===================================================================== EDRi-gram biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe Number 12.18, 24 September 2014 Read online: http://edri.org/edri-gram/12-18/ ======================================================================= Contents ======================================================================= 1. Risk-based approach to data protection: risky for fundamental rights 2. Romania: Mandatory prepaid SIM registration ruled unconstitutional 3. France adopts anti-terror law eroding civil liberties 4. The Turkish government tightens its grip over the Internet 5. Panoptykon called on MEPs to stop mass surveillance 6. FNF 2014: Tackling surveillance, censorship, net discrimination 7. ENDitorial: Italian IP Enforcement position: the essence of insanity? 8. Recommended Action 9. Recommended Reading 10. Agenda 11. About ======================================================================= 1. Risk-based approach to data protection: risky for fundamental rights ======================================================================= On 18 September an EU Council document related to the draft EU data protection regulation was published. The document summarises the positions of Member States that have given their views on a so-called “risk-based approach to data protection”, within the context of the (so far) 30-month negotiations on a review of European data protection legislation. Reading the document, the first question that comes to mind is: Is this going to make the data protection standards any better? The answer is, broadly speaking... no. Risk assessment is "the determination of quantitative or qualitative value of risk related to a concrete situation and a recognised threat". The main problem with a risk assessment in this context is the fact that personal privacy is a fundamental right. Measuring it with risk assessment methodology leads to an awkward misconception about what this fundamental right actually represents; The data controller cannot know about the context and dangers for individual people. Also the view that children's personal data is somewhat more sensitive than their parents' is incoherent. The fundamental rights of one part of the society cannot be more fundamental than the fundamental rights of another part of the society. There is strictly no difference between the two, neither from the human rights perspective nor from a practical perspective. Such assessments make a lot of sense in technical environments where operators deals with their own operational risks, but it is entirely wrong to assume that there is an easy way for assessing third party risk processing operations, especially if its about a narrow, fundamental human right. This is what the risk-based approach is all about - identifying "specific risks", assessing and categorising the rights of third parties and making decisions based on this. When it comes to assessment, the exposure of large data sets generates a higher degree of public attention. However, this does not necessarily mean they lead to a more significant threat. The reality of IT shows that systems with a small set of very specific data are not less valuable nor less important for privacy concerns. Apart from this misconception, it's shocking to see the massive amount of comments and subtle, detrimental changes that are being proposed by the German delegation, which made as many comments as all of the other Member States put together. These comments and changes will make future negotiations in the trialogue (negotiations between Commission, Parliament and Council) a lot more complicated. Indeed, rather than being a constructive intervention, the German comments look like an effort to stall the progress of what was gained over the last months by bringing up new ideas which will most probably have the effect of delaying and weakening the reform. Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (General Data Protection Regulation) - Risk based approach (02.09.2014) http://register.consilium.europa.eu/doc/srv?l=EN&f=ST%2012267%202014%20REV%202 Wikipedia: Risk assessment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_assessment (Contribution by fukami, EDRi member Chaos Computer Club, Germany) ======================================================================= 2. Romania: Mandatory prepaid SIM registration ruled unconstitutional ======================================================================= The Romanian Constitutional Court (CCR) ruled on 16 September 2014 that a law that required the mandatory registration of all prepaid SIM cards and free WiFi users, is unconstitutional, as a whole. The Court reviewed the law as a result of the Romanian Ombudsman’s objection concerning its possible unconstitutionality. Several human rights NGOs asked the Ombudsman in July 2014 to notify the CCR regarding the law which had been recently adopted, and to ask the Court to rule on the law’s constitutionality before its promulgation by the President. Also, on 15 September 2014, a Romanian association for the defence of human rights APADOR-CH and EDRi member ApTI submitted an amicus curiae requesting the CCR to rule the law unconstitutional, as it breaches the right to privacy. The Court ruled that “the law’s provisions are not precise and predictable, and the manner in which the necessary data regarding the registration of prepaid SIM cards and WiFi hotspot users is retained and stored does not provide sufficient means to guarantee the necessary efficient protections for these personal data against abuse or any other kind of unlawful access to and use of these data.” The full argumentation on this case will be published