Mobilisation Paquet-Telecom Reponses MEPs

English

Answer from Colm Burke, Irish MEP, Fiana Gael

July 9th 2008

Thank you for your e-mail concerning certain aspects of the Telecoms reform package, which is now going through the European Parliament.

As mentioned in a previous email, I now want to update you following the vote on July 7th in the Parliament's Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee, which produced a very large majority in favour of a series of amendments that significantly enhance users´ rights in electronic communications. These amendments were broadly supported by all major political groups including the EPP, the PSE, the Greens and ALDE.

I will also address the issue of the misrepresentation of Mr Harbour and Mr Kamall's amendments at the end of the email, by la Quadrature du Net.

Some of the key points are summarised below:

- Users will now be informed by operators, before contracts are concluded, about any restrictions on access to services (such as Skype).

- Market demand and competition between operators will decide whether they see any point in restricting access. The IMCO vote does not give governments new powers to decide that, or to make applications illegal.

- Where handsets or other terminal equipment are included free, or at a subsidised price, users must be informed of the cost of terminating their agreement early.

- Number porting (the process of keeping a number when switching networks) will now take one day (while it has previously taken up to one month). However, there are also provisions in case of slamming (when a consumer is switched to another network without their consent) which will allow NRAs to intervene in such cases.

- Promotion of the European 112 emergency call number across the EU, and measures to speed up the availability of mobile caller location when emergency calls are made. This is complementary to existing national emergency numbers.

- Disabled users will have equivalent access to communications with special terminal equipment for their needs.

The need to keep the Internet open by empowering regulators to intervene if a carrier discriminated against a particular service provider - for example, by blocking or slowing traffic.

- Regulators would be given enabling powers to allow standardised public service messages to be delivered to users. These service messages could include security protection advice, and advice on harmful or unlawful uses of the Internet, and their potential consequences. The information would be sent to all users, not to targeted individuals and not based on individual usage. Copyright infringement is just one of the areas that might be covered, but it will be up to public authorities to supply the information.

- Under Parliament's rules, the Committee also accepted, without a vote, a set of amendments from the Civil Liberties Committee on data protection. These include significant new requirements for operators to inform subscribers in the event of any breach of their personal data through electronic networks.

The level of cross party support confirm that MEPs totally reject the claims that these amendments are intended to reduce consumer choice and undermine individual freedom. In particular, the Directive contains no provisions on Copyright Law enforcement, not does it refer, in any way, to the French Government's proposed enforcement agreement.

Members of the Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee were highly critical of lobbyists who had completely misrepresented the objectives of the legislation. Nevertheless, they welcome further constructive suggestions for improvements to ensure that the text has no "unintended consequences" that infringe consumer rights. MEPs will examine the detailed drafting of all amendments before the final approval by Parliament in September.

Justification of amendments tabled by Mr Harbour and Mr Kamall

As is clear from the text, amendment H1 in fact gives national regulatory authorities and the Commission the power to take appropriate action to prevent degradation and slowing of traffic and against unreasonable restrictions of users' possibilities to access or distribute lawful content or to run lawful applications and services of their choice. Furthermore, recital 14 starts with the words: "It should be the end-users' decision what lawful content they want to be able to send and receive, and which services, applications, hardware and software they want to use for such purposes..." It also notes that "an unrestricted basic internet service" could be required as a response to a perceived problem.

It is evident that this protection should not extend to any unlawful content or applications. In fact, the question of lawfulness is outside the scope of this legislation and depends on the national laws of each country. It is to be decided by the relevant judicial authorities of each country, not by the ISPs.

Amendment K1 refers to the free movement of goods and makes it clear that a country can not start requiring manufacturers to incorporate features that would allow detecting or preventing for example copyright infringement, as that would hinder the free movement of the computers and other terminal equipment concerned. Any such requirements would have to be agreed by all member states of the EU. We are not aware of any such proposals.

K2 (tabled by Syed Kamall) was withdrawn.

Amendment H2 asks national regulatory authorities to promote - not force - cooperation, as appropriate, regarding protection and promotion of lawful content. It is entirely independent of "flexible response" and does not prescribe the outcome of any such cooperation.

As opposed to the text proposed by the Commission, amendment H3 shifts the burden of explaining the law from the ISPs to the appropriate national authorities. It also broadens the concept so that any type of unlawful activities are covered, not only copyright infringement. Such other activities could be for example child pornography. This public interest information would be prepared by the relevant national authority and then simply distributed by the ISP to all their customers. It involves no monitoring of individual customer usage of the internet.

None of the amendments have been drafted by any outside lobbying organisation.

I hope that clarifies the situation for you sufficiently. I welcome any further input you may have, so do not hesitate to contact me on this.

Yours sincerely,

Colm Burke MEP.

