IP = Internet Protocol

IP = Intellectual Property

Integrity = a quality we would like to see in politics



 Iptegrity.com is released under a Creative Commons licence. Please attribute the author when quoting or using it as a reference source. 

 

Don't miss iptegrity

Use Live Bookmarks in your browser to keep up to date with iptegrity.com (RSS feed)

Login / Comment

You will need to log in to make a comment on any of the Policy Matters articles.
Username

Password

Remember me
Password Reminder
No account yet? Create one
It is free to create an account. When you have created it, you will get an email, telling you how to activate it.

 Support IPTEGRITY

Iptegrity.com provides comment and news on EU Internet policy that is independent of all commercial and political interests. 


Your donation will help to keep it that way.

 

Home arrow Policy Matters arrow Telecoms package arrow Another amendment sneaked in to Telecoms Package
Another amendment sneaked in to Telecoms Package
Written by Monica Horten   
Aug 11, 2008 at 02:44 PM

 Key amendment switched at the last minute before the 7 July vote. What kind of law-making is this?

 

Annexe 1, Point 19 amendment to the Authorisation Directive has been deleted and replaced with an alternative text, that paves the way for ISP filtering at the framework level of EU law. 

Annexe 1, Point 19 of the Authorisation Directive  was an amendment which meant that EU governments could place copyright enforcement as a term of doing business for ISPs. In principle, it's a good thing that it has been deleted. What I am concerned about, is  the possible interpretation of the  text that has replaced it.

The deletion was voted through by the Industry, Research and Energy committee (ITRE)  on July 7th.  In its place, there is a new text, which  refers to another amendment  - Article 8 - point 4 - g. This amendment refers (via another linked amendment)  to co-operation between ISPs and rights-holders.  I have now been able to analyse it, and as I  suspected,  it means


more or less the same thing as the original amendment. It just says it in a roundabout way, instead of saying it directly, as the original one did.

Annexe 1, Point 19 of the Authorisation Directive   was  inserted by the College of Commissioners, with no scrutiny by the Commission Directorate responsible  for this legislation, and was largely overlooked in the discussion before the ITRE vote. This amendment - Point 19a -was not, to my knowledge, discussed as a compromise amendment. It has therefore had no scrutiny whatsoever, by any Parliamentarian.  I found it as Amendment 821 out of 830 amendments in  the ITRE committee report, so it's fair to ask whether it really got the scrutiny it deserved. 

 This is an appalling way to make laws. Amendments, hidden within a long text on a different piece of policy, suddenly switched at the last minute before a vote, in such a fashion that no-one even knows they are there. 

It would be comical, if it wasn't so serious and if it didn't mean the difference between a free or a restricted Internet. 

I have amended my paper of 21 July to include this change - click here to download the pdf.


User Comments
Please login or register to add comments

Last Updated ( Aug 18, 2008 at 11:17 AM )
<Previous   Next>

 "We who love the Internet

say that user rights are

defined by what we use our

Internet subscriptions for.

We do not want to be

reduced to consumers so

that our rights are only 

what is in the subscription

agreement. "

Eva-Britt Svensson, MEP


Your Freedom to

 repeal the DE Act

 


La Quadrature du Net

La Quadrature du Net

Don't disconnect us!  

European Commission Creative Content Online consultation

AK Zensur

AK Vorrat

Open Rights Group

open rights group

Exgae

  Code

GetUp Action for Australia

 Campaign against Internet filtering in Australia

...AK Vorrat - against data retention

  AK vorrat