From: [log in to unmask]
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
[log in to unmask]
Sent: 25 October 2006 22:16
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: EDRi-news Digest, Vol 43, 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 4.20, 25 October 2006
(EDRI-gram newsletter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 00:05:38 +0300
From: "EDRI-gram newsletter" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: EDRI-gram newsletter - Number 4.20, 25 October 2006
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID: <004c01c6f879$5414fa30$aad4cc55@luiza>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252";
reply-type=original
============================================================
EDRI-gram
biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe
Number 4.20, 25 October 2006
============================================================
Contents
============================================================
1. EU study on RFID tags shows major privacy concerns 2. Belgium newspaper
group continues its actions against search engines 3. EU-US PNR agreement
formally adopted by the EU Council 4. Big Brother Awards Germany 5. WSIS
follow up at UNESCO 6. Illegal video surveillance in Austria 7. ENDitorial -
Regulating the Patent Industry 8. Recommended Action 9. Agenda 10. About
============================================================
1. EU study on RFID tags shows major privacy concerns
============================================================
After a 6-month consultation period, an EU study initiated after Cebit trade
show in March 2006 shows concerns related to the use of RFID (radio
frequency ID) tags and reveals the necessity to assure the public that these
tags will not lead to a large-scale surveillance system.
The RFID tags are more and more used by businesses to monitor goods and
governments are presently considering the introduction of these tags in ID
documents. The RFID market will probably grow spectacularly in the next
years. The EU prediction is that more than 270 billion radio-frequency ID
tags could be sold by 2016 in the world.
During the EU conference 'Heading for the Future' that took place at the end
of the study consultation period, Ms Viviane Reding, EU Information Society
Commissioner, made some comments on the study :
"The large majority are willing to be convinced that RFID can bring benefits
but they want to be reassured that it will not compromise their privacy...
This is the deal that we have to strike if we want RFID to be accepted and
widely taken up."
According to the Commissioner the study showed that people needed to have
control on the information and decide on when and how the information is
used or updated.
The study has shown the general fear that RFID tags might affect privacy.
More than 55% of the individuals and organisations having participated in
the study consider that laws must be changed in order to protect the privacy
of the data provided by means of these tags. They also asked for technical
safeguards for tags to be turned off by default.
Reding considered that some of the measures that could be taken to meet the
concerns would include the use of technologies such as clear labelling of
tags and more transparency on the risks and opportunities of RFID system.
"Technologists tell me that many of the privacy concerns are unfounded.
Fine. If this is the case then I am sure we can win over public opinion by
explaining where there are risks and where there are not," said Reding. She
also added that more than half of the respondents wanted government legal
regulation over RFID industry rather than self-regulation.
During the conference technical issues were discussed such as the need to
have common European technical standard for RFID systems and the lack of a
common radio frequency allocation to all EU Member States. Besides technical
matters, the debate covered issues such as the risks related to collecting
and using personally-identifiable information (e.g., misuse of data, loss of
freedom), the biological effects of radio frequency waves or the impact of
the RFID tags on reusing and recycling packaging materials.
The EU intends to use the responses to the study (around 2 200) to decide
how to best use RFID technology in Europe and how to solve the security and
privacy issues related to it. The Commission Communication on RFID, with the
final conclusions from the consultation process, will be announced towards
the end of 2006 and will include legislative changes or clarifications to
the present legal framework, These could be drafted in 2007 as affirmed by
Commissioner Reding.
Radio tags spark privacy worries (16.10.06)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6055416.stm
Radio Frequency Identification Devices: Frequently Asked Questions on the
Commission's Public Consultation (16.10.2006)
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/06/378
Q&A: Radio-frequency ID tags (16.10.2006)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6055296.stm
Privacy concerns dog RFID use (19.10.2006)
http://www.itweek.co.uk/itweek/news/2166816/privacy-concerns-dog-rfid
EU mulls RFID privacy laws (17.10.2006)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/10/17/eu_rfid_consultation/
EDRI-gram: EU public consultation on RFID (15.03.2006)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.5/rfid
============================================================
2. Belgium newspaper group continues its actions against search engines
============================================================
After the decision against Google obtained on 5 September 2006, the Belgium
newspaper group Copiepresse has planned new actions against MSN and Yahoo,
alleging that they are infringing its copyright by showing excerpts of
articles and images from newspapers on their Belgian portals without paying.
