Il Parlamento ha approvato la "Risoluzione legislativa del Parlamento europeo del 28 aprile 2021 relativa alla posizione del Consiglio in prima lettura in vista dell'adozione del regolamento del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio relativo al contrasto della diffusione di contenuti terroristici online (14308/1/2020 – C9-0113/2021 – 2018/0331(COD))" [1] "Il Parlamento europeo, – vista la posizione del Consiglio in prima lettura (14308/1/2020 – C9-0113/2021), ..." la posizione del Consiglio è quella a cui faceva riferimento Giovanni. Antonio [1] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2021-0144_IT.html On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 3:56 PM Enrico Nardelli <nardelli@mat.uniroma2.it> wrote:
Giovanni
il documento che indichi alla fine ha come titolo "Position of the Council at first reading..." ed è appunto un documento del Consiglio della UE deliberato il 16 marzo.
L'articolo di radiobruxelleslibera invece parla di un "via libera" del Parlamento Europeo in data 29 aprile.
Prima domanda: "at first reading" implica che ci sarà una seconda lettura?
Seconda domanda: Forse nell'articolo con Parlamento si intendeva il Consiglio?
Insomma, la mia incertezza è: chi ha approvato cosa? è un'approvazione definitiva?
Grazie a chiunque potrà fornirmi una spiegazione.
Enrico
Il 08/05/2021 15:35, Giovanni Biscuolo ha scritto:
"J.C. DE MARTIN" <demartin@polito.it> writes:
https://radiobruxelleslibera.com/2021/05/04/terreg-regulation-foreign-censor...
Executive summary: l'articolo dice che TERREG [1] (REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on addressing the dissemination of terrorist content online - Adopted by the Council on 16 March 2021) è stato approvato dal Parlamento EU; TERREG permetterebbe agli organi di polizia nazionali di ordinare la rimozione dal web di qualsiasi contenuto ritenuto "propaganda terroristica", senza che sia un giudice ad ordinarlo.
For the records:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
Without making too much noise, on 29 April, 2021 the European Parliament gave the green light to the so-called TERREG regulation, i.e. the European legislation designed to counter the spread of terrorist content online through the EU. In practice, in order to prevent the dissemination of terrorist propaganda material via the Internet, Member States are authorized to impose the removal of such online content with an unusual speed: 1 (one) hour.
It could seem a proof of due efficiency in the face of the dangerousness of certain phenomena such as online terrorism, but if we then reflect on the application methods, the picture becomes obscure: the authority in charge of this function could also be simple police offices and the concept of “terrorist content” is by definition subjective and unclear. In other words, should a Member State appoint as Interior / Home Minister a political figure with sharp methods and even flexible ideas on the rule of law, the application of this regulation could become funcy. The TERREG applies not only to social platforms, but also to websites and simple blogs. To give an example taken from the concrete Italian news, if in certain circumstances a boat of illegal immigrants can be considered as a foreign invasion force by the Home Office, then even the definition of terrorism on the Internet could become a bit loose.
But the case can become even more complicated, because the TERREG regulation was also designed for transnational cases. In other words, the authority of any EU country may request the removal of online content (posts, publications) that are uploaded by a person having servers in another EU country. For example, the Italian judicial police could request the removal of content, published on a French site, which deal with attacks in Italy: it could be actual terrorist propaganda or a simple analysis of the Mitterand doctrine, however the initial judgment will probably be up to simple police offices, not even a judge. Examples do not stop there: a Hungarian ministry could ask an Italian provider to remove some content that shows Orban’s face with a Hitler mustache; or to cancel a speech by the billionaire Soros, who is not welcomed by the national government; or, finally, to close the page of an NGO that helps migrants in the Balkans. All contents that in Budapest, when the tension rises, could be labeled as “terrorists”.
In fact, there is no univocal normative definition to define a content as “terrorist propaganda” and it is objectively difficult to agree on a legislative definition. In the end, it will be the authority in charge of carrying out this assessment, while the authority of the country of destination (where the person who published the post in question is located) will probably be limited to acting as postman. In short, the phrase “there is mail for you” could in the future be a harbinger of real surprises for social platforms, websites or simple blogs, especially if a threatening letter from a Hungarian minister from Orban came out of the envelope. Also this blog could become a target, by the way.
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Saluti, Giovanni.
[1] https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-14308-2020-REV-1/en/pdf
_______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
-- EN
===================================================================== Prof. Enrico Nardelli Dipartimento di Matematica - Universita' di Roma "Tor Vergata" Via della Ricerca Scientifica snc - 00133 Roma tel: +39 06 7259.4204 fax: +39 06 7259.4699 mobile: +39 335 590.2331 e-mail: nardelli@mat.uniroma2.it home page: http://www.mat.uniroma2.it/~nardelli blog: http://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/blog/enardelli/ http://link-and-think.blogspot.it/ ===================================================================== -- _______________________________________________ nexa mailing list nexa@server-nexa.polito.it https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa