsperren auf Schiene (Futurezone.at)
04/07 Sagt Hallo zu Netzsperren: Innenausschuss des EU-Parlaments beschließt EU-Terrorismusrichtlinie (Netzpolitik)
05/07 EU-Parlament stellt Weichen für Websperren gegen Terror (heise)
05/07 Netzsperren – Waffe gegen Terror oder Zensur? (Sueddeutsche Zeitung)
05/07 Anti-Terror-Richtlinie: Zensur oder wirksame Maßnahme gegen Terrorismus? (Euractiv.de)
05/07 EU parliament pushes ahead with plans to block, remove terrorist content online (Ars Technica UK)
06/07 EU Commission under investigation for EU Internet Forum documents (VOX Pol)
07/07 Tech plans to fight net neutrality rules in 5G pledge (POLITICO)
11/07 This Facebook Nemesis Says Businesses Will Shun U.S.-EU Privacy Deal (Fortune)
12/07 Données personnelles : le Privacy Shield USA / UE adopté mais critiqué (Numerama)
12/07 Privacy Shield transatlantic data sharing agreement enters effect (CIO)
12/07 EU and US indulge in Privacy Shield self-congratulations in Brussels, but privacy activists say ‘See you in court’ (Diginomica)
12/07 1ST LEADPraise, criticism as EU clears way for new US data-sharing deal (EuropeOnline)
12/07 EU Clears Way For New Controversial Data-Sharing Deal With US (London South East)
12/07 EU-US Privacy Shield agreement goes into effect (The Verge)
12/07 Começa a valer acordo de transferência de dados pessoais entre Europa e EUA (Telesintese)
13/07 Past trade ghosts haunt Trump’s veep picks (POLITICO US)
13/07 European Digital Rights Advocates Warn about Trade Agreements (Law.com)
13/07 Survey: European Union Needs Trade Deal Privacy Regime (B&C)
13/07 EU stelt privacy burgers onvoldoende veilig (Knack.be)
13/07 L’UE ne protège pas assez la vie privée de ses citoyens (Knack.be)
13/07 EU-Kommission bestätigt “Safe Harbor”-Nachfolger (Verivox)
13/07 EU stelt privacy burgers onvoldoende veilig (Kassa NL)
13/07 L’UE ne protège pas assez la vie privée de ses citoyens (DataNews)
13/07 Survey: European Union Needs Trade Deal Privacy Regime (B&C)
14/07 Trade Agreements Undermine Data Protection, New Study Shows (MichiganStandard.com)
13/07 EU – US: Privacy Shield in Force – But For How Long? (Lexology)
13/07 Is the E.U. letting Russia and China abuse Europeans’ privacy? (The Daily Dot)
16/07 Transatlantischer Zoff: Digitaler Datenschutz oder digitaler Protektionismus? (Heise)
19/07 Telcos should only retain metadata to fight serious crime, EU judge says (CIO)
28/07 New EU-U.S. data transfer agreement debuts to high hopes, pot shots (TechTarget)


AUGUST

01/08 Privacy Shield ‘Shaky’, Companies May Choose More Reliable Means (Sputnik News)
02/08 POLITICO Pro Morning Tech: Android escalation — Privacy shield (POLITICO)
10/08 Digitale grupper smækker døren i protest mod EU-aftale (Information.dk)
19/08 Les messageries instantanées à l’assaut des opérateurs télécoms (Le Soir)
22/08 Anstehende Grundsatzentscheidung der EU: Schutz der Menschen oder Schutz der Geschäftsmodelle? (Netzpolitik)
25/08 Why France and Germany’s Encryption Stance May Be More Bark Than Bite (Fortune)
30/08 Europe’s net neutrality guidelines seen as a victory for the open web (The Verge)
30/08 EU’s net neutrality guidelines get published (BBC)
30/08 EU-Regulierer sichern die Netzneutralität stärker ab (Heise)
30/08 Here’s Why Europe’s Net Neutrality Advocates Are Celebrating (Fortune)
30/08 EU telecom regulators adopt strict net neutrality rules, industry dismayed (Reuters)
30/08 Victoire inespérée pour la neutralité du Net en Europe, Internet est sauvé! (20 minutes)
30/08 Neue Regeln zur Netzneutralität in EU beschlossen – Zivilgesellschaft und Netzaktivisten zufrieden (Telekom Presse)
30/08 Netzneutralität in Europa: “So gut abgesichert wie nie” (Futurezone.at)
30/08 Europa reforça neutralidade e restringe zero rating, mas vai avaliar caso a caso (Convergencia Digital)
30/08 Autoridades da UE adotam regras de neutralidade de rede à contragosto de operadoras (Extra Globo)
30/08 Wer regiert das Internet? (FES)
31/08 Un « triomphe » pour la neutralité du Net en Europe (Numerama)
31/08 Net neutrality activists claim victory in Europe (The Register)
31/08 No more internet fast lanes: Europe’s strict new net neutrality rules revealed (Silicon Republic)
31/08 EU setzt Netzneutralität streng durch: Sonderdeals für Online-Dienste am Ende (T3n)
31/08 Neue Regeln zur Netzneutralität in EU beschlossen – Zivilgesellschaft und Netzaktivisten zufrieden (Telekom Presse)
31/08 EU net neutrality guidelines praised as a “digital triumph” (Diginomica)
31/08 Activists Cheer Europe’s Updated Net Neutrality Rules (PCMag)
31/08 Open Internet Advocates Claim Victory in Europe Net Neutrality Fight (Motherboard)
31/08 EU’s net neutrality guidelines close ‘fast lane’ loopholes – but do they go too far? (Wired)
31/08 EU ‘net neutrality’ may stop ISPs from blocking child abuse material (The Register)
31/08 BEREC issues net neutrality guidelines (DigitalTV.net)
31/08 EU publiceert richtlijnen netneutraliteit (Knack.be)
31/08 L’UE publie ses directives à propos de la neutralité du net (Le Vif)
31/08 EU telecom regulators adopt strict net neutrality rules (ET Telecom)
31/08 Neutralité du Net : l’Europe présente ses lignes directrices (BeGeek.fr)
31/08 Neutralité du Net dans l’UE : le BEREC publie ses lignes directrices (Les Numeriques)
31/08 Netzneutralität: EU gegen Sonderdeals zwischen Telcos und Content-Anbietern (Inside-it.ch)
31/08 Spotify & Co.: EU beschränkt Surf-Sonderdeals für Streaming (W&V Online)
31/08 EU-Aufseher begrenzen Sonderdeals für Online-Dienste (Thuringen Allgemeine)
31/08 Net neutrality wins in Europe – a victory for the internet as we know it (ZME Science)


