"retention & online search: how current challenges for privacy become new threats for...
DESCRIPTION
On 8-9 June 2012, NGO Internews, with the support of the Annenberg School for Communication of Pennsylvania University and USAID, organised a “Conference on Internet Governance, Policy and Regulation” in Sarajevo (Bosnia-Herzegovina). Cedric Laurant presented some of the current challenges that privacy and data protection present for the defense of freedom of expression in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Several representatives from the Bosniak Minister of Communications, Communications Regulatory Authority, USAID and the Council of Europe assisted to the event, as well as from Bosniak NGOs working on freedom of expression issues and media organisations, together with international Internet governance, free speech and privacy experts from Europe and the United States. Panels covered the issues of privacy, data protection and free speech in the digital age, online security, and Internet governance, policy and regulatory aspects. More information at http://www.ulys.net/fr/conferences-489/current-privacy-and-data-protection-challenges-for-the-defense-of-free.htmlTRANSCRIPT
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 1
(SARAJEVO, BOSNIA-‐HERZEGOVINA, 8-‐9 JUNE 2012) INTERNEWS & ANNENBERG SCHOOL FOR COMMUNICATION
Cédric Laurant A5orney-‐at-‐Law, Cabinet Ulys (Brussels) Principal, Cedric Laurant ConsulAng
CONFERENCE ON INTERNET GOVERNANCE, POLICY & REGULATION
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 2
RETENTION AND ONLINE SEARCH: HOW CURRENT CHALLENGES FOR PRIVACY BECOME NEW THREATS FOR FREEDOM OF
EXPRESSION
ü IntroducAon: 2 illustraAons
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 3
RETENTION AND ONLINE SEARCH: HOW CURRENT CHALLENGES FOR PRIVACY BECOME NEW THREATS FOR FREEDOM OF
EXPRESSION
ü 1) public authority’s surveillance by data retenAon mandates
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 4
q How threats to privacy may present a threat to free speech:
§ 1. public authority’s surveillance by data retenAon mandates
CHALLENGE TO PRIVACY – THREAT TO FREE SPEECH?
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 5
http://www.zeit.de/datenschutz/malte-spitz-data-retention
q The case of Malte Spitz
THE CASE OF MALTE SPITZ
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 6
“How much informa[on do you give online every day? And who has access to it?”
See h`p://vimeo.com/19289724
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 7
THE CASE OF MALTE SPITZ
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 8
http://www.zeit.de/datenschutz/malte-spitz-data-retention
q 6 months of phone records (“traffic data”), enhanced with records of the Malte Spitz’s tweets and blog entries
q Person’s profile q Person’s rela[onships q Where he lives, works, spends [me with friends, spouse?... lovers?
q Indirectly reveals his poli[cal, philosophical, even sexual preferences.
THE CASE OF MALTE SPITZ
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 9
q Ques[ons: q Does this threaten Malte Spitz’s right to associate with others? To travel? To communicate or interact with whom he wishes?
q Does data reten[on poten[ally place every ci[zen under suspicion?
q Could such surveillance end the presump[on of innocence?
q …
THE CASE OF MALTE SPITZ
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 10
RETENTION AND ONLINE SEARCH: HOW CURRENT CHALLENGES FOR PRIVACY BECOME NEW THREATS FOR FREEDOM OF
EXPRESSION
ü 2) private sector’s surveillance through online behavioural and targeted adverAsing techniques
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 11
q How threats to privacy may present a threat to free speech:
§ 1. public authority’s surveillance by data retenAon mandates
§ 2. private sector’s surveillance through online behavioural and targeted adver[sing techniques
CHALLENGE TO PRIVACY – THREAT TO FREE SPEECH?
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 12
“COLLUSION”
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 13
“COLLUSION”
q A Firefox add-‐on that allows you to see which sites are using third-‐party cookies to track your movements across the Web. It shows, in real [me, how that data creates a spider-‐web of interac[on between companies and other trackers.
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 14
http://blogs.wsj.com/wtk/
“WHAT THEY KNOW” (WALL STREET JOURNAL)
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 15
ü 1. How can violaAons of individuals’ privacy affect their freedom of
speech?
