No. 1, 12 Editor: Anna Celsing Rue Cherpion 46 B-1390 Grez Doiceau Belgium +32 10 84 15 33 anna.celsing@skynet.be Publisher: Ulla Carlsson NORDICOM Göteborg university Box 713 SE-405 30 Göteborg Sweden

Piracy/IPR Enforcement ACTA To Be Rejected or “Fixed”? More Pressure on ISPs to Police the Net? Piracy: ISPs and Social Networks Cannot Be Forced to Install Filtering EU Office to Strengthen Enforcement of IPRs Revision of the Controversial IPRED Directive? Privacy and Data Protection EU Commission Presents Major Data Protection Reform Mixed Reactions to Proposed Data Protection Rules EU and US to Agree on Common Data Protection Principles? Council of Europe: Modernisation of Convention 108 Under Way Freedom of expression Internet Freedom - a Human Right? Court Ruling: Freedom of Expression and Right to Privacy Must Be Balanced EFJ: Council of Europe Must Act Against Terror Laws Internet Whose Internet Governance Principles Will Prevail? Calls for Regulation of Search Engines and Social Networks One in Four Europeans Has Never Used the Internet Media - general Strong Growth of Trade in Creative Goods and Services EU Commission: Turn Government Data into Gold! Film Support: EU Rules on State Aid to Change? Commission Looks into Acquisition of EMI by Universal European Media Literacy Study Launched Infrastructure Blocking of Internet Traffic Common in Europe More Spectrum for Mobile Services? Cloud Computing Soon To Be Regulated Piracy/IPR Enforcement ACTA To Be Rejected or “Fixed”? [Piracy/IPR Enforcement] In recent months political measures aimed at stopping internet piracy have sparked widespread, fierce protests both in Europe and the United States. In January, after an online protest in which more than 115 000 websites and over 13 million internet users participated, the US Senate and House of Representative decided to postpone their vote on the controversial Protect IP Act (PIPA) and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). Meanwhile similar protests were ignited in Europe by the signing of the plurilateral Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). In December 2011 ACTA was adopted unanimously by the EU Council and later – in January this year - signed by the European Commission and 22 of the 27 Member States. Many Europeans were not pleased. On a cold 11 February several tens of thousands of citizens from an estimated 200 cities in Europe went out in the streets in a massive pan-european protest against ACTA. The biggest turnout was in Germany, one of the EU countries not yet having signed the agreement. Already the day before the rally the German government decided to postpone the signing of ACTA until the European Parliament makes its decision. For similar reasons the Czech government decided in February to stop the ratification of ACTA. To enter into force as EU law ACTA must be ratified by the EU member states and approved by the European Parliament. As a result, there has been a great deal of discussion – and controversy – about ACTA in the European Parliament. Five committees are involved in the issue. Four of them are to provide Opinions to the International Trade Committee (INTA) which has overall responsibility and will present the final Recommendation to Parliament on how it should vote. The growing criticism of ACTA led the European Commission to announce in February its intention to refer the agreement to the Court of Justice of the European Union to verify its compatibility with the EU treaties and in particular with the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht appealed to the European Parliament to await the Court of Justice's opinion before determining its own position on ACTA. The Commission is eager to have ACTA approved, pointing to the economy. “Intellectual property is Europe’s main raw material, but the problem is that we currently struggle to protect it outside the European Union. This hurts our companies, destroys jobs and harms our economies”, explained Commissioner De Gucht. On 12 April MEP David Martin, the rapporteur on ACTA in the European Parliament's INTA Committee, released a Draft Recommendation, in which he recommends that Parliament reject ACTA. “The intended benefits of this international agreement are far outweighed by the potential threats to civil liberties”, explains Mr Martin saying that it is not precise enough, for instance with regard to the definition of “commercial scale” and the role of internet service providers. At an INTA meeting on 25 April it was decided that the committee's vote on the Recommendation would be postponed a month, until 21 June, to give the other committees more time to discuss and draft their opinions. (In several of these, views on ACTA still seem to vary considerably). This means that the final plenary vote in the European Parliament could be taken in early July. In late April there appeared to be a slight majority in Parliament for a rejection of ACTA, as important party groups such as the Socialists & Democrats, the Greens and the ALDE group (Liberals & Democrats) had announced that they would not approve the agreement. A critical Opinion on ACTA issued by the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) on 24 April may have influenced ALDE, which announced its negative position the following day. ACTA measures to enforce IP rights in the digital environment could threaten privacy and data protection if not properly implemented. Many of the voluntary enforcement cooperation measures would entail a processing of personal data by ISPs which goes beyond what is allowed under EU law, said the EDPS in his Opinion. The Data Protection Supervisor and many of the MEPs who are critical of ACTA – including the INTA Rapporteur David Martin – however