SEPTEMBER

01/09 EU begrenzt Sonderdeals für Online-Dienste (NWZ Online)
01/09 Neuer Leak: EU-Kommission plant 20-jähriges Leistungsschutzrecht (Heise)
01/09 Activist Pressure Nets Better Net Neutrality Rules in Europe (DSL Reports)
01/09 Europa gana, Internet sigue siendo libre (El País)
02/09 Europa sichert die Netzneutralität: Das bedeuten die Regeln im Alltag (Netzpolitik)
08/09 Automated systems fight ISIS propaganda, but at what cost? (The Verge)
08/09 Canada-EU counter-terror data exchange is illegal, says top EU judge (CIO)
09/09 Presentation of Dr. Monica Horten’s paper on uncertainty for internet intermediaries in EU (CDT)
12/09 Canada-EU counter-terror data exchange is illegal, says top EU judge (CIO)
12/09 (NL)
EDRi: Het gevecht tegen ‘hate speech’ ondermijnt de grondrechten van burgers / (EN) EDRi: The fight against hate speech undermines the fundamental rights of citizens
(Krapuul)
12/09 EU’s guidelines on net neutrality see the light although grey areas do remain (The European Sting)
13/09 EU-Canada Airline Data Pact Violates Privacy:Adviser (Bloomberg BNA)
13/09 Wikimedia, EDRI, and others call for EU Copyright Package to uphold DSM fundamental principles (IPKat)
14/09 EU Commission Proposes Mandatory Piracy Filters For Online Services (TorrentFreak)
14/09 Google may have to pay for news snippets under EU copyright reform (CIO)
15/09 Europe demands YouTube to pay more to artists (Ksat News)
15/09 EU Telecoms Proposals Stir Fierce Debate (TechWeek Europe UK)
16/09 EU is now giving Google new monopolies to the detriment of European citizens and Internet companies (The European Sting)
20/09 TiSA-Abkommen: Mehr Einfluss für Industrielobbyisten und weniger Datenschutz (Netzpolitik)
20/09 I nuovi Greenpeace Leaks sul Tisa “L’accordo sui servizi svende il pianeta” (La Repubblica)
20/09 Money Talks: EU’s copyright overhaul, interview with Diego Naranjo (TRT World)
20/09 VIDEO: experts on how to make copyright work again (Communia)
21/09 Leaked TiSA documents reveal threats to climate: Greenpeace (NewEurope)
21/09 Les fuites sur l’accord Tisa inquiètent les défenseurs des droits numériques (Contexte Numèrique)
21/09 Pro Morning Tech: Diplomats’ digital delay — Airbnb stool pigeon (POLITICO)
23/09 Komissio haluaa puuttua tekijänoikeuslakiin, koska Youtuben kaltaiset sivustot tienaavat sisällöllä mutta tekijät eivät (Helsingin Sanomat)
26/09 Gruppen European Digital Rights EDRi kritiserar EUkommissionens förslag till upp (Placely)
27/09 The EU’s Proposed Copyright Directive Is Likely To Be A Wonderful Gift — For US Internet Giants (Techdirt)
30/09 Signs Of Changing Trends In FTAs’ IP Chapters, Speakers Say At WTO (Intellectual Property Watch)
30/09 Time To Talk Digital Issues At WTO With Focus On Developing Countries, Forum Hears (Intellectual Property Watch)
30/09 PO TTIP IN CETI – TISA (Zavod Radio Študent)


