June 2016 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Re: [nexa] EU warns governments against banning Uber and Airbnb

by Stefano Quintarelli

anzi no, sbagliavo. "or service providers acting in their professional capacity". questo imho e' un pasticcio. per che' tali soggetti sono gia' regolamentati e facendoli ricadere in una categoria nuova, IMHO si crea confusione. si estendono le regole dei professional ai private individuals ? o si estende dai private individuals ai professional ? boh On 03/06/2016 08:58, Stefano Quintarelli wrote: > sembra precisa precisa la definizione di sharing economy che abbiamo > proposto nella nostra proposta di legge. > > On 02/06/2016 23:36, Alberto Cammozzo wrote: >> Ma la Commissione si riferisce davvero a Uber? >> >> La Commissione definisce la "collaborative economy" come "activities are >> facilitated by collaborative platforms that create an open marketplace >> for the temporary usage of goods or services often provided by private >> individuals" , e i providers sono 'private individuals offering >> services on an occasional basis (‘peers’) or service providers acting in >> their professional capacity ("professional services providers");' >> Ora, nel caso di Uber è assai dubbio che i "contractor" rientrino tra i >> "peers". >> Sono diverse le corti che si occupano dela questione , e dovrebbe >> esserci anche un procedimento spagnolo presso ECJ (anche se non ne trovo >> traccia su curia.europa.eu ma solo su Reuters): se sia un "mere >> transport service" o un digital service. >> >> Mi chiedo: cosa fa pensare la stampa che la Commissione considererebbe >> Uber una "collaborative platform"? >> >> Ciao, >> >> Alberto >> >> >> On 02/06/2016 14:18, Andrea Glorioso wrote: >>> Caro Stefano, >>> >>> Non sono certo di aver capito io cosa non hai capito tu :) ma la >>> "novità" è che la Commissione Europea ha detto agli Stati Membri di >>> darsi una calmata con gli istinti protezionisti e che esiste una cosa >>> chiamata libera concorrenza nel mercato interno... >>> >>> Personalmente sono d'accordo che non sia una novità che la Commissione >>> Europea ricordi agli Stati Membri che esistono principi e regole, ma >>> per alcuni il concetto non era e non è chiarissimo. >>> >>> O forse ho capito male io la tua domanda? >>> >>> Andrea >>> >>> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016, Stefano Quintarelli >>> <Stefano(a)quintarelli.it <mailto:Stefano@quintarelli.it>> wrote: >>> >>> Non è che abbia capito quale sia la novità... >>> >>> >>> Il 1 giugno 2016 11:40:02 Fabio Chiusi <fabiochiusi(a)yahoo.it> ha >>> scritto: >>> >>> >>> http://venturebeat.com/2016/05/31/eu-warns-governments-against-banning-uber… >>> >>> >>> >>> F. >>> >>> >>> Inviato da iPhone >>> >>> >>> ---------- >>> _______________________________________________ >>> nexa mailing list >>> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >>> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> nexa mailing list >>> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >>> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> -- >>> I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. >>> Keep it in mind. >>> Twitter: @andreaglorioso >>> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso >>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> nexa mailing list >>> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >>> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >> >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >> > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa

June 3, 2016

Re: [nexa] EU warns governments against banning Uber and Airbnb

by Stefano Quintarelli

sembra precisa precisa la definizione di sharing economy che abbiamo proposto nella nostra proposta di legge. On 02/06/2016 23:36, Alberto Cammozzo wrote: > Ma la Commissione si riferisce davvero a Uber? > > La Commissione definisce la "collaborative economy" come "activities are > facilitated by collaborative platforms that create an open marketplace > for the temporary usage of goods or services often provided by private > individuals" , e i providers sono 'private individuals offering > services on an occasional basis (‘peers’) or service providers acting in > their professional capacity ("professional services providers");' > Ora, nel caso di Uber è assai dubbio che i "contractor" rientrino tra i > "peers". > Sono diverse le corti che si occupano dela questione , e dovrebbe > esserci anche un procedimento spagnolo presso ECJ (anche se non ne trovo > traccia su curia.europa.eu ma solo su Reuters): se sia un "mere > transport service" o un digital service. > > Mi chiedo: cosa fa pensare la stampa che la Commissione considererebbe > Uber una "collaborative platform"? > > Ciao, > > Alberto > > > On 02/06/2016 14:18, Andrea Glorioso wrote: >> Caro Stefano, >> >> Non sono certo di aver capito io cosa non hai capito tu :) ma la >> "novità" è che la Commissione Europea ha detto agli Stati Membri di >> darsi una calmata con gli istinti protezionisti e che esiste una cosa >> chiamata libera concorrenza nel mercato interno... >> >> Personalmente sono d'accordo che non sia una novità che la Commissione >> Europea ricordi agli Stati Membri che esistono principi e regole, ma >> per alcuni il concetto non era e non è chiarissimo. >> >> O forse ho capito male io la tua domanda? >> >> Andrea >> >> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016, Stefano Quintarelli >> <Stefano(a)quintarelli.it <mailto:Stefano@quintarelli.it>> wrote: >> >> Non è che abbia capito quale sia la novità... >> >> >> Il 1 giugno 2016 11:40:02 Fabio Chiusi <fabiochiusi(a)yahoo.it> ha >> scritto: >> >> http://venturebeat.com/2016/05/31/eu-warns-governments-against-banning-uber… >> >> >> F. >> >> >> Inviato da iPhone >> >> >> ---------- >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >> >> >> >> -- >> >> -- >> I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. >> Keep it in mind. >> Twitter: @andreaglorioso >> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso >> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >

June 3, 2016

Re: [nexa] EU warns governments against banning Uber and Airbnb

by Alemanno

La causa citata ma non identificata è C-345/15 Asociación Profesional Élite Taxi v Uber Systems Spain, S.L. Request for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado Mercantil No 3 de Barcelona (Spain) lodged on 7 August 2015 — Asociación Profesional Élite Taxi v Uber Systems Spain, S.L. Questions referred Inasmuch as Article 2(2)(d) of Directive 2006/123/EC 1 <http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=170871&pageI…> of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market excludes transport activities from the scope of that directive, must the activity carried out for profit by the defendant, consisting of acting as an intermediary between the owner of a vehicle and a person who needs to make a journey within a city, by managing the IT resources — in the words of the defendant, ‘intelligent telephone and technological platform’ interface and software application — which enable them to connect with one another, be considered to be merely a transport service or must it be considered to be an electronic intermediary service or an information society service, as defined by Article 1(2) of Directive 98/34/EC 2 <http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=170871&pageI…> of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations and of rules on Information Society services? Within the identification of the legal nature of that activity[,] can it be considered to be … in part an information society service, and, if so, ought the electronic intermediary service to benefit from the principle of freedom to provide services as guaranteed in the Community legislation — Article 56 TFEU and Directives 2006/123/EC and … 2000/31/ EC? 3 <http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=170871&pageI…> If the service provided by UBER SYSTEMS SPAIN, S.L. were not to be considered to be a transport service and were therefore considered to fall within the cases covered by Directive 2006/123, the question arising is whether Article 15 of the Law on Unfair competition — concerning the infringement of rules governing competitive activity — is contrary to Directive 2006/123, specifically Article 9 on freedom of establishment and authorisation schemes, when the reference to national laws or legal provisions is made without taking into account the fact that the scheme for obtaining licences, authorisations and permits may not be in any way restrictive or disproportionate, that is, it may not unreasonably impede the principle of freedom of establishment. If it is confirmed that Directive 2000/31/EC is applicable to the service provided by UBER SYSTEMS SPAIN, S.L., the question arising is whether restrictions in one Member State [regarding] the freedom to provide the electronic intermediary service from another Member State, in the form of making the service subject to an authorisation or a licence, or in the form of an injunction prohibiting provision of the electronic intermediary service based on the application of the national legislation on unfair competition, are valid measures that constitute derogations from paragraph 2 in accordance with Article 3(4) of Directive 2000/31/EC. ____________ 1 <> OJ 2006 L 376, p. 36. 2 <> OJ 1998 L 204, p. 37. 3 <> Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (‘Directive on electronic commerce’) (OJ 2000 L 178, p. 1). > On 2 juin 2016, at 23:36, Alberto Cammozzo <ac+nexa(a)zeromx.net> wrote: > > Ma la Commissione si riferisce davvero a Uber? > > La Commissione definisce la "collaborative economy" come "activities are > facilitated by collaborative platforms that create an open marketplace > for the temporary usage of goods or services often provided by private > individuals" , e i providers sono 'private individuals offering > services on an occasional basis (‘peers’) or service providers acting in > their professional capacity ("professional services providers");' > Ora, nel caso di Uber è assai dubbio che i "contractor" rientrino tra i > "peers". > Sono diverse le corti che si occupano dela questione , e dovrebbe > esserci anche un procedimento spagnolo presso ECJ (anche se non ne trovo > traccia su curia.europa.eu ma solo su Reuters): se sia un "mere > transport service" o un digital service. > > Mi chiedo: cosa fa pensare la stampa che la Commissione considererebbe > Uber una "collaborative platform"? > > Ciao, > > Alberto > > > On 02/06/2016 14:18, Andrea Glorioso wrote: >> Caro Stefano, >> >> Non sono certo di aver capito io cosa non hai capito tu :) ma la >> "novità" è che la Commissione Europea ha detto agli Stati Membri di >> darsi una calmata con gli istinti protezionisti e che esiste una cosa >> chiamata libera concorrenza nel mercato interno... >> >> Personalmente sono d'accordo che non sia una novità che la Commissione >> Europea ricordi agli Stati Membri che esistono principi e regole, ma >> per alcuni il concetto non era e non è chiarissimo. >> >> O forse ho capito male io la tua domanda? >> >> Andrea >> >> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016, Stefano Quintarelli >> <Stefano(a)quintarelli.it <mailto:Stefano@quintarelli.it>> wrote: >> >> Non è che abbia capito quale sia la novità... >> >> >> Il 1 giugno 2016 11:40:02 Fabio Chiusi <fabiochiusi(a)yahoo.it> ha >> scritto: >> >> http://venturebeat.com/2016/05/31/eu-warns-governments-against-banning-uber… >> >> >> F. >> >> >> Inviato da iPhone >> >> >> ---------- >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >> >> >> >> -- >> >> -- >> I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. >> Keep it in mind. >> Twitter: @andreaglorioso >> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso >> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa

June 3, 2016

Re: [nexa] EU warns governments against banning Uber and Airbnb

by J.C. DE MARTIN

Chiosa a margine: a pensarci bene forse per tanto tempo abbiamo criminalizzato ingiustamente il "caporalato". Dopo tutto il "caporale" svolgeva la nobile e socialmente utile funzione di mettere in contatto domanda e offerta in un ambito fondamentale come quello del "mercato del lavoro"*. Se rivalutiamo il "caporale", il passo alle app è brevissimo: è chiaro che usare app, infatti, è molto più efficiente (e anche più elegante) di andare all'alba in piazza con un camion. Pensiamoci. ciao, juan carlos *virgolette in omaggio a Karl Polanyi. On 02/06/16 23:36, Alberto Cammozzo wrote: > Ma la Commissione si riferisce davvero a Uber? > > La Commissione definisce la "collaborative economy" come "activities are > facilitated by collaborative platforms that create an open marketplace > for the temporary usage of goods or services often provided by private > individuals" , e i providers sono 'private individuals offering > services on an occasional basis (‘peers’) or service providers acting in > their professional capacity ("professional services providers");' > Ora, nel caso di Uber è assai dubbio che i "contractor" rientrino tra i > "peers". > Sono diverse le corti che si occupano dela questione , e dovrebbe > esserci anche un procedimento spagnolo presso ECJ (anche se non ne trovo > traccia su curia.europa.eu ma solo su Reuters): se sia un "mere > transport service" o un digital service. > > Mi chiedo: cosa fa pensare la stampa che la Commissione considererebbe > Uber una "collaborative platform"? > > Ciao, > > Alberto > > > On 02/06/2016 14:18, Andrea Glorioso wrote: >> Caro Stefano, >> >> Non sono certo di aver capito io cosa non hai capito tu :) ma la >> "novità" è che la Commissione Europea ha detto agli Stati Membri di >> darsi una calmata con gli istinti protezionisti e che esiste una cosa >> chiamata libera concorrenza nel mercato interno... >> >> Personalmente sono d'accordo che non sia una novità che la Commissione >> Europea ricordi agli Stati Membri che esistono principi e regole, ma >> per alcuni il concetto non era e non è chiarissimo. >> >> O forse ho capito male io la tua domanda? >> >> Andrea >> >> On Wednesday, June 1, 2016, Stefano Quintarelli >> <Stefano(a)quintarelli.it <mailto:Stefano@quintarelli.it>> wrote: >> >> Non è che abbia capito quale sia la novità... >> >> >> Il 1 giugno 2016 11:40:02 Fabio Chiusi <fabiochiusi(a)yahoo.it> ha >> scritto: >> >> http://venturebeat.com/2016/05/31/eu-warns-governments-against-banning-uber… >> >> >> F. >> >> >> Inviato da iPhone >> >> >> ---------- >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >> >> >> >> -- >> >> -- >> I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. >> Keep it in mind. >> Twitter: @andreaglorioso >> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso >> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa

June 3, 2016

Re: [nexa] EU warns governments against banning Uber and Airbnb

by Andrea Glorioso

Perché i "contractors" di Uber non sarebbero "peers", precisamente? Scusa ma non capisco bene la questione che sollevi. On Thursday, June 2, 2016, Alberto Cammozzo <ac+nexa(a)zeromx.net> wrote: > Ma la Commissione si riferisce davvero a Uber? > > La Commissione definisce la "collaborative economy" come "activities are > facilitated by collaborative platforms that create an open marketplace > for the temporary usage of goods or services often provided by private > individuals" , e i providers sono 'private individuals offering > services on an occasional basis (‘peers’) or service providers acting in > their professional capacity ("professional services providers");' > Ora, nel caso di Uber è assai dubbio che i "contractor" rientrino tra i > "peers". > Sono diverse le corti che si occupano dela questione , e dovrebbe > esserci anche un procedimento spagnolo presso ECJ (anche se non ne trovo > traccia su curia.europa.eu ma solo su Reuters): se sia un "mere > transport service" o un digital service. > > Mi chiedo: cosa fa pensare la stampa che la Commissione considererebbe > Uber una "collaborative platform"? > > Ciao, > > Alberto > > > On 02/06/2016 14:18, Andrea Glorioso wrote: > > Caro Stefano, > > > > Non sono certo di aver capito io cosa non hai capito tu :) ma la > > "novità" è che la Commissione Europea ha detto agli Stati Membri di > > darsi una calmata con gli istinti protezionisti e che esiste una cosa > > chiamata libera concorrenza nel mercato interno... > > > > Personalmente sono d'accordo che non sia una novità che la Commissione > > Europea ricordi agli Stati Membri che esistono principi e regole, ma > > per alcuni il concetto non era e non è chiarissimo. > > > > O forse ho capito male io la tua domanda? > > > > Andrea > > > > On Wednesday, June 1, 2016, Stefano Quintarelli > > <Stefano(a)quintarelli.it <javascript:;> <mailto:Stefano@quintarelli.it > <javascript:;>>> wrote: > > > > Non è che abbia capito quale sia la novità... > > > > > > Il 1 giugno 2016 11:40:02 Fabio Chiusi <fabiochiusi(a)yahoo.it > <javascript:;>> ha > > scritto: > > > > > http://venturebeat.com/2016/05/31/eu-warns-governments-against-banning-uber… > > > > > > F. > > > > > > Inviato da iPhone > > > > > > ---------- > > _______________________________________________ > > nexa mailing list > > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it <javascript:;> > > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > nexa mailing list > > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it <javascript:;> > > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > > > > > > > > -- > > > > -- > > I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. > > Keep it in mind. > > Twitter: @andreaglorioso > > Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso > > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > nexa mailing list > > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it <javascript:;> > > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it <javascript:;> > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > -- -- I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep it in mind. Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro

June 3, 2016

Re: [nexa] EU warns governments against banning Uber and Airbnb

by Alberto Cammozzo

Ma la Commissione si riferisce davvero a Uber? La Commissione definisce la "collaborative economy" come "activities are facilitated by collaborative platforms that create an open marketplace for the temporary usage of goods or services often provided by private individuals" , e i providers sono 'private individuals offering services on an occasional basis (‘peers’) or service providers acting in their professional capacity ("professional services providers");' Ora, nel caso di Uber è assai dubbio che i "contractor" rientrino tra i "peers". Sono diverse le corti che si occupano dela questione , e dovrebbe esserci anche un procedimento spagnolo presso ECJ (anche se non ne trovo traccia su curia.europa.eu ma solo su Reuters): se sia un "mere transport service" o un digital service. Mi chiedo: cosa fa pensare la stampa che la Commissione considererebbe Uber una "collaborative platform"? Ciao, Alberto On 02/06/2016 14:18, Andrea Glorioso wrote: > Caro Stefano, > > Non sono certo di aver capito io cosa non hai capito tu :) ma la > "novità" è che la Commissione Europea ha detto agli Stati Membri di > darsi una calmata con gli istinti protezionisti e che esiste una cosa > chiamata libera concorrenza nel mercato interno... > > Personalmente sono d'accordo che non sia una novità che la Commissione > Europea ricordi agli Stati Membri che esistono principi e regole, ma > per alcuni il concetto non era e non è chiarissimo. > > O forse ho capito male io la tua domanda? > > Andrea > > On Wednesday, June 1, 2016, Stefano Quintarelli > <Stefano(a)quintarelli.it <mailto:Stefano@quintarelli.it>> wrote: > > Non è che abbia capito quale sia la novità... > > > Il 1 giugno 2016 11:40:02 Fabio Chiusi <fabiochiusi(a)yahoo.it> ha > scritto: > > http://venturebeat.com/2016/05/31/eu-warns-governments-against-banning-uber… > > > F. > > > Inviato da iPhone > > > ---------- > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > > > > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > > > > -- > > -- > I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. > Keep it in mind. > Twitter: @andreaglorioso > Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro > > > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa

June 2, 2016

Irish Data Protection Authority to Refer Legality of Model Clauses to CJEU

by Alberto Cammozzo

With the Privacy Shield on hold, EU Model Clauses are the principal legal means under which personal data transfers from Europe to the US are occurring. However, those too are under attack by privacy advocates. On May 25, 2016, the Irish Data Protection Authority issued a press release stating its intention to seek declaratory relief in the Irish High Court and a referral to the CJEU to determine the legal status of data transfers under Standard Contractual Clauses. At issue is the continued mass surveillance by the U.S. government, the same basis on which the Safe Harbor arrangement was struck down. [...] <http://blogs.dlapiper.com/privacymatters/irish-data-protection-authority-to…>

June 2, 2016

Lunedì di Ermes - Spettro radio e 5G: criticità e sfide

by ermes＠unina.it

Chiarissimi professori e gentili colleghi, Ho piacere di invitarVi per conto del Direttore del Centro Ermes (Centro Europeo di Ricerca sui Media per la Società dell'Informazione), prof.ssa Giovanna De Minico, al terzo dei 'Lunedì di Ermes', su 'Spettro radio e 5G: criticità e sfide', il 6 giugno 2016, ore 15.00, al Dipartimento di Giurisprudenza dell'Università Federico II di Napoli, corso Umberto I, 40, in Aula Guarino. Si confronteranno in un seminario informale due ingegneri, prof. L. Paura e dott.ssa A.S. Cacciapuoti, e una giurista, dott.ssa M. Avvisati. Per ulteriori informazioni, rinvio al programma su http://www.ermes.unina.it/index.php/it/ o Vi invito a contattarci all'indirizzo ermes(a)unina.it. Con l'occasione, segnalo che nella sezione 'progetti' del sito www.ermes.unina.it sono disponibili riprese audio integrali e materiali di approfondimento dei precedenti incontri. Cordialmente, Maria Francesca De Tullio