in approximately one month in the Official Journal. This is the second important ruling of the CCR on privacy issues, after its decision from 8 July 2014 that declared the second data retention law unconstitutional. The decisions triggered quick and aggressive reactions in the media from the Romanian Intelligence Service (SRI), Romanian Ministry of Internal Affairs, and politicians from the Committees supervising the SRI activity, all claiming that the CCR decisions have made a “legal vacuum” and now the terrorists will flood Romania to buy prepaid SIM cards. In an unprecedented move, the CCR issued a press release counterattacking those arguments and reiterating the legal arguments used in their decisions. The SRI came back the following day with a press release with more allegations that in these circumstances the institution may not defend the national security and that now anonymity is allowed in communications. But one should not be fooled by fooled by the smoke, as all this “security-forces-alleged-drama” has some real interests behind it. First, as the full argumentation behind the unconstitutionality of the prepaid law was not published yet, it is meant to pressure the CCR to water down the decision, so that another law could be initiated. Secondly, the security institutions in Romania want to push a new data retention law and another attempt (it would be the fifth one now) for mandatory prepaid SIM cards as quick as possible. Thirdly, all this talk hides the interests on another draft law - on cybersecurity - that was quietly adopted by the Chamber of Deputies and received just two days prior to the debate in the Senate (which is the decisive chamber for this law). As reported earlier in EDRi-gram, that law will give the right for SRI and other nine public institutions to have access to the computer data held by those companies, at a simple “motivated request” from these institutions in their own attributions. Romania: The law mandating the registration of prepaid SIM cards has been ruled unconstitutional (19.09.2014) http://thesponge.eu/index.php?idT=4&idC=5&idRec=1115&recType=story SRI Press release on the legal vaccum created by the CCR decisions (only in Romanian, 20.09.2014) http://www.sri.ro/comunicat-de-presa-20-09-2014-17-06.html CCR press release on the decision on law on the pre-pay cards (only in Romanian, 16.09.2014) http://www.ccr.ro/noutati/COMUNICAT-DE-PRES-103 CCR press release answering the SRI allegations (only in Romanian, 18.09.2014) http://www.ccr.ro/noutati/COMUNICAT-DE-PRES-106 EDRi-gram: Romania: No communication without registration (02.07.2014) http://edri.org/romania-no-communication-without-registration/ ApTI: Amicus Curiae to the CCR (only in Romanian, 15.09.2014) http://apti.ro/interventie-la-curtea-constitutionala-impotriva-inregistrarii-car telelor-prepay (Contribution by Bogdan Manolea, EDRi-member ApTI, Romania) ======================================================================= 3. France adopts anti-terror law eroding civil liberties ======================================================================= On 18 September 2014, the near empty French National Assembly adopted the "law strengthening the provision relating to the fight against terrorism". In an atmosphere marked by "apocalyptic" anxiety and speeches on the terrorist threat, particularly within the Internet, minister Bernard Cazeneuve and rapporteur Sébastien Pietrasanta wore down all opposition, blocking any further reflection on the serious breaches of the rule of law that are brought on by this bill. The evaluation of the proposal turned into a game of “who can propose the most extreme measures” between Minister Bernard Cazeneuve, rapporteur Pietrasanta and representatives from across the political spectrum. Despite criticism on both the content and form of the law increasing (including from the media usually unwilling to raise their voices on such issues), many Parliamentarians were ready to give up fundamental freedoms in the name of the fight against terrorism. The most discussed articles at the Chamber had already been identified as problematic early on by the French civil rights organisation La Quadrature du Net. These include: - Travel restrictions, control of freedom of movement via bans on leaving the country (Article 1); - Removal of the concept of "apologie du terrorisme" from the French press law of 1881 (Article 4); - Creation of an individual corporate terrorist offence and creation of an offence of regularly visiting terrorist websites (Article 5); - Administrative blocking of Internet websites that promote terrorism (Article 9). During the examination of the text, Bernard Cazeneuve evaded difficult questions, taking refuge in half-truths. For instance, he referred to the intervention of the administrative judge in the blocking process and suggested that he or she would systematically intervene as a mediator - while the text of the law foresees no such thing. Through denigration of his opponents and against the press that raised concerns about the law, he showed that his objective was mainly to pass ad hoc legislation to ease red tape for the police, rather than producing a proper law. In order to engage citizens and volunteers to take part in the debate before the vote, to raise awareness and to influence the parliamentarians, La Quadrature du Net created a website "presumes-terroristes.fr" (presumed terrorists) which provides a thorough analysis of the law, its consequences and dangers. Other associations, such as Reporters Without Borders and the Human Rights League, joined the campaign. The Senate will consider the text in the coming weeks. Even if the dangers of this law caught the