Filter resources
-
A losing game: moderating online content fuels Big Tech power
While online platforms have a role to play in dealing with systemic risks, holistic - not techno-centric - approaches are needed to guarantee our safety and free expression, argues Claire Fernandez
Read more
-
Digital Dignity Document Pool
Digital technologies can have a profound effect on our societies, but sufficient attention is rarely given to how certain applications differentiate between, target and experiment on communities at the margins. This document pool gathers resources for those that are interested in learning about and contesting the harms to dignity and equality that arise from uses of technology and data.
Read more
-
CJEU in surprise judgment: zero rating is illegal under EU law
Europe’s highest court has put an end to a long-standing legal battle around the EU’s Net Neutrality Regulation. In a landmark judgement published last week, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) confirmed what EDRi and its members have argued for years: that zero rating is illegal under EU law because it violates the neutrality obligations of internet access providers
Read more
-
The deterrent effect of the Julian Hessenthaler case: Criminal prosecution must not lead to diminished freedom of opinion
At the start of the trial against security adviser Julian Hessenthaler, who played a key role in the making of the so-called Ibiza video, 15 Austrian and international human rights organisations express their concern that his excessive criminal prosecution could – intentionally – have a deterring effect on future sources or whistleblowers and the exercise of freedom of opinion, freedom of the press and freedom of information. Julian Hessenthaler has been in custody since the end of 2020 (at first awaiting extradition, now awaiting trial) because of drug- and document-related charges against him.
Read more
-
Can the EU Digital Services Act contest the power of Big Tech’s algorithms?
A progressive report on the Digital Services Act (DSA) adopted by the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) in the European Parliament in July is the first major improvement of the draft law presented by the European Commission in December. MEPs expressed support for default protections from tracking and profiling for the purposes of advertising and recommending or ranking content. Now the ball is in the court of the leading committee on internal market and consumer protection (IMCO), which received 1313 pages of amendments to be voted in November. EDRi's member Panoptykon Foundation explores if the Parliament would succeed in adopting a position that will contest the power of dominant online platforms which shape the digital public sphere in line with their commercial interests, at the expense of individuals and societies.
Read more
-
How one word took an entire organization off the air
EDRi's member Bits of Freedom cannot share this blog post with their supporters on Facebook. The reason for this: the word "QAnon" appears in it. This single word was all it took to have the Facebook page of The Hmm and that of its three administrators removed.
Read more
-
Who will not be blocked by Facebook? SIN wins the first court battle
The District Court in Warsaw (Appellate Division) upheld its interim measures ruling from 2019 in which it temporarily prohibited Facebook from removing fan pages, run by the Polish NGO “SIN”, on Facebook and Instagram, as well as from blocking individual posts. This means that – until the case is decided – SIN’s activists may carry out their drugs-related education on the platform without concerns that they will suddenly lose the possibility to communicate with their audience. The decision is now final. EDRi's member Panoptykon Foundation sheds some light on the case and what it means on the broader scale.
Read more
-
All hands on deck: What the European Parliament should do about the DSA
After the European Commission’s proposal for a Digital Services Act (DSA) in December 2020, no less than seven committees in the European Parliament are now drafting their reports and opinions on the DSA. In parallel, member states are deliberating about the Council’s position, too. Yet, while the Commission has carefully tried to modernise the ageing rules of the E-Commerce Directive and make them fit for the platform economy, several of the committees’ draft reports propose—deliberately or not—to turn the DSA into a dystopian fundamental rights nightmare.
Read more
-
DSA should promote open and fair digital environment, not undermine the rule of law
The Rapporteur of the European Parliament Committee leading one of the most important legal initiatives to regulate platforms has spoken. The Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO) Committee's draft report on the Digital Services Act (DSA) turns online platforms into judge, jury and executioner when it comes to removing online content. This follows the same logic as the Copyright Guidelines that were presented last week. It also gives vast powers to the European Commission and national governments to suppress opposing voices.
Read more
-
European Commission ignores civil society concerns and sides with creative industries
Today is a sad day for Europe. Instead of listening to reason and arguments, the European Commission itself brought up in front of the CJEU, the backroom political influence of the entertainment industry has won once again. Clearly “earmarking” content means preferring the economic interests of a few powerful actors over the fundamental rights of a whole generation.
Read more
-
Copyright Reform in Germany: Damage Reduction on Article 17
While waiting for the implementation guidelines from the European Commission and the CJEU ruling on whether upload filters are legal or not, some Member States are implementing the Directive. Germany has done some damage reduction in its implementation, according to former MEP and current GFF staff Felix Reda
Read more
-
Antiterrorists in a bike shed – policy and politics of the Terrorist Content Regulation
The short story: an ill-fated law with dubious evidence base, targeting an important modern problem with poorly chosen measures, goes through an exhausting legislative process to be adopted without proper democratic scrutiny due to a procedural peculiarity. How did we manage to end up in this mess? And what does it tell us about the power of agenda setting the name of the “do something” doctrine?
Read more