The latest EDRi-gram

*The shiny new "Staatsschutzgesetz." Oh come on, how could a thing like that be a problem?

======================================================================

EDRi-gram

fortnightly newsletter about digital civil rights in Europe

EDRi-gram 13.17, 9 September 2015

Read online: https://edri.org/edri-gram/13-17/

1. Austria creates new agency with unprecedented surveillance powers
2. Portugal: Privatised copyright law enforcement agreement now public
3. EDRi identifies key challenges to freedom of expression online
4. Three French NGOs challenge French international surveillance
5. Journalists detained in Turkey for using encryption
6. Terrorists behind the attacks in France not radicalised �online�
7. Romania: After PNR, a proposal for retention of tourist data
8. ENDitorial: Racism in Germany - Facebook should do "more"
9. Recommended Action
10. Recommended Reading
11. Agenda
12. About

In the midst of the biggest surveillance scandal of mankind and after
years of criticism about rogue secret agencies spying on politicians and
the government bodies supposed to control them, Austria is planning to
establish a new secret agency.

Austria's draft state security law, 'Staatsschutzgesetz', grants new,
far reaching surveillance powers while reducing oversight and
transparency of the planned ten state security agencies that are tasked
with fighting threats to the state and its public institutions.

If the proposed law passes, state security services will have the power
to oblige companies and government bodies to hand over all available
data, including sensitive personal information protected by other laws.
This information is then stored for up to five years in a centralised
database. International data exchange of personal information with other
security agencies is explicitly encouraged. Authorisation for
surveillance measures is not granted to target individuals but to target
�groups� � a term which neither specified by the draft law nor the
specific request. Entire population segments would be targeted by
blanket mass surveillance, and innocent individuals would be added to
such groups by decision of the agency without any regard towards
necessity, effectiveness or proportionality.

While surveillance powers are extended, oversight is reduced. This
reform also lowers the control mechanisms: instead of approval by a
judge or attorney, the oversight is only carried out by the internal
legal redress officer of the interior ministry. A system of
parliamentary oversight does not exist in Austria.

This reform was drafted after the debate about returning Daesh fighters
and the terrorist attacks of Paris and Copenhagen. During the
consultation period, 18 major institutions (including associations of
judges, lawyers, doctors, Internet providers, the evangelic and catholic
church, the federal association or worker unions, the federal economic
chamber, the constitutional service of the Federal Chancellor, the
federal ombudsman, Amnesty International and the Austrian Working Group
on Data Retention), heavily criticised the draft law. The Working group
on Data Retention (AKVorrat.at) also launched a campaign under
www.staatsschutz.at listing more than 11 000 signatures and four
demonstrations in three cities against the proposal.

The draft law is scheduled to be voted upon in plenary between 13-15
October. Civil society is pressuring the Members of Parliament to amend
the law in order to establish the necessary safeguards and transparency
measures to bring it back in line with the constitution.

Petition against the planned State Protection Act
http://www.staatsschutz.at/en/

(Contribution by Thomas Lohninger, EDRi member Initiative für
Netzfreiheit, Austria)

On 12 August 2015, EDRi-gram reported about a Portuguese
'��self-regulatory'�� agreement against alleged online infringements of
copyright and related rights. The agreement has already entered into
force and is now public, thanks to a Portuguese citizen who made a
freedom of information request and successfully appealed its initial
rejection before the Portuguese Commission on Access to Administrative
Documents (CADA).

The agreement, a '��Memorandum of Understanding'�� was concluded between
various private and public bodies,including two Portuguese public
bodies, copyright and related rights-holders associations, the
Portuguese Association of Telecom Operators (APRITEL), the organisation
responsible for .pt domain registrations DNS.PT, the anti-'��piracy'�� group
MAPINET and advertising associations. Prior to the conclusion, the
agreement had been facilitated and promoted by the Portuguese
government. In an official statement, the government reported that
consumer organisations had also signed the agreement. However, no
consumer organisation currently appears as a party to the agreement.

The agreement foresees that the signatory copyright associations will
notify MAPINET of websites that contain either a minimum of 500 works
which allegedly infringe copyright and/or content providers'�� rights, or
sites that contain two-thirds allegedly infringing contents. MAPINET
will be in charge of gathering the evidence submitted by the
associations and will forward a maximum of two wide-ranging complaints
to IGAC per month. IGAC then contacts Internet Service Providers (ISPs)
to restrict access to the websites through �Domain Name System (DNS)
blocking� within 15 working days. The blocks expire after a year, unless
IGAC determines otherwise. Additionally, the affected websites will be
excluded from carrying advertisements from participating parties.