Copiepresse sent a cease & desist letter to the msn.be website, asking them
not to post excerpts from the articles under their copyright. Major Belgium
newspapers, such as Le Libre and Le Soir, are part of Copiepresse and they
are offering articles in French and German. Copiepresse considers that the
search engines are unfairly taking advantage of the content created by its
members and are gaining financially from selling advertisement attracted by
others people's content.
The Belgium group has also announced that they would start similar actions
against Yahoo services very soon.
The Microsoft Division in Belgium has started talks with Copiepresse in
order to reach a compromise. It is not clear yet whether the Belgians are
looking for an advertisement revenue-share agreement or a fixed amount to be
paid for allegedly using their content, but their main focus now is to
remove all their content from the search engines. Microsoft just started the
negotiations with Copiepresse on this issue, but no agreement has been
reached yet.
Meanwhile, in order to avoid any kind of court action against them,
Microsoft announced on 20 October 2006 that it had "provisionally" agreed to
comply with the Copiepresse request. The company will remove all the cached
articles and links from the msn.be website, its Live search engine and their
news aggregator.
This situation means that right now all the Belgium newspaper stories are
excluded from the 2 main search engines, since Google announced that it has
deleted that info from its Google News site worldwide and that the search
engine will not provide links to the cached pages.
The Copiepresse lawyers are still asking for the 34 millions fines to be
paid by Google, since it has not complied with the court decision right
away.
Copiepresse continues copyright crusade(20.10.2006)
http://www.theregister.com/2006/10/20/copiepresse_targets_yahoo/
MSN is latest target of Belgian copyright complaint (13.10.2006)
http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/10/13/HNpursuemsn_1.html
Google, Microsoft Surrender To Belgians (20.10.2006)
http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/topnews/wpn-60-20061020GoogleMicrosoftSurr
enderToBelgians.html
EDRI-gram: Belgium says no to Google News (27.09.2006)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.18/google_be
============================================================
3. EU-US PNR agreement formally adopted by the EU Council
============================================================
On 16 October, the EU Council formally adopted a decision to sign an interim
agreement with the United States on continuing the transfer of passenger
name record (PNR) data by air carriers to the US Administration.
The interim agreement will replace the Agreement signed in May 2004,
annulled in May 2006 by a judgment of the Court of Justice of the European
Communities.
Following the process of negotiations, the USA succeeded in obtaining
meaningful changes in the new agreement that meet the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) requirements and that are also based on changes that may
occur in the US legislation.
This implies that any change in the US laws will be reflected in the PNR
data transfer process, meaning that the US will be able to decide on how the
respective data will be processed and by whom.
Therefore, based on these conditions set out in a letter from DHS, a law
such as the US Presidential Executive Order issued on 25 October,
establishing that DHS and other agencies have to promptly provide "terrorism
information" "to the head of each other agency that has counterterrorist
functions" will give the US the right to process PNR data as they see fit.
The new agreement was heavily criticized by the MEPs during the plenary
session on 11 October 2006. Mr. in 't Veld (ALDE, NL) deplored the fact
that the President-in-Office and the Commissioner ignored the letter signed
by the Department of Homeland Security, which had given an interpretation of
the agreement going in a different direction from what had been said. She
asked for an explanation for the part of the letter, in accordance with
which, in addition to the purpose of fighting terrorism and related crimes,
data would also be collected to fight infectious disease and other risks,
which meant a considerable widening of the scope. She also considered that
the scope of the data sharing had been widened to include agencies which had
not all been specified.
Mrs. Kaufmann (GUE/NGL, DE) also announced that the agreement was not
acceptable to her political group. She considered it to be scandalous that
data could be transmitted to all US agencies combating terrorism, including
the CIA.
Mr Lambrinidis (PSE, EL) pointed out that the new agreement seemed more
flexible on US obligations than even the agreement that a private company,
SWIFT, had been able to negotiate with the US authorities for the
unacceptable transfer of banking data.
Commissioner Frattini tried to answer all the critics by considering it as a
situation of absolute urgency. If its ratification by all the national
parliaments had been necessary for its entry into force, it would not have
been possible to avoid chaos.