stress that they are aware of the need to protect intellectual property rights and support protection measures. The problem is that this particular agreement lacks clarity and does not strike the right balance between IPR protection and fundamental rights and freedoms. Now the question seems to be whether to demand satisfactory clarifications or even a renegotiation of the ACTA text, or to start from scratch and create a truly international agreement including important IPR infringing countries like China, which many have called for. The largest party group in the European Parliament, the centre-right EPP, which long seemed prepared to simply approve ACTA, now says: “Fix it first!” On 25 April the EPP Group’s shadow rapporteur, Swedish MEP Christofer Fjellner, called on the European Commission and Member States to ensure legal clarity regarding some of ACTA's provisions, before the EPP Group can support the agreement. The EPP Group demands that legal clarity on the role of ISPs be ensured under ACTA. It also asks the Commission and Member States to define the notion of infringement of intellectual property rights on a commercial scale and to add legal clarity as to when Member States could impose criminal enforcement measures on internet users. Read more What the position of the European Parliament will be by the time it votes on ACTA – at the earliest in July – remains to be seen. For the moment one can only be sure of one thing; before the vote takes place there will be a lot of lobbying and horse-trading in Brussels. Top More Pressure on ISPs to Police the Net? [Piracy/IPR Enforcement] In sensitive issues the European Commission often tries to avoid proposing direct, maybe controversial, legislation and instead “encourages” stakeholders to take volontary measures in different ways. One such issue seems to be the policing of the internet. In discussions about whether internet service providers (ISPs) should help combat illegal downloads ISPs and internet activists often refer to the EU Electronic Commerce Directive which under certain conditions grants liability exemptions to intermediary providers if they host or transmit illegal content placed online by a third party. Now the EU Commission has decided not to amend the directive – as was expected - but to add to it. The Commission says there have been calls for clarifications of how certain provisions of the directive regarding intermediaries' liability should be interpreted, in particular how "notice-and-action procedures" should work in practice. (These procedures refer to rules on removing or blocking of access to illegal content by an online company, after it has received a request to do so.) In a Communication on the e-Commerce directive released in January, the EU Commission says that it now intends to analyse how notice-and-action procedures can work in a way to best address such concerns. The Commission stresses that it wants to involve all stakeholders in this initiative and that there will be another, more targeted public consultation on notice-and-action procedures. In the Communication it writes that it appears necessary to set up a horizontal European framework for notice-and-action procedures, which – the Commission seems to hope - would encourage volontary, self-regulatory measures. As an example of such measures the Commission mentions in a footnote the Memorandum of Understanding signed in May 2011 between major rights-holders and internet platforms on the online sale of counterfeit products. This requires the signatories, in addition to a notification and take-down procedure, to take action against repeated infringements, including “ the suspension (temporary or permanent) or restriction of accounts or sellers.” Top Piracy: ISPs and Social Networks Cannot Be Forced to Install Filtering [Piracy/IPR Enforcement] Two recent rulings by the EU Court of Justice are relevant to the discussion of the role and liability of internet intermediaries. In February the European Court of Justice issued a ruling establishing that the owner of an online social network cannot be obliged to install a general filtering system, covering all its users, in order to prevent the unlawful use of musical and audio-visual work. “Such an obligation would not be respecting the prohibition to impose on that provider a general obligation to monitor nor the requirement that a fair balance be struck between the protection of copyright, on the one hand, and the freedom to conduct business, the right to protection of personal data and the freedom to receive or impart information, on the other”, explained the Court. A few months earlier, in November 2011, the European Court of Justice issued an almost identical ruling regarding internet service providers. The ruling established that - for similar reasons as those mentioned in the later case - it is against EU law to require an internet service provider to install a filtering system with a view to preventing illegal downloads. Top EU Office to Strengthen Enforcement of IPRs [Piracy/IPR Enforcement] In March the EU Council adopted a regulation giving the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (OHIM) certain new tasks in order to facilitate and support the activities of national authorities, the private sector and the Union institutions in the fight against infringements of the intellectual property rights covered by the IPRED directive (2004/48/EC). The Office shall organise, administer and support the gathering of experts, authorities and stakeholder assembled under the name European Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property Rights. The OHIM will “offer a forum that brings together public authorities and the private sector, ensuring the