ECJ

DRIP Forced Through

Friday, 18 July, 2014 - 12:00

The controversial Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Bill completed its path through Parliament on Thursday 17th July in just three days. It has now received Royal Assent.

The Pirate Party and civil liberties campaigners had criticised DRIP as an attack on fundamental rights, and an extension of powers and scope of mass surveillance. Concerns were also raised about the use of emergency powers to push the legislation through, leaving little time for constituents to contact their Members of Parliament.

Pirate Party Leader Loz Kaye said:

Maria Aretoulaki : European Court of Justice Google ruling gives the Dog a Bone

Yesterday the European Court of Justice, based in Luxembourg, passed a landmark ruling that has caused a lot of jubilation among data privacy advocates: the Google US and Spain versus the Spanish Agency for Data Protection and a brave Spaniard who sued Google for listing information on his repossessed home in its search results.

It has been hailed as the precedent that will secure individuals the "right to be forgotten" from the internet, if they so wish. Drunken pics of you and your mates on Facebook? Looking for a job? Ask for those photos to be taken down before the HR guy discovers them 30mins before your interview! Sorted! Or is it?

Sifting through the legalese, let's concentrate just on the actual ruling, i.e. Points 1-4 at the very end of the document / webpage. If you don't get distracted by the article numbers and opening and closing paragraphs, the ECJ has actually ruled the following:

1.       Article 2(b) and (d) of Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data are to be interpreted as meaning that, first, the activity of a search engine consisting in finding information published or placed on the internet by third parties, indexing it automatically, storing it temporarily and, finally, making it available to internet users according to a particular order of preference must be classified as ‘processing of personal data’ within the meaning of Article 2(b) when that information contains personal data and, second, the operator of the search engine must be regarded as the ‘controller’ in respect of that processing, within the meaning of Article 2(d).

Victory For Euro Consumers As EU Votes To End Roaming Charges, Guarantee Net Neutrality

 Some big advances today in the often frustrating, slow moving world of communications regulation: the European Union has voted in favor of ending mobile roaming charges, and also in favor of guaranteeing net neturality on data networks....

  

Wednesday, 9 April, 2014 - 03:30

Victory as Court Rules EU Data Retention Law Interferes with Fundamental Rights

Tuesday, 8 April, 2014 - 11:30

The Court of Justice of the European Union today declared that the Data Retention Directive is incompatible with the Union's Charter of Fundamental Rights after a reference by Irish and Austrian courts.

The Court found that the Directive "entails an interference with the fundamental rights of practically the entire European population", concluding that there is a "is there a general absence of limits" in the legislation.

INTA recommends rejection of ACTA

Thursday, 21 June, 2012 - 11:00

The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) was rejected by the European Parliament's International Trade committee (INTA) by 19 votes to 12 today. The vote comes after widespread international public opposition to the treaty. The committee also decided to ignore calls to postpone voting until after a European Court of Justice (ECJ) review of ACTA, widely seen as a delaying tactic to suppress opposition.

Ed Geraghty made the following comments on hearing of the result:

ACTA Referred to the ECJ - a delaying tactic to side-step public anger?

Wednesday, 22 February, 2012 - 19:30

Today the EU Commission referred the controversial IP enforcement treaty ACTA to the European Court of Justice, asking for a ruling as to whether it breaches the "fundamental rights" of the EU. The decision was made following large-scale protests against ACTA in all member states. Some see this as a cynical delaying tactic.

Pirate Party MEP and Rapporteur for the European Parliament industrial committee opinion on ACTA, Amelia Andersdotter said:

European court ruling against web blocking - what this means for the UK

Monday, 28 November, 2011 - 14:30

Last week, the European Court of Justice ruled on a case between Belgian copyright association SABAN and the ISP Scarlet. SABAM, who collect license fees for musical recordings, had been demanding that the ISP implement technology to detect when its users were filesharing recordings they had rights over, and block them. This would have involved snooping on all users' communications, and, like all web-blocking technologies, would have resulted in any number of false positives whilst failing to deter serious infringers.

More Information

Chat with us

   

Upcoming Dates

Social Media

Twitter icon Facebook icon RSS icon YouTube icon

Current Internal Elections

Board of Governors Election - June 2017 - View
Nominations opened: 15 June, 2017 - 19:30
Nominations close: Thursday, 29 June, 2017 - 19:30