The agreement is to be renegotiated next year and the US administration
intends to extend the period for keeping PNR data to 3 years and a half and
to add more items to the 34 presently agreed on.
"What is particularly outrageous is that if the law changes in the USA the
way the agreement is implemented changes too without any renegotiation -
which is very worrying given the nature of new laws which remove the rights
of suspects including habeaus corpus" says Statewatch editor Tony Bunyan.
Report on debate in the European Parliament (16.10.2006)
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2006/oct/eu-usa-pnr-debate.pdf
EU-USA PNR agreement renegotiated to meet US demands (06.10.2006)
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2006/oct/05eu-us-pnr-oct-06.htm
EU-USA PNR agreement (11.10.2006)
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2006/oct/eu-usa-pnr-coun-new-decision.pdf
Council adopts decision of Agreement with the United States on the continued
use of PNR data (16.10.06)
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ueDocs/cms_Data/docs/pressData/en/er/91308.pd
f
EDRI-gram : New EU-US interim deal on Passenger Name Record (11.10.2006)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.19/pnr
Observatory on the exchange of data on passengers (PNR) with USA
http://www.statewatch.org/pnrobservatory.htm
============================================================
4. Big Brother Awards Germany
============================================================
The 2006 German Big Brother awards ceremony took place last week in
Bielefeld and it was preceded by the demonstration "Freedom instead of Fear"
(Freiheit statt Angst) against Security and Surveillance Delusion, where
about 300 people protested against the growth of pervasive surveillance in
Germany.
For the first time at the German Big Brother Awards, the audience was asked
to decide which of the winners should receive the audience award. After the
count of the votes, with thirty-two percent of the polls, the prize went to
the winner in the Consumer Protection category, the Association of German
Insurers, for its "warnings and indications" database, which insurance
companies use to exchange substantial amounts of data about millions of
citizens - with undisclosed criteria, without sufficient legal foundation,
and unknown to the people affected.
In the Politic section the jury decided to award two prizes. The first prize
went to the members of the Fourth Parliament of the State of
Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania for legislation that allows eavesdropping and
sound recording in public spaces, even when no crime has happened yet. The
Interior Ministers Conference received the second award for its resolution
of 4 September 2006 to establish a joint anti-terror database, which is to
be supplied to and used by all German police forces and all 19 intelligence
services at the national and federal state level.
The obvious winner in the Economy section was SWIFT (Society for Worldwide
Interbank Financial Telecommunication) for sharing bank transfer data with
US authorities. The price was given to the German members of the SWIFT
supervisory board, Roland Bvff (Senior Vice President, Bayerische Hypo- und
Vereinsbank) and Wolfgang Gaertner (CIO, Deutsche Bank AG).
Philips company received the "Technology" Big Brother Award 2006 for the
specification that CD burners write their unique serial number on the CD and
thus facilitate tracking of the storage medium to the burner. With this
serial number the entertainment industry hopes to trace "bootlegged" copies
of music and other copyrighted CDs, i.e. unlicensed duplications of storage
media, in order to be able to prosecute the bootleggers. In fact, the
burnt-in code leaves a data trace that might give all CD creators a
difficult time of explaining themselves. The user of a burner is not warned
of this and burner producers are not forthcoming in declaring which devices
write such a code on the media.
The Federal Conference of Ministers for Education was the performer in the
Authorities & Administration section for plans to introduce life-long
student IDs, and a central education database, without binding the
individual educational data to a defined purpose, nor guarding them against
misuse and unauthorized access.
Big Brother Awards Germany 2006
http://www.bigbrotherawards.de/2006/
Demonstration "Freedom instead of Fear" (20.10.2006)
http://wiki.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/?title=Demoplanung#Berichte_und_Fotos
============================================================
5. WSIS follow up at UNESCO
============================================================
On 16-19 October 2006 UNESCO conducted the first multi-stakeholder
consultations on the implementation of the World Summit on the Information
Society (WSIS) Action Lines C3 (access to information), C7 (e-learning), C9
(media) and C10 (ethics) at UNESCO Headquarters in Paris, France.
