This text is a work of completely free usage. No need to indicate authorship,
all remix allowed and leverage for any purpose, including commercial.
SPREAD THIS PAGE WITH LINK
This page is a translation in progress of the original portuguese one available at http://bit.ly/16igualNSA
Campaign for the amendment of article 16 of Marco Civil of Internet in Brazil, to remove the provison that mandates service providers to keep bulk data collection of unsuspecting netizens
“Marco Civil with art. 16: Brazilian government becomes NSA”
Tags: #MarcoCivil #16igualNSA #privacy #surveillance #bulkdatacolection #dataretention #judicialorder #EdwardSnowden #fightback #NSA
We're brazilian activists trying to put up a strong campaign here in Brazil against article 16 of Marco Civil da Internet, wich makes it mandatory for all big companies to retain all logs of their respective online services for six months. That goes directly against the 13 Principles, right?
The thing is: we need international help. As soon as possible, since the approval in Rep. Chambers may occur this wednesday, 19th feb. We are trying to do nothing but fight back, carrying on the legacy of the last week global movement. Could you, world, help us out?
If you could please replicate the following message through your social media, it would be very helpfull:
Article 16 provides for compulsory keeping of access to Internet applications logs towards a broad listing of providers, in a sort of mandatory staple of all electronic navigational carried out in great sites, inverting the Brazilian constitutional principle of presumption of innocence, using a fundamental right as a bargaining chip to encourage the approval of the draft at the Representatives Chamber.
This provision is a violation of human rights. It falls short under the explicit recommendation by the United Nations Human Rights Concil Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, which suggests for i) Updating and strengthening laws and legal standards, ii) Facilitating private, secure and anonymous communications, iii) Increasing public access to information, understanding and awareness of threats to privacy, iv) Regulating the commercialization of surveillance technology and v) Furthering the assessment of relevant international human rights obligations.
We are fully aware that one cannot exactly compare NSA practices with that particular provision for Marco Civil. Because, if it passes, it is (although terrible) a transparent legal provision, which also foreseen due process and a judicial order for the data to be released to the competent authorities.
Nevertheless, it is failure legal provision, as it establishes data retention not only for connection logs, but also for navigation and other application logs. This connection with NSA practices has an assumed "marketing purposes", to make it more tangible to the general public to understand, as ultimately, it will lead to breaches in privacy rights and facilitate surveillance, particularly in our current context in which street protests, such as those against World Cup, are escalating and being organized mostly online.
Once approved this storage obligation, foreseen in article. 16, no provider may "not save" the data, or the provider will be acting outside the law and therefore subject to punishment, even if no crime ever came to be investigated as part of this provider online services.
Also, regarding the "not so bad" reservation, art. 16 does establishes that a judicial order is necessary for the government to access the data retained by the service providers. Even though, the main problem remains: art. 16 would make it illegal in Brazil (or for any Brazilian user) for an online service provider try to develop a business model not based on data retention, or better said, to offer a privacy safe online service. Therefore we will be doomed by law to give away any legal expectations of private navigation once using major services, or any for-profit small startup.
"As many other Latin Americans, I fought against authoritarianism and censorship, and I cannot but defend, in an uncompromising fashion, the right to privacy of individuals and the sovereignty of my country. In the absence of the right to privacy, there can be no true freedom of expression and opinion, and therefore no effective democracy." - Pres. Dilma Roussef, in her Opening speech of the 68th General Assembly of the United Nations (UN).
What you can do to participate in this campaign:
Publicize these images so that more people know about this cause:
"This is done not because it is necessary [...] but because technologies make it easy and cheap "- http://freesnowden.is/asksnowden/index.html
"I think a person should be able to dial a number, make a purchase, send a text, write an email or visit a website without having to think how this will be seen in your permanent record. "- http://freesnowden.is/asksnowden/index.html
"The second effect, least understood, but far more sinister, these programs is that they effectively create` `permanent records of our daily activities, even if there is nothing wrong with made on our part. [...]. You can not remember where you were dining at June 12, 2009, but the government yes. "-
"These programs were never about terrorism: they are about economic espionage, social control and diplomatic handling. They are about power. "- Open letter to the Brazilian people (12/17/2013)"
Six months ago, I revealed that the NSA wanted to hear the whole world. Now the whole world is listening back, and talking too. And the NSA did not like what you're hearing. The culture of indiscriminate surveillance around the world, exposed to public debate and real investigations on all continents, is collapsing. Just three weeks ago, Brazil led the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations to recognize for the first time in history that privacy no where digital network begins, and that mass surveillance of innocent people is a violation of human rights. The tide turned, and finally we can see a future where we can enjoy security without sacrificing our privacy." - Open letter to the Brazilian people (12/17/2013)
"Those who give up essential liberty for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety”
The idea of this campaign is pressuring Congress against the current version of art. 16 of the Civil Framework of the Internet in Brazil, which provides as follows:
Art 16. The provider of Internet applications organized as an entity that performs this activity in an organized, professional and economic purposes, shall keep logs of their access to Internet applications in secret, in a controlled environment and safety at within six months, under regulation.
