from Blackout Europe www.blackouteurope.eu http://blackouteu.wordpress.com/

Internet access is not conditional

Everyone who owns a website has an interest in defending the free use of Internet… so has everyone who uses Google or Skype… everyone who expresses their opinions freely, does research of any kind, whether for personal health problems or academic study … everyone who shops online…who dates online…socializes online… listens to music…watches video…

INDEX

1-WHAT THEY WANT TO ENFORCE
2- CONSEQUENCES FOR ALL OF US
3- OUR VOTES
4- HOW POLITICIANS WILL ACT
5- HOW WE WILL RESPOND
6- HOW TO DO IT – TOOLS

______________________________________

1-WHAT THEY WANT TO ENFORCE. THE TELECOMS PACKAGE

The internet as we know it is at risk because of proposed new EU rules (the Telecoms package) are being discussed now at 2nd reading in the Parliament stage. Under the proposed new rules, broadband providers will be legally able to limit the number of websites you can look at, and to tell you whether or not you are allowed to use particular services. It will be dressed up as ‘new consumer options’ which people can choose from. People will be offered TV-like packages – with a limited number of options for you to access.

It means that the Internet will be packaged up and your ability to access and to put up content could be severely restricted. It will create boxes of Internet accessibility, which don’t fit with the way we use it today.
This is because internet is now permitting exchanges between persons which cannot be controlled or “facilitated” by any middlemen (the state or a corporation). This possibility improves citizen’s life but force the industry to lose power and control. Access providers have now learned that controlling access they can control the information society development.That is why they are pushing to act those changes.
The excuse is to promote competition, offering choices to users which fit better their behavior on the Internet and, by collaborating with sectors interested in the promotion of lawful content (aka the entertainment industry), to control the flow of music, films and entertainment content against the alleged piracy by downloading for free, using P2P file-sharing. However, the real victims of this plan will be all Internet users and the democratic and independent access to information, culture goods..

2- CONSEQUENCES FOR ALL OF US

Think about how you use the Internet! What would it mean to you if free access to the Internet was taken away?
These days, the Internet is about life and freedom. It’s about shopping, booking theatre tickets … holidays, learning, job-seeking, banking, and trade. It’s also about the fun things – dating, chatting, invitations, music, entertainment, joking and even a Second Life. It is a tool to express ourselves, to collaborate, innovate, share, stimulate new business ideas, reach new markets – thrive without middlemen..

Listen to one of the fathers of the World Wide Web talking about network discrimination and how it could affect to the openness of the Internet

He talks about the USA,….but in Europe the same can happen if the Telecoms Package passes as it is now .

Just think – what’s your web address? Unless people have that address in their “package” of regular websites – they won’t be able to find you. That means they can’t buy, or book, or register, or even view you online. Your business won’t be able to find niche suppliers of goods – and compare prices. If you get any money at all from advertising on your site, it will diminish. Yes, Amazon and a select few will be OK, they will be the included in the package. But your advertising on Google or any other website, will be increasingly worthless. Skype could be blocked. (As it is in Germany in the use from iPhone, already). Small businesses could literally disappear, especially specialist, niche or artisan businesses.
If we don’t do something now – we could lose free and open use of the internet. Our freedom (of choice in information, market, culture, pleasure) will be curtailed.
3- THE VALUE OF OUR OPINIONS AND OUR VOTES

Tell the European Parliament to vote against conditional access to the Internet!
Remind them that they need your vote in June and that the Internet http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Political_Memory still give us the tools to be watching and judging what they are doing!
You must know you are not alone: hundreds of organizations are working on that and thousands of people have already contacted their parliamentarians about that. In scambioetico website you can also find some letters responding.

