France

Setting the trend, France’s president Nicolas Sarkozy continues to push for a three strikes law in his country. The first try to establish a graduated response, nick named HADOPI after the regulator body responsible for judging over internet suspensions, was striken down by the french supreme court, la Constitutional Council of France. Now, in the spirit of making law with brute force, Mr. Sarkozy is back with HADOPI 2. What’s new? A figleaf judge controlling and legitimating the decisions made by HADOPI. And a tacked-on provision to add internet suspension to the penalties for online fraud, whose wording raises concerns that plans to surveil electronic communications might be back on the agenda as well. Read more at laquadrature.net.

New Zealand

Somewhat similar to the french situation New Zealand is entering round two of its three strike law discussions as well. The first attempt raised enough public outrage to generate a deadlock in terms of the political decision process. What’s new? Instead of the ISPs, the New Zealand’s Copyright Tribunal will decide whether your digital life is suspended for a minor crime. Read more at The National Business Review.

Australia

After being a pioneer in the internet censorship debate, Australia now also tackles the graduated response idea. So far nothing much concrete is known, but communications minister Stephen Conroy is currently busy rattling sabers and collecting ideas from the cpyright lobby to make into a new law as fast as possible. Read more at itnews.

The rest of the world

Europe seems to be on track to agree upon the Stockholm program, that contains measures to control and constrain the internet as one of its key components. ACTA is also still lurking in the shadows as another framework providing scared old man with a new bogeyman and easy solutions to sell to the public.

If your country hasn’t announced restrictive measures influencing your rights online, it soon will. Get ready.

We Germans have quite an expertise in building walls. Today our parliament enacted a law to establish mandatory infrastructure to filter the internet. The law is targeted at child pornography, but industry and politicians already announced intentions to use the infrastructure to regulate access to online gambling, filesharing and more. Even if the law currently excludes these scenarios, it is doubtful if use in civil lawsuits can be excluded at all, not to mention that Germany has a history of expanding these kind of laws, like e.g. with traffic monitoring data collected for highway tolls.

Once again, our future and our digital rights are in the hands of a supreme court. A worrying development that this happens so often in so many countries, lately. What happens if this last bastion of civil rights fails this time, or the next time?

If it happens this time, Germany will join the ranks of countries controlling internet access this summer or autumn. This development marks a whole generation being alienated by the polictial establishment. It marks the utter disrespect for a petition against this law that gathered 135.000 supporters in just a few weeks. It marks a debate that discrimnated citizens that care about and understand the internet, as supporters of child porn or belittled them as “community”. Therefore I’m sad, disappointed and angry.

So, what’s next?

There’s no escape, this is a global development. Protests are being organized for next Saturday. But in the end I fear this is going to be our 10 foot high wall and we need to get used to bringing 11 foot ladders everywhere we want to go.

If you need to catch up with the developments in Germany, netzpolitik.org has a good summary.

More depressing news from Russia:

Russia’s interior minister is demanding the elimination of anonymity on the Internet for residents of former Soviet territories.

“Violators of the law should stop abusing the openness of the Commonwealth of Intependent States’ borders,” Rashid Nurgaliev was quoted by RIA Novosti as saying Thursday.

“They should not hide in the territories where the legislation of the states pursuing them is not valid,” he said at the CIS Interior Ministries meeting in Yalta.

According to Nurgaliyev, law-enforcement agencies with the interested ministries and the business community should monitor online registration constantly to minimize anonymity.

Russian police chief seeks to abolish anonymity in the Internet / MosNews.com

And from the UK:

Member of parliament Alan Johnson, the AGM’s guest keynote speaker, is the current U.K. secretary of state for health. He has also been tipped as a possible prime minister, should Gordon Brown vacate the position.

Johnson has had extensive dealings with the music industry during his stint as secretary of state for education and skills in 2006, and his ministerial post at the department of trade and industry in 1999.

He noted the uncertainty generated by the Internet, which has made music more accessible to consumers but also vulnerable to piracy.

“Music is better now in terms of variety and choice; music is everywhere because of the Internet,” he says, comparing today’s business with his youthful days in the 1960s, when music media was restricted to the public broadcaster BBC and pirate radio.

“But that has caused you so many problems because governments and regulators have not kept pace,” he declared.