collection, analysis and dissemination of relevant objective, comparable and reliable data regarding the value of intellectual property rights and infringements of those rights, identifying and promoting best practices and strategies to enforce intellectual property rights, and raising public awareness of the impact of infringements of intellectual property rights”. The president of the OHIM, Antonio Campinos, seems to have a rather open attitude. “Everyone should be heard about what the Observatory should do”, he said at a conference on the review of the IPRED directive at the end of April and announced that a consultation would be launched at the end of May. “The Observatory must be an independant body with full involvement of all stakeholders”, stressed Mr Campinos. In the autumn working groups will be set up in which different viewpoints will be represented, he said. Top Revision of the Controversial IPRED Directive? [Piracy/IPR Enforcement] The European Commission is working on proposal for a review of the controversial EU directive on the enforcement of intellectual property rights adopted in 2004, often called IPRED. The directive was not designed to deal with the challenges posed by the internet and a number of provisions of the directive lack sufficient clarity and have led to very diverging interpretations by Member States and the national courts, explains the Commission. Among the policy options being considered are rendering the rules on obtaining evidence from intermediaries more detailed and clarifying the definition of "commercial scale", fast-track low cost civil procedures and the possibility to act against webpages holding content that violates intellectual property rights. Those who will be affected by new rules “may include various intermediaries such as Internet Platforms, Internet Service Providers or transport establishments who could play an important role in the fight against infringements of intellectual property rights”, says the Commission in its roadmap for the proposal. On 26 April the EU Commission organised a conference in Brussels to receive further stakeholder input in view of its review of the directive. Here Jean Bergevin, a key official in the Commision's Internal Market directorate, stressed that the Commission has not yet decided whether a revision of IPRED is needed. Consultations will continue and soon a questionnaire with more targeted, specific questions and options will be issued, he said. Top Privacy and Data Protection EU Commission Presents Major Data Protection Reform [Privacy and Data Protection] “Phone apps help themselves to our contacts, Google tracks our web history, and supermarkets monitor our buying habits. Can anything stop the great data grab?” asked the Guardian in lengthy article about online privacy in February. Many others are worried too. According to a recent Eurobarometer 70% of Europeans are concerned that their personal data may be misused. Trust in online services is vital in today's economy, says the European Commission. In January it proposed a comprehensive reform of the EU's 1995 data protection rules “to strengthen online privacy rights and boost Europe's digital economy.” If the Commission's proposals are approved, people will have easier access to their own data , they will have a ‘right to be forgotten’ and be able to delete their data if there are no legitimate grounds for retaining it. Wherever consent is required for data to be processed, it is clarified that it has to be given explicitly, rather than assumed. A single set of rules on data protection will be valid across the European Union. If personal data is handled abroad by companies that are active in the EU market and offer their services to EU citizens the European Union's rules must apply. The Commission's proposals include a policy Communication and two legislative proposals: a Regulation setting out a general EU framework for data protection and a Directive on protecting personal data processed for the purposes of crime prevention and related judicial activities. See documents and other info The Commission's proposals have now been passed on to the European Parliament and EU Member States (meeting in the Council of Ministers) for discussion. They will take effect two years after they have been adopted. Top Mixed Reactions to Proposed Data Protection Rules [Privacy and Data Protection] Before the data protection reform package was published there was much lobbying in Brussels and internal strife within the European Commission. Until the new rules are adopted discussions will probably continue to be heated. The immediate reactions were rather mixed. Among those who welcomed the proposals was the European consumer organisation BEUC. “Today the EU is taking a large step towards giving data rights back to its rightful owners, individuals themselves,” said Monique Goyens, director general of BEUC. But not everybody is happy. Despite the pro-business changes brought to the original proposal, the digital industry does not seem satisfied. The Business Software Alliance (BSA) said that the proposal could bog down companies with onerous compliance obligations. The European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) Peter Hustinx was pleased with some of the proposals but not all. In his Opinion he says the proposed regulation constitutes “a huge step forward for data protection in Europe” as an instrument directly applicable in all the Member States. The rules will strengthen the rights of individuals and make controllers more accountable for how they handle personal data, he says. But he is “seriously disappointed “ with many aspects of the proposed directive for data protection in the law enforcement area. "(This