UNESCO is one of the lead facilitating agencies for the implementation of
the WSIS Action Lines. In accordance with the Tunis Agenda for the
Information Society and the consultation of possible Action Line
Moderators/Facilitators of 24 February 2006 in Geneva, UNESCO has for the
last months served as an interim focal point for several Action Lines. At
the Paris consultations UNESCO was approved as the formal facilitator for
action line C3, C7, C9 and C10. At the same time, it was stressed that
additional facilitators might step in at a later stage. The following report
does not include the consultations regarding media, since no one from EDRI
were able to participate on the 19th.
The meetings had approximately 60-70 participants, with the majority from
civil society and the private sector, and relatively little representation
from governments. The meetings were all structured around two main agenda
items. Firstly to discuss the clustering of substantive issues contained in
the Action Line, and secondly to discuss the terms of reference (TOR) of the
multi-stakeholder team (MST). The TOR was similar across the action lines,
and the proposal from UNESCO was widely approved with some minor
modifications to ensure that the process would remain open to additional
facilitators, e.g. from civil society. It was stressed that the Association
of Progressive Communications (APC) is proposed as co-facilitator of Action
line C2 (information and communication infrastructure) together with the
International Telecommunication Union (ITU), and that this is seen as a good
model. Also, it should be noted that the MST is an open ended platform which
is open for everyone.
Regarding the action line on Access to Information and Knowledge (C3),
UNESCO proposed to structure the action line around the issues of: Enabling
environment for access to public information, Community access, Libraries
and archives, Software models, Research and Development, Open Access, and
E-Government. Several civil society interventions argued that the
development of the public domain should be emphasized more clearly, and that
access to public information had to represent one specific area within a
broader "public domain" cluster. The industry representatives stressed that
one important aim of the action line was to create a space for outreach,
sharing and networking amongst the many initiatives at local level.
The Action Line on The Ethical Dimensions of the Information Society (C10)
was proposed by UNESCO to be structured around the following issues: Promote
respect for fundamental values and principles, Increase awareness of
information ethics, and Contribute to formulation of strategies and policies
promoting a) the protection of privacy, personal data etc. and b) preventive
measures against illegal use of ICTs. Many interventions argued that this
action line was rather different from the others (more vague and
cross-cutting), and as a result it was decided to skip the proposed
clustering. Instead there will initially be a mapping of existing
initiatives related to ethics in the information society, e.g. within the
realm of Council of Europe, and on this background further discussion on how
to promote the action line, including a possible "clearinghouse" for
initiatives related to C10.
For the action line on E-learning (C7) UNESCO proposed the following issue
clustering: Enhancing capacities for e-learning in education, Communication
and learning infrastructure, E-learning policies and strategies, Digital
Educational Content, Quality assurance, assessment, evaluation and
accreditation, Private-Public Partnerships, Research and Development in
e-learning. In addition, it was stressed that C7 had a close link to Action
line C4 on capacity building, as this had a special merit in relation to
e-learning and education. A number of interventions argued that the cluster
of Private-Public partnership should be titled multistakeholder
partnerships, as both funds and human resources were vital in relation to
e-learning and not only related to state-donor-private company partnerships.
Moreover the issue of financing was suggested as an overarching issue that
would possibly include discussion of both specific ICT education funding and
mainstreaming of ICT in national development strategies (in this case the
educational strategies), and the possible inclusion in the World Bank
Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers.
Meeting documents are available at:
http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=1543&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTIO
N=201.html
Survey on the use of an online collaboration platform for the WSIS Action
Line facilitation
http://www.unesco.org/webworld/survey/advanced/fillsurvey.php?sid=12
(Contribution by Rikke Frank Jxrgensen, EDRI-member Digital Rights -
Denmark)
============================================================
6. Illegal video surveillance in Austria
============================================================
During Infolaw legal forum on 17 October, Margot Artner, a Viennese lawyer,
expressed concerns regarding the existence of about 100 000 illegal
monitoring systems with recording functions in Austria. The estimation was
based on information obtained from vendors of monitoring software and
installing technicians.
Artner has waited for seven months in order to obtain from the data
protection commission the first permit for the operation of the video
monitoring system. The conditions required by the commission include the
deletion of records after 48h and the limitation of the access to the
recordings to only qualified staff that would have to work in pairs.
The only previous permit had been given to Wiener Linien (Vienna's public
transport system) just for a two-year test period and extended afterwards to
another two years. The commission had given the permit in order to check
whether such a system may help in preventing vandalism acts. The permit
allows the company to record passengers and personnel and keep the
recordings for 48 hours.
