(Dieser Artikel ist auch in deutscher Sprache verfügbar)
Concern has been raised by a memo sent to European policy-makers by the International Federation of Phonographic Industries asking European ISPs to filter the content transferred by their networks. The music and film industry continues to pressure from the EU regulators for control on the Internet, through ISPs.
The issue raises even more concern as some European politicians seem comfortable to consumer's communications being interfered with and controlled by ISPs on behalf of rightholders. In November 2007, the European Parliament's Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) handed to the Parliament a report amending a previous Culture and Education Committee report, calling ISPs "to apply filtering measures to prevent copyright infringements" with the purpose to "rethink the critical issue of intellectual property".
Following this ITRE report, the EDRi-member Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) Europe has sent a letter to the members of the Culture and Education Committee, showing how damaging Internet filtering would be from several points of view.
EFF points out that filtering by ISPs is inefficient, doing very little to address the rightsholders' concerns while affecting artists, researcher or teachers, as filtering devices would be unable to evaluate the exceptions or limitations of the copyright that these categories benefit of.
Internet content filtering will bring significant damages to the citizens' individual rights "in their roles as consumers, artists and educators" as well as additional costs for network reconfigurations that will be borne by ISPs and therefore passed on to their consumers.
EFF believes that:" Any country that has a centralized system in place to pry into all its citizen's private communications, and then pre-emptively sever those which it deems "unsuitable", creates both a very disturbing precedent, and a dangerously powerful tool vulnerable to misuse."
The vote on the final document will take place on the 21 January 2008 in the Culture and Education Committee.
Music Industry Pressures EU Politicians for Filtered Internet (7.12.2007)
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2007/12/music-industry-europe-filter-pres...
EFF Europe letter to the Culture and Education Committee
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/effeurope/CULT-filtering-letter.pdf
ISPs - Technical options for addressing online copyright infringement
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/effeurope/ifpi_filtering_memo.pdf
Network Filtering: Limiting Cultural Industries, Damaging the Internet
(12.12.2007)
http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/effeurope/NetworkFiltering.pdf
Draft report on cultural industries in the context of the Lisbon strategy -
Committee on Culture and Education (18.09.2007)
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/file.jsp?id=5498632
Draft Opinion of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy for the
Committee on Culture and Education on Cultural industries in Europe
(20.09.2007)
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2004_2009/documents/pa/685/6855...
Amendements to the opinion - ITRE Committee (31.10.2007)
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2004_2009/documents/am/692/6924...
Draft report - Guy Bono - Cultural industries in the context of the Lisbon
Strategy (26.11.2007)
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/recherche/NoticeDetaillee.cfm?d...
(Dieser Artikel ist auch in deutscher Sprache verfügbar)
A new policy paper drafted by the European Commission (EC) shows its intention to promote new measures to fight against illegal file-sharing, taking as a positive example the French agreement between ISPs and the record industries already presented in EDRI-gram.
The policy paper obtained by EurActiv and entitled "Creative content online in the Single Market" wants to involve all the stakeholders in the activities against piracy: "It seems appropriate to instigate co-operation procedures between access and service providers, right holders and consumers".
The Commission communication also talks about the development of new legal offers of digital content available for consumers, educational programs to raise awareness on the copyright issues and availability of the digital content in a single market, suggesting multi-national copyright licences and the interoperability of platforms offering legal content.
The digital content market is estimated to reach 8.3 billion euros by 2010 in the EU 25 and this is why the EC sees as a real concern the "piracy and unauthorised up- and downloading of copyrighted content". Therefore the Commission has started a public debate by "asking the sector's stakeholders whether they are ready to consider the French way, based on enforcement, and whether they consider applying filtering measures to be an effective means of preventing online copyright infringements."
The position of the EC is not a surprise, if we take into consideration the statement of the European Information Society Commissioner Viviane Reding at the European Publishers' Forum on 6 December 2007. She emphasised her efforts to promote a new law on digital publishing copyrights, explaining that : "With the telecom package, I want to support competitiveness, innovation and creativity. It is the first time that an electronic communications package includes specific requirements for network operators and users to respect copyright law."
Reading added: "People don't buy technology, they acquire contents and services. Therefore, the new rules contain references concerning compliance with national measures implementing the Copyright Directive and the Enforcement Directive. Moreover, the Universal Service Directive says that member states shall ensure that subscribers to electronic communications services or networks are clearly informed in advance of their obligations to respect copyright and related rights and of the most common acts of infringements and their legal consequences."
The commissioner also pointed out the new role of the EC in this domain - a catalyst through a "communication on creative content online in the single market, which will generate business negotiations and improve legal certainty."
But the publishers were also criticised, the European official considering they didn't adapt their business modes to the new dynamics asked by the raise of the Internet. According to Reading the publishers "face a big challenge in determining how to generate revenues in the digital age, and that most news and magazine publishers still earn less than 5 percent of revenues from new media, though this should double in the next year."
EU plans new measures to curb online piracy (10.12.2007)
http://www.euractiv.com/en/infosociety/eu-plans-new-measures-curb-onli...
EU Online Copyright Bill Coming; Publishers Debate DRMs (9.12.2007)
http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=861
EDRi-gram: New agreement between the French ISPs and record industries
(5.12.2007)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number5.23/french-agreement-piracy
(Dieser Artikel ist auch in deutscher Sprache verfügbar)
A public workshop held in Ukraine on 12 December 2007 was aimed to discuss the issues regarding the regulation of the new online media. The workshop was organised by Internews Ukraine together with the Council of Europe and the National Commission on Freedom of Speech and Development of the Information Sphere under the President of Ukraine.
Besides the Ukrainian participants - from online and offline media - from Kiev and other important cities in Ukraine, the Council of Europe invited two experts - Thomas Schneider, Chairman of the Council of Europe Group of Specialists on Human Rights in the Information Society and Bogdan Manolea from EDRi as observer in the same Group mentioned above.
The present law on media in Ukraine requires the offline media to register with a special office within the Ministry of Justice in order to be recognised as a journalist and have access to press conferences and have other rights, such as the protection of sources used in their journalistic activities. Although from the Ukrainian participants' interventions this process resulted to be more a notification than a registration, the main question of the seminar was whether the online media should be the subject of the same rules.
The two Ukrainian speakers that were supposed to speak pro and against the regulation of the online media (Mr. Roman Skrypin , Media director, "RBK-Ukraine" independent Ukrainian information agency and Ms. Tetyana Popova, Board Chairman, The Ukrainian Internet Association respectively) reached similar conclusions - that a general obligation of the registration of online media is not possible and therefore such an obligation can't be put in the legislation. But they both agreed that a voluntary registration should be possible for any online media. Mr.Skrypin was even more trenchant in declaring that in order to be called online media, one should register with the Ministry of Justice, thus having the same rights and obligations as the other professional journalists. He also added that blogs of other websites can still exist with no problem, but they wouldn't be trusted as the other registered media. Ms. Popova also explained that three years ago the Ukrainian authorities were looking into regulating the Internet as much as possible, but now the situation has changed.
Mr.Manolea intervened in pointing out that the discussion should also consider whether the mandatory registration with a state institution for offline media can be considered legal, especially under art.10 of the European Convention of Human Rights. He also asked for some clarifications regarding the advantages of registering as an online media with the Ukrainian authorities. From the later-on discussions, no specific advantages arose and the fact that almost all of the online media representatives at the seminar were not registered proved that the registration as such is doubtfully useful in any case. In fact, it appears that some of the online media representatives present saw the registration as a potential problem, since they could have been more easily dragged into defamation law-suits by the local oligarchs.
Thomas Schneider's presentation focused on the definition of media and media regulation, as seen through the standards developed by the Council of Europe (CoE). He also underlined that "Any requirement to register online media may qualify as a prior restraint on freedom of expression that may contravene Art 10", presenting the ECHR decision in the case Gaweda vs. Poland on registration requirements for print media. Also he discussed the CoE experience in trying to identify what is online media and the difficulty to find a comprehensive definition in this respect.
He emphasised that there should be no stricter regulation for online media than for offline media, according to the CoE Declaration on freedom of communication on the Internet from 2003 "Member states should not subject content on the Internet to restrictions which go further than those applied to other means of content delivery." But there could be an obligation to publish information of editorial responsibility and possibilities of contact ("Impressum"). However a distinction should be made between professional and individual websites and between those of relevance for public opinion shaping and others, respecting though the principle of secrecy of source of information.