OCTOBER

02/10 CETA: 10 rzeczy, których nie wiecie o umowie UE-Kanada, a powinni?cie (Gazeta Prawna)
04/10 The curious tale of the French prime minister, PNR and peculiar patterns (EurActiv)
05/10 The internet has been quietly rewired, and video is the reason why (Quartz)
06/10 Facebook is the privacy villain of the year (EUbusiness)
06/10 Facebook valt in de prijzen op Big Brother Awards (iHLN Internet and Games)
06/10 Facebook grand gagnant des Big Brother Awards (DH.be)
06/10 Violation de la Vie privée: Facebook grand leader des Big Brother Awards (RTBF.de)
06/10 Facebook valt in de prijzen op Big Brother Awards (DeMorgen)
06/10 Našiel sa najvä?ší sliedi? v súkromí ?udí. Anticenu za rok 2016 si odniesol Facebook (HNonline.sk)
06/10 Facebook is the privacy villain of the year (EUbusiness)
07/10 Nejv?tší slídil v soukromí? Facebook! míní ?ást Evropy (Tyden.cz)
07/10 Pro Morning Tech, presented by Uber: Portugal’s startup star — Platforms in parliament (POLITICO)
07/10 Facebook Crowned Privacy Villain Of 2016 By European Privacy Rights Group (Intellectual Property Watch)
07/10 Facebook wins ‘privacy villain of the year’ award (The Daily Dot)
07/10 La UE prepara su propia ‘tasa Google’, ¿qué puede suponer para ti? (Publico)
07/10 Facebook named privacy villain of the year (TweakTown)
08/10 Introducing: Maryant Fernández Pérez (Patreon)
10/10 Facebook wint Belgische Big Brother Awards (Executive-People)
10/10 Facebook- An ultimate privacy villain of the year! (Brands)
11/10 Facebook is the Privacy Villain of the Year (Propakistani)
11/10 European Commission paralysed over data flows in TiSA trade deal (EurActiv)
12/10 Noticias Uruguayas 11 octubre 2016 (KaosEnLaRed)
13/10 TiSA discussions hit privacy, data protection roadblock (iAPP)
14/10 EU Hopes To Table Language On Data Flows By Next TISA Round (World Trade Online)
15/10 Les «trilogues», l’une des boîtes noires les plus secrètes de Bruxelles (Mediapart)
19/10 Digital Defenders: a free open-licensed booklet for kids about privacy and crypto (BoingBoing)
19/10 Digital Defenders vs. Data Intruders (Netzpolitik)
21/10 Amazon as an ISP Isn’t Bonkers—It Makes Perfect Sense (Wired)
21/10 EDRi’s Digital Defenders wants to help kids protect their digital privacy (Techaeris)
21/10 Four Nations Call for Access to Encrypted Data (VOA)
24/10 Watchdogs Urge EU Leaders to Protect Citizens’ Data in Trade Agreements (Sputnik International)
24/10 TiSA truer databeskyttelse og retten til privatliv (Information.dk)
24/10 Datenschutz: Und was ist mit TiSA? (EurActiv.be)
24/10 EU Commission aims to ban forced data localization (iAPP)
25/10 Consumer groups demand carveout for data protections in TISA (World Trade Online)
26/10 EDRi’s Booklet for the protection of minors’ privacy (Title translated from Greek) (Eellak)
28/10 Storebror ser deg: Personvern til salgs i TISA (Allevents.in)
28/10 #12np-Review: „Don’t waste a good crisis!“ – Die EU-Richtlinie zur „Terrorismusbekämpfung“ (DokuHouse)
31/10 Tutele e intervento. Merkel lancia il modello renano di liberalismo online (Il Foglio)


NOVEMBER

07/11 Grande fratello alla francese, traccerà colore degli occhi e impronte (La Repubblica)
07/11 Who is spying on you? What Yahoo hack taught us about Facebook, Google and WhatsApp (Mirror)
08/11 French privacy row over mass ID database (BBC)
15/11 The Directive from EU – privatising cencorship and filtering the freedom of expression (Title translated from Greek) (Technicious)
15/11 The Directive from EU – privatising cencorship and filtering the freedom of expression (Title translated from Greek) (Creative Commons Greece)
23/11 What hacking from Yahoo, Facebook, Google and WhatsApp (Title translated from Bulgarian) (Digital.bg)
28/11 Facebook may be able to censor anything it wants as per a secret trade proposal (International Business Times)
28/11 Facebook Akan Bisa Sensor Konten Apa pun Sesuai Keinginan (Okezone Techno)
27/11 Secret Trade Proposal Would Give Facebook Free Reign to Censor by Algorithm (Motherboard)
30/11 Menschenrechtsorganisationen warnen vor Terrorismusrichtlinie der EU (Netzpolitik)


DECEMBER

01/12 EU terror law risks making protest a crime (EUobserver)
01/12 Rights groups expose flaws in EU counterterrorism directive (EurActiv)
01/12 French man sentenced to two years in prison for visiting pro-ISIS websites (TheVerge)
04/12 Brussels urges US social media sites to act swiftly on hate posts (Financial Times)
06/12 How EU Plans To Deal With Online Hate Speech? (iTech Post)
06/12 Social media groups join forces to counter online terror content (Financial Times)
06/12 Europa pressiona redes sociais a agirem rápido contra discurso de ódio (Folha de S.Paulo)
08/12 Facebook and Twitter Need to Shut Down Hate Speech Within 24 Hours, Europe Warns (Motherboard)
08/12 20-year link right detrimental to authors, says CEIPI (IPProTheInternet)
10/12 Sorry, Silicon Valley. Europe won’t be any easier in 2017 (tkusnews)


…and we might have missed some! Have you spotted us elsewhere? Please let us know by sending us a message to press[at]edri.org, and we’ll add the link to the list.

Twitter_tweet_and_follow_banner

close
19 Dec 2016

EDRi Awards 2016

By Joe McNamee

For the first time and with great solemnity, EDRi presents the first ever third edition of its annual awards.

