20 Dec 2017

EDRi Awards 2017

By Joe McNamee

For the first time and with great solemnity, EDRi presents the first ever 4th edition of our annual awards.

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

IAB & their silly statistics, with the honourable exception of the real statistics buried deep in the spin.

2. The Mark Zuckerbrot award for WTF

This award goes to a Member of the European Parliament (MEP) who is down with the kids and up with the facts, who explained to us that Facebook’s Mark “Zuckerbrot” “got the message” and now wants to regulate the morals of children online, just as the Audiovisual Media Services (AVMS) Directive demands. The same MEP has attacked EDRi publicly for opposing Google’s lobbying for internet filtering, arguing that we are supporting Google because we oppose them. No, we don’t understand either.

3. The cranial fracture facepalm award

Computer and Communications Industry Association’s (CCIA) insistence to a journalist that they are “not working on e-Privacy”, before immediately launching a lobbying campaign on e-Privacy and then paying a “consultant” for an “independent” study on e-Privacy.

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.

4. The “Max Schrems” award

David Carroll for his fight against Cambridge Analytica;

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) itself, for prohibiting (again, having done so already in 2012), the untargeted mass storage of telecommunications data (in its ruling on Tele2) and its clear Opinion on the EU/Canada PNR Agreement. Sadly, to “protect us” from lawbreakers, the European Commission and EU Member States continue to break the law in relation to both of these activities, as we reported (read more here & here).

5. The heroes who keep us energised award

We cannot name everybody, including last year’s awardees, but here are six top stars that are worth highlighting:

Tijn, Luca, Nina, Marlou and Joran

Who are they?

The students who organised the collection of 384 000 signatures to require an advisory referendum on the Dutch “dragnet” surveillance law. We need more people like them!

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.

Getting inspired, dig into our 2017 top reads

Notable publications of the year:

Did you like them? Please, check previous EDRi awards:

EDRi awards 2016
EDRi awards 2015

EDRi awards 2014

(Contribution by Joe McNamee and Maryant Fernández Pérez)


18 Dec 2017

We need a Communications & Community intern for 2018

By Kirsten Fiedler

European Digital Rights (EDRi) is an international not-for-profit association of 35 digital human rights organisations from across Europe. We defend and promote rights and freedoms in the digital environment, such as the right to privacy, freedom of expression, and access to information.

Join EDRi now and become a superhero for the defense of our rights and freedoms online!

The EDRi office in Brussels is currently looking for an intern to support the Communications Manager, the Community Coordinator as well as the Managing Director. Firstly, the internship will focus on campaigning and publications, offering an opportunity to learn the techniques and strategies used in press outreach and the production of a variety of written materials including EDRi’s successful bi-weekly newsletter, the EDRi-gram. Secondly, the intern will assist the team with tasks in support of our national member organisations.

The internship will begin on 3 March 2018 and end mid-July (13 or 20 July) with a monthly remuneration of 750 EUR.

Key tasks:

  • assistance with the writing and editing of the EDRi-gram newsletter;
  • contributions to EDRi’s social media presence;
  • research and writing of press releases, blogposts, newsletter articles, campaign material;
  • design and creation of visual campaign material;
  • development of educational materials;
  • maintenance and improving EDRi’s communications tools (e.g. wiki, website);
  • assistance with the network development;
  • coordination of pro bono translations via EDRi’s pool of volunteers;
  • assistance with event organisation and logistics;
  • assistace of the Managing Director with ad hoc research and administrative tasks.


  • IT & web: social media, WordPress, MediaWiki and image editing software;
  • excellent research and writing skills;
  • fluent command of spoken and written English;
  • experience in communications, journalism, media or public relations;
  • a demonstrated interest in and enthusiasm for online activism and campaigning for digital human rights.

How to apply:

To apply please send a maximum one-page cover letter and a maximum two-page CV (only PDFs are accepted) by email to julien.bencze[at]edri.org. Closing date for applications is 14 January 2018. Interviews with selected candidates will take place end January / beginning of February, and the decision will be taken by 2 February.

Please note that there is the possibility to continue in this position as a full-time substitute for a maternity leave after the internship. If you are interested in this opportunity, please indicate this in your application.