Pavlo Moiseev, Chief of Law Service from Internews Ukraine explained the legal details of the online media regulation, starting with the freedom of expression principle in the Ukraine's Constitution and the fact that the present laws do not foresee an obligatory registration for online media.
Bogdan Manolea entitled his presentation "The limits of freedom of speech and the no-limits of the Internet" and he presented the European legislation on the limits to the freedom of speech, but also the practical problems the states face when they try to enforce these rules on the Internet content. The speech concentrated on the specific cases - most of them already reported in the EDRI-gram - that prove the Internet content faces tremendous difficulties to regulate, although if there are some national regulations on online content that may be considered illegal, harmful or infringing third parties' rights. He also explained by practical cases that any solution of filtering by governments can't be efficient and creates more problems than it solves.Therefore as a practical recommendation before taking into consideration any kind of regulation regarding the Internet content should look if the specific norms will not endanger the freedom of expression, if they can be realistically implemented and if the result will not be just to move the content unde the jusrisdiction of other countries, but still online.
There was a lot of discussion about whether and how online media could and should be sued by the government or private persons for content that was not true or harmful in some way. In that respect, Thomas Schneider argued that, although there should be clear legal procedures about how to sue media that abuse their freedom of expression, going to court should in a democratic society only be the very last remedy. Sometimes, he said, things can be viewed from different angles and there might not be only one single truth. So people who do not agree with some media statement should make use of their right to reply and other ways to assure the diversity of opinions on an issue, before going to court too often.
In its closing statement, Andriy Kulakov, Director of Internews Ukraine summarised some of the key aspects of the seminar including that the registration of the online media is not obligatory in Ukraine and that the online media should look more into self-regulation, like the off-line media. He also concluded that the most efficient way forward in talking about Internet content is to use awareness raising and educational programs.
Bogdan Manolea - The limits of freedom of speech and the no-limits of the
Internet (12.12.2007)
http://www.edri.org/files/no-limits-internet.pdf
Thomas Schneider - Regulation of online media:europe's experience
(12.12.2007)
http://www.internews.ua/sm/site/news/uploads/2007/12/14/345_av.ppt
Seminar Regulation of on-line media: boundaries of freedom and willfulness
(only in Ukrainian, 14.12.2007)
http://www.internews.ua/ukraine/events/2007/12/14/1247.html
(Dieser Artikel ist auch in deutscher Sprache verfügbar)
During a conference on creative rights and cultural diversity organised by EUobserver on 6 December 2007, José Manuel Barroso, the President of the European Commission, stated the European Commission (EC) was not yet ready to take any short-term decision related to the management of the online music market.
Despite new calls at the conference to review the voluntary guidelines on the collective management of online music rights issued in 2005 by the EC and supported by collective rights managers (CRMs), Barroso said the EC needed some time to find the right solutions based on a balanced, sustainable consensus of all the involved stakeholders.
The guidelines are not legally binding for the EU states and, according to the music industry, about 21 out of the 27 members refuse to apply them. The European collecting societies also argue that the present guidelines favour big Anglo-American music publishers.
However, as Jorgen Holmquist, director general of the European Union executive's internal market unit stated, a public consultation this year has shown a lack of broad support for this kind of legislation. Yet, he agreed that the system for managing online music rights was unsatisfactory.
Mr Barroso stated he wanted to ensure that cultural diversity was properly represented on the Internet. "It's clear for me that we should not allow monopolistic licensing structures to emerge in the internet. The repertoire available in the internet must adequately reflect Europe's cultural diversity," he said.
The EC guidelines presently give authors and composers the right to choose the collecting society they want to use and also encourage collecting societies to offer a pan-EU license to music distributors.
Artists, supported by most MEPs, ask from the EC to regulate the online music market ensuring that CRMs provide a diversified range of music products, arguing that the present approach does not encourage niche and local markets. In their opinion, big CRMs will withdraw the successful international music products from the national CRMs which would therefore lose audience and which have a significant role in promoting and developing local talents. Already, some publishers such as EMI have started withdrawing the repertoires in English from some smaller CRMs.
Industry officials also say that the guidelines could become useless in case Universal Music Group which is the world's biggest music publisher decides to use only one collective society or even none at all.
In this sense, Universal's general counsel, Richard Constant said: "As we try to move into a digital world, we are held back by antiquated licensing practices. Europe is lagging behind (...) The recommendation is fundamentally flawed. We are still having to go to each society in each country for overpriced licenses."
