6 ms·

The EU, which Germany is a major part of, passed the Data Retention Directive [0] in 2006. That directive required every state in the EU to pass laws that all

by feral 13y ago

The EU, which Germany is a major part of, passed the Data Retention Directive [0] in 2006. That directive required every state in the EU to pass laws that all their citizens telecommunications metadata would be stored for at least 6 months, and often more, up to 2 years. As I understand it, this means all 'metadata' is required to be stored, including the source and destination for every phonecall and text message, including cell location for cellphones, and information mapping IPs to users for web+email (and perhaps also the source and destination of every e-mail; but I'm not certain about that?). I believe that the data is stored by service providers, and only passed to law enforcement in the context of a particular investigation in theory (in the Irish implementation, a court order is not required to access an individual's records; a request from a high ranking law enforcement officer or tax official is enough). But its all collected and stored. Maybe that's a sufficiently big difference that warrants the EU retention laws not being mentioned in this article? But it seems to me that they should still be part of this narrative. There have been challenges to the EU directive, and countries dragging their heels about implementing it. But, by and large, it is an established part of EU law. I don't know a lot about this area, but I feel that an understanding of existing European data retention laws seems to be missing from the coverage of the European reaction to the US data collection issues. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive

lispm 13y ago
The German 'Verfassungsgericht' has said in 2010 that it is unconstitutional.
blumentopf 13y ago
In Germany, the data retention law was ruled unconstitutional by the German Constitutional Court on March 2, 2010. Data retention was allowed in general by the court, but only with significant restrictions. The German government failed to pass a new law which fulfills both the EU data retention directive and the court's restrictions. The EU Commission therefore is currently sueing Germany to implement the EU data retention directive. If the EU Commission prevails, Germany will have to pay 315.036,54 Euro per day as a penalty fee until a proper law is enacted.
- kamjam 13y ago
  That's really interesting. We (people in the UK) have long been complaining that our Government stringently applies every single EU directive and human rights law but other countries just seem to ignore them (rightfully so IMO, sometimes logic should prevail). I know it's probably not strictly true, but it's things like this which may eventually lead to the disbanding of the EU and such integration of the law.
  - sentenza 13y ago
    But the UK opted out of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and is not even part of Schengen. I personally, as a German, am much less forgiving towards the UK than towards the US for what has been revealed. The UK is a EU member, which is so much more than just an ally. It is now clear that the UK spies on all continental Europeans, gives that data to the US, and at the same time tries to opt out of the EU cooperation on police and criminal justice. No matter how you turn it, this cannot be interpreted as anything else than a "spit in your face" gesture towards the rest or Europe. We now get the uneasy feeling that the current and past governments of the UK more or less hate us.
    - louthy 13y ago
      I think that's a bit harsh. The UK went into Europe based on the ideals of the common market, what came after isn't what anybody signed up for, so there's a constant mistrust of the overarching nature of the EU bureaucracy from the population at large, which the politicians who want votes reflect (and obviously stir up too). I think this clip from the classic comedy 'Yes, Minister' sums up Europe. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVrN-gkzVYI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVrN-gkzVYI The UK doesn't hate the rest of Europe, but clearly each nation will play its hand for its own political reasons.
      - sentenza 13y ago
