[Ecommerce] WIS Story on consumer/rights groups in EU information society

[Manon Ress]

TUESDAY, JANUARY 31, 2006  WASHINGTON INTERNET DAILY

MEPs Beginning to Listen?

Consumer, Rights Groups Handicapped in Information Society Debates

Civil liberties and consumer groups lobbying the EU on Information
Society issues are hampered by lack of money and access, observers
said.  On matters from privacy to digital rights to intellectual
property (IP), these groups =96- part of "civil society" -- find it
hard to compete with industry for lawmaker, govt. and Eurocrat
attention, they said.  Telecom sector lobbyists seem generally
satisfied with the process's transparency but rights advocates said
the system has grave problems current reform efforts won't fix.
Different civil society groups lead on different issues, said
Michelle Childs, head of European affairs for the Consumer Project on
Technology (CPTech).  The European Consumers' Organization (BEUC),
the umbrella group for consumer matters, is often the "civil society
group of choice" for the European Commission and therefore is invited
to participate in consultations.

The information society arena tends to be dominated by privacy and
data protection campaigners -- strong national groups and, at the EU
level, European Digital Rights (EDRi), said Childs.  In IP,
Nosoftwarepatents.org, the Free Software Foundation Europe and the
Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII) figured in a
2005 dispute over so-called computer- implemented inventions'
patentability.  "We all tend to come together in in-
formal or formal alliances when a new piece of legislation is being
promoted or a directive reviewed," she said.  In addition, the
Transatlantic Consumer Dialog, whose IP working group is chaired by
CPTech Dir. James Love, formally lobbies EU (and U.S.) officials.
U.S. civil liberties groups occasionally are invited to take part in
key consultations, said EDRi board member Sjoera Nas.  The Electronic
Privacy Information Center, Electronic Frontier Foundation, ACLU and
IP Justice are among groups without a regular presence in Brussels
that lobby on particular issues.

Can You Hear Me Now?

It's much harder for civil society than business to be heard in EU
debates, participants said.  "The reasons are the same as
everywhere," Childs said:  "Lobbyists have more numbers, more money
and more access."  Several EU commissioners have made it clear that
"industry are the prime consultees" and civil society "an
afterthought or an irritant."

BEUC and FFII have essentially permanent representation in Brussels;
not so most civil liberties groups, said Nas.  Without a permanent
office, "it is very hard to follow all developments and seriously
influence politics," Nas said.  New EU accreditation rules for
attending meetings make it even tougher for occasional lobbyists to
enter the Brussels arena, she said.  With only one pass available per
organization -- and only groups with "serious" offices in
Brussels allowed to apply -- civil society lobbyists must "depend on
a friendly European Parliament member to invite you to and pick you
up at the entrance, and invite you back again after you went out for
lunch," Nas said.

The absence of a stronger, more permanent civil society lobby stems
from a "very simple issue":   Money, said Nas.  Consumer unions get
steady incomes from their publications and services.  With little to
no funding, digital rights groups are run almost entirely on a part-
time, voluntary basis, Nas said.  U.S. citizens are more aware of the
need to support civil rights groups, but Europeans "seem to think it
is a government's job to fund its own opposition" -- in most of
Europe, a rarity -- she said.

Compared with industry's huge lobbying war chests, used to hire
professionals and rent Brussels turf, civil society advocates have
but "a few occasional color copies and train tickets to Brussels,"
Nas said.  But many MEPs know the skew in power and recognize the
tilt of the information they get, so they give civil society "a
welcome ear for our input," she said.  That doesn't always assure
victory, as proven by Parliament's approval of a fiercely fought
communications traffic data retention measure.

Now as in the past, EC focus on a single pan-European market tends to
require a supply-side rather than a demand side focus, said Childs.
The idea is that if the supply side works, benefits will flow to
consumers.  In fairness, she said, "telecom is slightly different: It
is clear that the liberalization agenda is now more mature and there
has been a focus on consumer issues."  IP remains under industry
domination, with an "IP arms race between the EU and the U.S. for
ever stronger protections and limits on user exceptions," Childs
said.  Thin European press coverage of EU-level events "gives
industry a free hand to lobby the EU with little public knowledge or
complaint," IP Justice Exec. Dir. Robin Gross said.  European media
tend to cover nationally, she said.
"Cozier" ties exist between industry and EU officials than seen in
the U.S., Gross said.  Example:  In 2003, the EU IP rights
enforcement directive was progressing through the European
Parliament.  Its shepherd was reporting member Janelly Fourtou, wife
of interim Vivendi Universal CEO Jean-Rene Fourtou, who "stood to
gain a windfall from the new directive," Gross said.

As industry lobbyists do, civil society groups dislike the Council of
Ministers' opaque decision making. But where industry lobbyists often
can press "at home" to get their govts. do the "right thing," but
many civil liberties groups lack presences in each member state, said
Childs.

Many key decisions occur at the World Summit on the Information
Society, World Trade Organizations (for telecom issues) and World
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and other such conclaves,
said Childs.  As in current talks on an updated WIPO broadcasting
treaty, the EU position is decided by the Council of Ministers,
usually without public consultation, and then pushed at the
international level by the Commission.  By the time a directive is pro-
posed at the EU level to carry out the treaty, some terms no longer
are open to amendment, Childs said.  Industry lobbyists have the time
and money for activities aimed at "trumping" the EU process, but
civil society doesn't, she said.

A Different View

The software patent fight proved the exception to the rule on civil
society's lack of clout, said Erik Josefsson, who heads FFII's
Brussels office.  MEPs were "bored to death" with corporate
lobbyists, and eager to hear all sides on the computer-implemented
inventions directive.  They appreciate FFII's effort to illuminate
what is viewed as a "complex and boring" issue, giving the group an
unusually strong voice.

FFII differs from other civil liberties groups in that members come
from civil society, nongovernmental bodies and small-to-midsized
businesses, Josefsson said.  Once it made its agenda against software
patents clear, "money came" from individuals and companies happy to
have someone knocking on doors in Brussels.  The gap between FFII and
other civil society groups derives from FFII's "presence" in
Brussels, he said:  "That makes all the difference."
The EC is eyeing a "transparency initiative" aimed at spotlighting EU
financial and governmental processes -- and at avoiding Abramoff-type
scandal.  Administration Comr. Siim Kallas is said to want an EU-wide
lobbyist registry showing who's doing what on whose behalf.  But as
reported by EUObserver.com, Kallas want a voluntary registry.

Kallas doesn't go far enough, Childs said.  There's no really open
record of private meetings between lobbyists and Commission
officials, MEPs and Ministers.  There's often "no clarity about the
input made by lobbyists" on early drafts of legislation, she said,
urging clear, consistent rules on who should be on working groups and
why.  The Council of Ministers opens its decision-making processes
only on certain issues, she said. The core problem is that the EC and
Council themselves aren't transparent to their own govts., said
Josefsson.  For example, Sweden's parliamentary committee on EU
affairs is supposed to be briefed by the govt. on EU level events,
but isn't.  "You can blame corporate lobbyists," but it's govt.
institutions themselves that aren't open, Josefsson said. -- Dugie
Standeford

************************************************
Manon Anne Ress
manon.ress@cptech.org,
www.cptech.org

Consumer Project on Technology
1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Washington, DC 20009 USA
Tel.:  +1.202.332.2670, Ext 16 Fax: +1.202.332.2673

Consumer Project on Technology
1 Route des  Morillons, CP 2100, 1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 791 6727

Consumer Project on Technology
24 Highbury Crescent, London, N5 1RX, UK
Tel: +44(0)207 226 6663 ex 252 Fax: +44(0)207 354 0607