Barroso rules out quick decision on online music market (9.12.2007)
http://euobserver.com/9/25302/?rk=1
EU exec stays above online music rights fray (7.12.2007)
http://www.news.com/2100-1028_3-6221934.html
EDRI-gram: Music: commission wants 1 internet clearing house (14.07.2005)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number3.14/music
(Dieser Artikel ist auch in deutscher Sprache verfügbar)
Pending the approval of its Committee of Ministers, the Council of Europe will try to promote a new broadcasting international document, building on the failed convention for the protection of broadcasting signals of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).
As WIPO's 184 members have failed in agreeing upon a text for the treaty and as the conference for a full negotiation planned for November 2007 was postponed at the request of several member states and the European Broadcasting Union, the Council of Europe intends to proceed on reinforcing the initial WIPO recommendations on the matter. "I suspect that Council of Europe member states would be very happy if the WIPO deadlock were overcome and revert to WIPO negotiations," Jan Malinowski, head of the Council's Media and Information Society Division, told Intellectual Property Watch. "However, at present many feel that progress at the Council of Europe level is desirable."
According to Malinowski, the Council would deal with the issue "by establishing a stronger legal basis in international law to provide guidance to states as to how to regulate the matter." He stated that during the last 20 years the Council has already "elaborated other instruments designed to enhance the protection of broadcasters neighbouring rights" such as the "Convention on the legal protection of services based on, or consisting of, conditional access adopted in 2001" and the "2002 Recommendation on measures to enhance the protection of the neighbouring rights of broadcasting organisations."
IP issues have been also tackled by the Council's Convention on Cybercrime, by dealing in a more general sense with the infringement of copyright and related rights online or through computer systems. Also, regarding the concerns expressed by civil rights organisations and developing countries related to the fair access rules, Malinowski said: "A human rights-centred approach is also necessary when examining access to education, to knowledge, research, and I would add, also as regards cultural and artistic expression and scientific development." He also added that "Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights consecrates the right to freedom of expression and information without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers".
A group of specialists of the Council of Europe has the task to prepare a report on the trends and issues related to the protection of intellectual property rights as well as "the fundamental right to freedom of expression and free flow of information, access to knowledge and education, the promoting of research and scientific development and the protection and promotion of the diversity of cultural expressions and artistic creation" and to make concrete proposals for actions to be taken in this area.
Broadcasting Treaty: Council of Europe Picks Up Where WIPO Left Off
(10.12.2007)
http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=864
EDRI-gram: The broadcast treaty stalled by WIPO General Assembly
(11.10.2006)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number4.19/broadcast
(Dieser Artikel ist auch in deutscher Sprache verfügbar)
A panel of nine experts including journalists and civic associations' members chose the awards for this year BBA winners at the ceremony on 13 November 2007 in Prague, from more than 70 nominations.
The Ministry of Interior of the Czech Republic received the award in the category Lifetime Menace for having ignored basic citizen privacy protection rights in elaborating the National Action Plan of Fighting Terrorism (NAP). During the elaboration process of NAP the Private Data Protection Office was not invited for discussion in issues. The Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data No. 108 of the Council of Europe, adopted by the Czech Republic is not mentioned in the National Action Plans for particular periods. The NAP also contains concepts with significant negative impact to privacy of persons - e.g. the plan for making of national database of biometric data for verification of travel documents (in NAP 2005-2007, item 10.3). The NAP for 2007-2009 period again contains concepts for further spreading of camera systems, for wider access to bank data, for access to location and further telecommunication data.
The award in the category Greatest Corporate Invader was granted collectively to the clients misusing the services or products of T-Mobile service "Where is .?", Cuckoldry test from DNAtest.cz, Mobile Bug from Goldsilver company and products of Odposlechy.com. The mentioned technologies or services allow intrusion to privacy unknown to the involved citizens.
The Board decided to give the Worst Public Agency or Official Award to Plzen city, as the trustee of the municipal camera system operator (Plzen City Municipal Property Administration) and as the trustee of Municipal Police, for invading of citizen's privacy with camera systems and the absurd plan to fit municipal policemen with candid cameras for revealing of serving alcohol to teenagers (especially when uselessness of such clips as evidence is notorious) and for misuse of the municipal camera system on 2 August 2007, when it was used for spying of private flat either deliberately or due to operator's failure. The Plzen city was called "the biggest administrative snooper".
