Our Imminent Summer of Digital Discontent

As you may have noticed, the weather is rather confused in the UK at the moment – one moment sweltering, the next freezing. But I predict this summer is certainly going to be hot, judging at least by what's going on in the world of digital rights.

First of all, there's ACTA. In a surprising but welcome decision, the INTA committee recommended that ACTA be voted on in the European Parliament, rather than referred to the European Court of Human Justice, as the European Commission is doing:

After an eventful process where a minority of pro-ACTA MEPs used procedural arguments to delay a decision, the EU Parliament's "International Trade" committee refused to refer ACTA to the EU Court of Justice. Such a referral would have delayed for 18 months the final vote on ACTA.

Respecting the original timetable, the rapporteur David Martin (S&D, UK) will now present a draft report to his colleagues on April 25th, 2012. This draft report will form the basis of the INTA committee's final recommendation to the rest of the Parliament on whether to consent to ACTA or to reject it.

The INTA committee, as well as the other committees working on opinion reports, will also resume their works on this illegitimate agreement.

That means we will need to contact our MEPs before the vote to make sure they understand why ACTA is a bad idea and should be rejected in the vote. Once that happens, the judgment from the ECJ will be irrelevant: ACTA will be rejected by Europe. And without Europe, ACTA as a whole is dead – hence the importance of convincing MEPs.

Still on the European front, there is the imminent revision of the “Intellectual Property Rights” Directive (IPRED). Although it's a little hard to know how the European Commission will play this in the light of the turbulence around ACTA, there's no reason to think that it will moderate its plans, which are pretty bad. Here's La Quadrature du Net's take on them:

the EU Commission released a communication on the digital single market covering most EU policies related to the Digital Agenda1. As this document suggests, the Commission is working on combating illegal gambling websites, which could take the form of censorship measures such as those implemented in France and other Member States2. Hypocritically, and probably to please the banking industry, the Commission does not even consider attacking illegal businesses' financial streams, which would be an effective way to tackle them. Instead, the Commission paves the way to censorship measures at the core of the network.

In the area of Copyright, the EU Commission sticks to the dangerous notion of “illegal content”, which doesn't mean anything by itself, except that the network will be programmed for enforcement. It is also pushing for extra-judicial “cooperation” between Internet actors, payment providers and entertainment industries, mirroring the very controversial Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA), currently discussed in the US Congress.

Again, just because SOPA and PIPA are on hold does not mean that there won't be further pushes to get them or something like them through the US system. Indeed, just recently the US Copyright Czar (what a ridiculous job title) has released her annual report on copyright and its enforcement, and from that it's clear the US will be pushing for more SOPA-like laws.

Meanwhile, back in the EU, we have more bad ideas: making "the production or sale of devices such as computer programs designed for cyber-attacks, or which find a computer password by which an information system can be accessed, would constitute criminal offences."

That's daft because, of course, many legitimate security tools can be used to discover computer passwords, so this would instantly criminalise those. The obvious solution would have been to allow an exemption for research, but the people in the European Parliament don't seem to understand what they are doing (just for a change).

Meanwhile, back in Blighty, we have even more worrying stuff if this report from James Firth is to be believed – and unfortunately, his sources are generally pretty good – about the imminent Communications Bill Green Paper:

I'm told ISPs would become responsible for deciding what is and what isn't copyright infringement on their networks and blocking infringing content without intervention from a court.

Notice and takedown would be expanded so that a whole website or domain could be taken down on a mere allegation from rights holders that the domain was used "substantially" for copyright infringement.

And search engines would be asked to police results, maintaining both a blacklist of whole domains which would never appear in search results and a whitelist of preferred purveyors of e-entertainment who would always appear at the top of the search results.

Again, this is seriously clueless stuff – breaking the Internet search engines and allowing arbitrary site blocking at the drop of a hat. It's really extraordinary how Western governments are happy to introduce levels of censorship today that a decade or so ago would have been unthinkable.

Finally, just when you thought things couldn't get any worse, we have total, police-state surveillance being planned for the UK:

The government will be able to monitor the calls, emails, texts and website visits of everyone in the UK under new legislation set to be announced soon.

Internet firms will be required to give intelligence agency GCHQ access to communications on demand, in real time.

The Home Office says the move is key to tackling crime and terrorism, but civil liberties groups have criticised it. 

….

A new law - which may be announced in the forthcoming Queen's Speech in May - would not allow GCHQ to access the content of emails, calls or messages without a warrant.

But it would enable intelligence officers to identify who an individual or group is in contact with, how often and for how long. They would also be able to see which websites someone had visited.

