04 Feb 2016

EDRi co-hosts the Privacy Camp, 26 January 2016


In the run up to CPDP conference in Brussels, civil society groups met at the fifth annual Privacy Camp to exchange views and develop new strategies. This year’s conference took place under the title “The Multiple Ways of (De/Self)-Regulation: What is at stake for Human Rights?” and included various panels and speakers from around the EU and the US involved in privacy activism. For those who missed it, we’ve provided an overview of the sessions (conference programme) below.

9:30-11:00 Opening session: Lobby X-Factor

Judges: Jennifer Baker (independent EU tech journalist), Olivier Hoedemans (Corporate Europe Observatory) and Cristian Bulumac (EU Parliament, Greens/NGL). Candidates: Raegan MacDonald (Mozilla), Walter van Holst (Vrijschrift), Joe McNamee (EDRi). Moderator: Rocco Bellanova (USL-B)

Privacy Camp kicked off with the greatest game show in the world: Lobby X-Factor. Three high-powered jury members, three world-class privacy pundits, and one proposed amendment to EU law. In order to determine an undisputed champ of EU privacy lobbying, candidates were challenged to persuade the jury of a proposal: let’s force all visitors to the Middle East to wear a tracking bracelet which uploads a selfie to a law enforcement app once per day.

Our host Rocco Bellanova first introduced the jury, composed of none other than Jennifer Baker, Olivier Hoedemans and Cristian Bulumac. Not easily impressed, it was clear from the start that contestants would have to bring their A-game to convince the Eurobubble veterans.

First off was Joe McNamee, who employed a broad range of tried-and-tested lobbying tactics. From bribing his targets with chocolate and alluding to comfy career opportunities, to simply shouting the word ‘freedom’, it was clear that Joe knew all the tricks in the lobbying book.


Raegan MacDonald displayed a markedly different style which one might call the ‘classic’ lobbying approach. The audience was amazed at her effortless stroll through the Brussels Bullshit Bingo, eliciting ‘oohs’, ‘ahs’, and riotous applause with each successive reference to synergy, stakeholders, security and innovation.

Walter van Holst took a maverick approach by focusing above all on unflinching honesty. He laid himself bare, explaining how his mortgage financing troubles had left him with no loyalty other than to his employer – therefore, the ideal lobbyist.

After tallying votes from the audience and jury members, it was Joe McNamee who took home the prize. We look forward to next year’s Privacy Camp to see if anyone dare take on our champ. Following a brief award ceremony, the participants also reflected on the real-world lessons to be learned from this experience. Bulumac noted how different strategies might be needed for different ‘targets’: while Joe’s Silicon Valley rhetoric might be able to charm assistants and younger staff, he believed that Raegan’s tried-and-tested buzzwords were unbeatable when it comes to persuading MEPs themselves. Clearly, the X-Factor was not just humorous (and dare we say glamorous?), but also educational.

11:30-12:45 Safe Harbor 2.0: a stillborn project?

Moderation: Diego Naranjo (EDRi). Speakers: Gloria Gonzalez Fuster (Vrije Universiteit Brussel), Laurent Lim (CNIL) and Marc Rotenberg (EPIC).

Following a brief introduction by Diego Naranjo, Laurent Lim kicked off the discussion by describing CNIL’s activities with regard to the Safe Harbour and international data transfers since the Schrems-decision. He also mentioned his personal skepticism of the Commission’s proposed reforms and the current viability of available alternatives (standard contractual clauses and binding corporate rules). Marc Rotenberg underlined Laurent’s conclusions by describing the shortcomings of US law in relation to international transfers. Gloria shared her experiences from visiting the US and the significance of the Schrems ruling in European law. After these opening marks, the floor was opened for discussion with the audience.

Both Laurent and Marc shared the sentiment that reaching an agreement before 1 February seemed unlikely of not impossible. “It’s too late now, the clock has run out”, Marc said. “The necessary reforms won’t happen before Tuesday. I won’t even have done my laundry before then”. EDRi can’t speak to the current status of Marc’s laundry, but he and Laurent have certainly been proven right on the lack of substantive legal reform. Laurent also added that, in his personal view, following the previous three month grace period, the question of enforcement has also become a ‘matter of credibility’ for DPAs and data protection law.

Another point of discussion was the differences in public perception between the US and the EU. Marc emphasised the converging trends in this field, debunking the conventional wisdom that Americans are freedom-oriented and Europeans are dignity-oriented. Gloria added, however, that Europeans continued to see privacy and data protection as universal rights, whereas Americans appear more amenable to exceptionalism approaches.

The panel also discussed the responsibilities and discretion of DPAs in handling complaints. From the audience, Max Schrems commented that the CJEU did not rule on this issue in his case. Marc, however, suggested that a duty to handle this complaint is implied by the logic of the judgment. While no consensus was reached on this point, it was suggested that Commission investigations might provide an impetus for more active enforcement at national level, especially in light of the hundreds of complaints launched against the Irish Data Protection Commissioner.

Finally, the issue of data localisation was raised. The panellists quickly agreed to refrain from using the unhelpful term ‘balkanisation’ and also that this trend would not in any way ‘break the internet’. Gloria noted that localisation does not generally yield concrete results for the protection of privacy, but that it can be a useful bargaining tool when negotiating with US legislators. Marc echoed this notion, stating that localisation can have a ratcheting effect on levels of privacy protection.

11:30-12:45 TTIP, TiSA, CETA and Co.:Trade agreements and digital rights

Moderation: Maryant Fernández Pérez (EDRi) Speakers: Walter van Holst (Vrijschrift), Ralf Bendrath (European Parliament, Policy Advisor), Jan-Willem Verheijden (EU Commission, Trade in Services Unit, DG Trade), Delphine Misonne (USL-B)

The panel discussed the main issues of trade agreements (in particular TTIP, TiSA, CETA) and their impact on digital rights.

Jan-Willem Verheijden, EU Commission Trade Official, opened the debate. Referring to TTIP and TiSA, he argued that they do not include the protection of personal data and do not affect data protection laws. From his point of view, the topic of data protection would not be touched by trade agreements as they deal with fundamental rights, “which are not negotiable”. On the other hand, he observed that data flows are important for the US and EU.

The second panelist was Ralf Bendrath, senior policy advisor to Jan Albrecht MEP. He observed that the protection of personal data is not a trade barrier but a fundamental freedom to be respected. Another important point touched by the MEP policy advisor was that the TiSA general exception based on Article XIV GATS offers insufficient protection for EU data protection rules. He also expressed his dislike of the “national security exceptions” provisioned in TiSA. Furthermore, quoting the draft TiSA text, he was wondering why the Commission chose to copy only parts of the e-Commerce Directive dealing with the topic of spam into the agreement, instead of the entire section.

Walter van Holst then took the floor and highlighted various concerns to civil society, including cryptographic standards and software source code disclosure requirements bans before moving on to more general issues. He questioned the validity of touching so many regulatory areas through secretly negotiated, take-it-or-leave-it trade agreements. Especially topics like ISDS (Investor State Dispute Settlement) and the proposed regulatory cooperation touch the fundamentals of our democracies and the rule of law. When the discussion arose about the necessity of multilateral or bilateral agreements instead of the existing GATT-frameworks, he pointed out that this had mostly to do with Brazil, India and China rightfully refusing to adopt US and EU-style IPR-legislation from which they have nothing to gain.

The final word was given to Delphine Misonne (USL-B researcher). In relation to TTIP, she criticised the ISDS system and stressed that the perceptions of the agreements’ issues are very different on both sides of the Atlantic. Having focused her academic research on environmental law, she also underlined that, regarding TTIP, there is a lack of public debate on environmental issues.

14:00-15:30 – Litigation activism and its future

Moderation: Ulf Buermeyer (Berlin Superior Court and CIHR). Speakers: Max Schrems (Europe vs Facebook), Adrienne Charmet (LQDN), Gus Hosein (Privacy International).

The panellists’ introductory remarks focused on their respective experiences with litigation activism. Common ground soon emerged, with the speakers stressing the high workload and related costs associated with litigation, and the importance of finding lawyers willing to provide expertise to help build a case. Gus Hosein added how Privacy International had benefited greatly from the the strong tradition of pro bono work in Anglo-saxon law firms.

A central theme was the importance of communications and PR throughout the litigation process. Gus warned against ‘hollow victories’; without the support of public opinion, favourable judgments may fail to lead to needed reforms – as occurred with the ECHR’s decision on prisoner voting rights in Hirst v UK. Max was praised for his effective communications strategies such as distributing FAQs to journalists directly after the judgment – in Gus’ words: ‘simple, correct, sexy’. Max advised to draft various statements in preparation for various possible outcomes. He also added that targeting large, popular companies is helpful in generating media attention, since journalists are eager to write on such issues. Adrienne described La Quadrature’s success with amicus curiae briefs to the Conseil d’Etat, for which they had crowd-sourced comments and feedback from over 500 participants.

