<div dir="ltr"><h1>ORG policy update/2015-w28</h1>
<p><span lang="en-US">This is ORG's Policy Update for the week
beginning 03/07/2015 </span>
</p>
<p><span lang="en-US"><br>Caspar Bowden, popular, respected and
outspoken privacy campaigner, has sadly died of cancer. He was a
strong opponent of mass surveillance and had been, </span><span lang="en-US">among
other influential positions,</span><span lang="en-US"> a director for
the Tor Project, in charge of overseeing the development of the Tor
browser. See our <a href="https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2015/caspar-bowden" target="_blank">post</a>
for further details.</span></p>
<p><br>
</p>
<h2><a name="14e7877a31588155_14e785c6f0c2932c_Debates"></a>Debates</h2>
<h3><a name="14e7877a31588155_14e785c6f0c2932c_House_of_Lords.27_debate_on_the_Anderson_report"></a>
House of Lords' debate on the Anderson report</h3>
<p>The House of Lords <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/ldhansrd/text/150708-0001.htm#15070839000405" target="_blank">held
a debate</a> on Wednesday, July 8th, on the <a href="https://terrorismlegislationreviewer.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/IPR-Report-Print-Version.pdf" target="_blank">report
of the investigatory Powers Review</a> written by David Anderson Q.C.
and in the light of the future debate on the Investigatory Powers
Bill this Autumn. There was a consensus on the quality and
thoroughness of the report. Lord Bates from the <a href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Home_Office" target="_blank">Home
Office</a> argued that the report show how much the intelligence and
law enforcement services take into account the protection of British
citizens' privacy.
</p>
<p>The main point of debate between the Lords was on the question of
the power to issue warrants. Baroness Manningham-Buller argued that
this power must remain with Secretaries of State, as they have
political accountability. On the opposite side, Lord Strasburger
advocated for a judicial issuing of warrants, on the grounds that
judges are the guarantors of individuals' liberties. Lord Scriven
made a long case against mass surveillance, which he described as
opposed to the values that the United Kingdom stands for.
</p>
<p><br><br>
</p>
<h2><a name="14e7877a31588155_14e785c6f0c2932c_Legal_Developments"></a>Legal
Developments</h2>
<h3><a name="14e7877a31588155_14e785c6f0c2932c_DRIPA_discussed_in_Court_this_week"></a>DRIPA
discussed in Court this week</h3>
<p>A hearing <a href="https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2015/dripa-challenge-in-court-today" target="_blank">was
held at the Royal Courts of Justice</a> on Thursday, July 9th, to
determine if the challenge to the <a href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Data_Retention_and_Investigatory_Powers_Act_2014" target="_blank">Data
Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014</a> brought by MPs <a href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/David_Davis_MP" target="_blank">David
Davis</a> and <a href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Tom_Watson_MP" target="_blank">Tom
Watson</a> should be brought to the European Court of Justice. This
challenge focuses on whether DRIPA is compatible with European laws
and the European Convention of Human Rights. <a href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Open_Rights_Group" target="_blank">Open
Rights Group</a> and <a href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Privacy_International" target="_blank">Privacy
International</a> made submissions at the start of the proceeding,
and <a href="https://www.openrightsgroup.org/ourwork/reports/open-rights-group-and-privacy-internationals-submission-in-dripa-case" target="_blank">made
the point</a> that the European Court of Justice has already set out
the requirements that domestic law must follow in order to comply
with European requirements on the protection of privacy.
</p>
<p>Liberty, the NGO representing the two MPs, opposed the
government's request to refer the case to the ECJ, as it would
considerably delay the final judgment, while the so-called “Snoopers'
Charter” is expected to be presented to Parliament this Autumn. The
Court rejected the reference request, and is expected to issue its
judgment next week.
</p>
<p><br><br>
</p>
<h2><a name="14e7877a31588155_14e785c6f0c2932c_Reports"></a>Reports</h2>
<h3><a name="14e7877a31588155_14e785c6f0c2932c_Cryptography_experts_warn_against_the_danger_of_weakening_encryption"></a>
Cryptography experts warn against the danger of weakening encryption</h3>
<p>An influential group of cryptography experts has published <a href="http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/97690/MIT-CSAIL-TR-2015-026.pdf?sequence=8" target="_blank">a
report</a> strongly advocating against “backdoor” access to
encrypted data to governments, or any other form of weakening of
encryption. Prime Minister <a href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/David_Cameron_MP" target="_blank">David
Cameron</a> and U.S. President Barack Obama <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/15/david-cameron-encryption-anti-terror-laws" target="_blank">have
called</a> for such measures, although in veiled terms. No concrete
legislative proposals on the subject has been released yet. The
experts argue that “these proposals are unworkable in practice,
raise enormous legal and ethical questions, and would undo progress
on security at a time when Internet vulnerabilities are causing
extreme economic harm.”
<br><br>Ross Anderson, one of the authors of the report, compared <a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2015/07/07/crypto-wars-2-0/" target="_blank">in a blog post</a>
the current situation with the "crypto wars" of the mid-90s, during
which the Clinton administration required the implementation of a chip
in electronic devices in order to access all communications, but had to
back down when it was proven that this would greatly compromise
communications' security.
<br></p>
<p><br><br>
</p>
<h2><a name="14e7877a31588155_14e785c6f0c2932c_International_Developments"></a>International
Developments</h2>
<h3><a name="14e7877a31588155_14e785c6f0c2932c_Company_selling_surveillance_software_hacked"></a>
Company selling surveillance software hacked</h3>
<p>Hacking Team, a Milan-based company, <a href="http://arstechnica.co.uk/security/2015/07/hacking-team-gets-hacked-invoices-show-spyware-sold-to-repressive-govts/" target="_blank">was
hacked</a> last weekend, and allegedly, over 400 GB of data from its
computers have been leaked. The company sells spyware to governments,
and has been criticised by civil rights group for selling to
countries with poor human rights records. Reporters Without Borders
<a href="https://surveillance.rsf.org/en/hacking-team/" target="_blank">designated it</a>
as an “enemy of the Internet” for its trade with Saudi Arabia,
Kazakhstan and Turkey. The recent leaks add even more countries, such
as Sudan and Azerbaijan, to the list.
</p>
<p>In internal e-mails, high-ranking employees <a href="http://arstechnica.co.uk/security/2015/07/massive-leak-reveals-hacking-teams-most-private-moments-in-messy-detail/" target="_blank">bragged
about</a> “the evilest technology on earth” and explained ways
that the company's softwares could circumvent protection such as the
use of TOR for anonymity or HTTPS against third-party interception.
</p>
<p>Dutch MEP Marietje Schaake <a href="http://motherboard.vice.com/read/italy-should-investigate-hacking-team-european-parliament-member-says" target="_blank">called
for</a> member states to stop using Hacking Team services and
demanded the opening of an investigation into its commercial
practices. Selling spyware could breach European sanctions against
states such as Sudan and Russia
</p>
<h3><a name="14e7877a31588155_14e785c6f0c2932c_Social_media_providers_could_have_to_refer_any_.E2.80.9Cterrorist_activity.E2.80.9D_to_US_law_enforcement"></a>
Social media providers could have to refer any “terrorist activity”
to US law enforcement</h3>
<p>Last week, the US Senate Intelligence Committee <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/08/us_senate_committee_wants_twitter_facebook_to_report_terrorist_posts/" target="_blank">approved
legislation</a> that appears to require “electronic communication
service providers” to inform the authorities about any extremist
content posted on their platforms. The exact content of the law is
not known. It could affect e-mail services, social media providers
and platform, such as YouTube.