§ 1º Court order may require, for a time, providers of Internet applications that are not subject to the provisions of the caput to keep logs of access to Internet applications, since it is dealing with records relating to specific facts in a given period.
§ 2º The police or administrative authority or the prosecutor may request a precaution to any provider of Internet applications that access logs of Internet applications are stored, even for a period longer than expected in the caput , subject to the provisions of § § 3 and 4 of article. 14.
§ 3º In any case, the availability to the applicant, the logs referred to in this article must be preceded by judicial authorization, as provided in Section IV of this Chapter.
§ 4º In the application of sanctions for noncompliance with the provisions of this article shall be considered the nature and seriousness of the offense, the harm resulting therefrom, any benefit to the offender, the aggravating circumstances, the background of the offender and recidivism.
It is important to concentrate criticism on art. 16 to prevent Marco Civil from being fully faded. There are several achievements in Marco Civil da Internet that bother telecommunications companies and other groups of power holders. Therefore, one of the strategies they are adopting is just trying to make the entire project to be rejected. The posture of cursing the project completely is precisely that which has been adopted by Eduardo Cunha ("Did not read and did not like", says PMDB leader on the new text of Marco Civil)
The House vote will likely take place February 19, Wednesday. For this reason there is urgency in this mobilization.
Since the proposal in December 11, 2013 the Civil Framework version provides the collection of compulsory mass of metadata (information to identify, locate and manage the data) of non-suspects. According to art. 16, any administrative officer, police officer or member of the Public Ministry may require the so called application logs, which are metadata of services you use on the Internet. This means that Brazil would create the enabling legislation guard our citizens as well as the NSA makes citizens around the world, without this having to have a reasonable suspicion.
The art. 16 command makes mandatory recordkeeping access to Internet applications for a broad list of providers, in a sort of compulsory wiretapping of all electronic navigational held in big websites, inverting the constitutional principle of presumption of innocence, using a fundamental right as the currency of political exchange to get the bill approved in the House of Representatives.
February 10, 2014 the press reported the letter signed by SIXTEEN organizations that expressed "serious concern" with the version of the text published on December 12, 2013, indicating that despite the efforts to build a parliamentary majority importance, it should not jeopardize the fundamental principles of Marco Civil, which they understand to be happening, especially with respect to art. 16.
Even after the civil society organizations have complained against vigilantism and have argued for a principiológico text as a general rule, respecting existing laws on specific issues, thus ensuring privacy, the Rapporteur of the Marco Civil Chamber, Mr Alessandro Molon (PT-RJ ), used the following words to explain the permanence of the wording of art. 16:
"After discussion with representatives of various parties in this House, we understand that the most suitable for the storage of records access to Internet applications on providing applications that require treatment is the application provider, established as a legal entity and does exert this activity in an organized, professional and economic purposes, keep records of their access to Internet applications in secret, in a controlled environment and safety, for six months under the Regulation. This guard, under Article 16, it is important for investigations of illegal within the Internet.
We made clear in § 2 of the present Article 16, that police or administrative authority or the prosecutor may request a precaution to any provider of Internet applications that records of access to Internet applications are stored for a period longer than expected in this article.
added the § 3 to the current Article 16, so just to clarify that the provision to the applicant, the connection logs, should be preceded by judicial authorization .
And also added § 4 to the current Article 16, which establishes guidelines for the judiciary in the application of sanctions for noncompliance with the provisions of Article 16, shall be considered the nature and seriousness of the offense, the harm resulting therefrom, any benefit to the offender, the aggravating circumstances, the background of the offender and
recidivism.'scurrent Article 18 (§ 1 of the former Article 13) provides that "except in the cases provided for" (new addition) in Civil Marco Internet, the option not to save records access to Internet applications does not imply liability for damages resulting from use of these services by third parties. The increase was included in the new version because the custody records of applications by the application providers, became mandatory for providers organized as a legal entity and who exercise their activities in an organized, professional and economic purposes. For other providers, which are not legal persons who exercise their activities in an organized, professional and economic purposes, the option not to save the records do not imply liability for damages arising from the use of their services by third parties.