Answer of a tory MEP (EPP/Con)

July 7th 2008

I suspect this is copy-pasta, so here's the body:-

My colleagues Malcolm Harbour MEP and Syed Kamall MEP have been involved with tabling some of the amendments involved in the Telecoms Package. Rather than reduce the rights of internet users and inhibit freedoms, the amendments are in fact intended to reinforce the openness of the Internet. Both have been responsible for making sure that consumers' rights are respected, with copyright issues being restricted to public service information only.

The amendments have been created to strike a balance between the need for monitoring of unlawful activity, thus protecting ordinary lawful users of the Internet, whilst ensuring "sweeping powers" are not handed down to authorities. It is evident that this protection should not extend to any unlawful content or applications. In fact, the question of lawfulness is outside the scope of this legislation and depends on the national laws of each country. It is to be decided by the relevant judicial authorities of each country, not by the ISPs. The intention is however not to turn ISPs into "copyright police". Whilst I appreciate that P2P and other filesharing devices are invaluable for businesses such as your own, the aim of this package is to clamp down on its illegal usage. I have no doubt that the Internet will move fast to fill the void left by their absence for legitimate, legal usage; already there is talk of a "legal P2P" alternative being created.

Amendment K1 refers to the free movement of goods and makes it clear that a country can not start requiring manufacturers to incorporate features that would allow detecting or preventing for example copyright infringement, as that would hinder the free movement of the computers and other terminal equipment concerned. Any such requirements would have to be agreed by all member states of the EU. We are not aware of any such proposals. Specifically, it states "in implementing the provisions of this Directive, Member States shall ensure, subject to paragraphs 2 and 3, that no mandatory requirements for specific technical features, including, without limitation, for the purpose of detecting,intercepting or preventing infringement of intellectual property rights by users, are imposed on terminal or other electronic communication equipment which could impede the placing of equipment on the market and the free circulation of such equipment in and between Member States".

Amendment H2 asks national regulatory authorities to promote - not force - cooperation, as appropriate, regarding protection and promotion of lawful content. It is entirely independent of "flexible response" and does not prescribe the outcome of any such cooperation. As opposed to the text proposed by the Commission, amendment H3 shifts the burden of explaining the law from the ISPs to the appropriate national authorities. It also broadens the concept so that any type of unlawful activities are covered, not only copyright infringement. Such other activities could be for example child pornography. This public interest information would be prepared by the relevant national authority and then simply distributed by the ISP to all their customers. It involves no monitoring of individual customer usage of the internet.

The package gives national regulatory authorities and the Commission the power to take appropriate action to prevent degradation and slowing of traffic and against unreasonable restrictions of users' possibilities to access or distribute lawful content or to run lawful applications and services of their choice. None of the amendments have been drafted by any outside lobbying organisation.

Position of Roger Knapman (NI/UKIP, UK, South West England)

July 7th 2008

"Roger Knapman MEP has asked me to thank you for your email and to reply as he is currently travelling to Strasbourg. He agrees withyou about the telecoms "package" and will be opposing it. He sees it as another example of unnecessary regulation from Brussels and a further potential threat to individual freedom.

Piers Merchant, assistant to Roger Knapman"

(Cette section contribué sous CC-bysa)

John Purvis and Struan Stevenson

July 10th 2008

Members of the European Parliament for Scotland

We wanted to update you following the vote on 7 July in the Parliament's Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee, which produced a very large majority in favour of a series of amendments that significantly enhance users´ rights in electronic communications. Some of the key points are summarised below:

· Users will now be informed by operators, before contracts are concluded, about any restrictions on access to services (such as Skype).

· Market demand and competition between operators will decide whether they see any point in restricting access. The IMCO vote does not give governments new powers to decide that, or to make applications illegal.

· Where handsets or other terminal equipment are included free, or at a subsidised price, users must be informed of the cost of terminating their agreement early.

· Number porting (the process of keeping a number when switching networks) will now take one day (while it has previously taken up to one month). However, there are also provisions in case of slamming (when a consumer is switched to another network without their consent) which will allow NRAs to intervene in such cases.

· Promotion of the European 112 emergency call number across the EU, and measures to speed up the availability of mobile caller location when emergency calls are made. This is complementary to existing national emergency numbers.

· Disabled users will have equivalent access to communications with special terminal equipment for their needs.

· The need to keep the Internet open by empowering regulators to intervene if a carrier discriminated against a particular service provider - for example, by blocking or slowing traffic.

· Regulators would be given enabling powers to allow standardised public service messages to be delivered to users. These service messages could include security protection advice, and advice on harmful or unlawful uses of the Internet, and their potential consequences. The information would be sent to all users, not to targeted individuals and not based on individual usage. Copyright infringement is just one of the areas that might be covered, but it will be up to public authorities to supply the information.

