From: [log in to unmask]
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
[log in to unmask]
Sent: 20 April 2005 21:07
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: EDRi-news Digest, Vol 25, Issue 2
Send EDRi-news mailing list submissions to
[log in to unmask]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mailman.edri.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/edri-news
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[log in to unmask]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[log in to unmask]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of EDRi-news digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. EDRI-gram newsletter - Number 3.8, 20 April 2005
(EDRI-gram newsletter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:01:56 +0200 (CEST)
From: "EDRI-gram newsletter" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: EDRI-gram newsletter - Number 3.8, 20 April 2005
To: [log in to unmask]
Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
============================================================
EDRI-gram
biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe
Number 3.8, 20 April 2005
============================================================
Contents
============================================================
1. WIPO seminar on ISP liability
2. Policing rights for entertainment industry Finland
3. Council of Europe draft statement on human rights and Internet
4. Bulgarian Big Brother Awards
5. New wave of lawsuits against European P2P-users
6. Data retention news
7. French minister demands compulsory biometric ID card
8. CFP debate on developments in Europe
9. EDRI statement at WIPO Development Agenda meeting (IIM)
10. Agenda
11. About
============================================================
1. WIPO seminar on ISP liability
============================================================
On 18 April WIPO hosted a seminar in Geneva on copyright and ISP
liability. Dominated by representatives of the entertainment industry and
international government officials, the highly politicised seminar ended
with the conclusion that more legislation was indeed necessary. The main
issue however remained unsolved; whether this legislation should provide
stronger protection for the fundamental rights and freedoms of all
internet users, or whether this legislation should further facilitate the
entertainment industry in hunting down individual internet users.
The opening keynote speeches by Lilian Edwards and Charlotte Waelde from
the AHRB Research Centre in Intellectual Property and Technology of the
University of Edinburgh provided the audience with an excellent overview
of all the issues related to provider liability for content provided or
shared by their customers. Edwards started with the problematic definition
of 'service provider', which now also includes online auctions, search
engines, RSS feeds, blogs, chat-rooms and price comparison sites. In the
period leading up to the year 2000 governments were hesitant to regulate
liability, fearing it would disturb the nascent market. But after 2000 the
market was mature enough and governments and the entertainment industry
were dissatisfied about the lack of self-regulatory solutions. The EU
E-commerce directive from 2000 then forced a compromise by distinguishing
in possible liability for hosting third party content and no liability for
mere conduit and temporary caching. Charlotte Waelde analysed the
jurisprudence of the different court cases against producers of P2P
software, both in the US and in the Netherlands. She concluded that it is
crucial for the liability question in P2P cases to determine whether the
ISP is somehow authorising the infringement, or whether an ISP is entitled
to presume that facilities will be used in accordance with the law.
Jule Sigall from the US Copyright Office showed himself very content with
the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 (DMCA) and stated that the
actual rise of P2P usage was directly caused by the success of notice and
takedown of websites. The possibility for a customer to file a counter
notice was very effective, according to him, to prevent abuse. An entirely
different view of the DMCA was given by Cory Doctorow, the European
Affairs director of EFF. He gave an overview of the wrongful complaints
collected by the Chilling Effects project and said many small providers
receive up to a 100 complaints a month, many of them not even compliant
with the minimum DMCA standards. Doctorow asked repeatedly 'What problem
does notice and takedown solve?' since hotly contested information will
always reappear in hundreds of other places, the procedure costs a lot and
leads to the inefficient prosecution of John Does, while seriously
threatening free speech and undermining due process rights.
In the afternoon the debate finally began to heat up, when attorney
Christiaan Alberdingk Thijm, Verizon Vice President Sarah Deutsch en
Universal Music Vice President Barney Wragg debated the pros and cons of
peer to peer usage. Wragg said his company embraced P2P usage but only
within systems that allow total control for artists, control the exact
usage of the materials and provide compensation at agreed rates. Universal
Music is signing up 10 new online download services a week, and even
though the revenues still account for less than 1% of the total business,
online sales are rising exponentially. Alberdingk Thijm, who successfully
defended KaZaA at the Dutch Supreme Court, replied by pointing out how
difficult the WIPO copyright treaty of 1996 had made life for people that
wanted to do legal business with online music. While the rise of Internet
made it possible to skip the intermediary from the exploitation, the
copyright treaty had made it much more difficult to get international
clearance from copyright owners. KaZaa for example tried very hard to get
licenses, but was refused everywhere. This deadlock put consumers in an
impossible position. The only solution Alberdingk Thijm saw is compulsory
licensing or general levying.
