Pardon for Snowden?

“We’re going to make a very strong case between now and the end of this administration that this is one of those rare cases for which the pardon power exists.”

The implicit point is that if Snowden is going to come home, his best chance is a presidential pardon, which is unlikely to come from Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. The final days of Obama’s final term are the best chance Snowden has, which gives Wizner and his team a little more than six months to make their case.

The Verge: President Obama should pardon Edward Snowden before leaving office »

Free the books!

The copyright protection term in the EU is currently 70 years after the author’s death. Several international agreements regulating copyright (such as Berne Convention and TRIPS agreement) suggest a significantly shorter protection term.

It is arguable how long copyright protection for authors, decades after their death, helps fostering economic growth. Most books go out of print within one year from their initial publication, and the same applies to music and films. The vast majority of works are not profitable for much longer. When it isn’t financially beneficial for the rights holders to print new editions of old books, but they are still under copyright protection, nobody else can publish them either. Because of this, many cultural works end up simply disappearing.

EDRi: Excessive copyright protection term killing creativity and access to culture »

Meanwhile, in Poland….

In response to the Polish government’s new counter-terrorism and surveillance laws, which allow authorities to block websites and telecommunications, limit the freedom of assembly, and allow secret surveillance of virtually the whole population, Freedom House issued the following statement:

“Granting open-ended powers to intelligence agencies to counter terrorism at the cost of every citizen’s privacy and freedom marks a clear abuse of power by the government,” said Daniel Calingaert, executive vice president. “The government seems determined to allow police and intelligence agencies to monitor all personal data and all communications without needing to establish the existence of any actual threat, a disturbing step toward removing checks and balances on government action.”

Via Techdirt »

Silicon Valley on mass surveillance: Enough is enough

Washington Post:

Like many Silicon Valley start-ups, Larry Gadea’s company collects heaps of sensitive data from his customers.

Recently, he decided to do something with that data trove that was long considered unthinkable: He is getting rid of it.

The reason? Gadea fears that one day the FBI might do to him what it did to Apple in their recent legal battle: demand that he give the agency access to his encrypted data. Rather than make what he considers a Faustian bargain, he’s building a system that he hopes will avoid the situation entirely.

WP: What’s driving Silicon Valley to become ‘radicalized’ »

CoE on blocking of Internet content and rule of law

EDRi reports…

Several European countries lack clear legal provisions and transparent procedures when it comes to blocking and removal of online content. A comparative study published by the Council of Europe stresses that any restriction on the right to freedom of expression must be provided for by law, be proportionate and follow legitimate objectives. Blocking should only be a measure of last resort and applied with great caution. Furthermore, if a state endorses voluntary blocking measures by private companies, the authors of the study ascribe full responsibility to the state for not placing such a system on a legislative basis, accepting insufficient judicial review and the possibility of overblocking.

EDRi: CoE study: Blocking content has to respect fundamental rights »

Council of Europe: Filtering, blocking and take-down of illegal content on the Internet »

Big Brotherism – the next step

A British startup has created a system for offering landlords continuous surveillance of their tenants’ online activity to determine whether they are likely to be asset risks. The system, named Tenant Assured, connects to the tenants’ social media accounts and mines their status updates, photos and private messages, feeding them to an algorithmic model, which is claimed to find potential signs of financial stress (which include posts with keywords like “loan” or “staying in”) or crime. The landlord gets an online dashboard, showing the tenant’s social connections, and a histogram of their online activity times, as well as flagging up any potential danger signs, as well as a five-factor psychometric profile of the tenant, annotated with what a landlord should look for.

Via Metafilter: Renting in the panopticon »

Main article, Washington Post: Creepy startup will help landlords, employers and online dates strip-mine intimate data from your Facebook page »

Sir Tim Berners-Lee: Let’s Unfuck the Internet!

This is exciting…

The web is a little fucked up right now. Governments are spying on civilians, some block specific websites, and companies like Amazon have a stranglehold on the cloud services business. But what if we could create a decentralized web, with more privacy, less government control, and less corporate influence?

Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web, wants to do exactly that. Sir Tim recently gathered some top computer scientists in a San Francisco church at an event called the Decentralized Web Summit, where attendees brainstormed ways to make the internet more broadly distributed. The smartest technologists on the planet showed up to join the discussions including early internet architect Vint Cerf and Brewster Kahle, founder of the Internet Archive.

Gizmodo: The Web’s Creator Now Wants to Unfuck It »

So, why?

“The temptation to grab control of the internet by the government or by a company is always going to be there. They will wait until we’re sleeping, because if you’re a government or a company and you can control something, you’ll want it,” he said.

The Inquirer: Sir Tim Berners-Lee: Internet has become ‘world’s largest surveillance network’ »

EDRi on hate speech, social media, EU and the rule of law

On 31 May, the European Commission, together with Facebook, YouTube (Google), Twitter and Microsoft, agreed a “code of conduct” on fighting hate speech.

In a society based on the rule of law, private companies should not take the lead in law enforcement, theirs should always have only a supporting role – otherwise this leads to arbitrary censorship of our communications. (…)

In practice, as illegal activity will be banned by terms of service, it will never be “necessary” to check a report against the law. (…)

In the code of conduct, there is not a single mention about the essential role of judges in our democratic societies. There is no mention about the enforcement of the law by public authorities. At each crucial point where law should be mentioned, it is not.

EDRi: Guide to the Code of Conduct on Hate Speech »

The beginning of an new era of Internet censorship?

Internet and social media giants Facebook, Twitter, Google’s YouTube and Microsoft on Tuesday pledged to combat online hate speech in Europe as the European Union’s European Commission unveiled a new code of conduct in Brussels designed to avoid the “spread of illegal hate speech.”

The companies vowed to review most valid requests for removal of illegal hate speech within 24 hours and to remove or disable access if necessary.

To be observed. Closely.

THR: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube Vow to Combat Online Hate Speech in Europe »

EDRi: Next year, you’ll complain about the Terrorism Directive

Next year, when your Member State starts blocking websites, without quite knowing why, when it starts imposing restrictions on Tor and proxy servers, without quite knowing why, when unaccountable, unclear legislation leads to arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement, and your government says that it is “EU law that it is obliged to implement” and you wonder why the press never reported on it, when you search in vain for who is accountable for a weak and dangerous text, come back and read this again.

EDRi: Next year, you’ll complain about the Terrorism Directive »