A Net dilemma for the European Parliament
- Author: Monica Horten
- Published: 27 January 2009
A rights-holder onslaught on the Medina report attempts to force the Parliament’s vote on graduated response and P2P filesharing issues...contrasted against the Lambrinidis report calling for a the policy principles establishing a balance between privacy and surveillance...the two reports present MEPS with a dilemma on how to move forward on Internet policy for Europe.
The Medina report, from the 73-year old Spanish MEP Manuel Medina Ortega , contains the full rights-holder wish-list of graduated response, ISP “cooperation”, secondary liability for peer-to-peer filesharing sites and other websites, content liability for ISPs, and content filtering. It reads like an onslaught by the rights-holder lobby.
For example, it "Calls for cooperation from internet access providers in preventing and curbing electronic piracy" and it "Supports the setting-up in the individual Member States of mecanisms, to be employed on instruction from rightholders and using a graduated approach, for the enforcement of copyright on the Internet".
Several amendments can be traced directly to the former French culture minister MEP Jacques Toubon – responsible for the “cooperation” amendment in the Telecoms Package; as well as MEPs Janelly Fourtou and Arlene McCarthy. Mme Fourtou is the wife of Jean-René Fourtou, who is President of the French film and music conglomerate Vivendi.
The significance of the Medina report becomes clear in
the context of the Telecoms Package political arguments over Amendment 138. Rights-holders attempts to get an EU-wide graduated response system endorsed by the Parliament have been stalled by amendment 138. The Medina report looks very much like an attempt to sneak in a vote by the Parliament that would endorse graduated response – and the other elements of their copyright enforcement agenda – in order to force the Parliament’s hand on the issue. The report has no legislative significance, and it’s chief role is to set the Parliament’s agenda and expression of views on policy.
By contrast, the Lambrinidis report seeks to establish a set of balanced principles for European Internet policy. Drafted by Greek MEP Stavros Lambrinidis, it calls on the European Council to develop a policy agenda that would enable privacy and freedom of expression to be equitably balanced against the increasing level of security and survellance on the Internet. It is – unlike the Medina report – a well-researched, well-argued, and thoughtful report. The one mistake it makes, in my opinion, is to include a clause on IP rights. This willl unfortunately leave it vulnerable to targetting by the rights-holder lobbyists, and the intelligent thinking behind this report risks being drowned in another bun-fight over copyright enforcement (rather like what happened with the Telecoms Package).
This would be a shame because the EU needs to find a platform where the policy principles on which we run the Internet are clearly established for all, and the Lambrinidis initiative is a good starting point for this policy discussion.
It certainly presents MEPs with a dilemma, which they will need to resolve before they enter the chamber to vote on the Medina report, which is anticipated in the next two months.
- Article Views: 12718
IPtegrity politics
- What's influencing tech policy in 2025?
- Online Safety and the Westminster honey trap
- Shadow bans: EU and UK diverge on user redress
- EU at loggerheads over chat control
- Why the Online Safety Act is not fit for purpose
- Fixing the human rights failings in the Online Safety Act
- Whatever happened to the AI Bill?
- Hidden effects of the UK Online Safety Act
- EU puts chat control on back burner
- Why did X lock my account for not providing my birthday?
- Creation of deep fakes to be criminal offence under new law
- AI and tech: Asks for the new government
- How WhatsApp holds structural power
- Meta rolls out encryption as political headwinds ease
- EU law set for new course on child online safety
- Online Safety Act: Ofcom’s 1700-pages of tech platform rules
- MEPs reach political agreement to protect children and privacy
About Iptegrity
Iptegrity.com is the website of Dr Monica Horten, independent policy advisor: online safety, technology and human rights. Advocating to protect the rights of the majority of law abiding citizens online. Independent expert on the Council of Europe Committee of Experts on online safety and empowerment of content creators and users. Published author, and post-doctoral scholar, with a PhD from the University of Westminster, and a DipM from the Chartered Institute of Marketing. Former telecoms journalist, experienced panelist and Chair, cited in the media eg BBC, iNews, Times, Guardian and Politico.
Politics & copyright
A Copyright Masquerade: How Corporate Lobbying Threatens Online Freedoms
'timely and provocative' Entertainment Law Review
Online Safety
- Online Safety and the Westminster honey trap
- Shadow bans: EU and UK diverge on user redress
- Why the Online Safety Act is not fit for purpose
- Fixing the human rights failings in the Online Safety Act
- Hidden effects of the UK Online Safety Act
- Why did X lock my account for not providing my birthday?
- Online Safety Act: Ofcom’s 1700-pages of tech platform rules
- Online Safety - a non-consensual Act
- Online Safety Bill passes as US court blocks age-checks law
- Online Safety Bill: ray of hope for free speech
- National Crime Agency to run new small boats social media centre
- Online Safety Bill: does government want to snoop on your WhatsApps?
- What is content of democratic importance?
- Online Safety Bill: One rule for them and another for us
- Online Safety Bill - Freedom to interfere?