4- WHAT OUR POLITICIANS WANT TO PASS

The EU proposals hold an enormous risk for our future. They are about to become Law – and will be virtually impossible to reverse. People (even the members of the European Parliament who are voting on it) don’t really seem to understand the full implications and the legal changes are wrapped up in something called “Telecoms Package” which lulls people into thinking it is just about industry.
However, in reality, hiding from public view, the amendments are about the way the Internet will operate in future.
Text about your rights to access and distribute content, services and applications, is being crossed out. And the text that is being brought in, says that broadband providers must inform you of any limitations, or restrictions to your access. Alternative versions use the word ‘conditions’ – and it is seriously being proposed that you will be told the conditions of use of Internet services. This is made to sound good – it is dressed up as ‘transparency’ – except that of course it means that the broadband provider will have the legal right to limit your access or to impose conditions, otherwise why would they need to tell you? If the Telecoms Package as it reads now is voted in, the changes will not be reversible.
5- HOW WE WILL RESPOND

We all have a stake in the Internet! You need to act now to save it!
Ask to your leaders and representatives’ in the European Parliament to support a free and open Internet, where restrictions and limitations are only decided by a judicial ruling and monitoring is forbidden.
Demand that Internet access providers will be required to offer a service open and without discriminations
Promoting growth and competition of the European economy should not be detrimental for citizen’s rights and the democratic participation. A fair welfare will not be reached if Internet does not stand free and open.
6- HOW TO DO IT (TOOLS):

Click here  to find a technical explanation  by Monica Horten,  article by article, so you can check with your own eyes what it is going on.
The open coalition has also sent a number of letters to the European Parliamentarians (MEPs) with an explanation of the controversial articles  http://www.co-ment.net/text/711/)
As suggested by La Quadrature You can :

1.Email, write to or phone your MEP – Follow the link to their website. to get the details.
-You can use this letter as a model if you want (click here)
-You are welcome to personalise the letter and include information that will make MEPs sit up, take note and take appropriate action. (Please do not be aggressive as they will not listen to you).
2.In this link you will be able to send these recommendations directly to all the Parliamentarians, (hacktivistas) Believe, they will really receive it and they will really feel the pressure.
3.Join our facebook group. http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=73537262931.
4.Send this site to everyone you know so that they can take action.
5.Syndicate this page so that you keep been informed: disinformation is what they count on, we must be aware.

ACT now!Tomorrow is too late!

A Hungarian party would send sixty representatives to the European Parliament in sixty months

YOU can be an EU representative if you want to – according to the campaign rhetoric of a lesser Hungarian party: “you” meaning anyone who joins them. They will select  who goes by drawing lots. If the party wins a seat, they will send not one but sixty representatives to Brussels… one after the other. Each of their representatives is going to have one month of stay and then resign… but during that time they must vote by the decisions of  the internet community who delegated them. That is true democracy á la IDE, that is the Party for Internetional Democracy.

“Have a nice time in Brussels for a month and for a six figure salary!” – reads a campaign brochure of the party. Wages in Hungary average around a net sum of 350 euros a month, one-tenth of the salary that a EU rep gets. And for them in Brussels, it is plus daily allowance, accommodation and travel expenses. HUF 1 million – and you don’t even have to speak foreign languages. Just ask for an interpreter, it can also be provided for.

The system is, that if IDE wins a seat, they will send the first person on their list to Brussels, who can spend there one month then resign and give the seat to the next person on the list, who will spend one month in Brussels as well then resign and so forth.

“Nothing forbids a representative to resign after one month and thus make the next person on the party list eligible for the post.” – they say. The IDE campaign criticizes the practice of established parties to award EU seats to their apparatchiks for their past services. They say, it’s an opportunity that should be open to anyone. And drawing lots is the best way to decide who goes.

They also argue that it is no problem if teir representatives are not the best qualified, since it is not the representatives themselves who are to decide on the issues. The party holds an online voting and their representative votes accordingly. That way they could alloy the direct and representative forms of democracy.

Should IDE get into the European Parliament, that may be very fresh air into democracy on three counts:

Never before have representatives gained their seats by drawing lots!

Never before have representatives been required  to resign after one month!

Never before have representatives been bound by the outcome of online voting!

