Internet Protocol – Intellectual Property Policy
& Brexit
Why did we get the GDPR? Find out in The Closing of the Net by me, Monica Horten - PAPERBACK OR KINDLE £15.99!
Galileo, a niche satellite technology programme, has escalated to the top of the Brexit political agenda as Britain and the EU wrangle over access to it. There is a thrilling tension as the two have become locked in an inter-governmental conflict overhung by industrial threats, against a backdrop of science-fiction-like technologies. Galileo symbolises the power of space communications for economic and security policy. And now the EU has signalled a red light to Britain’s key demand for full access to a next-generation encrypted service.
This analysis considers the EU’s new space programme proposals against Britains demands for inclusion in Galileo’s secure PRS service. It draws on the EU Proposal for a Regulation establishing the space programme and the British government’s Technical Note: UK Participation in Galileo, with additional input from the just-released EU slides on space-related activities.
A European satellite project unexpectedly finds itself at the uncomfortable end of the divorce wrangles between Britain and the EU. It illustrates the direct and tangible consequences of the government’s solid red lines, which put contracts and industry growth at risk. What is really at stake? This article draws on evidence given by the space industry to the House of Lords Select Committee on the European Union, and examines the Co-operation Agreements of Norway and Switzerland on Satellite Navigation Programmes. It views them through the prism of the draft UK-EU Withdrawal Agreement.
*Update 24 April 2018 - the Financial Times is now reporting an 'escalating row' between London and Brussels over Galileo.*
<<On the publication of the draft of the entire EU Withdrawal Agreement, this article investigates the Transition chapter and how far Britain’s influence could be written out from the very start. The analysis is based on the text published by the EU, and the British negotiators text which has been circulating online.>>
Will Britain become isolated and not influential, to paraphrase Sir John Major's words from his speech today? There is one aspect of Britain’s proposed Transition out of the European Union that risks being overlooked. Britain – its government, businesses and individuals such as academics, NGOs and researchers - could be excluded from EU decision-making bodies, agencies and expert groups from 29 March 2019 during the Transition period. As others have already said, Britain risks becoming a rule-taker, but this goes further. It means Britain stands to lose influence not only in law making and central banking, but regulatory and standards bodies, scientific and security agencies, and a plethora of smaller groups that input to policy-making.
Brexit means that Britain risks losing access to two vital EU satellite programmes. They deliver key communications technologies to power Mrs May’s vision for a 4th industrial revolution. It’s a failure to join the policy dots. Has the government lost the signal?
The European Parliament is not at the negotiating table, yet it does have ways of leveraging influence over the Brexit negotiations. Why does its position matter? Especially now that the British Parliament has narrowly won the right to vote on the final Brexit deal.
10 years ago in 2007, I started this blog, Iptegrity.com. Over that time, I’ve had a ring-side seat on policy debates about the way the Internet should be governed, and the battles over controlling content and surveillance. Here I reflect on those 10 years.
The latest 'compromise' from the Estonian Presidency on the EU Copyright Directive, cuts right across a fundamental balance in EU law. It seeks to embed hosting intermediaries into copyright law and to impose an onerous and heavy-handed form of prior restraint on Internet users. Moreover, in 10 years’ of working on EU policy, I have rarely seen legal drafting as repetitive, wordy and muddled as this. The problematic text is
I presented this speech entitled 'Data is the new currency' at the ThingMonk conference, Shoreditch, London on 13 September 2017. In the speech, I discuss the implications for the GDPR and for Brexit.
Did you know that by 2020, the European data economy is predicted to be worth some €643 billion? Many companies, yourselves included, are able to monetise the data trails that we all leave online, and you will know how personal data is now important in all kinds of ways from healthcare, to smart cities, to energy management and the Internet of things. This is what is meant by data is
Parma ham, Cognac and Roquefort cheese could become caught up in a political side-show in the Brexit talks following a European Commission position paper on intellectual property rights (IPR). The issue relates to Geographical Indications, which are specific rights pertaining to these and other food and wine products, and a demand from the EU for new British legislation. The timing of the demand - in a position paper on IP rights - is curious, and it has exposed an unexpected sensitivity in the Brexit negotiations. Why you might ask, does this matter at all?
An esoteric intellectual property right granted to a small pastry product leads us to the epicentre of the geopolitics of Brexit.
Britain’s international trade Minister Liam Fox let slip last week in a BBC Radio interview that his US trade talks will include intellectual property rights (IPR). The inclusion of IPR is not a surprise to seasoned watchers of the international trade agenda, but the implications for British businesses might be. Brexit means that some IP rights will fall away, such as geographical indicators which protect local British products like the Cornish pasty. There will be political choices for the British government. Those choices will be shaped by the wider geo-political forces between the EU and the US.
