RSSEU Passes Internet, Phone Logging Plan
By Ed Oswald | Published December 14, 2005, 2:20 PM
The European Parliament voted 378 to 197 with 30 abstentions on Wednesday to approve a plan that would give law enforcement access to telephone and Internet data to help combat crime and fight terrorism. The legislation means service providers would be forced to log messages and conversations.
Under the new rules, businesses would be required to keep a record of phone calls from landline and mobile phones, text messages, and Internet-based conversations for a period of up to two years.
In the case of an EU member state that has a pre-existing holding period that is longer than the law states, that state would be able to keep the preexisting law.
Britain, which controls the rotating EU presidency at this time, had pushed for the law following the attacks in London in July of this year. The country called Wednesday a "very important day for the European Union in its fight against terrorism and organized crime."
The European telecommunications industry lamented the move, saying it would place a burden on the region's e-communications industry, and would make it less competitive.
The industry pointed to the fact that only a small number of e-mail services would fall under the new law, as the largest e-mail providers are not under EU jurisdiction. This could open up a loophole for criminals to continue to operate, the companies argued.
Some lawmakers also criticized supporters of the measure, saying they caved in to pressure from the countries justice ministers by allowing them to do what they want with the data without restrictions.
Others have criticized the law for being too broad. The head of data protection in Germany Petter Schaar warned that clarification of the laws was needed in order "to keep the intrusion on citizens as limited as possible."
Although the bill has been approved by the EU at large, it is still up to member states to individually approve the legislation before it becomes law.
I understand the sentiments behind wanting this law but it is nevertheless absolutely disgraceful. Phone tapping is not legal in the UK and permission has to be sought in a court of law from a judge, for it legally to take place. If IPSs have to record all conversations beit spoken or written, this is in effect phone tapping for the internet under a different name, via the backdoor. Totally and utterly disgraceful.
Score: 0
|In years before, it was "Communists!" Now it's "Terrorists!" ... it's all fake, just to keep the control
Anyone that thinks democracy works, is a moron. Since people are super easy to manipulate, hence making democracy unusable.
History always repeats itself. One thing is always contant though, stupidity of people.
If we had world peace, we would have been colonized Mars long ago. :(
Score: 0
|Your comments are based on ignorance. There are generally two types of people that respond to democracy in the fashion you have. Those that live in another country(thinking theirs is best) and those that do not participate in the priviledges granted in the democracy(but complain about the outcomes).
Democracy and Communism have both pros and cons. With each, there are instances where one can exploit the system to their benefit. Terrorism has nothing to do with either at all. Terrorism is a tactic to force others to do what they want. A part of any society that has existed to date. Though their points need to be heard in both ruling societies, they should be allowed to stomp their feet like children and bomb cities and train depots so they can be heard.
Though I don't like the fact that phone conversations and text messages are being recorded, if it stops even 1 instance of a terrorist attack in any country - it is justified.
Democracy is like a marriage. There are somethings you will like and others you will not, but it is the ability to accept the views of others and not judge. It is the formation of the relationship and how problems are solved that is the key. Not to attack the others or avoid them altogether.
IMO
Score: 0
|Your comment, "athome", is based on the brainwashed, wishful thinking that is typical in times shortly before the arising of tyranny. There are generally two types of people in such times: those who stick to their wishful thinking, and those who see the reality.
Democracy is nothing but an IDEA, which exists in the minds of humans only. And, what is more, this idea has one big, fat disadvantage: it is based on majority, although human history proofs that the majority ALWAYS goes the wrong way. This is - as the former German Chancelor Helmut s*** stated - "the congenital defect of democracy".
You gotta learn about the reality - and not only from your brainwashing officially approved media.
When you speak of "the ability to accept the views of others and not judge" and "not to attack the others or avoid them altogether", you made it very clear with your comment that you yourself lack the simple doing in deeds what you preach others.
Anyway - terrorism is produced and paid by those who fight it. And, YES, there IS PROOF for it. You just have to seek it and you'll find it.
"Do you see a man wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him."
Score: 0
|yes, well f*** me hard scotty, this sucks.
Score: 0
|Only the email addresses (to/from) will be kept starting in 2007, not the data/text inside your e-mails simply because these can be encrypted.
Note: every ISP in Europe saves this data already, so it shouldn't be a big deal for you.
p.s. do you really think that encrypted e-mail data/text is save, dream on...
Score: 0
|If I use triple DES and AES, yes I do. The cost of decoding is too prohibitive.
Score: 0
|The funny thing is that this and much more is already being done on a covert level. They are just making it more legally and easily accessible to more people/groups.
Score: 0
|Ok, so you send one of your friends a 'private' e-mail, now tell me: How do they decode your message? You didn't send them your key per e-mail?
Again, dream on!
Score: 0
|I am a citizen of the EU and I do not feel well with such regulations. The question is, as always, "Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?" ("Who shall guard the guardians?"). Such limitations of one's privacy make no sense (except the propaganda of success). The old saying comes to memory: history teaches us that it teaches nothing.
Score: 0
|Personally I find this news a bit scary. I don't live in Europe but there's something downright scary about that being passed. It's so...anti-democratic. Leave it to the 'War on Terrorism' to turn freedom into just a MTV image.
Score: 0
|Why burden businesses? This is why overreaching government is so scary. This is Patriot Act, EU style, and not very helpful. If you want to make it easier to get a warrant, or whatever, fine. In the meantime, don't spy on innocent people!
Score: 0
|History shows that time and time again this is a slippery slop that leads to a very bad place. The simple fact is explained by a very true quotation, "Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely."