1. The “Humpty Dumpty Award” for the most silly “statistics”

The award goes to the “think tank” European Centre For International Political Economy (ECIPE) for its highly imaginative database on “barriers to trade”. The database includes some items whose validity as a significant barriers to free flow of data is tenuous as best. One example of such “barriers” is France’s rules on data protection by default, which are described as a “bandwitch” (sandwich? banned witch?) and net neutrality restriction. Contrary to what ECIPE suggests, such rules actually serve to increase trust and boost the free flow of data.

The EU’s data protection Directive is counted as eleven barriers to “free flow of data” in the European Union, while the EU’s Copyright Directive, with its well-known long list of options to restrict the free flow of data, is listed as a single barrier. One could almost be left with the impression that citizens’ rights are considered to be more of a barrier than economic rights.

2. The cranial fracture facepalm award

This year’s award goes to Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Axel Voss, for his unintentional opposition to the adoption of the Privacy Shield agreement.

You can still thank him for standing for your rights, whatever his intentions might have been:

voss_tw

 

3. The “we don’t need laws, we need law enforcement” award for blind abandonment of law “in the name of law enforcement”

The award this year goes to German Justice Minister Heiko Maas. Minister Maas has threatened to make Facebook and other social media companies criminally liable for failing to take arbitrary punitive action against illegal hate speech online.

In response to German Member of Parliament Andrej Hunko’s parliamentary question (pdf, in German) about a Die Zeit article concerning the deletion of 100 000 messages on Facebook, the response of the German Ministry of Justice was clear – that the German government completely abdicates responsibility:

“The Federal government has no information with regard to the extent to which the deleted contents reported in Die Zeit were illegal. The Federal Government also does not have a list of the 100 000 pieces of internet content. It is therefore impossible to assess, whether associated personal information were subject of a police investigation.

The Taskforce set up by Minister Maas on illegal hate messages on the internet does not check whether individual instances of hate speech are illegal or, in particular, are criminal. It has, since autumn 2015, developed standards for how the participating internet companies can effectively take action against hate messages. The internet companies check and delete, on their own responsibility, the content that is reported to them.” [our translation]


Positive EDRi Awards

On a more serious note, we should also spare a thought for the wonderful people that are doing wonderful work at a difficult time.

The “Max Schrems” award
Due to the new and pending litigation successes, the 2016 award goes to Les Exégètes amateurs for their success. Special mention goes to Max Schrems, for being the best Max Schrems in EuropePrivacy International and Digital Rights Ireland for their ongoing hard work.

The heroes who keep us energised award
This award is granted to Dunja Mijatovic, Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Representative on Freedom of the Media and David Kaye, United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression – for their inspirational energy, wisdom and insight.

new_award
The drafters of the International and European Human Rights core provisions
In challenging times, it is worth taking a moment to recognise the drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,  the European Convention of Human Rights, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and other international legal instruments that protect the rights and freedoms of people around the world.

Constitutions are chains imposed by Peter when sober on Peter when drunk.

– US Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes

Finally, we want to recognise the amazing work that all of our members and other digital rights activists are doing in Europe and around the world.

edri-awards-2016_members


Notable publications:


Check the previous EDRi awards!
EDRi awards 2015
EDRi awards 2014

(Contribution by Joe McNamee and Maryant Fernández)

Twitter_tweet_and_follow_banner

close
16 Dec 2016

Your privacy, security and freedom online: How to claim them back

By EDRi

This is the last blogpost of our series dedicated to privacy, security and freedoms. In this series, we have explained how your freedoms are under threat, and what you can do to fight back.

privacy_freedoms_small

Privacy: What is it?

The right to privacy is a crucial element of our personal security. It’s essential for free speech and democratic participation. It’s a fundamental right in the primary law of the European Union and is recognised in numerous international legal instruments.

Privacy helps us establish boundaries to limit who has access to our bodies, places and things, as well as our communications and our information.

– EDRi member Privacy International

By setting these boundaries, you will be able to exercise other freedoms, such as you right to free expression, right to freedom of association, or right to access to information without constraints.

Privacy is not an abstract concept. It is a cornerstone on which many of our fundamental freedoms are built. We should have the right to privacy, in order to be able to speak freely, to organise, to campaign and live without fear of discrimination.

How to claim back your freedom online

In our previous blogposts we have introduced different tools and tips for better privacy when using the internet. Although it is difficult to ensure a complete anonymity online, these tips can help you minimise being exposed. As with many other things, the need for security is a very personal one, depending on your work, your location and your relationships with people who might be in danger.

Increasingly, using privacy tools is an act of good citizenship. If only journalists or activists are using privacy enhancing technologies, it will be easier to identify and target them. If we are all using such technologies, we are helping defend those who are fighting to defend us.

Our tips are a good first step to protecting your privacy. These programs, apps and add-ons will protect you, to a certain extent, from mass surveillance. However, if you believe you need extra security, for example, if you are a human rights activist in a country where such occupation might put you in danger, you should contact the Access Now “Digital Security Helpline”. They are helping people at every hour of every day, in six languages.

In this video, prepared by our member Association for Technology and Internet (ApTI) – Romania, John learns how to protect his personal data:

You can watch all our privacy videos here.

What can politicians do to safeguard your freedoms online?