We are an equal opportunities employer with a strong commitment to transparency and inclusion. People from all backgrounds are encouraged to apply and we strive to have a diverse and inclusive working environment.


18 Dec 2017

We need a policy intern to join our team of superheroes!

By Kirsten Fiedler

European Digital Rights (EDRi) is an international not-for-profit association of 35 digital human rights organisations from across Europe. We defend and promote rights and freedoms in the digital environment, such as the right to privacy, freedom of expression, and access to information.

Join EDRi now and become a superhero for the defense of our rights and freedoms online!

The EDRi office in Brussels is currently looking for an intern to support our policy team, located in Brussels. This is your opportunity to get first-hand experience in EU policy-making and contribute to a change in favour of digital rights and freedoms across Europe. The internship will go from 5 March 2018 to 21 July 2018, and is paid 750,- EUR per month.

Key tasks:

  • Research and analysis on data protection, privacy, copyright, net neutrality, intermediary liability and freedom of expression, encryption, cross-border access to e-evidence and digital trade;
  • Monitoring international, EU and national related policy developments;
  • Organising and participating in meetings and events;
  • Assisting with writing of the EDRi-gram newsletter;
  • Assisting with preparing draft reports, presentations and other internal and external documents;
  • Assisting with preparing communication tasks;
  • Development of public education materials;
  • Find out more about internships at EDRi.


  • A demonstrated interest in and enthusiasm for human rights and technology-related legal issues;
  • Good understanding of European decision-making;
  • Experience in the fields of data protection, privacy, copyright, net neutrality, intermediary liability and freedom of expression, surveillance & law enforcement, or digital trade would be an asset;
  • Excellent research and writing skills;
  • Fluent command of spoken and written English;
  • Computer literacy.

How to apply:

To apply please send a maximum one page cover letter and a maximum two page CV in English and only in .pdf files (other formats – such as doc and docx – will not be accepted) to julien.bencze(at)edri.org.

We are an equal opportunities employer with a strong commitment to transparency and inclusion. People from all backgrounds are encouraged to apply and we strive to have a diverse and inclusive working environment.

The closing date for applications is 14 January. The interviews and written assignments will take place between 29 January-2 February. Please note that due to scarce resources, only shortlisted candidates will be contacted.


13 Dec 2017

Censorship Machine: Busting the myths

By Diego Naranjo

The European Union (EU) is currently reforming its copyright legislation. In September 2016, the European Commission proposed its controversial draft for the new Copyright Directive, that includes a mandatory “censorship machine” to filter all uploads from every user in the EU (Article 13).

To put an end to some of the most tenacious misconceptions related to these upload filters, we prepared this censorship machine myth-buster.

Myth 1: It is not a general monitoring obligation

A general monitoring obligation is banned by both EU law and case law of the EU’s highest court, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Those who defend the upload filter mechanism argue that it does not amount to a general monitoring obligation. The myth claims that, because the filter will look for specific files (specific copyrighted works in a database), it will be looking for millions of specific files.

In other words, the existing ban on general monitoring only covers monitoring that has no idea what it is looking for. EU law permits monitoring in “a specific case”, so this would just be “a specific case” millions of times over. It is clearly absurd to suggest that a general search of ALL files being uploaded, to check them against a list of millions of files is not a general search.

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

Myth 2: It won’t affect the right to privacy or data protection since no personal data will be used

Defenders of upload filters claim that this type of filter is not illegal according to relevant CJEU case law (Scarlet vs. SABAM and SABAM vs. Netlog) because the proposed filter does not involve any privacy invasion or collection of personal data. According to the filtering cheerleaders, the technology will just check the identifier of the file, not the content or the identity of who uploaded the file. This does not make sense because it would be impossible to have a complaints mechanism without knowing who uploaded the file.

There are other data protection and privacy concerns: The proposed new “ancillary copyright” creates a new right to prohibit the upload of any piece of text that is longer than any previously published “snippet”. To enforce this right, every phrase being uploaded would need to be automatically checked against the database of 20 years of press publications. A filter that reads every single text uploaded to the internet – which could be tweets, comments on social networks or blogposts, could not conceivably be anything other than a severe breach of privacy rights!

