europeanunion
Latest
Intel forced to pay record $1.4 billion fine for unfair sales tactics
The European Union's second-highest court has upheld a $1.4 billion fine levied against Intel for anti-competitive practices against chip foe AMD. In the original decision, way back in 2009, the European Commission found that Intel harmed its rival and consumers by giving unlawful rebates to retailers and PC makers like HP, Dell and Lenovo. Intel then appealed, saying the commission "ignore(d) the reality of a highly competitive microprocessor marketplace." But the Luxembourg General Court found that Intel had a long-term game plan to shut out AMD and "attempted to conceal the anti-competitive nature of (those) practices." It therefore ruled that the record fine representing 4.15 percent of Intel's 2008 revenues was fair, saying the EU could have levied a penalty as high as 10 percent. Intel expressed disappointment with the decision, but it does have one more shot at an appeal: the EU's Court of Justice. So far, however, it hasn't said whether it's willing to drag out the six-year-old case any further.
EU court rules that reading online news doesn't violate copyright
You probably didn't know it, but the legality of what you're doing right now has been a hotly debated issue in EU courts -- reading articles online. For the last four years the Public Relations Consultants Association (PRCA) and the Newspaper Licensing Agency (NLA) have been trying to determine if browsing and viewing copyrighted material online required the authorization of the copyright holder; today the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled that it does not. It sounds like a no-brainer, but the facts are a little more complicated: the two groups were arguing over the application of licenses to media monitoring agencies and their effects on the end-user.
What you need to know about the 'right to be forgotten' on Google
Who decides your rights to privacy and freedom of speech on the internet? Earlier this month, a landmark ruling by Europe's biggest court left Google trying to find an answer to that unanswerable question. The case, which centers on the so-called "right to be forgotten," allows European users to actively ask providers to remove personal information that's become "outdated" or "irrelevant." Even if Google (or other search engines) has indexed it in a fair and legal way, it's obligated to comply with the ruling. It's opened a debate over whether a company known for its complex search algorithms should be given the duty of making judgement calls over what should and should not remain online for the world to see. Google co-founder Sergey Brin wishes he could "just forget the ruling," but unfortunately for him, Google, and you, the issue is real. And it's going to impact the way we search the web forever.
EU prevents Motorola and Samsung from suing over standards-based patents
The patent wars are about to cool down in Europe... a little bit, anyway. The European Commission has revealed measures that prevent both Motorola and Samsung from using lawsuits over standards-based patents as offensive weapons against competitors, rather than last-ditch options when negotiations fail. To start, the regulator has ordered Motorola to cut out any "anticompetitive" terms in patent licensing deals with Apple and other companies. Motorola is allegedly abusing its control of cellular patents by forbidding companies from contesting those patents' validity; companies and their customers shouldn't be forced to pay for licenses that might not hold up in court, the Commission says. Motorola won't pay a fine for the claimed violation since there's no precedent, but the phone maker now can't threaten a lawsuit simply because Apple wants to challenge the patents it's licensing.
Court rules that the EU's data retention law violates privacy rights
The European Union has argued that telecom companies must hold on to internet and phone records for long periods to help track down evildoers, but the European Court of Justice disagrees -- vehemently. It just ruled that the EU's Data Retention Directive, which preserves metadata for up to two years, is a "wide-ranging and particularly serious" violation of the EU's privacy rights. It collects more information than necessary, doesn't establish firm limits and lets companies send data outside of the EU, according to the ruling. While the Directive doesn't scoop up actual content, the court believes that the unrestricted collection allows too much insight into people's daily activities and social connections. Sound familiar? It should. The ruling acknowledges the privacy concerns that prompted the US' proposed metadata reforms, but goes one step further -- the court is contending that bulk data retention by itself is dangerous without serious restrictions.
