Press Releases related to International
Consumers, Librarians, and Innovators Tell EU 'We're Not Criminals'
Coalition Submits Fixes to European Parliament to Prevent Vague New Copyright Crimes
Brussels - The Electronic Frontier Foundation's (EFF's) European Office today announced a broad coalition aimed at fixing a poorly drafted intellectual property enforcement proposal that could make criminals of thousands of people in the European Union.
The Second Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive (IPRED2) -- set for vote in the European Parliament early next week -- makes "aiding, abetting, or inciting" intellectual property infringement on a "commercial scale" a criminal offence. However, IPRED2 defines criminal offences so vaguely that creators of legitimate websites, Internet service providers, and even librarians could be investigated by the police and face criminal records as well as fines of hundreds of thousands of euros.
The coalition battling against IPRED2 includes the Brussels-based European Consumers Organisation (BEUC), the European Bureau of Library, Information and Documentation Associations (EBLIDA), the Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE), and the Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII). The group sent an open letter to the European Parliament today, urging members to support amendments that would protect consumers, innovators, and researchers.
"Criminal law needs to be clear to be fair. IPRED2 as it is currently drafted is neither," said Erik Josefsson, European Affairs Coordinator for EFF. "These amendments clarify that criminal sanctions should be saved for true trademark counterfeiters."
IPRED2 also proposes allowing entertainment company representatives to join police in investigating businesses that they claim infringe -- or even "incite" infringement -- of their intellectual property.
"Such secondary liability is a major threat for software developers and Internet service providers," said Ante Wessels of FFII.
"The current draft of IPRED2 creates legal uncertainty and confusion, which will act as a barrier for libraries and archives in their efforts to digitize and bring digital information to end users," said Andrew Cranfield, Director of EBLIDA.
The next vote on IPRED2 is scheduled for April 25 in Strasbourg, France.
For the open letter to the European Parliament:
http://www.copycrime.eu/files/openletter-ipred.pdf
For more on IPRED2:
http://www.copycrime.eu
To take action and tell your MEP to support these amendments:
http://www.copycrime.eu/petition
For more on EFF Europe:
http://www.eff.org/global/europe
Contacts:
Erik Josefsson
European Affairs Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
erik@eff.org
Danny O'Brien
International Outreach Coordinator
Electronic Frontier Foundation
danny@eff.org
American Studios' Secret Plan to Lock Down European TV Devices
EFF Exposes Standards Jeopardizing Innovation and Consumer Rights
San Francisco - An international consortium of television and technology companies is devising draconian anti-consumer restrictions for the next generation of TVs in Europe and beyond, at the behest of American entertainment giants.
EFF Tackles New Role in Europe
EFF Europe Office Opens in Brussels
San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) opened a new office in Brussels today to work with various institutions of the European Union (EU) on innovation and digital rights, acting as a watchdog for the public interest in intellectual property and civil liberties policy initiatives that impact the European digital environment.
New Canadian Voice in Digital Rights Issues
Online Rights Canada Launches with EFF, CIPPIC Support
Toronto - Online Rights Canada (ORC) launched in Canada Friday, giving Canadians a new voice in critical technology and information policy issues. The grassroots organization is jointly supported by the Canadian Internet Policy & Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).
WIPO Lockout Inspires Global Protest
Residents of 56 Nations and Members of Hundreds of NGOs Sign Petition to Open Meetings on Intellectual Property and the Developing World
Geneva - When the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) earlier this month shut out many public interest groups from two April meetings about the impact of patent, copyright and related regimes on the developing world, many civil society groups greeted the news with concern.
WIPO Shutting Out Public Interest Organizations
Experts on Development Won't Be Heard at Crucial Meetings
Geneva - Last week, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) announced that it will shut out most public interest organizations at two important meetings devoted to intellectual property and development. As a result, WIPO delegates from 182 nations will discuss these issues without hearing from many of the world's best-qualified experts.
EFF Fights for Justice at WIPO
New "Pseudo Copyright" for Broadcasters Will Harm the Global Public Interest
Geneva - This week, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) will hold a committee meeting to debate the merits of its proposed "Treaty on the Protection of Broadcasting Organizations." The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) will be there to urge delegates to reject aspects of the treaty that would impoverish the public domain and thwart innovation.
WIPO Announces Plans to Support Public Domain, Open Source
Geneva - The United Nation's (UN) World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has adopted a "development agenda" that acknowledges the need for balance in worldwide policy on trademark, copyright, and patents. In the past, WIPO has been roundly resistant to attempts to balance the interests of copyright holders, who make up the majority of WIPO participants, and the public, which had never been represented at the meetings.
European Parliament Adopts Controversial IP Enforcement Directive
The European Parliament today voted to adopt an overbroad Directive on
Intellectual Property Enforcement that gives rightsholders powerful new
enforcement tools to use against intellectual property infringers. EFF
opposed the proposed Directive because it did not distinguish between
unintentional, non-commercial infringement by consumers and for-profit
criminal counterfeiting enterprises. "Under this Directive, a person who
unwittingly infringes copyright - even if it has no effect on the market -
could potentially have her assets seized, bank accounts frozen, and home