area) requires some specific rules, but not a general lowering of the level of data protection", writes the EDPS. The so-called Article 29 group –including representatives of the national data protection authorities of the EU Member States – had similar reactions. In its Opinion on the proposals the group welcomes the inclusion of provisions that give incentives to controllers to invest, from the start, in getting data protection right (such as data protection by design)and that the proposals place clear responsibility and accountability on those processing personal data. The European data protection authorities however criticize the data protection rules for police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters. They are too weak and lacking important data protection principles such as limiting retention periods, transparency and accuracy of personal data, says the Article 29 group. Top EU and US to Agree on Common Data Protection Principles? [Privacy and Data Protection] Given the global nature of the Internet, the overhaul of EU data protection rules will have international significance. Foreign countries got involved in the negotiations at an unsually early stage, not least the United States, whose companies may have to abide by stricter provisions to do business in Europe. Before the Commission data protection proposal was made public the US Department of Commerce complained about the negative impact of certain rules, such as those regarding explicit consent, the right to be forgotten and privacy by design. The intense lobbying from the United States seems to have watered down the draft legislation to some extent. Better data protection is, however, also important for the United States. At the end of February the Obama Administration unveiled a Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights .“As the Internet evolves, consumer trust is essential for the continued growth of the digital economy. That’s why an online privacy Bill of Rights is so important. For businesses to succeed online, consumers must feel secure”, said President Obama. So, will Brussels or Washington be the first to draft a new framework for data protection of international significance? Or will they try to overcome their differences in social, cultural and legal systems reflected in different approaches to privacy and find some common principles to build on for the future? There seem to be attempts to find common ground. On 19 March a High Level Conference on Privacy and Protection of Personal Data, was held simultaneously in Washington and Brussels with the participation of EU Commission Vice-President Viviane Reding – who is responsible for the proposed reform package - and U.S. Secretary of Commerce John Bryson. “Both parties recognize that while regulatory regimes may differ between the US and Europe, the common principles at the heart of both systems, now re-affirmed by the developments in the US, provide a basis for advancing their dialogue to resolve shared privacy challenges”, reads the EU-U.S. joint statement from the meeting. Which party will dominate the dialogue and its outcome remains to be seen. Top Council of Europe: Modernisation of Convention 108 Under Way [Privacy and Data Protection] The Council of Europe is pushing for global recognition of its convention on the processing of personal data (usually referred to as Convention 108) as the only practicable option for global privacy standards. The Convention has already served for many years as the backbone of international law in over 40 European countries and has influenced policy and legislation beyond Europe’s shores. In January 2011 the Council launched a consultation on how the Convention should be modernised. In March this year the Council published a draft with proposed changes, based on this and other consultations. Among the changes, it is proposed to specifically mention the right to control one's own data and human diginity in the preamble. However, no new explicit inclusion of a “right to oblivion” is considered necessary. A new exception is proposed for data flows for the purposes of freedom of expression and information. “The issue of transborder data flows will be key in the modernisation process”, says T-PD, the Consultative Committee working on this matter. The document is subject to public consultation to allow the T-PD to review and discuss these proposals at its 28th Plenary meeting (19-22 June 2012), for their completion and submission to the Committee of Ministers. Read more Top Freedom of expression Internet Freedom - a Human Right? [Freedom of expression] More and more people are saying that Internet freedom is a human right, including policymakers at the international level who have brought up the issue on several occasions in recent months. On 29 February the United Nations' Human Rights Council held a panel discussion on the promotion and protection of freedom of expression on the internet. The internet has transformed human rights movements as states can no longer exercise control by claiming monopoly over information. This has resulted in a backlash effect and intensified attempts to unduly restrict access to online content or the internet as such, said Navi Pillay, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, in her opening speech. Blocking of the net is not the only problem however. Freedom of expression on the internet requires access to the internet in the first place. Its benefits cannot be fully reaped as long as large parts of the world’s population lacks reliable and fast internet connections, said Ms Pillay. Several delegates from various parts of the world brought up this issue again during the discussion. China called on the international community to