"Thecurrent wording of this Article installs a true climate of vigilantism, it requires that all persons who use largeservices have their lives online recorded for future devassado be from a simple request for administrative agent, officer or member of the MP and that even if the data are only released after court order, they will be collected indefinitely, making anyone suspicious. It is not difficult, by the way the judiciary works in Brazil, a climate of vigilantism is generated mainly against "undesirable", those who challenge the powers that be.
Moreover, the measure prevents the creation of services that promote privacy and for this abdicate save logs of users. Common services on thetoday Internet and that have been established as fundamental tools for maintaining the privacy of citizens Network will be prevented from emerging in Brazil, beyond that inhibit the emergence of writing services even without this purpose, since this cost will be increased flap mere obligation of custody logs.'s
vigilantism was a fact that the Civil Marco in its original conception, aimed at spreading, since the Civil Marco, the result of unprecedented discussion with society, was the result of the fight against them . vigilantistas who wins with this wording
understand that with the proposed new fundamental pillars of this bill were shaken, hampering the realization of some rights that are protected under the principled part of the project, namely: the right to the inviolability and secrecy of the flow and contents of private communications, the right to privacy and freedom of expression.
there is still a way to go in the processing of this law and it may still be a tool to ensure neutrality, privacy and freedom. But this time, the Civil Marco is completely mischaracterized and away from the covenant that was made with whole society that collectively
built.'sGood that it is also clear that in referring to this particular article the rapporteur has already closed position. This means that only with a strong public outcry there any possibility of changes in this device.
This provision constitutes a violation of human rights. The proposed statutory command falls short of explicit recomendaçções the Report of the Human Rights Council of the United Nations by Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression(A/HRC/23/40) suggests that: i) Upgrading and strengthening of laws and legal standards, ii) facilitate private, secure and anonymous communications, iii) Increase public access to information, understanding and awareness of threats to privacy, iv) Regulatory marketing surveillance technology and v) Promote the evaluation of relevant international human rights
obligations.'snew text expands the obligations of recordkeeping. Unlike the previous version which included mandatory saves only the connection records, the current version also makes it mandatory recordkeeping access to Internet applications to a broad listing of providers. Therefore establishes a kind of compulsory staple of any navigation performed in major electronic sites, reversing the constitutional presumption of innocence. This activity stands out, requires considerable investment and encourage obliged to store data to use them commercially companies. fundamental pillars of this project, nor encourage a fundamental right to become the currency of commercial exchange.
Note that in the European Union, where the standards of privacy protection are higher, the Directive dealing with mandatory records retention concerns only records connection, and not to the records of applications. And even the retention of data connection is having questioned its constitutionality.
In Germany, for example, such a provision was declared unconstitutional, taking into consideration the history of the Nazi period, which took advantage of databases much simpler data. Germany was also the country that, along with Brazil, presented the resolution at the UN Assembly on the right to privacy, approved by majority. For our country the national context is consistent with their international agenda, no record keeping should be limited by the rights provided for in Article 7. If required, shall be determined by and limited to records relating to specific facts time. Furthermore, any predictions access to these records must be preceded by court order and protected by limits on abuses.
Cory Doctorow (fiction writer, founder of the Open Rights Group and co-editor of the blog BoingBoing) once said that the social networking market had room for some company make lots of money by offering a service that guarantees privacy. But Brazil is about to approve a device that closes that door law by making it illegal for the option not monitor its users to any and all "provider of Internet applications organized as an entity that performs this activity in an organized manner professionally and economic purposes."
Examples ofservices online that guarantee the privacy of users and that would become illegal in Brazil with the approval of the art. 16:
The recordkeeping, and generate risks to the privacy of anyone surfing the Internet and be costly for companies, it is also ineffective for the purposes of alleged security for your . compulsory
In the European Union, in only 0.001% of the cases (one case in 10 000), the keeping of logs effectively helped in solving crimesmodel:.
A Brazilian entrepreneur reports that it is necessary to keep some records in terms of its business
no can we give up, because if a publisher go to court for being accused of fraud, we have to prove that fraud occurred. There has never been a case, but threats were not lacking.
Hired to keep records physical machines in the USA. Expensive and we do not keep all users, only our 100,000 active sites. If we were to keep everything would be impractical.
Know when you call the call center and they say that their call is being recorded? It's like that. I record the logs of users entering the site with our services, but not the other access to other sites. And definitely do not keep the transacted information (passwords, comments, etc. where there were clicks): I have nothing that I do not wantuse..
To embed this document use the