June 2, 2016

Quadrature: "DIRECTIVE ON TERRORISM: THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AGAINST OUR FREEDOMS"

by J.C. DE MARTIN

* Press Release TAGS : SURVEILLANCE, NET FILTERING, TERRORISM, MONIKA HOHLMEIER La Quadrature du Net -- For immediate release Permanent link: https://www.laquadrature.net/en/terrorisme-directive-european-parliament-ag… [1] DIRECTIVE ON TERRORISM: THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AGAINST OUR FREEDOMS Paris, 1st June 2016 -- Far from the French and European media spotlights, a draft directive on terrorism [2] is being discussed at the European Parliament and will be voted on 15 June. This directive, aiming to frame the European counter-terrorism policies and laws, is crucial for Europeans to enjoy their fundamental rights. But the current political discussions and negotiations would lead to widespread fiasco on freedoms and to an alignment of the worst policies violating civil rights, especially on the Internet, through censorship and surveillance. Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) must redress the balance and strengthen the safeguards provided for the European citizens. The draft [3] directive on terrorism was presented in December 2015 by the European Commission. Initially, it was aiming at giving collective definitions and an harmonised framework to ease the cooperation between countries in the fight against terrorism and against its financing and to provide assistance to victims. However, under the authority of the rapporteur Monika Hohlmeier [4] (EPP - DE1 [5]), and with the support or pressures of governments (especially French government), the text become more stricter at the European Parliament and is heading towards a framework for the whole European Union where the fight against terrorism will pick up from everything La Quadrature du Net has been denouncing in France for 2 years: censorship of websites, attacks against encryption and right to privacy, heavy electronic surveillance and lack of safeguards for civil rights. AT WHICH POINT ARE THE DISCUSSIONS AT THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT? The text will be voted by the Committee on Civil Liberties (LIBE [6]) on 15 June. This vote is crucial, it is where that the almost final version of the text will be adopted. The amendments currently in discussion need to be inspected every day to see where the provisions get better or worse. The power balance is bad for civil rights advocates. * the rapporteur Monika Hohlmeier [4] (EPP - DE) supports since the beginning a hard line, continually strengthening surveillance and censorship measures; * the social-democrat left (S&D), represented by the shadow [7] rapporteur Caterina Chinnici [8] (S&D - IT), is in a wait-and-see approach. France is pressuring French socialist MEPs to endorse all the provisions tabled by the right-wing group and the rapporteur doesn't seem to have any intention to oppose the serious infringement of rights in the text; * the centrist group (ALDE) carries a tradition of protecting civil rights at the European Parliament. To us , the shadow rapporteur Petr Jezek [9] (ALDE - CZ) seems too shy and needs to get more involved against the EPP - S&D security alliance; * on the Greens side, Eva Joly [10] (Greens/EFA - FR) knows as a determined opponent to the French Surveillance Law and whose political family opposed attacks on freedom of speech and surveillance, seem to be off topic and does not oppose the worst provisions of the text. We need her political group to take hold of the position for the Greens; * only Cornelia Ernst [11] (GUE/NGL - DE) is clearly opposed to the provisions of the text and is in favour of the defence of civil rights. The situation is fragile: because of the moral and media pressure of the terrorist risk, because of the pressure from governments (France in particular) who want to cover their existing legislation in that directive, the text is about to create a sort of umbrella legislation too wide and not enough protective, and yet still targeting the Internet and fundamental rights. WHICH MEASURES OF THIS DRAFT DIRECTIVE ARE TARGETED BY LA QUADRATURE ? La Quadrature du Net focused specifically on the compromise amendments2 [12] currently discussed. They affect fundamental rights on the Internet and in electronic communications. Therefore, this is not the whole the directive. CONCERNING THE INFRINGEMENT OF FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION The compromise amendments 6 [13] (recital 7a and article 14a) aims to establish all "measures to block access to webpages publicly inciting to commit terrorist offences". It clearly opens the door to websites blocking, which is a heavy infringement of freedom of speech and freedom of information. And this without being actually efficient to fight terrorism, as the French experience shows [14] since its implementation 18 months ago. The text of the amendment does not foresee either any guarantee of effective lega appeal nor any framing of this censorship by a judge. This brings the European text closer to the French legislative framework and because other European countries are ordered to apply these measures, it will make them fall into the same trap: non-transparent censorship, non-existing guarantees, marginal results. In addition to encourage this kind of measures for Europe, when they were only a French exception so far, MEPs suggest also that companies should be held for responsible if they do not cooperate by deleting content or blocking websites3 [15]. The last versions of the text required that websites remove all the content following a request, without any guarantee, under penalty of prosecutions. This is simply a destruction of the fragile balance between responsibility of online content and fundamental rights4 [16]. ON ENCRYPTION AND ELECTRONIC EVIDENCES The compromise amendment 10 establishing a recital 15b deals with cooperation between Member States, Eurojust and Europol to collect, share and make admissible electronic evidence5 [17], which means that it applies to investigations and surveillance over networks. Now the text is too vague. If cooperation between Member States can only be encouraged, the current text is too vague. The amendments tabled by the rapporteur at the beginning of the study of the text explicitly quoted Tor, VPNs and other privacy protection tools as obstacles to investigations. If these tools are no longer explicitly mentioned, it promises dangerous future provisions. At a minimum, we should support these provisions with a clear definition of the right to respect for privacy and the right to confidentiality of electronic communications, reasserting the right to [18] encryption, the right to anonymity and the right to use pseudonyms (see proposal [19] La Quadrature du Net on surveillance). ON NOTIONS OF ASSISTANCE AND COMPLICITY The compromise amendment 