USA Government, called "the biggest international snooper", won the Award in the category International Privacy Invader for running of a large network of technical spying and monitoring devices called Echelon. The system monitors electronic communication and infringes the privacy right. Moreover, the U.S. Government refuses to publish any information that could rule out the suspicion that the system is misused for industrial espionage and for groundless monitoring of honest people communication.
In the category Dangerous New Technology, Martin Pegner, chief of the DNAtest.cz project was awarded for the so called Cuckoldry test. Promotion of this service stimulates spying of relatives. Making of DNA tests unknown to the persons whose biological samples are concerned, is considered by the board to be unacceptable. Absence of Ethic Code in DNA testing which should contain requirement for the consent of the tested persons is criticised as well.
JUDr. Stanislav Gross of JUDr. Eduard Bruna Law Office was awarded in the category Boot in the Mouth. The Price was given for the statements in the article published on 13 December 2006 in Lidové Noviny, in the Horizont section, under the title "Let us not to demonise wiretapping". The statements "Protection of the basic values of our society in the contemporary turbulent world will unfortunately require enlarging of state competences having features of exceptions from the rights guaranteed by the Constitution" and "That is why I would intercede against demonising of the official wiretapping and for acknowledgement of their necessity in the contemporary turbulent world" express, according to the board, unilateral effort for strengthening repressive and monitoring activities of the state , with no respect to basic rights, especially privacy.
In the category Big Brother's Legal Rule the Award was given to Law No. 321/2006, which amends Law no.141/1961 about the criminal trial proceedings (Code of Criminal Proceedings) as amended by the subsequent laws and Law no. 283/1991 about Police of the Czech Republic, so called "DNA Amendment of the Code of Criminal Proceedings and of the Police Law". According to the Amendment, Police is allowed to take DNA sample not only from the accused person but also from suspected persons but it goes even further on - they can require the sample from the "concerned" person, i.e. de facto from anybody according to own discretion. The Amendment also smuggled this unprecedented measure into the Police Law - the possibility of broad DNA sampling of almost the whole imprisoned population - from the persons serving jail sentence for premeditated criminal offence to persons subjected to protective therapy. Finally, the Amendment introduces the possibility to forcefully collect DNA samples.
The Smith positive Award for privacy defenders was given to Josef Skvorecký Private Grammar School student representatives for their active intervention against monitoring of students and teachers in the classrooms of the Josef Skvorecký Private Grammar School in 2006.
Interior Ministry, Gross win 'Big Brother' prizes (14.11.2007) http://www.praguemonitor.com/en/212/czech_national_news/14629/
BBA 2007 press release (only in Czech, 13.11.2007) http://www.slidilove.cz/nejvetsi_slidilove_opet_odhaleni
Video reportage of the Czech BBA 2007 (13.11.2007)
http://video.respekt.cz/Big-Brother-Awards.html
(contribution by Filip Pospisil - EDRI-member Iure Remedium - Czech Republik)
(Dieser Artikel ist auch in deutscher Sprache verfügbar)
As a result of a complaint made by the Norwegian web browser developer Opera Software ASA, the European Commission will examine under the antitrust regulation Microsoft's abuse in distributing the browser Internet Explorer with the Windows operating system.
Opera Software states that Microsoft does not follow accepted web standards and therefore hinders programme developers in making programs that work with each other. In spite its many innovations in the field, the Norwegian company, although successful in making browsers for mobile phones, has failed to gain a share of the browser market on the Internet which is dominated by Microsoft's Internet Explorer. "Microsoft's unilateral control over standards in some markets creates a de facto standard that is more costly to support, harder to maintain, and technologically inferior and that can even expose users to security risks," argued Opera.
This action follows the sucessfull one taken by EU antitrust authorities which determined the unbundling of Media Player from Windows operating system, in October this year.
The complaint issued by Opera is supported by ICT software and hardware providers such as Oracle, Nokia, Adobe, IBM and by the European Committee for Interoperable Systems (ECIS). Thomas Vinje, ECIS spokesman and legal councillor stated in a press release on 13 December 2007: "By tying its Internet Explorer product to its monopoly Windows operating system and refusing to faithfully implement industry-accepted open standards, Microsoft deprives consumers of a real choice in internet browsers".