The discussion also turned to the United States, where NGOs appear to litigate more actively. To explain this activity, US activist Marc Rotenberg (EPIC) pointed to the beneficial cost apportionment rules in the US which allow each side to bear its own costs (as opposed to the loser pays principle common in Europe). He also stressed the efficacy of amicus curiae briefs. However, downsides of the US system included the comparative difficulty of suing companies outside of a class action context, and the distribution of class action damages to non-neutral NGOs under the cy-près doctrine.

Other themes throughout the panel included the difficulty of finding lawyers trained in privacy and data protection law (and who don’t work ‘for the other side’); the balance between litigation before national courts and European courts; and the advantages brought by the General Data Protection Regulation regarding damage rules, collective redress and direct access to the CJEU.

The panel also discussed possible next steps in strengthening European litigation activism. They stressed the importance of international exchange and communication and combining resources from various actors. This could include technical expertise from the hacker community, litigation experience from professional lawyers, specialist legal knowledge from privacy activists and the financial means of larger NGOs such as consumer organisations. The need for a coordinating hub or network at European level was mentioned repeatedly. At these points, many eyes turned towards EDRi’s representatives in the room, although it was also acknowledged that these activities would involve a serious workload and require serious investments.

14:00-15:30 – Technology, regulation,…: What response to mass surveillance? (privacy by design & by default, obfuscation)

Moderation: Rocco Bellanova(USL-B and PRIO) Speakers: Eleanor Saitta (OpenITP and IMMI), Jérémie Zimmermann (La Quadrature du Net), Julia Powles (University of Cambridge and the Guardian)

The afternoon panel focused on mass surveillance and the possible responses to it. Eleanor Saitta spoke first. She argued that regulation is a key instrument and a cost driver (in other words, it can make surveillance more expensive) as it can lead companies towards different business models. Regulation is also important for innovation, and has a very critical role in preserving our freedom to build solutions that prevail on surveillance. In this sense, regulation is a tool that could be useful, as it gets market to build infrastructures. Julia Powles, (the Guardian and University of Cambridge) agreed on this point, as to her it is really important that regulation could lead the way to technology.

Jeremie Zimmermann intervened in the discussion. In his opinion, the topic of mass surveillance represents a collective failure. The failure consists in the fact that, after two years since Snowden’s revelations no one dared to bring legal action against the Safe Harbour agreement (only a student had this idea). A second failure is the battle for convincing inside and outside the institutions that privacy matters: “we may somehow give up on this elaborate bourgeois problem” and try to elaborate different communication strategies. We should pay attention on the concept of intimacy, which is different from the concept of privacy. Building on this, another failure enumerated by Jeremie Zimmermann was the fact that privacy campaigns did not reach the public in an extensive manner. Talking about regulation and technology is not sufficient, and a more cultural approach would be needed.

16:00-17:30 – Closing Session: New surveillance laws in the wake of Charlie Hebdo and 13/11

Moderation: Estelle Massé (Access) Speakers: Ton Siedsma (Bits of Freedom), Jim Killock (OpenRights Group), Anna Biselli (Digitale Gesellschaft) , Agnès de Cornulier (La Quadrature), Jesper Lund (IT-Pol)

The closing session aimed to create a dialogue on new surveillance laws in the wake of Charlie Hebdo and 13/11 events. The panel gathered NGOs representatives from Bits of Freedom, Open Rights Group, Digitale Gesellschaft, La Quadrature, and IT-Pol. With this composition, the panel was intended for NGOs to share their views on possible next steps for joint campaigning on the issue of mass surveillance.

Agnès de Cornulier, representative of the French association La Quadrature du Net, took the floor first. She explained how 2015 was a black year for freedoms in France: many security measures were enacted, and the state of emergency has been unreasonably prolonged. Particularly, Agnès focused on the proposed bill on the state of emergency, expressing her concerns regarding measures for police searches of electronic devices, Internet censorship and freedom of association.

Ton Siedsma then explained the current situation in Netherlands, following Minister Ronald Plasterk’s proposal amending the Dutch Intelligence and Security Act of 2002. He also pointed out that Bits of Freedom created an online consultation tool in order to help citizens respond the public consultation on the security bill.

Jesper Lund spoke about the mass surveillance situation in Denmark, referring in particular to the Danish anti-terror proposal issued on 19 February 2015 and the new Danish PNR proposal.

The situation in Germany was covered by Anna Biselli, from Digitale Gesellschaft. First, she talked about the German political situation that led to the data retention bill proposal on June 2015. Secondly, she added that a new draft legislation on public secret services should be announced by the first days of February 2016. Digitale Gesellschaft is waiting for it in order to analyse its contents.

(Contribution by Elisabetta Biasin and Paddy Leersen, EDRi interns)

01 Feb 2016

EDRi’s work in 2015

By Kirsten Fiedler

Information technology has a revolutionary impact on our society. It has boosted freedom of communication and democracy but has also led to new approaches to surveillance and is increasingly used to impose restrictions on fundamental rights. In the past year, we worked hard to ensure that your rights and freedoms in the online environment are respected when they are endangered by the actions of political bodies or private organisations.

Sadly, 2015 was a year in which our rights and freedoms were endangered on multiple occasions. In response to the terror attacks in Paris, Europe’s governments were quick to react to the tragedy by calling for more surveillance, ignoring the failures of existing measures. At the EU level, this meant the rushing of anti-terror measures (Directive on combating terrorism), a big push for the adoption of the previously rejected proposal for the monitoring of air passengers (EU PNR) and the launch of initiatives to push Internet companies into voluntary censorship measures.

But there were also successes, especially with regard to data protection and the demise of the “Safe Harbor” agreement. Our key campaigns were heavily focused on driving a positive agenda – for a conclusion of the data protection reform package, for the upholding of equal access to the Internet (net neutrality) in Europe, and for a reform of the EU’s outdated copyright framework. For copyright, we want to improve access to knowledge and culture online, thereby indirectly reducing incentives for invasive enforcement mechanisms. We also worked on privatised law enforcement by Internet companies as well as trade agreements (both of which are horizontal topics that touch virtually all digital rights issues).

Last but not least, we’ve been preparing for the future. In March 2015, EDRi’s members agreed on a multi-annual strategy and decided on the organisation’s four key focus areas for the next years (data protection and privacy, surveillance, network neutrality and copyright reform).

You can find the full annual report 2015 here (pdf) and our transparency report there (png). You can also check out our press review 2015, our responses to public consultations last year and, last but not least, you can find a neat overview of our biggest achievements below:

Data protection and privacy
Network neutrality
Copyright Reform
Privatised law enforcement
Trade agreements

Data protection and privacy

Privacy material


Surveillance material

Network neutrality

Our net neutrality material

Copyright Reform

Our copyright reform material

Privatised law enforcement

Our material on privatised enforcement

Trade agreements

Our trade agreements material

  • Document pool on the non-legislative resolution of the EU Parliament
  • Infographic to explain the legislative process of the resolution
  • Two booklets: EDRi’s “Red lines on TTIP” (pdf) and “TTIP and Digital Rights” (pdf)
  • Analysis of amendments tabled in various committees (for ex, in INTA together with BoF)
22 Jan 2016

Mozilla’s Open Web Fellowship 2016: Join EDRi’s team!

By Kirsten Fiedler

imagesMozilla’s Open Web Fellows programme, which was launched in 2015, is an international programme designed to link developers, engineers, technologists and programmers with civil society organisations around the world to help protect the Internet. For this second year of the programme, EDRi is proud to be the among the first European organisations to be chosen as a host organisation for the Mozilla Web Fellowship. You can apply here until 21 March, check out the criteria below.

Keeping the internet open is EDRi’s “raison d’être”. While EDRi has been successful in defending digital rights in the EU through a succession of major campaign victories, there is still a need to increase the capacity of the organisation to fulfil its role at the heart of policy-making in Brussels, due to the ongoing onslaught of draft legislation and “self-regulation” initiatives that could endanger the openness of the Internet.

In the past years, we have been fighting against the damaging trade agreements, supporting Europe’s data protection reform and campaigned against EU surveillance proposals, such as the telecommunications data retention directive and air passenger data collection and exchange deals with countries outside the EU.

