European justice ministers seem divided over industry costs from mandatory retention of communications traffic data, and likely won’t reach agreement at an Oct. 12 formal meeting, European Digital Rights (EDRI) said Thurs. Meeting informally Wed. and Thurs. in Newcastle, U.K., ministers heard from EuroISPA, European Telecom Network Operators’ Assn., GSM Europe and other industry groups, EDRI said: “Their response is not positive. Though they profusely claim utter willingness to fight any kind of crime, especially terrorism, they find most of the demands of the ministers completely unreasonable, such as registering location data during mobile communications and registering failed caller attempts.” U.K. Home Office Secretary Charles Clarke unnerved civil rights advocates by calling for a rethink of the 50-year-old European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Times have changed since the treaty was enacted, Clarke said Thurs. at a news briefing after the ministers’ meeting. The ECHR is very important but jurisprudence must acknowledge today’s world situation, he said. While his comments ostensibly referred to deporting people suspected of terrorism, he “obviously thought it was acceptable to attack the general principle of protecting citizens against their govts. by granting them inalienable minimum rights and freedoms,” EDRI said. European Justice Comr. Franco Frattini said yesterday he strongly backs a quick decision on data retention. “We cannot renounce now” a previous decision to harmonize data retention laws, he said. Dutch ISPs Thurs. urged Dutch and European Parliament members not to act until they've seen a long-awaited EC proposal for a data retention directive. The draft is said to be coming Sept. 21, although EDRI said an Oct. delivery is likelier. Late in Aug., the Dutch ISP Assn. (ISPO) told Frattini and Information Society & Media Comr. Viviane Reding it fears Internet industry concerns are being ignored in the rush toward data retention. Like many industry groups, ISPO complained about the lack of evidence supporting traffic data retention, and the effect such a law might have on ISP finances. ISPO also criticized the EC draft’s proposed “flexible list” of the types of Internet and telephony data to be held, saying it “will continuously be subjected to expansion.”
A storm of protest greeted a European Commission (EC) move to regulate online audiovisual (AV) services. The plan would apply the 1989 TV without Frontiers (TVWF) directive to Internet TV programming and “non-linear"(on- demand) services. But in comments submitted in advance of a major AV conference to occur later this month, telcos, ISPs and media groups panned the idea, saying it’s overkill and would hamper efforts to boost Europe’s economy.
Mandatory retention of Internet and telecom traffic data has “no place in an ordered society,” the Information Technology Assn. of America (ITAA) said Wed. With European justice and home affairs ministers set to discuss both the European Presidency/Council draft framework decision and a proposed European Commission (EC) directive today (Thurs.) in Newcastle, U.K., ITAA urged govts. to move toward a data preservation approach taken by the U.S. and other nations. However, it said, any mandatory retention scheme must blend the most acceptable parts of the 2 documents and be based on best existing business practices on duration of retention and definitions of information to be held. For much of the sector, those likely would include retention for 6-12 months of some basic voice communications traffic and for no more than 3 months of Internet Protocol address data. ITAA criticized both proposals for claiming to require retention only of such data as can be processed and stored without extra industry effort, saying the texts don’t reflect that. It reiterated industry claims that law enforcement agencies (LEAs) have all the access they need to communications data via close working relationships with telcos and ISPs. If a data retention law is coming, the group said, it must blend current business practices with a standardized preservation regime in a way appropriate to industry cases, LEA needs and privacy requirements. Data retention costs - and who pays them - have intensified an already heated debate. Both drafts are “welcome departures” from earlier texts because they begin to address retention cost reimbursement, ITAA said. However, it added, its comments “are in no way an endorsement of mandatory retention as a concept.” Despite massive opposition from industry, privacy advocates and many lawmakers, the U.K. Presidency aims to make data retention a reality this year. Home Secy. Charles Clarke Wed. urged European Parliament members (MEPs) to “look closely at the case that we put forward” for this and other antiterrorism measures. Clarke told MEPs voluntary retention of telecom data has been invaluable in the inquiry into the London bombings and other cases, and circulated a report citing examples. He dismissed cost concerns, saying, “In the U.K. we have successfully established a system in partnership with a major service provider to retain essential data for up to 12 months for the cost of 1.2 million [$1.5 million]. Compared to the average costs for forensic work on a single murder case of over 0.5 million [$622,000], that is an acceptable cost to bear.” “If the U.K. government considers its present voluntary program for data retention in the U.K. satisfactory, as evidenced by a Home Office report on the program to Parliament, why do the proposed measures of the latest Council draft framework decision from the Presidency not reflect the program’s definitions and principles?” ITAA asked.
LONDON - A European Commission (EC) plan for boosting productivity and growth may be the most practical arrangement available, but it’s unlikely to make Europe the world’s most competitive knowledge-based economy by 2010, many said here Tues. The “i2010” initiative aims to halt and reverse the Continent’s economic slide against competitors in the U.S., China and Korea by focusing on information & communications technology (ICT). But delegates at a packed U.K. Presidency/European Union conference Mon. first rejected 53%-47% and then stalemated on a motion endorsing i2010 as it stands as the best way to achieve that goal.
