Difference between revisions of "Telecoms Package Vote Sept24 Mobilisation"

From La Quadrature du Net
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 1: Line 1:
Translations :  [[Telecoms_Package_Vote_Sept24_Mobilization_es|spanish]] | [[Telecoms_Package_Vote_Sept24_Mobilization|english]] | [[Telecoms_Package_Vote_Sept24_Mobilization_de|german]]
+
Translations :  [[Telecoms_Package_Vote_Sept24_Mobilization_es|Spanish]] | [[Telecoms_Package_Vote_Sept24_Mobilization_fr|French]] | [[Telecoms_Package_Vote_Sept24_Mobilization_de|German]]
  
 
Telecoms Package Vote - vote on September 24th
 
Telecoms Package Vote - vote on September 24th

Revision as of 02:14, 20 September 2008

Translations : Spanish | French | German

Telecoms Package Vote - vote on September 24th

Let's Mobilize against surveillance of the European Internet

This page is constantly updated. Please check it often, using for instance its RSS feed. Help improving by editing the associated discussion tab. Any comment welcome.

Executive summary of current situation

  • The "Telecoms Package" directives will be voted in Euroepan Parliament in Brussels on September 24th, 11h30, in plenary session.
  • Some amendments, contain some very disturbing/harmful/problematic dispositions.
    • Some amendments could allow Member States to create "graduated response" against unauthorized file sharing, which would have many harmful consequences for civil liberties
    • The notion of "lawful content" is a threat for civil liberties and the socio-economic development of the Internet.
  • Progress was made in the rework of the LIBE amendments, according to the EDPS report of Sept. 2nd
  • Some good amendments got tabled (Bono amendment on Trautmann report, Verts/ALE, GUE/NGL, IND/DEM ones)
  • There is little time left to inform Members of European Parliament (MEPs) about those questions and advice them to vote in order to protect citizens/consumers' freedom and rights.

Detailed argumentation

"Graduated Response"

Some amendments could allow Member States to create "graduated response" against unauthorized file sharing, which would have many harmful consequences for civil liberties.

  • The notion of "cooperation" between internet service providers and cultural industries, about the "promotion of lawful content" is vague
    • General interest messages sent to all customers could be acceptable
    • Targeted messages, based on the surveillance of individual user's behaviour is untolerable
    • There is no clear limitation that excludes individual messages from that "cooperation".


  • LIBE amendments were reworked according to the EDPS recommandations
    • The EDPS suggested to delete problematic amendments, and as a second choice to rewrite them. Unfortunately, the second choice that was taken.
    • Major improvements were made. They will make the graduated response harder to implement, but it's still a threat.


"Lawful content"

The notion of "lawful content" is bad for civil liberties and socio-economic development of the Internet.

  • Who shall determine what is lawful and what is not except the judicial authority ?
  • Will administrative authorities be able to decide of what is "lawful content" ?
  • What about fair use, independent author's diffusion, Creative Commons, bottom-up innovation which is the root of the development of digital environment ?


Bono amendment

The plenary amendment tabled by Guy Bono (PS, FR), Daniel Cohn-Bendit (Greens, DE, chairman), Zuzana Roithova (EPP/ED, CZ) guarantees that citizen's fundamental rights, including freedom of speech, can only be restricted by the judicial authority.


Article 8.4

"The national regulatory authorities shall promote the interests of the citizens of the European Union by inter alia:"

...

"h) applying the principle that no restriction may be imposed on the rights and freedoms of end users 
in accordance with Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union 
on freedom of expression and information, without a prior ruling by the judicial authorities, 
except where dictated by force majeure or by the requirements of preserving network integrity and security, 
and subject to national provisions of criminal law imposed for reasons 
of public policy, public security or public morality."


  • Today, the judicial judge is the guardian of civil liberties and freedom of citizens. This amendment guarantees that this will continue, that no administrative authority can order justice rulings impacting on internet users' ability to access and distribute content.
  • The exceptions for "force majeure" and "national provisions of criminal law imposed for reasons of public policy, public security, or public morality" are already in Member State's criminal laws. Nothing will be changed here.
  • The exceptions for "preserving network integrity and security" are legitimate, technically demonstrable, and described in ( some other part of the texts )
  • The reference to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union ... (?)


Everyone shall call his/her MEP!

  • Ask them to vote for the Bono amendment that guarantees that citizen's fundamental rights, including freedom of speech, can only be restricted by the judicial authority.
    • If there is a doubt about whether the "graduated response" is still in the package or not, the best is to guarantee that it won't be.
    • The judge is the guardian of freedom and civil liberties already. This amendment won't change that situation, nor the criminal law of member states.
  • advise them of the voting recommandations from La Quadrature

You can find your MEP here : list @ europarl.europa.eu