Listan

listan@lists.dfri.se

3 participants
829 discussions

sms+mail -> txt+mail
by Erik Josefsson 03 Sep '13

03 Sep '13

Jag har två appar i min telefon som jag användermed känslan av att den ena är lite mer privat (sms). Fastän det kostar och är ganska dyrt har jag alltså skickat tusentals sms fastän jag lika gärna skulle kunnat maila.Jag tror inte att jag är ensam om detta. Jag skulle kanske kunna klara att sluta smsa och bara mejla, men kom just på att det kanske inte är så dumt att ha ett irrationellt beteende om man skullebyta ut sms-tjänsten mot den nya tjänsten TXT. Den finns inte än, men skulle kunna uppfinnas. Alltså en tjänst som man använder när man vill vara helt privat. Alltså en tjänst som beter sig på det sättet man tror sms funkar. Kanske med ett helt nytt protokoll? Grejjen är den attäven om jag börjar kryptera mina mail (försöker igen och igen...), så tror jag att mitt invanda mail-beteendeförr eller senare kommer att klanta till det för mig. När man vill varaprivat går man ju undan, viskar eller gör nåt annat distinkt så att man själv vet att man är privat.Visst skulle det hjälpa om hela min mailklient blev blinkande röd om jag skulle göra bort mig, menrent teoretiskt så borde risken för misstag vara mindre om man helt enkelt "gör" på nåt annat sätt när man ska prata avskilt och enskilt med folk. Men TXTkanske redan finns? //Erik

3 2

Debattartikel i DN om reglerna kring nedtagning av websidor
by Linus Nordberg 03 Sep '13

03 Sep '13

Hej! Dagens DN Debatt har den här texten, undertecknad av bl.a. DFRI: http://www.dn.se/debatt/godtyckligt-regelverk-hotar-friheten-pa-natet/ Kommer EU-kommissionär Cecilia Malmström att se till att framtida regler för stängning av websidor kommer att tas fram i en öppen och demokratisk process?

1 0

Fwd: ADBJ Seminarium 5/9 - Påminnelse
by Robert Malmgren 02 Sep '13

02 Sep '13

det här kan nog vara av intresse för flera här -------- Original Message -------- *Påminnelse!* ___________________________________________________________________ ADBJ -- Svenska Föreningen för IT och Juridik inbjuder till seminarium *När*: Torsdagen den 5 september 2013, kl. 17.30 *Plats*: Advokatfirman Fylgia, Nybrogatan 11, Stockholm *Anmälan senast*: 3 september, till e-postadressen: kansliet(a)adbj.se <mailto:kansliet@adbj.se> *Ämne*: Förslagen från utredningen om IT-brottskonventionen I utredningens betänkande ingår förslag till lagändringar för att Sverige ska kunna tillträda och uppfylla Europarådets konvention om IT-brottslighet med tilläggsprotokoll och även direktivet om angrepp mot informationssystem m.m. Förslagen innebär bl.a. skärpta straff för dataintrång men även vissa nya tvångsmedel för att säkerställa information i brottsutredningarna. Enligt förslagen ska den som innehar elektroniska uppgifter av betydelse för en brottsutredning kunna föreläggas att spara dem under tystnadsplikt ("bevarandeföreläggande"). Den som har kunskap om ett IT-system och dess funktioner ska också kunna föreläggas att vara behjälplig i en brottsutredning. Av betänkandet (SOU 2013:39) framgår att svensk rätt behöver modifieras för att uppfylla konventionskravet avseende vad som ska utgöra urkundsförfalskning. Detta kan enligt utredningen ske genom att regeringens förslag till nytt urkundsbegrepp i 14 kap. 1 § brottsbalken antas av riksdagen. Sekreteraren för utredningen, Anna Graninger, kommer att berätta om utredningens slutsatser. Utredningens expert, advokaten Per Furberg, Setterwalls Advokatbyrå, kommenterar också förslagen. __________________ Vi inleder kl. 17.30 med en enklare förtäring och seminariet håller på mellan ca 18.00--19.15. Deltagarantalet är begränsat -- först till kvarn gäller! Seminariet är gratis för medlemmar. Icke medlemmar betalar en anmälningsavgift om 250 kronor. *OBS!*Anmälan är bindande! Någon bekräftelse av Din anmälan kommer inte att skickas ut. Vid förhinder ska avanmälan ske senast kl. 12.00 dagen före seminariet. Deltar Du inte trots att Du är anmäld kommer vi att debitera dig 250 kronor.

