NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
[ NNSquad ] EU privacy czar against ACTA
Begin forwarded message: > From: Richard Forno <rforno@infowarrior.org> > Date: February 22, 2010 10:45:56 AM EST > To: Undisclosed-recipients: <>; > Cc: Dave Farber <dave@farber.net> > Subject: EU privacy czar against ACTA > > EU Data Protection Supervisor Warns Against ACTA, Calls 3 Strikes > Disproportionate > > Monday February 22, 2010 > > http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4809/125/ > > Peter Hustinx, the European Data Protection Supervisor, has issued a > 20-page opinion expressing concern about ACTA. The opinion is a > must-read and points to the prospect of other privacy commissioners > speaking out. Moreover, with the French HADOPI three strikes law > currently held up by its data protection commissioner, it raises > questions about whether that law will pass muster under French privacy > rules. > > Given the secrecy associated with the process, the opinion addresses > possible outcomes based on the information currently available. The > opinion focuses on three key issues: three strikes legislation, > cross-border data sharing as part of enforcement initiatives, and > transparency. > > Three Strikes > > On three strikes, the opinion begins by noting the privacy > implications: > > Such practices are highly invasive in the individuals' private sphere. > They entail the generalised monitoring of Internet users’ activities, > including perfectly lawful ones. They affect millions of law-abiding > Internet users, including many children and adolescents. They are > carried out by private parties, not by law enforcement authorities. > Moreover, nowadays, Internet plays a central role in almost all aspects > of modern life, thus, the effects of disconnecting Internet access may > be enormous, cutting individuals off from work, culture, eGoverment > applications, etc. > > The opinion then assesses three strikes within the context of European > data protection law, concluding that it is a disproportionate measure: > > Although the EDPS acknowledges the importance of enforcing intellectual > property rights, he takes the view that a three strikes Internet > disconnection policy as currently known - involving certain elements of > general application - constitutes a disproportionate measure and can > therefore not be considered as a necessary measure. The EDPS is > furthermore convinced that alternative, less intrusive solutions exist > or that the envisaged policies can be performed in a less intrusive > manner or with a more limited scope. Also on a more detailed legal level > the three strikes approach poses problems. > > Among the specific problems, Hustinx concludes that the benefits simply > don't outweigh the costs: > > The EDPS is not convinced that the benefits of the measures outweigh > the impact on the fundamental rights of individuals. The protection of > copyright is an interest of right holders and of society. However, the > limitations on the fundamental rights do not seem justified, if one > balances the gravity of the interference, i.e. the scale of the privacy > intrusion as highlighted by the above elements, with the expected > benefits, deterring the infringement of intellectual property rights > involving - for a great part - small scale intellectual property > infringements. > > Data Sharing > > The opinion also considers the privacy implications of data sharing > arrangements facilitated by ACTA for enforcement purposes: > > It can be questioned first whether data transfers to third countries in > the context of ACTA are legitimate. The relevance of adopting measures > at international level in that field can be questioned as long as there > is no agreement within the EU member states over the harmonisation of > enforcement measures in the digital environment and the types of > criminal sanctions to be applied. In view of the above, it appears that > the principles of necessity and proportionality of the data transfers > under ACTA would be more easily met if the agreement was expressly > limited to fighting the most serious IPR infringement offences, instead > of allowing for bulk data transfers relating to any suspicions of IPR > infringements. This will require defining precisely the scope of what > constitutes the 'most serious IPR infringement offences' for which data > transfers may occur. > > The opinion follows this with detailed recommendations on how ACTA can > facilitate sharing of information and ensure appropriate privacy > safeguards. > > Transparency > > Hustinx is direct and to the point on the issue of transparency: > > The EDPS strongly encourages the European Commission to establish a > public and transparent dialogue on ACTA, possibly by means of a public > consultation, which would also help ensuring that the measures to be > adopted are compliant with EU privacy and data protection law > requirements. > ------------------------------------------- Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/ Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com ----- End forwarded message -----