CyberLaw Blog

Archive for the ‘Germany’ Category

Germany’s Nazi Exception: Constitutional Court OKs Curtailing of Free Speech: “Germany’s constitution strongly and explicitly protects the freedom of speech. Still, the country’s highest court has now said that — given the injustice and horrors of the Nazi regime — it is constitutional to make an exception that bans speech glorifying Hitler’s ideology.”

(Via SPIEGEL ONLINE – International.)

Two German Killers Demanding Anonymity Sue Wikipedia’s Parent: “German courts allow the suppression of a criminal’s name in news accounts once he has paid his debt to society, a provision that is now pitted against the American First Amendment.

(Via NYT > Technology.)

German rail firm pays €1.1m fine over employee snooping: “Germany’s national rail company has agreed to pay a €1.1 million for spying on its employees for more than a decade.”

(Via OUT-LAW News.)

Kevin Anderson: Net surveillance and filters are a reality for Europe, too | Technology | The Guardian: “Net surveillance and filters are a reality for Europe, too

Kevin Anderson, guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 24 June 2009 20.30 BST

The internet is playing such a key role in ­getting information out of Iran that attention has focused, once again, on how much Iran controls the internet within its borders. Iran controls the internet gateways into the country, and in 2006 the government outlawed any connection faster than 128kbps – until the policy met stiff opposition from business leaders and even members of the Iranian parliament.

It’s easy to point to countries such as Iran, which the Open Net Initiative says maintains some of the most extensive internet controls in the world, while overlooking the increasing filtering and surveillance of the internet in Europe.

Yaman Akdeniz, the director of Cyber-Rights and Cyber-Liberties, spoke at the recent Deutsche Welle Global Media Forum about the increasing number of websites blocked in Turkey. In 2007, the Turkish parliament fast-tracked ­legislation to regulate the internet, ­passing the bill in just 59 minutes. Supporters defended the legislation on the grounds that it would protect children. In two years, the number of sites blocked went from zero to 2,600.

But many of the sites being blocked have little to do with protecting children from inappropriate content. Blogger, Google’s blogging service, was blocked temporarily because one blog was being used to distribute pirated videos of football matches. Richard Dawkins’s site was blocked over complaints from Turkish creationists, and Turkey is one of a handful of countries in the world that completely blocks YouTube, Akdeniz says. The Turkish government had asked YouTube to remove videos seen as defamatory to the founder of modern Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. YouTube’s owner, Google, offered to block Turkish users from seeing the offending videos, but the Turkish government demanded the videos be taken down from the global site.Of course, whether in Iran or Turkey, the filters are ineffectual.

The Turkish government may be able to block YouTube on computers, but they haven’t figured out how to block the service on Apple’s iPhone. But it’s not just on the edge of Europe, in Turkey. Let’s look to the heart of Europe, to Germany, which has just passed a law to crack down on child ­pornography sites by adding offending sites to a DNS blacklist.

German net activists launched an e-petition opposing the plan. They needed to get at least 50,000 signatures in six weeks for the petition to be read in parliament, but they needed only three days to get that number. When the ­petition was closed six weeks later, it had 130,000 signatures, making it the most successful e-petition.

Instead of using filtering technology, the internet community suggested targeting the offending sites. Using leaked blacklists – such as Germany was proposing – net activists were able to get 60 sites containing child pornography shut down, by contacting international internet service providers, the internet activist and blogger Markus Beckedahl said.

The German government backed down on completely blocking the sites after civil rights and even victims’ rights groups joined internet activists to oppose the plan. Now, internet users coming to a restricted site will see a ­government warning telling them viewing child pornography is a crime, but the user will still be able to access the site.

Child pornography is an easy target, and it has long been used as a rallying cry by internet censors. But we often don’t know what is being blocked.

Here in the UK, it is illegal to even look at the list of blocked sites kept by the Internet Watch Foundation. And while a crackdown on websites makes good headlines, net activists question whether the filtering works or tackles the issue of the exploitation of children.

‘Instead of effectively investing time and efforts to have illegal content removed from the internet, the German government is choosing censorship and blocking – an easy and dangerous way out,’ says Beckedahl.Akdeniz told Deutsche Welle, ‘In a sense, blocking access to these Web sites does not necessarily make the problem go away. We just push it off our computer screens — whether in Germany or the United Kingdom or any other country- but that doesn’t necessarily mean the serious problem of sexual exploitation of children and child pornography disappear from the Internet.’

German parliament passes bill in fight against child pornography sites | Germany | Deutsche Welle | 19.06.2009

The German lower house of parliament, the Bundestag, has adopted a new set of laws making it possible to block child pornography Web sites.

The legislation requires Web hosting companies to post ’stop’ signs when internet users try to access child pornography sites. The bill still has to go through several stages before it becomes law.

The motion has been the subject of a protest petition, with opponents claiming it is a first step towards Internet censorship. The petition has gathered 130,000 signatures calling for the bill to be scrapped.