RETENTION AND ONLINE SEARCH: HOW CURRENT CHALLENGES FOR PRIVACY BECOME NEW THREATS FOR FREEDOM OF
EXPRESSION
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 16
1. HOW CAN VIOLATIONS OF YOUR PRIVACY AFFECT YOUR FREEDOM OF SPEECH?
q Ar[cula[on between privacy and freedom of speech.
q Privacy as a core human right and a condi[on for freedom of expression. (But also freedom to travel, to associate, etc.)
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 17
ü 2. Challenges to individuals’ privacy: illustraAons of how actual or hypotheAcal infringements to individuals' privacy have led, or may lead, to a restricAon of their
freedom of expression
RETENTION AND ONLINE SEARCH: HOW CURRENT CHALLENGES FOR PRIVACY BECOME NEW THREATS FOR FREEDOM OF
EXPRESSION
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 18
2.1. DATA RETENTION
q How regula[ons in Europe manda[ng the reten[on of communica[ons data -‐ e.g., online traffic and mobile communica[ons -‐ on online service providers and telecommunica[ons companies, have affected Internet users, consumers and individuals’ right to privacy and, as a result, their freedom of speech.
q Delega[on by the state of law enforcement-‐specific du[es to the private sector (Choicepoint case).
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 19
DATA RETENTION IN EUROPE
Extract from the European Privacy & Human Rights 2010 report. Map available at h5ps://www.privacyinternaAonal.org/projects/global-‐country-‐reports
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 20
Struggles against data reten[on in Central and Eastern Europe
Case study of Poland
(by Katarzyna Szymilewicz, Panoptykon)
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 21
• Overview of data reten[on regimes (and struggles against them).
• 2011 case study of Poland contrasted against the cases of Hungary, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Czech Republic and Romania: necessity and propor[onality revisited.
• Interpreta[ons?
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 22
Purpose limita[on for data reten[on
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 23
Poland For preven[on or detecAon of crimes, for prevenAon and detecAon of fiscal offences, for use by prosecutors and courts if relevant to the court proceedings pending, for the purpose of the Internal Security Agency, Foreign Intelligence Agency, Central AnA-‐CorrupAon Bureau, Military Counter-‐intelligence Services and Military Intelligence Services to perform their tasks.
Hungary To enable invesAgaAng bodies, the public prosecutor, the courts and na[onal security agencies to perform their du[es, and to enable police and the Na[onal Tax and Customs Office to invesAgate intenAonal crimes carrying a prison term of two or more years.
Bulgaria For ‘discovering and inves[ga[ng severe crimes and crimes under ArAcle 319a-‐319f of the Penal Code and for searching persons’.
Lithuania For the inves[ga[on, detec[on and prosecu[on of serious and very serious crimes, as defined by the Lithuanian Criminal Code.
Romania & Czech Rep.
Not transposed.
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 24
Access to retained data
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 25
Poland Police, border guards, tax inspectors, Internal Security Agency, Foreign Intelligence Agency, Central AnA-‐CorrupAon Bureau, military counter-‐intelligence services, military intelligence services, th.e courts and the public prosecutor. Requests must be in wri[ng and in case of police, border guards, tax inspectors, authorised by the senior official in the organisaAon.
Hungary Police, NaAonal Tax and Customs Office, naAonal security services, public prosecutor, courts. Police and the NaAonal Tax and Customs Office require prosecutor’s authorisaAon. Prosecutor and naAonal security agencies may access such data without a court order.
Bulgaria Specific directorates and departments of the State Agency for NaAonal Security, the Ministry of the Interior, Military InformaAon Service, Military Police Service, Minister of Defence, NaAonal InvesAgaAon Agency; the court and pre-‐trial authoriAes under the condiAons. Access only possible on the order of the Chairperson of a Regional Court.
Lithuania Pre-‐trial invesAgaAon bodies, the prosecutor, the court (judges) and intelligence officers. Authorised public authoriAes must request retained data in wri[ng. For access for pre-‐trial invesAgaAons a judicial warrant is necessary.