Among the many threats we are now facing is the current wave of “counter-terrorism” proposals after the attacks in France and Denmark, with European governments rushing to adopt new laws with little or no obvious consideration of effectiveness, proportionality or whether our freedoms and privacy rights are being sacrificed in the process. In addition, private companies are increasingly being trusted to take measures to achieve public policy goals this poses a growing threat to freedom of expression and the rule of law, particularly because international human rights law is binding on states and not on private organisations – and can therefore be circumvented by “voluntary” enforcement actions.

Europe’s standard-setting role with regard to policy-making in the digital sector is particularly important, as nearly all relevant laws are decided at the EU-level and only have to be implemented by the 28 Member States.

The Mozilla Fellow will spend 10 months with the EDRi office in Brussels, working in cooperation with us to safeguard the Internet as a global public resource. We look forward to hosting a young tech leader who will lend us his/her expert perspective on our key priorities for the next year: In 2016, we will be focusing on data protection, surveillance, copyright and network neutrality. It is absolutely crucial for our work in Brussels to create a better understanding of Internet policy issues among policy makers and the broader public. We are excited to share our advocacy experience and to add technical expertise to our team.

Apply to become a Ford-Mozilla Open Web Fellow at EDRi if you want to put your technical expertise to work on European legislation. We have lots to do!

Applications will open on 1 February and close on 21 March – see Mozilla’s website.

Who can apply?
It could be you! Broadly speaking, we are looking for makers – those who see a problem in the world and can solve it through technology or media. The right candidate may bring specialities in design, development, storytelling, research and policy analysis, and should be comfortable performing as a technologist, a tinkerer, and a curious contributor to the fellowship program. You do not need to have previous experience with Internet advocacy, policy or activism. A lot of campaign design, community organizing, education, and coalition building happen through teamwork and skills like data visualization and participatory learning. You can be at any stage in your career, provided you are open to learning.

21 Jan 2016

Access Now, EDRi on data protection: “No Safe Harbour 2.0 without reform on both sides of the Atlantic”

By Theresia Reinhold

On January 12, Estelle Massé, Policy Analyst at Access Now, and Joe McNamee, Executive Director at EDRi, were invited by the committee of EU data protection authorities – the Article 29 Data Protection Working Party – to discuss the aftermath of the Safe Harbour ruling.

Read our full submission to the Article 29 Data Protection Working Group (PDF).

At that meeting, we discussed the consequences of the European Union Court of Justice (CJEU) ruling in the case C-362/14 (Maximillian Schrems v Data Protection Commissioner, known as “the Schrems case”) which invalidated the Safe Harbour arrangement. We provided evidence to the EU data protection authorities on the reforms needed on both sides of the Atlantic, including the specific reforms needed in the US for a robust new transatlantic data transfer agreement that would resist legal challenge. Here is the list of reforms we recommend:

  1. Surveillance reform in the European Union and the United States which includes
    a. Reform of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Section 702
    b. Reform of Executive Order 12333
    c. Reform of EU Member States’ legislation on surveillance
  2. US compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)
  3. Passage of comprehensive data protection legislation at federal level in the US
  4. EU member states to stop avoiding their human rights obligation in the guise of the ill-defined “national security exemption”

Despite the impetus for reform generated by the Schrems ruling and the launch of negotiations for a so-called Safe Harbour 2.0, the status quo remains on both sides of the Atlantic. Worse, legislation was passed in the US that potentially negates the possibility of a future transatlantic data transfer agreement. That legislation is the Cybersecurity Act of 2015 (also known as CISA). Passage of the Cybersecurity Act increases the breadth of unaccountable, secret US spying and further cements the corporate-intelligence relationship. This law would require the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to deliver “cyber threat” indicators, which are shared with the intelligence and law enforcement agencies in near real-time. Companies would be granted broad legal immunity for supplying those indicators to the US government, which could include personal information. The option exists to transfer the information entirely secretly. That means massive repositories of personal information, including data transferred from the EU, could be secretly turned over to spying agencies.

We highlighted these shortcomings in our meeting and written submission. They are in addition to the considerations raised by the limitations the Schrems ruling imposed on the EU Commission and the repeated “misleading” of US institutions and secret re-interpretation of US legislation.

Finally, we called on negotiators to take the time necessary to conduct reform that would provide users and companies on both sides of the Atlantic with a robust, trustworthy mechanism for transfer of data, upholding the right to privacy and ensuring legal certainty.

13 Jan 2016

Swedish border control becomes a privacy nightmare for travellers

By Guest author

European citizens are finding that their freedom of travel is being curtailed as more and more Schengen countries introduce temporary border controls in response to the flow of refugees from the Middle East war and conflict zones. Moreover, Sweden and Denmark have passed national legislations which gives train, bus and ship operators the responsibility of checking if their passengers have valid travel documents before they are transported through the border zone where state border guards officially check passports or identification documents. This is similar to the obligations imposed on carriers in the EU Directive 2001/51/EC, except that the new Swedish and Danish obligations apply to passengers transported within the Schengen area.

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

At the Swedish border, the obligations on transport operators to check IDs of passengers took effect on 4 January 2016. This has disrupted train travel from Copenhagen to Malmö, the main option of public transportation over the Øresund Bridge. At Copenhagen Airport Station, just before the bridge to Malmö, all passengers have to disembark the train and walk through a security checkpoint with ID inspection. After the checkpoint, passengers can board another train which takes them to the official border control on the first Swedish station after the Øresund Bridge, and then onwards to their final destination on the Swedish side of the Øresund Region.

In addition to the general disruption and travel delays for passengers, the ID inspection at Copenhagen Airport railway station has generated a lot of public controversy over privacy since the train operator DSB has decided to take photos of the identity documents presented for inspection at the checkpoint. This information is retained in a central database for up 30 days, and Swedish Police will be granted access to the database upon request, according to a press release from DSB.

Under the new Swedish law, transport operators are subject to a fine of 50000 SEK (about 5500 EUR) for every passenger that is transported to the border without a valid ID unless the operator can document that the ID inspection prior to crossing the border was carried out in accordance with Swedish law. The legal requirements for this documentations are unclear, and this has led DSB to take the radical step of retaining copies of the ID presented for every passenger. DSB is the only public transport operator in the Øresund Region that retains copies of passenger IDs for this documentation purpose.

The legality of the data retention has been questioned by a Danish data protection expert. The processing of personal data takes place in Denmark and is therefore subject to the Danish Data Protection Act. In Denmark, the processing of citizen ID numbers (present on all identity documents) is subject to special requirements similar to those for sensitive personal data, and the legal arguments submitted by lawyers for DSB to the Danish Data Protection Agency do not address this issue. A more general issue is the legal basis for the retention of copies of ID documents in the first place. The DSB lawyers refer to the exemption for “a task carried out in the public interest or in the exercise of official authority vested in the controller” in Article 7(e) of the Data Protection Directive, but the real purpose of the data retention is to avoid the possibility of fines being imposed on DSB for passengers without ID. In any case, there is clearly an issue of proportionality that must be considered here since a central database with pictures and other personal data of citizens, readily accessible by the Swedish Police (and possibly other public authorities), is a significant intrusion.

The Danish government has not yet imposed ID check obligations on transport operators between Germany and Denmark, and such a step would have to be negotiated with the German authorities since the ID check by the private operator takes place in Germany. However, if the Swedish-Danish idea of imposing ID check obligations on private transport operators spreads to other EU countries, it will have huge consequences for the freedom of travel and privacy for European citizens, especially if the private transport operators are pressured into keeping copies of the passenger IDs for their internal “documentation” of the ID checks. A partially privatised border control system along these lines would, in effect, extend the mass surveillance of European air travellers in the PNR (Passenger Name Records) Directive to train, bus and ship passengers on intra-EU cross-border routes.

Questions and answers for the DSB ID check (04.01.2016)

Practical Guide for the Swedish regulation on ID checks, Swedish Police (in Swedish only, 30.12.2015)

DSB press release about the retention of passenger ID copies (in Danish only, 02.01.2016)

DSB has registered passengers in violation of the law, Politiken (in Danish only, 07.01.2016)

(Contribution by Jesper Lund, IT-Pol Denmark)



13 Jan 2016

Chaos Communication Congress 2015

By Kirsten Fiedler

The Chaos Communication Congress, which is the world’s longest-running annual hacker conference, took place from 27 to 30 December 2015. It gathered 12,000 participants from around the globe and featured more than 160 superb talks in the areas of hacking, science, arts, culture, ethics, society and politics. We have collected all must-see digital rights sessions for you.