3 2

EurActiv - Professor Svallfors: "Edward Snowden deserves the Sakharov Prize"
by Erik Josefsson 30 Aug '13

30 Aug '13

http://www.euractiv.com/pa/edward-snowden-deserves-sakharov-analysis-530027 Edward Snowden deserves the Sakharov Prize A deserving recipient of the 2013 Sakharov prize would be the American whistleblower Edward Snowden, writes Stefan Svallfors. By exposing the US Prism spying program, Snowden made it possible for us to say 'No -- this is not a development and a society we want', he argues. /Stefan Svallfors is Professor of Sociology at Umeå University (Sweden) and the Institute for Future Studies (Denmark). This op-ed was originally published in Swedish in Sydsvenska dagbladet on 29 August 2013. / Since 1988, the European Parliament has awarded the Sakharov Prize. According to its statutes, this is given to a person or group "who made remarkable efforts to defend human rights and fundamental freedoms" and thus "worked against intolerance, fanaticism and oppression." The award is given in memory of the Russian physicist Andrei Sakharov (1921-1989), known as one of the men behind the hydrogen bomb but even more as a Soviet dissident with his Human Rights Committee and his defence of political prisoners. Sakharov stands as a symbol of the individual human being who dares to stand up against tyranny and oppression, even when the personal cost is very high. A most deserving recipient of the 2013 price would be the American whistle blower Edward Snowden. In May, The Guardian published his disclosure of the extensive, illegal and deeply intrusive monitoring conducted by the American National Security Agency. For this heroic effort Snowden has paid a heavy personal price. He is hunted as an outlaw by the U.S. government, accused of crimes that will put him in jail for the rest of his life. The U.S. government has threatened the governments that dare to offer him asylum with serious consequences. In a painful irony, the only sanctuary that had been found for Snowden is Russia, a country whose democratic problems and authoritarian tendencies are obvious. But is really Snowden a worthy recipient of the prize, someone may sneeze. Is not America the world's leading democracy, a friend of Europe, committed to the rule of law? Yes. But even democracies can hide pockets of tyranny in their hearts: a democratic state may well coexist with other systems that are characterised by anything but democracy and law. As the monitoring system which now puts its global tentacles far into the private lives of citizens. By exposing this system Snowden made it possible for us to say No -- this is not a development and a society we want, we protect our civil rights and freedoms when they are threatened. Snowden's revelations make explicit demands on citizens and politicians to act and react. How have we responded to these demands? Not in any impressive way one must say. Individual politicians and many citizens have reacted, expressed support for Snowden, trying to act in his defence. They see the unpleasant consequences of a surveillance system where innocent citizens get their electronic communication and their phone calls tapped and mapped. The German President Joachim Gauck, with his personal East German experience, for example stated that Snowden "deserves respect" for his actions. But otherwise an awkward silence, evasive answers, gentle tiptoeing. Merkel hums, The European Commission whispers, the parliaments remain silent. On the Swedish side, even more depressing inaction is observed. Sweden acts together with Britain to make sure the question should not be addressed at European level. This is a bilateral issue and by the way, no Swedish interests are at stake, the Foreign Minister distractedly announces before returning to Twitter. The government obviously sees no reason to allow this issue to eclipse the splendor of Obama's forthcoming state visit. From the political left, a complete disinterest is shown. No social democratic position is advanced or even formulated. It is tragic to see how thin the liberal veneer is in many places. When liberalism is no longer easy and obvious, when it requires courage and sacrifice, when we are forced to choose and our choices have real costs, what happens then? We fall into line, we bend to power. Without grumbling we let fairly manageable threats from terrorists sweep away fundamental rights and freedoms. We must demand more of ourselves and our elected officials than that. We could start by giving Edward Snowden the prize whose name symbolises a man who refused to bow to oppression and thereby actually changed history.

