Tech policy & human rights
Big tech accountability? Read how we got here in The Closing of the Net
Have the copyright lobbyists won this round, or is it just a full agenda?
The Conference of Presidents, which decides the agenda of the European Parliament, including which motions will be voted in any given session, has failed to include a key motion on ACTA in any of the May plenary sessions.
The motion asks for a referral to the European Court of Justice, in order to get a legal opinion on the compatibility of ACTA with the EU Treaties. It was put forward by the Green group, and is understood to have the support of the Socialists and the Left group.
Instead, it seems the motion will be moved back to June 7th, and it is unclear
what this means or what the reason was.
There seems to be some contention about whether the European Parliament can take vote on an ECJ referral before the ACTA agreement has been formally received. However, the Parliament must make the referral before it votes on consent to ACTA, which may give it a limited window of opportunity.
Given the divergence of opinions on whether or not ACTA is compatible, the ECJ opinion would seem to be a sensible, if not essential, move.
The deferral does beg the question as to whether there is a legitimate procedural reason, or how much the Parliament is being influenced by the recent lobbying of the copyright industries, including the Motion Picture Association ( representing the Hollywood studios) and the IFPI (recorded music industry). They would like to see the EU sign and give consent to ACTA as soom as possible.
A somewhat technical (in the legal sense) explanation of the position regarding the request for an ECJ referral on ACTA .
The correct attribution for this article is: Monica Horten (2011) ACTA: European Parliament postpones ECJ motion http://www.iptegrity.com 9 May 2011
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial-Share Alike 2.5 UK:England and Wales License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/uk/ It may be used for non-commercial purposes only, and the author's name should be attributed.
Online Safety Bill: latest
- Online Safety Bill: does government want to snoop on your WhatsApps?
- What is content of democratic importance?
- Online Safety Bill: One rule for them and another for us
- Online Safety Bill - Freedom to interfere?
- Copyright-style website blocking orders slipped into Online Safety Bill
- £2 billion cost to British businesses for Online Safety Bill
- Online Safety Bill: Ministers to get unprecedented powers over speech
- What's the point of the Online Safety Bill?
IPtegrity commentary
- UK bulk intercept surveillance - court ruling calls for tighter safeguards
- Not a blank cheque: European Parliament consents to EU-UK Agreement
- Oversight Board Decision moves Facebook into human rights ambit
- UK border safety alert - mind the capability gap
- What? Will UK government ignore security as it walks away from EU?
- Britain unplugged: the security risk of no-deal
- Betting on a costly space race: MPs probe OneWeb satellite deal
- Disrupting supply chains: how leaving the Single Market means systemic breakdown
- Big tech and anti-trust: an ill-fitting suit?
- Schrems ruling puts a spoke in UK data flows from 2021
- Russia Report: how to balance social media and national security?
- Digital rights - why they matter in a time of coronavirus
- EU upload filter - Germany’s crucial deciding vote
- Copyright Directive upload filter - why EU Council should block it
- Data and Brexit – a mis-calculation?
- EU lawmakers seek to protect free speech in online content rules
- How Brexit rips up business models Part 2: visas for money and music
Published work
- Algorithms Patrolling Content: Where’s the Harm?
- 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
My Linked In profileIptegrity in brief
Iptegrity.com is the website of Dr Monica Horten. I’ve been analysing analysing digital policy since 2008. Way back then, I identified how issues around rights can influence Internet policy, and that has been a thread throughout all of my research. I hold a PhD in EU Communications Policy from the University of Westminster (2010), and a Post-graduate diploma in marketing. I’ve served as an independent expert on the Council of Europe Committee on Internet Freedoms, and was involved in a capacity building project in Moldova, Georgia, and Ukraine. I am currently (from June 2022) Policy Manager - Freedom of Expression, with the Open Rights Group. For more, see About Iptegrity
Speaking engagements
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
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.
The politics of copyright
A Copyright Masquerade - How corporate lobbying threatens online freedoms
'timely and provocative' Entertainment Law Review