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

Talks by EDRi staff, members and observers

Avoiding kernel panic: Europe’s biggest fails in digital policy-making (Walter van Holst and Kirsten Fiedler, EDRi)

Link: https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7227-avoiding_kernel_panic_europe_s_biggest_fails_in_digital_policy-making

Ten years after we lost the war (Frank Rieger, CCC and Rop Gongrijp)

Link: https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7501-ten_years_after_we_lost_the_war

One year of securitarian drift in France (Adrienne Charmet & taziden)

Link: https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7423-one_year_of_securitarian_drift_in_france


Crypto Wars II (Kurt Opsahl, EFF)

Link: https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7386-crypto_wars_part_ii

Sin in the time of technology (Jillian York, EFF and Matthew Stender)

Link: https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7286-sin_in_the_time_of_technology


Net Neutrality in Europe (Thomas Lohninger, Initiative für Netzfreiheit)

Link: https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7387-net_neutrality_in_europe

Cyber all the Wassenaars (Walter van Holst, Vrijschrift, Nate Cardozo, EFF, Richard Tynan, Privacy International and Meredith Patterson)

Link: https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7280-cyber_all_the_wassenaars

Other must-see digital rights talks

Safe Harbor (Max Schrems)

Link: https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7513-safe_harbor


The state of Internet censorship (Will Scott andz@torproject.org)

Link: https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7143-the_state_of_internet_censorship


The possibility of an army (Constant Dull)

Link: https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7517-the_possibility_of_an_army

The price of dissent (Cage and Cerie Bullivant)

Link: https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7443-the_price_of_dissent

Collect it all: open source intelligence for everyone (M.C. McGrath)

Link: https://media.ccc.de/v/32c3-7340-collect_it_all_open_source_intelligence_osint_for_everyone


More videos of the conference have been released at:

Photos of the conference can be found at

(Contribution by Kirsten Fiedler, EDRi)



18 Dec 2015

Santa Claus confirms NSA attack on naughty or nice database

By Joe McNamee

A press conference was organised this morning on behalf of Mr Santa Claus. At the conference, a spokes–elf confirmed that there had been repeated attempts to hack the “naughty or nice (NON)” database. The NON-database was thought to be used by Mr Claus to keep records of young inhabitants of planet earth, in order to set gift-giving priorities on 6, 24 and 25 December each year.

Mr Claus’ spokes-elf stressed that the security of the database was not compromised in any way. He also confirmed that the IP addresses associated with the attack were traced to the US National Security Agency (NSA). In response, a spokesperson for the NSA said that he could neither confirm nor deny that the attack took place. He also refused to confirm the rumour that the attack took place in order to check whether or not the boys and girls working at the NSA were on the naughty list.

The NSA further pointed out that Mr Claus set up the database without any authorisation and, crucially, chose to avoid providing either encryption keys or an encryption backdoor to the United States or any of its five-eyes allies. “What is the point,” asked the spokesperson, “of having five eyes, if we’re not allowed to see everything?”

In a written statement, the NSA argued that they had a strong legitimate interest in gaining access to the database.

Firstly, it is very suspicious that Mr Claus chooses to live at the North Pole outside any national jurisdiction. Secondly, if he is not involved in criminal activity, why does Mr Claus use unbreakable encryption? Thirdly, we have strong grounds for believing that Mr Edward Snowden was on the “nice” list last year and that he received cool floofy slippers as a result. It is as if Mr Claus does not even care that it was really, really cold in Fort Meade last Christmas and our tootsies were freezing.

After the press conference at the North Pole*, a post on Santa’s blog said that his NON-database is, actually, a non-database – a decoy, in other words. Security is best served by using distributed structures, so the records are stored

— in the consciences of each little Edward Snowden and each little Jimmy Clapper – consciences that are either white as the driven Snowden or….clapped out.


*It is well known that Santa lives in Korvatunturi, Finland. We used artistic licence for comedy effect in this article.


08 Dec 2015

EU Consultation on future internet regulation – have your say!

By Diego Naranjo

The European Commission has launched a consultation on the role of “Internet platforms” – which it basically defines as pretty much any online services you can think of!

The consultation is of crucial importance because it will help define the rules that govern how you use the Internet. It will be crucial for new rules on important issues such as online law enforcement, online privacy, open data and copyright.

The right to hyperlink, the right to privacy, the right not to have your uploads deleted by YouTube or Facebook. These are just some of the issues at stake.

It is your internet. These are your rights. This is your one chance.

In order to make things easier, EDRi has created an “answering guide” – an online tool with the European Commission’s questions and our analysis to guide your answers. The guide can be found here: http://edri.limequery.org/index.php/346935/lang-en


Key things to remember:

  • You don’t have to answer every question (apart from the mandatory questions on the first page)
  • We have colour-coded the questions (green for general, red for data protection, etc. So, if data protection is the only issue that you’re interested in, just click through the guide and answer the questions tagged as “data protection”.
  • The consultation is very long. You have the option to save your answers and continue later.
  • Please submit your responses by one minute to midnight on 24 December. If you want to submit after that date, you can submit up till 31 December on the Commission’s website – https://ec.europa.eu/eusurvey/runner/Platforms/



02 Dec 2015

EDPS Opinion: Effective data protection needed for “big data”

By Joe McNamee

On 19 November 2015, the European Data Protection Supervisor published an Opinion on the challenges of “big data”. The Opinion is entitled “A call for transparency, user control, data protection by design and accountability”. The title alone shows how extensive and complicated the issue of big data really is, and squeezing all of these issues into a 21-page document was clearly a major challenge.

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

The Opinion recognises the significant environmental, social and economic benefits that the collation and analysis of massive amounts of data can bring. However, this brings privacy challenges, even for “anonymous” data, as the flood of data makes it increasingly possible to re-identify individuals in datasets previously believed to have been “anonymised”. This meta-problem sits on top of a set of significant challenges:

  • How is it possible to have transparency in a world where the algorithms used to analyse big data are considered to be trade secrets?
  • How do we redress the information imbalance between organisations that hold vast amounts of data and the individuals whose data is being processed?
  • How can we respond to the demands of big data advocates, who want to store as much data for as long as possible, to permit yet-undiscovered data processing?
  • How do we retain the principle that data must be accurate, when much big data processing is about making guesses about what is probably going to happen – in relation to health, possible criminal activity, credit worthiness, etc.?
  • Faced with extensive invisible data processing, what will be the chilling effect on creativity and innovation? The dangers of the chilling effects of non-transparent and unpredictable discrimination against non-standard behaviour are described in some detail.

With regard to transparency, the Opinion makes the crucial – and frequently overlooked – point that “the personal data processed in big data contexts are no longer primarily comprised of information that individuals knowingly give to organisations”. In that context, the Opinion argues that the individual must have the right to have access to information in an intelligible form, including the logic on which any output data is based.

The Opinion also goes into a brief but useful description of the nature of consent and opt-out mechanisms which, while relevant in this context, also provides a helpful overview of the issues at stake in wider data protection law. The Opinion argues that the ability of the data subject to use the collected data more meaningfully, this could change the relationship between the individual, their data and the data controller. This would also permit a fairer balance of benefits between the companies and individuals. Furthermore, more data portability would lead to more accountability and more competition and innovation. In the same context, the Opinion also argues that the same innovation effort that is put into data exploitation should be put into user-friendly data controls for the individual.

Under the banner “data protection and privacy by design” the Opinion maintains the privacy-by-innovation theme, arguing that laws, procedures and privacy policies are no longer enough and that a more innovative approach generates a “win-win” situation: “Privacy-friendly engineering can also be invaluable in helping develop new business models for generating value from for example, data stores”.

Finally, the Opinion addresses the question of accountability and, in keeping with the general approach of the document, it stresses the need to have ongoing processes in place, rather than seeing accountability as a one-off exercise.

The Opinion is written in a very compact way, it is very much a summary of a great deal of complex issues and questions. It is certainly a valuable contribution to a debate that is urgently needed.

EDPS Opinion: Meeting the challenges of big data – A call for transparency, user control, data protection by design and accountability (19.11.2015) https://secure.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/site/mySite/shared/Documents/Consultation/Opinions/2015/15-11-19_Big_Data_EN.pdf

EDPS press release: EDPS encourages a new debate on Big Data (19.11.2015)

EDRi paper: An introduction to data protection

(Contribution by Joe McNamee, EDRi)



27 Nov 2015

EDRi’s press review 2015

By Kirsten Fiedler


21/01 Some French want a Patriot Act, but they have something even tougher (globalpost)

21/01 Eurovision tellybods: Yes, you heard right – net neutrality (The Register)

21/01 EBU urges European net neutrality (Digital TV Europe)

21/01 Some French want a Patriot Act, but they have something even tougher (globalpost)

22/01 Calls for European ISPs to filter content could be illegal, EU council documents suggest (Resellernews)

22/01 Pedidos para ISPs filtrarem conteúdos podem ser ilegais (Computerworld)

22/01 Internetowa cenzura niezgodna z prawem UE? Litwini bior? pod lup? kontrowersyjn? dyrektyw? (dobreprogramy)

22/01 Calls for ISPs to filter content could be illegal, EU council documents suggest (CIO, Pc Advisor, Pc World)

22/01 Germany’s Infamous Copyright Warning Letters May Be Reined In — In A Few Years’ Time (klerk)

26/01 Patriot Act à la française: Braucht Frankreich weitere Überwachungsmaßnahmen? (Netzpolitik)

27/01 What did you see? Terrorism, democracy, privacy (Euranet Plus)

27/01 TSA Plans to Remove Social Media Screening From Airport Security Proposal (Sputnik)

27/01 US TSA Proposed Social Media Checks Threaten Freedom of Speech (Sputnik)

27/01 The Satire And The Faux: Reflections On Charlie Hebdo – OpEd (eurasia review)

27/01 Neutralité du Net : le rendez-vous manqué du Parlement européen (Mediapart.fr)

29/01 Agcom censura chi parla delle sue censure’: la denuncia dell’European digital rights (Il Fatto Quotidiano)

29/01 Kampf gegen den digitalen Hass (tagesschau.de)

30/01 Charlie Hebdo must not be used to expand surveillance (“Scoop” World)

31/01 To be continued – The rules of the road on the internet will always be a work in progress (The Economist)


02/02 Netzneutralität: “Das Netz, wie wir es kennen, ist in Gefahr” (Der Standard)

07/02 EDRi adviseert Facebookgebruikers adblocker (security.nl)

07/02 Le combat d’Amazon à Bruxelles (security.nl)

08/02 European civil rights organisation advises Facebook users to use ad blocker (myce)

08/02 France’s embrace of harsh anti-terror laws that go far beyond America’s Patriot Act (globalpost)

10/02 NSA : beaucoup de bruit pour rien dans la lutte antiterroriste (Libération)

11/02 Let op wat je zegt, jouw smart-tv luistert mee (De Staandard)

11/02 European Parliament Votes For Renewal Of Mandate For Internet Governance Forum (Intellectual Property Watch)

15/02 Kampf gegen EU-Überwachung: Jetzt European Digital Rights (EDRi) unterstützen (Anonymous News Germany)

17/02 Zum Schutz digitaler Grundrechte (Eurozine)

24/02 EU-Urheberrechtsreform: Antwort auf den Berichtsentwurf (Netzpiloten.de)

24/02 Integracija, asimilacija in terorizem (Radio Student FM89.3)


03/03 Alarms sound over changes to EU roaming, net neutrality and privacy rules (Gigaom)

03/03 National governments punch holes in EU data protection bill (EU Observer)

03/03 EU data protection reform ‘badly broken,’ civil liberty groups warn (PCWorld)

03/03 European countries, pushed by Germany, are systematically working to destroy the fabric of European privacy legislation, rights groups say (Sputniknews)

03/03 La riforma UE sulla protezione dei dati è sotto attacco (Messaggero Veneto)

04/03 EU data protection reform draft “an empty shell” (ITPRO)

04/03 Connected Continent, ok al compromesso lettone: roaming semi-abolito dal 2016 (Corriere delle Comunicazioni)

04/03 Privacy? What privacy? EU’s draft law on your data is useless, say digital rights orgs (The Register)

04/03 Leaks Show EU Privacy Reform Being Gutted, Groups Say (Law 360)

04/03 Wolf im Schafspelz: EU-Rat einigt sich auf Verwässerungen der Netzneutralität (Netpolitik.org)

04/03 Protection des données personnelles : le pas en arrière de l’Europe (ZDNet)

04/03 Privacy groups warn the European Council is undermining new data protection laws (IT Pro)

04/03 En Europe, la neutralité du Net se fera attendre (L’Opinion)

05/03 Member states hope to soften data protection in reform talks (EurActiv)

05/03 European Governments Seeking To Water Down EU’s Proposed Data Protection Legislation (techdirt)

05/03 Medienmenü: Kirsten Fiedler (Krautreporter)

05/03 Freedom campaigners warn against EU ministers pushing for 2-speed internet (The Guardian)

05/03 UE : des groupes de défenses de la vie privée exposent leur pessimisme (Developpez.com)

06/03 Outcome of EU privacy debate will affect lives for decades (The Irish Times)

06/03 UE b?dzie gorzej chroni? prywatno??? (Computerworld)

07/03 Germany double-dealing over data legislation, say negotiators (The Irish Time)

07/03 EU-Staaten untergraben die Netzneutralität (Heise Online)

09/03 Keep an eye on you: the EU’s controversial plans to track air passengers (Euronews)

09/03 El ojo europeo que todo lo ve (Euronews)

09/03 “Big Brother” nos céus da Europa: O debate (Euronews)

09/03 Vitatott intézkedés az európai utasok megfigyelésér?l (Euronews)

09/03 Passenger Name Record: la “schedatura” dei passeggeri Ue che fa discutere (Euronews)

09/03 AB’nin yolcular? takibe alan tart??mal? güvenlik paketi (Euronews)

09/03 Fluggastdatenspeicherung: Gläserne Passagiere an Bord (Euronews)

09/03 Lutte contre le terrorisme : le “Passenger Name Record” est-il la solution ? (Euronews)

09/03 Passenger Name Record: full debate (Euronews)

09/03 Privacy advocates worry ahead of EU data protection talks (PCWorld)

11/03 E’ battaglia sul roaming Ue. I socialdemocratici: “Abolirlo subito” (Corriere delle Comunicazioni)

12/03 Proposed changes to data protection rules could affect consumer rights (European Voice)

13/03 EU step up border checks to fight terrorists (Euranet Plus)

15/03 Tentazioni anti-privacy della Ue (Il Sole 24 Ore)

15/03 A European Digital Single Market Is Only Possible if Internet Users Are Heard (EFF)

15/03 Nieuw akkoord over roaming is ook eind aan local breakout (telecompaper)

18/03 We need copyright reform so Belgians can watch cricket, says MEP (The Register)

18/03 Parliament copyright working group too close to business say activists (New Europe)

23/03 [MàJ] Droit d’auteur : l’équilibre du groupe de travail de Cavada mis en cause (Next Impact)

23/03 Secret des affaires: une dangereuse directive européenne (Mediapart)

25/03 The Future is Now: EU Seeks to Digitalize Its Economy (Sputnik International)

26/03 Fluggastdaten: Breite Mobilisierung gegen die Totalüberwachung von Reisenden (Netzpolitik)


13/04 After victory for net neutrality in the US, the battle moves to Europe (ars technica)

13/04 European rights groups make net neutrality push (V3.co.uk)

13/04 European rights groups back net neutrality (Advanced Television)

14/04 La presión de las multinacionales quiere acabar con la neutralidad en la red (Europa abierta – RTVE)

13/04 European rights groups make net neutrality push (v3.co.uk)

14/04 EU net neutrality proposals are ‘incoherent’ and ‘misleading’, say campaigners (Out-law.com)

15/04 Data protection and privacy must be excluded from TTIP (LSE Media Policy Project Blog)

15/04 European cinema fears copyright reform (Euranet)

21/04 Rights groups press European Commission on data protection laws (V3.co.uk)

21/04 EU data protection reform triggers privacy warning (Computerworld)

21/04 EU accused of watering down General Data Protection Regulation (Techworld)

21/04 Privacy, appello a Juncker dalle Ong: “La Commissione rispetti gli impegni” (Corriere delle Comunicazioni)

22/04 Jean-Claude Juncker unter Beschuss: Bürgerrechtler fordern Versprechen zur EU-Datenschutzreform ein (t3n)

22/04 EU data protection reform triggers warning from civil rights groups worldwide (GoodGearGuide)

22/04 ‘Wijzigingen EU DATA Beschermingsregulering gevaarlijk’ (winmag)

22/04 ‘Databescherming wordt niet versterkt, maar juist uitgekleed’ (Computerworld.nl)

22/04 Nová reforma Európskej únie prinesie stratu súkromia, varujú ob?ianskoprávni aktivisti (CYBERSEC.sk)

23/04 Privacy Campaigners Write To Europe Over Data Protection Concerns (misco.co.uk)

27/04 Worldwide: Global Data & Privacy Update – 23 April 2015 (mondaq)

–/04 Le Conseil de l’Union Européenne veut tuer la neutralité du Net : agissons ! (Global Security Mag)


02/05 Das EU-Parlament und die Folgen des NSA-Skandals: Vorsicht mit der IT-Sicherheit (Heise online)

