Navigation

Archive | EU

“EU Directive on counterterrorism is seriously flawed”

By on December 1, 2016 in Civil liberties, Civil rights, EU, War on Terror

A terrorism Directive put together without a proper consultation, without any impact assessment and without meaningful public debate creates the worst possible outcome

…said Joe McNamee, Executive Director of European Digital Rights.

It is too unclear to be implemented in a harmonised way across the EU, too shrouded in secrecy to have public legitimacy and too open to interpretation to prevent wilful abuse by governments seeking to exploit its weaknesses.

EDRi: European Union Directive on counterterrorism is seriously flawed »

Terrorism Directive: Document pool »

0

TiSA and corporate censorship

By on November 28, 2016 in Censorship, Civil liberties, EU, Free Information, Rule of law

(W)hile having provisions to promote freedom of expression will be a step forward, the latest US made a proposal in TiSA which does not respect the rule of law and would remove rights to freedom of expression. The proposal is that internet companies would not be liable for any damage caused by voluntary restrictions of individuals’ free speech if they undertake such restrictions “in good faith” because they feel that the communications are “harmful or objectionable”.

EDRi: New leaks confirm TiSA proposals that would undermine civil liberties »

TiSA = Trade in Services Agreement

0

EU cryptic on encryption

By on November 17, 2016 in Cryptography, EU

The European Union intends to simplify investigative authorities’ access to encrypted content. This emerged from the replies to a questionnaire that was circulated to all Member States by the Slovak Presidency of the EU Council. After a “reflection process”, efforts in this area are, according to the summary of the replies, intended to give rise to a framework for “cooperation” with internet providers. It remains unclear whether this will take the form of a recommendation, regulation or directive or, indeed, what “cooperation” might mean.

EDRi: New EU network to combat the “challenges stemming from encryption” »

0

EU in new attempt to make ISP:s police and censor the Internet

By on November 12, 2016 in Censorship, Civil liberties, Copyright, EU, Freedom of Speech, Intellectual Property, Internet, Rule of law

Joe McNamee, EDRi: EU Copyright Directive – privatised censorship and filtering of free speech »

The proposed Directive:
1) requires internet companies to install filtering technology to prevent the upload of content that has been “identified by rightsholders”
2) seeks to make internet providers responsible for their users’ uploads
3) gives internet users no meaningful protection from unfair deletion of their creations

So, ISP:s will have to check on all content uploaded by users – i.e. scrutinize everything that is uploaded to the Internet.

What is to be allowed or censored will not be a matter of rule of law – but falls under company terms and conditions that can state… whatever.

There will be no legal means of redress or appeal.

Freedom of speech and freedom of information will be in the hands of ISP:s who are to be liable for all user uploads. There is good reason to fear that these companies will be overly anxious and cautious – censoring everything with even a remote possibility of being an infringement of copyright.

This is yet another attempt to get around the eCommerce-directives principle of »mere conduit« stating that net operators can not be liable for what users are doing in their cables.

And imagine the burden on the ISP:s, having to police all of the users net activities.

This proposal is an assault on »mere conduit«, free speech, privacy and the rule of law. It must be stopped.

/ HAX

1

EDRi on censorship of free speech in the EU

By on November 12, 2016 in Censorship, EU, Freedom of Speech, Internet, Rule of law, social media

EDRi on the EU agreement with social media to censor e.g. hate speech and radicalization, the »Joint Referral Platform«…

Both incitement to violence and violence itself are utterly unacceptable. However, this abhorrent behaviour must also not result in attacks on core principles of our society. In particular, any restrictions must be proportionate, necessary and genuinely meet their objectives. This means that we need clear laws and clear responsibilities for all parties involved: states, providers and civil society. (…)

The restrictions are not provided for by law ‒ terms of service take precedence. Furthermore, as demonstrated by the German parliamentary question, the proportionality cannot be assessed as the State is not in possession of useful data.

EDRi FAQ: EU Code of Conduct on illegal hate speech »

0

No, CETA is NOT approved yet

By on October 31, 2016 in Democracy, EU

The European Parliament:

However, Parliament will still need to approve it before it can ultimately enter into force. The international trade committee is set to vote on the trade deal in December and then all MEPs will still have to vote on it during a plenary session. If approved, CETA could already enter into force next year.

Link »

0

EU-US Privacy Shield sent to court

By on October 31, 2016 in Big Data, Data Protection, EU, EU-US Privacy Shield, Privacy, US

The EU was warned not to hasten when replacing the fallen “Safe Harbour” agreement with the US with a new agreement to protect European personal data. But the EU Commission did. And it did a poor work.

The new agreement – the EU-US Privacy Shield – suffers much the same problems as its predecessor. Immediately here were warnings that if it is to be sent to court, it will meet the same fate as the previous agreement: Invalidation.

And here we go…

Privacy Shield legal spat puts EU-US data flows at risk again »

0