CyberLaw Blog

Archive for the ‘EU’ Category

IP rights enforcement laws criticised by rights holders but supported by ISPs, European Commission says: “EU laws on the enforcement of intellectual property (IP) rights should set out internet service providers’ (ISPs) responsibilities for combating online piracy, copyright holders have told the European Commission.“

(Via OUT-LAW News.)

Delete child pornography web pages across the EU, says Civil Liberties Committee

Justice and home affairs – 14-02-2011 – 22:22

Committee : Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

Child pornography or child abuse material on the web must be removed at source in all EU countries, said the Civil Liberties Committee on Monday, in amendments to proposed new EU rules to prevent abuse, stiffen penalties, and protect victims. Where removal is impossible, e.g. because pages are hosted outside the EU, Member States may still ‘prevent access’ to this material, in line with their national laws, MEPs added, so no Member State will be prevented from blocking sites.
Civil Liberties Committee MEPs made a series of amendments Monday to a proposed EU directive to combat sexual abuse, sexual exploitation of children and child pornography. Studies suggest that between 10% and 20% of minors in Europe may be sexually assaulted during childhood.

Complete removal at source must be the main aim

The original Commission proposal would have made blocking of child porn web sites mandatory for Member States. MEPs instead advocate removal at source and, should that prove impossible, allow Member States to ‘prevent access’ to this material.

EU Member States must impose binding requirements to ensure the ‘removal at source of internet pages containing or disseminating child pornography or child abuse material’, MEPs say.

The EU must also co-operate with third countries to secure the prompt removal of such material from servers hosted in those countries, they add.

Preventing access

Should removal at source prove impossible (e.g. because the state where servers are hosted is unwilling to co-operate or because its procedure for removing the material from servers is particularly long), Member States ‘may take the necessary measures in accordance with national legislation to prevent access to such content in their territory’, say MEPs. The adopted amendment therefore in no way prevents any Member State from blocking sites, in line with its national law.

National measures preventing access ‘must be set by transparent procedures and provide adequate safeguards, in particular to ensure that the restriction is limited to what is necessary and proportionate, and that users are informed of the reason for the restriction’, MEPs say. Content providers and users must also be informed of the possibility to appeal, and to whom to appeal, under a judicial redress procedure, they add.

Tougher penalties and ban on working with children

The new rules would introduce tougher penalties across the EU for those who sexually abuse or exploit children. The proposal sets minimum penalties for 22 criminal offences, but also allows Member States to impose harsher measures and sentencing.

Offenders would face penalties ranging from one to over ten years in prison, depending on the crime. Since some 20% of sex offenders go on to commit further offences after conviction, MEPs stipulate that convicted offenders ‘may be temporarily or permanently prevented from exercising professional activities involving direct and regular contact with children and volunteer activities related to the supervision and/or care of children’.

When recruiting, employers will be entitled to obtain information on any convictions for sex crimes. After recruitment, if serious suspicion arises, employers may still request such information, even if it has to be obtained from criminal records held in other EU countries. Member States may also take other measures, such as putting in place ’sex offenders registers’ accessible to the judiciary and/or law enforcement agencies, add MEPs.

Abuse by persons in a position of trust, authority or influence over the child (for instance, family members, guardians or teachers) is included in, and punishable under, the new criminal offences. Higher sentences would also be imposed on anyone committing an offence involving children with a physical or mental disability, in a situation of dependence or under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

‘Sex tourists’ travelling abroad to abuse children will also face prosecution, under the new rules on jurisdiction.

EU-wide criminalization of ‘grooming’

New forms of abuse and exploitation, such as ‘grooming’ (befriending children through the web with the intention of sexually abusing them), or making children pose sexually in front of web cameras, will also be criminalised. MEPs have added a rule that offenders who use different means to target a great number of children so as to multiply their chances of committing the crime would face harsher penalties.

Protecting victims

MEPs have strengthened proposed rules on assisting, supporting and protecting victims, to ensure that they have easy access to legal remedies and do not suffer from participating in criminal investigations and trials.

Next steps

Negotiations between Parliament and Council representatives will continue in the coming months, with a view to reaching a compromise preferably in the first half of 2011. Once adopted, this directive will replace current EU legislation dating from 2004. Member States would then have two years to transpose the new rules into their national laws.

Committee vote on report of Roberta Angelilli (EPP, IT): 40 in favour, none against, 5 abstentions

In the chair: Juan Fernando LÓPEZ AGUILAR (S&D, ES)

REF.: 20110131IPR12841

MEPs call for shutting down of child pornography web pages throughout EU

Tue, Feb 15 2011 09:29 CET
byThe Sofia Echo staff

MEPs call for shutting down of child pornography web pages throughout EU

Child pornography or child abuse material on the internet must be removed at source in all EU countries, the European Parliament’s civil liberties committee said on February 14 2011, in amendments to new EU rules that are designed to prevent abuse, stiffen penalties, and protect victims.