EDRi has long campaigned against such '��voluntary agreements'��: they
undermine the rule of law, do not show any evidence of their
effectiveness (or even lack of counterproductive effect), and run
counter to principles of human rights online without the right to
redress nor due process of law.

EDRi-gram: Portugal: �Voluntary� agreement against copyright
infringements (12.08.2015)
https://edri.org/portugal-voluntary-agreement-against-copyright-infringements/

Memorandum of Understanding against alleged copyright infringements
(only in Portuguese, 30.07.2015)
https://paulasimoesblog.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/memorando.pdf

Memorandum of Understanding: Website Blocking in Portugal #PL118 (only
in Portuguese, 01.09.2015)
https://paulasimoesblog.wordpress.com/2015/09/01/pdf-memorando-de-entendimento-bloqueio-de-sites-em-portugal-pl118/

Portuguese Commission on Access to Administrative Documents (CADA)
http://www.cada.pt/

(Contribution by Maryant Fernández Pérez, EDRi)

On 13 November 2014, EDRi met with the European External Action Service
(EEAS) for a civil society consultation on the EU Human Rights
Guidelines on Freedom of Expression Online and Offline. The EEAS aims at
improving the Guidelines in the future and was seeking input to that
end. EDRi had already outlined its position in its response to the 2013
public consultation on the Draft EU Human Rights Guidelines on Freedom
of Expression. In August 2015, EDRi submitted a paper to update its
position (see links below).

EDRi believes that several key challenges stand in the way of the
freedom of expression online. The first relates to legislative
transparency and the right to access documents held by public bodies, an
issue that is mentioned briefly in the Guidelines and recognised in the
legislative framework of the EU. Denial of access obstructs the
democratic participation and limits the ability of media and civil
society actors to function. Improvements in this regard are slow to take
root, and new restrictions have been introduced by EU bodies to the
detriment of freedom of expression online. In the area of transparency
and democratic participation, the EU should lead by example - as a
global standard setter rather than going back on its own commitments.

Secondly, the question of the role and liability of internet
intermediaries online is an issue of concern. According to the EU legal
framework, they are not required to proactively police Internet content,
a point that is mentioned in the Guidelines. According to the �safe
harbour� provisions of the E-Commerce Directive, intermediaries are not
liable for the conduct of third parties unless they are aware or in
control of the content, nor are they required to generally monitor such
conduct. And yet, privatised policing activities are frequently imposed
on intermediaries by states, through coercion or, for example, public
relations pressure. Obligations imposed on intermediaries must be
balanced so as to not result in unpredictable, arbitrary or
disproportionate restrictions on fundamental rights and freedoms.

Thirdly, an issue that needs to be addressed is that of law enforcement
online, which often consists of �voluntary� measures being imposed on
the private sector to help �self-regulate� (i.e. regulate their
customers) or arbitrarily delete online content. Such actions can have a
legitimate purpose, such as combatting child abuse, but ultimately lie
outside a legal framework and, as the European Court pointed out in the
Data Retention case, a legitimate purpose is not enough to prove
legality under the European legal framework. Furthermore, in the absence
of common definitions for �extremist� or �terrorist� views, applying
similar filtering or blocking systems in pursuit of �national security�
leaves room for arbitrary restrictions of universal human rights, in
contradiction to all relevant international legal instruments.

In terms of EU objectives, the institutions should promote legislative
transparency and the rule of law, safeguarding fundamental rights and
freedoms rather than encouraging "voluntary" restrictive measures by
Internet intermediaries. The Guidelines ought therefore to be developed
in the spirit of an EU cybersecurity strategy which supports the
promotion of access to information and freedom of expression.