06/05 Could iPlayer access be extended across EU? (The Local)

06/05 Push to stream foreign media sites in Sweden (The Local)

07/05 EU ‘racing to catch up’ with Digital Single Market plan (Euractiv)

07/05 European digital strategy ‘could boost public services’ (Public Technology)

07/05 Digital Single Market, si teme l’ingorgo legislativo (Corriere delle Comunicazioni)

11/05 Wir müssen besonders aufpassen, dass Menschenrechte offline ebenso wie online gelten und respektiert werden. (SPD #DigitalLEBEN)

17/05 Mercato unico digitale, la strategia dell’Ue (Il Sole 24 Ore)

18/05 Le Danemark demande à Google et consorts de l’aider contre le piratage (EurActiv)

19/05 Facebook faces fight with digital rights group over Internet.org net neutrality concerns (V3.co.uk)

19/05 Facebook: Internet.org viola derechos de libertad y privacidad (El Comercio)

19/05 Internet.org de Facebook pondría en riesgo neutralidad de la red, advierten (Vanguardia)

20/05 Facebook’s Internet.org slammed by critics who claim the project ‘violates the principles of free speech and privacy’ (Mail Online)

20/05 Digital rights news from 2025 (boingboing)

20/05 Internet.org vive sus semanas más turbulentas (TeleSemana.com)

20/05 Diskriminierung im Netz ist durch nichts zu rechtfertigen (Netzpolitik.org)

20/05 Zurück aus der Zukunft : Digital Rights News von 2025 (Netzpolitik.org)

20/05 Il vecchio continente in cerca della connessione universale (Il Manifesto)

21/05 67 instituciones contra Facebook por violar los derechos de los usuarios con Internet.org (PORTALTIC)

22/05 Un total de 65 grupos de 31 países publican una carta abierta a Mark Zuckerberg sobre los riesgos de Internet.Org (teinteresa.es)

22/05 Carta abierta a Mark Zuckerberg sobre los riesgos de Internet.Org (europa press)

22/05 Net neutrality faces unwilling Council negotiators (EurActiv)

26/05 EU-Debatte: Kein Kompromiss über Netzneutralität und Roaming in Sicht (heise online)

26/05 Digitaler Binnenmarkt: So will die EU den Durchbruch schaffen (TECHTAG)

26/05 Nyvalgt Europa-Parlament skal tage kampen op med NSA-overvågning (information.dk)

27/05 EU net neutrality could kneecap the Tories’ opt-out pr0n filter plans (The Register)

27/05 EU-Streit: Regierungen gegen Netzneutralität und Roaming-Aus (derStandard.at)

28/05 Lajm i fundit: EDRI i shkruan letër Kryetarit të Parlamentit të Kosovës (#NdalPergjimitRKS)

29/05 European Parliament Trade Committee Tries To Defuse TTIP Controversy But Outcome Remains Uncertain (Intellectual Property Watch)

29/05 EU weer strenger over netneutraliteit en roaming – Reuters (telecompaper)


02/06 Internet.org es denunciado (tecnonews)

03/06 MEPs, Council still deadlocked over EU telco laws (The Register)

05/06 Facebook Inc. Answer To Critics Of Internet.org (BIDNESS ETC)

05/06 The new Digital Single Market Strategy lacks ambition (Europe’s World)

11/06 Buchtipps in Sachen Big Brother (bookbytes)

15/06 Wetsvoorstel bescherming persoonsgegevens is ‘stap achteruit’ (de Volkskrant)

15/06 European Ministers Agree To Disagree On Data Protection Reform (TechCrunch)

15/06 EU Council pushes data-privacy reform forward (COMPUTERWORLD)

15/06 EU-Minister beschließen Datenschutzreform (T-online)

15/06 EU-Datenschutzreform: Zweckbindung und Datensparsamkeit ausgehebelt (heise online)

15/06 Europese Raad gaat akkoord met voorstel Europese Databeschermingswet (Executive-People)

16/06 Europa unita sull’e-privacy: stretta su diritto all’oblio e uso improprio dei dati (Corriere delle Comunicazioni)

16/06 European Parliament Committee Copyright, Trade Secret Votes (IP Watch)

16/06 UE, verso un’unica privacy? (Punto Informatico)

16/06 Nächster Schritt zum EU-weit einheitlichen Datenschutz (Datenschutz Praxis)

17/06 Russia data law to cost billions, silence dissent (EUObserver)

17/06 Lobby in Europa zorgt voor absurd internetbeleid (fd.)

18/06 TTIP – Why the world shoul beware (rosalux-europa.info)

19/06 Privacy e copyright, l’Europa alla ricerca dell’Unione digitale (La Repubblica)

19/06 Günther Oettinger und die Lobbyisten: Der Telekommissar (Spiegel Online)

22/06 Päätös tuomioistuimelta: Uutissivusto on vastuullinen anonyymeistä kommenteista (Markkinointi & Mainonta)

23/06 EU-Abgeordnete knicken bei Netzneutralität ein (heise Netze)

24/06 Oettinger trifft vor allem Netzbetreiber-Lobbyisten (Computer Base)

24/06 Medienversammlung der LfM – Gleiches Netz für alle (InfoDigital)

24/06 So umwerben Lobbyisten den EU- Digitalkommissar (Kronen Zeitung)

24/06 Gleich schlechte Standards (taz.de)

25/06 Oettinger meets almost exclusively with corporate lobbies, report shows (Euractiv)

25/06 Europe: The Next Front in the Battle for Net Neutrality (EFF)

26/06 Now It’s Europe’s Turn to Fight For Net Neutrality (Gizmodo)

27/06 L’inventeur de la “neutralité du net” alerte l’Europe (Numerama)

29/06 European net neutrality under threat, warn rights groups (v3.co.uk)

30/06 EU plans to destroy net neutrality by allowing Internet fast lanes (ars technica)

30/06 Accordo sulla net neutrality, nella Ue si apre l’era dell’open Internet (Corriere delle Comunicazioni)

30/06 Europe agrees to scrap roaming charges while paving way for ‘internet fast lane’ (Guardian)

30/06 Net neutrality, prime bocciature: “Troppe eccezioni alla regola” (Corriere delle Comunicazioni)

30/06 EU Agrees to Scrap Roaming Charges, Enshrine Net Neutrality” (The Wall Street Journal)

30/06 “Arrivederci roaming”. Finalmente l’Europa cancella la tassa sui cellulari all’estero (e sceglie la net neutrality) (Che Futuro!)

30/06 Net neutrality, prime bocciature: “Troppe eccezioni alla regola” (Corriere delle Comunicazioni)

30/06 UE acuerda abolir el “roaming” en 2017 (Canal Sur, Andalusian Public News Agency)

30/06 The EU decides on net neutrality rules, but not everyone is happy with it (The 42)

30/06 EU Backs Diluted Net Neutrality Law (Nasdaq)

30/06 UE, data di scadenza per il roaming (Punto Informatico)

30/06 Roaming abolito da giugno 2017. Ora la palla passa ai big telefonici (Il Fatto Quotidiano)

30/06 EU plans to end roaming and ensure Net neutrality (New Europe)

30/06 Los operadores piden que el fin del “roaming” no distorsione los mercados nacionales (eldiario.es)

30/06 Un cheval de Troie menaçant la neutralité du Net caché par l’Europe (20 minutes)

30/06 Europa crea dos tipos de Internet y dice NO a la neutralidad de la red (microno)

30/06 EU-beslut ger oro för gräddfil på nätet (Dagens Nyheter)

30/06 Roaming abolito da giugno 2017. Ora la palla passa ai big telefonici (Il Fatto Quotidiano)

30/06 Die Netzneutralität wird de facto abgeschafft (futurezone)

30/06 Net neutrality, prime “bocciature”: “Troppe eccezioni alla regola” (Cor.Com)


01/07 ‘Watered down’ net neutrality rules could mean ‘almost anything’ (The Register)

01/07 La UE retrasa dos años y medio el fin del ‘roaming’ (El Correo)

01/07 Trägt die EU das neutrale Internet jetzt zu Grabe? (Krone Zeitung)

02/07 Edri: “L’Italia è fuori legge sulla data retention” (Corriere delle Comunicazioni)

03/07 POLITICO Pro’s Morning Tech: Freedom of panorama — Right to fast broadband — Data retention (Politico)

03/07 European Digital Rights ruft EU-Kommission auf, illegale Gesetze zur Vorratsdatenspeicherung in der EU zu prüfen (Netzpolitik)

06/07 Data retention, l’Italia è un cattivo esempio (Punto Informatico)

07/07 Qué derechos digitales están en juego con el TTIP (eldiario.es)