IDE, the Party for Internetional Democracy has been a registered party in Hungary since 2004 and is listed in the official register of the parties running for seats in the European Parliament. (See the website of the Országos Választási Bizottság/ National Election Committee: www.valasztas.hu; http://www.valasztas.hu/ep09vt/p1.jsp)

The Pep-NET, the Pan-European E-participation Network is holding it’s online discussion-forum on the  recently published eparticipation survey at www.internet-discourse.eu.

Do you know, what experts are saying? Just come, and visit this life forum of researchers and practicioners to grasp the scent of hot air around participatory culture of different actors in this field!

I am copying one of my submissions to the forum:

….

I think, chaos and fractal approach to understand something, which is beyond or normal notions, which is a process, which might not be seen easily by language and hides below the different directions..not an easy approach. Irina somehow suggest this.

We have to ask, what do we want to do with e-participation? I try to get closer.

What is our responsibility when setting directions or the future?

Clear aims.
Crisis ethics and values.
Diversitiy support.

Clear aims, means, that we have to realize, that people of Europe needs support to change the dinamics of their politics. There has been a debate on the local-global issue. We have to support with insturments people at local levels- why? Because that is the primarly field of interacting with politics – and you have a much better chance to experiance success, to give the first learning experiance, before moving to the big global issues. The EC has to understand – that it’s position should not be for the benefit (only) for the institution itself.

There must not be a debate on do we need change in e-particiaption policy, I suggest. Our democracies mostly having serious injuries by our higher politician levels, which has opened space for the lack, or weak regluation on lower levels – this is also the source of the political crisis. I say political, because the ciris partly about the policy of financial (un)regulations.

Since, there is no real transparency in the EC- there is no real basic for serious e-participation initiated from the higher end.

There is the lack of trust.

How to trust in an institution, which does not fulfill the minimum requirements of good governance ie.: transparency?
Did you asked, how should be an ideal pre-e-participatory state look like? What are the needed pre-existing factors, that builds the basic trust?
Without better transparency, we are just playing a game, without a real prize..

Change perspective. Change your position.

We need to look at around our house:
Do we follow the best model to develop e-participation supporting insturments (softwares, training, interrela.tions, networks)?
I do think not! We are following the web0.1 way!
The benefit of all this way can not take place, nor the working of the suitable models.

There is no place for that from the policy, governance side yet. E-participation programmes supported by the Comission are giving a lot for some – but leaves untouchable the most part of the interested parties!
And most of them are those, who really needs help, to repaire, heal their democracies!
This is important, how to understand and balance the interest, and create conditions in relation to this. – this is the responsibility of the Comission. But can we blame companies participating in e-participation support programmes, with their false models and un-social friendly expectations?
I think, maybe not. But we have to ask questions from them and from the Comission.

What is the suitable model, for financing and delivering public policy, or democracy building applications, programmes?

How do you categorize it, if you think as a need in the society, and as an application?

What kind of model, what kind of spreading policy would you use for development and sharing?

Community planning, open source and non-commercial, public for all!
Obvious isn’t it?! There must not be any voices around the competence of the companies! This is more a social issue! Not a business one. And this is a real danger, when we think about e-participation, that we automatically put this just behind e-government and not participation.

How important is the sharing factor? One of the most important. Since, if we look at our aims- we are sharing tools-approaches, training programmes, that can help self-reparation of the illness parts of the society! And of course create new sicknesses, but there should not be doubt, that this will go along.
In the close future, there must be a minumum set of standards for e-participation projects. Strong, strict and ciris friendly, standards that support sharing, collabiorative aim creation agenda setting. In this programme European Governacne Culture can show, what is the future about. Ther is not itme to wait more.

There is no time and money to waste more on research and useless dissemniation of propriatery, closed source code and small, institution closed programmes!

It is time to chnage policy, dear leaders. It is time to set clear aims and to put the political will to work for the better strategic, more consciousness behaviour – for the real benefit of the society.
You still have some balls on your side. But the time is running fast, and the possibility of initiating real change can fly away easily…
I wish you all the best I can.