1 0

Re: Fwd: [DFRI-listan] Stefan Svallfors: "Låt Snowden få Sacharovpriset"
by "Christian Engström (pp)" 29 Aug '13

29 Aug '13

Sara, Utmärkt idé att nominera Snowden till Sacharovpriset. Tar du reda på hur vi gör? /Christian On 2013-08-29 14:25, Erik Lönroth wrote: > Kanske något för er? > > Sista datum är den 12:e september. > > /Erik Lönroth > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: *Erik Josefsson* <erik.hjalmar.josefsson(a)gmail.com > <mailto:erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com>> > Date: Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 11:35 AM > Subject: [DFRI-listan] Stefan Svallfors: "Låt Snowden få Sacharovpriset" > To: "listan(a)lists.dfri.se <mailto:listan@lists.dfri.se>" > <listan(a)lists.dfri.se <mailto:listan@lists.dfri.se>> > > > Sydsvenskan publicerar idag 29 augusti en artikel av Professor Stefan > Svallfors: > > *"Låt Snowden få Sacharovpriset"* > http://www.sydsvenskan.se/opinion/aktuella-fragor/lat-snowden-fa-sacharovpr… > > Nedan en engelsk version. > > //Erik > > *A Sakharov for our time? > * > Since 1988, the European Parliament has awarded the Sakharov Prize. According to its statutes, this is given to a person or group "who made remarkable efforts to defend human rights and fundamental freedoms" and thus "worked against intolerance, fanaticism and oppression." > > The award is given in memory of the Russian physicist Andrei Sakharov (1921-1989), known as one of the men behind the hydrogen bomb but even more as a Soviet dissident with his Human Rights Committee and his defense of political prisoners. Sakharov stands as a symbol of the individual human being who dares to stand up against tyranny and oppression, even when the personal cost is very high. > > A most deserving recipient of the 2013 price would be the American whistle blower Edward Snowden. In May, The Guardian published his disclosure of the extensive, illegal and deeply intrusive monitoring conducted by the American National Security Agency. For this heroic effort Snowden has paid a heavy personal price. He is hunted as an outlaw by the U.S. government, accused of crimes that will put him in jail for the rest of his life. The U.S. government has threatened the governments that dare to offer him asylum with serious consequences. In a painful irony, the only sanctuary that had been found for Snowden is Russia, a country whose democratic problems and authoritarian tendencies are obvious. > > But is really Snowden a worthy recipient of the prize, someone may sneeze. Is not America the world's leading democracy, a friend of Europe, committed to the rule of law? Yes. But even democracies can hide pockets of tyranny in their hearts, a democratic state may well coexist with other systems that are characterized by anything but democracy and law. As the monitoring system which now puts its global tentacles far into the private lives of citizens. By exposing this system Snowden made it possible for us to say No – this is not a development and a society we want, we protect our civil rights and freedoms when they are threatened. > > Snowden's revelations make explicit demands on citizens and politicians to act and react. How have we responded to these demands? Not in any impressive way one must say. Individual politicians and many citizens have reacted, expressed support for Snowden, trying to act in his defense. They see the unpleasant consequences of a surveillance system where innocent citizens get their electronic communication and their phone calls tapped and mapped. The German President Joachim Gauck, with his personal East German experience, for example stated that Snowden "deserves respect" for his actions. But otherwise an awkward silence, evasive answers, gentle tiptoeing. Merkel hums, The European Commission whispers, the parliaments remain silent. > > On the Swedish side, even more depressing inaction is observed. Sweden acts together with Britain to make sure the question should not be addressed at European level. This is a bilateral issue and by the way, no Swedish interests are at stake, the Foreign Minister distractedly announces before returning to Twitter. The government obviously sees no reason to allow this issue to eclipse the splendor of Obama's forthcoming state visit. From the political left, a complete disinterest is shown. No social democratic position is advanced or even formulated. > > It is tragic to see how thin the liberal veneer is in many places. When liberalism is no longer easy and obvious, when it requires courage and sacrifice, when we are forced to choose and our choices have real costs, what happens then? We fall into line, we bend to power. Without grumbling we let fairly manageable threats from terrorists sweep away fundamental rights and freedoms. > > We must demand more of ourselves and our elected officials than that. We could start by giving Edward Snowden the price whose name symbolizes a man who refused to bow to oppression and thereby actually changed history. > > > > Stefan Svallfors > Professor of Sociology at Umeå University > & the Institute for Future Studies > -- Christian Engström Member of the European Parliament Piratpartiet - The Pirate Party +46-70-663 37 80 http://christianengstrom.wordpress.com/ christian.engstrom(a)piratpartiet.se <mailto:christian.engstrom@piratpartiet.se> Pictures: http://picasaweb.google.com/christian.engstrom.pirat/ChristianEngstrom#