Myth 3: The complaints mechanism will be an effective tool for citizens affected by malfunctioning of the filters

The proposed complaints (“redress”) mechanism is doomed to be ineffective in practice. Companies will have a choice – either

  1. go to the expense of setting up a mechanism for assessing the legality of an upload in the national context of copyright exceptions for education, parody, quotation, and so on; or
  2. go for the cheap option of simply saying that anything that is caught by the filter is a breach of their terms of service.

The European Commission’s proposal relies on an unexplained hope that internet companies will choose the complicated, expensive option for dealing with complaints, rather than the cheap, simple solution.

Myth 4: Article 13 will fix the perceived “value gap” between platforms and authors

Music publishers have recognised themselves in their 2017 annual report, that there has been a 60.4% revenue growth in music subscription and overall growth of 5.9%. Leaving this aside, copyright lobbyists still claim that there is a “value gap” or a “transfer of value” between online platforms and rights-holders or collecting societies. Rights-holders and collecting societies claim that, currently, the big streaming platforms (such as YouTube and SoundCloud) do not pay enough.

The explanatory memorandum of the Copyright Directive proposal explains that the aim of the proposal is to improve “the position of right-holders to negotiate and be remunerated”. It is clear that the proposal aims to use copyright law to fix what it seems to be a competition law problem. It does so in a massively heavy-handed way, imposing Google-style filtering on all EU companies, with apparent indifference for unintended consequences for the online environment and the rights of internet users. Common sense would be: Use copyright law to fix copyright, use any other specific instrument to fix any other specific problem.

Myth 5: If we include a reference to the Charter of Fundamental Rights, everything will be fine

The Charter of Fundamental Rights is primary law of the European Union, and is binding on the European Commission and Member States. Inserting a clause saying that any measure needs to respect the Charter of Fundamental Rights adds little in this situation insofar as it covers the European Commission and Member States. More importantly, it is legally incorrect and meaningless with regard to measures chosen by private companies, who are not bound by the Charter. In short, such a reference is either irrelevant or legally incorrect.

Myth 6: It is a cheap tool that any smaller companies in Europe can afford

Another statement that is spread among policy makers is that these filters are cheap and that any small or medium-sized enterprise (SME) in Europe can afford them. However, internet giants like YouTube and SoundCloud have invested millions of euros in their filtering technology.

An upload filter is not “a” tool. It is a complicated and costly combination of a text filter, a filter to read text quoted in images (like Twitter sharepics), a filter for audio files, a filter for audio-visual files, a filter for images, and so on. Realistically, smaller European companies could not afford to install such technology, and would simply need to step away and let their non-European competitors that are not bound by the European copyright rules take over their business. Or they could try their luck with the courts.

Myth 7: It is only about making Google pay

Many legislators seem to think that the proposed new Copyright Directive is about targeting few specific platforms: YouTube/Google and Facebook, in particular. In a nutshell, the problem with regulating the internet as if it consisted only of YouTube/Google and Facebook, is that you will end up with an internet that consists only of YouTube/Google and Facebook. Google has actively lobbied for their filtering solution – So is giving Google what they lobbied for the best way of making them pay?

Myth 8: The proposal respects EU case law

The CJEU has ruled twice on the issue of proactive filtering of communications by internet access providers and internet hosting providers (Scarlet/Sabam C-70/10 and Netlog/Sabam C-360-10 rulings). The Court has ruled that this activity is contrary to the fundamental rights to conduct a business and to freedom of expression. The Commission’s efforts to circumvent these rulings by leaving the final decision up to the internet companies themselves, out of the reach of the Charter, is profoundly objectionable.

The dangers of the proposed Copyright Directive are huge for the online ecosystem in Europe, citizens’ fundamental rights and European internet companies. It is time for policymakers to stop believing and propagating these myths. When the European Parliament’s Legal Affairs Committee adopts its report next year, it needs to do so based on the facts.

Copyright reform: Document pool

Deconstructing the Article 13 of the Copyright proposal of the European Commission

Press statement and FAQ: Scarlet/Sabam Ruling a vital victory for Internet freedoms (24.11.2011)

SABAM vs Netlog – another important ruling for fundamental rights (16.02.2012)

Video: Why is the EU Commission pushing for illegal copyright filtering?

