Navigation

German court censors Böhmermanns Erdogan poem

By on May 17, 2016 in affairs, Censorship, Civil liberties, Democracy, Freedom of Speech, Germany

A German court, Landgericht Hamburg, has decided that tv presenter Jan Böhmermann can not repeat parts of his infamous poem about Turkish President Erdogan.

The court finds passages in the text abusive and defamatory. Frankfurter Allgemeine reports that refusal to follow this ruling can lead to an administrative fine of up to 250,000 euros or administrative detention of up to six months.

Böhmermann now has the possibility to appeal against the verdict.

However, this is not the main trial. The Section 103 case will be tried by the Mainz Criminal Court at a later point.

Turkish President Erdogan has also applied for an injunction against Springer CEO Mathias Döpfner. This following Springers support for Böhmermann. The injunction is to be tried by the Cologne Landgericht. But this court has already indicated that it will not recognize the case. This can, in turn, be appealed against by Erdogan’s lawyers.

This is a can of worms.

The entire case is troublesome from a freedom of speech perspective. Especially as it also concerns freedom of the press and artistic expressions. And it gets outright awkward and absurd when German courts are deconstructing Böhmermann’s poem to decide what parts should be considered as acceptable humor and what parts should not.

There were, at one point, hopes that the German legal system would simply throw out President Erdogan’s complaints and make a firm stand for free speech. But now it seems as if the case will take a different turn.

What makes the case even worse is the fact that the German government allowed President Erdogan’s complaints on political grounds. Germany simply needs Turkey to stem the flow of refugees from Syria (and other countries). So much so that the government is prepared to put free speech on the line.

This will be a defining moment for German democracy.

/ HAX

• Gericht verbietet Teile von Böhmermanns „Schmähgedicht“ »
• Erdogan geht auch gegen Springer-Chef Döpfner vor »

Update:
• BBC: German court rules against comic Boehmermann over Erdogan poem »

1

Edward Snowden on unchecked government

By on May 16, 2016 in Big Government, Civil liberties, Democracy, Snowden

A lot of people laud me as the sole actor, like I’m this amazing figure who did this. I personally see myself as having a quite minor role. I was the mechanism of revelation for a very narrow topic of governments. It’s not really about surveillance, it’s about what the public understands—how much control the public has over the programs and policies of its governments. If we don’t know what our government really does, if we don’t know the powers that authorities are claiming for themselves, or arrogating to themselves, in secret, we can’t really be said to be holding the leash of government at all.

CJR – Snowden interview: Why the media isn’t doing its job »

0

The Closing of the Net

By on May 13, 2016 in Big Data, Big Entertainment, Big Government, Copyright, Data Retention, Hacktivism, Intellectual Property, Internet, Privacy

Monica Hortens new book The Closing of the Net is now available.

In a mail to colleagues, fans and friends she writes…

I am delighted to announce that my new book “The Closing of the Net” has been released.

“The Closing of the Net” discusses how political decisions are influencing the future direction of Internet communication. As the interests of powerful businesses are manipulating governments and policymakers, and become more embedded in the online world, so these corporations seek greater exemption from liability. The book confronts the deepening cooperation between large companies and the state. Political manoeuvrings, it argues, suggest that the original vision of a free and democratic Internet is rapidly being eclipsed by a closed, market-led, heavily monitored online ecosystem. “The Closing of the Net” tackles the controversies surrounding individual rights today, addressing policy agendas such as net neutrality, copyright and privacy. It includes research that I have not previously published on topics including Megaupload, the EU Data Retention Directive, UK copyright lawsuits, and more.

“The Closing of the Net” is published by Polity Press http://tinyurl.com/zhqz5j6 and is available from Amazon http://amzn.to/1S6zxJ7 It has been described as “thriller-esque”! I do hope you enjoy it.

Monica Horten gave us a lot of important input about the Telecoms Package and other net oriented dossiers when I worked with the Pirate Party in the European Parliament.

0

Surveillance: Who owns you and your life?

By on May 12, 2016 in Big Brother, Civil liberties, Democracy, Human rights, Police state, Privacy, surveillance

There are many dimensions to the concept of privacy.

A fundamental question is: Who owns you and your life?

If you are not the owner of your person – that will open up for abominations like slavery, organ farming, and some absurd utilitarian concepts.

But if you are the owner of your person – this must include your body as well as your mind and your faculties.

So… if you are the owner of your person – does anybody else (a private person or a collective of persons) have the right to look into your mind, your thoughts and your beliefs? Does anybody else have the right to look into your relations to other people, your quest for knowledge or your personal habits and preferences?

Because that is exactly what is done when government snoops around in your communications, among your files and in your social networks.

The only reason I can find for allowing this is if a person is threatening other peoples’ security or property.

A person who is no threat to others should be left alone. And this is actually what is said e.g. in the European convention on human rights. People have the right to privacy and private correspondence unless they are a threat to others or to society. (Obviously, it might be debated what constitutes a threat to society. But you get the general rule.)

However, governments do not care. They want mass surveillance. They want to collect as much information as possible about as much people as possible.

The ruling political class simply does not treat us as free citizens but as serfs.

You should keep that in mind next time there is a general election.

/ HAX

1

Germany to abolish open wi-fi liability for users’ behavior

By on May 11, 2016 in Big Entertainment, Copyright, File Sharing, Germany, Intellectual Property, Internet

Germany’s ruling coalition has decided to abolish the liability for users’ copyright infringements and other behavior when operating an open wi-fi access point. This weird and anachronistic liability has seriously hampered the organic net growth in Germany, and was recently challenged at the European level. The revised law is expected to take effect as early as this fall.

Falkvinge – Finally: Germany to abolish open wi-fi liability for users’ behavior »

0

Chelsea Manning winner of Blueprint Enduring Impact Whistleblowing Prize

By on May 10, 2016 in Civil liberties, Hacktivism, Manning, Transparency, Wikileaks

Chelsea Manning, the former Army soldier convicted of the biggest leak of classified documents in U.S. history, was honored in absentia Monday at a London ceremony for her role in providing Wikileaks with secret documents concerning the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Manning, 35, was named the winner of this year’s Blueprint Enduring Impact Whistleblowing Prize during an event hosted by Blueprint for Free Speech, a Melbourne-based nonprofit, at the London offices of the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

“The award recognizes the exceptional importance of the disclosures by Manning in revealing the illegal practice of torture and detention, and in increasing the public understanding of the impact of war on civilians.”

The Washington Times: Chelsea Manning honored with award, cash prize for WikiLeaks disclosures »

0

Governments vs. WhatsApp

By on May 10, 2016 in Big Brother, Cryptography, IT security, Privacy, surveillance

In other words, there is no central repository of plain-text messages that the company can access to comply with a court subpoena. Nor is there a “universal key” that can be used as a government backdoor to decrypt information. When a user sends a message on WhatsApp, he or she can feel fairly confident that no confidence man in the middle lurks between them and the intended recipient of a message. Such security is a very strong selling point in this age of constant data breaches and headache-inducing identity thefts.

Reason: Why We Should All Care About Brazil’s War on WhatsApp »

0

More on TTIP, IP and the Internet

By on May 6, 2016 in Big Entertainment, Copyright, EU, Intellectual Property, Internet, TTIP, US

“Reading between the lines, it would seem that the United States negotiators are being heavied by their IP industries to push for stronger measures on IPR enforcement. This would be consistent with the industry lobbying on the previous attempt for an EU-US copyright treaty – known as ACTA or Anti-counterfeiting Trade Agreement. It is also consistent with the intensity of the relationship between the lead US negotiating body, the United States Trae Representative (USTR) and representatiives of the US entertainment industries – notably the Motion picture Association of America (MPAA).

A suggestion that is hinted at by the EU negotiators is a new IPR Committee. It is not clear where such a committee would be based, or what its role is, but we can safely assume that it will incorporate the interests of the US corporations who seek to influence EU policy.”

Monica Horten at IPTegrity.com – TTIP leaks: US warned on sensitive IPR issues »

0

EU: Privatised censorship and surveillance

By on May 4, 2016 in Big Entertainment, Censorship, Copyright, EU, Intellectual Property, Internet

In relation to the real motivation behind the privatised censorship proposals (copyright), the draft talks about platforms “which make available copyright-protected content uploaded by end-users”. The wording is very deliberate. While the E-Commerce Directive gives liability protection to hosting companies that passively host content on behalf of their users, “making available” is an active use of content for which the rightsowner has a “exclusive right to authorise or prohibit any communication to the public”. As a result, any “making available” by online platforms without prior consent of the rightsholder would be a breach of copyright, for which the platform would be liable. The only option for being liable for a “making available” by your customers is to subject any uploads to prior checking, filtering and/or takedown in cases of doubt. Online platforms already delete vast amounts of perfectly legal content uploaded by users, so this new incentive would make the situation even worse.

EDRi: Leaked EU Communication – Part 1: Privatised censorship and surveillance »

0

Snowden on whistleblowing

By on May 4, 2016 in Civil liberties, Democracy, Human rights, Manning, NSA & Snowden, Privacy, Rule of law, Snowden, US, Wikileaks

When you first go on duty at CIA headquarters, you raise your hand and swear an oath — not to government, not to the agency, not to secrecy. You swear an oath to the Constitution. So there’s this friction, this emerging contest between the obligations and values that the government asks you to uphold, and the actual activities that you’re asked to participate in. (…)

By preying on the modern necessity to stay connected, governments can reduce our dignity to something like that of tagged animals, the primary difference being that we paid for the tags and they’re in our pockets. It sounds like fantasist paranoia, but on the technical level it’s so trivial to implement that I cannot imagine a future in which it won’t be attempted. It will be limited to the war zones at first, in accordance with our customs, but surveillance technology has a tendency to follow us home.

Edward Snowden in The Intercept: Whistleblowing Is Not Just Leaking — It’s an Act of Political Resistance »

0