Where removal is impossible, for example because pages are hosted outside the EU, then EU member states may ‘prevent access’ to this material, in line with their national laws, adds the committee, the European Parliament said in a media statement.

Members of the committee made a series of amendments to a proposed EU directive to combat sexual abuse, sexual exploitation of children and child pornography. Studies suggest that between 10 per cent and 20 per cent of minors in Europe may be sexually assaulted during childhood.

‘We must strengthen prosecution, criminalise new forms of child sexual abuse, such as ‘grooming’ through social chat rooms, and above all protect child victims before, during and after criminal proceedings’, said Roberta Angelilli (EPP, IT), who is steering the legislation through the European Parliament, the media statement said.

The original European Commission proposal would have made blocking of child pornography web sites mandatory for EU member states. MEPs instead advocate removal at source and, should that prove impossible, allowing member states to ‘prevent access’ to this material.

Removal at source

The number of child pornography web sites is growing and an estimated 200 images containing child pornography are put on line every day. The children portrayed are ever younger, and the images are becoming more graphic and more violent.

EU member states must impose binding requirements to ensure the ‘removal at source of internet pages containing or disseminating child pornography or child abuse material,’ MEPs say.

The EU must also co-operate with third countries in to secure the prompt removal of such material from servers hosted in these countries, they add.

Preventing access

Should removal at source prove impossible (for example because the state where servers are hosted is unwilling to co-operate or because its procedure for removing the material from servers is particularly long), EU member states ‘may take the necessary measures in accordance with national legislation to prevent access to such content in their territory,’ say MEPs.

National measures preventing access ‘must be set by transparent procedures and provide adequate safeguards, in particular to ensure that the restriction is limited to what is necessary and proportionate, and that users are informed of the reason for the restriction,’ MEPs say. Content providers and users must also be informed of the possibility to appeal, and to whom to appeal, under a judicial redress procedure, they add.

Tougher penalties and ban on working with children

The new rules would introduce tougher penalties across the EU for those who sexually abuse or exploit children. The proposal sets minimum penalties for 22 criminal offences, but also allows member states to impose harsher measures and sentencing.

Offenders would face penalties ranging from two to more than 10 years in prison, depending on the crime. Since about 20 per cent of sex offenders go on to commit further offences after conviction, MEPs also stipulate that member states may impose on convicted offenders a temporary or permanent ‘ban on engaging in occupations involving any form of contact with children’.

When recruiting, employers will be entitled to obtain information on any convictions for sex crimes. After recruitment, if serious suspicion arises, employers may still request such information, even if it has to be obtained from criminal records held in other EU countries. Member states may also take other measures, such as putting in place ’sex offenders registers’ accessible to the judiciary and/or law enforcement agencies, add MEPs.

Abuse by people in a position of trust, authority or influence over the child (for instance, family members, guardians or teachers) is included in, and punishable under, the new criminal offences. Higher sentences would also be imposed on anyone committing an offence involving children with a physical or mental disability, in a situation of dependence or under the influence of drugs or alcohol.

‘Sex tourists’ travelling abroad to abuse children will also face prosecution, under the new rules on jurisdiction.

EU-wide criminalisation of ‘grooming’

New forms of abuse and exploitation, such as ‘grooming’ (befriending children through the web with the intention of sexually abusing them), or making children pose sexually in front of web cameras, will also be criminalised. MEPs have added a rule that offenders who use different means to target a great number of children so as to multiply their chances of committing the crime would face harsher penalties.

Protecting victims

MEPs have strengthened proposed rules on assisting, supporting and protecting victims, to ensure that they have easy access to legal remedies and do not suffer from participating in criminal investigations and trials.

Raising awareness to prevent crimes

MEPs emphasise the need to prevent crime, through information campaigns, research and education programmes to raise awareness and reduce the risk of children becoming victims of sexual crimes. These measures must be addressed to all parties concerned, including children, parents and teachers, to show them how to recognise signs of sexual abuse, both online and offline. Help-lines should also be set up, adds the committee.

Next steps

Negotiations between European Parliament and European Council representatives will continue in the coming months, with a view to reaching a compromise in the first half of 2011. Once adopted, this directive will replace current EU legislation dating from 2004. Member states would have two years to transpose the new rules into their national laws.