EDRi Comments on Article 24 of the EU action plan on Human Rights and
democracy and the EU Human Rights Guidelines on Freedom of Expression
Online and Offline
https://openatrium.edri.org/sites/default/files/eeas_freedom_of_expression_edricomments.pdf

EEAS Consultation on the Draft EU Human Rights Guidelines on Freedom of
Expression, EDRi response (15.08.2013)
https://edri.org/files/eeas_response.pdf

Cybersecurity Strategy of the European Union: An Open, Safe and Secure
Cyberspace, JOIN(2013) 1 final (7.2.20130)
http://eeas.europa.eu/policies/eu-cyber-security/cybsec_comm_en.pdf

EDRi-gram: EC adopts Guidelines on Freedom of Expression Online and
Offline (21.05.2014)
https://edri.org/ec-adopts-guidelines-on-freedom-of-expression-online-and-offline/

(Contribution by Inka Kotilainen, EDRi intern)

On 3 September 2015, the non-profit Internet Service Providers (ISPs)
French Data Network (FDN) and the FDN Federation (FFDN) as well as a
digital rights advocacy group La Quadrature du Net announced the
introduction of two legal challenges before the French Council of State
against the Internet surveillance activities of French foreign
intelligence services, Directorate-General for External Security (DGSE).
As the French government plans the introduction of a new bill on
international surveillance, these challenges underline the need for a
thorough oversight of surveillance measures.

On 31 August, with the assistance of law firm Spinosi-Sureau, La
Quadrature du Net, FDN and FFDN brought legal action seeking a summary
judgement and suspension against the unpublished decree regulating
measures of the surveillance of international communications by the
DGSE, which was secretly adopted in 2008. Even though this decree,
revealed by the magazine l'Obs in July 2015 remains secret, its
existence has not been refuted by the French government. What is known,
however, is that is its designed to authorise the massive tapping by the
French foreign intelligence services of Internet communications going to
or coming from French territory.

The legal challenge focuses on two main points:
- The fact that this decree is secret, automatically prevents both
citizens and Members of Parliament from knowing about it, which
contradicts the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights
- The fact that the French Constitutional Council's censorship of the
provision on international surveillance (article 854-1 of the Interior
Security Code voted in the Surveillance Law) reinforces the illegal
nature of the decree, since it made clear that the legislative basis for
such a decree should bring real and detailed safeguards

The implementing decree adopted in April 2008 had no legislative basis
and its unconstitutionality is confirmed by the French Constitutional
Council's decision.

"Through these legal challenges, our organisations are denouncing the
massive collection of Internet traffic data by French intelligence
agencies, conducted outside of any legal framework or effective
oversight mechanism. Just as the government announces a new bill on
"international surveillance", this trial is a reminder that no one
should be above the rule of law. The upcoming bill will have to break
away from the logic of mass surveillance and provide a rigorous
oversight that is compliant with international and European human rights
standards, while ensuring transparency without which there cannot be any
democratic control of the state," said Félix Tréguer, co-founder of La
Quadrature du Net.

On 31 August, with the assistance of law firm Spinosi-Sureau, La
Quadrature du Net, FDN and FFDN brought legal
Three French NGOs challenge French international surveillance (03.09.2015)
https://www.laquadrature.net/en/Three-French-NGOs-are-challenging-French-International-Surveillance

Exclusive. How France listens (also) to the world (only in French,
01.09.2015)
http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/societe/20150625.OBS1569/exclusif-comment-la-france-ecoute-aussi-le-monde.html

Brief for summary and suspensive judgment (only in French)
https://www.laquadrature.net//files/Recours_d%C3%A9cret_secret_2008_R%C3%A9f%C3%A9r%C3%A9_suspension.pdf

Brief for judgment as a matter of law (only in French)
https://www.laquadrature.net//files/Recours_d%C3%A9cret_secret_2008_Requ%C3%AAte_sommaire.pdf

(Contribution by La Quadrature du Net, France)

On 27 August, a British journalist and a cameraman working for Vice
News, a news channel that broadcasts in-depth documentaries about
current subjects, and their fixer were detained in Turkey while
reporting in Diyarbakir, the main city of the country's predominantly
Kurdish southeastern region. At the beginning of September, the three
men were charged by a Turkish judge in Diyarbakir with "deliberately
aiding an armed organisation". The basis for the charge was that the
fixer used a complex encryption system on his personal computer that
many Islamic State militants allegedly also use for strategic
communications.

In recent years, there have been several cases of journalists and
activists being harassed or detained in Turkey. Moreover, the current
Turkish government has repeatedly censored and monitored online
platforms, such as YouTube and Twitter. However, what makes this case
stand out, is the argument used to present the charges. For certain
governments, the use of a neutral technology is becoming a new reason to
believe that people have something to hide and that they are committing
a crime.

However, encrypted communications have long been an important element of
digital security, used for example, not only by companies such as Amazon
or PayPal, but also by human rights defenders, lawyers and citizens that
want to preserve their privacy and security. Privacy-enhancing
technologies, like the TOR browser or email encryption, are essential to
ensure that we can express ourselves freely � and that ideas that may
make society advance have spaces where they can develop.

Nevertheless, there is a common misunderstanding that high standards of
privacy could create unnecessary burdens for law enforcement agencies.
However, experts such as the United Nation's Office of the High
Commissioner, disagree with this view. In a recent report, the UN's
Office of the High Commissioner stated that encryption "provides the
privacy and security necessary for the exercise of the right to freedom
of opinion and expression in the digital age."

On 6 September, Vice News reported that two of the detained journalists
had been released and have returned to the UK. The third member of the
team is still being held by the Turkish authorities.

Vice News fixer "charged over encryption software" (02.09.2015)
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/09/vice-news-fixer-arrested-encryption-software-150901200622345.html

Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the
right to freedom of opinion and expression, David Kaye (22.05.2015)
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/RegularSessions/Session29/Documents/A.HRC.29.32_AEV.doc

U.N. report: Encryption is important to human rights � and backdoors
undermine it (28.05.2015)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2015/05/28/un-report-encryption-is-important-to-human-rights-and-backdoors-undermine-it/

Why the terrorist attacks I�ve endured have strengthened my commitment
to privacy
http://www.privacysurgeon.org/blog/incision/why-the-terrorist-attacks-ive-endured-have-strengthened-my-commitment-to-privacy/

EDRi-gram: A new wave of Internet blocking in Turkey (29.07.2015)
https://edri.org/new-wave-of-internet-blocking-turkey/

EDRi-gram: Social media platforms blocked again in Turkey (08.04.2015)
https://edri.org/social-media-platforms-blocked-again-turkey/

(Contribution by Pierre Christopher, EDRi intern)

On 26 August, the French Minister of the Interior Bernard Cazeneuve
announced in an interview that '90 percent of those drifting into
terrorism do it on the Internet'��. It is not the first time that
Cazeneuve mentioned this figure – he used the same statistics already on
numerous occasions, mainly to defend measures contained in the
controversial law on intelligence 'Loi Renseignement'�� (often referred to
as the '��French Patriot Act'��), adopted on 24 June 2015.

The '90 percent'�� comes from the report '��The Metamorphosis' brought
about
in young people by new terrorist discourses� by a Paris-based Centre of
Prevention of Sectarian Derivatives linked to Islam (CPDSI). The report
is based on interviews with only 160 families affected by Islamist
extremism. This can hardly be considered a representative statistical
sample, not only because of the low number of interviewees, but also
because the families interviewed were chosen among ones who actively
contacted the CPDSI via a phone number offering support to families who
feared that a member was being radicalised. Even more worrying than the
tiny sample size is, of course, that the respondents were answering
questions about influences that were exercised on somebody else –�� their
family member. The '��statistic' is therefore devoid of credibility,
despite its political effectiveness.

Without any doubt, jihadist networks use the Internet in order to get
organised, and social networks offer a convenient platform to distribute
propaganda and to keep in touch with supporters. However, many experts
agree that videos distributed through social media play a minimal role
in the recruitment process for jihadists. "The idea that by watching a
video, someone suddenly decides to leave for Syria doesn't correspond to
the reality. Rather, it's groups of young people who gather in a mosque
or a kebab restaurant and become radicalised together," explained Peter
Neumann, Director of the International Centre for the Study of
Radicalisation (ICSR).

The recent attacks in France and Belgium were, according to the
investigations of the French intelligence services, police and
gendarmerie, committed by terrorists who were not radicalised online.