promote access to the internet in developing countries, but also seemed concerned about too much freedom of the Internet, noting that the abuse of freedom of expression could not only violate human rights but also undermine social stability and national security. Guatemala hit the crux of the matter when asking if there was a magic formula on how to regulate the internet without controlling it and who had the right to regulate the web. Read more The OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media, Dunja Mijatovic, is another policymaker who regards internet freedom as a human right and she stresses that not only states should respect it. “Today it is not only governments that are forming the reality of the Internet. Civil society, industry, media companies, journalists and bloggers – in their respective roles – are shaping the Internet of tomorrow. The observance of human rights of individuals, including the right to freedom of expression, also should be part of corporate responsibility...”, writes the OSCE Representative. Nor should freedom of expression be reserved for journalists. “Freedom of the media is not reserved for media companies or editorial offices. This right applies to all forms of journalism that is meant for public distribution, be it professional or “citizen”. It is a basic human right and cannot be divided into traditional media and new media”, says Ms Mijatovic. Top Court Ruling: Freedom of Expression and Right to Privacy Must Be Balanced [Freedom of expression] In January the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the Finnish courts failed to uphold the right to freedom of expression in a case relating to a magazine’s coverage of a police officer accused of abusing his power, reports the European Federation of Journalists. The ruling in the Lahtonen v. Finland case says that the domestic courts failed to strike a balance between the competing interests of freedom of expression and respect for private life. Mika Lahtonen, journalist and editor-in-chief of the monthly magazine Alibi, published an article iincluding name, age and place of work of a police officer who was accused of abusing his power to steal a car. Lahtonen was accused of violating the private life of the police officer by disseminating his personal information. Top EFJ: Council of Europe Must Act Against Terror Laws [Freedom of expression] The European Federation of Journalists together with press freedom groups and professional organisation recently called on the Council of Europe to respect its commitments made almost three years ago about press freedom and anti-terrorism laws. At a Council of Europe conference of media ministers in Reykjavik in May 2009 ministers committed to “review national legislation and/or practice on a regular basis to ensure that any impact of anti-terrorism measures on the right to freedom of expression and information is consistent with Council’s standards”. In a joint letter to the international body’s Secretary General, the campaigners “deeply regret” that so far absolutely no progress has been made by member states on this issue. The letter calls on Council ministers to act on the issue at the coming ministerial conference in Belgrade, Serbia 2013. Top Internet Whose Internet Governance Principles Will Prevail? [Internet] Only a few years ago policymakers did not seem very aware of the internet's potential to trigger political and social changes and did not pay much attention to the net. Now everybody is discussing Internet governance and promoting their own ideas about what the principles for Internet policy-making should be. In December 2011 the OECD - an organisation mainly representing Western, highly developed nations and whose aim is to stimulate world trade – issued a Recommendation on Principles for Internet Policy Making. “Promote and protect the global free flow of information”, “ promote investment and competition om high speed networks and services”, “ promote and enable the cross-border delivery of services” and “foster voluntarily developed codes of conduct”, are some of the policy principles recommended by the OECD. A different view of Internet policy is expressed in a position paper released the same month by Dunja Mijatovic, the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media. (OSCE, the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe, works not only on “hard” security issues but also on promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.) “The question is not whether governments should or should not regulate the Internet. The questions are how, what and to what extent content should be regulated? ...Any restriction to the use of the Internet is only legitimate if it is in compliance with international norms and standards, necessary for a democratic society and prescribed by law”, says Ms Mijatovic recommending the multi-stakeholder governance approach of the UN Internet Governance Forum (IGF). Similar ideas are expressed in an ambitious Internet governance strategy adopted in March by the Council of Europe, whose aim is to protect human rights, pluralist democracy and the rule of law throughout the whole European continent. The strategy identifies priorities and sets goals for the internet-related work of the Council between 2012 and 2015. Its main objectives include: protecting the Internet’s universality, integrity and openness; maximising rights and freedoms for Internet users; advancing data protection and privacy; enhancing the rule of law and effective co-operation against cybercrime; maximising the Internet’s potential to promote democracy and cultural diversity; and protecting and empowering children and young people. Internet governance is soon to be discussed again. On 