Otherwise, politics has to count with dangers. Some recommendations to avoide them.
Soon, more and more people will ask, when realizing the vividnes of e-participation: hey, we are doing this, why don’t you support us? We know, how technology works, why do you behave, that you don’t know how does it working? Why are you so blind, that you don’t see the thousends of volunteers around the net, Europe and beyond, waiting for engagement?
Why don’t you trust us? If you don’t trust, how can you trust in e-participation?

Trust in traditional supplier companies has change – their role has to change. Instead of fulfilling minimum requirements, they must(!) adopt a social responsible attitude!

All the e-participation development issue shoud be undertaken in a social enterpreneur spirit, because this is primarly a social advanture – not a political, and not a technological, and must not be a business one. To have better social life, we need both (tech and policy) to work for the society. These are tools.
But they must not govern us!

Since the Hungarian Taxation office has been producing the necesarry taxation program only for Windows based computers, and has decided that all Hungarian businesses now have to submit their tax returns on-linem. The solution made online taxation not working for non-microsoft based computers, encouraging some of the Hungarian IT businessmen battleing against the ridiculous segregation.

“Why should a Hungarian national and EU citizen be forced to buy proprietary American software in order to communicate with his Government? There are many, many ways that a government can collect data on-line without forcing its citizens to buy expensive and unreliable foreign software.”

The case of Charles Barcza with APEH (Hungarian Taxation Office)

APEH’s tax return files simply do not work on any other platform, not even using WINE or CrossoverLinux. So if you are a Macintosh or Linux user, then tough luck mate! This has infuriated Hungarian businessman and software developer, Charles Barcza. He develops and runs blackPanther, one of the biggest home-grown, Hungarian-language Linux distribution.

Despite smiling for our photo, Charles is not a happy Hungarian at all because APEH’s decision renders his blackPanther OS and all other non-Microsoft operating systems useless for submission of tax returns in Hungary. (read the original English article here

Speaking government

The battle is still not ended, while a new initiative driven by IT professionals questioning one of the recently intorduced channels of the government – the official homepage of the Government Spokesperson.

The (nearly)Hungarian only website is the official site for the media from the government’s spokepersons- the content is only accessible for the press, so regardless the fact, that the spekings and all the other official press releases are free, possibly public domain, accessing the content is limited to the official workers of the press (bloggers seclueded)

What made the site to be focused by the mainstream media recently, was the high price of the service, and the enormous IT background, that has been purchased for it – the total cost is:$1.31m from the central budget. This fact caused a hot dispute, where politicians, IT experts have been attacking the decision of government officials.

Experts agree that the estimated costs of establishing a website like kormanyszovivo.hu would be no more than one tenth of the price paid, one of them has made the website in one night:

http://kormanyszovivo.g-art.hu/

The developer has told the story in his online video ’s aim was, to show, that the original website of the Government was a waste of money, and he has made nearly the same functionality with less errors in one night.

Counting on the Bill Steve

These examples shows, that although clear recommendations paving the way of e-government, politically and officially there are  holes, where lobbist can move in. Since Hungary is a small place, there is not so much scandal in the European press around these issues.

The metods of citizen participation in issue raising have a lot of freedom. Nagy György, an IT developer has expressed his, and many of his collegues opinion to the CEO of Microsoft last year, when he has been hit with eggs at the University of Corvinus in Budapest. (check out the game inspired by his attack - http://www.egg-attack.com/ and the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtBQ4UCXQ…

The case has put the focus of Public Procurement practice of IT softwares in Hungary into focus, when the tender for 4 year frame has been directly set to Microsoft, in a value of 92,735,479.300 EUR. Pretty much, isn’t it?

The international context

The Microsoft name has been directly mentioned in the process, the circumstances of the tender were suited to Microsoft -  this has made opposition by several IT organizations.(recent Hungarian statistics showed, that the Prime Minister’s Office (where e-government belongs to) Central Service Division has mentioned “Microsoft, or equivalent” in January in the Tenders 1631 times

A recent study by Openforum Europe resulted strange facts. OFE has monitored public procurement notices for computer software published on Tenders Electronic Daily. 136 contact notices were scanned for trademarks in the period from February 1 to April 25, 2008. OFE’s monitoring exercise shows that in 34 tender notices out of 136 (25 percent), company brand names were mentioned in procurement documents effectively preventing competition from alternative products. In 17 cases (12.5 percent), tender notices mentioned Microsoft or one of Microsoft’s products.