        You bring up an interesting point. I very often read that the UK joined for the single market but then afterwards the EU started taking away national sovereignty. I don't quite understand how this view of things is possible. From the very start, when the Coal and Steel Community was created in 1952, loss of national sovereignty was, to a certain degree, built into the system. The primary goal of European cooperation was to take away the ability of European nations to go to war with one another. Also remember the "de fact solidarity" that Robert Schuman spoke of in his famous declaration in 1950: With all the horrors of WW2 fresh in mind, nobody could expect the people of Europe to show solidarity for another, so the framework of Europe must be set up to generate a "de facto solidarity". The whole system should be set up in such a way that the people of Europe cannot _not_ show solidarity. We learned this in school and it seems to be generally accepted by the general populace, at least in the "old" continental Western Europe. If you ask older Germans or French about European integration, they will talk about avoiding war, not about the single market. The only possible explanation I can come up with for the sentiment that the EU was "all about the single market" is that UK voters were horribly misled by their press and politicians at the time of EU accession. Is this plausible? On a side note: I admit that what I wrote about hating Europe was harsh, but we (i.e., me and many others I've spoken to) do feel genuinely betrayed.
philipp-de 13y ago
There's more. There's technical standards, procedures and laws accross europe for the storage, retrieval and processing of metadata and other information. it's called ETSI Lawful Interception see: * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawful_interception#Technical_description http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawful_interception#Technical_d... * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawful_interception#Europe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawful_interception#Europe * http://www.etsi.org/index.php/technologies-clusters/technologies/security/lawful-interception http://www.etsi.org/index.php/technologies-clusters/technolo... * http://webapp.etsi.org/WorkProgram/Report_WorkItem.asp?WKI_ID=25520&curItemNr=43&totalNrItems=44&optDisplay=44&titleType=all&qSORT=HIGHVERSION&qETSI_ALL=&SearchPage=TRUE&qTB_ID=608;LI&qINCLUDE_SUB_TB=True&qINCLUDE_MOVED_ON=&qSTOP_FLG=N&qKEYWORD_BOOLEAN=O http://webapp.etsi.org/WorkProgram/Report_WorkItem.asp?WKI_I... * http://webapp.etsi.org/WorkProgram/Report_WorkItem.asp?WKI_ID=24772&curItemNr=44&totalNrItems=44&optDisplay=44&titleType=all&qSORT=HIGHVERSION&qETSI_ALL=&SearchPage=TRUE&qTB_ID=608;LI&qINCLUDE_SUB_TB=True&qINCLUDE_MOVED_ON=&qSTOP_FLG=N&qKEYWORD_BOOLEAN=O http://webapp.etsi.org/WorkProgram/Report_WorkItem.asp?WKI_I... This has been in place much longer than the "data retention" directive.
1morepassword 13y ago
The EU data retention directive really doesn't compare to what's happening in the US. It merely instructs ISP's and telco's to keep their logs stored for a minimal period of time. It's about keeping the metadata around "just in case" potential evidence isn't destroyed, and even this is already extremely controversial and is still being challenged. The law still applies when it comes to getting actual access to that data, and just because the Irish may have thrown due process out of the window doesn't mean everyone else has, and certainly not the Germans. The data retention doesn't cover the actual contents of the communications, and it doesn't give any government or intelligence agency the right to access the data outside the legal framework that already existed before the internet was even a thing. It doesn't even come close to what the US is doing.
danbruc 13y ago
Without judging this I see one positive thing - it is publicly known what information is collected, there is a debate about it and you can file a lawsuit against it. And as seen in Germany they courts are really taking the issue serious and don't just try to silence you. To me this seems orders of magnitude better than not even knowing what is going. Of course, as seen in the case of the UK, there is no guarantee that nothing else is going on but even after the events of last weeks I still have quite a bit of trust in Europe. After reading a bit into it I think the situation is actually quite good. The EU passed the directive requiring all EU countries to adopt national laws for data retention but now there are lawsuits all over the place. The directive has been widely adopted by the member states - in some cases after being sued by the EU for not adopting the directive (but this court is not responsible for ensuring that the directive does not violate other laws) - but at least in Germany, Romania and the Czech Republic the laws have been canceled after they were ruled unconstitutional. There are pending lawsuits against national laws in other countries, more lawsuits against member states, for example Germany, by the EU for not adopting the directive and lawsuits against the directive. After being ruled unconstitutional and violating human rights in several countries I think it is only a matter of time until the whole thing gets buried. It will have cost an insane amount of time, money and dedication but the system still seems - more or less - to work.