· Under Parliament's rules, the Committee also accepted, without a vote, a set of amendments from the Civil Liberties Committee on data protection. These include significant new requirements for operators to inform subscribers in the event of any breach of their personal data through electronic networks

The level of cross party support confirms that MEPs totally reject the claims that these amendments are intended to reduce consumer choice and undermine individual freedom. In particular, the Directive contains no provisions on Copyright Law enforcement, not does it refer, in any way, to the French Government's proposed enforcement agreement.

Members of the Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee were highly critical of lobbyists who had completely misrepresented the objectives of the legislation. Nevertheless, they welcome further constructive suggestions for improvements to ensure that the text has no "unintended consequences" that infringe consumer rights. MEPs will examine the detailed drafting of all amendments before the final approval by Parliament in September.

A detailed examination of the points referred to in the "Quadrature" mailing can be found below. We also enclose the post-vote Conservative Press release by Malcolm Harbour, for your interest.

Liam Aylward MEP (Ireland)

July 10th 2008

Thank you for your email of 3rd July 2008, concerning the Telecoms Package. As you know, this package was discussed in the meeting of the Industry, Research and Energy Committee (ITRE) on the evening of 7th July in Strasbourg. Although I am not a member of the ITRE Committee, I, and many of my colleagues here in the European Parliament, find it important to stay up-to-date on such issues that will be voted upon in the next plenary session in September.

It has been divided into the following areas:

  1. Citizens' rights directive

This covers service provision and user rights. The rapporteur for the Internal Market Committee is Malcolm Harbour (EPP-ED, UK). The aim of this review of existing rules on access to networks and services and other rights of users of universal services is to strengthen and improve the rights of consumers who use electronic communications (fixed and mobile telephony, voice over internet, internet). The main issues that are dealt with in this report are:

§ More information on privacy - by which operators would have to keep their subscribers informed of any possible restrictions on access, use or distribution of content, services and lawful applications. It would be up to national authorities to deal with any infringements, including breaches of intellectual property rights. In addition, any gathering of data from a computer would require the prior consent of the user.

§ More transparent and comparable tariffs, making it easier to switch operators - operators should provide users with transparent, comparable, appropriate and up-to-date information on prices and tariffs, charges for terminating a contract and general terms and conditions, with the aim of enable users to independently assess the cost of switching operators. This would also avoid the monopoly position of most operators.

§ Making life easier for elderly and handicapped people, extending access to the emergency number - MEPs feel that, although now it is possible to call the 112 emergency number from anywhere in the EU, this number should be accessible regardless of the type of electronic communication used. Equally, the emergency services should have the technical means to locate the caller. All facilities should be entirely accessible to elderly and handicapped people.

§ Availability of services and content - the application of "network neutrality" would enhance service quality by preventing discrimination to do with the use and distribution of internet content, applications or services.

  2. Electronic communications: common regulatory framework directive

This covers future electronic communication networks, which will transport all types of information and services. The rapporteur is Catherine Trautmann (PSE, FR). She told the Committee that her report sees the package facilitating the development of access for all Europeans to the information society. She sees "no opposition between the interest of consumers and companies as competition in the market would be economically and socially beneficial."

MEPs stated that measures requiring that a service be supplied in a specific frequency band would have to be justified by reference to general interest aims such as ensuring safety of life, promoting social, regional or territorial cohesion, avoiding inefficient use of radio frequencies, or promoting cultural and media aims such as cultural and linguistic diversity and media pluralism.

  3. Creation of the European Electronic Communications Market Authority (EECMA)

The Parliament's rapporteur is Pilar del Castillo (EPP-ED, ES). On the more general need for reform, she said "There are still bottlenecks in the way of our creation of an integrated market place. There still exist cross-border issues and disparities between Member States as regards to broadband access, digitalisation and services. These need to be resolved".

As an alternative to the Commission's plan for a European Electronic Communications Market Authority (EECMA), she suggests an independent advisory Body of European Regulators in Telecoms (BERT). "The objective of BERT is to develop in a flexible, efficient and non-bureaucratic way prime conditions for the telecom market so that the latter may operate solely under general competition law...let's not create a cumbersome body which lobbies for its own existence."

MEPs propose a new "co-regulation" procedure which would require national regulatory authorities to consult the Commission and BERT before taking regulatory decisions. This would prevent national authorities from making any inappropriate or ineffective decisions.

  4. Repeal of the GSM Directive

The rapporteur is Francisca Pleguezuelos (PSE, ES). The objective is to allow a larger choice of services and technologies and thereby to maximise competition in the use of the bands so far covered by the GSM Directive, while ensuring that services remain coordinated and protecting the continued operation of GSM (Global System for Mobile communications).

This is the current information that we in the European Parliament have on the Telecoms Package. I realise that you received most of your material from this website (http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Mobilisation_Paquet-Telecom), but I hope that this email provides you with a balanced outlook on this topic.

Thank you for drawing my attention to this issue. I am sure that you will be interested in the results of the plenary voting in September.