Graham Taylor, Chief Executive of OFE commented “Frankly we were shocked at the likely extent of the problem. Public authorities not only stand accused of wasting potentially billions by inefficient purchasing, but also locking their users and citizens into today’s solutions, and being unable to take advantage of new innovation in the future”

There should no be doubt about, that citizens all over Europe need opensource softwares for E-participation as well. Governments might think different, but at least, this is a process, where the voice of citizens has an extra tone (they are – we are developers as well, contributing to the community) a real, trans-national productive tone, which must be taken into consideration in the European strategy for e-participation more stronger.

We can be sure, that the right direction is open source in e-participation.

(originally written for Civil College at www.pep-net.eu)

In October, the Council of Europe has organized the annual conference related to democracy – the Forum for the Future of Democracy, in Madrid, 2008.10.15-17. This years topic has been e-democracy.

The Council of Europe  has been an active agent in transforming democracy in Europe, although, it defentaly needs the e-democratic changes as well – just like other political institutions around Europe.

The conference forum has been too traditional in a sense, that regardless the title of the event, it has been lacking the interactive features, and showed the lack of methods to create real forum. Regardless the fact, that the focus and the topic is right, we need to ask, how will the proposed recommendation of electronic-democratic reforms (Prepared by the Ad-hoc commitee on E-democracy)  give a new spin for better governance in the Council of Europe.

Final conclusions can be reached here!

The questions is not only about hot to propose, promote, recommend e-democracy genuinely to the member states, but more about the cultural shift, that need to happen inside as well. It is a pity, that many of the changes remain unseen.

• The revision of the websites of the Council of Europe institutions is not an open proces. Maybe you could give as well some good points to improve! You can see mines here.
• There is no integrating unit-function inside the organization, who seeks, engages and harnessing the power of cros department cooperation in the related areas, such as active citizenship, Youth, Internet Literacy etc…
• There has been no support for opening and consulting on the recommendation with the wider public -expect the Forum in Madrid.
• The other new initiative, the European Week for Local Democracy needs to be re-tuned from the cititzen perspective and in the light of e-democracy.

These hot areas are not here to blame anybody. Therey are here, to motivate us, to require more reforms from those institutions who are promoting change outside. They are here, to see, sometimes at intergovernmental cooperations governments can do a lot, if they have willingnes.

E-democracy a place, where plenty of space is waiting for the nobel commitments of governments to strenghten democratic values in Europe – outside the EU as well.

The official site of the COE on e-democracy: http://www.coe.int/T/E/Integrated_Projec…

A great event soon: check out www.headstar-events.com  E-democracy

I have become conscious about the situation going over in Belorussia, by a friend of mine a recently imprisoned youth leader.

It is our European responsibility, to show solidarity for those, who are suffering under the practice of dictatorship. I welcome those, who are willing to act for supporting the Belorussian freedom, by sending me a mail, or by just being informed by RSS, or other tools.

This copy of an article, from the Charter97.org, the website supporting the Belorussian freedom movement.

Youth activist Andrei Kim is sentenced to 1.5 year in penal colony by the Tsentralny district court of Minsk. Other participant of the trial of 14 – Alyaksei Bondar, Artsyo Dubski, Mikhas Kryvay, Mikhas Pashekvich, Ales Straltsou, Ales Charnyshou, Tatsyana Tsishkevich – are sentenced to correctional works without sending them to penitentiary institutions. They must charge the state 20 per cent of their wages. Anton Koipish and Uladzimir Sayrheeu are fined of 100 basic units. The judgement was read by judge Alena Illina.

Andrei Kim is found guilty in participation in the unauthorised protest action, and also accused of violent acts against traffic militia officer Yury Sychou. But guilt of Andrei Kim wasn’t proved at the trail. Video materials, shot by the KGB, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Belarusian Television, showed Sychou was hit by another militiaman. Andrei Kim didn’t come near to the militiaman.