Note from Yaman Akdeniz: Mandatory EU wide blocking is rejected but the provisions still allow the MS to adopt state level legal measures that provide for blocking access to know child pornography sites outside the EU jurisdiction.

Vote on Blocking in Libe Committee | MOGiS e.V. –: “Vote on Blocking in Libe Committee

Posted on 2011/02/14

by Joe McNamee => http://www.edri.org/about/sponsoring

The Civil Liberties Committee of the Parliament this evening, in an ‘orientation vote’ that will set up the negotiations with the Council adopted a text which:

* rejects mandatory EU-wide blocking
* removes all references to ‘self-regulation’
* removes all references to ‘non-legislative measures’

What we did not get is a specific obligation on Member States to require a prior judicial ruling before blocking sites nor a ban on countries that currently block. Both of these, in my view, were wholly impossible, but they are still a ‘stain’ on this being a full success. But from absurdly unrealistic to some (intermediate!) success is quite a journey.

The texts adopted are below.

Article 21

Measures addressing websites containing or disseminating child pornography or child abuse material

1. Member States shall take the necessary legislative measures to obtain the removal at source of Internet pages containing or disseminating child pornography or child abuse material. Internet pages containing such material shall be removed, especially when originating from an EU Member State. In addition, the EU shall cooperate with third countries in securing the prompt removal of such content from servers in their territory.

2. When removal at source of Internet pages containing or disseminating child pornography or child abuse material is impossible to achieve, Member States may take the necessary measures in accordance with national legislation to prevent access to such content in their territory. These measures must be set by transparent procedures and provide adequate safeguards, in particular to ensure that the restriction is limited to what is necessary and proportionate, and that users are informed of the reason for the restriction. Content providers and users shall be informed of the possibility to whom to appeal under a judicial redress procedure.

2a. Any measure under paragraphs 1 and 2 shall respect fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons, as guaranteed by the European Convention of the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and general principles of Union law. Those measures shall provide for prior authorisation in accordance with national law, and the right to an effective and timely judicial redress.

2b. The European Commission shall submit to the European Parliament an annual report on the activities undertaken by Member States to remove child sexual abuse material from Internet pages.

Recital 13

(13) Child pornography, which constitutes child abuse material, is a specific type of content which cannot be construed as the expression of an opinion. To combat it, it is necessary to ensure as quickly as possible the full removal at source of Internet pages containing or disseminating child pornography or child abuse material and to identify the offenders to start procedures against them, as the investigation and prosecution of such crimes should be a priority. Any webpage originating from an EU Member State and containing sexual abuse material of children should be removed. The EU, in particular through increased cooperation with third countries and international organisations and with the help of bilateral or multilateral agreements, should seek to facilitate the effective removal by third country authorities of websites containing child pornography or child abuse material, which are hosted in their territory, as well as concurrent criminal prosecution of persons who placed such content on or distributed it over the internet. In that regard international cooperation between judicial and police authorities should be strengthened and reporting points put in place. However, should despite such efforts the removal at source of Internet pages containing or disseminating child pornography or child abuse material prove impossible to achieve where the original materials are not located within the EU,either because the State where the servers are hosted is not willing to cooperate or because the procedure for removal of the material in the State concerned proves to be particularly long, Member States may take the necessary measures in accordance with national legislation to prevent access to such content in their territory. There should be strengthened cooperation between public authorities, particularly in the interest of ensuring that information regarding websites containing child pornographyor child abuse material is as complete as possible and of avoiding duplication of work. Any suchmeasure must be in accordance with national legislation, respect the rights of the end users, adhere to legal and judicial procedures and comply with the European Convention on Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The Safer Internet Programme has set up a network of hotlines whose goal is to collect information and to ensure coverage and exchange of reports on the major types of illegal content online.

MEPs putting child pornographers’ rights ahead of abuse victims, claim campaigners | Society | The Observer: “MEPs putting child pornographers’ rights ahead of abuse victims, claim campaigners

Childrens’ charities attack move to inform child pornographers when images are removed from the internet

* Jamie Doward
* The Observer, Sunday 13 February 2011
* Article history

European MPs have been accused of putting the rights of child pornographers ahead of abused children after it emerged that they are to water down new laws, backed by the UK government, for curbing the dissemination of child abuse images [see footnote].

The European parliament’s civil liberties, justice and home affairs committee (LIBE) will meet in Strasbourg tomorrow, when it is expected to approve a controversial measure that would compel EU member states to inform publishers of child pornography that their images are to be deleted from the internet or blocked. Child pornographers will also have to be informed of their right to appeal against any removal or blocking. The measure would make the UK’s system for blocking and removing child pornography without informing the publisher illegal.