Alyn Smith MEP

July 9th 2008

Many thanks for getting in touch with me and for drawing my attention to your concerns with some of the amendments to the proposed telecoms package. Since the Parliament's draft report on the package was under consideration by the Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee I raised your concerns with my Green/EFA group colleagues on that Committee as I am not a member of the Internal Market Committee.

The Telecoms universal services report was adopted last night in Committee with my group voting in favour of it because of the multiple benefits it will bring to consumers. Regarding the issue as to whether amendments to the proposed telecoms package would allow internet service providers to monitor or block users' access to the internet by controlling the content of users' internet activities, the Commission's original proposal allows national regulators to take measures against service degradation and slowing of traffic over internet networks. It explicitly states that users must not have their online access unreasonably restricted. My group colleagues in the Internal Market Committee agree with this because we consider that using the internet is a service of general (economic) interest and that therefore it is very important indeed to ensure appropriate network management in order to prevent degradation of service.

In addition, the Greens/EFA had tabled an amendment to add that ISPs must ensure that subscribers can send and receive any form of content without prejudice of the needs to preserve the integrity and security of the networks. The compromise amendment keeps the same idea by stating that "the ability of users to access or distribute lawful content or to run lawful applications and services of their choice is not unreasonably restricted". Recital 14 confirms that "it should be the end-users' decision what lawful content they want to be able to send and receive, and which services, applications, hardware and software they want to use for such purposes, without prejudice to the need to preserve the integrity and security of networks and services". So these provisions do not give ISPs the right to monitor or block the traffic on the internet because of the content of subscribers' activities. Their purpose is rather to avoid slowing down of the traffic.

The report as adopted does not provide for "internet policing" by internet providers. It does not give ISPs the right to block anything unlawful for content purposes. My group believes that the public shoul be informed about activities that are unlawful, in particular because many parents do not know what their children do on the internet.

Like my group, I believe internet access is a service of general interest and a minimum quality of service must be guaranteed to all users. This report will go to the Parliament's plenary session in September and in the meantime we remain open minded to any ways in which to improve the proposed telecoms package further.

Eoin Ryan MEP (Ireland)

July 10th 2008

Committee on Economic & Monetary Affairs

Thank you for your email regarding your concerns with the Telecoms package. This report is currently being debated and voted upon at the Committee stage. I am not a member of the Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee (IMCO) or the Industry, Research and Energy Committee (ITRE), which are the Committees currently dealing with the Report, however I forwarded your email to the Group Advisor who will take your concerns under consideration for my colleagues who are on these committees. Once the report is voted upon and finalised at the Committee level it will be debated and voted upon in the Plenary session. This will most likely be during one of the autumn sessions.

I have received a considerable number of emails regarding the amendments to the Telecoms Package, file sharing and Intellectual Property Rights and interest in this Package is very high. If there is an umbrella organisation or spokesperson who you are aware of that I could meet to discuss this issue I would be delighted to do so. As I would like to be fully briefed before the Plenary debate and vote I also welcome an information on this issue that you would like me to be aware of. I look forward to hearing from you.

If you have any further comments or questions please do not hesitate to contact me.

Press Release from MEP Kathy Sinnott

Jul 7th 2008

MEP Kathy Sinnott attacks anti-privacy amendments in “Telecom package”

Kathy Sinnott MEP for Munster is opposed to a series of amendments this week in Strasbourg to the European Telecommunications Directive designed to give the EU control over citizen’s internet usage. The proposed amendments to the could force internet service providers to turn over information on customers and monitor their internet usage. It could also force software makers to include spyware in their products to allow not only governments but also corporations to monitor citizen’s activities whether or not they are suspected of unlawful behaviour

Kathy Sinnott MEP said "I am a great proponent of net neutrality. The reason the internet is what it is today, is that no-one owns it and no company or government has as yet taken control over it. These amendments being pressed by some MEP’s seek to move Europe closer to the Chinese internet model where usage is monitored and where an individual goes online can be curtailed. This will give vast control over our lives to governments and in some cases corporations. I believe that law enforcement agencies should be allowed to pursue specific targets (eg. child pornography, terrorism) but monitoring the entire populace is not the way to go about it. These intrusions into our privacy would be unacceptable and I will be urging my colleagues to vote down all such amendments on July 7th.”

If these amendments pass they will come before the European Parliament for debate and vote in September or October 09. If you are interested in being updated. Please let me know.

Kathy is Democracy co president of the Independence/Democracy Group in the European Parliament

Nigel FARAGE

July 7th 2008

Dear Sir

Thank you for your message about the insertion of provisions relating to IPR into the Telecoms Package.

Be assured that UKIP's MEP's will vote against any such insertion and, indeed, against the package itself and any amendment which extends its scope or hastens its introduction.