The Tsentralny district court of Minsk found A. Kim guilty on the article 364 of the Criminal Code (violence or threat of violence against a militiaman). The youth activist is sentenced to 1.5 year of imprisonment in a minimum security penal colony.

“An evident conclusion – Andrei Kim is a political prisoner,” a U.S. diplomat said. He emphasises the United States called and will call on the Belarusian regime to release all political prisoners. At this date they are Alyaksandr Kazulin and Andrei Kim, Jonathan Moore said to BelaPAN.

One of the accused, Anton Koipish, was taken by emergency ambulance from the courtroom. The activist felt bad, he had high blood pressure.

People, who came to support the activist, met the judgement with shouting “Freedom!” “Long live Belarus!” and “Shame!”. Youth activists also held a protest action near the court. They formed a chain near the court wall. Each of them had a sheet of paper with a letter, together they made up a phrase “For what?”

The prosecutor demanded 2 years of imprisonment for Andrei Kim, 2.5 of restriction of liberty for M. Pashkevich, A. Dubski, and A. Bondar, and 2 year of correctional labour without sending them to penitentiary institutions.

From three to five thousand people attended the rally of entrepreneurs in the Minsk center on 10 January, organised against presidential decree No 760. Dozens of them were detained and beaten up.

14 participants of the rally were charged with riot. Alyaksei Bondar, Artsyom Dubski, Andrei Kim, Anton Koipish, Mikhas Kryvay, Mikhas Pashekvich, Ales Straltsou, Uladzimir Sayrheeu, Ales Charnyshou, and Tatsyana Tsishkevich have had trial today.

It is not likely know, what the situation is in Belorussia right now regarding the human rights. There is a very good article on the TOL (Transitions online – currently accessible by payed subscription) and a newer one discussing and analyzing the trends and fears of the society. The newest article can be read here.

Sometimes videos can say more. This video has been recorded on the independence day, Marth the 25th. http://www.overstream.net/view.php?oid=l…

We have been around 80.000, celebrating the Earth Day, and putting cycling into center. A city, which is not bycicle friendly had to face a huge amount of peaceful demonstrators. The biggest number of cyclerz on this planet..

More videos soon..

It could be a wrong fun – but it is not. When a country’s governing party on it’s website puts a map, where the closest neighbour has been dissapeared, it has some significant message about it’s leaders.

I just can not figure out, what the Slovakian  people would think about this party. It seems, that there is no culture among the members of the party- or at least, they lack some common cultural standard in communication.
It also interesting, what  Jan Slota  has been said many times, that: “In Slovakia, there are no Hungarians, only Slovaks, who speak Hungarian”.

God save us from false political leaders.

I have posted this idea on 60 ideas for Europe a project site run by the European Movement. Take a look at here, or there, and add comments and rate the idea.

The topic

It is not widely known that the general rights for EU member state citizens are not equal, when we are addressing the issue of European Parliament Elections. Some member states has adopted regulations regarding the voting procedure of EP candidates, which are only let people from the national parliament’s parties to be nominated for EP candidates.

This is unequal, uneuropean to preserve this state, where myself, as an European Citizen can not be nominated to be an EP candidate, because I am not the member of a parliament party.

This is an unequal and unbalanced representative structure. Civil socety has to review it, and foster change.
The question of voting needs to be standardized and regulated more from an EU perspective, giving not recommendations, but some strict regulations on equal possibilites on who could be a candidate for EP elections.

 

WE ARE NOT HAVING EQUAL EUROPEAN UNION CITIZEN RIGHTS AT THE EP ELECTIONS IN THE MEMBER STATES.

We have some rights in common regarding voting, but there is no common agreement on nominations to be a candidate.
How do you feel about it?

And finally, the idea here is to have all the elections on one weekend Europe-wide! This would not only make the elections more in the light, but also it would be much CHEAPER, and more people would participate.
That is what I would like to see- European Voting Weekend.
What is your view? Please respond in the comments.