2 1

Stefan Svallfors: "Låt Snowden få Sacharovpriset"
by Erik Josefsson 29 Aug '13

29 Aug '13

Sydsvenskan publicerar idag 29 augusti en artikel av Professor Stefan Svallfors: *"Låt Snowden få Sacharovpriset"* http://www.sydsvenskan.se/opinion/aktuella-fragor/lat-snowden-fa-sacharovpr… Nedan en engelsk version. //Erik *A Sakharov for our time? * Since 1988, the European Parliament has awarded the Sakharov Prize. According to its statutes, this is given to a person or group "who made remarkable efforts to defend human rights and fundamental freedoms" and thus "worked against intolerance, fanaticism and oppression." The award is given in memory of the Russian physicist Andrei Sakharov (1921-1989), known as one of the men behind the hydrogen bomb but even more as a Soviet dissident with his Human Rights Committee and his defense of political prisoners. Sakharov stands as a symbol of the individual human being who dares to stand up against tyranny and oppression, even when the personal cost is very high. A most deserving recipient of the 2013 price would be the American whistle blower Edward Snowden. In May, The Guardian published his disclosure of the extensive, illegal and deeply intrusive monitoring conducted by the American National Security Agency. For this heroic effort Snowden has paid a heavy personal price. He is hunted as an outlaw by the U.S. government, accused of crimes that will put him in jail for the rest of his life. The U.S. government has threatened the governments that dare to offer him asylum with serious consequences. In a painful irony, the only sanctuary that had been found for Snowden is Russia, a country whose democratic problems and authoritarian tendencies are obvious. But is really Snowden a worthy recipient of the prize, someone may sneeze. Is not America the world's leading democracy, a friend of Europe, committed to the rule of law? Yes. But even democracies can hide pockets of tyranny in their hearts, a democratic state may well coexist with other systems that are characterized by anything but democracy and law. As the monitoring system which now puts its global tentacles far into the private lives of citizens. By exposing this system Snowden made it possible for us to say No -- this is not a development and a society we want, we protect our civil rights and freedoms when they are threatened. Snowden's revelations make explicit demands on citizens and politicians to act and react. How have we responded to these demands? Not in any impressive way one must say. Individual politicians and many citizens have reacted, expressed support for Snowden, trying to act in his defense. They see the unpleasant consequences of a surveillance system where innocent citizens get their electronic communication and their phone calls tapped and mapped. The German President Joachim Gauck, with his personal East German experience, for example stated that Snowden "deserves respect" for his actions. But otherwise an awkward silence, evasive answers, gentle tiptoeing. Merkel hums, The European Commission whispers, the parliaments remain silent. On the Swedish side, even more depressing inaction is observed. Sweden acts together with Britain to make sure the question should not be addressed at European level. This is a bilateral issue and by the way, no Swedish interests are at stake, the Foreign Minister distractedly announces before returning to Twitter. The government obviously sees no reason to allow this issue to eclipse the splendor of Obama's forthcoming state visit. From the political left, a complete disinterest is shown. No social democratic position is advanced or even formulated. It is tragic to see how thin the liberal veneer is in many places. When liberalism is no longer easy and obvious, when it requires courage and sacrifice, when we are forced to choose and our choices have real costs, what happens then? We fall into line, we bend to power. Without grumbling we let fairly manageable threats from terrorists sweep away fundamental rights and freedoms. We must demand more of ourselves and our elected officials than that. We could start by giving Edward Snowden the price whose name symbolizes a man who refused to bow to oppression and thereby actually changed history. Stefan Svallfors Professor of Sociology at Umeå University & the Institute for Future Studies

4 5

[Läsvärt] Från tidningen Advokaten - Om vikten av Snowden
by Alexander Rydekull 29 Aug '13

29 Aug '13

Det kom en länk på IRC! (Tack) Som jag tyckte var väldigt bra, jag passade på att föreviga den på dfri.se: https://www.dfri.se/lasvart-fran-tidningen-advokaten-om-vikten-av-snowden/ Ps. För er som inte är i IRC-kanalen så är ni så välkomna till # dfri_se(a)irc.oftc.net .Ds -- /Alexander Rydekull

3 3

Unleashing the potential of cloud computing in Europe 2013/2063(INI)
by Erik Josefsson 28 Aug '13