Clearly, this is extreme stuff: every communication that we make would be recorded and accessible by the UK's intelligence services. Or rather, the supposedly intelligent intelligence services, for this kind of blanket surveillance is born of incompetence and laziness, the last resort of people unable to do their job under democratic conditions.

Instead, they use the usual cover of "terrorism" to justify these unprecedented measures, which they used before to introduce blanket CCTVs around our cities. Weren't they supposed to solve the problem? They didn't, and mass surveillance of communications won't either, which will then lead to yet more erosion of civil liberties in this countries. That's why we must stop this rot before it goes any further.

The good news is that the widespread outrage that has greeted this extreme proposal seems to have caused the coalition to pause in its plans, if only to regroup, with some mixed signals emerging about whether there will be a consultation before bringing them back. We need to be prepared to make cogent submissions to that if it happens, and to fight for it if it doesn't.

So, it's looking like it's going to be a long, very hot summer. Get those knotted handkerchiefs ready...

Urgent: Defend a Balanced UK Approach to Copyright

Copyright consultations seem to be like buses: you wait for years, then several come at once. In the wake of the Hargreaves report, and the follow-up UK government consultation, we have another one, albeit rather different in emphasis.

On Open Enterprise blog.

Open Standards Licensing: Apple's Key Evidence

As regular readers know, there is a struggle going on between the free software community that needs open standards to be RF (strictly speaking "restriction-free", but usually called "royalty-free") and traditional companies based on proprietary software that are pushing for FRAND - Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory - not least because it will allow licences like the GNU GPL to be excluded. The argument is that RF means that any claimed patents within a standard must be made available at zero cost - and that, the proponents of FRAND insist, is unworkable, since companies will not be prepared to "sacrifice" their patents in this way.

On Open Enterprise blog.

ACTA Update XI

Although I've not written about ACTA here for a few weeks, things are still bubbling away in Brussels. Here's a good summary of what's going on from La Quadrature du Net, probably the best source of information on ACTA:

On Open Enterprise blog.

If ACTA Is So Great, Where Are All The Supporters Extolling Its Virtues?

One of the striking features of the ACTA debate is the deafening silence from those who are in favor of it. Maybe that's down to the SOPA effect: companies and organizations are frightened of being associated with such an unpopular idea. Of course, it could just be that even its most fervent supporters can't really come up with any plausible justifications for it. That's certainly the impression you get reading a rare attempt to raise the ACTA flag from the Institute for Policy Innovation, entitled "Acting Out on ACTA." 

On Techdirt.

UK Publishers Association Outraged It Wasn't Consulted Ahead Of The Public Over Open Access To Publicly-Funded Research

While the global boycott of Elsevier by academics continues to gain momentum and signatures – at the time of writing, the number is approaching 9000 – there's an open access storm in a teacup brewing in the UK. 

On Techdirt.

Should There Be A Right To Copyright Exceptions?

Last month I wrote about how the Netherlands is looking to introduce new flexibilities into its copyright laws, based on some interesting research on copyright exceptions. There must be something in the air, because a wide range of other groups are contemplating exactly the same approach. 

On Techdirt.

Why is Firefox - and Open Source - a Disaster in China?

Like many people, I've been tracking the steady ascent of Google Chrome - and corresponding decline of Microsoft's Internet Explorer - for some time now. Just recently, yet another milestone has been reached, apparently:

On Open Enterprise blog.

ACTA On Hold, But The Protests Continue In Serbia

One reason the European Commission decided to refer ACTA to the European Court of Justice may have been in the hope that people would simply get bored and move on. It's certainly true that the cities of Europe aren't full of protesters as they were a couple of months ago, but that doesn't mean that everything has died down completely. Here, for example, is one country whose population still has strong feelings on the matter: 

On Techdirt.

Iceland: Haven of Openness?

One of the recurrent themes on this blog is the painfully slow progress in terms of getting open source deployed by the UK government. That's despite the fact that there have been multiple statements that it really wants to use more of the stuff, and definitely will - probably, at some point in the future, if the wind is the right direction....

On Open Enterprise blog.

Australian Gov't: Not In The Public Interest For The Public To Be Interested In Secret Anti-Piracy Negotiations

Last month Techdirt wrote about yet more secret meetings between the copyright and internet industries, this time in Australia, where the federal government there was "encouraging" them to come up with ways of tackling online copyright infringement. 

On Techdirt.

German Gov't Uses Anger Over Lack Of ACTA Transparency To Justify Further Lack Of Transparency

Even though the ACTA text is now finalized, getting details from national governments about what exactly happened during the negotiations is proving extremely difficult, with information still trickling out slowly. 

On Techdirt.