The rules on online privacy in the EU will be soon updated. A proposal for a new ePrivacy Directive will be published in January 2017. This law deals with privacy and confidentiality of communications for the entire EU, and it affects issues related to your freedoms online. The way in which the freedoms we described will be protected in the following years or decades will depend on, to a high extent, how this new proposal develops. Are politicians ready to fight for your protection?

Do you want to help us to defend your rights? Stay informed and act with us to become part of the change that will ensure our privacy is respected in the online world.

Read all the blogposts of this series here, to know more about your freedoms online, and how they are threatened!

Twitter_tweet_and_follow_banner

close
14 Dec 2016

ENDitorial: What do two copywrongs make? Definitely not a copyright

By Joe McNamee

Anyone who turns up in Brussels these days and tries to follow discussions around the proposal for “ancillary copyright” (aka “link tax”) in the Copyright Directive must be truly baffled.

----------------------------------------------------------------- Support our work with a one-off-donation! https://edri.org/donate/ -----------------------------------------------------------------

A court ruling imposing this approach failed in Belgium, hurting smaller publishers and everyone except Google. A similar law failed in Germany, hurting smaller publishers and everyone except Google. An even worse version of the policy failed even worse in Spain, hurting smaller publishers. Then, as part of its Copyright Directive, the Commission proposed an even worse version of it. Is this crazy? Or a plan so cunning that you could pin a tail on it and call it a fox?

Brussels politics is all about balance. It is all about fairness and compromise – or at least something that can be sold as fairness and compromise. So, the European Commission knows that if it proposes two awful proposals at the same time, European policy-makers would be unwilling to reject both measures. This is particularly the case when they have been ostensibly proposed to “protect European creators”. In the “consensus-driven” Brussels environment, to lose one measure might be regarded as misfortune, but to lose both could be portrayed as carelessness in the protection of Europe’s creators.

So, what else has the European Commission proposed? Well, Article 13 of the Copyright Directive and its explanatory recitals, in a total of about 600 words, also appears to want:

  • to make internet hosting services directly liable for any copyright infringements of their customers;
  • to make internet hosting services indirectly liable for any copyright infringements of their customers;
  • to remove the liability protections provided for in the 2000 E-Commerce Directive (just for copyright);
  • to require the conclusion of licensing agreements between web hosting companies and rightsholders;
  • to require the installation of upload filtering and monitoring of almost all material uploaded to the internet in Europe;
  • to invent a peculiar “pluristakeholder” discussion about how to filter users’ content that includes the hosting companies and rightsholders, but not internet users;
  • to codify outlandish misinterpretations of the European Court of Justice (CJEU) rulings in the Scarlet/Sabam, Netlog/Sabam, Telekabel, and L’Oreal/eBay cases into European law;
  • to invent a complaint mechanism for users whose information has been unfairly deleted by the hosting companies. This complaint mechanism would be set up and run by the same hosting companies. The mechanism would, in practice, be voluntary, as the companies could simply claim that content was deleted on the basis of terms of service rather than on the basis of the law.

The Article 13 proposals are, of course, much more difficult to delete, because it’s a tight tangle of numerous different proposals at the same time. Furthermore, it is designed to befuddle politicians, as it is hugely complicated to understand, but easy to sell as an “anti-Google” measure, despite the fact that it hurts pretty much everyone except Google.

Make no mistake about it, the European Commission both wants ancillary copyright AND the toxic Article 13 and that is what it is fighting for. However, the Commission’s “plan B” of going for a “balanced compromise” of losing one and keeping the other is as real as it is ridiculous.

06_copyright

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on copyright in the Digital Single Market (14.09.2016)
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/proposal-directive-european-parliament-and-council-copyright-digital-single-market

CJEU judgement: Telekabel/Constantin Film
http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=149924&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=165217

CJEU judgement: eBay/L’Oreal
http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=107261&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=165147

CJEU judgement: Netlog/Sabam
http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=119512&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=164867

CJEU judgement: Scarlet/Sabam
http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=115202&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=165057

E-Commerce Directive
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/e-commerce/directive/index_en.htm

EDRi: EU Copyright Directive – privatised censorship and filtering of free speech (10.11.2016)
https://edri.org/eu-copyright-directive-privatised-censorship-and-filtering-of-free-speech/

(Contribution by Joe McNamee, EDRi)

EDRi-gram_subscribe_banner

Twitter_tweet_and_follow_banner

close
14 Dec 2016

Polish government: Watchdogs are not welcome

By Guest author

Governments do not like being watched. Nevertheless, it has become common in developed democracies to support independent media and watchdog organisations, sometimes even with dedicated public funds. Wise governments know that listening to justified and neutral criticism is a way to survive past the next elections. The Polish government has clearly decided to follow another path, less inclusive and less democratic. In recent weeks Poland has witnessed concerted, political effort targeting civil society. This new fight started by Law and Justice (PiS), a right of centre political party in Poland, is about trust, sources of funding, access to public information , and – last but not least – freedom of assembly.