08/07 EU telecoms reforms take leap forward (POLITICO)

08/07 European Parliament Decides In Favour Of TTIP Mandate And “New ISDS” (IP Watch)

09/07 Europa se prepara para aprovar projeto que garante neutralidade da rede (Boa Informação)

09/07 Europe prepares to enforce its take on net neutrality (PC World)

10/07 Europe prepares to enforce its take on net neutrality (CIO New Zealand)

10/07 Neutralidade da Internet na UE agrada a activistas (Computerworld Portugal)

15/07 Europe a step closer to keeping records on all passengers flying in and out of the Continent (The Register)

15/07 EU air passenger data retention system ready for take-off, says Parliament (CIO)

15/07 EDRi asks European Commission to examine data retention laws in the EU (Lexology)

15/07 Neutralidade da Internet pouco discutida (Computerworld Portugal)

15/07 ¡Cuidado! El TTIP también revisa los derechos digitales (Revista Cloud Computing)

16/07 EU air passenger data retention system ready for take-off, says Parliament (ComputerWorld UK)

22/07 EU Uses Fear of Terror to Expand its Surveillance Powers (Breitbart News)

22/07 Unia Europejska chce bez rozg?osu zagwarantowa? neutralno?? sieci (Computerworld.pl)

28/07 Facebook Shifts Focus With Internet.org (Tech Week Europe)

29/07 Microsoft’s new privacy policy and Windows 10 troubleshooter to stop automatic updates (Network World)

30/07 Windows 10: Neue Datenschutzbestimmungen – Windows wird zur Datensammelstelle (Heise)

30/07 Die neun größten Probleme bei Windows 10 (Welt)

30/07 Bürgersicherheit in Spanien: Gesetzentwurf nicht besser als Maßnahmen in China (Netzpolitik.org)

31/07 Windows 10 reaction: Microsoft takes the good with the bad (Silicon Beat)

31/07 Microsoft – Warning personal data abuse will follow the installation (linkedin.com/pulse)


01/08 Nach Installation an Datenschutz denken (N24)

01/08 Windows 10: Microsoft under attack over privacy (The Guardian)

02/08 Microsoft under attack over privacy (Gulf News)

02/08 Windows 10 uudistaa käyttöehdot – Kasvi: ”Suomalaiset naiiveja tietosuojan suhteen” (YLE)

02/08 Microsoft under fire over collecting user data in new Windows 10 (IBN Live)

03/08 Microsoft comes under fire for Windows 10 default settings (IT Pro Portal)

03/08 Windows 10 hit by privacy concerns (FT)

03/08 Das sind die neun grössten Probleme mit Windows 10 (Handelszeitung)

03/08 Microsoft: Tietoja kerätään vain suostumuksella (YLE)

03/08 Tekikö Microsoft pahan virheen Windows 10:ssä? (digitoday.fi)

03/08 If you installed Windows 10 and like privacy, you checked the defaults, right? Oh dear (The Register)

03/08 Windows 10: It’s not really free (siliconangle)

03/08 CNPD: “Dateschutzreegele vun Amazon si legitim” (Radio 100.7 Luxembourg)

04/08 EFF-led group wants to give do-not-track some bite (PCWorld)

04/08 Is Microsoft reading YOUR emails? Windows 10 may threaten your privacy, watchdogs warn (MailOnline)

04/08 So schützen Sie Ihre Daten bei Windows 10 (Süddeutsche Zeitung)

04/08 Windows 10: Datenschützer kritisieren Microsofts Datensammelwut (ingenieur.de)

04/08 EFF-led group wants to give do-not-track some bite (PCWorld)

04/08 Windows 10 Stokes Privacy, Browser Choice Concerns (eWeek)

05/08 Windows 10 spies on emails, images, credit cards, more (WND)

06/08 Windows 10 – Datensammler mit Startproblemen (shz.de)

08/08 Business and Tech Digest, Windows 10 Wants Your Data, Malwares for Android and Apple, Exploding Battery Packs and Unstealable Bikes (BizTekMojo)

10/08 Windows 10: An operating system that gathers data on everything you do (World Socialist Web Site)

11/08 France adopts controversial surveillance Act (Privacy Laws & Business)

11/08 Verbraucherzentrale: Windows 10 macht Nutzerdaten zur Ware (ZDNet)

11/08 Windows 10 das Spionieren austreiben (t-online.de)

20/08 Dutch head for collision with EU on patient privacy (Politico.eu)

23/08 Estas son las líneas rojas del Parlamento Europeo a la agenda digital del TTIP (eldiario.es)

24/08 Estas son las líneas rojas del Parlamento Europeo a la agenda digital del TTIP (utopos journal)

27/08 Data politics: Do web trackers win votes? (tomorrow.is)

28/08 EU-Datenschutzreform: Industrie lehnt Klausel gegen NSA-Spionage ab (Heise)


03/09 Watch this cartoon on proposed new EU data rules – or you’re DOOMED. Maybe (The Register)

03/09 Windows 10 Nabs Over 5% of Desktop OS Market in a Month (eWeek)

03/09 Watch this cartoon on proposed new EU data rules – or you’re DOOMED. Maybe (The Register)

04/09 Mail app on Windows 10 build 10532 lets you disable ‘conversation view’ (Forex Report Daily)

11/09 La Banque de données de la police nominée aux Big Brother Awards (RTBF)

15/09Politikum: Ein Gespräch mit der Digital-Rights-Aktivistin Kirsten Fiedler über rechte Hetze im Netz (WDR5)

15/09 Views About Internet Turn Negative (The New York Times)

23/09 U.S.-EU Data-Transfer Pact Should Be Invalidated, Says Advocate General (Wall Street Journal)

23/09 US protection of Europeans’ personal data is inadequate, says EU court official (PC World)

23/09 You call THAT safe? Top EU legal bod says data sent to US is anything but (The Register)

23/09 El ‘caso Facebook’ restaría poder a la Comisión en favor de los Estados (El País)

23/09 Facebook, la Corte europea spariglia le carte: “Stati Ue possono bloccare dati” (Cor.Com)

23/09 EU court delas blow to ‘invalid’ US data sharing deal (Tribune)

23/09 U.S.-EY Data Pact should be invalidated, says advocate general (Nasdaq)

24/09 EU Court may follow Advocate’s General urge to suspend data transfer to US (Sputnik)

24/09 Vers la fin de la surveillance généralisée des internautes européens par les Etats-Unis ? (Le Monde Informatique)

29/09 Microsoft Blog reponds to Windows 10 Privacy Criticism (TechWeek Europe)

29/09 Datenschutz unter Windows 10, Microsoft erklärt sich (nzz.ch)

30/09 Les organisations citoyens condamnent la proposition de loi sur la surveillance en masse (Liberation)

30/09 Netizen Report: Will Brazil Give Up on Defending Digital Rights? (Slate)


01/10 CPJ joins call to oppose draft surveillance law in France (CPJ)

02/10 Privacy: ‘Tijd om stil te staan bij het gevoerde veiligheidsbeleid en welke prijs we daarvoor betaalden’ (Knack.be)

05/10 Data watchdog’s ‘blind trust’ criticised by German regulators (Irish Times)

06/10 ECJ strikes down beleaguered Safe Harbour data sharing with US (Euractiv)

06/10 5 takeaways from the death of safe harbor (Politico)

06/10 Safe harbour ruling: RELAX, Facebook and Google will be FINE! (The Register)

06/10 ‘Safe harbour’ ruling illustrates growing chasm between US and EU (The Guardian)

06/10 Le cadre légal du transfert de données vers les Etats-Unis invalidé par la Cour européenne de justice (L’Usine Digitale)

06/10 European Court Strikes Major Blow To Silicon Valley (Think Progress)

06/10 Fifteen years late, Safe Harbor hits the rocks (EUbusiness)

06/10 Facebook goes into space: Firm is building a satellite to beam internet across Africa (MailOnline)

06/10 Facebook sieht sich nicht betroffen (golem.de)

06/10 Fahrplan zur Netzneutralität: EU-Parlament am Zug (Netzpolitik.org)

06/10 Mancanza di protezione dei dati in Usa, Ue: “Continuare trasferimento con giuste tutele” (eunews.it)

06/10 Corte Ue: “Usa non garantiscono privacy”. Nel mirino Facebook & co. (Cor.com)

07/10 Ireland’s role as EU’s chief privacy regulator in spotlight (Financial Times)

07/10 La relación comercial entre la UE y EE UU, en estado crítico (El Pais)

07/10 Data Transfer Pact Between U.S. and Europe Is Ruled Invalid (The New York Times)

