Citizen Protest Halts Chat Control; Breyer Celebrates Major Victory for Digital Privacy
www.patrick-breyer.de
In a major breakthrough for the digital rights movement, the German government has refused to back the EU's controversial Chat Control regulation yesterday after facing massive public pressure. The government did not take a position on the proposal. This blocks the required majority in the EU Counci

Chat Control didnt pass - they didnt even vote because they were afraid the result would be embarassing.

And we got told so many times, that EU now wants Chat Control. But it was a big fat lie.

EU is a democracy with different opinions, and when a small group of facists tries to read your chats, it does not represent the EU opinion.

But the whole media got you thinking so. Proving even on Lemmy, you and me are extremly prone to propaganda.

I quoted the article here with the news:

In a major breakthrough for the digital rights movement, the German government has refused to back the EU’s controversial Chat Control regulation yesterday after facing massive public pressure.

The government did not take a position on the proposal.

This blocks the required majority in the EU Council, derailing the plan to pass the surveillance law next week.

  • Alaknár@sopuli.xyzEnglish
    2·
    3 hours ago

    Have you read the sources you posted?

    Negotiations will now begin between the Parliament, the Council of the EU, which represents national governments, and the European Commission to determine the final shape of the law.

    Nobody is mandating anything - yet.

    Sure, it might end up like that, but - to date - the Commission has been rather sensible when it comes to such things. They also have the example of UK that shows that the law works against its intentions by driving people towards unregulated and more dangerous websites.

    We’ll see how it goes.

    • iii@mander.xyzEnglish
      1·
      2 hours ago

      That’s simply how any EU directive works: EU decides what must happen, and it’s up to the individual countries to put it into their respective laws.

      That way people get angry at their federal government instead. Who can point their finger higher up. Who can then point to the countries specific implementation in their turn. It’s a neat trick. Nobody’s responsible for anything.

      the law works against its intentions

      When has that ever stopped a puritan?

      • Alaknár@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        2·
        52 minutes ago

        EU decides what must happen, and it’s up to the individual countries to put it into their respective laws.

        Wow, it’s so weird that the article you linked lied, then!

        • iii@mander.xyzEnglish
          1·
          38 seconds ago

          No, it’s saying that exact thing: online users of porn must be deanonymised on penalty of prison. To stop child abuse because that’s related somehow?

          It’s just that the countries themselves can choose the particulates: who will do the deanonymisation, in what way, what will enforcement look like, etc.

          That’s what they mean with “the final shape of the law hasn’t been determined yet”.

          Every EU directive works that way: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_(European_Union)

          A directive is a legal act of the European Union[1] that requires member states to achieve particular goals without dictating how the member states achieve those goals

          In this case: the de-anonymisation must happen. Up to the respective countries to figure out the methodology.