Johnson noted that deregulation of banks in previous years had been blamed for that sector’s more recent problems, and so did not recommend a lack of regulation surrounding the activities of the music industry.

Govt Minister Backs ‘Regulation’ To Tackle Piracy

The German Bundestag, or lower house of parliament, passed legislation on Thursday making terrorist activity – even with no clear intent to carry out an attack – punishable by up to ten years in prison.

The new law gives officials more authority to prosecute crimes that are thought to endanger Germany.

Any involvement with suspected terrorist groups, including contacting them, preparing for a terror attack by collecting money, financing terrorist activities, gathering bomb materials, spending time in a terrorist training camp or publishing bomb-building instructions will now be illegal.

(via Berlin passes new anti-terrorism laws – The Local)

There also seems to be some confusion if even downloading or reading bomb-building instructions is illegal as well now. I might be too cynical, but I’m reminded of the concept of “thought crimes”.

Austrian Interior Minister Maria Fekter again emphasized her intended realization of online surveillance on a conference of Austrian Jurist Comission on May 23rd. Fekter claimed to enable Austrian law enforcement authorities with »necessary appliances«, including online surveillance and data retention, as soon as possible.

Austrian Interior Minister Fekter at ÖJK

According to Austrian Newspaper DER STANDARD, Fekter ardently advocated to »attach importance to fighting delinquency and security in the same way it is done with data protection, personal freedom rights and defense against a potential surveillance society.« She also argued that »security and safety are top priority in civil needs – far ahead of data protection or privacy.«

Since January 1st 2008, Austrian law already allows police to investigate internet usage and localize cell phones without legal inspection. A parliamentary request by Peter Pilz (Die Grünen) showed that over 6000 users have been under investigation form January 1st to September 22nd, 2008; 22 a day.

(via derStandard.at, bmi.gv.at, APA OTS; Image: Austrian BM.I/Robert Stein)

Having just passed its super-controversial Création et Internet“graduated response” law, you might think the French government would take at least a brief break from riling up the “internautes.” Instead, the government is prepping a new crime bill that will, among other things, mandate Internet censorship at the ISP level, legalize government spyware, and create a massive meta-database of citizen information called “Pericles.”

French newspaper Le Monde has the details on the new law, dubbed “Loppsi 2.” Together with the recent Dadvsi law (which banned DRM circumvention) and Création et Internet (which disconnects repeat online copyright infringers), Loppsi 2 will “fix” France’s various cybersecurity issues.

[...]

Under Loppsi 2, French ISPs would also need to participate in a Web censorship regime that initially appears targeted at child pornography. Critics like Jean-Michel Planche, who advises the French government on Internet issues, are already calling the new bill the end of an open and neutral Internet. (via Ars Technica)

While France  will probably pass its three-strikes legislation later today, the pressure on other countries to follow suit keeps building up. Next up, the United Kingdom:

Persistent illegal file-sharers should be cut off from the net, an alliance of UK creative industries will tell the government later.

The alliance wants the government to force internet service providers (ISPs) to disconnect users who ignore repeated warnings about sharing illegal content.

John Woodward, head of the UK Film Council, said illegal file-sharing was hurting film-making and risking jobs.

The coalition says more than 50% of net traffic in the UK is illegal content.

Mr Woodward said: “The growing threat of illegal P2P (peer to peer) file-sharing threatens [the creative industries], as films go unmade, DVD sales deteriorate and jobs are lost in production and distribution of content.” [...] (via BBC)

La Quadrature du Net:

Strasbourg, May 6 2009 − The debates on the Telecoms Package, thanks to a remarkable citizen mobilization, led to an extremely strong recognition of the access to internet as a fundamental right with the re-adoption of amendment 138/46 in second reading by a qualified majority. It is the final blow against three-strike laws such as Nicolas Sarkozy’s HADOPI bill, which are explicitely banned. The European Parliament nevertheless adopted a soft compromise on issues of network equity: no strong protection against “net discrimination” was adopted.

La Quadrature warmly thanks the numerous European citizens who have contributed to the possibility of this new and stronger than ever statement for fundamental rights. Even on issues connected to network offers, the worst provisions introduced since the beginning of the legislative process were not adopted. Thanks to the public debate, the ill-intended co-operation between ISPs and right holders and discrimination of Net services and contents will not be forced, even though doors are still open for introducing it in Members States.