There are some things money can’t buy

(Contribution by Diego Naranjo and Joe McNamee, EDRi)



13 Dec 2017

Copyright Directive may lead newspapers to become their own censors

By Diego Naranjo

Copyright discussions continue in the European institutions. On one hand, Axel Voss, the German conservative (EPP/CDU) Parliamentarian in charge of the dossier in the European Parliament Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) is on some sort of a stand-by while the German government forms. On the other hand, the EU Council, composed of the relevant ministers in charge of the copyright Directive proposal, is speeding up. The two worst proposals in it are the upload filter (“censorship machine”) in Article 13 and the ancillary copyright in Article 11.

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

In the latest documents leaked from the Council meetings there is a new definition of a type of online service, “online content sharing service provider” (OCSSP) which would be the one affected by the censorship machine proposal (Article 13).

Although enough has been said about the risks of the upload filter and ancillary copyright separately, less has been said about the potential interconnections between the two of them. The Council’s new text on Article 13 says that OCSSPs “shall not be liable” for making available copyrighted content, if rightsholders have not provided the necessary data to identify the work and thus allow OCSSPs to block the content in advance. The idea seems to be to “soften” the upload filter by putting responsibility on rightsholders.

However, if the ancillary copyright in Article 11 of the copyright Directive proposal were to be adopted, any text that was part of any article published in the last 20 years would be subject to the filtering regime imposed by Article 13. In principle, this would also cover images containing text from a news article. These two provisions together will thus create the biggest censorship machine ever.

As the owner of the rights of the articles (given to them contractually by its journalists) each newspaper would retain the ancillary rights to articles up to “20 years after the publication of the press publication”. If the newspaper provides data from the relevant articles to any OCCSP, that service would need to filter and block access to any articles (or snippets from those articles), as the result of a combination of the new ancillary copyright and the upload filters. As a result, websites like Reddit would need to have a licence to offer the service unless it blocked access to every snippet of text from article from that newspaper that is less than 20 years old. That said, nobody can say for certain if Reddit, being based outside Europe, would either be covered by the Directive or subject to reprisals through “self-regulatory” “follow the money” arbitrary enforcement measures implemented by payment and advertising networks.

To stop this, call now the Members of the European Parliament from your country and contact national ministries working on copyright (ministries of culture, generally), and tell them to oppose the proposed upload filter and to stop the censorship machine!

Time to stop the #CensorshipMachine: NOW! 30.11.2017)

Copyright reform: Document pool

Stop the censorship machine!

Save the meme!

(Contribution by Diego Naranjo, EDRi)



13 Dec 2017

What happens to our data on rental cars?

By Privacy International

On 6 December 2017, EDRi member Privacy International published research about data on connected cars. The report “Connected Cars: What Happens To Our Data On Rental Cars?” presents concerns about the way connected transportation facilitates the generation and collection of information about drivers in ways that most people are not able to understand, question, or access.

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

When you rent a car at the airport or use a car-share for a family day trip, one of the first things you are likely to do before setting off on your journey, is to connect your phone to the car. Doing so can allow information such as your name and navigation history to be stored on the car. When the car is returned, this information is usually not deleted, and can therefore be accessible to the next driver. During the course of the research, Privacy International rented multiple cars and found that on every car past drivers’ personal information was readily accessible.

Beyond this information, connected cars can generate, collect, and store information about the car’s location and about how the driver interacts with the car – for example whether the driver often brakes suddenly. Privacy International is concerned that these types of information, which are of interest to third parties such as insurers, will be sold or shared with third parties without drivers being aware of it.

This first stage of Privacy International’s research focuses on data on rental cars, specifically the “infotainment system”, the in-car communications and entertainment system. Multiple rental companies, based in Europe, the UK, and the US, helped the researchers to understand their internal policies and procedures around driver data that is stored on infotainment systems, as well as how they view their position in data protection terms. The research was also conducted by renting a number of cars and looking at what data is collected and retained by the rental cars’ infotainment systems. Off the back of this research, Privacy International has written to rental companies to ask for further internal policies around data retention and deletion, as well to car manufacturers to ask about plans to build data deletion into cars. Various civil society organisations in the US and Europe joined in writing to the companies, including ANCE – The European Consumer Voice in Standardisation, Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, Consumer Action, Consumer Federation of America, Consumer Watchdog, EPIC, Hermes Center for Transparency and Digital Human Rights, and the Norwegian Consumer Council. Privacy International has also written to the UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office.