Romania & Czech Rep.
Not transposed.
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 26
Reten[on periods
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 27
Poland
2 years.
Hungary
6 months for unsuccessful calls and 1 year for all other
data.
Bulgaria
1 year Data which has been accessed may be retained for a
further 6 months on request.
Lithuania
6 months.
Romania & Czech Rep.
Not transposed.
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 28
Number of requests for retained data in 2009
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 29
Poland
1 048 318.
Hungary
None provided.
Bulgaria
None provided.
Lithuania
72 473.
Romania
None provided.
Czech Republic
280 271.
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 30
( POLAND
number of requests for retained data:
2009 – 1 048 318 (total for the EU: 2 051 082) 2010 – 1 382 521
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 31
Courts, Prosecu[on and Police
56%
Military police 0%
Fiscal Intelligence
1%
Border Guard 15%
Military Intelligence
11%
Central An[-‐corrup[on Bureau 4%
Internal Security Agency 13%
POLAND data checks performed in 2009
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 32
Subscriber data 54%
Other 3%
Geoloca[on 9%
Billing data 34%
Types of data checks performed by 6 agencies between
Jan 2009 and Oct 2010
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 33
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS SHOWING CHALLENGES TO LEGALITY AND LEGITIMACY OF DATA RETENTION LAWS IMPLEMENTED IN EASTERN EUROPEAN MEMBER STATES
q Romania: ConsAtuAonal Court: blanket data retenAon unconsAtuAonal per se (2009); new drag data retenAon bill introduced in Parliament (2011), but rejected by Senate (end 2011).
q Czech Republic: ConsAtuAonal Court: naAonal provisions implemenAng the DirecAve recognised not proporAonate (2011); Chamber of DepuAes’ current a5empts to reintroduce data retenAon (2012).
q Bulgaria: Supreme AdministraAve Court revised and amended naAonal law on data retenAon on the basis of unconsAtuAonality with Bulgarian ConsAtuAon and ECHR (2008).
q Hungary & Poland – pending cases.
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 34
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS SHOWING CHALLENGES TO LEGALITY AND LEGITIMACY OF DATA RETENTION LAWS IMPLEMENTED IN EASTERN EUROPEAN MEMBER STATES
q European Court of Jus[ce: decision expected soon that will assess compaAbility of data retenAon mandate of Data RetenAon DirecAve with respect to the fundamental right to privacy.
q European Commission: suing Germany for failing to implement the Data RetenAon DirecAve (May 2012)
q Other EU Member States: q Germany: ConsAtuAonal Court declared unconsAtuAonal the naAonal data
retenAon law (March 2010). § Court ordered deleAon of collected data. § Court stated: data retenAon could “cause a diffusely threatening feeling of being
under observa@on that can diminish an unprejudiced percep@on of one's basic rights in many areas.”
q Ireland: Court referred to European Court of JusAce a case challenging legality of Data RetenAon DirecAve (thanks to an Irish NGO) (May 2010).
q Cyprus: Supreme Court: parts of data retenAon law are unconsAtuAonal (Feb. 2011).
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 35
INTERPRETATIONS?
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 36
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 37
q Used in Mexico by the police… and the mafia (!);
q Contains name, tel.no. and ID no. (Clave Única de Registro de Población);
q Useful to locate someone.
“RENAUT” DATABASE DATABASE (REGISTRO NACIONAL DE USUARIOS DE TELEFONÍA MÓVIL)
OTHER EXAMPLES OF HOW ACTUAL INFRINGEMENTS TO INDIVIDUALS' PRIVACY HAVE LED TO A RESTRICTION OF THEIR FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 38
RETENTION AND ONLINE SEARCH: HOW CURRENT CHALLENGES FOR PRIVACY BECOME NEW THREATS FOR FREEDOM OF
EXPRESSION
ü 2.2. How making an online search can reduce freedom of speech?