An “upstart” London-based TV channel aims to create a direct link between govt. agencies and public bodies and “willing” audiences. Information TV (ITV) -- which bills itself as a “new approach to public service broadcasting” -- transmits programs via broadcast and simulcast on U.K. environmental, health, science and technology, and education and skills issues, plus European cultural and educational topics. It carries its own programming and that of SoundTV, which provides entertainment shows and which will launch next month as a separate channel managed by ITV. The commercial channel is funded by content providers who pay to air programs. CEO Fred Perkins said he’s not interested in building mass audience but in catering to viewers looking for specific public-service information. But advertisers, too, are beginning to see the value in devoting a half-hour or hour to a product instead of fighting competitors on mainstream channels, he said. ITV also carries programming created by entrepreneurs who, for whatever reason, aren’t able to start their own channels. The TV industry should “wake up to convergence” and start satisfying consumer demand for content, Perkins said. Absence of exciting content is fuelling infringement, but piracy should be “a stimulant [to creativity] rather than a threat.” What’s more worrisome, he said, are sometimes “backward ideas” coming from Brussels. The European Union (EU) TV Without Frontiers directive and various moves toward regulating Internet content are bids to apply old-fashioned rules to a new TV arena, Perkins said. The danger is the EU will impose doctrines and laws that encourage, rather than discourage, piracy, he said.
Europe’s telecom industry would like to have a common position on retention of telephony and Internet traffic data when it meets in Sept. with justice and home affairs (JHA) ministers, said Sandro Bazzanella, dir.-EU affairs for the European Competitive Telecom Assn. At an informal Sept. 8-9 JHA Council event called by the U.K. Presidency, ministers, law enforcement officials and industry representatives will discuss the Council’s controversial draft framework decision on data retention, he said. It’s unclear whether the talks will include a proposed directive about to emerge from the European Commission (EC) as well. Communications services providers (CSPs) say data preservation, not retention, is the way to help law enforcement, claiming there’s no need to hold massive amounts of traffic data, Bazzanella said. But European CSPs seem divided on whether to harmonize national data retention laws with EU law, he said. In countries that have tough data retention rules, CSPs see harmonization as easing regulation. But in countries where CSPs and law enforcement cooperate smoothly even without data retention laws, providers fear a directive or framework decision could mean stiffer requirements, Bazzanella said. Italy, which boasts one of Europe’s strictest data retention regimes, recently enacted antiterrorism legislation that, among other things, requires all telephony providers to store traffic data until Dec. 31, 2007. Providers of public Internet access also must retain users’ data, said digital policy consultant Andrea Glorioso. ISPs must hold the data for at last 6 months, a period that can be extended 6 more months. The law mandates identification of mobile telephone users before service actually is activated, whether at the moment of the order or when the SIM is handed over, he said. Owners of Internet cafes and public telephone shops with at least 3 terminals must get permits within 30 days from local Ministry of Home Affairs representatives and store all customer traffic data. Wi- Fi points and locations that don’t store traffic data will have to demand users show identification, a practice already used at some Italian airport hotspots, Glorioso said. Legally, Bazzanelle said, the new provisions enable traffic data retention by outlawing relevant data protection provisions until the end of 2007. The law doesn’t contain specific rules for Internet traffic data, but calls for telephony providers to store all failed dial attempts, a stipulation whose high cost riles telcos. Ministers agreed, however, to hold a further debate on the costs and allocation of costs caused by the requirement, “while excluding any financial reimbursement by the State.” Glorioso said some provisions -- such as an obligation for Internet public points to hold user data -- aren’t “that bad,” but the public and private sectors “completely lack the necessary resources to put the law in practice.” Italian politicians often take a short-term approach, he said. With the 2006 elections near, pols seek “public visibility and emotional impact, not the practical viability of these measures. The Italian govt. was under pressure to act against terrorism before the Aug. parliamentary break, said Marco Berliri, a telecom attorney with Lovells in Rome. Because data retention at the EU level remains only a proposal, the govt. felt it needed an emergency law. But Berliri said the measure is a law decree, which will dissolve unless approved by Parliament.
The push for mandatory communications traffic data retention is killing industry and consumer confidence in the European Union (EU), 3 German industry groups said this week. Politicians aren’t adequately explaining the reasons for and benefits of holding Internet and telecom data, and their failure to assess the impact of such legislation is convincing citizens and businesses their concerns are being ignored, the organizations said. The Federation of German Industries (BDI), German Assn. for Information Technology, Telecoms & New Media (BITKOM) and German Carriers Assn. (VATM) disputed the need for mandatory retention and said any such obligation must be strictly limited.
A German high court ban on most preemptive tapping of phone calls, e-mail and other communications could empower opponents of retention of communications traffic data. The challenged state law, enacted by Lower Saxony, authorized police to eavesdrop on citizens and process cellphone traffic and location data, e-mails and SMS traffic even without suspicion of crime. But the Federal Constitutional Court held the law unconstitutional, saying preventive surveillance must be based on reasonable belief a specific crime is planned. At least one other state reportedly has such a law and others are said to be considering them.
Despite keen European Commission (EC) interest in wireless loops to close the last mile, use of the 5.8 GHz band that way is being delayed by concern over possible interference with military uses. There are “unsolved issues related to the protection of military radar, which is why this band has not made the same progress in Europe in comparison” with 2 other unlicensed bands recently freed to spur Wi-Fi development, said Andreas Geiss of the EC’s Information Society Directorate-General radio spectrum policy unit. “Member states have very contradicting views as to the possibilities to use this band for broadband wireless access [BWA].”
The European Commission (EC) this week freed unlicensed radio spectrum in advance of an expected wave of new Wi-Fi applications. The move to make 2 frequency bands available in all member states for wireless access requires use of “intelligent” techniques to avoid interference with other users, especially military radar and satellite services, in the frequencies. Some say problems of uneven quality and lingering shortages would be solved better by licensed spectrum made available by wireless access platforms for electronic communications services (WAPECS).