Terrorists behind the attacks in France are not radicalised �online�
(only in French, 26.08.2015)
http://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2015/08/26/les-terroristes-ayant-agi-en-france-ne-se-sont-pas-radicalises-en-ligne_4737368_4408996.html

CPDSI: The Metamorphosis brought about in young people by new terrorist
discourses (only in French)
http://www.bouzar-expertises.fr/images/docs/METAMORPHOSE.pdf

New Trends in Youth Radicalisation (09.12.2014)
http://tonyblairfaithfoundation.org/religion-geopolitics/reports-analysis/report/new-trends-youth-radicalisation

Web and terrorism: When Bernard Cazeneuve drifts into 100% (only in
French, 20.02.2015)
http://www.nextinpact.com/news/93139-net-et-terrorisme-quand-bernard-cazeneuve-bascule-a-100.htm

On 15 July 2015, the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home
Affairs (LIBE) of the European Parliament narrowly voted in favour of
the EU Passenger Name Record (PNR) Directive proposal (32 in favour, 26
against, no abstentions), a mass surveillance measure to collect and
process air traveller data for profiling purposes. This came after the
rejection of a previous PNR proposal by the LIBE Committee in 2013 and
the subsequent abandonment of that proposal in 2014.

Even so, in a worst case scenario of having the PNR Directive proposal
fast-tracked through the legislative procedure, like the Data Retention
Directive of 2006, it would still take some six months for the proposal
to go through all the steps before becoming European law.

Roughly at the same time, the Romanian Government was having far fewer
qualms about PNR than the European Parliament and its Committees. On 13
July 2015, the draft law �Government Statute no. 13� was silently
adopted, thus creating a Romanian PNR system. No public debate was
conducted, and the impact of the new law on fundamental rights was not
assessed.

On 5 August 2015, another proposal for a governmental decision was
published, mandating the implementation of a PNR-like system for people
staying at any hotel, hostel or guest house in Romania. This means that
personal identification data of everyone who is renting a room in
Romania is entered by a hotel employee in a centralised computer system
called �Integrated Tourist Record Computer System� (SIET). The system
would be hosted and run by Special Telecommunications Service (STS),
which is a militarised intelligence agency with almost no civilian
oversight.

Access to the tourist data gathered and stored within this system raises
even more questions. The purpose of the system is, ostensibly, to gather
and analyse tourist data to improve the quality of the Romanian tourism
industry. However, while the tourism industry is only going to get
access to statistical data, various law enforcement organisations of the
Internal Affairs Ministry (MAI) will have unrestricted access to all
data based simply on an agreement between them and the STS.

The proposal's authors and supporters justify the measure by explaining
that it just brings in a computer system to do what was already being
done with pen and paper. Romania is still using a system from the
communist times, where all tourists who book a room at a hotel or
hotel-like establishment are being asked for identification as a
mandatory precondition for their stay. The personal data collected by
the hotel is being forwarded on a daily basis to the local police station.

On 26 August, at EDRi member ApTI's request, the Romanian Economy,
Commerce and Tourism Ministry (MECT) organised a public debate about
SIET. Unfortunately, any attempt to debate the issues of SIET on the
basis of its impact on fundamental rights is futile.

EU PNR document pool (27.07.2015)
https://edri.org/eu-pnr-document-pool/

Statute no. 13/2015 regarding the use of some data from the passenger
name registers for cross-border cooperation in order to prevent and
combat terrorism, terrorism-related infractions and infractions against
national security, as well as preventing and removing threats to
national security (only in Romanian, 13.07.2015)
http://lege5.ro/Gratuit/g4zdonbxhe/ordonanta-nr-13-2015-privind-utilizarea-unor-date-din-registrele-cu-numele-pasagerilor-in-cadrul-cooperarii-transfrontaliere-pentru-prevenirea-si-combaterea-actelor-de-terorism-a-infractiunilor-conexe

Governemt Decision for the adoption of the Integrated Tourist Record
Computer System and the Norms regarding the access, record keeping and
protection of tourists in establishments with accommodation facilities
(only in Romanian)
http://www.minind.ro/PROPUNERI_LEGISLATIVE/2015/HG_SIET_2015.pdf

Do you want the Police to know where you go on vacation? Join the public
debate about the Integrated Tourist Record Computer System (SIET) (only
in Romanian, 20.08.2015)
http://privacy.apti.ro/2015/08/20/vrei-ca-politia-sa-stie-pe-unde-mergi-in-vacanta-participa-la-dezbaterea-publica-pe-tema-sistemului-de-evidenta-a-turistilor-siet/

How we found out that we'll all have �a chip under our skin� at the
public debate about SIET (only in Romanian, 03.09.2015)
http://privacy.apti.ro/2015/09/03/cum-am-aflat-ca-vom-avea-toti-un-cip-sub-piele-la-dezbaterea-publica-pe-tema-siet/

(Contribution by Matei Vasile, EDRi member ApTI, Romania)

Xenophobic attacks against refugees in Germany have dramatically
increased over the past two years. In the first six months of 2015,
German authorities counted 150 attacks on asylum-seeker shelters
throughout the country.