Report: Connected Cars: What Happens To Our Data On Rental Cars? (06.12.2017)

Coalition of consumer and privacy-rights groups send letters to rental companies and car-share schemes mentioned in new Privacy International report (06.12.2017)

Video: Connected Cars: What Happens To Our Data On Rental Cars? (06.12.2017)

(Contribution by Sara Nelson, EDRi member Privacy International)



13 Dec 2017

MEPs demand balanced approach to dealing with illegal online content

By Joe McNamee

On 5 December 2017, a group of 31 Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) sent a letter to the European Commission demanding action on illegal content online. The letter was initiated by Dutch Liberal MEP Marietje Schaake, and its signatories are from across the political spectrum.

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

The letter reacts to the extreme position taken in the Commission’s “Communication on Illegal Content Online”, arguing that some of the proposals “pose fundamental challenges to preserve the rule of law online”. As inspiration for a more balanced approach, the MEPs point to the Council of Europe’s draft Recommendation on the role of internet intermediaries and EU Guidelines on Freedom of Expression Online and Offline. Despite the fact that the latter document was prepared by the Commission itself only four years ago, the Commission deleted a reference to it in the final revisions of Communication on Illegal Content Online.

The letter suggests – as the Commission itself internally concluded in 2014 – that there should be additional procedural safeguards for “notice and takedown,” as foreseen by the E-Commerce Directive. The MEPs argue that a “clear focus on enhancing transparency, and limiting the privatization of content removal decisions, is essential” both to avoid abuse of such procedures in the EU and to legitimise or vindicate questionable laws abroad.

In line with EDRi’s letter to the Digital Economy Commissioner Mariya Gabriel on 20 October 2017 (no response has yet been received), the MEPs demand thorough research. However, there is currently little sign of any such thorough research being prepared. This means that, while entirely justified and accurate, the letter strikes fear in the hearts of many that are close to discussions on this topic.

The Commission is so focussed on delivering what copyright lobbyists want (takedowns and staydowns), it appears to have abandoned all diligence in relation to fundamental rights or, indeed, every other kind of concern regarding other kinds of illegal content. The European Parliament was so unhappy with the Commission’s report on takedown and blocking of child abuse websites, it has demanded that a proper report be prepared. In the Resolution (due for adoption on 14 December) the Parliament calls for a proper report, “deplores” the failure to respect the deadline for submitting the report and lists various types of statistics that should have been provided and calls on Member States to transpose the Directive fully and correctly.

In keeping with this far from diligent approach, the Commission has indicated that – in relation to content that relates to serious crime and terrorism – it has no idea how many (if any) of the referrals of potentially terrorist or serious criminal content by the EU Internet Referral Unit to internet providers have led to prosecutions, or even investigations. For nearly every type of serious illegal content online, availability of the content is only a part of a wider problem. There seems to be little, if any, concern about this.

In this environment, if MEPs are to get an appropriate response from the Commission, a significantly new approach from the Commission would be needed. Such an approach would place a far greater emphasis on evidence-gathering, protecting fundamental rights and fighting crime than currently is the case.

Letter to the commission on notice and action procedures (05.12.2017)

EU Human Rights Guidelines on Freedom of Expression Online and Offline https://eeas.europa.eu/sites/eeas/files/eu_human_rights_guidelines_on_freedom_of_expression_online_and_offline_en.pdf

EDRi writes to EU Commissioner Gabriel about tackling illegal content online (20.10.2017)

Report on the implementation of Directive 2011/93/EU on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography (2015/2129(INI))

Parliamentary question E-001772/2017 (12.06.2017)

(Contribution by Joe McNamee, EDRi)



04 Dec 2017

#BoostYourShield against violations of digital rights!