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 39
2.2. HOW MAKING AN ONLINE SEARCH CAN REDUCE FREEDOM OF SPEECH?
q Profiling by online marke[ng industry, data aggregators and other online adver[sing companies: characterisa[on of Internet user as a type of consumer fiwng into marke[ng and data mining categories, which in turn may affect their choices online as a consumer, computer user, individual or ci[zen.
q “Dynamic” pricing: discriminatory aspects. q Google’s new merged privacy policy and consequences (example of search in Google
and YouTube while logged on through gmail account). q Facebook’s subject access request (Max Schrems’ case: h`p://europe-‐v-‐facebook.org). q Rapleaf case: tying of an e-‐mail address to a profile. q “SSN” case: individual’s date + place of birth (zip code) sufficient to guess his/her
Social Security No. q Facebook “Apps”:
h`p://online.wsj.com/ar[cle/SB10001424052702303302504577327744009046230.html#ar[cleTabs%3Dinterac[ve
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 40
http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/st_RAPLEAF_20101018.html
RAPLEAF CASE
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 41
OUTLINE (1/2)
q Introduc[on: 2 illustra[ons showing extent of the: q a) Challenges to privacy, and q b) How they may present a threat to free speech:
§ 1) public authority’s surveillance (data retenAon): Malte Spitz’s case § 2) private sector surveillance (WSJ “What They Know” example of 3rd party
tracking through online behavioural adverAsing).
q 1. How viola[ons of your privacy can affect your freedom of speech: q 1.1. ArAculaAon between privacy and freedom of speech. But also freedom to travel, to associate, etc.
q 1.2. Privacy as a core human right and a condiAon for freedom of expression.
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 42
OUTLINE (2/2)
q 2. Challenges to individuals’ privacy: illustra[ons of how actual or hypothe[cal infringements to individuals' privacy has led, or may lead, to a restric[on of their freedom of expression q 2.1. Data retenAon: how regulaAons in Europe mandaAng the retenAon of communicaAons data affect users and consumers' right to privacy and, as a result, their freedom of speech.
q 2.2. How making an online search can reduce freedom of speech?
q 3. Take-‐aways
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 43
3. TAKE-‐AWAYS
q What solu[ons? q EU legal framework (ECHR, EU Chart FR, DP Dir., DP Reg.). q Integra[on/adapta[on of Bosniak legal framework within the EU framework.
q Civic engagement and public opposi[on in Eastern European countries (cfr Eastern European cons[tu[onal courts’ decisions on data reten[on).
q Impact of Civil Society & NGOs. q Ci[zens’ public trust in their government and public ins[tu[ons (cfr data reten[on slides).
q Risks of discrimina[on.
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 44
ü New Technologies, Privacy & ICT ü Intellectual Property ü Cinema, Media & Entertainment ü E-‐Payment, E-‐Finance & Internet Banking ü Sport & Gaming ü Commercial Law
ULYS BELG
IUM
224 avenue
de la Cour
onne
1050 Bruxe
lles
Tel : +32 (0)
2 340 88 10
Fax : +32 (0
)2 345 35 80
ULYS FRAN
CE
33 rue Gali
lée
75116 Paris
Tel : +33 (0)
1 40 70 90 1
1
Fax : +33 (0
)1 40 70 01
38
ULYS ISRA
EL
Vered Towe
r, Derech H
ashalom, 53
Givatayim
Tel : +972 (0
)3 770 70 20
Fax : +972
(0)3 770 70
19
ULYS, a Moder- and Human Law Fir5, Dedicated to Innovation ! THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION !
AREA
S OF EXPERT
ISE
Cédric Laurant A5orney-‐at-‐Law, Cabinet Ulys (Brussels)
(Member of the Brussels and District of Columbia Bars)
Principal, Cedric Laurant ConsulAng [cedric.laurant [at] ulys [dot] net] [c [at] cedriclaurant [dot] com]
CONFERENCE ON INTERNET GOVERNANCE, POLICY & REGULATION (SARAJEVO 8-‐9 JUNE 2012)
www.ulys.net -‐ www.droit-‐technologie.org 45
PresentaAon available at:
h5p://blog.cedriclaurant.org