This is because the EU is inherently, irreformably and dangerously un-democratic and anti-democratic.

I quite agree with you about the undesirability of the elements you mention; but the content of the provisions is less significant, to us, than their source.

Nevertheless, I'm sure we shall vote as you would wish.

Yours faithfully

Andrew S. Reed

(Office of Nigel Farage)

ThomasWise/en Tom Wise

July 10th 2008

Thank you for your email. I will oppose these proposals, if and when they get to a plenary session.

The vote on Monday 7th July – if that is the correct date - is in a committee of which I am not a member and thus cannot vote. Needless to say that committee, as are most, is quite likely to be dominated by rabid federalists whose single and unabashed ambition is to destroy the nation state and impose on the great unwashed (you and me) laws that give the unelected EU complete power and control over everything we do. That it removes individual liberties is something they relentlessly pursue: just another reason for us to leave.

Tom

Tom Wise MEP UKIP Member to the Eastern Counties

---

Dear Globenet, thanks for your email. The Industry Committee and Internal Market Committees voted on the 'telecoms package' on Monday this week. Sadly, I do not sit on this committee and thus was not able to vote. When it comes to plenary, please be reassured that I will oppose it.

However, you should be aware that once the Commission has got an idea, it rarely if ever gives up. Just because 600+ MEPs reject a plan, the Commission can bring it back as and when they want, as they say, "before a more acquiescent Parliament" They never give up. Resistance is futile and some of them actually resemble the BORG, the originators of that phrase!

There is a solution, however, and that is to get out of the EU. That can only be achieved by electing to Westminster a party with that aim. None of the current incumbents fit that bill!

Best wishes Tom Wise MEP

Glyn Ford

July 10th 2008

Thank you for your email regarding the amendments being made to the telecom package. I will certainly pass on your comments and concerns to Mr Ford.

We have received a great deal of emails regarding this and I thank you for taking the time to write. Please do not hesitate to contact us again should you have any other queries.

Catherine Stihler

July 10th 2008

Dear Sir/Madam

Thank you for your e-mail concerning the vote on the universal service and user rights directive, part of the "telecoms package", which took place in the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO) Committee on Monday 7 July.

The Committee strongly backed proposals to enhance users´ rights and data protection in electronic communications.

Key rights include: • a one day limit, down from up to one month, to transfer your number when you switch networks; • guaranteed information from operators, before contracts are concluded, about any restrictions on access to services; • information on the cost of terminating agreements early (with such costs limited to cases involving a subsidised handset); • guaranteed equivalent access to communications for disabled users, with special terminal equipment for their needs; • information for subscribers in the event of any breach of their personal data through electronic networks; • guaranteed access to the European 112 emergency call number across the EU; and • availability of mobile caller location across Europe when emergency calls are made.

The Committee also agreed on the need to keep the Internet open by empowering regulators to intervene if a carrier discriminated against a service provider by blocking or slowing traffic.

To help keep citizens informed online, regulators in each Member State are empowered to develop standardised public service messages for users, which could include security protection advice, and advice on harmful or unlawful uses of the Internet, and their potential consequences. The information would be sent to all users, not to targeted individuals and not based on the monitoring of individual's use of the internet.

Despite claims to the contrary made by some lobbying organisations, this Directive contains no provisions on the enforcement of intellectual property rights online. The report encourages regulatory authorities to promote appropriate cooperation to ensure lawful online activity. This does not seek to promote or prescribe any enforcement regime, which would be beyond the appropriate scope of the Directive. Claims therefore that it amounts to the introduction of a form of "graduated response" are totally false.

One amendment by Conservative MEP Syed Kamall does introduce potentially dangerous ambiguity in the field of privacy protection online. This amendment was opposed by the Labour Group of MEPs but adopted by a narrow majority in the Civil Liberties Committee. Under the Parliament's rules this text dealing with data protection had to be adopted without a vote in the IMCO Committee on 7 July. However all Members agreed on the need to review this text and Labour MEPs call for its withdrawal before the final report is adopted by the Parliament in plenary in September. We will continue to examine the details of this legislation in preparation for the plenary vote.

Yours sincerely,

Catherine Stihler MEP

Christian Silvu Busoi

July 10th 2008

Dear colleagues,

Most of you must have received many mails on the Harbour and Alvaro reports on the Telecom directives (universal service and protection of privacy) that were voted Monday 7 July in IMCO committee.

They all referred to an article from La Quadrature du Net (http://www.laquadrature.net/files/note-IMCO-ITRE-quadrature-20080630.pdf) arguing that some selected amendments will damage the openness of the Internet and reduce the rights of Internet users.

This is absolutely not the case! And it was not our intention. Lobbyists misrepresented the objectives of the legislation. The report never involves monitoring of individual customer usage of the internet, neither sanctions of the customer.

