[A2k] Re: EU Parliament approves anti-graduated response report (Pranesh
Prakash)
Celia Blanco Vallejo
celiabv@gmail.com
Mon Mar 30 15:11:01 2009
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
IMCO Committe is voting tomorrow the amendments to the Telecoms Package
which can bring back the 3 strikes, introduce net discrimination and
limitations on access to content, services and applications. Dress up as
traffic management policies there are some Amendments pushed by At&T and the
UK and French Goverment that will allow ISP to control (maybe with some *
help* from content providers) what flows on their networks.
A coalition of different european organizations has sent 2 open letters (
http://www.co-ment.net/text/711/ and http://www.co-ment.net/text/980/) to
the MEPs urging to vote against those amendments. You can read more here:
http://www.laquadrature.net/en
http://www.iptegrity.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=35&Itemid=62
http://www.blackouteurope.eu/
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=73537262931
Celia Blanco. P2P Foundation
http://p2pfoundation.net/The_Foundation_for_P2P_Alternatives
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 7:00 PM, <a2k-request@lists.essential.org> wrote:
> Send A2k mailing list submissions to
> a2k@lists.essential.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> a2k-request@lists.essential.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> a2k-admin@lists.essential.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of A2k digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Release: Reading Rights Coalition Urges Authors to Allow Everyone
> Access to E-books (Manon Ress)
> 2. EU Parliament approves anti-graduated response report (Pranesh
> Prakash)
> 3. UK Libel Law Is a Global Threat To Web Free Speech (Jeffrey A.
> Williams)
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 1
> From: Manon Ress <manon.ress@keionline.org>
> To: a2k discuss list <a2k@lists.essential.org>
> Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 10:13:49 -0400
> Subject: [A2k] Release: Reading Rights Coalition Urges Authors to Allow
> Everyone Access to E-books
>
> --
> [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
>
> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
>
> CONTACT:
> Chris Danielsen
> Director of Public Relations
> National Federation of the Blind
> (410) 659-9314, ext. 2330
> (410) 262-1281 (Cell)
> cdanielsen@nfb.org
>
> Reading Rights Coalition Urges Authors to Allow
> Everyone Access to E-books
>
> Informational Protest to be Held at Authors Guild Headquarters
>
> New York City (March 30, 2009): The Reading Rights Coalition, which
> represents people who cannot read print, will protest the threatened
> removal of the text-to-speech function from e-books for the Amazon
> Kindle 2 outside the Authors Guild headquarters in New York City at 31
> East 32nd Street on April 7, 2009, from noon to 2:00 p.m. The
> coalition includes the blind, people with dyslexia, people with
> learning or processing issues, seniors losing vision, people with
> spinal cord injuries, people recovering from strokes, and many others
> for whom the addition of text-to-speech on the Kindle 2 promised for
> the first time easy, mainstream access to over 245,000 books.
>
> When Amazon released the Kindle 2 electronic book reader on February
> 9, 2009, the company announced that the device would be able to read e-
> books aloud using text-to-speech technology. Under pressure from the
> Authors Guild, Amazon has announced that it will give authors and
> publishers the ability to disable the text-to-speech function on any
> or all of their e-books available for the Kindle 2.
>
> Dr. Marc Maurer, President of the National Federation of the Blind,
> said: =93The blind and print-disabled have for years utilized text-to-
> speech technology to read and access information. As technology
> advances and more books move from hard-copy print to electronic
> formats, people with print disabilities have for the first time in
> history the opportunity to enjoy access to books on an equal basis
> with those who can read print. Authors and publishers who elect to
> disable text-to-speech for their e-books on the Kindle 2 prevent
> people who are blind or have other print disabilities from reading
> these e-books. This is blatant discrimination and we will not
> tolerate it.=94
>
> Mike Shuttic, president of the Association on Higher Education and
> Disability (AHEAD), said: =93AHEAD envisions educational and societal
> environments that value disability and embody equality of
> opportunity. This vision of AHEAD is directly aligned with the
> efforts of this coalition. Although much rhetoric is made about
> potential obstacles and problems that exist, the basic goal is clear
> and simple=96=96access for everyone. And why create something that
> prevents it?=94
>
> Mitch Pomerantz, president of the American Council of the Blind, said:
> =93Removing the text-to-speech features closes the door on an innovative
> technological solution that would make regular print books available
> to tens of thousands of individuals who are blind or visually impaired.=94
>
> Andrew Imparato, President and Chief Executive Officer for the
> American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD), said: =93It is
> outrageous when a technology device shuts out people with all kinds of
> disabilities. AAPD works to remove barriers to accessibility and
> usability in technology, and we don=92t expect to see people with
> disabilities singled out by having to pay more for access. New
> technologies, such as electronic books, should be available to
> everyone regardless of disability.=94
> Paul Schroeder, vice president of programs and policy for the American
> Foundation for the Blind, said: "Those of us with print disabilities
> have long dreamed of a world in which books and media are available to
> us at the same time as everyone else. The Kindle 2 offers that
> possibility for the first time. We hope publishers and authors come
> to see that text-to-speech is simply an alternative means of access to
> print."
