Just a new name: Germany does Not move away form data retention at all(translate.google.com)
translate.google.com
Just a new name: Germany does Not move away form data retention at all
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fnetzpolitik.org%2F2013%2Fspiegel-online-ente-union-gibt-vorratsdatenspeicherung-nicht-auf-benennt-sie-nur-um%2F
21 comments
Also, the super-annoying typo (s/from/form/) in the title doesn't help. Makes it even more misleading, I guess.
But the data is being collected anyway.
The Verfassungsgericht ruled that collected data had to be deleted.
Sure provides may store data for themselves - for example for billing purposes.
Sure provides may store data for themselves - for example for billing purposes.
And such data can be accessed by law enforcement agencies, see http://dejure.org/gesetze/TKG/113.html (also the old version).
Sure, why not. I'm not against that. This has to happen on a case by case basis.
No, it was being collected, until the Bundesverfassungsgericht put a stop to that, and now the EU is pouting, which is still in progress.
I wish that were true. The data is collected anyway by the ISPs, but not necessarily stored 6 month (sometimes longer, sometimes shorter) and not on that foundation. There were some legal proceedings because of that.
Then why the talk about Germany paying 300 000 € a day for violating the EU directive? ( http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/vorratsdatenspeich... )
A source would be kinda nice. Not because I doubt it's possible, but simply because I haven't heard of it.
A source would be kinda nice. Not because I doubt it's possible, but simply because I haven't heard of it.
Those are different things. Just because there is no law forcing the ISPs to collect the data and providing a specific exchange interface following the EU directive, doesn't mean that germany has no other laws giving access to the data the ISPs collect anyway; and other laws permitting ISPs to collect those data. See § 113 TKG as source, which I linked below - it is not a secret.
edit: I'm trying to make that more clear. The difference is that right now, they are not forced by law to collect those data, hence the penalty and lawsuit from the EU. But they may do so - and that is done in practice -, and there is a law that if they do, law enforcement can get access.
edit: I'm trying to make that more clear. The difference is that right now, they are not forced by law to collect those data, hence the penalty and lawsuit from the EU. But they may do so - and that is done in practice -, and there is a law that if they do, law enforcement can get access.
Just because there is no law forcing the ISPs to collect the data and providing a specific exchange interface following the EU directive, doesn't mean that germany has no other laws giving access to the data the ISPs collect anyway
And who claimed it hasn't? I didn't.
You said "the data" is being collected anyway. This, without any further elaboration, seemed to imply "the data that the EU data detention directive would cover", and not "the data ISPs collect to enable their operations".
I think the difference is that if an ISP wants to collect as little as possible, and anonymize/delete any data they don't absolutely need anymore, that'd be legal; If the police wants it 12 months later, they can just say "sorry, we don't have it anymore", provided that's truthful. Under the EU data detention directive that's no more, as not keeping the data for at least X months would be verboten.
And who claimed it hasn't? I didn't.
You said "the data" is being collected anyway. This, without any further elaboration, seemed to imply "the data that the EU data detention directive would cover", and not "the data ISPs collect to enable their operations".
I think the difference is that if an ISP wants to collect as little as possible, and anonymize/delete any data they don't absolutely need anymore, that'd be legal; If the police wants it 12 months later, they can just say "sorry, we don't have it anymore", provided that's truthful. Under the EU data detention directive that's no more, as not keeping the data for at least X months would be verboten.
> And who claimed it hasn't? I didn't.
You did, in a way, with
> No, it was being collected, until the Bundesverfassungsgericht put a stop to that
Have a look at http://www.datenschmutz.de/moin/TK-Verkehrsdaten as to which data are currently saved and for how long, keep in mind that the mentioned numbers are old (but realize that collected Bestandsdaten includes data from people with flatrate, which would never be necessary for billing purposes).
You did, in a way, with
> No, it was being collected, until the Bundesverfassungsgericht put a stop to that
Have a look at http://www.datenschmutz.de/moin/TK-Verkehrsdaten as to which data are currently saved and for how long, keep in mind that the mentioned numbers are old (but realize that collected Bestandsdaten includes data from people with flatrate, which would never be necessary for billing purposes).
Have a look at http://www.datenschmutz.de/moin/TK-Verkehrsdaten
"Unter dem Stichwort Vorratsdatenspeicherung werden solche Daten speziell für Repressionszwecke gespeichert. Sie ist derzeit ausgesetzt, die Verkehrsdatenabfrage als solche bleibt aber in Kraft."
The data detention is "currently suspended" according to your own link... sigh.
You did not address the distinction between the police/intelligence agencies having access to the data providers collect and keep, unfortunately but mostly voluntarily -- and the EU data detention directive, which Germany only implemented for a short while and is now in gridlock about, and which would force the providers to keep that stuff around, wether they want to or not.
I mean, if it's all the same, what is the fuss about? You did not answer that. Just because it is still bad, doesn't mean it's all the same, and that accepting and implementing the EU directive would make no difference.
"Unter dem Stichwort Vorratsdatenspeicherung werden solche Daten speziell für Repressionszwecke gespeichert. Sie ist derzeit ausgesetzt, die Verkehrsdatenabfrage als solche bleibt aber in Kraft."
The data detention is "currently suspended" according to your own link... sigh.
You did not address the distinction between the police/intelligence agencies having access to the data providers collect and keep, unfortunately but mostly voluntarily -- and the EU data detention directive, which Germany only implemented for a short while and is now in gridlock about, and which would force the providers to keep that stuff around, wether they want to or not.
I mean, if it's all the same, what is the fuss about? You did not answer that. Just because it is still bad, doesn't mean it's all the same, and that accepting and implementing the EU directive would make no difference.
Please, read again what I wrote two comments above. I specifically adressed the difference.
Oops, you're right. Then let's agree to agree on the facts, and sorry for being obtuse. I had the impression you were belittling the fact that Germany is in violation of the EU directive, but that doesn't really follow from what you said, I read that into it.. probably because of "everybody is doing it (what the NSA does)" comments I read occasionally around here, and a general jadedness around the issue. Thanks for your patience ^^
Yes, it it's not great as it is, but it would be worse when the EU directive is actually followed, from what I can tell, and I wanted to stress that.
Yes, it it's not great as it is, but it would be worse when the EU directive is actually followed, from what I can tell, and I wanted to stress that.
Nicht zum Thema:
wer hätte gerne ein HN mit deutsch als Amtssprache?
So then, make one. Post a link to HN when it is ready to go, and promote it in Europe. But appending this question to an unrelated topic is not going to be the best way of getting it done.
Data retention law is currently ruled unconstitutional and it's not in place.