Sarah Deutsch started from a moderate position, saying most service
providers have evolved into content producers, with a joint interest in
combating piracy. But after those reassuring words, she opened a frontal
attack on the Motion Picture Association, specifically the wish-list
circulated in advance of the conference, demanding a.o. that providers
should immediately hand-over identifying details about their customers to
right holders and terminate contracts with 'repeat' (alleged) infringers.
This proposed 'ISP code of conduct' conflicts with all existing law in the
US and Europe, and doesn't contain a single reciprocal obligation for
right holders. She said Verizon received hundreds of thousands of invalid
notices per year, based on automated search bots operated by commercial
bounty hunters, leading to a barrage of complaints sent from invalid
e-mail addresses. An ISP is not a policing service and privacy-rights of
users should be respected. She also disqualified the demands from the
industry to use 'available filtering or blocking technology' to stop users
from file-sharing as 'a slippery slope that can easily lead to situation
we know from China, where all traffic is filtered on the backbone.'
A spokeswoman from the IFPI (International Federation of the Phonographic
Industry) stood up from the audience and explicitly denied any involvement
with the MPA wish-list (See also EDRI-gram 3.7). Later on, panellist Ted
Shapiro from the MPA said the wish-list was based on the success of
general agreements with service providers in France, Spain and Italy and
that the MPA had exchanged information with the IFPI. The denial of any
IFPI interest is even stranger in the light of the speech by IFPI CEO John
Kennedy to the European network operators on 3 March 2005, published on
the IFPI website, with remarkably similar demands on the ISP industry.
In the closing debate the audience didn't get much chance to speak up; the
7 panellists used almost an hour of the dedicated 1,25 hour interaction
time. In the few possible interventions the complete lack of consensus
became extremely clear, with ISPs being bluntly accused of promoting
thievery, while the entertainment industry was accused of only using a
stick to change the behaviour of customers, in stead of also holding out
carrots. When Ted Shapiro said it was impossible to compete with free,
Lilian Edwards immediately pointed to the success of expensive mineral
water, in spite of the abundant availability of free tapwater.
WIPO program with presentations of most speakers (18.04.2005)
http://www.wipo.int/meetings/2005/wipo_iis/en/program.html
Speech John Kennedy, CEO IFPI at ETNO conference (03.03.2005)
http://www.ifpi.org/site-content/press/inthemedia14.html
============================================================
2. Policing rights for entertainment industry Finland
============================================================
The Finnish Electronic Frontier Foundation is raising alarm about a
proposed last-minute change in the new Finnish copyright law that would
grant the entertainment industry the right to obtain identifying
information about alleged infringers from service providers. The
legislative committee of the Finnish parliament produced a statement on 17
April 2005 in which they agreed to change this wish from the right holders
into law. On top of that, the committee also proposes that providers
should disconnect customers if "the economic damage caused by the actions
of the user becomes notable".
Similar to the voluntary agreement closed by the French providers with the
entertainment industry, a copyright holder in Finland should be able to
get a court order to force an ISP to disconnect a client and divulge his
identity at even the slightest suspicion of copyright violation. According
to EFFI such a clause constitutes a brute violation of basic rights.
EFFI feels that such wide-reaching breaches of an individual's rights
should be considered by the constitutional committee. "The data should
only be divulged during a police investigation in accordance with current
legislation and even then it should never be given to involved parties",
Kai Puolamdki, board member of EFFI, says. He adds: "Anyone could demand
the disclosure of confidential telecommunication logs or even the
disconnection of a client, if he were convincing enough. This law would
make such an action possible. For example, the Church of Scientology has
already demanded that ISPs divulge the identities of the cult's critics
under similar legislation already in effect in the United States."
The proposed change in legislation was partially caused by the failed plea
from the record companies at the Helsinki District Court last year to
disconnect a user of KaZaA. The record industry was unable to show that
the benefit from such a decision would be greater than the damage caused
to the user.