It is no accident that people have time and time again decided it was better for the government to stay out of people's personal business and that an idea of a right to privacy was a good idea. When governments gain too much power, they can easily be abused by the people who control that power. Remember that governments are made of people, not magically wise creatures that always have the people's best interests at heart. The reality is that governments are controlled by politicians, people who seek power, and will want to hold on to that power. To this end, compromises will be made that eventually over time lead to a very tragic result.
It is for this reason that it is much better to err on the side of freedom than on the side of control. It is nothing but folly that leads a society to believe that the government can solve all problems if only it has the unwaivering authority to do so. The people of governments always say, "Trust us, let US take care of you."
What the people then become are subjects of the government, instead of the government being the subject of the people. People lose their power. They lose the very ability to protect themselves. They lose the very thing they sought to protect from the beginning-- their security.
Would one rather live with a possible threat of danger (which is never avoidable) or live with the threat of an ever-watchful eye of a police state?
Thanks.
Score: 0
|VERY GOOD QUESTION ! ! !
Hear! Hear!
You are right in every aspect.
I just wanna add this: the whole EU building is nothing but the preparation of tyranny. If you study what has been going on and what goes on in Brussels, you will come to the conclusion that nearly every new rules and laws are made with the aim of robbing the local governments off their powers - at least that's the result of what they are DOING. And those people, who make the laws, are not idiots, just the contrary . . .
Score: 0
|The drastic measure adopted by the European parliament is hardly necessary and would only restrict the individual freedom without improving any security. This is because the present internet infrastructure allows the personal computer owners to operate annonemously and now the cellphone owners can operate annonemously. This is because of the Internet Infrastructure in place. The blog at http://www.newerawisp.blogspot.com/
is trying to have a new infrastructure developed that severely restrict the power of the personal Computer owners to simply send communications to servers and to bar the servers to send the communications back to the clients.
For this infrastructure to be developed the financial support of cellphone manufacturers or the music industry is totally necessary because the venture capitalists have too much financial stake in the present infrastructure. The music industry and the cellphone manufacturers would be the primary beneficiaries of the new infrastructure since the music piracy would become a thing of the past and thed cellphones would replace the personal computers for the surfing of the internet.
Score: -1
|This whole thig seems ridiculous to me.
Current rules: To monitor email / phonecalls you need a warrant from a high court.
New rules: They'll spy on everyone automatically, but they'll need a court order to access the data.
So, they can't use the data they gather to get a court order so... what's the point? I'm afraid I simply don't believe intentions are good here. It'll become a big-brother society. Not a good thing.
Score: 0
|I keep saying it-- millions upon millions have died over time fighting fascism, totalitarian communism, & religious fanaticism-- but in spite of this, the West is turning little by little into a combo USSR, Gestapo, & Taliban-- only in a 'kinder & gentler' environment.
But what's even more eerie is that we protesters are in the minority: the majority of populaces everywhere support this general direction with all kinds of cheap excuses: "oh, anything to deter _______(insert your most pressing fear: terrorism, money laundering, smut, illegal sharing, religious decay, etc.)...most polls confirm this-- we are sheep slowly being led to the slaughterhouse: albeit in a 'kind & gentle manner'.
Score: 0
|It could not have been said better than what you've said here...
Score: 0
|it is still up to member states to individually approve the legislation before it becomes law.
im not worried, this wont be an issue here in sweden.(i hope)
Score: 0
|Thank God for Canada's Privacy Act which makes this illegal.
Score: 0
|for now but we are looking at the same thing here in Canada. Actually the bill is to be passed next summer if it has not passed allready
Score: 0
|Just use encryption.
Score: 0
|"The legislation means service provides"
providers.
"Under the new rules, business"
businesses.
"keep the preexisting law"
pre-existing.
...but now I'm just pickin' on ya, Ed.
Score: 0
|This is just nuts. If this is okay then I guess recording all your phone conversations and keeping those for two years comes next?!?!
What is even worse is that in most cases they don't even need a court order to get the records that the ISP will be keeping.
this does NOTHING to fight terrorism.
Score: 0
|And the precedent it sets for other coutnries is frightening.
The USA could easily use this to justify it's own "need" to ...
oh...wait...Patriot Act. D'oh!
Score: 0
|That's good.
People shouldn't worry about their privacy in regard to this matter as long as strigent enforcement is used to protect privacy.
For those terrorists, they need to rot in hell.
Score: 0
|as if terrorists didn't already knew ways to evade such a control...
by the way, if we remember the Airbus vs. Boeing affair, we all know that no matter what, governments will use private data for illegitimate reasons ;)
Score: 0
|How do we check that "Stringent Enforcement" is being used? We can't see any of the data because we don't have a warrant - makes it quite difficult to prove if someone's using the information. It'll be like wire-tap technology. Inadmissible in court, but still used in counterintelligence.
2 links for you all:
http://enigmail.mozdev.org
http://www.gnupg.org
Score: 0
|"People shouldn't worry about their privacy in regard to this matter as long as strigent enforcement is used to protect privacy."
That is naive to the point where it beggars description.
Why? Because those preventions never occur and the various governments always use their paranoia and lust for control to "justify" ever increasing encroachments on the rights of citizens, especially their privacy.
As to terrorism, the best way to prevent and fight that is to stop propagating a foreign policy where a country sticks its fat nose in other people's business, installs and props up puppet governments in the name of "democracy" and uses the International Monetary Fund for econmic and political blackmail.
At that point, countries won't have nearly as much to be pissed about and terrorists will gain few friends.
A jingoistic "fight the commies" mindset and raping privacy ain't gonna do it.
Score: 0
|Terrorists are humans in the end. This means they are just as idiotic as the rest of us. No more technology literate/illiterate than the next guy. Their tactics are somewhat childish in that they spend months/years sneaking around emailing and making plans only to call you up afterwards and say they did it!
Score: 0
|