07/10 La confusa propuesta sobre “Neutralidad de la Red” llega al Parlamento Europeo (El Periodico de Canarias)

07/10 Endnu en privatlivs-aktivist sejrer over systemet (Information.dk)

08/10 Új korszak kezd?dhet az interneten (Sg.hu)

08/10 Privacy, Corte Ue: “Usa non garantiscono protezione dei dati personali” (blognotizie.info)

12/10 Google should ‘inform more’ on right to be forgotten (EUobserver)

19/10 Isis: EU vote on anti-Islamist recruitment laws slammed as ‘nonsensical online censorship’ (IBTimes)

21/10 How an Austrian student sent the tech sector into a tailspin (The Irish Times)

22/10 Europe’s ‘Net Neutrality’ Could Allow Torrent and VPN Throttling (Torrent Freak)

22/10 How an Austrian student sent the tech sector into a tailspin (The Irish Times)

26/10 Zo probeert Facebook de Europese politiek te beïnvloeden (NRC.NL)

26/10 Entscheidungstag für die Netzneutralität: Europa muss beweisen, dass es Politik ohne Lücken machen kann (WIRED.de)

26/10 Europe Vote Threatens Net Neutrality. Help Save the Open Internet (The Huffington Post)

26/10 Is the future of Europe’s Internet in danger? (Deutsche Welle)

26/10 Zo probeert Facebook de Europese politiek te beïnvloeden (nrc.nl)

26/10 EDRi pede clarificações sobre neutralidade de rede (ComputerWorld.com.pt)

26/10 Entscheidung gegen die Netzneutralität: Europa hat leider Politik mit Lücken gemacht (Wired)

27/10 EU parliament set to vote on net neutrality rules (BBC)

27/10 Game over for real net neutrality? European Parliament votes in favor of disappointingly weak rules (Tech.eu)

27/10 The European Parliament just dealt a major blow to net neutrality (Bussiness Insider)

27/10 Parliament rejects amendments protecting net neutrality (The Verge)

27/10 ¿Victoria de los usuarios o de la industria? (El Pais)

27/10 EU deals major blow to net neutrality (The Times of India)

27/10 EU abolishes roaming charges, but may have just hurt net neutrality (Mashable)

27/10 El Parlamento Europeo abre la puerta a la privatización de Internet (Publico)

27/10 EU parliament set to vote on net neutrality rules (PCTech Magazine)

27/10 European Parliament votes against net neutrality amendments (BBC)

27/10 Auf die Nutzer und Regulierer kommt es an (Golem.de)

27/10 EU vote for ‘neutral’ net plan draws sharp criticism (CIO)

27/10 European Parliament rejects net neutrality amendments (IT pro)

27/10 European Parliament Votes For Net Neutrality (Cloud Tweaks)

27/10 Tim Berners-Lee, Tech Companies, And NGOs Call On EU Parliament To Fix Net Neutrality Loopholes (tom’sHARDWARE)

27/10 Is the future of Europe’s Internet in danger? (DW)

27/10 EU trækker en streg i sandet: Slut med at blive mobil-flået efter ferien (Viden)

27/10 EU-Parlament beschließt zweideutige Netzneutralitäts-Verordnung – Jetzt entscheiden Gerichte und Regulierungsbehörden (ITPRESS)

27/10 Network neutrality landmark: European Parliament voted new legislation (Storm.mg)

27/10 Parlamento Europeu rejeita emendas para neutralidade (Computerworld)

27/10 Europski Parlament izglasao internet za bogate i internet za siromasne (Index.hr)

28/10 Europarlement neemt wazige beslissing over netneutraliteit (Knack.be)

28/10 Parliament green lights roaming and net neutrality (EurActiv)

28/10 Netzneutralität: Beschluss des EU-Parlaments lässt viele Fragen offen (Heise Online)

29/10 As police seize Newsnight laptop, concerns grow at reach of UK counter-terrorism measures (CPJ)

29/10 Obywatele przeciwko inteligentnym granicom (tokfm.pl)

30/10 Simona Levi: «Ser un alertador de la corrupció és un accident (Nacio Digital)

30/10 Türkiye’ye çifte özgürlük uyar?s? (BBCTurkce.com)

31/10 “Democracy: Im Rausch der Daten” – der Weg zur EU-Datenschutzreform als Lehrstück (irights.info/)

31/10 Una delegación del Free Culture Forum es recibida por la alcaldesa de Barcelona Ada Colau (AraInfo)


01/11 Free Culture Forum: La red como territorio radicalmente democrático (Publico.es)

01/11 Mégis jön a kétsebességes internet? (Lumens.hu)

03/11 Europe, Still Angry at U.S. Spying, Prepares to Increase Its Own (The Intercept)

04/11 Schwangere Daten (ORF.at)

05/11 The EU rules on network neutrality: key provisions, remaining concerns (European Parliament)

06/11 ENDitorial: Die Reform der EU-Datenschutzverordnung – eine vergebene Chance? (netzpolitik.org)

14/11 Democracy: the film that gets behind the scenes of the European privacy debate (The Guardian)

16/11 Golem: Ein Wiesel für ein modernes Urheberrecht (Golem.de)

16/11 Rights activists and small ISPs form telecoms lobby group (Politico.eu)

16/11 Digitaler Binnenmarkt: #NetCompetition will Wettbewerb erhalten (Netzpolitik.org)

16/11 Netzpolitischer Wochenrückblick KW 45 & 46: Im Rausch der Daten (Netzpolitik.org)

16/11 Small telcos and consumer groups team up against former monopolies (EurActiv)

16/11 Chile, puerto inseguro (elmostrador.cl)

17/11 Small telcos and consumer groups team up against former monopolies (EurActiv.com)

NetCompetition alliance calls for more competitive broadband

18/11 NetCompetition bietet ehemaligen Monopolen die Stirn (EurActiv.de)

18/11 Software-Klassiker XP-Antispy ist zurück (T Online)

18/11 Fre*****, Gleichheit, Brüderlichkeit (DRadio Wissen)

19/11 Competition Markets Authority warns EU panel that greater online platform regulation could “have a detrimental effect on the development of markets” (Lexocology.com)

20/11 NetCompetition alliantie wil meer concurrentie in breedband (Telecompaper.com)

20/11 EU Council Pushes For Collection Of Flight Passenger Data After Paris Attacks (Eurasia Review)

23/11 Europäisches 9/11 (swr.de)

25/11 Europe’s digital rights debate nearing the finishing line (Malta Today)

25/11 Statement by GUE/NGL MEP Barbara Spinelli on the prevention of radicalisation report vote (barbara-spinelli.it)

26/11 MEPs want to make internet companies liable for radical content online (EurActiv)

26/11 Kühlen Kopf bewahren (ORF.at)

26/11 Radicalizzazione violenta: i rischi della politica della paura (barbara-spinelli.it)

26/11 Freiheit oder Sicherheit (ORF.at)


01/12 EU-Initiative gegen Radikalismus im Netz (ORF.at)

01/12 Freedom of expression in the digital sphere (the Law Societies Brussels Agenda, December 2015)

03/12 Unión Europea: luchar por la transparencia para una democracia plena (publico.es)

04/12 Washington Internet Daily (page 11) (Washington Internet Daily)

04/12 3sat Kulturzeit: Wohin führt die Angst? (3sat Kulturzeit)

04/12 EU-Kommission und Internet-Unternehmen: Terrorpropaganda und Hetze sollen schnell aus dem Netz (heise.de)

05/12 Filtern, abblocken, Hintertür einbauen (taz.de)

05/12 La UE pide el compromiso de los gigantes informáticos para luchar contra la “radicalización online” (eldiario.es)

05/12 EU will Internet von schädlichen Inhalten reinigen” (mmnews.de)

09/12 EU counter-terror bill is ‘indiscriminate data collection’ (EUobserver)

09/12 Prueba de fuego para el registro europeo de datos de pasajeros aéreos (el Periodico)

16/12 This company has a compelling argument why mobile carriers may never be able to roll out ad blocking in Europe (Business Insider)

16/12 Certain Sections of Proposed European Data Protection Law Remain Unclear (Sputniknews.com)

16/12 Die Internetwirtschaft ist beruhigend unzufrieden (Zeit Online)

16/12 Zwischen Bürokratiemonster und starken Verbraucherrechten (futurezone.at)

17/12 People aren’t happy with Europe’s tough new rules for data protection (Business Insider Australia)

17/12 Washington Internet Daily (page 7) (Washington Internet Daily)

17/12 EU Data Protection Deal Confirmed: Overview, Next Steps (Forbes)

18/12 Councils uncertain over effect of European Union General Data Protection Regulation fines (Publictechnology.net)