The Closing of the Net  "original and valuable"  Times Higher Education

Secret talks at DG Markt may not comply with  EU procedures, especially transparency. And are the industry lobbyists getting preferential access? has previously exposed these talks. Now the European Parliament is putting direct questions to the Commission.


Two members of the European Parliament yesterday put questions to DG Markt (European Commission) in respect of  talks taking place about copyright enforcement measures for the Internet.  Stavros Lambrinidis and Francoise Castex, both from the Socialist and Democrat group, allege that the secret talks could lead to the imposition of Hadopi-style copyright enforcement measures through the back door - with the Commission's blessing. They ask whether the talks comply with EU procedures for transparency, and whether certain industry groups are getting special access to the policy-making process.

In a press statement, they said:These talks, if true, could well lead to the back-door imposition of a ‘hadopi-type’ regime throughout Europe, with the Commission’s imprimatur, and without any prior legal scrutiny and preconditions. It is indeed very curious that the Commission apparently decided to hold such talks without involving elected representatives of the European Parliament, Data Protection Supervisory Authorities, civil society or anybody else who might bring to the discussions differing points of view. The Commission must explain under which authority it acts as a facilitator for such secret talks and for the negotiation of such an MoU between private parties, under its auspices”

 Mr Lambrinidis and Mme Castex, want confirmation of dates, agendas and topics discussed at the meetings. One concern they express is that the Comission is aiming at an agreement to impose a Hadopi-style copyright enforcement measures throughout the European Union - as these are measures which affect the fundamental rights of EU citizens, the talks could be in breach of procedure.


The other concern is that the Commission could be offering exclusive access to those representatives of the entertainment and telecoms industries who attend - access to the current review of the IPR Enforcement directive.


Specific questions raised by Mr Lambrinidis and Mme Castex ask: 

-whether DG Markt is trying to broker a Memorandum of Understanding between the entertainment and telecoms industry lobbying associations, which  could result in the back-door imposition , without any Parliamentary scrutiny, of  a "hadopi-type regime throughout Europe"


- whether  DG Markt is holding discussions with these industry lobbying groups on the IP Enforcement directive  in a way which could give these groups priority access over others (such as citizens and privacy advocacy groups).


The talks are understood to have been going on for over a year, with industry representatives from IFPI (music) and ETNO (telecoms) but no civil society representation. In particular, there are no citizens groups, and  the data protection supervisor has also been excluded.


From what is known about the talks, DG Markt is taking a cloak-and-dagger approach to the talks, which are held behind securely  closed doors, and attendees are not allowed to speak about them externally (ISPs & rights-holders in dust-up over Europe-wide MoU ). They are chaired by Margot Froehlinger, who heads up the IPR and copyright work at DG Markt.


Mr Lambrinidis and Mme Castex raise some serious issues. If the Commission is trying to broker an agreement which affects users fundamental rights, then  surely it should involve a wide range of representatives, and the European Parliament, as well as experts on the specific fundamental rights issues? And surely  it is inappropriate for such discussions to take place among a closed group of industry lobbyists who are paid to advocate specific business positions? The apparent exclusion of the Data Protection Supervisor, on a matter which affects privacy, is an obvious example which is cited.


Moreover, if the likes of IFPI and ETNO get priority involvement  and exclusive access to a major public policy review, such as that of the IPR Enforcement directive, it is not unreasonable to suggest that this would be  a breach of policy-making protocol.


We  eagerly await what  Mrs Froehlinger will  pull out of her handbag in response.  




Written questions to the European Commission from  MEPs Stavros Lambrinidis and Francoise Castex:


1. Does the Commission confirm that such talks have been taking place?  If so, what was the agenda and the list of invitees [...]?


2. Were the data protection authorities, including the European Data Protection Comissioner, invited to the meetings that dealt with personal data sharing? If not, why not?


3. Is it true that the Commission is engaged in closed-door negotiations of a "MoU" between trade associations on matters directly relating to fundamental rights? What is the exact role of the Commission in these negotiations and how is the Commission's involvement in negotiating and MoU among private parties complying with the established procedures and the principles of transparency?


4. Does the commission deny the information that the Participants of the Stakeholders dialogue in Online  Copyright Infringements have been offered exlcusive access and priority involvement in DG Markt internal decision-making process on the review of the IPRED?  If so, could it inform us on who else has simlar access and involvement with the Commission on the IPRED matter?



Flattr this


This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial-Share Alike 2.5 UK:England and Wales License. It may be used for non-commercial purposes only, and the author's name should be attributed. The correct attribution for this article is: Monica Horten (2011) MEPS ask Commission: come clean on ‘EU hadopi'talks  29 January 2011








The Copyright Enforcement Enigma tells the story of the 2009 Telecoms Package and how the copyright industries tried to hijack it.

'accurate and absorbing account of the story of the Telecoms Package' -Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology

'...a must read for those interested in knowing in depth about copyright enforcement and Internet.' -Journal of Intellectual Property Rights.  

Read more  

Ask your library to get it!

Order direct from the publisher.

Go to   Amazon

Copyright Enforcement Enigma launch, March 2012

European Parliament launch for Copyright Enforcement Enigma

Don't miss Iptegrity!  RSS/ Bookmark is the website of Dr Monica Horten, European expert on Internet policy and Visiting Fellow at the London School of Economics & Political Science. She is an independent expert on the Council of Europe Committee on Cross-border flow of Internet traffic and Internet freedom (MSI-INT). She was shortlisted for The Guardian Open Internet Poll 2012. Iptegrity  offers expert insights into Internet policy. 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 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