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.

The correct citation is shown on each article.

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 Telecoms package: crucial obligations on "co-operation"
Telecoms package: crucial obligations on "co-operation"
Written by Monica Horten   
Nov 13, 2008 at 01:35 PM

A legal analysis of the Telecoms Package, released today by the UK's Open Rights Group, says that the Package provides for a set of "crucial obligations' on Europe's telecoms companies and ISPs to "co-operate" with the copyright industries. 

 

The analysis considers whether the Telecoms Package could provide a legal platform for either 3 strikes (graduated response)  or filtering. It provides a breakdown, from a legal perspective, of the amendments in the Telecoms Package which relate to these types of measures.

In the summary, the authors say: "This is a crucial set of obligations, about to be imposed on all of Europe’s ISPs and telcos, which should be debated in the open, not passed under cover of stealth in the context of a vast and incomprehensible package of telecoms regulation. It seems, on careful legal examination by independent experts, more than possible that such a deliberate stealth exercise is indeed going on. When passed, these obligations will provide Europe level authority for France’s current “3 strikes” legislation, even though this has already been denounced as against fundamental rights by the European Parliament, when it was made clear to them what they were voting for or against."

On network filtering, they comment:  "What seemed therefore to be a provision requiring

 

CSPs to act in the public good to protect networks from threats like viruses and hackers, could in actual fact potentially be interpreted in a way where it might also require CSPs to implement damaging technical sanctions against alleged (but not proven) filesharers."

On user safeguards, they say:  

"Importantly, two amendments originally inserted by the EUP did provide protection against nonjudicial imposition of disconnection and other sanctions against alleged filesharers, in particular Art.32a of the Universal Service Directive (see para 35 of brief) and Art.8(4)(ga) of the Framework Directive (see para 28 ). However, both of these provisions were deleted by the CoM, and did not appear in the CoM’s proposed final text"

 

You can download the report here.  


User Comments
Please login or register to add comments

Last Updated ( Nov 13, 2008 at 02:15 PM )
<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