‘MEPs seem more concerned with the rights of child pornographers than they do with the rights of children who have been sexually abused to make their foul, illegal images,’ said John Carr, an adviser to the UK government on child internet safety and the secretary of the Children’s Charities Coalition on Internet Safety.

For the directive to become an EU-wide law it must be agreed both by the Council of Ministers and the European parliament.

The Council of Ministers agreed tough new measures approving the blocking and deletion of child pornography images shortly before Christmas. But LIBE intends to reject them after civil rights campaigners mounted a lobbying campaign, warning that they were a form of internet censorship.

• This footnote was added on 14 February 2011. The Information Office of the European Parliament has asked us to make clear that the amendment in question clearly states that in cases where it is not possible to remove internet pages with child porn material because the images are held outside the EU, member states ‘may prevent access’ to them. The option of blocking sites is therefore still available to countries such as the UK.

Net censors use UK’s kid-safety frenzy to justify clampdown • The Register:

It’s time to talk Turkey…

By Jane Fae Ozimek
Posted in Government, 10th February 2011 14:38 GMT

An obsession with child protection in the UK and throughout the EU is encouraging a cavalier approach to law-making, which less democratic regimes are using to justify much broader repression on any speech seen as extreme or dangerous.

That was the accusation made by academic and online legal expert, Dr Yaman Akdeniz, at last week’s Onscenity Conference in London. Dr Akdeniz, now an Associate Professor of Law with Istanbul’s Bilgi University, was concerned with what he saw as a ‘domino effect’.

He said: ‘The UK and EU are supporting measures that allow for websites to be censored on the basis of purely administrative processes, without need for judicial oversight.’

He went on to explain that even though the EU endorses very high principles when it comes to censorship, its practice often falls far short, with different working groups facing both ways on this issue.

He said: ‘Several countries within the EU operate secret block lists, which makes it even harder for individuals to know what is going on or for due process of law to be carried out.’

Dr Akdeniz, who also runs the cyberlaw site, prefaced his remarks by looking at censorship in Turkey. He noted that hundreds of sites were permanently blocked, and although the excuse given was often couched in moral terms, the actual targets for blocking appeared to depend as much on considerations of politics and commerce.

He highlighted sites including blogs critical of government, that had been blocked on grounds of being pornographic, even though their content was far softer than other mainstream pornography still freely available.

Also relevant is the saga of YouTube, banned in its entirety after it carried a clip allegedly implying that Kemal Ataturk, founder of modern Turkey, was effeminate. Shortly after one court reinstated YouTube’s right to be viewed in Turkey, a subsequent court ordered it blocked again because it allegedly carried a clip of the former chairman of the opposition, Deniz Baykal, in a bedroom with a female aide.

According to international anti-censorship lobby Reporters sans Frontieres, Turkey continues to be one of the biggest banners in Europe, with some 5,000 different sites banned in their entirety at last count, including geocities.com, myspace.com and dailymotion.com.

Dr Akdeniz claimed that trends visible today in Turkey are equally applicable across the Middle East.

Meanwhile, in a further sign of how UK censorship techniques are being exported around the world, three prominent UK experts were addressing a conference in Turkey this week to provide further insights into the UK model of net ‘safeguarding’.

The programme for Turkish Internet Safety Day, included a stellar cast of Turkish speakers, plus three Brits: Prof Dr Sonia Livingstone, who lectures at the LSE and is Director of EUKids Online; Facebook’s European Political Director Lord Richard Allan; and John Carr, a United Kingdom government adviser on Internet safety policy for children, who also works with European NGO Alliance for Child Safety Online (eNACSO) and Children’s Charities’ Coalition on Internet Safety (CHIS).

According to Dr Akdeniz, ‘John Carr will be exporting the British ‘way of protecting children’ from harmful content on the Internet and will probably welcome the Turkish efforts to block access to thousands of websites’.

Dr Livingstone will be looking at studies of the experiences of children and young people in in the context of new technologies. John Carr is examining self-regulatory practices and the role of NGOs in social sharing sites. ®

Business Insight | Infotech-Telecoms:

Europe seen needing regulation on Internet access
22 December, 2010

LONDON – Europe’s confidence that it need not follow the United States in adopting rules to ensure fair Internet access may be short-lived, as competition between mobile operators and service providers like Skype intensifies.

A debate over net neutrality — the principle that all Internet traffic be treated equally — has been heating up in the United States for years but has so far generated little public concern in Europe.

At stake is the ability of Internet service providers (ISPs) to ration access to their networks, allowing them to manage congestion but running the risk they will favour their own services or those who pay more, restricting consumer choice.

