dikini.net

0029/2010

Written declaration on setting up a European early warning system (EWS) for privacy offenders.

The European Parliament,

• having regard to the Commission communication on the fight against cyber crime (COM(2007)0267),
• pornography and sex offending,

1. whereas it is essential to ensure that the internet continues to afford a high level of virtual democracy, which does not present any threat to privacy,
2. whereas, however, improper use of the opportunities provided by technology may facilitate abuse of individual privacy and freedom,
3. whereas the internet also allows governmental and law enforcement agencies to enjoy freedom of action,
4. putting them on the same footing as honest citizens and making it difficult for the authorities to trace them,

1. Calls on the Council and the Commission to act on Communication COM(2007)0267
2. Asks the Council and the Commission to implement Directive 2006/24/EC and ensure that no tracking is implemented and individual freedoms safeguarded rapidly and effectively;
3. Calls on the Member States to coordinate a European early warning system involving their public authorities, based on the existing system for food safety, as a means of tackling abuse of power;
4. Instructs its President to forward this declaration, together with the names of the signatories, to the Council and the Commission.

I'm quite busy at the moment, but I think this is just too important an issue not to bother typing something about it.

Don't take me wrong, the issues the original declaration tries to tackle are important. Both children and adults shouldn't suffer from violence, sexual or otherwise. The offenders should be punished and stigmatised in a 21st century society.

I just don't believe that censorship and total surveillance is the way. Step by step individual freedoms are pushed to the sidelines by excuses such as fraud, terrorism, sex offenders... Yes, total surveillance can be effective, usually to monitor what the subjects are doing and punish them accordingly. The twentieth century eastern block security apparatus has proven it to be so. Do we want to be back there? Really?

I know I don't. The less powers the police and other government agencies have, the more I would trust them. And the reverse is true as well. I think history has taught us that the more powerful a state, or its representatives are, the more they become an enemy of it's own people.

It is none of your business what I search for. What I read. Whom I email.

The original

It is an important bill. Not just for the issues I am really concerned - the ones related to IP. The Digital switchover, availability of broadband and the rest are important but I'm not going to write about them. I still don't fully understand the logic to have all of the above bundled together in one bill. The only connection is topical - the internet, but mixing management issues with ones related to freedom of expression leads to some dodgy arguments, like "the law has to go through, as the management issues can't wait" and then mixed with "We have to do something now, will revise later". Anyone who has written software knows the logic. We have heard it and used it, with a difference - we don't release with known critical bugs. Debugging and fixing a release is not fun.

digital rights restrictions management (DRM), noun

A technology that allows pants to be sold with a filching hand pre-installed in the pocket.

"In January 2006 the European Commission published the Study on the Economic and Technical Evolution of the Scientific Publication Markets of Europe. The Study resulted from a detailed analysis of the current scholarly journal publication market, together with extensive consultation with all the major stakeholders within the scholarly communication process (researchers, funders, publishers, librarians, research policymakers, etc.).
The Study noted that 'dissemination and access to research results is a pillar in the development of the European Research Area' and it made a number of balanced and reasonable recommendations to improve the visibility and usefulness of European research outputs."

from Petition for guaranteed public access to publicly-funded research results

It is a very important request, but not going far enough. Essentially, the petition requests all knowledge, result of publicly funded research to be made openly and freely (they are not explicit about it, but this is what I understand from the context) available and accessible.

Also during the Openness session, a representative from Reporters without Borders questioned the panelist from Cisco Systems, the company who provides the Chinese government with the technology to spy on its citizens and block websites — and that eventually leads to the imprisonment and killing of people who are critical of the policies of the Chinese government. Art Reilly of Cisco said it provides the same technology to all governments and does not feel responsible for the way in which China uses the technology to repress its people. Would that argument absolve a company of ethical responsibility for providing gas to the Nazis, knowing full well that the gas would be used to exterminate people? Here’s a video clip of the exchange.
from the ipjustice blog, more clips linked from there