EFFI press release (18.04.2005)
http://www.effi.org/julkaisut/tiedotteet/lehdistotiedote-2005-04-18.en.html
============================================================
3. Council of Europe draft statement on human rights and Internet
============================================================
On 6 and 7 April 2005 a committee of the Council of Europe debated on the
merits of a new recommendation on human rights and Internet. On behalf of
European Digital Rights Meryem Marzouki from the French digital rights
organisation IRIS attended, in fact as the only NGO present. This second
meeting of the Multidisciplinary Ad-hoc Committee of Experts on the
Information Society (CAHSI) ended with a statement that will be presented
to the CoE Committee of ministers, probably to be adopted by the CoE
Summit of heads of states in mid May 2005.
The meeting was foremost an intergovernmental meeting, with EDRI in an
observer role. Besides government representatives (of which the UK, the
Netherlands and Norway were the most active), the secretariat of the group
and the Culture and Media divisions of the CoE were present, as well as a
delegate from the European Commission.
The objective was to finalise the document drafted during the first
session on 3 and 4 February 2005. Thus most of the meeting was spent on
amending the document, section by section, word by word. Marzouki was
given the opportunity to introduce EDRI and outline three main
reservations on the document. First of all, the document tended to
over-stress the harmfulness of ICT. Secondly, there was too much focus on
and promotion of self- and co-regulation and thirdly, EDRI saw no reason
for the references to the Cybercrime Convention and specifically its
controversial Additional Protocol (on xenophobic and racist speech).
The finalised (long) document was published on the CoE website on 13 April
2005. Though EDRI remains very concerned about the focus on
self-regulation, for example with notice and takedown procedures, at least
some distinction was made between harmful and illegal content. In stead of
calling for a general combat against all illegal and harmful content, the
recommendation now calls for the promotion of education and end user
skills to critically assess the quality of information. In the section
with suggestions for the private sector the dangers of private censorship
and the need to distinguish between harmful and illegal content are
explicitly addressed, but these points did not make it to the section
where governments are invited to take action. The document states:
"Private sector parties are "encouraged to address in a decisive manner
(...) private censorship (hidden censorship) by Internet service
providers, for example blocking or removing content, on their own
initiative or upon the request of a third party; the difference between
illegal content and harmful content."
Another point in the draft statement EDRI is pleased to see is the call on
member states to promote interoperable technical standards to allow for
the widest possible access to content. Sadly, the attempt to create a time
limit on measures curtailing human rights was limited to measures
appealing to article 15 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the
article that grants member states exceptional rights in case of war or
public emergencies threatening the life of the nation. Most of the state
surveillance and control measures EDRI is highly concerned about, do not
invoke this exception but are presented as regular extensions of law
enforcement powers.
Another issue EDRI was concerned about was the section about Intellectual
Property. Much weaker than the recommendations of the Unesco NL conference
from February 2005 this draft statement at least calls for protection of
access to information. "Intellectual property rights must be protected in
a digital environment, in accordance with the provisions of international
treaties in the area of intellectual property. At the same time, access to
information in the public domain must be protected, and attempts to
curtail access and usage rights prevented."
Draft political statement on the principles and guidelines for ensuring
respect for human rights and the rule of law in the information society
approved by the CAHSI (13.04.2005)
http://www.coe.int/t/e/integrated_projects/democracy/02_Activities/00_CAHSI/
011cahsi(2005)7enfinal.asp#TopOfPage
(Thanks to Meryem Marzouki, EDRI-member IRIS)
============================================================
4. Bulgarian Big Brother Awards
============================================================
On 13 April 2005 EDRI-member Isoc Bulgaria organised its second Big
Brother Award Ceremony. This years winner in the category of most heinous
political institution was the Council of Ministers, for changing the Data
Protection Act. Data protection was used as an excuse to block access to
personal data of public figures, including politicians.
The individual Bulgarian who most excelled in violating privacy rights was
the Chief Prosecutor, for starting an investigation against the
journalists who created the BBC television report 'To Win The Games',
about alleged bribery for the 2012 Olympic Games city selection. Two
journalists posing as businessmen talked to the Bulgarian Member of the
International Olympic Committee (Ivan Slavkov) and offered him money if
he'd vote for London. The 'prize' also goes to the Appeal prosecution
office of the city of Plovdiv for requesting the social security numbers
of all cybercafe visitors in the city, and demanding detailed records
about the time they accessed the Internet.