On 27 August, in an attempt to address the situation, Germany's minister
of justice and consumer protection urged Facebook to take down racist
material more pro-actively. The newspaper Tagesspiegel got hold of a
letter that was sent by minister Heiko Maas to Facebook. In this letter,
he expressed his dissatisfaction with the way in which the US company
deals with racist and xenophobic content. He pointed out that according
to the social network's community standards, it �removes hate speech,
which includes content that directly attacks people based on their race,
ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation etc.� and asked
Facebook for a meeting to discuss �the possibility to increase the
effectiveness and transparency of its community standards�.

Unfortunately, it is not clear at all to what kind of content Maas is
referring to nor what kind of measures he is now expecting of Facebook -
as the company's community standards do not only re-prohibit already
illegal behaviour but also include restrictions on content that would be
perfectly legal in almost all European countries. At various times,
Facebook has considered it acceptable, in some circumstances, to post
messages containing videos of beheading, while unacceptable to upload a
drawing which contained dots that were perceived as female nipples. Dots
perceived as male nipples have always been acceptable.

Heiko Maas seems to be suffering from the widespread disease that
affects the ability to differentiate between unlawful posts and the
legitimate exercise of the right to freedom of expression. This
widespread confusion was promptly confirmed in the response from
Facebook's spokesperson to the German minister, where the company
explained that it works "hard every day to protect people on Facebook
against abuse, hate speech and bullying�. In Germany, hate speech is a
criminal offence under the Penal Code (§130 (1)), harassment at the
workplace, however, is not illegal.

Another article on the same topic in the ZEIT interpreted Maas' request
that Facebook should show more "own initiative" - and this demonstrates
how quickly an unclear request can lead to a very dangerous approach.
While increased transparency regarding Facebook's takedown activities is
certainly a good idea, referring to the �effectiveness� of the community
standards looks like an encouragement to censor legitimate speech.
Should all removals be reported to the German police as a potential
criminal offence � Maas is silent on the subject.

Yet, a look at the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (Art. 52.1) and the
European Convention on Human Rights (Articles 8 and 10) is sufficient to
raise serious doubts as to the legality of asking a US company to become
an unaccountable arbitrary judge, jury and executioner over online
communications in Europe.

Heiko Maas is right on one point though - the internet is not a legal
vacuum. It is not a space where US companies should be able to
arbitrarily delete legitimate content and speech. Numerous examples show
that Facebook's censorship activities are already a problem. Too often,
Facebook takes down posts or shuts down entire accounts that are
perfectly legal in Europe. Only a few months ago, Femen activist Eloïse
Bouton noticed that Facebook had blocked her account after she uploaded
the cover of her book. In addition, there are still no penalties for the
abuse of Facebook's flagging system - a problem from which dissidents
around the globe suffer. Ironically, citizens are more heavily regulated
in this �legal vacuum� (by both the law and by terms of service) than
traditional media, which only have to contend with the law.

So why does Heiko Maas mention Facebook's community standards when he
could have just produced evidence to demonstrate the company does not
take down illegal content quickly enough � in breach of its obligations?
Why is Germany's justice minister thereby encouraging increased
extra-judicial activities by a private company without a clear legal
basis or judicial control?

The spokesman for domestic politics of the Greens in the Bundestags
confirmed that statistics show, that very often "almost no effort to
identify the perpetrators" is being made. Instead of simply asking for
more commitment from Facebook, wouldn't it therefore be wiser to
encourage the social network's users to file complaints to the German
authorities and to improve the identification and efficient prosecution
of right-wing terrorists by law enforcement?