Bad Idea: Internet Service Providers Should Assume Most Digital Locker Content Is 'Illegal'

In an interesting blog post, James Firth discusses a comment from music industry analyst Mark Mulligan, quoted in a BBC story about the digital locker site Hotfile: 

On Techdirt.

Welcome to the Open Data User Group

Back in October I wrote about a UK government consultation on the subject of the proposed Public Data Corporation. The government has now responded with one of its well-written documents [pdf]. Here's part of the executive summary:

On Open Enterprise blog.

UK Copyright Industries Suddenly Become Fans Of Evidence-Based Policy Making

Building on the solid work of the Hargreaves Report on copyright, the UK government took a surprisingly sensible attitude in its proposed implementation of most of Hargreaves' suggestions. The consultation period for those proposals ends shortly, and the panic among the copyright industries that the UK government might actually make copyright slightly less biased in their favor is evident. Here's a Daily Telegraph piece where they try to undermine the economic rationale behind the moves, professing scepticism about UK government claims that modernizing copyright will add billions to the UK economy: 

On Techdirt.

Urgent: Please Reply to UK Copyright Consultation

It seems like the UK copyright studies and consultations have been going on for years - first with the Gowers Review, followed by the Hargreaves Report and concluding with the current consultation on copyright. That consultation ends this Wednesday, so time is running out to make a submission.

On Open Enterprise blog.

Strange: Vote Against Freeing Up Orphan Works Achieves 113% Turnout In EU Committee

One of the unresolved problems of copyright is how to deal with huge numbers of orphan works -- creations still in copyright, but whose owners can't be traced to give permissions that may be necessary for re-use. The European Parliament's JURI committee met recently to vote on a new report on possible permitted uses of orphan works, prepared by the Polish Member of the European Parliament, Lidia Geringer de Oedenberg. 

On Techdirt.

Drone Attack: How We Might Willingly Embrace The Surveillance Society

It's striking how drones have passed from a mysterious weapon used to wreak destruction in distant lands to something that could well become a familiar sight in the skies of the US and Europe. Meanwhile, the technology is progressing rapidly, allowing drones to fly in synchronized swarms and even to be printed out by the sheet. But what might some of the effects on our daily lives be -- for example in the sphere of privacy? 

On Techdirt.

Microsoft's Open Standards Fairy Tale

Regular readers of this column will know that I often write about the issues of open standards and FRAND vs. RF licensing. One particular column that explored this area appeared back in October 2010.

On Open Enterprise blog.

TPP Talks Deadlocked; Still No Transparency

As Techdirt revealed a couple of days ago, one reason why the European Commission decided to refer ACTA to the European Court of Justice was a fear that another SOPA disaster was in the offing. It's a little too early to be sure, but we may be seeing the first signs that the equally problematic TPP agreement is also running into problems because of heightened sensitivity to key issues in the wake of the Net-based revolt against SOPA. 

On Techdirt.

Spotify Finally Launches In Germany -- And Immediately Hits Data Protection Problems

The music streaming service Spotify has adopted a rather unusual pattern of launches around the world. Founded in Sweden, it spread gradually to various parts of Europe, and only later arrived in the US. The main reason for this slow rollout seems to have been difficulty striking licensing deals with the major recording companies. 

On Techdirt.

Submission to Consultation on Copyright: Exceptions

In my previous post about submitting a reply to the UK government consultation on copyright, I concentrated on one area, that of orphan works. That's arguably the second most-important topic that the report discusses, not least because of the huge potential liberating orphan works has. But without doubt, the most important area is that of exceptions to copyright.

On Open Enterprise blog.

Collection Society To Libraries: No Story Time For Kids Unless You Pay To Read Aloud

If there's a common trait of the various rightsholders groups around the world, it is their sense of entitlement. If anyone does anything with a work under copyright, they feel they have a right to regulate it and be paid for it. A good example is the claim by the Authors Guild that owners of Kindles weren't allowed to use an experimental text-to-speech feature, since that would infringe on the entirely made up concept of "audio rights" -- and hence, presumably, require further payment. 

On Techdirt.

Do We Have a Right To Open Public Data?

The progress made by the open data movement is pretty extraordinary. A few years ago, data was something that only statisticians cared about, but today it is one of the most vibrant areas of exploration and innovation. I think that's in part because of open source's example of how opening things up allows people to experiment and make progress faster than keeping everything locked down.

On Open Enterprise blog.

European Commission Blames Social Networks For ACTA Failure; Worried About Its Imminent Directive On Copyright Enforcement

Now that the EU's ratification of ACTA has departed from the original script of everyone just waving it through, the European Commission is clearly trying to come up with Plan B. Some insights into its thinking can be gained from the minutes (pdf) of a recent Commission meeting, pointed out to us by André Rebentisch. 

On Techdirt.