28 Aug '13

Hej DFRI-listan, Jag tänkte värma upp med att komma tillbaka från semestern med en "INI-rapport" i mitt utskott JURI i EP. *Unleashing the potential of cloud computing in Europe2013/2063(INI)** *http://parltrack.euwiki.org/dossier/2013/2063%28INI%29 Ändringsförslag mottages tacksamt innan deadline 30 augusti. mvh //Erik DRAFT OPINION of the Committee on Legal Affairs for the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy on Unleashing the Potential of Cloud Computing in Europe (2013/2063(INI)) Rapporteur(*): Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (*) Associated committees -- Rule 50 of the Rules of Procedure SUGGESTIONS The Committee on Legal Affairs calls on the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution: /1. Urges the Commission to take action to further harmonise laws across the Member States in order to avoid jurisdictional confusion and fragmentation and to improve the transparency of the digital single market;// // //2. Calls on the Commission to review other EU legislation to address gaps related to cloud computing; calls, in particular, for the revision of the intellectual property rights regime, the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, the Unfair Contract Terms Directive and the////E-Commerce Directive, which are the most relevant pieces of EU legislation that apply to cloud computing;// // //3. Calls on the Commission to establish a clear legal framework in the field of copyright content in the cloud, especially with regard to licensing regulations;// // //4. Stresses that, owing to uncertainties regarding applicable law and jurisdiction, contracts are the main tools for establishing relations between cloud providers and their customers, and that there is therefore a clear need for common European guidelines in that field;// // //5. Calls on the Commission to work together with the Member States to develop European best practice models for contracts, or 'model contracts', that will ensure complete transparency by providing all terms and conditions in a very clear format;// // //6. Calls on the Commission to develop, together with stakeholders, voluntary certification schemes for provider security systems which would help to harmonise practices across cloud providers and which would make clients more aware of what they should expect from cloud service providers;// // //7. Stresses that, owing to jurisdiction problems, European consumers are in practice unlikely to be able to seek redress from cloud services providers in other jurisdictions; calls therefore, on the Commission to provide adequate means for redress in the consumer services area, since there is a strong imbalance of power between consumers and providers of cloud computing;// // //8. Calls on the Commission to ensure a speedy implementation of Alternative Dispute Resolution and Online Dispute Resolution and to make sure that consumers are equipped with adequate means of collective redress against security and privacy breaches as well as against illegal contract provisions for cloud services.// / SHORT JUSTIFICATION Your rapporteur welcomes the Commission's Communication, but considers it appropriate, in order to ensure that upcoming legislation will be operative, to call on the Commission to make certain provisions more stringent and to look at the problem together with all other legislation that may assist in eliminating barriers and unlocking its full potential. Cloud computing has a huge potential and should provide benefits for business, citizens and the public sector1 but, as a new model of networked computing, poses some legal and contractual risks. Among other concerns, such as security or supplier lock-in, there is major concern among both service providers and users regarding the lack of standardisation which would be required for a single market across Europe, the diversity of relevant legislation across Europe, currently unclear contract provisions and the lack of clear rules on intellectual property rights (IPR). Recent research shows that 48 % of managers in both the private and the public sectors are aware that the implementation of cloud computing can speed up and facilitate their work. More than half of them have not, however, introduced any procedures to minimise business risks such as identity theft. The biggest threat in the cloud are so called 'insiders', those working in the establishments providing cloud services, who have access to customer data, followed by other tenants of the service provider in the cloud, notably in case of a breakdown of isolation mechanisms. The EU digital single market remains fragmented due to differing legal regimes among the Member States, and when it comes to IPR only a limited level of harmonisation has taken place in the wake of the Copyright Directive. Action must therefore be targeted to address the issue of cloud services that depend on a uniform IPR regime to cross borders. The proposals on collective rights management and the private copy levy must take into account the development of new technologies, in particular cloud computing services, and clarify the rules for securing IPR in a digital environment. According to the recent Commission public consultation on cloud computing, the legal regime was unclear to respondents in 90 % of cases. There is general confusion among stakeholders regarding rights and responsibilities in cross-border cloud computing situations, in particular with regard to matters relating to liability and jurisdiction. Coupled with the fragmentation of the internal market, this calls for further harmonisation of laws across the Member States, in particular by eliminating gaps and weaknesses in applicable EU legislation, notably the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive and the Unfair Contract Terms Directive in terms of consumer protection, and the E-Commerce Directive when it comes to exemptions from private copy levies. Consumers and SMEs who want to make use of public clouds are often faced with 'take-it-or-leave-it' contracts, most often tick-box agreements. The Commission should therefore, together with the Member States, consider introducing clearer rules or model contracts. There is a need for guidelines and standardised model contract schemes setting out the key terms and conditions that are important to users, while increasing transparency. Cloud users should furthermore be able to evaluate any cloud service offer on the basis of standardised procedures regarding the security and warranties provided by the service, so-called Service Level Agreements (SLA). A voluntary certification scheme enabling users to evaluate and compare, in a simple manner, the level of conformity to standards, interoperability and the security systems of cloud services should therefore be implemented at European level, taking into account the differences encountered in these respects at the three different levels of service: Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS) and Software as a Service (SaaS). The first case concerns security equipment, supply lines, data, etc. In the second case, responsibility for security largely lies with the client, who should adequately protect their data. In the third, responsibility lies with the supplier. The provision of adequate means of redress for users when it comes to cloud computing service providers is necessary, in particular in the consumer service area. Owing to jurisdictional problems, European consumers are currently in practice unlikely to be able to seek redress from the service provider. The Commission should therefore speed up the implementation of Alternative and Online Dispute Resolution and forms of collective redress in order to facilitate the solving of conflicts in this area faced by users, without putting too much additional pressure on national courts.

