#Terreg regulation: foreign censorship is today getting closer – radiobruxelleslibera
https://radiobruxelleslibera.com/2021/05/04/terreg-regulation-foreign-censor... (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))
"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 -- Giovanni Biscuolo Noi, incompetenti come siamo, non abbiamo alcun titolo per suggerire alcunché.
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/ ===================================================================== --
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
Buonasera, premetto solo che la proposta legislativa c.d. TERREG non era nemmeno nel mio radar, l'ho "scoperta" oggi grazie alla segnalazione di Juan Carlos... e ho fatto solo in tempo a leggere e comprendere di cosa si trattava, rimanendo BASITO dal fatto che mi pare si tratti della riproposizione della "Avia" da poco ritenuta incostituzionale dalla corte francese :-O Ho quindi deciso di aggiungere "al volo" qualche dettaglio senza però avere ancora avuto il tempo di approfondire, come sto facendo ora. Antonio Iacono <antiac@gmail.com> writes: [...]
la posizione del Consiglio è quella a cui faceva riferimento Giovanni.
Grazie mille Antonio per le ulteriori informazioni, voglio solo precisare che il documento del consiglio che ho indicato nel mio messaggio precedente l'ho preso dal link riportato nell'articolo di radiobruxelleslibera in oggetto, non l'ho recuperato io. [...] Questo è il contenuto del testo adottato dal Parlamento:
[1] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2021-0144_IT.html
Il final draft della proposta del COnsiglio mi pare questo: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_e... Aggiungo il briefing del 22 Aprile 2021 del Parlamento Europeo che fornisce qualche dettaglio sul contenuto: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/agenda/briefing/2021-04-26/7/terroris... --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- Briefing 22-04-2021 - 19:12 Newsletter - 26-29 April 2021 - plenary session Terrorist content online: final vote to ensure removal within one hour On Thursday, plenary is set to give its green light to new rules preventing the dissemination of terrorist content online. Internet platforms will have one hour to remove flagged content or disable access to it in all member states. This may be texts, images, sound recordings or videos that incite, solicit or contribute to terrorist offences, provide instructions for such offences or solicit people to participate in a terrorist group. In line with the definition included in the Directive on combating terrorism, it will also cover content providing guidance on how to make and use explosives, firearms and other weapons for terrorist purposes. Content uploaded for educational, journalistic, artistic or research purposes, or used to raise awareness, will be exempt. EP and Council negotiators also agreed that companies will not be obliged to monitor all the content they upload, and no automatic filters will be imposed. The new rules will apply 12 months after their entry into force. Procedure: ordinary legislative procedure, second reading agreement 2018/0331 (COD) Debate: Wednesday, 28 April Vote: Thursday, 29 April --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 3:56 PM Enrico Nardelli <nardelli@mat.uniroma2.it> wrote:
[...]
L'articolo di radiobruxelleslibera invece parla di un "via libera" del Parlamento Europeo in data 29 aprile.
La scheda web [2] dell'atto in oggetto, 2018/0331(COD), riporta il "Key events" e l'ultimo riportato è "29/04/2021 - Final act signed"
Prima domanda: "at first reading" implica che ci sarà una seconda lettura?
Lo status del provvedimento ad oggi indica "Status: Awaiting Parliament 2nd reading", si tratta di una procedura di tipo COD (COD - Ordinary legislative procedure (ex-codecision procedure": sono ignorante in procedura legislativa comunitaria e non ho idea di cosa questo significhi.
Seconda domanda: Forse nell'articolo con Parlamento si intendeva il Consiglio?
No, proprio il Parlamento
Insomma, la mia incertezza è: chi ha approvato cosa?
Il Parlamento ha approvato in prima lettura il documento 2018/0331(COD) in final draft; non ho idea /se/ quanto sintetizzato nell'articolo sia una interpretazione corretta del contenuto della proposta. Credo di capire che la definizione di contenuto illegale sia contenuta nella "Directive on combating terrorism" https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/IT/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32017L0541&fr... ...però sono ignorante in merito.
è un'approvazione definitiva?
Non mi pare, è prevista una seconda lettura in parlamento
Grazie a chiunque potrà fornirmi una spiegazione.
A me interesserebbe, indipendentemente dal fatto che la proposta sia ancora da approvare in seconda lettura, capire se l'interpretazione data nell'articolo è corretta, in particolare in merito alla vaghezza di cosa costituisce "propaganda terroristica". Grazie! Giovanni. [2] https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/ficheprocedure.do?lang=en...)
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...
[...] P.S. OT: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/IT/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32017L0541&fr... il punto g definisce atto terroristico «rilascio di sostanze pericolose o il cagionare incendi, inondazioni o esplosioni i cui effetti mettano in pericolo vite umane» e io non riesco a non pensare a qualche grande azienda... -- Giovanni Biscuolo Noi, incompetenti come siamo, non abbiamo alcun titolo per suggerire alcunché.
participants (4)
-
Antonio Iacono -
Enrico Nardelli -
Giovanni Biscuolo -
J.C. DE MARTIN