7 compromise amendments, co-signed by EPP, PSE, ALDE and Greens, and of course adopted in committee, ensured that consumers' rights are respected, with copyright issues being restricted to public service information only.

I want to clarify what has been adopted. You will then find attached: - a summary of key points adopted - and responses from the rapporteur (with which I totally agree) on the specific compromise amendments concerned in the article should you wish to answer the mails.

Best regards,

Cristian Busoi

Graham Watson MEP (ALDE's leader) (Casework Manager for Graham Watson MEP)

July 18th 2008

Thank you for your e-mail concerning the Telecoms reform package, which is now going through the European Parliament. Earlier this month the Parliament's Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee voted by a large majority in favour of a series of amendments that significantly enhance users´ rights in electronic communications.

These significant amendments include:

· The IMCO vote does not give governments new powers to restrict access, or to make applications illegal. Instead market demand and competition between operators will decide whether they see any point in restricting access.

· Number porting (the process of keeping a number when switching networks) will now take one day (while it has previously taken up to one month). However, there are also provisions in case of slamming (when a consumer is switched to another network without their consent) which will allow NRAs to intervene in such cases.

· Users will have to be informed of any costs incurred when terminating agreements early, where handsets or other terminal equipment are included free, or at a subsidised price,.

· Operators will have to inform users about any restrictions on access to services (such as Skype) before contracts are concluded;

· Promotion of the European 112 emergency call number across the EU, and measures to speed up the availability of mobile caller location when emergency calls are made. This will remain complementary to existing national emergency numbers.

· Disabled users will have equivalent access to communications with special terminal equipment for their needs. With regard to keeping the Internet open by empowering regulators to intervene if a carrier discriminated against a particular service provider - for example, by blocking or slowing traffic the following was agreed;

· Regulators would be given enabling powers to allow standardised public service messages to be delivered to users. These service messages could include security protection advice, and advice on harmful or unlawful uses of the Internet, and their potential consequences. The information would be sent to all users, but this would not be to targeted individuals and not be based on individual usage. Copyright infringement is just one of the areas that might be covered, but it will be up to public authorities to supply the information.

· The Committee also accepted under parliamentary rules, a set of amendments from the Civil Liberties Committee on data protection. Significantly this includes new requirements for operators to inform subscribers in the event of any breach of their personal data through electronic networks.

I note from the cross party support on this matter which claims these amendments are intended to reduce consumer choice and undermine individual freedom are not the case. The Directive contains no provisions on Copyright Law enforcement, and it does refer, in any way, to the French Government's proposed enforcement agreement.

Committee members who examined this Bill in detail welcome constructive suggestions for improvements to ensure that the text has no "unintended consequences" that infringe consumer rights. Nonetheless I think they all agreed that some lobbyists who had completely misrepresented the objectives of the legislation. MEPs will finally vote on the amendments in Parliament in September.

Thank you for contacting me on this matter and if I can be of any assistance in the future, please do not hesitate to contact me.

In view of your interest in how I might be able to help you, it occurs to me that you might like to receive my weekly email newsletter providing news and my views on EU developments. If so, please let me know and I will add your email address to my distribution list.

Yours sincerely,

Graham Watson MEP Member of the European Parliament for South West England and Gibraltar and Leader of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe in the European Parliament

Press release from Kathy Sinnot, Irish MEP

-Press Release-

MEP Kathy Sinnott attacks anti-privacy amendments in “Telecom package”

Kathy Sinnott MEP for Munster is opposed to a series of amendments this week in Strasbourg to the European Telecommunications Directive designed to give the EU control over citizen’s internet usage. The proposed amendments to the could force internet service providers to turn over information on customers and monitor their internet usage. It could also force software makers to include spyware in their products to allow not only governments but also corporations to monitor citizen’s activities whether or not they are suspected of unlawful behaviour

Kathy Sinnott MEP said "I am a great proponent of net neutrality. The reason the internet is what it is today, is that no-one owns it and no company or government has as yet taken control over it. These amendments being pressed by some MEP’s seek to move Europe closer to the Chinese internet model where usage is monitored and where an individual goes online can be curtailed. This will give vast control over our lives to governments and in some cases corporations. I believe that law enforcement agencies should be allowed to pursue specific targets (eg. child pornography, terrorism) but monitoring the entire populace is not the way to go about it. These intrusions into our privacy would be unacceptable and I will be urging my colleagues to vote down all such amendments on July 7th.”

If these amendments pass they will come before the European Parliament for debate and vote in September or October 09. If you are interested in being updated. Please let me know.