>
> Dr. Peter Blanck, chairman and university professor at Burton Blatt
> Institute at Syracuse University, said: =93As electronic books become
> the norm, denying universal access will result in more and more people
> with disabilities being left out of education, employment, and the
> societal conversation. We will all suffer from the absence of their
> participation and contribution to the debates that occupy us as a
> society.=94
>
> George Kerscher of the Digital Accessible Information System (DAISY)
> Consortium, said: "The DAISY Consortium envisions a world where people
> with print disabilities have equal access to information and
> knowledge, without delay or additional expense. Authors and
> publishers surely must share this vision. Now that the issue of human
> rights has been explained, and the opportunity for larger sales are
> known, I urge the Authors Guild to reverse their position on text-to-
> speech and join us in actively encouraging all publishers and reading
> technology developers to open the world of reading to everybody.
> Authors, join us on the picket line."
>
> Steve Jacobs, president of IDEAL Group Inc., said, =93Not only is text-
> to-speech important to people who are blind, it is critical in
> providing quality educations to millions of young people who rely on
> text-to-speech to learn effectively. This includes students with
> autism, learning disabilities, mobility disabilities, and cognitive
> disabilities that impact their ability to acquire information with
> their eyes only. I remain hopeful that the talented members of the
> Authors Guild come to understand the potential negative impact of
> disabling the text-to-speech function on their e-books and reconsider
> their position.=94
>
>
> Cynthia D. Waddell, executive director of the International Center for
> Disability Resources on the Internet (ICDRI), said: =93The mission of
> ICDRI supports the removal of barriers in electronic and information
> technology and the promotion of equal access. ICDRI welcomes the text-
> to-speech functionality being offered by the Kindle 2 since it
> increases mainstream access to books for the first time in history.
> We question why the Authors Guild demands that it be turned it off
> since many more books would be sold if text-to-speech was turned back
> on. Not only
> does this feature benefit persons with disabilities, but it also helps
> persons for whom English is not their native language. In an
> increasingly mobile society, flexibility in access to content improves
> the quality of life for everyone.=94
>
> James Love, director of Knowledge Ecology International, said:
> =93Knowing full well that not everyone can see, the Authors Guild wants
> the right to be seen, but not heard. By bullying Amazon to change the
> technology of Kindle 2, the Authors Guild will either deny access to
> people who are disabled, or make them pay more. By attacking disabled
> persons in this way, the Authors Guild is attacking everyone who would
> otherwise benefit from the contributions this community has the
> potential to offer.=94
>
> James H. Wendorf, executive director for the National Center for
> Learning Disabilities, said: "Access to the written word is the
> cornerstone of education and democracy. New technologies must serve
> individuals with disabilities, not impede them. Our homes, schools
> and ultimately our economy rely on support for the future, not
> discriminating practices and beliefs from the past.=94 While the
> Kindle 2 is not currently accessible to blind users, Amazon recently
> announced on its Kindle 2 blog that it is currently at work on making
> the device=92s navigational features accessible to the blind.
>
> The coalition includes: American Association of People with
> Disabilities, American Council of the Blind, American Foundation for
> the Blind, Association on Higher Education and Disability, Bazelon
> Center for Mental Health Law, Burton Blatt Institute, Digital
> Accessible Information System (DAISY) Consortium, Disability Rights
> Education and Defense Fund (DREDF), IDEAL Group, Inc., International
> Center for Disability Resources on the Internet, International
> Dyslexia Association, International Dyslexia Association=96=96New York
> Branch, Knowledge Ecology International, Learning Disabilities
> Association of America, National Center for Learning Disabilities,
> National Disability Rights Network, National Federation of the Blind,
> NISH, and the National Spinal Cord Injury Association. In addition to
> the April 7 New York City protest, the coalition will participate in
> the Los Angeles Times Festival of Books on April 25-26.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 10:30:39 +0530
> From: Pranesh Prakash <pranesh@cis-india.org>
> To: NLS IP <nls-ip@googlegroups.com>,
> Commons Law <commons-law@sarai.net>,
> A2K Discussion List <a2k@lists.essential.org>
> Subject: [A2k] EU Parliament approves anti-graduated response report
>
> The report pits privacy against copyright infringement, and seems to
> hold that privacy will win.