by feral 13y ago

lispm 13y ago

The German 'Verfassungsgericht' has said in 2010 that it is unconstitutional.

blumentopf 13y ago

In Germany, the data retention law was ruled unconstitutional by the German Constitutional Court on March 2, 2010. Data retention was allowed in general by the court, but only with significant restrictions. The German government failed to pass a new law which fulfills both the EU data retention directive and the court's restrictions. The EU Commission therefore is currently sueing Germany to implement the EU data retention directive. If the EU Commission prevails, Germany will have to pay 315.036,54 Euro per day as a penalty fee until a proper law is enacted.

kamjam 13y ago
That's really interesting. We (people in the UK) have long been complaining that our Government stringently applies every single EU directive and human rights law but other countries just seem to ignore them (rightfully so IMO, sometimes logic should prevail). I know it's probably not strictly true, but it's things like this which may eventually lead to the disbanding of the EU and such integration of the law.
- sentenza 13y ago
  But the UK opted out of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and is not even part of Schengen. I personally, as a German, am much less forgiving towards the UK than towards the US for what has been revealed. The UK is a EU member, which is so much more than just an ally. It is now clear that the UK spies on all continental Europeans, gives that data to the US, and at the same time tries to opt out of the EU cooperation on police and criminal justice. No matter how you turn it, this cannot be interpreted as anything else than a "spit in your face" gesture towards the rest or Europe. We now get the uneasy feeling that the current and past governments of the UK more or less hate us.
  - louthy 13y ago
    I think that's a bit harsh. The UK went into Europe based on the ideals of the common market, what came after isn't what anybody signed up for, so there's a constant mistrust of the overarching nature of the EU bureaucracy from the population at large, which the politicians who want votes reflect (and obviously stir up too). I think this clip from the classic comedy 'Yes, Minister' sums up Europe. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVrN-gkzVYI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVrN-gkzVYI The UK doesn't hate the rest of Europe, but clearly each nation will play its hand for its own political reasons.
    - sentenza 13y ago
      You bring up an interesting point. I very often read that the UK joined for the single market but then afterwards the EU started taking away national sovereignty. I don't quite understand how this view of things is possible. From the very start, when the Coal and Steel Community was created in 1952, loss of national sovereignty was, to a certain degree, built into the system. The primary goal of European cooperation was to take away the ability of European nations to go to war with one another. Also remember the "de fact solidarity" that Robert Schuman spoke of in his famous declaration in 1950: With all the horrors of WW2 fresh in mind, nobody could expect the people of Europe to show solidarity for another, so the framework of Europe must be set up to generate a "de facto solidarity". The whole system should be set up in such a way that the people of Europe cannot _not_ show solidarity. We learned this in school and it seems to be generally accepted by the general populace, at least in the "old" continental Western Europe. If you ask older Germans or French about European integration, they will talk about avoiding war, not about the single market. The only possible explanation I can come up with for the sentiment that the EU was "all about the single market" is that UK voters were horribly misled by their press and politicians at the time of EU accession. Is this plausible? On a side note: I admit that what I wrote about hating Europe was harsh, but we (i.e., me and many others I've spoken to) do feel genuinely betrayed.

philipp-de 13y ago

There's more. There's technical standards, procedures and laws accross europe for the storage, retrieval and processing of metadata and other information. it's called ETSI Lawful Interception see: * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawful_interception#Technical_description http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawful_interception#Technical_d... * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawful_interception#Europe http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawful_interception#Europe * http://www.etsi.org/index.php/technologies-clusters/technologies/security/lawful-interception http://www.etsi.org/index.php/technologies-clusters/technolo... * http://webapp.etsi.org/WorkProgram/Report_WorkItem.asp?WKI_ID=25520&curItemNr=43&totalNrItems=44&optDisplay=44&titleType=all&qSORT=HIGHVERSION&qETSI_ALL=&SearchPage=TRUE&qTB_ID=608;LI&qINCLUDE_SUB_TB=True&qINCLUDE_MOVED_ON=&qSTOP_FLG=N&qKEYWORD_BOOLEAN=O http://webapp.etsi.org/WorkProgram/Report_WorkItem.asp?WKI_I... * http://webapp.etsi.org/WorkProgram/Report_WorkItem.asp?WKI_ID=24772&curItemNr=44&totalNrItems=44&optDisplay=44&titleType=all&qSORT=HIGHVERSION&qETSI_ALL=&SearchPage=TRUE&qTB_ID=608;LI&qINCLUDE_SUB_TB=True&qINCLUDE_MOVED_ON=&qSTOP_FLG=N&qKEYWORD_BOOLEAN=O http://webapp.etsi.org/WorkProgram/Report_WorkItem.asp?WKI_I... This has been in place much longer than the "data retention" directive.

1morepassword 13y ago

The EU data retention directive really doesn't compare to what's happening in the US. It merely instructs ISP's and telco's to keep their logs stored for a minimal period of time. It's about keeping the metadata around "just in case" potential evidence isn't destroyed, and even this is already extremely controversial and is still being challenged. The law still applies when it comes to getting actual access to that data, and just because the Irish may have thrown due process out of the window doesn't mean everyone else has, and certainly not the Germans. The data retention doesn't cover the actual contents of the communications, and it doesn't give any government or intelligence agency the right to access the data outside the legal framework that already existed before the internet was even a thing. It doesn't even come close to what the US is doing.

danbruc 13y ago

Without judging this I see one positive thing - it is publicly known what information is collected, there is a debate about it and you can file a lawsuit against it. And as seen in Germany they courts are really taking the issue serious and don't just try to silence you. To me this seems orders of magnitude better than not even knowing what is going. Of course, as seen in the case of the UK, there is no guarantee that nothing else is going on but even after the events of last weeks I still have quite a bit of trust in Europe. After reading a bit into it I think the situation is actually quite good. The EU passed the directive requiring all EU countries to adopt national laws for data retention but now there are lawsuits all over the place. The directive has been widely adopted by the member states - in some cases after being sued by the EU for not adopting the directive (but this court is not responsible for ensuring that the directive does not violate other laws) - but at least in Germany, Romania and the Czech Republic the laws have been canceled after they were ruled unconstitutional. There are pending lawsuits against national laws in other countries, more lawsuits against member states, for example Germany, by the EU for not adopting the directive and lawsuits against the directive. After being ruled unconstitutional and violating human rights in several countries I think it is only a matter of time until the whole thing gets buried. It will have cost an insane amount of time, money and dedication but the system still seems - more or less - to work.