The US communications regulator on Tuesday adopted rules that banned high-speed Internet service providers from blocking lawful traffic but allowed them to ‘reasonably’ manage their networks.

In Europe, telecoms operators such as Deutsche Telekom, France Telecom or Telefonica — former state monopolies which typically have close relationships with national governments — still have the upper hand.

The European Commission has so far refrained from legislating to avert a looming conflict with the likes of Skype, Google or Facebook, which offer virtually free voice communications and messaging, striking at the heart of the carriers’ business.

But Internet service providers (ISPs) — mainly telcos in Europe — already actively manage traffic to make it more efficient, and the potential to do more to protect their own services or earn extra revenues may be too much to resist.

‘Mobile operators will be sorely tempted to do all they can to block the competition and stop them from cannibalising their revenue streams,’ says Bengt Nordstrom, chief executive of Nordic telecoms consultancy Northstream.

‘While operators have dodged the net neutrality bullet for now, they can expect further intrusion from the European Commission in the not-too-distant future,’ says Nordstrom, who predicts such intervention will come in 2012.

Europe’s competitive environment is different from that in the United States, with fiercer rivalry among more mobile carriers operating in smaller markets, and a less-developed cable infrastructure.

This has led some to argue that the need for legislation in Europe is far less, as competition between ISPs allows customers to easily switch to an alternative provider if they are not getting the services they want.

At the same time, the operators argue they need and deserve help to upgrade their networks, which have begun to creak under the weight of traffic generated by services like Google-owned YouTube, Facebook and the BBC iPlayer.

‘What is evident is that Internet search engines use our networks without paying for it. That’s real luck for them and a disgrace for us,’ Telefonica Chairman Cesar Alierta said this year. ‘We do everything. I mean, they just have algorithms.’

Bernstein analysts wrote in a recent research note: ‘In Europe, unlike the US, the net neutrality debate can, and we think will, be cast not as a battle for free speech but instead as a battle between aggressive over-reaching, freeriding US content companies and homegrown European infrastructure providers (that also happen to be the number two or three employer in each respective country).’

They said their stock preferences to play this state of affairs was for European telcos and US cable operators.

Vodafone Deutsche Telekom, France Telecom, Telefonica and Telecom Italia have all complained about Google, Facebook and Apple using their networks to deliver services without contributing to network investments.

So far the European Union has taken a wait-and-see attitude, having directed national governments to ensure ISPs adopt non-discriminatory and transparent policies — something they will have to put into practice by May 2011.

Meantime, it is consulting to determine whether traffic-management tools deployed by ISPs constitute a problem.

‘There is cognitive dissonance. The service providers say we’re not doing any of this, the likes of Skype say their services are being throttled,’ says one senior EU official. ‘It’s clear that you have to be vigilant about these issues.’

Who holds the balance of power in the delicate relationship between the telcos and the content providers is ‘the $64,000 question’, according to Andrew Bud, founder and chief strategy officer of mobile transmission and billing firm mBlox.

‘That power balance is continually shifting,’ said Bud, who has long argued companies that want to push their content and services through networks to consumers should pay. He sees Europe as past the need for a net-neutrality debate.

‘I can see events accelerating towards a new consensus,’ he said, citing most recently a speech by British Communications Minister Ed Vaizey in which he said it might make sense for content providers to pay for differing levels of service.

Northstream’s Nordstrom reckons that consolidation in the trillion-dollar telecoms industry will pick up pace, changing the status quo, and predicts that European regulators will step in to legislate in 2012.

He points to carriers’ past reluctance to self-regulate in the case of roaming charges for making mobile calls abroad — costs that were eventually slashed by the EU — saying operators tended to exploit favourable conditions for as long as possible.

‘Nothing happened until regulation came, and now it’s data. Operators are rather waiting to be regulated and trying to leverage the situation as much as they can,’ he says. ‘There’s a lot of money to be made before regulation comes in.’ – Reuters

Prove data retention law’s usefulness or repeal it, says EU privacy chief: “The Data Retention Directive is the most privacy-invasive piece of legislation ever adopted by the European Union and has never been fully justified, Europe’s top privacy watchdog has said.“

(Via OUT-LAW News.)

EU Parliament backs ACTA with few reservations: “

Still need more clarity though

The European Parliament has welcomed a controversial international intellectual property treaty as a ’step in the right direction’ but has reiterated calls for clarity on the impact of the law on existing EU rights.…

“

(Via The Register – Public Sector.)

EU Parliament backs ACTA with few reservations: “The European Parliament has welcomed a controversial international intellectual property treaty as a ’step in the right direction’ but has reiterated calls for clarity on the impact of the law on existing EU rights.“

(Via OUT-LAW News.)