4 concerns the assistance and complicity to perpetration of terrorist infractions. Especially, recital 11 and article 16 are not sufficiently clear on the notion of intention, leaving a large leeway for interpretations. Knowing that tools, in particular encryption tools, can be used by terrorists cannot be sufficient to turn those who make and share those tools into accomplices. It is absolutely necessary to clarify the notion of complicity and implies that the accomplice has the intention to give an assistance to the person directly involved with the infraction. What would become a person that published a encrypted chat service? What kind of responsibility is foreseen for a service such as Tor? LA QUADRATURE DU NET REGRETS THE ESCALATION OF PROPOSALS APPROVING INTERNET CENSORSHIP AND EXTREMELY INVASIVE SURVEILLANCE MEASURES WITHOUT ANY SAFEGUARDS. BY NATURE, THIS TEXT WILL BE USED AS A FRAMEWORK AND GOAL FOR ALL COUNTRIES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. IT SHOULD THEREFORE BE STRICTLY CONTROLLED TO PREVENT ANY DEVIATION AND ANY ESCALATION OF SURVEILLANCE INFRINGING FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS, PILLAR OF THE VALUES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. _"IT IS ESSENTIAL FOR MEPS OF THE LIBE COMMITTEE TO RESTRICT THE APPETITE FOR SECURITY OF THE RAPPORTEUR HOHLMEIER AND TO RESIST THE WISHES OF COUNTRIES ALREADY ENGAGED IN THIS SPIRAL, LIKE FRANCE, WHO THUS SEEK TO VALIDATE THEIR DANGEROUS STRATEGIES "_ says Agnès de Cornulier, in charge of legal and political analysis at La Quadrature du Net. Read our analysis [20] of the next of the directive on our wiki. Follow compromise amendments [13] on our wiki. * 1. [21] Usually MEPs are represented by the political group they belong to [22], here the EPP, and by their Member State, here Germany * 2. [23] Once the rapporteur presented his/her report (it means the amendments he/she wants to submit to the vote) each MEPs is allowed to submit amendments to the text too. Then after several meetings between the rapporteur and the shadow rapporteurs, lead away from prying ears, the rapporteur presents the compromise amendments but without publishing the different versions and saying a word about the negotiations. This leave the field free to undemocratic practices. * 3. [24] This provision was proposed by Rachida Dati during the preparation of her report [25] about terrorism which was adopted by the European Parliament on 3 November 2015 * 4. [26] Meanwhile the European ombudsman publicly worries about the opacity of the discussions between governments, EUROPOL and big internet companies within the_Internet Forum_ define the rules of the fight against hate speech outside any legal framework and without inviting the civil society. This was denounced by EDRI [27] * 5. [28] Written evidence is, according to the French Law [29], defined as resulting "a sequence of letters, characters, numbers or any other signs or symbols endowed with an intelligible meaning, whatever their support and transmission procedure". The evidence is used to show the validity of an agreement, a charge, etc. The written proof includes electronic evidence ABOUT LA QUADRATURE DU NET La Quadrature du Net is an advocacy group that defends the rights and freedoms of citizens on the Internet. More specifically, it advocates for the adaptation of French and European legislations to respect the founding principles of the Internet, most notably the free circulation of knowledge. > In addition to its advocacy work, the group also aims to foster a better understanding of legislative processes among citizens. Through specific and pertinent information and tools, La Quadrature du Net hopes to encourage citizens' participation in the public debate on rights and freedoms in the digital age. La Quadrature du Net is supported by French, European and international NGOs including the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Open Society Institute and Privacy International. List of supporting organisations: https://www.laquadrature.net/en/they-support-la-quadrature-du-net [30] PRESS CONTACT AND PRESS ROOM contact(a)laquadrature.net - +33 (0)972 294 426 https://www.laquadrature.net/en/press-room [31] _To unsubscribe, click here [32]_ _La Quadrature du Net 60, rue des Orteaux Paris, 75020 _ Links: ------ [1]https://www.laquadrature.net/en/terrorisme-directive-european-parliament-… [2]http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1464696371949&uri=CELEX:52015PC0625 [3]http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52015PC0625&rid=1 [4]http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/96780/MONIKA_HOHLMEIER_home.html [5]https://www.laquadrature.net/en/terrorisme-directive-european-parliament-… [6]http://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/libe/home.html [7]https://wiki.laquadrature.net/Glossaire#Shadow_rapporteur [8]http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/124861/CATERINA_CHINNICI_home.html [9]http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/124707/PETR_JEZEK_home.html [10]http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/96883/EVA_JOLY_home.html [11]http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/96852/CORNELIA_ERNST_home.html [12]https://www.laquadrature.net/en/terrorisme-directive-european-parliament… [13]https://wiki.laquadrature.net/Directive_Terrorisme/Amendements_LIBE/en [14]https://wiki.laquadrature.net/Directive_Terrorisme/en#Net_censorship_and… [15]https://www.laquadrature.net/en/terrorisme-directive-european-parliament… [16]https://www.laquadrature.net/en/terrorisme-directive-european-parliament… [17]https://www.laquadrature.net/en/terrorisme-directive-european-parliament… [18]https://blogs.mediapart.fr/edition/libres-enfants-du-numerique/article/050215/le-droit-lanonymat-et-au-chiffrement [19]https://www.laquadrature.net/fr/node/9519 [20]https://wiki.laquadrature.net/Directive_Terrorisme/en [21]https://www.laquadrature.net/en/terrorisme-directive-european-parliament… [22]http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/hemicycle.html [23]https://www.laquadrature.net/en/terrorisme-directive-european-parliament… [24]https://www.laquadrature.net/en/terrorisme-directive-european-parliament… [25]https://www.laquadrature.net/en/mep-committee-libe-dati-report [26]https://www.laquadrature.net/en/terrorisme-directive-european-parliament… [27]https://edri.org/commission-under-investigation-eu-internet-forum/ [28]https://www.laquadrature.net/en/terrorisme-directive-european-parliament… [29]https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCode.do?idSectionTA=LEGISCTA000006165596&cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006070721 [30]https://www.laquadrature.net/en/they-support-la-quadrature-du-net [31]https://www.laquadrature.net/en/press-room [32]http://www.laquadrature.net/civicrm/mailing/optout?reset=1&jid=186&qid=6…