Kathy is Democracy co president of the Independence/Democracy Group in the European Parliament

For further information, questions or comments, please contact Kathy on:

Mobile: +353 87 278 6552

Brussels office: +32 228 47692

Cork office: +353 21 4888 793

Email: kathy.sinnott@europarl.europa.eu

Website: www.kathysinnott.ie

Français

Maxime Herrmann - Assistant de Catherine Trautmann (PSE)

4 juillet 2008

Monsieur, Nous sommes en contact avec la Quadrature du Net et l'amendement de compromis qu'ils signalent n'est plus sur la table de discussion entre les groupes politiques. Je suis d'ailleurs désolé qu'ils aient maintenu la diffusion de cette note malgré la rencontre que j'ai eue avec l'un d'eux vendredi 27 juin (et l'assurance apportée que cet amendement ne serait pas maintenu tel quel), mais attire votre attention sur le fait que celle-ci a récemment été corrigée et que le rapport de Mme Trautmann n'est plus concerné.

Merci en tout cas de votre message. Bien cordialement,

---

Suggestion de réponse à la réponse : Toutes les dispositions dangereuses qui étaient dans le rapport Trautmann se sont comme par magie retrouvées dans le rapport Harbour dès que La Quadrature du Net a commencé à mettre la lumière dessus. Si Mme Trautmann a admis que ces dispositions étaient problématiques, gageons qu'elle s'opposera à leur vote dans le rapport Harbour, et qu'elle et ses collègues socialistes ne laisseront pas implémenter dans le droit européen le projet de riposte graduée de Mr Sarkozy. Monsieur Malevé,

Mme Vergnaud's position (PSE)

7 juillet 2008

La position du PSE et de Mme Vergnaud qui est responsable de ce dossier pour le PSE en IMCO est claire : les éléments liés à la riposte graduée n'ont rien à faire dans le paquet télécom, ça doit être discuté dans le cadre de "Content online". Il a été tenu compte du risque évoqué, et en l'état actuel des compromis en ITRE et en IMCO, ainsi que du vote en LIBE (coopération renforcée avec IMCO sur la partie ePrivacy), rien ne permet la riposte graduée, et le PSE est vigilant sur ce point.

Le seul point favorable aux ayants-droits, en ce sens soutenus par le PSE, c'est l'information contractuelle et post-contractuelle aux consommateurs, contenue dans les compromis IMCO (information générale sur le respect des droits et libertés d'autrui, y compris les droits d'auteur, distribuée par les opérateurs et rédigée dans le cadre d'une coopération entre autorités, opérateurs et ayants-droits).

Si vous souhaitez d'avantage d'informations, vous pourvez vous adresser directement au Bureau de Madame Vergnaud. Sincères salutations

Giovanna Corda

Pierre Pribetich

10 juillet 2008

Monsieur,

Je vous remercie pour votre email, dont les informations alimenteront le débat en vue d'une meilleure compréhension des enjeux et des défis auxquels notre société doit faire face au niveau européen.

La criminalisation des consommateurs téléchargeant sans but lucratif n'est sans doute pas la meilleure solution, notamment pour la diffusion de la culture.Compte tenu de l' évolution des moeurs, des mentalités et des pratiques, la licence globale permet de répondre pour partie à cet enjeu complexe.

La licence globale constitue le noyau pour parvenir à un juste équilibre entre la rémunération des acteurs de la culture, le choix des consommateurs et la diversité culturelle européenne.

Je vous informe également que nous avons déposé une déclaration écrite avec Michel Rocard, Jean-Louis Cottigny, Daniel Cohn-Bendit et Bronislaw Geremek visant à promouvoir les logiciels libres. Nous appelons à la migration de l'ensemble du réseau informatique du Parlement européen vers les logiciels libres tout en demandant que soit développé le financement de la recherche publique dans ce domaine.

Pour plus d'informations, je vous invite à consulter mon site: www.pierre-pribetich.eu

Pour être considérée par les autres institutions européennes, cette déclaration écrite doit recevoir 400 signatures de députés européens. Je vous invite donc à contacter les députés européens de votre circonscription afin de promouvoir activement les logiciels libres.

Veuillez agréer, Monsieur, mes sincères salutations.

Pierre Pribetich Député européen

Evelyne Gebhard (SPD/PSE)

La taille du paquet législatif, les formulations ambigües dans certains amendements, ainsi que quelques critiques de pointant certains amendements, ont malheureusement donné l'impression ces derniers jours que le Parlement européen projetait d'instaurer de profondes intrusions dans la vie privée des citoyennes et des citoyens. Mais ce n'est pas le cas.