Finally the television producers of the program 'SIA Advertising' were put
in the icecold spotlight for using the personal data of 15.000 people for
advertising, without prior warning or consent. These people had applied
for participation in the Big Brother show.
Press release ISOC Bulgaria (in Bulgarian, 14.05.2005)
http://bg.bigbrotherawards.org/ceremony2005.html
============================================================
5. New wave of lawsuits against European P2P users
============================================================
The music industry has launched a new wave of lawsuits against individual
P2P users in Europe. For the first time individual users were targeted in
Finland, Ireland, Iceland and the Netherlands. These countries join
Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy and the UK, where litigation
started last year.
During a press conference in the Netherlands on 12 April 2005, in the
presence of IFPI CEO John Kennedy, the local representative of the
entertainment industry Brein announced it would start 32 court cases
against individual alleged infringers. In order to obtain the identifying
data of the users behind IP-addresses from which music was unlawfully
uploaded, Brein will sue five Dutch internet providers (Planet Internet,
Het Net, @Home, Wanadoo and Tiscali). These 5 providers had agreed earlier
in April to forward complaints from the right holders to their customers.
In total, Brein sent 50 intimidating cease and desist letters, demanding
the recipient would identify him- or herself, agree to pay an average fine
of 2.100 euro and sign a unlimited binding agreement to never ever
"directly or indirectly be involved in any way or have an interest in
unlawfully distributing materials on the internet". If ever again cought
in such a very broadly defined act, the signee agrees to pay a fine of
5.000 euro per day.
Only 7 people were shocked into signing all their rights away. None of the
providers handed over the identifying data voluntarily, claiming only a
judge could define if such a privacy violation was legitimate. EDRI-member
Bits of Freedom has an anonymised copy of one of these letters on its
website (in Dutch only).
According to an international IFPI press release 248 people in Europe have
faced sanctions or paid fines or compensation averaging more than 3,000
euro each. IFPI also seems extremely proud of prosecuting professionals:
"Those who are paying the price of piracy include a German judge, a French
cook and a British local councillor." With the 9.900 cases already dealt
with or pending in the US, in total IFPI is now dealing with 11.552
lawsuits.
E-zine The Register reports that in the UK on 19 April a judge ordered 5
ISPs to hand over the identifying data of 33 filesharers. The case brings
the number of people in the UK to face legal action for illegal file
sharing up to 90.
IFPI press release (12.04.2005)
http://www.ifpi.org/site-content/press/20050412.html
Letter Brein (in Dutch, 31.03.2005)
http://www.bof.nl/docs/breinvordering.pdf
UK court orders ISPs to reveal IDs of 33 filesharers (19.04.2005)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/19/bpi_p2p_lawsuits/
============================================================
6. Data retention news
============================================================
On Wednesday 13 April the Dutch news agency ANP broke the news that the
European Council of Justice and Home Affairs had definitely withdrawn the
data retention proposal from their schedule and would wait for a proper
1st pillar proposal from the European Commission, following devastating
legal advice from both the Commission as well as the internal legal
service. Thanks to the civil rights organisation Statewatch the two
documents (in French only) had been leaked to the public on 10 April 2005.
Both texts suggest that the Council is wrong in assuming it can create
mandatory data retention in the third pillar (criminal law and policing).
The proposal will have such a major impact on the internal market and the
existing e-privacy directive of 2002 that only the Commission, with full
co-decision rights of the European Parliament, is allowed to propose
legislation.
ANP also suggested the Commission' proposal wouldn't be ready before
September 2005, thus seriously delaying the Council scheme of introducing
a framework decision on data retention by the 1st of June 2005. EDRI could
not get any confirmation of this news. The day before ANP brought the
news, during an intensive debate with the legal affairs committee of the
Dutch Lower House about the draft framework decision, Justice Minister
Donner completely denied the importance of the two documents. The Council
would just continue its work, and if the Commission would come up with a
proposal it would be early enough for the Council to take a position on
the legalities. A majority of MPs wanted much more proof of the necessity
and especially effectivity of data retention, before they could agree with
any further steps in the JHA Council. Donner said he would send another
letter to the Lower House explaining his position on the necessary data
and required powers for international collaboration. He also promised that
the results of a new investigation into the need and necessity of data
retention would become publicly available and discussed in Parliament
before the Netherlands would agree to any JHA vote on the issue. Donner
commissioned the report in February 2005 to the criminal law faculty of
the Erasmus University of Rotterdam. According to the minister, the
discussion was removed from the JHA schedule of 14 April "because there
was still too much difference in opinion on the kind of data to be
retained."
