Jenny’s Pennies

I had actually completely missed this.

Short recap: Early in the fall last year, EU commissioner Franco Frattini (responsible for for freedom, security and justice within the European Commission) proposed that web searches for certain words and phrases should be blocked within the EU. He said to Reuters:

“I do intend to carry out a clear exploring exercise with the private sector … on how it is possible to use technology to prevent people from using or searching dangerous words like bomb, kill, genocide or terrorism”

(Is it only me, or is it really creepy that he said he wants to use technology to prevent people from not only searching but also using words like genocide and terrorism? What the hell did he mean by that?! And how can a word be dangerous? I thought actions and deeds were dangerous. If we say that words are dangerous, we are very close to the idea of thought crime.)

At his European Commission website, Frattini wrote in his “weekly thought” on September 9th 2007:

There is much long-term work we are carrying out at European level: from initiatives on radicalisation, bio-terrorism, security of explosives and detonators, and the need to constantly monitor the web. The web remains a fantastic opportunity for education and freedom but also a way for Osama Bin Laden and other terrorists to communicate all around the world, as well as for disseminating information on how to make explosives.

We must also ensure that our counter-terrorism work is underpinned by the best technology we can have. This is vital for us and difficult too because we have to strike the right balance between the right to security and the other fundamental rights of individuals, including privacy and procedural rights.

Frattini did say that he didn’t want to ban discussions about for example genocide and terrorism, only “how to”-sites. But how do you differentiate between the two? Of course, Frattini got a lot of criticism for his proposal (Google Frattini +censorship for an idea).

The Swedish Justice Department dismissed the proposal and it was made likely that Sweden would veto it, as it would violate Swedish law. And now in 2008, it is soon time for a decision in the EU council of ministers on this proposal. And it is no longer likely that Sweden will put in a veto.

The EU website blocking system would probably work like the Swedish filter for child pornography. The nifty thing is that the child pornography filter is not a part of the law, and therefore does not violate the law against censorship. It works like this: internet service providers (ISPs) sign an agreement with the police, and the police tells the ISPs what sites to block, all without any court involvement. The list of what is blocked is secret, and so is the agreements with the ISPs. We just have to trust that the system works.

Be silent. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. Step into the time machine, we are going to 1984, where a search on “genocide” can make you a suspect. I better finish reading this book before it gets censored as well.

I hope some other government vetoes Frattini’s proposal, now when my own has no sense of decency.