Le 7 juillet après de longs pourparlers au sein de la commission du marché intérieur et de la protection des consommateurs du Parlement européen, la décision retenue en matière de service universel ne prévoit aucune surveillance des utilisateurs d'Internet. Au contraire, les internautes seront informés par contrat de leurs droits et devoirs impliqués par l'utilisation d'internet. Contrairement à ce que certains craignent, il ne s'agira pas de courriels personnels de menace de la part du fournisseur d'accès. Concernant l'inquiétude fréquemment exprimée ces derniers jours, les FAI ne sont pas contraints à bloquer l'acces aux utilisateurs en cas de non respect des droit d'auteur comme cela était exigé par les Français. En raison de sa taille, le paquet Télécom est examiné simultanément par plusieurs commissions du Parlement européen. Dans le commission du marché intérieur, la majorité s'est prononcé pour un amendement autorisant le traitement de données personnelles d'internautes pour des raisons de sécurité. Mon parti, le PSE a voté contre. Malheureusement la majorité libérale conservatrice s'est imposée au sein de la commission. Ceci dit, le Parlement européen n'a pas dit son dernier mot. Je vous assure que nous ferons tout pour que le principe de la neutralité du Net soit préservé. Ce qui est encore possible, puisqu'une séance plénière en septembre sera consacrée à ce projet de loi. Soyez assurés que nous, les eurodéputés du PSE, n'aspirons pas à la surveillance des consommateurs avec le paquet Télécom. Abstraction faite des questions de copyright et des questions de sécurité, nous nous y attachons - et nous réitèrerons notre vote dans les séances plénières à venir pour que le paquet Télécom prévoie une extension du service universel (i.e. la fourniture de base des services de télécommunication à la population) concernant la bande passante et la téléphonie mobile. En outre, nous avons veillé à ce que les FAI soient obligés de limiter les engagements d'abonnements à 12 mois (au lieu de 24 mois comme c'est le plus souvent pratiqué) et d'assurer aux consommateurs la possibilité de changer d'opérateur. En même temps, l'accessibilité aux services de communication, en particulier les numéros d'appel d'urgences, pour les handicapés doit être améliorée.

Cordialement

Evelyne Gebhardt

Deutsch

Evelyne Gebhard (SPD/PSE)

7 Juli

die Größe des Gesetzespakets, missverständliche Formulierungen in einigen Änderungsanträgen sowie einige durchaus kritisch zu sehende Änderungsanträge haben leider in den letzen Tagen zu dem Eindruck geführt, dass das Europäische Parlament tiefe Eingriffe in die Privatsphäre der Bürgerinnen und Bürger plant. Dem ist nicht so.

Der am 7. Juli im Ausschuss für Binnenmarkt und Verbraucherschutz des Europäischen Parlaments nach langen Verhandlungen verabschiedete Beschluss zum Bereich Universaldienste sieht keine verdachtsunabhängige Überwachung von Internetnutzern vor. Hingegen werden Internetnutzer bei Vertragsabschluss über ihre Rechte und Pflichten bei der Internetnutzung informiert. Es werden aber nicht - wie teilweise befürchtet wurde - individuelle "Droh-Emails" der Internetprovider an ihre Kunden geben. Entgegen der vielfach in den letzten Tagen geäußerten Sorge werden die Internetprovider auch nicht dazu gezwungen, bei Verstößen gegen Urheberrechte durch einen Nutzer dessen Internetzugang stillzulegen, wie von französischer Seite gefordert wurde. Das "Telekom-Paket" wird aufgrund seiner inhaltlichen Breite gleichzeitig in mehreren Ausschüssen des Europäischen Parlaments behandelt. Im Innenausschuss fand sich eine Mehrheit für einen Änderungsantrag, der eine Verarbeitung von Verbindungsdaten der Internetnutzer aus Sicherheitsgründen erlaubt. Meine Fraktion, die SPE, hatte dagegen gestimmt. Leider hat sich im Ausschuss die liberalkonservaative Mehrheit durchgesetzt. Damit ist im Europäischen Parlament aber noch nicht das letzte Wort gesprochen. Wir werden weiterhin darauf hinwirken, dass das Prinzip der Netzneutralität gewahrt bleibt. Dies ist noch möglich, da erst im September das Plenum über diesen Gesetzesentwurf abgestimmt werden wird. Seien Sie versichert, dass wir SPE-Abgeordneten mit dem Telekom-Paket Verbraucherschutz, nicht Verbraucherüberwachung, anstreben. Abgesehen von den Copyright- und Sicherheitsfragen haben wir uns dafür eingesetzt - und werden dies bis zur Abstimmung im Plenum weiter tun - dass das Telekompaket zu einer Ausweitung des Universaldienstes (d.h. der verpflichtenden Grundversorgung der Bevölkerung mit Telekommunikationsleistungen) auf Breitband und Mobilfunk führt. Außerdem haben wir dafür gesorgt, dass die Anbieter dazu verpflichtet werden, Verträge mit einer Laufzeit von 12 Monaten anzubieten (neben den bisher vorherrschenden 24-Monats-Verträgen), um dadurch die Möglichkeit eines Anbieterwechsels für die Verbraucher zu stärken. Gleichzeitig wird der Zugang für Behinderte zu Kommunikationsdienstleistungen im Allgemeinen und zu Notrufnummern im Besonderen verbessert.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,

Ihre Evelyne Gebhardt