On 15 April the German e-zine Heise got a similar quote from a
spokesperson of the Council about the irrelevance of the legal advices.
The Working Party on Cooperation in Criminal Matters (high level
officials) would just continue to work on the details of the framework
this week. To underline their determination, on 15 April the Council
published a new proposal made by Lithuania on the content of communication
data to the working group. The Lithuanians suggest that the police
definitely needs access to massive databases with all imaginable
telecommunication protocols, as well as username, password, PIN and PUK
codes.
Heise also quotes a furious Alexander Alvaro, the EP rapporteur on the
proposal (in a purely consultative role). Alvaro was outraged at a speech
by the Luxembourg Justice minister Luc Frieden, who told the European
Parliament that it was unnecessary to debate the legal approach if all
parties agreed on the same goal. Apparently, the Council still expects a
hardcore data retention proposal from the Commission to appear early in
June 2005.
EU: Data Retention proposal partly illegal, say Council and Commission
lawyers (10.04.2005)
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2005/apr/02eu-data-retention.htm
Heise: Weiter Zoff um EU-Pldne zur Speicherung von TK-Verbindungsdaten
(15.04.2005)
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/58625
Lithuanian proposal on the content of communication data (published
15.04.2005)
http://register.consilium.eu.int/pdf/en/05/st08/st08004.en05.pdf
============================================================
7. French minister demands compulsory biometric ID card
============================================================
The French minister of the Interior Dominique de Villepin has announced
plans to force every Frenchman to buy a new electronic ID card with a chip
containing photograph and fingerprints. On 11 April the French government
outlined its plan to introduce biometrics on passports by 2006 and on ID
cards by 2007.
In an interview with the newspaper France-Soir a day later, De Villepin
said ID cards should be made compulsory again in France, after the
obligation was deleted in 1955.
IDG News reports that the current French obligation to show ID at request
is relatively mild. Citizens may present a driving license or a passport,
even an expired one, or call witnesses. A passport currently costs about
60 euro in France, while identity cards are free. "The price of the
passport will be increased a little. And there'll be a fee for the
identity card: that's the price of security," De Villepin told the
newspaper.
The biometric information and other identifying information will be stored
in a separate encrypted block on the chip, allowing access only to
authorised officials. The chip will also contain some digitised
authentication, to be able to file electronic tax declarations.
Because the information is stored on a contact-less chip, citizens may
well be scanned secretly, a major concern of civil rights organisations.
But according to the French newspaper Le Monde the architecture of the
system consists of 4 separate central databases, and only authorised
officials may link information about fingerprints or facial scans to the
database with general identifying information. Access to the databases
will be tracked, and there will be penalties for wrongful use.
Both IDG and Le Monde provide interesting lists of ID obligations in other
European countries, following the decisions by the European Council of
Justice and Home Affairs in December 2004 and the European Commission in
February 2005 to include biometrics on contact-less chips on passports
(see EDRI-gram 3.7). The decision does explicitly not cover ID cards, but
many countries seem very happy to include the data on chips on these cards
as well.
The resistance in the UK against mandatory ID has been covered extensively
in EDRI-gram and has proven very effective so far. In Germany a paper ID
card is compulsory, to be replaced by an electronic card containing
fingerprints in the future. In Belgium an electronic ID card will be
compulsory by the end of 2006, but there are no plans yet to introduce
biometrics. In Italy, Estonia and Finland electronic ID cards are
voluntary. Italians may choose to provide their fingerprints, while the
Finnish card only contains only the holders name. In the Netherlands,
which recently introduced compulsory identification, both passports and ID
cards will contain a face scan before the deadline of August 2006, stored
on a contact-less chip. Fingerprints will be added later.
French may have to buy compulsory biometric ID cards (12.04.2005)
http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/index.cfm?go=news.view&news=4668
Le Monde: Feu vert pour la carte d'identiti ilectronique (12.04.2005)
http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3244,36-638179@51-627772,0.html
EDRI-gram 3.7: No delay for EU biometric passports (06.04.2005)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number3.7/biometrics
French government organised national debate about electronic ID cards
(February-June 2005)
http://www.foruminternet.org/carte_identite/
============================================================
8. European Privacy developments at CFP05
============================================================
European privacy developments and counter strategies from civil society
was one of the topics at the annual US privacy conference, Computers,
Freedoms and Privacy (CFP), last week in Seattle.