Companies and governments increasingly abuse online tools to restrict our freedoms: mass surveillance, random censorship, blocking access to information, knowledge and culture, continuous monitoring of what we do online, tracking and profiling.

We are now looking for 200 Digital Defenders to join our fight against these digital rights violations!

By becoming a regular donor, you will help to boost the shield against digital rights violations and allow us to continue defending your rights and freedoms online.

Advocating for digital rights is a long-term commitment and thereby needs long-term support. We are happy about any kind of support we get, but having regular donors allows us to think ahead and to work sustainably. And: Regular giving is easy and convenient! You will always have the flexibility to change or cancel your donation – at any time you want, without any hassle.

European Digital Rights (EDRi) is a not-for-profit association of digital civil rights organisations. Our objectives are to promote, protect and uphold civil rights. We advocate for a world where everyone enjoys privacy, where we are not being spied on and our data is not being sold or abused. A world where we can share our thoughts freely, without fear.

30 Nov 2017

EDRi celebrates its 15th anniversary – save the date

By Kirsten Fiedler

European Digital Rights (EDRi) will be celebrating its 15 years of fighting for fundamental rights online. We wish to mark the occasion with a celebration of the enduring passion and energy of the digital rights movement in Europe!

The anniversary will take place on 12 April 2018 in Brussels, before EDRi’s annual General Assembly. We look forward to our network of supporters, EDRi’s members and friends who will help us celebrate our this milestone and reinforce our passion to promote human rights online.

When: 12 April 2018
Where: Brussels (exact venue tbc)

EDRi’s founders had the vision to see the need for international cooperation to promote and defend the pillars of our democracy in the digital environment. Our anniversary is a celebration of our successes, but also a call to action for the next 15 years

said Joe McNamee, Executive Director of European Digital Rights (EDRi).

The anniversary celebration will include many surprises. Stay tuned for new announcements in the coming months!

30 Nov 2017

Time to stop the #CensorshipMachine: NOW!


Following the launch of the controversial proposed Copyright Directive in September 2016, the European Parliament and the Member States (gathered in the Council of the European Union) are now developing their positions.

Now it’s the time to send a clear message to European Parliament and national governments to oppose the “censorship machine”!

What happened in the EU Parliament?

The European Parliament Committee in charge of the file, the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI), has been relatively quiet on their Report. However, some compromises have been drafted on Articles that do not concern the so-called “censorship machine”, the upload filter in Article 13 of the Copyright Directive proposal. On the other hand, the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) voted on its Opinion on 20 November 2017 to remove the mention to upload filters, as did the Internal Market and Consumer Committee (IMCO). So far, those two Committees have been in favour, while two others opposed (Industry, Research and Industry (ITRE) and Culture and Education (CULT). The next step in the parliamentary process is the vote in JURI.

What about the EU Council?

The Troika of copyright extremist Member States (Spain, France and Portugal) have given Estonia (who holds the Presidency of the Council until January 2018, when Bulgaria will take on the role) new “ideas” on how to make the Copyright Directive even worse.

What can you do now?

To make sure we won’t end up with a censorship machine that will limit our freedom of expression, we need to remind your MEPs and our national governments how important it is to oppose upload filters!

Should every upload to the internet in Europe be under surveillance?
Should big online companies like Google and Facebook get a huge competitive advantage?
…or should we defend our freedom of expression and fundamental rights, and stop the #CensorshipMachine?

The time to speak up is now!

In just two weeks, the European Parliamentarians will leave for their holidays – and even if the vote on the proposal is scheduled for January 2018, crucial parts of the negotiations will be taking place already before the holidays. That’s why you need to make your voice heard now!

There are two easy actions you can take before 17 December:

  1. Contact your representatives in the European Parliament JURI Committee!
    You can find your MEP in the list below, including their twitter handle and further contact details when you click on their names. Ideally you can call or just email them. If you prefer calling from your computer you can use EDRi member Bits of Freedom’s free calling tool.You can also tweet at your MEP by using the hashtags #CensorshipMachine and #FixCopyright! You could tweet for example along the lines:

    .@MEP_twitter_handle, please oppose the #CensorshipMachine in the #copyright Directive proposal! #FixCopyright

  2. Contact the relevant ministry in your country dealing with the file!
    You can find some contact details here. (If you have more, please feel free to add them to the spreadsheet!) To strengthen your message, team up with other human rights, consumer or internet users associations, and draft a common response!

