- Listan - DFRI

Lite facebookcensur. Ingen.
by Anders Sundman 16 May '13

16 May '13

Om någon inte redan sett och häpnat över Facebooks censur[0] av blogposten "33 anledningar - varför feminism behövs" [1]. Kanske skulle någon knåpa ihop en kort notis med kommentar från DFRI? Vådan med att de stora offentliga rum på nätet, där människor träffas och diskuterar viktiga saker, är allt annat än offentliga och demokratiska. Eller något åt det hållet. Jag tror att det är viktigt att försöka göra människor medvetna om att denna censur förekommer med hjälp av konkreta exempel eftersom man annars låter som en total foliehatt. Kanske skulle DFRI kunna starta en motsvarighet till "timeline of sexist incidents in geek communities" [2]? En tidslinje med incidenter i Sverige med nätcensur, instiftande av frihetsfientliga lagar, etc.. // Anders [0] https://www.change.org/petitions/facebook-inc-stop-your-misogynist-and-anti… [1] trettiotreanledningar.com" [2] http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_incidents

3 4

Svenskt Internet under attack
by Martin Millnert 15 May '13

15 May '13

Hej, har ni observerat de "floaters" som kommer nu nyligen? Jag tänker på det här med att lokala poliskommisarien ska få tillgång till FRA's snart legaliserade inhemska taps (sniffar de i Skanova cross-connect-rum eller?), för det är ju dit vi är påväg i raketfart... "Jaha, men Johansson fildelar nog? Bäst vi tar ut hans trafik och kontrollerar." -- kan ju aldrig gå fel. http://www.idg.se/2.1085/1.507439/ra--olaglig-fildelning-bor-ge-strangare-s… En annan attack på Internet, som dröjde längre än många trodde: http://www.dn.se/ekonomi/vagrar-stanga-ner-pirate-bay Vi behövs! /M

2 1

Spela Data Dealer!
by Linus Nordberg 15 May '13

15 May '13

Hej! DFRI fick just tips om ett spel som heter "Data Dealer". Kanske kan vara något för listan? Här är brevet från en av skaparna, Renée Winter, Österrike: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- Hi, as a member of "Data Dealer", a small team of developers and activists in the fields of privacy and digital rights in Vienna, Austria, I´d like to introduce you to a project, which aims to raise awareness of personal data and online privacy in a new and fun way: DATA DEALER: LEGAL? ILLEGAL? WHATEVER. "Data Dealer" is a satirical online game about collecting and selling personal data, also available on Facebook. Players run all kinds of companies and online ventures - from dating sites and loyalty card systems to search engines and their own social web - and ruthlessly sell private information to clients of all kinds. Their growing data empires have to be defended against various threats, including competing players trying to hack into their databases, complaining citizens, critical media and pesky privacy activists. Data Dealer is a nonprofit project, released under a Creative Commons license and based on HTML5 instead of Flash. Data Dealer video trailer and demo, released on Monday May 13: http://datadealer.com Our really nice Facebook page address: http://facebook.com/datadealer Data Dealer is one of eight nominees at the 2013 Games for Change Awards (NYC, US, June 2013)! http://bit.ly/100vPtV We´ve been working hard on that for the last 2 years - with lots of ups and downs. There is some more info on our website: The German demo received outstanding media coverage (both high-profile & yellowpress, National TV, gaming) and several awards: http://datadealer.com/coverage Data Dealer is developed by a small team based in Vienna, Austria: http://datadealer.com/team Press info, downloads & images: http://datadealer.com/press It would be so great if you´d like to help us spread the word! If you have any hints or support for us, please let us know! Best regards from Vienna, Renée --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

1 0

Nu har DFRI ett pressrum på Mynewsdesk
by Hanna Larsson 14 May '13

14 May '13

http://www.mynewsdesk.com/se/pressroom/dfri

1 0

Fwd: Angående Amendment 1537 / dataskyddsförordningen
by Andreas Jonsson 14 May '13