The company has been criticised as the investment for the system was about
3.7 million euros while the return might be only in the range of about
200000 euros/year by reducing vandalism.
Although such systems presently operate legally in police stations, banks,
traffic monitoring, military facilities and in some individual companies
that have alarm-based activated cameras, most of the systems with recording
functions are operating illegally. A permit for all these systems is
necessary from the data protection commission and they have to be input into
the data processing registers irrespective of the number of cameras included
in the system.
The operation without permit is penalised with 9 445 euros besides other
additional costs related to re-apply for the permit and obtain the cease and
desist orders. A permit is necessary even if cameras are installed only to
identify robbers and the labour laws provisions must be observed in the
working areas.
Legal experts say that Austria may have 100,000 illegal video monitors
(20.10.2006)
http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/79786
============================================================
7. ENDitorial - Regulating the Patent Industry
============================================================
We know that for over two decades, the global patent industry has been
trying - discretely, and sometimes less discretely - to get software patents
legalised. When Brian Kahin wrote about the US software patent issue in
1990, the US had already allowed software patents for almost a decade.
Today, in Europe, we still have the uncertain status where the EPO grants
software patents and national high courts mostly reject them.
The Commission has been promoting a new scheme, called EPLA, which is driven
by the hunger of the global patent industry and its frustration with
Europe's failure to follow the American lead.
A key to understanding EPLA is to see that the global patent industry is a
lucrative set of businesses that makes money from researching, writing,
granting, licensing, and litigating patents. The patent industry in Europe
consists of:
* The national patent offices.
* The European Patent Office. (EPO)
* Independent patent experts and attorneys.
* Patent lawyers who manage intellectual property issues for major
corporations.
* Patent-holding specialist firms (also called 'patent trolls').
It's a global industry because most of the investment in purchasing and
litigating patents is from overseas. EPO patents are not rewarding European
investors as much as they are giving foreign interests control over European
industries.
The patent industry already has a near-monopoly over the patent system. The
same people govern the EPO, help define the EU Council's and Commission's
patent policies, work as experts in business and private practice, sit as
MEPs, and lobby for laws that favour the patent industry.
The only real regulation on the patent industry today is the system of
national high courts that strike down EPO patents when they are considered
invalid. EPLA proposes to remove that layer of regulation and create a
self-regulating monopoly. The justification for EPLA is that a single court
is cheaper and more predictable than the current diversity of national
courts. (This justification is false - the EPO has itself said EPLA would
be more costly for most SMEs.)
In my blog entry "The EPLA Shuffle", I describe the way the Commission has
acted as the mouthpiece and patron of the patent industry. I describe the
pro-EPLA propaganda, so you can recognise and counter it when you see it. I
explain how the Commission is conducting a huge astroturf campaign to push
for EPLA. And I say that the Foundation for a Free Information
Infrastructure (FFII) is taking steps on designing a new patent system.
Let me describe the FFII vision. We believe that change in the patent
system is needed. The patent industry is already a dangerous monopoly, and
it cannot remain loosely regulated. We want to see a proper EU patent
system that sits under our courts and is governed by our European
Parliament.
The initiative is called the "European Patent Conference". We are launching
it with two conferences. One will be on 25 November, in Munich. The second
will be in mid-January in Brussels. We plan to include not just the
software industry but telecoms, pharma, and other sectors. During 2007
we'll continue to organise events, build up a base of ideas and papers, and
aim to bring a solid proposal to the table.
The European Patent Conference is not just an event, it's a work in progress
that will, if we succeed, turn the software patent debate on its head. The
core question is not whether software should be patentable. As Kahin said:
"never before has an industry in which copyright was widely established
suddenly been subjected to patenting". The core question is whether an
unregulated global patent industry can be allowed to take over the European
patent system.
Do we control our future patent system, or does it control us? That's the
question, and we - you and me - are the answer. If you want to help, you
can become a member of the FFII, you can donate, or you can work with us on
the European Patent Conference.
Brian Kahin - The Software Patent Crisis (1990) http://deoxy.org/swpc.htm
The EPLA Shuffle (22.10.2006)
http://heironymouscoward.blogspot.com/2006/10/epla-shuffle.html
EDRI-gram: The European Parliament ready to vote on EPLA (11.10.2006)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.19/epla
(Contribution by Pieter Hintjens - President FFII e.V.)