During the specific debate devoted to developments in Europe it became
clear that while EU countries used to be known for their strong privacy
legislation and oversight mechanisms, the last couple of years represent a
serious set-back in human rights protection. Examples discussed included
mandatory data retention, ID cards such as the recent French proposal,
transfer of passenger data and biometric identifiers on passports. The
mainly American audience was quite astonished about the amount of privacy
invasive measures, which have been introduced in Europe as part of the
'war on terror'.
The panel also tried to analyse the differences in the civil society
landscape in US and Europe, and panelist Ivan Szekely gave some visionary
thoughts on how to strengthen and broaden the advocacy base in Europe,
i.e. by mainstreaming privacy advocacy into community activities of art
and sports. The panel also debated the trend of increased policy
laundering between national states and EU, and between US and Europe, with
the lack of democracy and transparency this implies.
In the panel was Meryem Marzouki from EDRI-member IRIS in France, Gus
Hosein from Privacy International and Ivan Szekely from Open Archives
Hungary.
Program CFP05
http://www.cfp2005.org/
(Contribution by Rikke Frank Jxrgensen from EDRI-member digital rights in
Denmark, moderator of the panel)
============================================================
9. EDRI statement at WIPO Development Agenda meeting (IIM)
============================================================
After signing an international petition urging the WIPO to open its doors
to non-governmental organisations for the important debates on developing
an alternative development agenda, European Digital Rights was awarded
last-minute ad hoc accreditation on 11 April 2005. The German DRM-expert
Volker Grassmuck was able to make a statement on behalf of EDRI during a
special Inter-sessional Inter-governmental Meeting (IIM) from 11-15 April
2005.
Grassmuck concentrated on the conflict between the circumvention
protection of DRM and copyright exceptions. Article 11 of the WIPO
Copyright Treaty obligates Members to "provide adequate legal protection
and effective legal remedies against the circumvention of effective
technological measures." Many WIPO Members, including most European
countries have therefore introduced anti-circumvention provisions into
their national laws. While in Europe recently some interesting balances
have been struck by governments, for example the unique agreement with
German Publishers Association, the German Phonographic Industry and the
German Library to enable the National Library to circumvent DRMs for
preservation purposes, the situation for the developing nations is
extremely bleak. Grassmuck said: "It therefore appears that while
developing nations are getting the same - some would argue excessive -
level of technologically implemented IP protection as developed nations,
they are lacking the corresponding mechanisms that counterbalance IP
protection with access to knowledge."
But North-South discrepancies are not the only concern of European Digital
Rights: "Part of the next step towards re-establishing balance is defining
a set of minimum unwaivable exceptions as has been suggested by the
distinguished delegate from Chile at the last SCCR meeting. In particular,
as the only mandatory exception under Berne, there must be a mechanism to
protect the quotation exception against DRM, as pointed out by Sam
Ricketson in a WIPO study on limitations and exceptions."
EDRI considers access for NGOs to these meetings crucial, since it offers
one of the very few chances to try to tilt the current imbalance between
right holders and consumers/civil society. On 4 October 2004 the WIPO
member states adopted a proposal from Argentine and Brazil (supported by
numerous developing nations) to work on a Development Agenda. At the
adoption, member countries explicitly called upon WIPO to 'give greater
weight to the interests of consumers and public interest at large.' But at
the IIM meeting only NGO's with permanent member status before fall 2004
were allowed.
In the final statement of the IIM it was decided that EDRI and the other
non-permanent NGOs will also get ad hoc accreditation at the two follow-up
meetings on 20-22 June and in July.