14-18 May another international WSIS Forum will be held in Geneva. Among many other topics of interest on the agenda is a High Level Dialogue on Governance of Cyberspace. Top Calls for Regulation of Search Engines and Social Networks [Internet] In recent months there has been much discussion about the increasing power of various types of Internet “intermediaries”, especially search engines and social networks. People call them the new gate-keepers and secret police, pointing out, for example, that Google can render any website effectively invisible and knows more about its users than their families do. Yet the new tech giants are not responsible to anyone or held accountable for their activities, many complain. That is not really true. Two years ago the EU Commission announced it was looking into complaints that Google disadvantages competitors by lowering their search rankings. By August 2011 Google faced a total of nine antitrust complaints which EU regulators are investigating. The U.S. Federal Trade Commission has also investigated Google following accusations that it abused its market dominance, the U.S. Senate's antitrust panel has held a hearing on Google's market clout and so on. Facebook is under scrutiny too. In the United States the company faces government audits about how it collects and shares data and regulators in Ireland and Germany have clashed with Facebook over privacy issues. The recently proposed reform of EU data protection rules, too, has much to do with concerns about the tracking of users' online activity to create profiles for advertising and other purposes. Lately there have been some new policy-related developments. In a strategy paper on Internet policy the European Parliament's largest party group, the EPP, calls for search neutrality and measures to improve privacy protection in social networks. These issues were recently discussed in the Council of Europe in Strasbourg too. At the beginning of April the Council's Committee of Ministers adopted two Recommendations, one on search engines and the other on social networking services. In the Recommendation on search engines, the Ministers call for more transparency and respect for users’ rights in the processing of personal data – for example of cookies, IP addresses and individual search histories. In the Recommendation on social networking services, the Committee of Minsters calls on states to work with operators to raise users´ awareness of their rights and the challenges to them by using clear and understandable language. It also recommends helping users understand the default settings of their profiles - which should be privacy-friendly - and make informed choices about their online identity. Top One in Four Europeans Has Never Used the Internet [Internet] For many people today it seems difficult to live without the internet, however a still non-negligible part of the EU population has never used it. In the first quarter of 2011 almost three quarters of households in the European Union had access to the internet, but 24% had never used it. There are significant differences between EU member states. Household internet access ranges from 45% in Bulgaria to 94% in the Netherlands. The share of those who never used the internet varies between 5% in Sweden and 54% in Romania. These are some of the results of a survey by Eurostat, the statistical office of the European Union, on ICT usage in households and by individuals in the 27 EU Member States, Iceland, Norway, Croatia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Turkey. In addition to internet use and broadband connections, the survey covers indicators such as e-commerce, e-skills and e-government. In 2011, the largest proportions of internet users who obtained information from websites of public authorities were observed in Denmark (86% of internet users), Sweden (74%) and Finland (65%). Read more Top Media - general Strong Growth of Trade in Creative Goods and Services [Media - general] Global trade in creative goods and services more than doubled in eight years, from US$ 260.5 billion in 2002 to 559.5 billion in 2010. New media have constituted the fastest growing creative sector in recent years; the level of exports grew by 16 percent during the last decade, reports UNCTAD. UNCTAD, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, has a global database on the creative economy, based on official national data provided by governments. Creative goods and services include products such as arts and crafts, books, graphic and interior design works, fashion, films, music, new media, printed media, visual and performing arts, audiovisual products, and creative services. Expansion of the creative economy has been rapid in developing countries, indicates UNCTAD data. As economic growth has been higher in developing regions, domestic demand for creative products has expanded apace, especially in the emerging economies of Asia, Latin America, and Africa. Read more Top EU Commission: Turn Government Data into Gold! [Media - general] “Europe’s public administrations are sitting on a goldmine of unrealised economic potential: the large volumes of information collected by numerous public authorities and services,” declared the European Commission in December 2011 when launching an Open Data Strategy for Europe. The strategy will boost the thriving industry that turns raw data into the material that hundreds of millions of ICT users depend on, for example smart phone apps, such as maps, real-time traffic and weather information andmore. Other leading beneficiaries will include journalists and academics, says the EU Commission. The Commission proposes to update the 2003 Directive on the re-use of public sector information by, for