SUBSCRIBE TODAY!
Subscribing entitles a reader to complete stories on all topics released as they happen, special features, confidential documents and access to the complete, searchable story archive online back to 2004.
IP-Watch Summer Interns

IP-Watch interns talk about their Geneva experience in summer 2013. 2:42.

Inside Views

Submit ideas to info [at] ip-watch [dot] ch!

We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.

Latest Comments
  • So simply put, we have the NABP saying that all ph... »
  • The original Brustle decision was widely criticise... »

  • For IPW Subscribers

    A directory of IP delegates in Geneva. Read more>

    A guide to Geneva-based public health and intellectual property organisations. Read More >


    Monthly Reporter

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter, published from 2004 to January 2011, is a 16-page monthly selection of the most important, updated stories and features, plus the People and News Briefs columns.

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter is available in an online archive on the IP-Watch website, available for IP-Watch Subscribers.

    Access the Monthly Reporter Archive >

    Desperate Final Stretch For The “Marco Civil Do Brasil”

    Published on 14 November 2013 @ 1:37 am

    By for Intellectual Property Watch

    The original 10 internet governance principles that formed the basis for Brazil’s Marco Civil legislation were presented proudly by the Brazilian delegation to the Internet Governance Forum in Vilnius. That was in 2010. In 2012, civil society organisations warned that an amended Marco Civil could erode freedom of the internet. It took yet another year and former NSA contractor Edward Snowden to bring the original ideas, developed in a forward-looking broad public consultation process, back to the floor of the Brazilian Parliament – and there the fight goes on.

    According to reports from Brazil, there is a stalemate at the Parliament in Brasilia over the Marco Civil right now. Since last week, no other votes have been able to be taken due to the fight about the legislation which has been debated and, at times, applauded internationally.

    The law must be voted in the House of Representatives. After being postponed last week, it was again postponed yesterday, according to Carolina Rossini, Project Director for the Latin America Resource Center at the Internet Governance and Human Rights program at the New America Foundation’s OTI, due to pressure by “telcos who do not accept the text on Net Neutrality.”

    Pressure from industry had already resulted in the draft legislation being shelved at the end of last year.

    Rossini provided an English language translation of the text, available here.

    The net neutrality rules provided in the current draft text ban discrimination of traffic for “content, origin and destination, services, terminal or application” or any other characteristic, as long as it does not result from “technical requirements necessary for adequate performance of services under regulation” (Article 9). An additional decree would regulate the option of traffic management for technical reasons. Telecommunications providers have been up in arms against such provisions, in Brazil and elsewhere.

    Fundamental Digital Rights

    The core of the Marco Civil is a translation of fundamental rights to the internet, including freedom of access and expression, freedom of privacy and data protection, as well as net neutrality. Civil society groups worldwide applauded not only the content of the original draft proposal, but also the process by which it was developed.

    “It was more than a public consultation, it was a public debate in a portal called e-Democracy in which every sector, every individual who wanted to have his or her opinion expressed, could put in their opinion on the details of the civil rights framework,” Carlos Afonso, executive director of the Institute Nupef and member of Internet Steering Committee in Brazil (CGI.br) said at the recent Internet Governance Forum in Bali. The Steering Committee, portrayed as an example of real multi-stakeholder governance, has prepared the Marco Civil and steered the public consultation.

    But what had been developed via the innovative process was derailed in Parliament in November 2012. The resulting text led the Electronic Frontier Foundation to warn that the “new version of Marco Civil threatens freedom of expression.”

    Rapporteur Alessandro Molon, a congressman for Brazil’s Workers’ Party, in a March 2013 interview spoke about a “civil society defeat,” especially as Brazil approved two cybercrime bills while postponing the Marco Civil. It was easier to decide what should be seen as a crime than to guarantee the rights of citizens, Molon told Brian Pellot from Index on Censorship at the time.

    Back to Start – New Old Marco Civil

    But now the post-Snowden amendments have reinstated some of the earlier protections. “The text is much closer to many of the goals that have inspired Marco Civil in the first place,” said Rossini, who did an analysis and English language translation of the text, presented last week by Molon.

    “Freedom of expression is stronger throughout the text,” Rossini said. “Privacy is also stronger. We have good text on net neutrality and good text on ISP liability” [referring to internet service providers].

    The new paragraphs 19 and 20 establish the levelled limitation of liability. Access providers will not be liable, application providers will “only be liable for civil damages arising out of content generated by third parties if [they] do not take steps, after specific court order, within the framework and technical limits of its services and timely mentioned, to make the content identified as infringing unavailable, except otherwise established by law.“

    Exceptions from these limited liability rules as provided in amendments included last winter are out for now. But Rossini warned: “The details will be later set by the copyright law, under reform, and that probably will be voted in 2015.”

    A concern of civil society is the retention of communication logs – retention is provided for in Article 10, though access shall be governed by court orders. All in all, civil society favours the draft bill.

    Post-Snowden Effects

    In addition to the re-installment of old guarantees aspired for by civil society organisations, the post-Snowden Marco Civil also embodies the reaction of Brazil’s government to the NSA mass surveillance. President Dilma Rousseff announced her government would seek to protect citizens and companies in Brazil from the tapping and snooping. Localization of data is the catch-word. So according to the articles 11 and 12, internet providers offering services to Brazilian users, regardless of where they are based, would be obliged to adhere to Brazilian legislation and they have to allow for a verification that they do (Article 11).

    This is quite similar to what the European Union is considering with regard to their data protection regulation in the making. But Brazil goes a step further and “through Decree, (the Executive Branch) may force connection providers and Internet applications providers provided for in art. 11, who exercise their activities in an organized, professional and economic way, to install or use structures for storage, management and dissemination of data in the country, considering the size of the providers, its sales in Brazil and breadth of the service offering to the Brazilian public,” according to the draft bill. Enforcement measures include warnings, fines and the suspension of services.

    It “makes no sense to include” such policies in the Marco Civil, Afonso wrote in a recent article. Unless the government decided to intervene directly in the services offered at the network (and most major services open to the public were free and made by private companies), the only way to stimulate the construction and operation of data centres in the country is to make this activity internationally competitive.

    Afonso was similarly sceptical about email “made in Brazil” and the call for more independent infrastructure. With regard to the latter, some things are already in place – and it does not happen overnight.

    Whither Marco Civil?

    “We have been working on gathering maximum support amongst parties in order to preserve key elements of Marco Civil, such as net neutrality,” Molon wrote tonight in response to questions from Intellectual Property Watch. During this week he had numerous meetings with party leaders and fellow deputies, Molon said, in an effort to explain points of the bill. Numerous parties had already shown their support to net neutrality and realized it is essential to maintain the free and democratic spirit of the internet.

    “I expect Marco Civil to be voted and approved next week,” he said.

    Monika Ermert may be reached at info@ip-watch.ch.

     

    Comments

    1. Brazil’s Marco Civil about to be voted in Parliament « vgrass.de says:

      […] also embodies the reaction of Brazil’s government to the NSA mass surveillance,” writes Monika Ermert on Intellectual Property Watch. She also presents an English language translation of the current […]

    2. English Translation of the New Version of Brazil’s Marco Civil » infojustice says:

      […] Property Watch reports that the bill has hit a roadblock in the legislature, and “pressure from industry had already […]


    Leave a Reply

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website. By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

    By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

    2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

    3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

    4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

    5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

    6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

    7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

    8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

    9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.

     

     
    Your IP address is 101.226.169.209