> The report is available at: http://bit.ly/eu-mar-26
>
> ------
> http://torrentfreak.com/eu-rejects-3-strikes-for-file-sharers-090327/
>
> EU Rejects =E2=80=983 Strikes=E2=80=99 for File-Sharers
> Written by enigmax on March 27, 2009
>
> The European Parliament has approved a report which goes against the
> French plan to implement a =E2=80=983 strikes=E2=80=99 regime for alleged
> P=
> 2P
> copyright infringers. The proposals to increase security and ensure
> freedom on the Internet were accepted, but disconnecting users from
> the Internet was ruled out.
>
> For the third time in a year the European Parliament has spoken out
> against tougher anti-piracy legislation that would allow alleged
> file-sharers to be disconnected from the Internet based on evidence
> from anti-piracy lobby groups. Instead, they chose to protect rights
> and freedoms of Internet users.
>
> The report from Greek MEP Stavros Lambrinidis concerning security and
> the protection of fundamental freedoms on the Internet, has been
> accepted by an overwhelming majority. The European Parliament adopted
> the report with 481 votes in favor, 25 against and 21 abstentions.
> French proposals that would allow a =E2=80=98graduated response=E2=80=99
> ak=
> a =E2=80=983
> strikes=E2=80=99 regime to deal with alleged copyright infringers were
> rejected.
>
> =E2=80=9CWhile ensuring that the Internet is more secure is a legitimate
> go=
> al
> for our societies, we must monitor and restrict the use of
> surveillance and control techniques that threaten our freedoms,
> especially in cases which question its necessity, proportionality and
> effectiveness,=E2=80=9D says the report.
>
> In a clear snub to both the French government and copyright holders
> the report says, =E2=80=9CGovernments or private companies should not see
> t=
> he
> denial of such access as a means of imposing sanctions, as proposed in
> some countries in the union.=E2=80=9D
>
> The report further states that computer and electronic literacy is the
> new literacy of the 21st century and that guaranteeing Internet access
> to all European citizens is synonymous with guaranteeing education.
>
> The French tried to protect their upcoming 3 Strikes law, but failed.
> An amendment proposed to read, =E2=80=9CAccess to the Internet should not
> b=
> e
> the subject of abuse for purposes of illegal activities and that a
> balance between the various basic rights guaranteed in Community
> legislation must be respected,=E2=80=9D was rejected.
>
> At this stage it is unclear if this pressure from the European
> Parliament will cause the French to reconsider their =E2=80=983 strikes=E2=
> =80=99
> plans. It would not be the first time Sarkozy has chosen to ignore the
> democratic vote.
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2009 04:30:34 -0700
> From: "Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>
> Organization: IDNS and Spokesman for INEGroup
> To: A2k <a2k@lists.essential.org>
> Subject: [A2k] UK Libel Law Is a Global Threat To Web Free Speech
>
> All,
>
> I have to wonder how access to knowledge is fully recognized
> if the UK justice system has decided to lean in this direction. Seems
> to me that investigative reporters in the UK will all soon be unemployed
> and seeking employment elsewhere much to the UK publics disadvantage.
> I am also greatly ashamed at PM Brown for not speaking out strongly
> against this sort of behavior on the cusp of the G 20 meeting. He
> should be soundly scolded!
>
> God save the queen!
>
> See: http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=09/03/29/1411207
>
> London media lawyer Emily MacManus argues that UK libel
> law has three features which
>
> http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/email/will-net-free-speech-survive-british-libel-litigation
> make it the 'defamation tourism' capital of the world and a serious
> threat to Web free speech. First, there is no free speech presumption
> in the UK as there is, for example, in the US. Second, every access of
> a Web page is considered to be a separate act of publication in the UK
> (unlike the US, where 'original publication' holds). Third,
> 'no-win-no-fee' libel litigation is now allowed in the UK. If any blog,
> anywhere, publishes something you'd like taken down, threaten libel
> action in the UK: no one except the super-rich can afford to even take
> these cases to court, so media lawyers advise publishers to 'take it
> down, take it down quickly, take it down again.' There's not much
> chance that the judges will move the law any time soon because they
> just aren't seeing the cases that could cause them to set new
> precedent."
>
> Regards,
>
> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 284k members/stakeholders strong!)
> "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
> Abraham Lincoln
> "YES WE CAN!" Barack ( Berry ) Obama
>
> "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
> very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
>
> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
> liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
> United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
> ===============================================================
> Updated 1/26/04
> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
> div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
> ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
> jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> My Phone: 214-244-4827
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> _______________________________________________
> A2k mailing list
> A2k@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k
>
>
> End of A2k Digest
>