attention of civil right associations already several months ago, media and press attention came very late. La Quadrature du Net calls on citizens to contact their Senators to raise awareness as early as possible about the dangers of this law, and continues to raise awareness, as it is crucial for the legislative process and could profoundly change the text during its reading at the Senate. France's new anti-terror bill: All presumed terrorist until proven guilty? (22.06.2014) http://www.laquadrature.net/en/frances-new-anti-terror-bill-all-presumed-terrori st-until-proven-guilty “Presumes-terroristes.fr” (presumed terrorists) https://presumes-terroristes.fr/ Terrorism: a dangerous bill (15.09.2014) http://www.lemonde.fr/proche-orient/article/2014/09/15/terrorisme-un-projet-de-l oi-dangereux_4487639_3218.html (Contribution by Christopher Talib, La Quadrature du Net) ======================================================================= 4. The Turkish government tightens its grip over the Internet ======================================================================= On 8 September 2014, the Turkish parliament passed an amendment to the already draconian Internet law. The amendment allows the Turkish Telecommunication Authority (TIB) to block (without a court order) any website that appears to threaten "national security or public order”. Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are required to execute the blocking order of the TIB within four hours. This enables the government to block content quickly and without due process of law. In addition to allowing blocking of websites without a court ruling, the law also obliges ISPs to store all data on web users' activities, such as browsing history, for two years, and make it available to the authorities upon request, without a court order. The new law, as well as other recent actions of the Turkish government, have raised concerns about freedom of speech in the country. The large majority of the traditional mainstream media is either directly or indirectly under the government control, and the Internet remains one of the few channels for free speech in Turkey, but the government is continuously increasing the measures to control also the Internet. During the last few years, the Turkish government has blocked sites which broadcast recordings that appear to indicate corruption of government officials and appear to show dubious relationships with the fundamentalist organisations in Syria and Iraq. In spring 2014, social media platform Twitter and a video-sharing website YouTube remained blocked for several weeks. "National security and maintaining public order" were used as justifications also to this blocking. Turkey becoming intelligence state with new Internet law (09.09.2014) http://www.todayszaman.com/national_turkey-becoming-intelligence-state-with-new- internet-law_358245.html Turkey tightens Internet controls, weeks into new government (09.09.2014) http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/09/09/turkey-internet-idINKBN0H41AJ20140909 Turkey tightens grip over the internet (09.09.2014) http://online.wsj.com/articles/turkey-tightens-grip-over-the-internet-1410279325 Turkey: Internet freedom, rights in sharp decline (02.09.2014) http://www.hrw.org/news/2014/09/02/turkey-internet-freedom-rights-sharp-decline ======================================================================= 4. The Turkish government tightens its grip over the Internet ======================================================================= On 8 September 2014, the Turkish parliament passed an amendment to the already draconian Internet law. The amendment allows the Turkish Telecommunication Authority (TIB) to block (without a court order) any website that appears to threaten "national security or public order”. Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are required to execute the blocking order of the TIB within four hours. This enables the government to block content quickly and without due process of law. In addition to allowing blocking of websites without a court ruling, the law also obliges ISPs to store all data on web users' activities, such as browsing history, for two years, and make it available to the authorities upon request, without a court order. The new law, as well as other recent actions of the Turkish government, have raised concerns about freedom of speech in the country. The large majority of the traditional mainstream media is either directly or indirectly under the government control, and the Internet remains one of the few channels for free speech in Turkey, but the government is continuously increasing the measures to control also the Internet. During the last few years, the Turkish government has blocked sites which broadcast recordings that appear to indicate corruption of government officials and appear to show dubious relationships with the fundamentalist organisations in Syria and Iraq. In spring 2014, social media platform Twitter and a video-sharing website YouTube remained blocked for several weeks. "National security and maintaining public order" were used as justifications also to this blocking. Turkey becoming intelligence state with new Internet law (09.09.2014) http://www.todayszaman.com/national_turkey-becoming-intelligence-state-with-new- internet-law_358245.html Turkey tightens Internet controls, weeks into new government (09.09.2014) http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/09/09/turkey-internet-idINKBN0H41AJ20140909 Turkey tightens grip over the internet (09.09.2014) http://online.wsj.com/articles/turkey-tightens-grip-over-the-internet-1410279325 Turkey: Internet freedom, rights in sharp decline (02.09.2014) http://www.hrw.org/news/2014/09/02/turkey-internet-freedom-rights-sharp-decline ======================================================================= 5. Panoptykon called on MEPs to stop mass surveillance ======================================================================= On 11 September 2014 digital right activists and advocates around the world commemorated the anniversary of 9/11 terrorist attacks on the WTC as the Freedom not Fear Day. It reminded decision makers and society as a whole that “absolute security” is a fallacy that can never be achieved, even in return for giving up all citizens’ rights and freedoms. EDRi member Panoptykon Foundation used this opportunity to remind the Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) about their promises to end the mass surveillance. On 12 March 2014, after a series of public statements made by politicians, activist and experts (including Edward Snowden), the European Parliament adopted strong resolution against mass surveillance, and MEPs called both Member States and European institutions to take political measures and adopt stronger legal guarantees in order to end mass surveillance programmes carried out by European and American agencies. Now that the summer holidays are over and the newly elected MEPs have moved to Brussels, it’s time for the European Parliament to follow up on recommendations adopted in the previous term. Panoptykon came up with a list of concrete steps that could be taken by Members of the European Parliament and called Polish representatives to get active. The list of recommended actions that MEPs found in their mail boxes on 11 September included: 1. Exerting pressure on the Council and national governments to speed up the reform of the data protection regime. 2. Ensuring that the “umbrella agreement” between the EU and the US on data protection for law enforcement purposes does not allow broad national security exemption. 3. Pressing for constant evaluation of the Safe Harbour, PNR and SWIFT agreements in order to find out whether data protection safeguards are respected in practice. 4. Including mass surveillance as an issue in the hearings of the candidates for new Commissioners. 5. Continuation of the LIBE committee investigative work on the basis of new disclosures. Freedom not Fear - 11 September we celebrate the International Day of opposition to surveillance (only in Polish, 07.09.2010) http://panoptykon.org/wiadomosc/wolnosc-nie-strach-11-wrzesnia-obchodzimy-miedzy narodowy-dzien-sprzeciwu-wobec-inwigilacji European Parliament: there is no consensus on mass surveillance, you need to increase oversight of special services (only in Polish, 12.03.2014) http://panoptykon.org/wiadomosc/parlament-europejski-nie-ma-zgody-na-masowa-inwi gilacje-trzeba-zwiekszyc-nadzor-nad-sluzba Appeal to the European Parliament: Time to fulfill your promises and stop mass surveillance! (only in Polish, 10.09.2014) http://panoptykon.org/wiadomosc/apel-do-parlamentu-europejskiego-czas-spelnic-ob ietnice-i-zatrzymac-masowa-inwigilacje (Contribution by Katarzyna Szymielewicz and Anna Obem, EDRi member Fundacja Panoptykon, Poland) ======================================================================= 6. FNF 2014: Tackling surveillance, censorship, net discrimination ======================================================================= Between 26 and 29 September, the annual Freedom not Fear (FNF) conference and barcamp will take place in Brussels. As every year, the action days are challenging the false dichotomy that better security comes at a price: the abandonment of our privacy rights. On Friday evening, the event will be kicked off with a keynote speech by Simon Davies, publisher of the Privacy Surgeon and founder of Privacy International, who recently released the first global analysis of the impact of the Snowden revelations. He will be joined by Paul Nemitz, Director at DG Justice of the European Commission, for a discussion of the data protection reform and the future of the EU-US umbrella and Safe Harbor agreements. During the weekend, there will be speakers and workshops on a wide range of topics including Glyn Moody on the Trans-Atlantic Trade Agreement (TTIP/TAFTA) and Jillian York on surveillance. The barcamp style event will allow participants to propose additional ad hoc presentations or workshops in an open environment. On Sunday evening, there will be a screening of the documentary “The Internet’s Own Boy: The Story of Aaron Swartz”. On Monday, participants of the conference will have the possibility to experience EU policy-making first-hand with a visit of the European Parliament. On that day, the Parliament will be very busy with the first hearings of the “Juncker team” and a meeting of the Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs committee. Supporters of this year’s Freedom not Fear are, among many others, European Digital Rights, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Digitale Gesellschaft, Access, NURPA, digitalcourage... Freedom not Fear http://www.freedomnotfear.org/ Brussels privacy advocates summit to tackle surveillance, censorship, net discrimination http://edri.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/FNF14_posterA4.pdf Freedom Not Fear 2014, Schedule http://wiki.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/Freedom_Not_Fear_2014/Schedule A crisis of accountability - A global analysis of the impact of the Snowden revelations (10.06.2014) http://www.privacysurgeon.