Tagesspiegel, Facebook: no place for racism (27.08.2015)
http://www.tagesspiegel.de/medien/antwort-auf-brief-von-heiko-maas-facebook-kein-ort-fuer-rassismus/12238614.html

Letter from Heiko Maas to Facebook, Tagesschau (27.08.2015)
http://www.tagesschau.de/inland/facebook-maas-101~_origin-0bd499e5-9a13-4a5e-9217-f418e5440ce5.html

Huffington Post, Breasts on Facebook: Stop the Censorship, Mark
Zuckerberg! (02.03.2015)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eloise-bouton/breasts-on-facebook-stop-_b_6608052.html

(Contribution by Kirsten Fiedler, EDRi)

Educate and empower children on online privacy!
Help us crowdfund educational material to teach online privacy to kids!
Donate now!
http://www.globalgiving.org/projects/online-privacy-for-children/

Say no to an interior secret agency in Austria!
Sign and spread the online petition to prevent the creation of an
interior secret agency in Austria!
https://www.staatsschutz.at/en/

The Red Web by Andrei Soldatov and Irina Borogan review � Russia�s
attack on internet freedoms
http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/sep/02/the-red-web-review-andrei-soldatov-irina-borogan-review-russias-attack-internet-freedoms

Parliament calls for stricter controls over surveillance tech exports
(09.09.2015)
http://www.marietjeschaake.eu/2015/09/media-euractiv-parliament-calls-for-stricter-controls-over-surveillance-tech-exports/

Study Finds �Supercookies� Used Outside U.S. (17.08.2015)
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2015/08/17/study-finds-supercookies-used-outside-u-s/

28.09.2015, Brussels, Belgium
Trilogues and transparent law-making
http://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/activities/calendarevent.faces/en/1001/html.bookmark

01.10.2015, Brussels, Belgium
Internet as a Commons: Public Space in the Digital Age
http://www.greens-efa.eu/internet-as-a-commons-13850.html

13.10.2015, Strasbourg, France
Freedom of Expression: Still a precondition for democracy?
http://a.cs.coe.int/team81/mig/Conference_Freedom_of_expression_Strasbourg_2015/

15.10.2015, Brussels, Belgium
Big Brother Awards Belgium
https://bigbrotherawards.be

16.10.2015, Brussels, Belgium
EDRi members meetup

16.10.2015, Brussels, Belgium
Freedom not Fear
https://www.freedomnotfear.org/

30.10.2015, Barcelona, Spain
FCForum�15
http://fcforum.net/en/

30.10.2015, Barcelona, Spain
Free Culture Forum 2015

04.11.2015, Warsaw, Poland
CopyCamp Conference 2015 � Understanding the Social Impacts of Copyright
http://copycamp.pl/en/

05.11.2015, Warsaw, Poland
The School of Rock(ing) EU Copyright
https://edri.org/the-school-of-rocking-eu-copyright/

06.11.2015, London, United Kingdom
Mozilla Festival
https://2015.mozillafestival.org/

06.11.2015, Erlangen, Germany
FIfF-Conference 2015: Commercialisation of the Soci(et)al � Markets and
Power in the Age of Total Datafication
http://www.fiff.de/

17.11.2015, Brussels, Belgium
EUhackathon
http://www.2015.euhackathon.eu/

27.12.2015, Hamburg, Germany
32C3
https://events.ccc.de

EDRi-gram is a fortnightly newsletter about digital civil rights in
Europe. Currently EDRi has 33 members based or with offices in 19
different countries in Europe. European Digital Rights takes an active
interest in developments in the EU accession countries and wants to
share knowledge and awareness through the EDRi-gram.

All contributions, suggestions for content, corrections or agenda-tips
are most welcome. Errors are corrected as soon as possible and are
visible on the EDRi website.

Except where otherwise noted, this newsletter is licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. See the full text at
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/

Newsletter editor: Heini Jarvinen [email protected]

Information about EDRi and its members: http://www.edri.org/

European Digital Rights needs your help in upholding digital rights in
the EU. If you wish to help us promote digital rights, please consider
making a private donation.
https://edri.org/donate/

- EDRI-gram subscription information
subscribe by e-mail
To: [email protected]
Subject: subscribe
You will receive an automated e-mail asking to confirm your request.
Unsubscribe by e-mail
To: [email protected]
Subject: unsubscribe

- EDRI-gram in Macedonian
EDRI-gram is also available partly in Macedonian, with delay.
Translations are provided by Metamorphosis
http://www.metamorphosis.org.mk/mk/vesti/edri

- EDRI-gram in German
EDRI-gram is also available in German, with delay. Translations are
provided by Andreas Krisch from the EDRI-member VIBE!AT - Austrian
Association for Internet Users
http://www.unwatched.org/

- Newsletter archive
Back issues are available at:
http://www.edri.org/newsletters/

- Help
Please ask [email protected] if you have any problems with subscribing
or unsubscribing.