Slashdot Mirror
EU Resists US Lobbying As Privacy War Looms
judgecorp writes "The European Commission is resisting pressure from US firms and public bodies designed to derail its privacy proposals, which include the 'right to be forgotten' that would allow users to demand their data be removed from Internet sites. Facebook and others oppose the right to be forgotten as it would interfere with their ability to market stuff at friends and connections of their users."
Exactly: after all, what is lobbying? No, the nice gentleman from facebook is not trying to buy my vote on this matter. We are simply good friends who like to take lunch together. Only I have a chronic habit of forgetting my wallet, but he's more than happy to foot the bill. He's also quite fond of my wife, and loves to treat her to the occasional gift of exquisite diamonds and spa trips. But it's okay: he never tries to influence my vote. We're just friends.
Hehe -- and if all else fails, your wife might get these mistress pictures sent to her :)
It's Europe - she doesn't care: Mitterand Funeral
Also, any EU regulations on the "right to be forgotten" can be no more than regulations on businesses and is unlikely to apply to such a foundation.
Er... no. EU powers, including in the area of data protection, do not just apply to businesses.
You cannot. Because they do not exist. "Welcome breath of fresh air"? Er no, the Commission has the strange idea that citizens deserve to have their rights protected more than corporations deserve the freedom to take them away. That is why the UK neocons want out of the EU: it stands up for ordinary people.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
Ernst Strasser, Austrian (former) MEP is just on trial for offering to sell his influence for EUR 100.000,-
Problem is, the so-called lobbyists where british journalists.
There are fine videos on youtube (he actually speaks english, ahem, sort of) as well, try to spill not your coffee though.
I don't know where you got the impression that this was about a right to completely scrub oneself from every server on the internet with a magic button. It's about the right to tell a web site, to which you have previously provided information, that it must remove that information.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
The European Commission do indeed do lots of stupid things but I think anything aimed at giving users greater privacy and control over their personal information is a good thing.
The EC makes shit tons of good stuff that you never hear about. A lot more than bad stuff, in fact.
The EC's biggest problem stems from EU governments that actively lobby it to pass regulations and directives on unpopular topics. Local politicians seldom mention that their great new reform is a mere transcription into local law of an EU directive (aka something they're obligated to do). In contrast, they'll sure as hell blame EU technocrats (which, incidentally, they named) for coming up with directives that force them to pass much needed yet highly unpopular reforms.
A case in point is the recent lashing out at the EU over deficit reduction. No politician gets elected in the EU by promising to axe the public sector, axe entitlement programs, raise taxes, and so on. The EU stability pact, in this light, is a blessing: they get to do all that with a convenient scapegoat. Hollande's position on it during the French presidential campaign, in this regard, was exemplary of EU demagoguery. He posed for voters, promising that he'd renegotiate the pact. Upon being elected, he quacked around for a few weeks, in an effort to disguise his pig of a bluff into a not-too-ugly princess. And, now, he can now freely blame his predecessor and the EU to pass the highly unpopular reforms that he knew were much needed from the start. (Whether he actually does remains an open question, but I'd opine that he has little choice.)
Most people don't care about anything, unless and until it affects them personally.
This is (in theory) why governments enact "nanny state" legislation; to prepare for, and protect its population from, bad things that those who will be affected haven't even considered yet.
Few people consider about the cost of hospitalisation after a car accident, until they're in one. Hence national health services.
Few people consider the cost of leaving embarrassing photos on Facebook, until it comes up in a job interview. Hence this legislation.
To be fair, all Governments lobby on behalf of their domestic corporations - think of all the times that politicians from the ruling party in a country go to another country and negotiate trade agreements or highlight the products and services of their domestic companies to decision-making politicians of the host country.
Heck, if politicians DID NOT do this, they would probably be accused of not doing their jobs when going abroad. Indeed, this is one of the more common roles of most diplomatic ambassadors.
(As a case in point, and granted it is not about politicians but it is close enough, the British Royal yacht Britannia was funded by the British taxpayer. When a previous Government said they wanted to stop paying for Britannia, quite a few people in British industry objected because the Royal family often used the yacht as a lobbying tool for British businesses abroad).
Certainly, when the lobbying goes beyond the "our companies offer wonderful services/products, and we can arrange tax breaks that are passed on as discounts" or "build your new manufacturing facility in my back yard, and get some very favorable terms" to "if you do not do it our way, then we will make life hard for you" then that, for me, is something the politicians and companies need to be called out on, but that is not lobbying, that is making threats.
It's not America. Here in Europe we have had centuries to turn corruption into a civil, polite art.