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Snowden-final-repo rt-for-publication.pdf New Commission: how MEPs will scrutinise the candidate commissioners (15.09.2014) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/news-room/content/20140915STO62302/html/Ne w-Commission-how-MEPs-will-scrutinise-the-candidate-commissioners Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs http://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/libe/home.html (Contribution by Kirsten Fiedler, EDRi) ======================================================================= 7. ENDitorial: Italian IP Enforcement position: the essence of insanity? ======================================================================= On 11 September, the Italian Presidency of the European Union submitted a discussion paper to the Council (see link below). The paper explains that, following the “review of Directive 2004/48/EC”, the controversial, so-called “Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive” (IPRED) and the public consultation, it is “clear that the current legislative framework is not necessarily fit for purpose”. This is not an unreasonable assessment. It is also not surprising that the Italian Presidency mistakenly believes that there was a review of the Directive, bearing in mind the volume of unproductive European Commission activity (two “roadmaps, one conference, two consultations and an implementation report) that there has been on the topic. Unless the “review” they are referring to is the implementation report which, curiously enough, does not contain the word “review”. However, having established that the current legislative framework is not fit for purpose, the best thing that the Presidency can think of proposing is to expand and deepen the failed, not fit for purpose enforcement measures that are currently in force. The Italians apparently hope that, if they do the same thing over and over again, different results will be produced. The document calls for “clarity” on the retention of personal data by intermediaries and the use of such data to identify infringers. They propose this even though the European Court of Justice has ruled that wide-scale retention of personal data for law enforcement purposes, even for serious crime, is contrary to the primary law of the European Union. In order to avoid abuses (that the Italian document helpfully recognises as a real possibility), it proposes that enforcement efforts focus on “commercial scale infringements”. It does this, in apparent ignorance of the fact that the European Commission, in one of its roadmaps for a review of the Directive, indicated that a clearer definition of “commercial scale” is needed in order to avoid individual consumers being unfairly targeted. Rather than seeking to reform the legal framework, which it describes as not “necessarily” fit for purpose, rather than reforming the definition of “commercial scale”, the Italian Presidency suggests a directionless reflection on the possibility of imposing policing duties on undefined Internet intermediaries. It foresees obligations requiring them to somehow “know” their customers in order to... well, they don't actually tell us. In the same vein, the Italian Presidency implicitly supports expanding the range of Internet intermediaries on which injunctions can be imposed. It also supports expanding the range of injunctions that can be imposed and expanding the geographic area covered by them - creating the possibility of cross-border or pan-European injunctions. Unsurprisingly, the document makes no reference whatsoever to any research indicting that such measures would be necessary or proportionate. Mysteriously, bearing in mind that the currently enforced version of the Directive permits orders “to pay the rightholder damages appropriate to the actual prejudice suffered by him”, the Italian Presidency suggests that action be taken to “ensure that damages awarded are sufficient to cover the prejudice suffered”. This suggests that European courts are not competent enough to work out what appropriate damages might be, under the current legal framework - with, again, no hint of any evidence to back up this position. In fairness to the Italian Presidency, the incoherence, incompetence and ineptitude of the document echos the failings of the Commission's recently published Communication on IP Enforcement. Perhaps the Italian Presidency is only guilty of passing off a European Commission document written as its own - in the name of “intellectual property”. Enforcement of intellectual property rights - Presidency paper (11.09.2014) http://register.consilium.europa.eu/doc/srv?l=EN&f=ST%2013076%202014%20INIT Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights (02.06.2004) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32004L0048R%2801%29 Report: Application of Directive 2004/48/EC on the enforcement of intellectual property rights (22.12.2010) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52010DC0779&from=E N Consultation on the Commission Report on the enforcement of intellectual property rights (2011) http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/2011/intellectual_property_rig hts_en.htm Proposal for a revision of the Directive on the enforcement of intellectual property rights (2011) http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/impact/planned_ia/docs/2011_markt_006_revie w_enforcement_directive_ipr_en.pdf Commission Communication on civil enforcement of IP within the Internal Market (2013) http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/impact/planned_ia/docs/2013_markt_036_civil _enforcement_ip_en.pdf European Commission Communication: Towards a renewed consensus on the enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights: An EU Action Plan (2014) http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52014DC0392 European Commission IP Enforcement