June 2, 2016

Re: [nexa] EU warns governments against banning Uber and Airbnb

by Andrea Glorioso

Caro Stefano, Non sono certo di aver capito io cosa non hai capito tu :) ma la "novità" è che la Commissione Europea ha detto agli Stati Membri di darsi una calmata con gli istinti protezionisti e che esiste una cosa chiamata libera concorrenza nel mercato interno... Personalmente sono d'accordo che non sia una novità che la Commissione Europea ricordi agli Stati Membri che esistono principi e regole, ma per alcuni il concetto non era e non è chiarissimo. O forse ho capito male io la tua domanda? Andrea On Wednesday, June 1, 2016, Stefano Quintarelli <Stefano(a)quintarelli.it> wrote: > Non è che abbia capito quale sia la novità... > > > Il 1 giugno 2016 11:40:02 Fabio Chiusi <fabiochiusi(a)yahoo.it> ha scritto: > > >> http://venturebeat.com/2016/05/31/eu-warns-governments-against-banning-uber… >> >> >> F. >> >> >> Inviato da iPhone >> >> >> ---------- >> _______________________________________________ >> nexa mailing list >> nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it >> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > nexa mailing list > nexa(a)server-nexa.polito.it > https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa > -- -- I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep it in mind. Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro

June 2, 2016