14 May '13

Hej! glömde cc:a listan /a -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Angående Amendment 1537 / dataskyddsförordningen Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 23:13:05 +0200 From: Andreas Jonsson <andreas(a)romab.com> To: annamaria.corazzabildt(a)europarl.europa.eu Hej Anna-Maria! jag heter Andreas Jonsson och håller just på att utveckla en knapp som anmäler webbsidor som bryter mot svensk lagstiftning vad gäller cookies[1]. Jag läste på parltrack[2] att du lagt ett förslag för att man som individ ska slippa bli spårad (är det du menar med "object"?) och att man dessutom att om man givit samtycke så ska man kunna revokera det. Det verkar rimligt, men vi som européer har redan ett starkare skydd från EU E-Privacy directive från 2009. Blir inte resultatet att du undergräver redan existerande lagstiftning, samt att tolkningsfrågor dyker upp om vad som gäller om detta drivs igenom? [1]. https://www.dfri.se/pts-knappen [2]. http://parltrack.euwiki.org/mep/Anna%20Maria%20CORAZZA%20BILDT#am-1537-PE-5… Mvh Andreas

1 0

Nu börjar Pugwash-seminariet!
by Linus Nordberg 14 May '13

14 May '13

Hej! Jag lyckades inte ta mig till Frescati för Pugwash-seminariet. Någon som är där? Förutom Hanna som sitter i panelen alltså. http://pugwash.se/2013/04/18/arsmote-och-seminarium-om-cybersakerhet/

2 2

Fwd: [A2k] UK IPO office releases emails that show close collaboration with publishers on WIPO treaty for the blind | Knowledge Ecology International
by Erik Josefsson 12 May '13

12 May '13

Hur är det i Sverige, kan man få ut korrespondens mellan regeringen och t.ex. förlagsbranschen? //Erik -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [A2k] UK IPO office releases emails that show close collaboration with publishers on WIPO treaty for the blind | Knowledge Ecology International Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 18:34:22 -0400 From: Jamie Love <james.love(a)keionline.org> To: a2k(a)lists.keionline.org, Ip-health <ip-health(a)lists.keionline.org> http://keionline.org/node/1719 UK IPO office releases emails that show close collaboration with publishers on WIPO treaty for the blind On May 10, 2013, a very revealing freedom of information request was made available from the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO). The request had been filed on April 14, 2013 by the journalist Glyn Moody, for: ======== Emails, letters and any other written communications from the last six months, between the Publishers Association or representatives of UK publishers, and the Intellectual Property Office, on the subject of the WIPO treaty for the blind (formally, the "Treaty to facilitate Access to Published Works by Visually Impaired Persons and Persons with Print Disabilities".) ======== On May 10, 2012 the IPO released 28 pages of partly redacted correspondence. (available here [2]) Unfortunately, the document itself is not accessible for persons who are visually impaired.The original request and the IPO justification for the redactions are available here: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/wipo_treaty_for_the_blind [3] What do the emails show? In one case, the publishers asked to recommend a person with "outside expertise" for the UK delegation to WIPO. In another exchange, the publishers share a link to an article by Professor Ruth Okediji, a negotiator for Nigeria, explaining why they object to references to fair use in the treaty text. The publishers pushed the UK delegation repeatedly to fight for a restriction for exceptions in cases where there is "commercial availability" of works, in one case highlighting the text in the new Canada law. One of the IPO documents has the heading "Why WIPO Should Not Introduce Fair Use Into the Instrument for Print Disabilities." Another is subtitled, "How commercial availability can work for all." Overall, the emails deal extensively with publisher opposition to fair use, and promotion of commercial availability and requests that the treaty include restrictive three-step test language (even while asserting that other treaties and agreements already mandate the three step test for all copyright exceptions). The emails also demonstrate the close cooperation and communication between the IPO and the publishers in the negotiations. The exchanges would have been more revealing if the IPO had not redacted the names and titles of the individuals receiving and sending the emails. Source URL: http://keionline.org/node/1719 [2] http://keionline.org/sites/default/files/RedactedPAemails.pdf [3] https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/wipo_treaty_for_the_blind _______________________________________________ A2k mailing list A2k(a)lists.keionline.org http://lists.keionline.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k_lists.keionline.org

1 0

Internets mörka sidor
by Hanna Larsson 11 May '13

11 May '13

Hej, är det någon som har läst, eller har en kopia på, "Internets mörka sidor"? Ska vara med i en debatt om cyberkrigsföring på tisdag där författaren deltar och behöver listans hjälp att förbereda mig :) Hälsningar Hanna

3 2

[erik.hjalmar.josefsson@gmail.com: Re: [iindep-hub] 1049 Street]
by Ante Wessels 07 May '13