----------------------------------------------------------------- Support our work - make a recurrent donation! https://edri.org/supporters/ -----------------------------------------------------------------

The attack on civil society organisations started on national (no longer public) television. Evening news devoted a big part of their prime time to “prove” “unclear” connections between public figures associated with former government, such as the president of the Constitutional Tribunal or former President of Poland, and members or employees of civil society organisations. Needless to say, the facts were manipulated to suggest fraudulent transactions. No matter how ridiculous the media story was, watchdog organisations and think tanks turned out to be an easy target for such propaganda. Due to the nature of their work, they spend most of their funds on salaries and engage in the debate on public matters. For national media, that very fact was sufficient to undermine their legitimacy, as if the only legitimate form of civic activity was charity: voluntary work and “giving out money to the needy”. In the “civil society bubble” the differences between charitable and watchdog organisations is obvious, this is not a common knowledge among typical TV audience. Therefore, the risk of government’s campaign having negative impact on the credibility of watchdogs is real.

The media attack on particular individuals from the civil society turned out to be just a prelude before the government went on a war against the whole sector. Shortly after the campaign the Polish Prime Minister announced creating a new institution that will manage all public grants in a centralised way. Not surprisingly, this new institution will also determine the goals for the publicly funded civic activity in Poland. Before they were defined by particular ministries, which pursued various goals depending on their scope of activity. While public funding in Poland has never been independent from short-term political goals, its centralisation will certainly decrease the chances of any independent civic activity being supported by the state. This shift will most likely affect those organisations that used public money to help vulnerable or excluded groups that are now presented as “public enemies”, such as LGBTQ persons, women seeking legal abortion or refugees.

Sounds worrying? Well, this is just the beginning of bad news from Poland. At the beginning of December 2016 the Polish Parliament adopted a new law on public gatherings. In the opinion of Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights, it may significantly restrict individuals’ ability to hold counter-demonstrations and spontaneous gatherings. This attack on freedom of assembly happens just before the 35th anniversary of the introducion martial law in Poland (13 December 1981 – 22 July 1983) – a dark period in Polish history, bringing back memories such as tanks on the street, opposition under arrest and the army shooting at protesting citizens.

As of 13 December, almost 200 civil society organisations signed an appeal to the Senate, the upper chamber of the Polish Parliament, demanding that it reject the law. However, only cosmetic amendments were introduced. There is not much hope that the President will listen to the voice of concerned citizens. At the same time, we suspect that controversial changes in the law on public gatherings can be used as a distraction from other initiatives pushed through the Parliament.

Watchdog organisations in Poland face a really hard time. Persistent media attacks on their credibility and government-lead propaganda campaign create challenging conditions for fundraising; legal changes – such as the one limiting freedom of assembly – impose additional constraints on their activity, while the political situation requires fast and more spontaneous responses. Now everything is in the hands of citizens: Polish watchdogs need their support – also in financial terms – more than ever.

Polish PM angers human rights campaigners with plans to shake up NGOs (28.11.2016)
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/28/polish-pm-beata-szydoa-angers-human-rights-campaigners-ngos

Amendments to the law governing public assemblies (02.12.2016)
http://citizensobservatory.pl/ustawa/amendments-to-the-law-governing-public-assemblies/

Citizens Observatory of Democracy
http://citizensobservatory.pl/

(Contribution by Anna Obem and Katarzyna Szymielewicz, EDRi member Panoptykon Foundation, Poland)

EDRi-gram_subscribe_banner

Twitter_tweet_and_follow_banner

close
14 Dec 2016

Google’s forgetful approach to the “right to be forgotten”

By Joe McNamee

Google is unquestionably a pioneer with regard to transparency reporting in the online environment. It was among the first to demand more transparency regarding government restrictions on freedom of communication and access to user data. The company has continued to learn and refine its processes. It has produced a consistent methodology for the various types of restriction, making their reports easier to read, thereby further increasing transparency.

----------------------------------------------------------------- Support our work - make a recurrent donation! https://edri.org/supporters/ -----------------------------------------------------------------

None of this, however, applies to actions taken as a result of the famous and incorrectly named “right to be forgotten” ruling. In this case, the Costeja ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), Google must de-link individual’s names to search results about them that are “inaccurate, inadequate, irrelevant or excessive”. Under the ruling, nothing is deleted and nothing is removed from Google’s index.

On the front page of Google’s transparency reporting, there are section on government-based deletions called “government requests to remove content” and a section on copyright removals called “requests by copyright owners to remove search results”. The section reporting on the EU data protection ruling is called “European privacy requests for search removals”. While the first two (government and copyright) lead to search results being removed from Google’s index, nothing is removed from Google’s index under the EU data protection ruling.

If one then clicks on either “government requests to remove content” or “requests by copyright owners to remove search results,” the next page shows a graph that shows the evolution of removal requests over time. This is very useful to see both the volume of removals and the overall trends.

However, if one clicks on “European privacy requests for search removals” there is no graph. All that is presented is the total amount of requests. The words “remove” and “removal” appear 26 times on the page, despite the fact that nothing is actually removed from Google’s index. Even the first line of the “transparency” page is not accurate, stating that “in a May 2014 ruling, Google Spain vs. AEPD and Mario Costeja González, the Court of Justice of the European Union found that individuals have the right to ask search engines like Google to remove certain results about them.”

The question is why would Google, having produced a very good, clear methodology for displaying statistics for actual content removals, choose to misrepresent de-linking of names with search results as “removals” and not the methodology that it has, laudably, pioneered? One cannot help being left with the impression that the figures do not tell the story that Google is trying to tell. From 1 June 2014, when it launched the tool to allow people to exercise their rights under the CJEU, Google has received 658 613 requests (which is approximately 725 per day). In the period 11 October 2016 to 10 November 2016, it apparently (based on our observations of the numbers published on the page) received 13 436 requests (or approximately 447 per day), which is significantly lower than the overall average. This risks creating the impression that a reduction in numbers, at a time when Google is using the ruling to bash European data protection rules at every opportunity does not exactly fit with the public relations spin.

Google is struggling with working out its own views on this topic, which might explain some incoherence. Google believes that it should not be required to adjust its search algorithms to protect privacy. However, it also has voluntarily chosen to adjust its search algorithms to protect privacy in relation to abusive “mug shot websites” (by pushing them down the results list). Google believes that it should not have to de-link names with “inaccurate, inadequate, irrelevant or excessive” on a global level. However, Google believes that it should de-index revenge porn globally in order to protect victims. Google thinks that national laws should not have extra-territorial effect. However, Google voluntarily gives extra-territorial effect to US copyright law.

Google has been a pioneer in transparency reporting. It should not forget this.

06_google

Google Transparency Report
https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/

CJEU judgement: Google Spain vs. Costeja
http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=152065&doclang=en

(Contribution by Joe McNamee, EDRi)

EDRi-gram_subscribe_banner

Twitter_tweet_and_follow_banner

close
14 Dec 2016

Net neutrality violations ceased after AKVorrat intervention

By Guest author

On 5 October 2016, EDRi observer AKVorrat Austria filed a complaint with Austrian telecoms regulator RTR against mobile operator Hutchison Drei based on Drei’s violations of net neutrality principles. Now the operator has given in and stopped the offending practice. At the same time, Drei has more than quadrupled data volumes included in its data plans, and in some cases has even increased them 17-fold. This shows that net neutrality is beneficial to service operators as well as customers, even though the telecoms industry would rather ignore the new net neutrality provisions in EU law.

----------------------------------------------------------------- Support our work - make a recurrent donation! https://edri.org/supporters/ -----------------------------------------------------------------

When customers use up all data included in their plan, Drei slows down their internet connection or cuts it off altogether. However, for many years, services provided by Drei itself or by the operator’s partners were excluded from this limitation. It wasn’t realistically possible to use a service such as Netflix on a widely-used 4 GB plan, whereas the TV streaming service 3MobileTV, operated by Drei itself, could be used without restrictions. In this way, Drei used their control over their customers’ internet access to give their own services an unfair advantage. This practise, “zero rating”, limits customers’ freedom to choose which services to use, and it violates the principle of fair competition between all service operators, from small start-ups to large established players.

AKVorrat’s complaint appears not to have been concluded yet. The regulator so far has only stated that Drei has been asked to comment on the complaint, but Drei has already reacted by changing their practices, at least in the case of new contracts. All ten of the services AKVorrat criticised are now advertised with a remark stating that they cannot be accessed when the data volume included in the plan is used up.

As was the case previously in the Netherlands and in Slovenia, the prohibition of preferential treatment of operators’ own services has had a positive effect on the data volumes included in customers’ data plans. In both of these countries, volumes have on average been doubled after zero rating had been prohibited. Since AKVorrat filed their complaint, Drei has increased data volumes in all plans by at least 425%, in some cases even by 1700%. Whenever there is no business model to be built upon artificial scarcity of data, there are fewer incentives for operators to keep their own customers’ data volumes low.

Against this backdrop, at the end of November 2016, the three largest mobile operators in Austria started attacking the regulator RTR and its CEO. The operators criticised RTR simply for enforcing the new net neutrality provisions in EU law. Of course, this is exactly RTR’s legally mandated purpose, and considering the recent developments in Austria’s telecoms market, one can only be thankful that RTR takes its mandate seriously.

03_nn_akvorrat

Response from Austrian telecoms regulator RTR (only in German, 28.10.2016)
https://akvorrat.at/sites/default/files/docs/antwort_rtr_-_rson_66_16_schreiben_an_akvorrat_sig-clean.pdf

Data plan comparison
https://akvorrat.at/sites/default/files/docs/3hutchison-tarifvergleich.ods

AK Vorrat submits a complaint on net neutrality violations (only in German, 05.10.2016)
https://akvorrat.at/content/drosseln-verboten-akvorrat-reicht-beschwerde-wegen-verletzung-der-netzneutralit%C3%A4t-ein

(Contribution by Thomas Lohninger, EDRi observer AKVorrat, Austria)

EDRi-gram_subscribe_banner

Twitter_tweet_and_follow_banner

close
14 Dec 2016

Council debates encryption and other closed-door matters

By Guest author

In July 2016, Justice Ministers in the European Union met to discuss the “issue” of encryption in the context of the fight against crime and terrorism. In August, Bernard Cazeneuve and Thomas de Maiziere, the French and German ministers of interior, announced that because more people are using encryption, governments must develop a coordinated response. In September, the Slovak Presidency of the Council of the EU, the institution that represents Member State governments, shared a questionnaire with Council members to guage national approaches to encryption. That same month, the Commission circulated a questionnaire on Criminal Justice in Cyberspace. In November, Cazeneuve and de Maiziere revised their demands, backing off from encryption and pointing a finger at the issue of jurisdiction. In November, a Council progress report indicated that encryption is essential, but a problem to be solved. In December, at the Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Council meeting, it was decided that more needs to be done and the Commission was asked to prepare several legislative proposals for June 2017.

That much we know.