page: The Directive on the enforcement of intellectual property rights http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/iprenforcement/directive/index_en.htm (Contribution by Joe McNamee, EDRi) ======================================================================= 8. Recommended Action ======================================================================= Promote open access worldwide! Diego Gomez, a Colombian graduate student is facing up to eight years in prison for posting research results online. Academic research should be free to access and available under an open license that would legally enable the kind of sharing that is so crucial for enabling scientific progress. https://act.eff.org/action/let-s-stand-together-to-promote-open-access-worldwide ======================================================================= 9. Recommended Reading ======================================================================= Classified Information: A review of current legislation across 15 countries & the EU http://www.ti-defence.org/publications/dsp-pubs/304-classified-information.html The future of the Internet - Innovation and investment in IP interconnection http://www.adlittle.com/downloads/tx_adlreports/ADL_LibertyGlobal_2014_FutureOfT heInternet.pdf Analysis: TTIP and TiSA: big pressure to trade away privacy http://www.statewatch.org/analyses/no-257-ttip-ralf-bendrath.pdf French crime database system in breach of Convention for storing information on individuals against whom proceedings have been dropped (18.09.2014) http://www.statewatch.org/news/2014/sep/echr-france-judgment-brunet-v-France-sto rage-of-information-on-crime-database.pdf Report: On the joint review of the implementation of the Agreement between the European Union and the United States of America on the processing and transfer of Financial Messaging Data from the European Union to the United States for the purposes of the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program (11.08.2014) http://www.statewatch.org/news/2014/sep/eu-com-tftp-jt-rep-eu-usa-com-513-14.pdf EU Data Protection Law: The Review of Directive 95/46/EC and the Proposed General Data Protection Regulation http://www.statewatch.org/news/2014/sep/eu-2014-09-edps-data-protection-article. pdf "ACTION SEE" Network established - requiring transparency and accountability from the governments (17.09.2014) http://www.metamorphosis.org.mk/en/news/macedonia/2692-formirana-mrezata-action- see-se-bara-transparentnost-i-odgovornost-od-vlastite Tor Challenge Inspires 1,635 Tor Relays (19.09.2014) https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/09/tor-challenge-inspires-1635-tor-relays ======================================================================= 10. Agenda ======================================================================= 25 September, Brussels, Belgium Apero on the Future of the Internet - FNF pre-event https://s3.amazonaws.com/access.3cdn.net/0f0e19dc3f25715002_07m6b2szn.pdf? 26 September 2014, Berlin, Germany IPEN Workshop: Engineering Privacy into Internet Services and Applications https://secure.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/edps/EDPS/IPEN 26-29 September 2014, Brussels, Belgium Freedom not Fear 2014 http://www.freedomnotfear.org/ 3 October 2014, Brussels, Belgium Exchange of best practices on transparency of media ownership https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/exchange-best-practices-transparency -media-ownership 9-10 October 2014, Florence, Italy ICT Proposers' Day http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/ict-proposers-day-9-10-october-2014 25 October 2014, Vienna, Austria Keine Macht Spionen - Big Brother Awards 2014 http://www.bigbrotherawards.at/2014/ 6-7 November, Warsaw, Poland The International CopyCamp Conference 2014 http://copycamp.pl/en/ 2-3 December 2014, Brussels, Belgium EUhackathon http://www.2014.euhackathon.eu/ ======================================================================= 11. About ======================================================================= EDRi-gram is a biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe. Currently EDRi has 34 members based or with offices in 19 different countries in Europe. European Digital Rights takes an active interest in developments in the EU accession countries and wants to share knowledge and awareness through the EDRi-gram. All contributions, suggestions for content, corrections or agenda-tips are most welcome. Errors are corrected as soon as possible and are visible on the EDRi website. Except where otherwise noted, this newsletter is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. See the full text at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ Newsletter editor: Heini JarvinenInformation about EDRi and its members: http://www.edri.org/ European Digital Rights needs your help in upholding digital rights in the EU. If you wish to help us promote digital rights, please consider making a private donation. http://www.edri.org/about/sponsoring http://flattr.com/thing/417077/edri-on-Flattr - EDRI-gram subscription information Subscribe by e-mail To: edri-news-request@mailman.edri.org Subject: subscribe You will receive an automated e-mail asking to confirm your request. Unsubscribe by e-mail To: edri-news-request@mailman.edri.org 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/mk/vesti/edri - EDRI-gram in German EDRI-gram is also available in German, with delay. Translations are provided by 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 if you have any problems with subscribing or unsubscribing.
Thursday, September 25, 2014
EDRi-gram biweekly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment