Assange and the He said She said

The press is full of it.... 

..sexual misconduct by Julian Assange that is.  And, while this is a great spectacle it is ultimately not that interesting.  Any trial is going to come down to a simple 'He said, she said' and while there may well be plenty of testimony it's unlikely that we will end up with a a full unbiased opinion of what actually took place. 

To be honest I don't care.  The ladies in question, driven either by the trauma of their experience, their virtuous desire for justice or a 'hell hath no fury' desire for revenge have reported an incident they believe breaks the law. Julian Assange almost certainly has a different interpretation of events...  and a court will decide if he either did, or didn't do something that breaches Sweden's laws. It will sell a lot of papers....

Neither outcome has any particular bearing on the activities of his brainchild Wikileaks. 

The fact that the case seems to have been badly handled by the Swedish authorities is largely a sideshow.  It seems likely that the way it has been handled falls short of the standards here for legal protection of information on a suspects identity - something they will no doubt get mauled for - but as far as I can see that all hinges on the original prosecutor who, when asked on the phone by a journalist if they had raised a warrant on Assange stupidly said 'yes' rather than 'no comment'.  Journalists we should remember are professionals in weedling information out of people... 

In fact the most interesting thing from my point of view is who tipped off the press?  .. and with what motive?  (...since it resulted in unproven but serious accusations about someone's private life becoming front page news around the globe)

But being Sweden, the press's sources have full legal protection...  so I'm not likely to find out anytime soon.

New technology threatens democracy: European commission reports

"The new technologies inherently tend to shift the balance of power away from the individual towards those who hold data on them: the terms “data subject” and “controller” are gaining deeper, more sinister meaning. Some technologies can sometimes be used to counter some of this - but they are much weaker and often inherently less effective than claimed or believed. Unless we tame the new technologies, their unimpeded use will undermine democratic society itself. And the tool to tame the machine in this respect is data protection."

When a European Commission report talks about impending changes undermining democratic society itself then it's definitely time to sit up and take notice...

Over at The Lift I found a reference to a recent report commissioned by the European Commission on the coming challenges for Data Protection (and by implication privacy).  The report is well balanced and erudite and makes interesting reading... looking at issues like authorities sharing data across international boundaries, data mining and profiling, privacy concerns with social networking, and securing data protection when your web activity itself is not limited to national boundaries.  Or more simply put... how the law needs to evolve to protect your rights to privacy.

The report 'has been kept short' and is only 57 pages...   Good bedtime reading

Let's play privacy invaders: EU, ACTA and the Digital Economy Act

When I think of privacy I think of going about my business unhindered and unmonitored by the state.. or anyone else for that matter.  It's a right.. and curiously I expect the law to not only respect that right but also to protect it.  But expectations and reality don't always match up.

This week though these are some positive signs that privacy concerns are starting to be taken more seriously. 

First off, the Electronic Frontier Foundation reports that EU data protection officials have been looking into the EUs Data Retention Directive and how it has been applied in the member states.  Their findings are depressing reading ...

• Service providers retain and hand over data in ways they shouldn't.
• data retention often exceeds the maximum allowed under the directive - in some case by as much as eight years!
• More data is being held than the directive allows - including in some cases message content and not just traffic data.
• Callers locations are being monitored continuously under a call - contravening the directives provisions

They conclude that
"The provisions of the data retention directive are not respected and the lack of available sensible statistics hinders the assessment of whether the directive has achieved its objectives."

The good news is that it's not until abuses are visible that you can do something about it.  The timing here is also good as the directive is up for review and this can contribute to revision or repeal of the directive which, in my view, inherently is a gross violation of people's privacy.

Meanwhile, the same Article 29 committee has also raised concerns about the privacy implications of the ACTA agreement (see Michael Geist for excellent coverage on ACTA). 

"WP29 emphasizes that any form of large scale monitoring or systematic recording of data of EU citizens would be contrary to the provisions of Directive 95/46/EC since that would affect millions of individuals, regardless of whether or not they are under any suspicion."

After a critical look at other provisions - including making service providers hand over personal data to copyright holders they conclude:

"Copyright infringement needs to be dealt with on a global scale and requires international cooperation. However the way things stand now, several of the proposed measures are in the end bound to interfere with the private life of many citizens.
In the EU, any such interference is subject to EU fundamental rights and must be proportional. Given the aspects of ACTA currently under negotiation and outlined above, the WP29 remains to be convinced that this will be the case."

The third piece of good news is really a consequence of the above... or at least a supporting document from the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) giving a full analysis of objections to the three strikes principle.  The Open Rights Group highlight that this expert opinion should have implications for the UK governments Digital Economy Act - at least the parts dealing with combating copyright infringement .

In the words of the EDPS:

"...the monitoring of Internet user's behaviour and further collection of their IP addresses amounts to an interference with their rights to respect for their private life and their correspondence; in other words, there is an interference with their right to private life. This view is in line with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. "

The bottom line seems to be that letting copyright holders loose as private police with powers to request private details on anyone they choose is likely to end up the wrong side of EU rights legislation....  which would be a welcome victory for our collective privacy.

Piratpartiet and The Pirate Party -  Putting privacy first.

Copyright: How long is long enough?

Last week there was a ruling in Australia on what Men At Work get to pay out for having copied a riff from an Australian folk tune published over 70 years ago...  It's actually a folk tune that I learned i school when I was a kid and I have to say I've never even thought about the similarity to 'Down Under'.

It's an interesting reminder though of what it means to have copyright terms that stretch long after an author or artists lifetime.  The band clearly made a fair bit of money from their hit - and now have to take a 5% cut from their royalties to pay... well who exactly?  

The value for society in copyright lies in the ability to stimulate creativity by giving limited monopoly rights to creators.  But here we see that the active creators, the band, are penalised to the benefit of a publishing house who are milking the benefits of someone else's creativity (Marion Sinclair- who died 22 years ago). 

Are long copyright terms really serving society's interests?   Even within a songwriter or artist's lifetime there is a clear disincentive to create new material if existing material continues to enjoy protection for the rest of their life.  The more talented and successful the creator the less incentive they have to work again.  Aren't they just the people that society wants to be most active?

Shorter copyright terms increase incentives to bring out and market new innovative material - and will hugely increase the free availability of older materal to be used in new creative ways.  It should mean a richer world for all of us... though we might hear some complaints from beyond the veil....

Global warming making a comeback.

Here in Sweden January was a remarkably chilly month, even for Sweden, and with cold winters gripping much of the northern hemisphere there were no shortage of voices ready to use it as evidence that global warming is a myth.  The global temperatures really haven't been rising since the end of the nineties, and a good cold winter is yet more proof that... isn't it?

Sadly it's easy to see what you want to see - the accusation that climate deniers often make against the scientific community.  Equally sadly the cold winters unfortunately don't mean that the climate is cooling.  The latest global measurements show the opposite - the year to date (january to may) is the warmest on record.

Worse... solar output has been declining over the last decade as part of a known solar cycle that has now turned.  The sun is going to be increasing output again which will lead to higher temperatures.  Nothing you read in scientists emails is going to change that.....

Thinking 'After Intellectual Property'

I know. I'm behind the times... but wisdom doesn't age. If you've not seen Steal This Film, do. A great perspective on the intellectual property debate...




"These are strange times indeed. While they continue to command so much attention in the mainstream media, the 'battles' between old and new modes of distribution, between the pirate and the institution of copyright, seem to many of us already lost and won. We know who the victors are. Why then say any more?

Because waves of repression continue to come: lawsuits are still levied against innocent people; arrests are still made on flimsy pretexts, in order to terrify and confuse; harsh laws are still enacted against filesharing, taking their place in the gradual erosion of our privacy and the bolstering of the surveillance state. All of this is intended to destroy or delay inexorable changes in what it means to create and exchange our creations. If STEAL THIS FILM II proves at all useful in bringing new people into the leagues of those now" prepared to think 'after intellectual property', think creatively about the future of distribution, production and creativity, we have achieved our main goal."

India goes in to bat against ACTA

Trade is a two way street... and if you decide to make a private club to rewrite the rules it's maybe not surprising that the people you choose to leave out don't have the same rosy view of your club as you do.  At the latest meeting of the World trade Organisation India has been speaking out about ACTA.

"ACTA could short-change legal process, impede legitimate competition and shift the escalated costs of enforcing private commercial rights to governments, consumers and taxpayers. They also represent a systemic threat to the rights of legitimate traders and producers of goods, and fundamental rights of due process of individuals."

Right on the wicket.....   More on India's objections to ACTA over at Michael Geist.