It seems that, once again, an important legislative process is being set in motion behind closed doors. With the exception of the Council meeting outcomes document, none of the documents were made public. The lack of transparency around these actions, both at the EU and member state level, undermines the already vulnerable trust between EU citizens, their respective governments, and EU institutions.

----------------------------------------------------------------- Support our work with a one-off-donation! https://edri.org/donate/ -----------------------------------------------------------------

EDRi members Access Now, Bits of Freedom and several other organisations have been fighting for transparency on these hidden discussions around encryption. The answers to the Slovak Presidency questionnaire on national approaches to encryption would not only provide us insight into an opaque decision-making process, but can go a long way in helping us understand how law is interpreted and applied across member states; they are essential to public understanding of existing legislation concerning encryption. Many of these documents have been acquired, the rest will be targeted through freedom of information requests in order to make sure we have the whole picture about what member states are thinking.

So far we have learned that most law enforcement investigations run into encryption, either online or offline, and lack the specific knowledge and technical capability to adequately process this. We have learned that law enforcement often uses commercially available software or contracts third parties to obtain the information from encrypted devices and communication channels, but this evidence is not admissible in court. It has also been pointed out that while compelling people to turn over their encryption keys would certainly help investigations, most member states have laws protecting individuals from self-incrimination.

While helpful to our overall understanding of the EU’s plans to legislate in the future, there are still a lot of stones left unturned, and a lot of conversations into which we have no insight. The EU is not likely to undermine encryption – it would be counter-intuitive given the position of the Commission, ENISA, and several others. We may, however, see extremely harmful legislation labeled as “access to e-evidence” coming our way. As the Council requested, in June 2017 we can expect the Commission to come with solutions to e-evidence, namely streamlining mutual legal assistance, improving cooperation with service providers and taking a closer look at enforcement jurisdiction in cyberspace.

02_encryption

EU ministers are targeting encryption. We need to know more. (08.11.2016)
https://www.accessnow.org/eu-ministers-targeting-encryption-need-know/

Mixed messages: crypto and other closed-door conversations in the EU(09.12.2016)
https://www.accessnow.org/mixed-messages-crypto-closed-door-conversations-eu/

(Contribution by Lucie Krahulcova, EDRi member Access Now, International)

EDRi-gram_subscribe_banner

Twitter_tweet_and_follow_banner

close
14 Dec 2016

Digital Defenders help kids defend their privacy around Europe

By Heini Järvinen

In October 2016, we published a booklet entitled “Your guide to Digital Defenders – Privacy for kids!“, to help young people between 10-14 years to protect their privacy.

Since it’s publication, the original English version of the booklet has been downloaded over 21 000 times. Thanks to a generous donation, it has also been printed. The booklet is already available in GermanSerbian and Greek. Translations into a number of other languages are ongoing.

----------------------------------------------------------------- Support our work with a one-off-donation! https://edri.org/donate/ -----------------------------------------------------------------

The booklet helps kids make safer and more informed choices about what to share and how to share online. It includes chapters on what privacy actually is, how to use safer messaging systems and how to improve the security of smartphones. In the parallel universe depicted in the booklet, a team of superheroes (the Digital Defenders) fights a group of villains (the Intruders). The heroes and villains were created by German comic artist and illustrator Gregor Sedlag.

The booklet is the outcome of an international project with contributions by EDRi’s network: Bits of Freedom, Open Rights Group, Chaos Computer Club, Digitale Gesellschaft, ApTI Romania, Mediamocracy and many more.

If you would like to participate in distributing the booklet in schools in your country or to contribute to the translations, please contact us at brussels[at]edri.org! To help get the translated booklets printed and distributed locally, you can also make a donation on https://edri.org/donate.

01_digital_defenders

EDRi’s privacy for kids booklet: Your guide to the Digital Defenders (17.10.2016)
https://edri.org/privacy-for-kids-digital-defenders/

Digital Defenders vs. Data Intruders
https://edri.org/files/privacy4kids_booklet_web.pdf

Digital Defenders vs. Data Intruders in:

EDRi-gram_subscribe_banner

Twitter_tweet_and_follow_banner

close
13 Dec 2016

e-Privacy Directive revision: Document pool

By Diego Naranjo

New devices are being developed and increasingly these technologies have the ability to connect to the internet and communicate between them. These devices, while making our life easier in many aspects, they also create new threats to your privacy. We are explaining in our series of blogposts on privacy the freedoms that are under threat.

European legislation protecting your personal data (the General Data Protection Regulation and Law Enforcement Directive on Data Protection) has been recently updated, but the battle to keep your information safe is not over yet. The European Union is revising its legislation on data protection, privacy and confidentiality of communications in the electronic communications environment: the e-Privacy Directive. This piece of  legislation contains specific rules related to your freedoms in the online environment.

e-privacy_docpool

This new battle for our freedoms starts once the European Commission will publish its proposal on the e-Privacy Directive on 11 Januar 2017. In this document pool we will be listing all the relevant documents as they are made public. This will allow you to follow the developments on the review of the Directive:

EDRi’s analysis

Legislative documents:

Consultations, reports, studies, events:

 


Read more about privacy and e-Privacy Directive:

e-Privacy Directive: Frequently Asked Questions
https://edri.org/epd-faq/

Your privacy, security and freedom online are in danger (September-December 2016)
https://edri.org/privacy-security-freedom/

Twitter_tweet_and_follow_banner

close