example, making it a general rule that all documents made accessible by public sector bodies can be re-used for any purpose, commercial or non-commercial, unless protected by third party copyright. It will also expand the reach of the directive to include libraries, museums and archives for the first time; the existing 2003 rules will apply to data from such institutions. In addition, the Commission will make its own data public through a new "data portal". More info The European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) Peter Hustinx has some concerns about the Commission's proposals. In his recent Opinion on this issue he highlights the need for specific safeguards for data protection whenever public sector information (PSI) contains personal data. "The re-use of PSI containing personal data may bring significant benefits, but also entails great risks to the protection of personal data, due to the wide variety of data held by public sector bodies. The Commission proposal should therefore more clearly define in what situations and subject to what safeguards information containing personal data may be required to be made available for re-use", explains the EDPS. Top Film Support: EU Rules on State Aid to Change? [Media - general] EU Member States provide an estimated €3 billion per year in film support. This aid must be compatible with the European Union's rules. In March the EU Commission launched a public consultation on the state aid criteria it proposes to use to assess Member States' film support schemes in future. It looks like the rules are soon to change. The proposed criteria for state aid are set out in a draft Communication, on which the Commission invites comments by 14 June 2012. This is the second and final consultation in the process of reviewing the current state aid assessment criteria, which are due to expire by 31 December 2012 at the latest. One of the main changes proposed by the Commission is to extend the scope of activities covered by the Communication to include all phases of an audiovisual work from concept to delivery to audiences. The existing rules only apply to production support. At the Cannes film festival a workshop will be held on 19 May which will focus on the current discussions on film funding rules in Europe. The event is organised by the European Audiovisual Observatory. The workshop “takes place at a crucial phase in the consultation process”, points out the Observatory’s director, Wolfgang Closs, who regards it as a forum for film funders, producers, investors, professionals and European institutions to tackle some of the more controversial points of the draft Cinema Communication. The draft Communication and information about the public consultation is available here. The final Communication is due to be adopted by the Commission in the second half of 2012. Top Commission Looks into Acquisition of EMI by Universal [Media - general] 23 mars - The European Commission has opened an in-depth investigation under the EU Merger Regulation into the proposed acquisition of the recorded music business of EMI by Universal Music Group. The Commission's initial market investigation indicated that the proposed transaction may raise competition concerns in the wholesale of physical and digital recorded music in numerous Member States as well as in the European Economic Area (EEA) as a whole, particularly in light of the merged entity's high market shares and increased market power. Before 8 August 2012 the EU Commission must take a final decision on whether the proposed transaction would significantly impede effective competition in the EEA. Read more Top European Media Literacy Study Launched [Media - general] In January the European Media Literacy Education Study (EMEDUS) - conducted by the Autonomous University of Barcelona (UAB), through the Department of Communication and Education and a consortium of six other European institutions – was launched. The study – which is funded by the Lifelong Learning Programme of the EU Commission's Directorate-General for Education and Culture - aims to provide policy recommendations at both national and European level and to support educational policies to foster media education in the 27 Member States of the European Union. Currently the UAB team of researchers is working on an analysis of existing literature on the subject in the EU countries, both in formal and informal education. In its final stage the project intends to operate an observatory that will seek to update all information related to the topic and provide information on the status and progress of media literacy within each EU member state. On 20 April EMEDUS was presented to over 35 European experts on media literacy meeting in Brussels. Top Infrastructure Blocking of Internet Traffic Common in Europe [Infrastructure] There has been much criticism of so-called traffic management practices of internet service providers such as blocking or throttling peer-to-peer (P2P) traffice on networks and pressure on the European Commission to do something about it. As a first step the Commission asked BEREC, the new Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications, to investigate the extent of these and other traffic management practices. In early March BEREC submitted its preliminary findings. “The most frequently reported traffic management practices are the blocking and/or throttling of peer-to-peer (P2P) traffic, on both fixed and mobile networks, and the blocking of Voice over IP (VoIP) traffic... When blocking/throttling is implemented in the network, it is typically done through deep packet inspection (DPI)”, reports BEREC in its press release. Activists claiming that such practices are common were apparently