Statement Volker Grassmuck on behalf of EDRI (12.04.2005)
http://lists.essential.org/pipermail/a2k/2005-April/000250.html
Group Request for Reconsideration of NGO Accreditation Policy for WIPO
Development Agenda Meetings 11 -15 April 2005 (29.03.2005)
http://www.ipjustice.org/WIPO/group_request032905.shtml
Overview of other NGO and country statements at IIM
http://www.cptech.org/ip/wipo/iim1.html
============================================================
10. Agenda
============================================================
21 May 2005, London, UK
Conference: Suspect Communities, the real 'war on terror' in Europe
http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/research-units/hrsj/events/events_home.cfm
27-28 May 2005, Florence, Italy, E-Privacy Conference 2005
This edition of the foremost Italian conference on privacy in the digital
age will focus on automatic data collection and retention. During the
conference the first Italian Big Brother Award Ceremony will be held in
the stunningly beautiful Palazzo Vecchio.
http://e-privacy.firenze.linux.it/
6-11 June 2005, Benevento (Naples), Italy
Digital Communities 2005
http://www.ssc.msu.edu/~espace/DC2005.html
13 June 2005, Brussels, Belgium
European Commission Information day on the Safer Internet Plus Program.
Further information and registration forms will be available at the end of
April 2005
http://europa.eu.int/saferinternet
17-18 June 2005, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
3d Amsterdam Internet Conference organised by OSCE Representative on
Freedom of the Media
30 June - 1 July 2005, Geneva, Switzerland
International Symposium on Intellectual Property (IP) Education and
Research, organised by WIPO
http://www.wipo.int/academy/en/meetings/iped_sym_05/
11-15 July 2005, Genova, Italy, OSS 2005
http://oss2005.case.unibz.it/index.html
28-31 July 2005, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
What The Hack, major open air hacker / internet lifestyle event. Reduced
early bird entrance fee available until 10 May 2005.
http://www.whatthehack.org/
8-9 September 2005, Brussels, Belgium
EuroSOCAP Workshop on confidentiality and privacy in healthcare
3 year programme to develop new ethical standards for privacy and patient
access to (electronical) files, started on 31 January 2003.
http://www.eurosocap.org
============================================================
11. About
============================================================
EDRI-gram is a biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe.
Currently EDRI has 17 members from 11 European countries. European Digital
Rights takes an active interest in developments in the EU accession
countries and wants to share knowledge and awareness through the
EDRI-grams. All contributions, suggestions for content or agenda-tips are
most welcome.
Except where otherwise noted, this newsletter is licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 License. See the full text at
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
Newsletter editor: Sjoera Nas <[log in to unmask]>
Information about EDRI and its members:
http://www.edri.org/
- EDRI-gram subscription information
subscribe by e-mail
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: subscribe
You will receive an automated e-mail asking to confirm your request.
unsubscribe by e-mail
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: unsubscribe
- EDRI-gram in Russian, Ukrainian and Italian
EDRI-gram is also available in Russian, Ukrainian and Italian, a few days
after the English edition. The contents are the same.
Translations are provided by Sergei Smirnov, Human Rights Network, Russia;
Privacy Ukraine and autistici.org, Italy
The EDRI-gram in Russian can be read on-line via
http://www.hro.org/editions/edri/
The EDRI-gram in Ukrainian can be read on-line via
http://www.internetrights.org.ua/index.php?page=edri-gram
The EDRI-gram in Italian can be read on-line via
http://www.autistici.org/edrigram/
- Newsletter archive
Back issues are available at:
http://www.edri.org/edrigram
- Help
Please ask <[log in to unmask]> if you have any problems with subscribing or
unsubscribing.
============================================================
Publication of this newsletter is made possible by a grant from
the Open Society Institute (OSI).
============================================================
End of EDRi-news Digest, Vol 25, Issue 2
****************************************
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous
content by the NorMAN MailScanner Service and is believed
to be clean.
The NorMAN MailScanner Service is operated by Information
Systems and Services, University of Newcastle upon Tyne.
====
This e-mail is intended solely for the addressee. It may contain private and
confidential information. If you are not the intended addressee, please take
no action based on it nor show a copy to anyone. Please reply to this e-mail
to highlight the error. You should also be aware that all electronic mail
from, to, or within Northumbria University may be the subject of a request
under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and related legislation, and
therefore may be required to be disclosed to third parties.
This e-mail and attachments have been scanned for viruses prior to leaving
Northumbria University. Northumbria University will not be liable for any
losses as a result of any viruses being passed on.
************************************************************************************
Distributed through Cyber-Society-Live [CSL]: CSL is a moderated discussion
list made up of people who are interested in the interdisciplinary academic
study of Cyber Society in all its manifestations.To join the list please visit:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/cyber-society-live.html
*************************************************************************************
|
