There are references to a review of Counter-terrorism and a Commision for Countering Extremism which will include Internet-related policies. Although details are lacking, these may contain threats to privacy and free speech. The government has opted
for a "Digital Charter", which isn't a Bill, but something else.
Digital Charter
This isn't a Bill, but some kind of policy intervention. Perhaps the
Digital Charter will be for companies to voluntarily agree to, or a statement of government preferences. It addresses both unwanted and illegal
content or activity online, and the protection of vulnerable people. The work of CTIRU and the IWF are mentioned as examples of work to remove illegal or extremist content.
At this point, it is hard to know exactly what harms will
emerge, but pushing enforcement into the hands of private companies is problematic. It means that decisions never involve courts and are not fully transparent and legally accountable.
Counterterrorism review
There will be a review of counterterrorism powers . The review includes "working with online companies to reduce
and restrict the availability of extremist material online".
This appears to be a watered down version of the Conservative manifesto commitment to give greater responsibility for companies to take down extremist material from
their platforms. Already Google and Facebook have issued public statements about how they intend to improve the removal of extremist material from their platforms.
Commission for Countering Extremism
A Commission will look at the topic of countering extremism, likely including on the Internet.
This
appears to be a measure to generate ideas and thinking, which could be a positive approach, if it involves considering different approaches, rather than pressing ahead with policies in order to be seen to be doing something. The quality of the Commission
will therefore depend on their ability to take a wide range of evidence and assimilate it impartially; it faces a significant challenge in ensuring that fundamental rights are respected within any policy suggestions they suggest.
Data Protection Bill
A new Data Protection Bill , "will fulfil a manifesto commitment to ensure the UK has a
data protection regime that is fit for the 21st century". This will replace the Data Protection Act 1998, which is in any case being removed as the result of the new
General Data Protection Regulation passed by the European Parliament last year. Regulations apply directly, so the GDPR does not need
to be 'implemented' in UK law before Brexit.
We welcome that (at least parts of) the GDPR will be implemented in primary legislation with a full debate in Parliament. It is not clear if the text of the GDPR will be brought into
this Bill, or whether it supplements it.
This appears to be a bill to at least implement some of the 'derogations' (options) in the GDPR, plus the new rules for law enforcement agencies, that came in with the new
law enforcement-related Directive and have to be applied by EU member states.
The bulk of the important rights are in the GDPR, and cannot be tampered with before Brexit. We welcome the chance to debate the choices, and especially to press for the right of privacy groups to bring complaints directly.
The Digital Economy Bill (DEBill) will require that porn sites verify the age of their users in order to prevent under 18s from viewing pornography. Despite concerns that this will leave porn users vulnerable to hacks and security risks, the
Government has failed to amend the Bill so that privacy is written into the legislation. Instead, Codes of Practice will place the responsibility for protecting people's privacy with porn sites not the companies supplying age verification technology.
Executive Director Jim Killock said:
Age verification is an accident waiting to happen. Despite repeated warnings, parliament has failed to listen to concerns about the privacy and security of
people who want to watch legal adult content.
As we saw with the Ashley Madison leaks, the hacking of private information about people's sex lives, has huge repercussions for those involved. The UK government has failed to take
responsibility for its proposals and placed the responsibility for people's privacy into the hands of porn companies.
Censorship regime
The Bill will also enable the creation of a censorship
regime as the BBFC will be given powers to force ISPs to block legitimate websites without any judicial process. These powers were added to the Bill, when it became apparent that foreign porn sites could not be compelled to apply age verification. During
parliamentary scrutiny, they were extended to include other content, not just pornography, raising further concerns about the threat to free speech.
Killock added:
These new powers will put in
place a vast system of censorship which could be applied to tens of thousands of adult websites. The BBFC will be under pressure to censor more and more legal content. This is a serious assault on free speech in the UK.
Almost 25,000 ORG supporters signed a petition calling for the Government to reject plans for blocking legal pornography.
The Digital Economy Bill has received the royal assent. Interesting comments and links on Pandora Blake's blog. Apparently a thrilling thirteen parliamentary jobsworths could be arsed to turn up for the final debate in the House of
Comics. I would think it's now in the interest of porn producers, as well as their British customers, to drop any restrictions on access via VPNs and to help UK punters get round any attempted firewall.
Pandora seems to know more
about the matter than the 650 political twats together!
