Freedom to hold opinions and freedom of expression are fundamental human rights which shape our modern democratic society, the rule of law, the stable and sustainable inclusive development, and the social participation. All EU Member States have the obligation to acknowledge, protect, and promote the right to freedom of opinion and expression. To freedom to hold opinions is among the main achievements of our digital era. The global digital society allows such interaction that is fostering active cultural exchange and democracy on a whole new level.
The EU engages with the development and protection of the freedom of opinion and expression and strongly condemns the increasing level of threat and violence against journalists, media participants, and other stakeholders. Based on the existing tools and documents, these guidelines reconfirm basic principles and offer clear priorities and measures to be implemented by the EU institutions and member countries in order to protect and promote effectively the freedom of expression online and offline.
Among the EU priority areas of action is the area of promoting and respecting human rights in cyberspace and other information and communication technologie.
digital rights management (DRM) | Definition & Examples | nuigewithd.ga
EU acknowledges the need of more effective application of the corporate social responsibility principles through a No-Disconnect Strategy. It is focused on the specifics of human rights in the corporate ICT sector and allocate part of the innovation and research funding to the development of technologies fighting censorship. These actions are applied through a line of instruments for the EU human rights protection such as the European instrument for democracy and human rights.
Since this instrument provides special funding for projects in the area of cyber censorship and fighting acts against human rights facilitated by information and communication technologies. In light of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, our research aims to establish whether the scope of the right under Article 10 ECHR needs to accommodate the new realities of ICTs being used by citizens in journalistic-like activities and whether the self-regulation of the press is still an adequate regulatory tool.
Every consumer in the European Union has the right to receive clear and understandable essential information from a trader of products or services before concluding an online purchase.
Poster un commentaire
Every online consumer concluding a contract in the EU has the right to receive timely, clear, and complete contractual information. Every consumer has the right to receive, after having ordered the goods or services, confirmation of the key elements of the contract in writing or on a durable medium, such as e-mail.
Any consumer in the EU, also in the digital environment, is protected from unfair standard contract terms by traders that create an unreasonable imbalance to the detriment of the consumer. Any consumer, including the digital consumer, has the right either to complain to the national enforcement authorities or to take legal action against a trader in the EU that uses unfair commercial practices. Consumers must not be misled or exposed to aggressive marketing and this applies also in the digital environment. Any consumer in the EU must receive goods or services ordered online from a trader within 30 days, unless something else has been agreed with the seller.
Consumers in the EU have at least seven days to change their mind about goods or services they have ordered online from a trader. Come on government, stand up for us! Does article13 protect users against unjustified content blockages?
- In the Shadows.
- Exploring The World of Biology.
- The Sci Fi Freaks Guide To The Televisual Galaxy - All The Shows (Second Edition)!
- Oh, China!: An Elementary Reader of Modern Chinese for Advanced Beginners (The Princeton Language Program: Modern Chinese)?
- Search form!
NGOs call to ensure fundamental rights in copyright implementation The UdPs in question are military status reports regularly sent to Federal ministries about the deployment of the German military abroad. Funke Medien tried initially to obtain a series of documents via a freedom of information request, which was denied. The German government took the view that Funke Medien had infringed the copyrights by publishing the UdPs.
- Do You Know Your Digital Rights?;
- An beginner's guide to digital rights.
- Facebook secures exclusive digital rights for ICC cricket events – TechCrunch.
Exceptions and limitations allow to use copyrighted works without specific authorisation from the rights holder the author or the entity owning the rights of reproduction. Whether military reports or any other piece of public information is protected by copyright must be, according to the CJEU, defined case by case by national member states courts.
This national interpretation also applies to exceptions in Article 5 3 of the Infosoc Directive, in this case for reproduction rights for journalistic purposes. The Court said that even if the UDPs were considered works protected by copyright, Funke Medien had the right to use the work for journalistic purposes under the copyright exception, and that therefore the publication of the papers was legal. This judgment does not act in vacuum. From the very beginning of the discussion EDRi and other civil society groups raised the alarm on the risks of Article 13 , and we published thorough analysis of Article 17 then Article Despite the widely extended claims that the copyright Directive would not lead to upload filters, it became pretty clear pretty quickly that it was all about implementing upload filters.
National parliaments are deciding how to implement the copyright Directive, and the way this happens could lead to upload filters taking care of how even documents from public authorities with a public relevance become part of the public discourse. Get in touch with your national EDRi members, Wikimedia chapter or consumer organisation, and make sure upload filters are not going to be mandatory in your country!
Re-Deconstructing upload filters proposal in the copyright Directive You can read the introduction here. In our previous blog posts on the upcoming E-Commerce review, we discussed examples of what can go wrong with online content regulation. Even then, policymakers will need to put in place sufficient safeguards in order to avoid the wrongful removal of legitimate speech, art and knowledge. The current E-Commerce Directive and the absence of workable notice-and-action rules have created a Wild West of intransparent content moderation and removal practices.
Which action to take should of course depend on the type of allegedly illegal content or activity that is concerned. Implementing those rules would need to be mandatory for platform companies. Although many academics and NGOs have written extensively about safeguards that should be introduced in any notice-and-action system, there are currently no minimum procedural requirements in place in the EU that hosting companies would be obliged to follow.
This is not good for reputable businesses and certainly not good for people. While this list is not exhaustive, it provides the baseline for a human rights-respecting notice-and-action system that should be implemented as part of an E-Commerce Directive review. Designing such a system is far from simple, and there are opposing commercial and political interests involved that will push hard to have it their way.
However, similarly to the General Data Protection Regulation GDPR and data protection, getting the content moderation conundrum right provides Europe with a unique opportunity to set global human rights standards for a thriving online space — a space where everybody can feel safe, express themselves freely, and benefit from unhindered open access to the vast amount of knowledge and opportunity that is the internet. What is the problem? Agenda By Guest author. By Epicenter. Why was the complaint rejected? What are the next steps? Impact on innocents What this small show of success does not capture, however, is the damage inflicted on the thousands of innocent passengers who are wrongly flagged by the system and who can be subjected to damaging police investigations or denied entry into destination countries without proper cause.
Why is this happening? The rate fallacy Imagine a city with a population of 1 people implements surveillance measures to catch terrorists.
Digital rights are civil rights
By Dean Willis. Your rights? By Andreea Belu. Copy link. By Centrum Cyfrowe Foundation. By Bits of Freedom. What was that again, Article 17 or 13?
File Extensions and File Formats
The Netherlands found European rules harmful The Dutch government was crystal clear in the debate that took place at the European level prior to the adoption of the Directive: these rules do more harm than good. From European to Dutch rules Since this is a Directive, all Member States must incorporate the rules into national legislation. But, unfortunately… On 2 July , the Dutch Ministry of Justice and Security published a draft bill for this transposition.
A more ambitious proposal is desperately needed EDRi member Bits of Freedom strongly urges the Dutch government to come up with a more ambitious bill. The Netherlands must do better In short, the Netherlands must do better.
By Diego Naranjo. Copyright or freedom of the press? CJEU replies: Copyright is king. Or freedom of the press. It depends. Towards nationally implemented upload filters? By EDRi. A workable notice-and-action system The current E-Commerce Directive and the absence of workable notice-and-action rules have created a Wild West of intransparent content moderation and removal practices. Some examples of human rights safeguards There should be an obligation for hosting companies to notify users when their content has been flagged by someone, ideally before any action against the content is taken, with exceptions where law enforcement needs to investigate criminal offences.
Hosting companies should be obliged to report certain very serious criminal offences such as the distribution of child abuse material to law enforcement. Users whose content has been flagged should be able to send a counter-notice to defend themselves against wrongful removals. After public outcry and lawsuits, Sony recalled some of the CDs and stopped installing rootkits on future releases. Since computer software can be copyrighted, the concept of DRM has expanded to products that contain software.
This claim conflicted with some farmers, who felt that they should be able to repair their own tractors without having to contact a John Deere representative. The conflict between the farmers and John Deere reflected the larger controversy over DRM, with the pro-DRM side claiming that such measures protect intellectual property and the anti-DRM side claiming that such measures negate the rights consumers have over their own property. Digital rights management.
Info Print Cite. Submit Feedback. Thank you for your feedback.