07 May '13

----- Forwarded message from Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson(a)gmail.com> ----- Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 16:14:13 +0200 From: Erik Josefsson <erik.hjalmar.josefsson(a)gmail.com> To: Ante Wessels <ante(a)ffii.org> Subject: Re: [iindep-hub] 1049 Street User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130413 Icedove/17.0.5 Thank you! Please tell <listan(a)lists.dfri.se> :-) On 05/07/2013 03:46 PM, Ante Wessels wrote: > Great work! > > Last year I filed a complaint against the Parliament for lying > about the existence of documents. > > The Parliament fails to register documents properly. This way it > is not known what is known by the Parliament. > > keep it up! > > Ante > > > On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:59:47AM +0200, Erik Josefsson wrote: >> For all of you ACTA fans out there, here's DFRI's mini series on 1049 >> Street: >> >> dfri <https://www.dfri.se/wiki/>/ ep-acta-docs >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> * DFRI request to EP (2013-02-26) >> <https://www.dfri.se/wiki/ep-acta-docs/mail-acta-docs-schulz.txt> >> * EP response (2013-03-26) >> <https://www.dfri.se/wiki/ep-acta-docs/email-response-2013-03-26.txt> >> o Question asked to the Court >> <https://www.dfri.se/wiki/ep-acta-docs/Request_for_an_opinion_A1-12.pdf> >> o Written observations by Parliament >> <https://www.dfri.se/wiki/ep-acta-docs/EP_written_observations.pdf> >> o Letter of 20 December 2012 >> <https://www.dfri.se/wiki/ep-acta-docs/letter_20-12-2012.pdf> >> * DFRI followup request to EP (2013-04-09) >> <https://www.dfri.se/wiki/ep-acta-docs/mail-acta-docs-schulz-2.txt> >> * EP response (2013-04-15) >> <https://www.dfri.se/wiki/ep-acta-docs/EP-response-2013-04-15.txt> >> * DFRI second followup request to EP (2013-04-21) >> <https://www.dfri.se/wiki/ep-acta-docs/mail-acta-docs-schulz-3.txt> >> * DFRI request to EC (2013-04-22) >> <https://www.dfri.se/wiki/ep-acta-docs/mail-acta-docs-barroso.txt> >> * EP response (2013-04-25) >> <https://www.dfri.se/wiki/ep-acta-docs/EP-response-2013-04-25.txt> >> * EC response (2013-05-03) >> <https://www.dfri.se/wiki/ep-acta-docs/EC-response-2013-05-03.txt> >> * DFRI thanks EP (2013-05-06) >> <https://www.dfri.se/wiki/ep-acta-docs/mail-acta-docs-schulz-4.txt> >> >> In the next episode, will we see the Commission find out that it >> actually sent this doc to Moreira? Or will the Commission realise that >> the doc was not a Question from the Court, but a Decision? >> >> Best regards. >> >> //Erik >> ___________________________________________________________________________ >> iindep info hub - hub(a)iindep.org - https://listes.globenet.org/listinfo/hub >> policy: * do NOT forward mails or non-public information from this list >> * new subscribers must be approved by a list member >> * messages from non-members addresses are bounced back >> list admin is Nil (mailto:hub-owner@iindep.org, he rarely reads the list) ----- End forwarded message -----

1 0

ACTA documents in the European Parliament's register
by Andreas Jonsson 06 May '13

06 May '13

Dear Mr Rufas Quintana, Thank you for your kind and helpful answer. The Commission made it clear in June last year that a negative vote on ACTA would not stop the proceedings before the Court[1]. Therefore, there is an overwhelming public interest in disclosure of the document that, according to a Commission spokesperson[2], made the Commission withdraw its referral. We are obliged that the Transparency Unit has thoroughly established that "the question asked by the Court of Justice" has not "been served also on the European Parliament", in contrast to the Commission's claim in reply to written question E-000018/2013[3]. We have acted on your advise to contact the Commission[4]. Best regards, Andreas Jonsson DFRI - Föreningen för digitala fri- och rättigheter https://dfri.se/index.en [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0Q8sSndEcs and http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-477_en.htm?locale=en [2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCBTFh3IhQY [3] http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do?reference=E-2013-00001… [4] https://www.dfri.se/wiki/ep-acta-docs/mail-acta-docs-barroso.txt

1 0