“A formidable campaign from the citizens put the issues of freedoms on the Internet at the center of the debates of the Telecoms Package. This is a victory by itself. It started with the declaration of commissioner Viviane Reding considering access to Internet as a fundamental right1. The massive re-adoption of amendment 138/462 rather than the softer compromise negotiated by rapporteur Trautmann with the Council is an even stronger statement. These two elements alone confirm that the French ‘three strikes’ scheme, HADOPI, is dead already.” explains Jérémie Zimmermann, co-founder of La Quadrature du Net.

To safeguard these provisions, the European civil society will have to be strongly mobilized during a conciliation phase that would proceed with a newly elected Parliament and a new Presidency. Furthermore, some provisions in the compromise amendments to the Harbour directive adopted today allow telecoms operators to alter the Internet as we know it. Nothing will forbid them to turn the Internet away from a neutral zone where people have equal access to all content applications and services.

As these provisions have been negotiatied with the Council, they are likely to become law. Citizens will have to be particularly attentive to the transposition and implementation of the adopted provisions. It would be disastrous for the Internet to stop being a space where all can create innovative services and contents without permission from gatekeepers. In order for consumers to be in a position to endorse equitable network offers and reject the discriminatory offers, it is essential for at least some of the offers to be non-discriminatory. We will call the regulatory authorities and the Commission to ensure it by all policy means.

“The strong statement for the access to the Internet as a fundamental right demonstrates that the Parliament can be courageous and reject the pressure to compromise when essential values are at stake. Unfortunately, on issues that appear more technical such as the absence of discrimination of services and contents on the Internet, the Parliament did not take the full measure of what it is at stake yet. Citizens must remain mobilized on these crucial questions.”, concludes Gérald Sédrati-Dinet, analyst for La Quadrature.

I’m delighted that someone seems to have found his spine under her/his desk. am138/46 is not much, as I mentioned, but it’s a start. Let’s see what developments the conciliation process brings in this ongoing soap about your basic civil rights…

This week marks a new political disappointment for me. Being lied in the face by a politician, via Twitter.

Last week, as reported, the ITRE committee managed to vote the Bono Amendment back into the Telecoms Package draft. As I already said, the Bono amendment (am138/46) is not a very big accomplishment in terms of digital right. It merely preserves judicial oversight, you know – by an actual judge(!), in case someone wants to disconnect your line to modern life and participation in the media forever by banning you from getting an internet connection after a copyright holder claimed you violated his rights.

As Cory Doctorow said recently, graduated response – cutting your line to the net – is the digital equivalent of a death sentence. It’s forbidding access to books, music, culture, news, communication and entertainment – all at once. Taking away this basic human right – to participate in humanity – should, if at all, be a measure reserved for the highest of crimes. It’s certainly not adequate punishment for downloading three songs illegally.

However we aren’t even discussing that. That fight we already seem to have lost. We just want a judge, someone legitimized by the sovereign, to preside over our digital death sentences. Now, in a comprise to appease the council, the Bono Amendment got castrated to just require a “independent and impartial tribunal” instead of a judge. And don’t kid yourself. The majority for such a tribunal will consist of copyright lobbyists. – Welcome back to the dark ages of the law. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition! Another tribunal once considered “independent and impartial”.

Why the pressure to remove judicial oversight? To me it smells like there is going to be quite a lot more activity on these tribunals than the judicial system can handle. So now, not only politics are heavily influenced by lobbyist, but the lobby also decides who’s guilty. Next up – the copyright police. Brought to you by ACTA.

But back to my initial point: Catherine Trautmann, head of the ITRE committee, who vouched to not bow to the pressure of the council just a week ago, failed spectacularly. And in a surprisingly short period of time. Claiming to have defended am138/46 just after failing to do so gives me the impression she thinks we are stupid enough to believe that kind of lie. Shame on that! I’d rather be spat in the face, madame.

And for a lesson in face-spitting just ask Malcolm Harbour, Mrs. Trautmann. He’s the guy that said this week: ”I am absolutely delighted. It has been deeply frustrating to feel this one issue which was not in any way at the centre of what we were doing could derail two years of work[...]”

Well, aren’t you glad your basic rights to a fair trial did not get in the way of Mr. Harbour’s important “work”?

Seriously. Dear politicians: Fuck you guys. All of you.