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 Civil liberties groups warn on web surfing data pools
Civil liberties groups warn on web surfing data pools
Written by Monica Horten   
Feb 03, 2009 at 11:12 PM

European civil liberties groups are calling on MEPs to reject a Telecoms Package amendment that, if passed in its present form, could permit network operators to collect and mine users Internet and email data.

 

European Digital Rights (EDRi), France's La Quadrature du Net, and Germany's AK Vorrat have jointly  issued a  warning  about  Amendment 181 in the e-Privacy directive of the e-Privacy directive. They say it is so badly worded that it potentially allows operators to collect an unlimited amount of personal data related to our communications usage, including email traffic records and web surfing data. Vast 'pools' of data could be  stored for an unlimited amount of time, which goes much further than  the existing EU law in the Data Retention directive. 

 

The problems lie in both the European Parliament and the Council versions of the amendment.  The European Parliament version provides some protection for end-users but also could be interpreted as allowing the data to be passed to a third party.

 The Council version removes all data protection requirements whilst limiting the scope to security purposes.

 They are joined by the European


 Data Protection Supervisor, Peter Hustinx,  who warns against the risk of abuse.  The EDPS has advised that Amendment 181  should either be rejected or the data protection safeguards for users should be reinstated.

 However, caution should be the watchword on this issue. Should it be dropped or re-worded? The problem with the Telecoms Package concerns how the different amendments link together. This amendment doesn't function in isolation and the consquences for user's privacy can alter with any new revisions to the amdendment, or to other amendments. For example, the Parliament  passed amendments to Article 4 1a and 1b (Amendment  122). Amendment 122 combined with Amendment 181  provided a loop-hole for filtering peer-to-peer traffic. The Council dropped Amendment 122, however, we do not yet know the final fate of it in the trialogue discussions.

 And  it seems to me that this could be the first trigger of an e-privacy timebomb, sitting quietly, inside the Telecoms Package. Amendment 181 is not the only amendment in the Telecoms Package with implications for compromising users privacy. There have been several interest groups lobbying for the weakening of privacy law in one way or another. There are several different industry agendas.  The copyright lobby, the telco lobby, the IT security lobby. Each one wants something slightly different. All believe their business will benefit from weaker privacy rules, increased  access to personal data,  and as little as possible regulatory oversight of their activities. The practices they intend  will include traffic processing, traffic filtering, graduated response, network security and "traffic management".

 

It raises the issue of privacy for users on telecommunications network and the Internet, with a host of  questions which  should be aired and debated before the legislation is passed. An important issue is how much regulatory oversight is needed, and at what level should intervention occur. This should be a wake-up call for anyone who is concerned about e-privacy!

 

 

If you found this article useful, remember you read it on iptegrity.com! 

 
User Comments
Please login or register to add comments

Last Updated ( Feb 03, 2009 at 11:22 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