right. Another, related phenomenon critics have focused on is so-called premium managed services, i.e. giving preference access to business users and others able and willing to pay more to get a faster and better connection. Such services may also be looked into by BEREC in its work on net neutrality, which it will report on by this summer. Neelie Kroes, the EU Commissioner responsible for the Digital Agenda, does not seem to have anything against premium services. “ Openness here is a subtle term. For me it does not mean banning all targeted or limited offers: it means being transparent about them... I want to ensure that internet users can always choose full internet access – if that's what they want”, said Commissioner Kroes at an international internet conference in mid-April. Such thoughts have support in the European Parliament. “...it is acceptable that data services or applications are transmitted to users according to different speed and data amounts. A “pay-for-priorisation-system”, for instance, allows consumers to choose between several service delivery speeds,” writes the EPP, the largest party group in the European Parliament, in its strategy paper on Internet policy. As for throttling P2P services or blocking voice-over-internet (VoIP), however, the EPP group is adamant: “Such discriminatory practices cannot be tolerated”. Top More Spectrum for Mobile Services? [Infrastructure] With today's rapid advances in telecommunication technology the radio spectrum is becoming a more and more vital asset. Spectrum issues are decided at the UN International Telecommunication Union (ITU) World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC) held every four years. At the beginning of this year such a conference, WRC-12, was held in Geneva. A main issue discussed was the need for additional spectrum for mobile networks. One of the achievements of the conference was to allocate spectrum resources for mobile broadband. Read more At the European level, too, there have been important developments in this area lately. In February the European Parliament adopted the five-year Radio Spectrum Policy Programme (RSPP) which will allow sufficient spectrum to be made available for wireless applications and services such as high speed 4th generation (4G) wireless broadband. Specific steps to be taken by the EU Member States and the Commission include, for example, that all Member States should have authorised the use of the 800 MHz band for wireless broadband communications by 1 January 2013. One of the main objectives here is to cover sparsely populated areas. Documents and other info Top Cloud Computing Soon To Be Regulated [Infrastructure] Lately there has been much buzz about cloud computing, which involves a range of infrastructure, software, data or applications residing in the 'cloud' off your own premises and accessed via the Internet. Neelie Kroes, the EU Commissioner for the Digital Agenda, is excited about this development. “Cloud computing will change the way businesses do IT, and it will change our economies. Because it will tremendously increase flexibility and efficiency. And I think we could all do with a productivity boost right now”, said Ms Kroes at a conference in late January. However both policymakers and business people are aware of potential risks of cloud computing with regard to data and infrastructure security, legal liability and privacy protection. “How can individuals and businesses feel secure if they don't know where their data is stored?”, summed up a lawyer recently at a cloud computing conference in Brussels. Such insecurity is also worrisome to regulatory authorities, as further use of cloud systems would mean that huge amounts of public and commercial data would migrate to servers possibly located outside national borders or on other continents outside their control. Commissioner Kroes is working on these issues. Before the summer break she intends to present a European Cloud Strategy, in which the Commission will assess all possible obstacles and problems related to the Cloud. The important centre-right EPP party group in the European Parliament has already presented some thoughts on this issue in a strategy paper on Internet policy. When developing a European Cloud three conditions should be taken into account, says the EPP Group. The cloud must be technically reliable and resilient, it must be secure and provide for a liability scheme and technical standards and thirdly, it must be designed in a way that European users´ data are protected according to EU standards. ”Either EU jurisdiction must be extended to all data collected within the EU or via international agreements which allow the EU to control that its standards are kept in third countries.”, adds the parliamentary group. The high-tech cloud computing sector is wary of EU policy-making and has expressed concerns about the recently proposed new EU data protection rules, saying that overly prescriptive rules could “undermine the economic advances that a truly global cloud can provide." Top

About the newsletter European Media Policy is a newsletter from NORDICOM providing an up-date on policy developments at the European level. We concentrate on news from the European Union – current issues and trends in media policy, new proposals for legislation, debates in the European Parliament, recently taken or impending policy decisions and reactions among those concerned, new support programmes and EU studies in the field etc. There will also be some coverage of developments in the Council of Europe. The newsletter will normally be published three times per year. The December issue will provide an overview of the main events of the year and comment on media policy trends.