Related to this complaint, Microsoft commented: "We will, of course, cooperate with any inquiries into these issues, but we believe the inclusion of the browser into the operating system benefits consumers, and that consumers and PC manufacturers already are free to choose any browsers they wish".
During a press briefing on 12 December 2007, Jonathan Todd, the spokesman for Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes stated that the Commission would examine the complaint but that it was too early to make any "intelligent comment".
Opera complains to EU about Microsoft's IE bundling (13.12.2007)
http://www.siliconvalley.com/news/ci_7712063?nclick_check=1
A new EU competition case looms for Microsoft (14.12.2007)
http://www.euractiv.com/en/infosociety/new-eu-competition-case-looms-m...
EDRi-gram: EU court confirms the 497 million euro fine against Microsoft
(26.09.2007)
http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number5.18/microsoft-decision-tpi
(Dieser Artikel ist auch in deutscher Sprache verfügbar)
Like everywhere else, DRM (Digital Restrictions Management) systems which impose technical restrictions on what end users can do with texts and multimedia content are highly unpopular also in Switzerland.
At the same time, the representatives of the entertainment industry claim that this technology is necessary, and politicians are inclined to believe their view that there should be a law against circumvention of DRM system. The main difference from most other countries is that Swiss citizens are able to force a national vote about the change of the law by collecting 50 000 signatures.
Of course the politicians know this and take it into account already when discussing legal proposals in the commissions of the Parliament. As a result, even though the copyright law revision adds a prohibition against breaking DRM systems and against marketing computer programs which have this purpose, this prohibition is significantly restricted by a clause which says that it cannot be enforced against anyone who circumvents DRM systems only for purposes that are explicitly allowed by the law, such as making a small number of copies of music or video CDs for friends, or reverse engineering. In this regard, the Swiss copyright law allows more than the corresponding laws of many other countries.
The big question is of course whether these restrictions of the prohibition against breaking DRM systems are sufficient to prevent DRM systems from having a severe negative impact on society. There are serious doubts about that and, while the draft law was under consideration in the two chambers of the Parliament and their legal affairs commissions, these concerns have been pointed out by various organizations representing Swiss consumers and business interests which are opposed to DRM. Nevertheless, in the judgement of these organizations, the revision that the Swiss Parliament decided on is not such a bad compromise to make them want to organize or support a referendum campaign against it.
In spite of this, someone has now announced a referendum campaign against the revision of copyright law. Since the organizations which have so far been active in this political process are not supporting it, no-one expects the campaign to have much success, but of course surprises are always possible in politics.
Campaign website
http://www.no-dmca.ch
Swiss DADVSI : a petition for a referendum is launched (only in French,
4.12.2007)
http://www.ratiatum.com/breve6160_DADVSI_suisse_une_petition_pour_un_r...
(Contribution by Norbert Bollow - EDRI-member Swiss Internet User Group)
(Dieser Artikel ist auch in deutscher Sprache verfügbar)
HuriSearch - Developed by HURIDOCS, HuriSearch is the first and only
comprehensive search engine specialized in human rights. It provides direct
full text search of over 4 000 human rights websites. Currently over 3 100 000 pages are indexed.
http://www.hurisearch.org
(Dieser Artikel ist auch in deutscher Sprache verfügbar)
27-30 December, Berlin, Germany
24th Chaos Communication Congress
http://events.ccc.de/congress/2007/Main_Page
17 January 2008, London, UK
Nanotechnology for security and the crime prevention III
http://www.nano.org.uk/events/ionevents.htm#security
18 January 2008, Torino, Italy
COMMUNIA Workshop: "Technology and the public domain"
http://ws1-2008.communia-project.eu
22 January 2008, London, UK
Gov 2.0, or Truly Transformative Government
http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/events/details.cfm?id=169
12 February 2008, Brussels, Belgium
European ICT standardisation policy at a crossroad: A new direction for
global success
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/ict/policy/standards/cf2008_en.htm
10-12 March 2008, Geneva, Switzerland
WIPO Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights: Sixteenth Session
http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/details.jsp?meeting_id=14502
17-18 June 2008, Seoul, Korea
The Future of the Internet Economy - OECD Ministerial Meeting
http://www.oecd.org/FutureInternet
23-25 July 2008, Leuven, Belgium
The 8th Privacy Enhancing Technologies Symposium (PETS 2008)
http://petsymposium.org/2008/