============================================================
8. Recommended Action
============================================================
Review of the Regulatory Framework for electronic communication networks and
services (open until 27.10.2006)
http://europa.eu.int/information_society/activities/consultations/index_en.h
tm#open_consultations
EU Evaluation Impact Assessment System Questionnaire (open until 30.11.2006)
http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/ipm/forms/dispatch?form=eias&lang=en
DG Competition Open Consultations
http://ec.europa.eu/comm/competition/general_info/consultation.html
Bloggers privacy expectations and attitudes Online survey done by Karen
McCullagh - PhD researcher at CCSR, University of Manchester. The survey
will be open until the end of November.
http://www.ccsr.ac.uk/privacysurvey/
============================================================
9. Agenda
============================================================
27-28 October 2006, Sofia, Bulgaria
Cyber Terrorism as a new security threat
http://www.crime-research.org/cyberterrorism07
29 October 2006, Athens, Greece
First annual conference - Global Internet Governance Academic Network
(GigaNet)
http://www.internetgovernance.org/pdf/GigaNet.Athens.CFP.8.Sept.2006__2_.pdf
30 October - 2 November 2006, Athens, Greece Internet Governance Forum
http://www.intgovforum.org/
30 October 2006, Prague, Czech Republic
Czech Big Brother Awards
http://www.bigbrotherawards.cz
31 October 2006 - deadline for nominations Stupid Security Awards - Privacy
International The awards aim to highlight the absurdities of the security
industry. The competition is open to anyone from any country.
http://www.privacyinternational.org/stupidsecurity
31 October - 1 November 2006, Erevan, Armenia Open Source Policy Conference
Role of open source software in development of information society.
http://gipi.am/?i=254
1 November 2006, London, United Kingdom
The database state?
This workshop will feature expert speakers on two major UK databases: the
Children's Information Sharing Index and the NHS Care Records Service.
http://dooooooom.blogspot.com/2006/10/database-state.html
2-3 November 2006, London, United Kingdom 28th International Data Protection
and Privacy Commissioners'
Conference
http://www.privacyconference2006.co.uk/
13 November 2006, London, United Kingdom Blocking Denial of Service Attacks
A conference to discuss technical, legal, regulatory and contractual
measures that would have a real effect in reducing Denial of Service attacks
on-line.
http://www.communicationsresearch.net/events/article/default.aspx?objid=1464
15-16 November 2006, Skopje, Macedonia
International Conference "e-Society.Mk"
http://www.e-society.org.mk/
16 November 2006, Basel, Switzerland
Big Brother Awards Switzerland
http://www.bigbrotherawards.ch/2006/
30 November - 1 December 2006, Berlin, Germany The New Surveillance - A
critical analysis of research and methods in Surveillance Studies. A two day
international Conference hosted at the Centre for Technology and Society of
the Technical University Berlin.
http://www.ztg.tu-berlin.de/surveillance
2 December 2006, London, United Kingdom
Reclaiming Our Rights
www.londonmet.ac.uk/reclaimingourrights
14 December 2006, Madrid, Spain
Conference on the Admissibility of Electronic Evidence in Court in Europe.
The final event of the project Admissibility of the Electronic Evidence in
Court in Europe (A.E.E.C.) funded by the European Commission and led by the
Spanish company Cybex.
http://www.cybex.es/AGIS2005/
===========================================================
10. About
===========================================================
EDRI-gram is a biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe.
Currently EDRI has 21 members from 14 European countries and 5 observers
from 5 more countries (Italy, Ireland, Poland, Portugal and Slovenia).
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, corrections or
agenda-tips are most welcome. Errors are corrected as soon as possible and
visibly on the EDRI website.
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: Bogdan Manolea <[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 Macedonian
EDRI-gram is also available partly in Macedonian, with delay. Translations
are provided by Metamorphosis
http://www.metamorphosis.org.mk/edrigram-mk.php
- EDRI-gram in German
EDRI-gram is also available in German, with delay. Translations are provided
Andreas Krisch from the EDRI-member VIBE!AT - Austrian Association for
Internet Users http://www.unwatched.org/
- 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.
End of EDRi-news Digest, Vol 43, 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, Newcastle University.
====
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
*************************************************************************************
|