The proposed law has been promoted by Family Affairs Minister Ursula von der Leyen, who claimed it was an ‘important sign from society.

‘We in Germany won’t stand for it any longer that images of children being raped can be called up on the Web,’ said Leyen.

Lawmakers modified the bill to respond to the criticism and added a sunset clause whereby the legislation would expire after three years.

Others claimed that the bill did not go far enough in restricting access to child pornography.

Internet users will still be able to access child pornography sites even after the stop sign appears, but they will have to click through the warning, which informs them that viewing child pornography is a crime.

Once the legislation passes, police officials will have to draw up a list of Web sites that feature child pornography and send the list to all telecommunications companies.

The bill also requires Germany’s chief privacy commissioner, Peter Schaar, to regularly view the lists. Schaar has opposed this, saying it is not his job.

av/AP/dpa
Editor: Rick Demarest

Censored Street Views: Google Bows to German Data Privacy Demands: “The dispute between Google and the data protection office in Hamburg over the company’s Street View service has been settled. Google has agreed to erase identifiable raw data depicting people, property or cars upon request.”

(Via SPIEGEL ONLINE – International.)

Germany poised to impose police-run block list: “

Quality of German debate shames cosy UK arrangements

Germany’s main political parties have agreed the text of legislation designed to enshrine the blocking of selected internet sites in law.…

“

(Via The Register – Public Sector.)

Blocking access to child porn doesn’t help victims, expert says | Science & Technology | Deutsche Welle | 08.06.2009: “”

Crime | 08.06.2009
Blocking access to child porn doesn’t help victims, expert says

Condemnation of child porn is universal, but not everyone agrees on how to fight it

Germany was right to drop plans that would have blocked access to Web sites containing child pornography, an expert told DW. Such schemes don’t always work, lack transparency and seldom help victims.

Germany’s family ministry recently suggested creating a list of Web sites that contain child pornography and blocking access to them. But the plan was eventually dropped after civil rights – and even victims’ rights – groups opposed the proposed law.

The government’s decisions to shelve the plan was the right one, according to Yaman Akdeniz, the director of British Cyber-rights and Cyber-liberties organization and an expert on the legal issues surrounding child pornography.

He told Deutsche Welle that such technology-based blocks are not always effective and don’t help children who have been sexually abused.

Deutsche Welle: What are some of the technology-based measure being used around the world to fight child pornography and how effective do you think they are?

Yaman AkdenizBildunterschrift: Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: Blocking access to Web sites never works 100 percent of the time, Akdeniz said

Yaman Akdeniz: In the last few years, because of the limitations of the legal systems – the perpetrators or criminals are not always located in the jurisdiction where child pornography is accessible – governments and policy makers started to develop policies to block access to known Web sites and other forums carrying child pornography. Usually this involves blocking access completely from one country to known sources around the world. The UK has been very active in blocking access to child pornography Web sites. Lists are complied on a daily basis and the lists are fed into a system, which many Internet service providers use to block access to known Web sites carrying child pornography.

That sounds similar to a German plan that’s been put on the shelf now. What do you think of the German government’s decision not to block access to Web sites with child pornography?

First of all, there are questions marks about the effectiveness of such a system. I don’t know the exact details of the system in Germany or why the system was dropped, however, these systems are not 100 percent effective. There are issues of transparency – nobody knows what’s being blocked and nobody knows what the criteria are for blocking. Secondly, these systems only prevent accidental access to such Web sites. If anybody wants to deliberately access these Web sites, they will somehow find the technological means to access them. These preventives tools and technologies are never 100 percent effective in blocking access.

Technologists are also developing what we call circumvention technologies to bypass the blocking or censorship mechanisms. These are used, for example, in China to fight political censorship, but they can also be used to bypass blocking mechanisms for any other types of content. Real hardcore pedophiles or anyone else who wants to access these Web sites will find the means to access them.

In a sense, blocking access to these Web sites does not necessarily make the problem go away. We just push it off our computer screens – whether in Germany or the United Kingdom or any other country – but that doesn’t necessarily mean the serious problem of sexual exploitation of children and child pornography disappear from the Internet.

Is there a technological way to help the victims of child pornography?

From a policy development point of view, I think the emphasis of policy initiatives should be preventing sexual exploitation of children.

For example, there is concern that there are more new, exploitative images coming online because most people have digital cameras or telephones. That means real children are being abused somewhere around the globe. Policy makers and police need to concentrate on identifying these children and saving them.

First the abusers then the commercial distributers need to be targeted and then policy makers need to worry about the people who download or view child pornography and prevent them from accessing or viewing child pornography. I’m not here to say that’s not important, but we need to prioritize and there are more important things to be done in the fight against child pornography.

Do you think the Internet has made it easier to spread child pornography or increased access to it?