How far does the French-British action plan against terrorism on the Internet impose new liabilities on Internet companies? Where does an upload filter become prior censorship?
When Theresa May met the French President Emmanuel Macron in June this year they agreed a joint proposal to suppress terrorist content content on the Internet. They vowed to work together to block content, freeze user accounts and get access to encrypted content. This would involve stay down measures and access to personal data behind IP addresses. The plan has received little coverage, no doubt overshadowed by much bigger geo-political agendas. In this post, I consider how the Franco-British Action Plan puts pressure on Internet intermediaries and raises questions for human rights online.
The strange case of the right to IP which will cease in the UK post-Brexit.
The Great Repeal Bill - now known by its new title of the European Union (EU) Withdrawal Bill – will take away a right to intellectual property (IP) granted under EU law. Here's why:
The irony of Britain leaving the European Union is that that other side is driving.
The British have been forced to accept that trade negotiations will not run in parallel with the 'divorce' talks, that the negotiators wll meet 4-weekly, that the default setting is 'transparency'. How is the EU is able to impose terms, when this should be a joint negotiation? It is a manifestation of power play in an imbalanced relationship. This article investigates the power relations of Brexit and suggests that the EU is able to wield 'structural power' in order to shape choices for the British.
In seeking a response to terrorism, how can we protect our democratic values online as well as offline? Theresa May says there should be no safe spaces for online extremism, but attacking online platforms, and laying the blame entirely at their feet, is at best unhelpful and fundamentally problematic. How should we, as a society, ensure safeguards against the unintended consequences of such measures?
Copyright enforcement remains an ongoing policy issue, with the current processing of the new Copyright Directive in the European Parliament.
This article is the text of my speech at the Council of Europe "Freedom of Expression Online" conference in Nicosia, Cyprus on 28 April 2017. The speech is entitled Balancing freedom of expression online: insights from copyright cases. I address Member State and ECJ caselaw, taking copyright enforcement cases, mainly from the UK, as examples. The cases concern the blocking or filtering of content, and balancing the conflicting rights of copyright versus freedom of expression.
IP News & views
- EU copyright bombshell: social media sites to police content
- Brexit: a sad day for free speech in Britain
- Social media, video & clouds in firing line as EU sparks Internet content battle
- TTIP leaks: telecoms proposals threaten net neutrality & citizens rights
- TTIP leaks: US warned on sensitive IPR issues
- EU 'historic' data protection rules highlight privacy paradox
- EU wants to know how ISPs can block music files - in 500 words
- Investigatory Powers Bill - is it leading the world over a cliff?
- Out for a duct: what chance for fibre to the home?
- Ofcom review: Static on the line brings uncertainty for broadband industry
- UK telecoms review – is Openreach too hot to touch?
- EU drops the net neutrality principle – will it mean content restrictions?
- EU net neutrality – how political is this decision?
- Net neutrality or zero rating? Tomorrow's EU vote will decide
- Netzpolitik.org: treason inquiry over German blog and leaked spy plans
Published work
- Content responsibility: The looming cloud of uncertainty for Internet intermediaries
- Freedom of Expression, Human Rights Standards and Private Online Censorship
- The Policy Challenge Of Content Restrictions: How Private Actors Engage The Duties Of States
- Internet Policy Review - The Aereo dilemma and copyright in the cloud
- JIPITEC - The Digital Economy Act in the dock
States v the 'Net?
Read The Closing of the Net, by me, Monica Horten.
"original and valuable" Times higher Education
" essential read for anyone interested in understanding the forces at play behind the web." ITSecurity.co.uk
Find out more about the book here The Closing of the Net
FROM £15.99
In 2012, I presented my PhD research in the European Parliament.
My Linked In profileDon't miss Iptegrity! 
RSS/ Bookmark
Iptegrity.com is the website of Dr Monica Horten. She is a trainer & consultant on Internet governance policy, published author& Visiting Fellow at the London School of Economics & Political Science. She served as an independent expert on the Council of Europe Committee on Internet freedom. She has worked on CoE, EU and UNDP funded projects in eastern Europe and beyond. She was shortlisted for The Guardian Open Internet Poll 2012. Iptegrity offers expert insights into Internet policy (and now Brexit). Iptegrity has a core readership in the Brussels policy community, and has been cited in the media. Please acknowledge Iptegrity when you cite or link. For more, see IP politics with integrity
Iptegrity.com is made available free of charge for non-commercial use, Please link-back & attribute Monica Horten. Thank you for respecting this.
Contact me to use iptegrity content for commercial purposes
Iptegrity in the media
The politics of copyright
A Copyright Masquerade - How corporate lobbying threatens online freedoms
'timely and provocative' Entertainment Law Review