3 3

Nordic Creative Common Film Festival
by Erik Lönroth 27 Aug '13

27 Aug '13

Hejsan! Jag hoppas ni är sugna på att kolla på lite film och vara med på öppningen av "Nordic Creative Common Film Festival". Piratpartiet i Stockholms län (via våra EU-parlamentariker) upplät europahuset för premiären så de kunde ha en fin premiär (kostnadsfritt såklart) som allmänheten kan njuta av. Här är en inbjudan av Lawrence Lessig: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqDAzzKx2XE Här är facebook-eventet för själva premiären den 30:e augusti: https://www.facebook.com/events/552071578179335/ Här kan man fixa sin gratisbiljett: http://events.nordicfilmfestival.cc/#!/events/25 Själva premiären hålls i Europahuset på regeringsgatan mitt i Stockholm, men vem som helst kan hålla en visning med CC-film vart man än känner för det och via en "app" registrera in sin visning i programmet. Vänligen /Erik Lönroth, Piratpartiet i Stockholms län

1 0

Fwd: Diarieföring hos PTS
by Andreas Jonsson 21 Aug '13

21 Aug '13

PTS-knappen fortsätter att skapa nya vänner :-) /andreas -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Diarieföring hos PTS Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2013 08:16:41 +0000 From: <Erica.Nystrom(a)pts.se> To: <andreas(a)romab.com> Hej Andreas. Alla handlingar och meddelanden som kommer in till en myndighet är allmän handling. Lagen kräver inte att allmänna handlingar särskilt registreras, under förutsättning att de hålls ordnade på ett sätt så att det utan svårighet kan fastställas att de inkommit eller upprättats. (se 5 kap. 1 § offentlighets- och sekretesslagen). PTS håller alla inkomna frågor och klagomål ordnade på ett sätt som uppfyller lagens krav. En anmälan till PTS leder inte alltid till att myndigheten inleder ett tillsynsärende. PTS måste prioritera bland alla uppgifter som åligger myndigheten. I de fall PTS väljer att inleda ett tillsynsärende registreras detta som ett ärende i vårt diarium. Sådana ärenden finns också tillgängliga i vårt online-diarium. Med vänliga hälsningar Erica Nyström Verksjurist Post- och telestyrelsen (PTS) Rättssekretariatet Telefon: 08-678 56 35 Mobil: 073-644 56 35 erica.nystrom(a)pts.se<mailto:brita.soderstrom@pts.se> www.pts.se<http://www.pts.se/> PTS arbetar för att alla i Sverige ska ha tillgång till effektiva, prisvärda och säkra kommunikationstjänster. Hej PTS! Jag har sökt i PTS diarium online efter ärenden som berör LEK 6 kap 18 § under 2013[1]. Jag har inte hittat något ärende, trots att jag är säker på att ett flertal anmälningar skickats till PTS registrator-adress <pts(a)pts.se<mailto:pts@pts.se>> under den tidsperioden. > > > > Jag skulle därför vilja fråga om alla meddelanden som skickas till > > pts(a)pts.se<mailto:pts@pts.se> diarieförs? Om inte, vad eller vem avgör om ett meddelande publiceras i online-diariet? > > > > Tacksam för svar. > > > > Vänliga hälsningar > > Andreas Jonsson > > https://dfri.se > > > > [1] http://e-tjanster.pts.se/ovrigt/diariet/ > >

1 0

← Newer
1
...
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
...
83
Older →

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

Listan