</p>
<p>Industry officials and civil liberty advocates have expressed
their fear that this might undermine users' privacy. Anonymous
industry official <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/lawmakers-want-internet-sites-to-flag-terrorist-activity-to-law-enforcement/2015/07/04/534a0bca-20e9-11e5-84d5-eb37ee8eaa61_story.html" target="_blank">told
the Washington Post</a> that “asking Internet companies to
proactively monitor people’s posts and messages would be the same
thing as asking your telephone company to monitor and log all your
phone calls, text messages, all your Internet browsing, all the sites
you visit”.
</p>
<p><br><br>
</p>
<h2><a name="14e7877a31588155_14e785c6f0c2932c_European_Union"></a>European Union</h2>
<h3><a name="14e7877a31588155_14e785c6f0c2932c_Parliament_adopts_report_on_copyright_reforms"></a>
Parliament adopts report on copyright reforms</h3>
<p>The report on copyright enforcement in Europe, written by Pirate
Party MEP Julia Reda <a href="http://www.euractiv.com/sections/infosociety/copyright-meps-ditch-plans-google-tax-tourist-photo-ban-316177" target="_blank">was
adopted</a> by the <a href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/European_Parliament" target="_blank">European
Parliament</a> in plenary session on Thursday, July 9th. More than an
evaluation report, this document states the position of the European
Parliament on copyright, while the Commission is expected to issue a
legislative proposal on it this Autumn. Adopted by a large majority
(445 votes in favour, 65 against), the report didn't include, as its
author <a href="https://juliareda.eu/2015/07/eu-parliament-defends-freedom-of-panorama-calls-for-copyright-reform/" target="_blank">gladly
pointed out</a>, the controversial amendment removing “freedom of
panorama”. This proposal, if implemented, would have prevented
citizens from posting pictures taken in public places on social
networks, or Wikipedia to use pictures of recent buildings. A
<a href="https://www.change.org/p/european-parliament-save-the-freedom-of-photography-savefop-europarl-en" target="_blank">petition</a>
against this amendment had been signed by more than 550,000
supporters. The amendment on the so-called “Google tax”, which
paved the way for ancillary copyright for press publishers on
services such as “Google News”, was not adopted either.
</p>
<p>The report calls for the end of geo-blocking, new exceptions on
copyright for public libraries and scientific research (with data
mining), and greater harmonisation of copyright laws and enforcement
in the European Union.
</p>
<p><br><br>
</p>
<h3><a name="14e7877a31588155_14e785c6f0c2932c_Explanatory_notes_of_the_regulation_on_Net_Neutrality_abates_fear_of_two-tier_Internet"></a>
Explanatory notes of the regulation on Net Neutrality abates fear of
two-tier Internet</h3>
<p>When the trialogue on the Telecoms Single Market Regulation
reached an end last week, after two years of negotiations, it was
feared that net neutrality was under threat. In particular, digital
rights activist groups in Brussels pointed out the vagueness in the
wording of the regulation.
</p>
<p>The recitals (binding explanatory notes), released this week, have
<a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/09/net_neutrality_deal_closes_loopholes_promises_level_playing_field_without_scaring_the_horses/" target="_blank">largely
abated</a> those concerns. Estelle Massé, from the NGO Access,
stated that the recitals close possible loopholes that would allow a
two-tier Internet, and effectively protects net neutrality, without
using this exact phrase. Both Access and <a href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/European_Digital_Rights" target="_blank">European
Digital Rights</a> (EDRi) have expressed regrets that <a href="http://www.cio.com/article/2946313/europe-prepares-to-enforce-its-take-on-net-neutrality.html" target="_blank">the
law doesn't address the issue of “zero-rating”</a>. Zero-rating
arrangements allow users to access a particular internet service on
their mobile, without it being counted in their data plan. It <a href="https://www.accessnow.org/blog/2015/04/02/access-submits-comments-on-zero-rating-to-government-of-brazil" target="_blank">has
been criticised</a> as anti-competitive and a threat to net
neutrality.
</p>
<p><br><br>
</p>
<h3><a name="14e7877a31588155_14e785c6f0c2932c_Parliament_votes_position_on_TTIP_negotiations"></a>
Parliament votes position on TTIP negotiations</h3>
<p>After an unsuccessful first try a month ago, the European
Parliament <a href="http://www.euractiv.com/sections/global-europe/european-parliament-backs-ttip-rejects-isds-316142" target="_blank">adopted
a position</a> on the <a href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/TTIP" target="_blank">TTIP</a>
(Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership) negotiations on
Wednesday, July 8th. The most contentious point in the debate has
been the Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provision, which
allows for the creation of ad hoc international tribunals to settle
disputes between states and companies. Many MEPsargued that ISDS was
a blow to rule of law and sovereignty. Eventually, a compromise was
found with a new system of tribunals with “publicly appointed,
independent professional judges”, where “private interests cannot
undermine public policy objectives”.
</p>
<p>The position was voted in with 436 in favour, and 241 against.
European Digital Rights (EDRi) <a href="https://edri.org/ttip-resolution-what-did-the-parliament-say-about-digital-rights/" target="_blank">welcomed</a>
the call from the Parliament to exclude data protection from the
talk, and its reiteration that mass surveillance programmes should be
abandoned. However, the text does not exclude copyright, trademarks
and patents from the negotiations.
</p>
<p><br><br>
</p>
<h2><a name="14e7877a31588155_14e785c6f0c2932c_ORG_Media_coverage"></a>ORG Media
coverage</h2>
<p>See <a href="https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/ORG_Press_Coverage" target="_blank">ORG
Press Coverage</a> for full details.
</p>
<dt>2015-07-06 – Vice - <a href="https://www.vice.com/read/cost-of-uk-government-surveillance-383" target="_blank">British
Taxpayers Are Funding the UK's Mass Surveillance Program</a>
</dt><dd>
Author: Lauren Razavi
</dd><dd style="margin-bottom:0.2in">
Summary: Jim Killock quoted on the cost of mass surveillance in the
UK and how the money could be spent otherwise
</dd><dt>
2015-06-29 – Bloomberg - <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-07-02/u-k-politician-theresa-may-voted-internet-villain-of-the-year-" target="_blank">U.K.
Politician Theresa May voted “Internet villain of the year”</a>
</dt><dd>
Author: Amy Thomson
</dd><dd style="margin-bottom:0.2in">
Summary: Jim Killock quoted on the Snoopers' Charter
</dd><dt>
2015-07-10 – Inquisitr - <a href="http://www.inquisitr.com/2240682/orwellian-move-whatsapp-may-be-banned-in-uk-under-new-snoopers-charter-law/" target="_blank">Orwellian
move? WhatsApp may be banned in UK under new “Snoopers' Charter'
law</a>]
</dt><dd>
Author: Anne Sewell
</dd><dd style="margin-bottom:0.2in">
Summary: Open Rights Group quoted on the Snoopers' Charter
</dd><h2>
<a name="14e7877a31588155_14e785c6f0c2932c_ORG_contact_details"></a>ORG contact details</h2>
<p><a href="http://www.openrightsgroup.org/people/staff" target="_blank">Staff page</a>
</p>
<ul><li><p style="margin-bottom:0in"><a href="http://www.openrightsgroup.org/people/staff#jim" target="_blank">Jim
Killock, Executive Director</a>
</p>
</li><li><p style="margin-bottom:0in"><a href="http://www.openrightsgroup.org/people/staff#javier" target="_blank">Javier
Ruiz, Policy</a>
</p>
</li><li><p style="margin-bottom:0in"><a href="http://www.openrightsgroup.org/people/staff#ed" target="_blank">Ed
Paton-Williams, Campaigns</a>
</p>
</li><li><p style="margin-bottom:0in"><a href="http://www.openrightsgroup.org/people/staff#pam" target="_blank">Pam
Cowburn, Communications</a>
</p>
</li><li><p><a href="http://www.openrightsgroup.org/people/staff#lee" target="_blank">Lee
Maguire, Tech</a>
</p>
</li></ul></div>