Compared to the pre-Internet age – which I’d would say is before the mid-1990s – child pornography was predominately a cottage industry and not very visible, but, obviously, the problem of pedophilia and child pornography has not been created by the Internet. It’s the medium where its distribution is facilitated. More child pornography is in circulation, but that does not necessarily mean there is more child pornography compared to the 1980s. It’s the technological development of not just the Internet, but cheaper access to digital cameras and mobile phones with cameras that make it easier to take photos.

But when you look at the prosecution statistics, especially in the United Kingdom and the United States, there were only a handful of prosecutions back in 1995 because the police in both countries were not in a position to find the criminals and they didn’t come in contact with pedophiles because they were circulating their images in secrecy.

Now they do it on the Internet, which has resulted in several successful operations, and in the UK police are now averaging over 1,000 prosecutions every year for child pornography offenses. In the United States that number reached about 1,500 a year, and has been such since about 2001. A lot of people are being prosecuted for child pornography related offenses because they leave digital traces. Easy accessibility and visibility, perhaps, turned into better policing and more people are being prosecuted – as a result of which, I hope more children will be saved from these abusive environments.

We can’t just blame the Internet. The Internet has also been beneficial.

Interview Sean Sinico

Editor: Kate Bowen

Family Minister vs. Freedom of Speech: Anti-Child Pornography Law Flounders: “Germany’s family minister wants a law blocking Web sites that contain child pornography. But critics say the law could be used to censor just about anything — and that it wouldn’t be effective in the first place.”

(Via SPIEGEL ONLINE – International.)

Delete, don’t block: It works! | UnPolitik.de

This is the English version of a German press release on ak-zensur.de
28 May, 2009

Within 12 hours, 60 child pornography sites were removed from the internet

In the ongoing German dispute over the appropriate action against documented child abuse on the Internet(child pornography), the supporters of a mere blocking solution argued that it is often not or only with considerable effort possible to remove the illegsl content or to get hold of it’s originator.

Alvar Freude of the Working Group against Internet blocking and censorship (AK Zensur) put this argument to the test. He analyzed the various European blocking lists via automatic procedures and wrote to each provider on whose servers child pornography was located according to lists. He received an impressive response: Within 12 hours after sending the first e-mail 60 websites were already deleted.

Further results and insights:

* The first reactions respectively deletions followed after a few minutes and came among others from the USA, Holland, Denmark, Russia and Germany.

* Three of the the deleted websites were located on servers in Germany.

* A total of 348 providers in 46 different countries were contacted automatically and informed of 1943 allegedly illegal websites. A previous individual analysis of the web sites content has not been made. (It is completely illegal in Germany to look at child pornographic content.)

* 250 providers have responded to the request, but they mostly found legal content. Samples that were taken afterwards confirmed the legal content.

* Ten providers indicated that a total of 61 cases of illegal content had been removed. With a simple e-mail you can achieve a lot.

* The examination through the providers showed that the vast majority of websites, including some from Germany, appeared to have no child pornographic content, some do not contain any objectionable material at all – therefore the websites were blocked in error. In Finland several domestic websites were blocked, that contain a critical examination of the blocking issue.

* The providers have not been informed that some of their hosted websites were put on the blocking lists.

* When made aware of this fact, the providers are more than willing to cooperate and remove illegal content as soon as possible.

* A certain part of the illegal material was located on ‘hacked’ websites, ie sites that were exploited through security holes to spread external material. Here too the providers were very grateful for the supplied information.

The process to shut down websites with child pornographic content does not take longer than the transmission of a blocking list. This shows the absurdity of the reasoning behind simple blocking – there is no rational reason to just block criminal content and leave it on the Internet, still accessible for everyone who uses minimal effort to circumvent the block.

What was possible for a citizens’ initiative, such as the Working Group on Internet blocking and censorship, should be even easier for the German government and law enforcement agencies and their results should by far exceed the results of AK Zensur.

Delete, don’t block – the motto of AK Zensur – is possible!

Released by: Working Group against Internet blocking and censorship (AK Zensur)
Web: http://ak-zensur.de/ (in German)

Press Contact:
Alvar Freude
presse@ak-zensur.de
+49 179 13 46 47 1

About the Working Group against Internet blocking and censorship (AK Zensur):

The Working Group on Internet blocking and censorship (AK Zensur) speaks out against the Federal Government’s planned Internet blocking and promotes an effective fight against child abuse instead of ineffective symbolic politics that only promotes ‘looking the other way’, does not help the victims and establishes an infrastructure that restricts basic public rights. AK Zensur coordinates the work of Internet blocking opponents, but is also appreciates the many activities that are happening decentralized in the on- and offline world.

The members of AK Zensur are amongst others: Chaos Computer Club (CCC), FoeBuD Association, Association of Information Technology and Society (FITUG), Forum of Computer Scientists for Peace and Social Responsibility Association (FIfF), Victims Of Abuse Against Internet Blocks (MOGIS), netzpolitik.org, the online platform ODEM.org, Trotz Allem e.V. and numerous individuals.