Members of the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI)

The European Parliament works in different specialised Committees. The Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) consists of one chair (Pavel Svoboda), four vice-chairs (Jean-Marie Cavada,  Laura Ferrara, Mady Delvaux and Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg), 20 members and 23 substitutes*. This Committee is in charge of, among other files, the discussions on copyright.


Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
Evelyn Regner


S&D Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ)



Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
Emil Radev


EPP Граждани за европейско развитие на България (ГЕРБ)
Angel Dzhambazki*




Czech Republic

Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
Pavel Svoboda (Chair)


EPP Křesťanská a demokratická unie – Československá strana lidová (KDU–ČSL)
Jiří Maštálka


GUE-NGL Komunistická strana Čech a Moravy (KSČM)



Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
Jens Rohde*


ALDE Det Radikale Venstre



Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
Jean-Marie Cavada (Vice-Chair)


ALDE Génération Citoyens (GC)
Joëlle Bergeron


EFD Sans étiquette
Marie-Christine Boutonnet


ENF Front national (FN)
Gilles Lebreton


ENF Front National (FN)
Pascal Durand*


Greens/EFA Europe Écologie
Constance Le Grip*


EPP Les Républicains (LR)
Virginie Rozière*


S&D Parti radical de gauche (PRG)



Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
Heidi Hautala*


Greens/EFA Vihreä liitto



Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann


S&D Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (SDP)
Julia Reda


Greens/EFA Piratenpartei Deutschland (PIRATEN)
Axel Voss


EPP Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (CDU)
Evelyne Gebhardt*


S&D Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (SPD)
Angelika Niebler*


EPP Christlich-Soziale Union in Bayern e.V. (CSU)
Rainer Wieland*


EPP Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (CDU)
  Tiemo Wölken*


S&D Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (SPD)



Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
Kostas Chrysogonos


GUE-NGL Synaspismós Rizospastikís Aristerás (Syriza)



Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
József Szájer


EPP Fidesz-Magyar Polgári Szövetség-Keresztény Demokrata Néppárt (Fidesz)



Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party

Brian Crowley


ECR Ireland /
Fianna Fáil Party



Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
Laura Ferrara (Vice-Chair)


EFDD Movimento 5 Stelle (M5S)
Enrico Gasbarra


S&D Partito Democratico (PD)
Isabella Adinolfi*


EFDD Movimento 5 Stelle (M5S)
Mario Borghezio*


ENF Lega Nord (LN)
Sergio Gaetano Cofferati*


Stefano Maullu*


EPP Forza Italia (FI)



Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
Antanas Guoga*


EPP Independent
Viktor Uspaskich*


ALDE Darbo partija (DP)



Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
Mady Delvaux (Vice-Chair)


S&D Parti ouvrier socialiste luxembourgeois (POSL)



Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
Francis Zammit Dimech


EPP Partit Nazzjonalista (PN)



Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (Vice-Chair)


 S&D  Bezpartyjna
Tadeusz Zwiefka


EPP Platforma Obywatelska (PO)
Kosma Złotowski*


 ECR Prawo i Sprawiedliwość (PiS)
Stanisław Żółtek*
 ENF Kongres Nowej Prawicy (KNP)



Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
António Marinho e Pinto


ALDE Partido Democrático Republicano (PDR)



Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
Daniel Buda*


EPP Partidul Naţional Liberal (PNL)
Răzvan Popa*


  S&D  Partidul Social Democrat (PSD)



Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
Rosa Estaràs Ferragut


EPP Partido Popular (PP)
Luis de Grandes Pascual*


EPP Partido Popular (PP)



Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
Max Andersson


Greens/EFA Miljöpartiet de gröna (MP)
Jytte Guteland*


S&D Arbetarepartiet- Socialdemokraterna


United Kingdom

Name and Twitter handle EU political group National party
Mary Honeyball


S&D Labour Party
Sajjad Karim


ECR Conservative Party
Jane Collins*


EFDD UK Independence Party (UKIP)