As part of its Digital Single Market strategy, the European Commission has unveiled "plans to help European industry, SMEs, researchers and public authorities make the most of new technologies." In order to "boost innovation," the Commission wants to accelerate the creation of new standards for five buzzconcepts: 5G, cloud computing, internet of things, data technologies, and cybersecurity. [...]

"Open" is generally used in the documents to denote "open standards," as in the quotation above. But the European Commission is surprisingly coy about what exactly that phrase means in this context. It is only on the penultimate page of the ICT Standardisation Priorities document that we finally read the following key piece of information: "ICT standardisation requires a balanced IPR [intellectual property rights] policy, based on FRAND licensing terms."

It's no surprise that the Commission was trying to keep that particular detail quiet, because FRAND licensing—the acronym stands for "fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory"—is incompatible with open source, which will therefore find itself excluded from much of the EU's grand new Digital Single Market strategy. That's hardly a "balanced IPR policy." [...]

That de facto exclusion of open source from this major new EU initiative is shocking, but not entirely unexpected. The European Commission has been steadily moving to marginalise open source for over a decade. [...]

http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2016/04/anti-innovation-eu-excludes...

Exceptions in the proposed EU-US Privacy Shield framework that would allow the US to carry out mass surveillance of EU citizens are "not acceptable," the Article 29 Working Party of EU data protection authorities said today in a press conference.

The Chairman of the group, Isabelle Falque-Pierrotin, explained that the Article 29 Working Party would look with "great interest" on the forthcoming ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on whether mass surveillance of EU citizens could be legal. If the CJEU finds that the surveillance carried out by GCHQ is unlawful, it would have a big impact on the national security exceptions included in Privacy Shield. [...]

Since Safe Harbour was struck down by the CJEU largely because of concerns about mass surveillance, there is a real possibility that Privacy Shield will suffer the same fate unless the the Article 29 Working Party's concerns are adequately addressed. That would lead to even greater uncertainty for transatlantic data flows—something the European Commission and US companies will be keen to avoid.

http://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2016/04/privacy-shield-us-surveilla...

The [Federal Communications Commission] voted this week on a proposal for rules that will govern how broadband and wireless providers handle your personal online data. [...]

The new rules prohibit broadband providers from sharing your information, such as your name, location or online activity, with third parties without your consent. It's meant to provide the same kind of protection offered to telephone customers.

The rules would also require broadband and wireless providers to disclose in plain language how consumer data is collected, how it's shared with third parties and how it's used by outside firms. The plan also calls for broadband companies to strengthen security practices for customer data. [...]

The rules only cover broadband and wireless service providers. But online companies, such as Facebook or Google, or device makers, such as Apple, are excluded from the rules. That means these companies are still able to collect data about your location and Internet surfing habits and sell it to advertisers or other third parties. [...]

The vote on Thursday was just the beginning of the process. The FCC opened up its proposal for public comment. Then there will be another period to comment on the comments. And finally, the agency will draft its final rules, which the agency will vote on. The whole process could take six months or longer. [...]

http://www.cnet.com/news/how-the-fcc-plans-to-protect-your-privacy-from-...

A new study shows that knowledge of government surveillance causes people to self-censor their dissenting opinions online. The research offers a sobering look at the oft-touted "democratizing" effect of social media and Internet access that bolsters minority opinion. [...]

This research illustrates the silencing effect of participants’ dissenting opinions in the wake of widespread knowledge of government surveillance, as revealed by whistleblower Edward Snowden in 2013. [...]

“It concerns me that surveillance seems to be enabling a culture of self-censorship because it further disenfranchises minority groups. And it is difficult to protect and extend the rights of these vulnerable populations when their voices aren't part of the discussion. Democracy thrives on a diversity of ideas, and self-censorship starves it,” [Elizabeth Stoycheff, lead researcher of the study and assistant professor at Wayne State University] said. “Shifting this discussion so Americans understand that civil liberties are just as fundamental to the country's long-term well-being as thwarting very rare terrorist attacks is a necessary move.” [...]

[This article has been translated in French here]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/03/28/mass-survei...