EU court rules that internet providers may have to block pirate sites
Internet providers in Europe may soon have little choice but to filter out pirate sites. In resolving an Austrian case, the European Court of Justice has ruled that EU countries can ask carriers to block copyright infringers, whether or not the networks are involved. The EU's laws don't require that governments limit injunctions to just the parties directly linked to a case, according to the court. While the decision isn't good news for online free speech advocates, there's no guarantee of a chilling effect -- individual nations still have to decide whether or not they'll block sites in the first place. It's the providers who are most likely to face any short-term consequences, since they may have to pay extra to obey local content restriction orders. [Image credit: European Union Naval Force Somalia, Flickr]
Europe pushes for a less US-dominated internet
The European Union is more than a little jittery about a US-centric internet after learning the extent of the country's mass surveillance. Accordingly, the European Commission has proposed a whole host of measures that would shift control to the international community. It wants a firm schedule for globalizing internet infrastructure, more power for the Internet Governance Forum, fewer conflicts between countries' internet laws and a venue for improving transparency policies. The regulator doesn't want to give too much clout to any one group, though -- Commission VP Neelie Kroes prefers a "multi-stakeholder" approach that lets innovators move at their own pace. The proposal still needs support from both the Council of the EU and the European Parliament before it can take effect, but it could give Europe a united front when it's pushing for changes in internet policy. [Image credit: The Council of the European Union]
European researchers have created a hive mind for robots and it's being demoed this week
RoboEarth isn't as sinister as it sounds. It's not a special interest group advocating for a new world order with robots at its core -- not yet, anyway. The project, which is backed by the European Union and brings together researchers from universities in Germany, the Netherlands and Spain, is actually more benign than that; it's being described as a "world wide web for robots." We know what you're thinking: What does that even mean? And what would a robot-curated Tumblr look like? The implications are ridiculous, but the reality is not. Simply put, RoboEarth is a four-years-in-the-making, cloud-based hive mind for robotics that aims to store and share knowledge among (you guessed it) robots. The end goal being that single-tasked robots will become a thing of the past. And now, its many collaborators are ready to show off what RoboEarth can realistically do this week. This initial RoboEarth demo, set to take place on January 16th at Eindhoven University in the Netherlands, will highlight the system's ability to offload real-time computational tasks in the cloud and then disseminate that knowledge to four networked robots working in a mock hospital. According to the BBC, these robots will be tasked with serving drinks to patients, assisting in navigation by uploading maps to the cloud and even helping to open pill boxes. The benefit of all of this shared data being that no one robot is limited to a specific task -- any robot can become multi-purpose. But there's another upside to this cloud processing that could impact the reality of assistive technology in the home and that's the potential for cheaper-to-produce and longer-lasting commercial robots. With much of the data computation being offloaded to the cloud, manufacturers won't need to create robots with top-shelf components, making them more affordable long-term investments for consumers. Which, in turn, means you'll be able to hold onto Rosie just long enough to consider her a member of the family.
EU wants to know if US studios' TV deals restrict pan-European viewing
Many European TV aficionados are all too familiar with US content exclusives; you can't watch that hit American movie unless you're with the right provider. However, the European Commission is concerned that these deals go one step too far. It's now investigating whether or not some exclusives violate antitrust rules by preventing access beyond a single EU country, effectively carving up the continent's TV market along national borders. Would-be viewers beyond a carrier's home market shouldn't have to suffer, the EU argues. There's no deadline for the investigation, and there are no guarantees that it will lead to action against broadcasters. However, the move is still good news for Europeans who want more choice as to how (and when) they watch US shows. [Image credit: European Union - European Parliament, Flickr]
Google's new concession offer gets EU antitrust chief's stamp of approval
Google and the European Commission have been doing their seemingly interminable antitrust dance for three years now, but today's development might signal a shift in the tides. In July, the EU's Competition Commissioner, Joaquin Almunia, had deemed Google's previous concession offer unworthy and informed Eric Schmidt that the company had to "present better proposals." According to The New York Times, Google has evidently heeded his words and ponied up a new offer that's evidently enough to please the antitrust chief, although specific terms have yet to be disclosed. At the heart of the problem is Google's tendency to squeeze its rivals (including, but not limited to, Microsoft, Foundem and Hotmaps) out of search results, making it difficult for users to find them. The new offer allegedly addresses those concerns, and while it's unlikely that a decision will be made earlier than next spring, the EU's tentative approval of Google's efforts could mean that case is inching its way to a settlement. Almunia has said that he intends to present the proposal to the complainants in the case, who seem less than enthused. David Wood, the legal counsel for the Microsoft-backed Initiative for a Competitive Online Marketplace (ICOMP) told the Times, "It is far from clear from Commissioner Almunia's description of the revised package of proposed commitments that they go nearly far enough."
EU bureaucrats want to force Apple to adopt micro-USB adapter
Since the concept was first introduced, consumers have complained about proprietary chargers. Regardless if they're needed or not for a given product, they can be annoying and inconvenient. But are they bad for the environment? That's the argument being put forward by the Members of the European Parliament's internal market committee. On September 26, the body voted unanimously to propose a law that would require companies to use a universal mobile phone charger. The law requires mobile phone manufactures to include the universal micro-USB charger in its designs. In a statement, Germany's MEP, Barbara Weiler, explained her support of the measure. We urge member states and manufacturers finally to introduce a universal charger, to put an end to cable chaos for mobile phones and tablet computers. This isn't the first time the European Union has sought to impose a charger standard on manufactures. In 2009, the Commission reached a voluntary agreement with 10 mobile phone manufacturers to adopt the micro-USB charge and sync interface as the industry standard. Apple signed the agreement, a Memorandum of Understanding, but has not replaced its 30-pin or 8-pin chargers. Thursday's vote means this formerly voluntary agreement is no longer voluntary. For Apple, with proprietary chargers that factor into the optimization of the iPhone design, this law raises some troubling concerns. Apple already sells iPhone micro-USB adaptors, and perhaps it could start including them with new iPhones as a workaround. The international market committee will now meet with the European Council to negotiate on how to move the legislation forward toward passage. No dates have been announced for those meetings.
Apple and 13 other companies warn that EU patent shakeup may encourage patent trolls
Seemingly not a week goes by without hearing some new story about a patent troll mysteriously emerging out of the woodwork, with questionable second-hand patents in hand, and suing a smorgasbord of tech companies for patent infringement. While the Obama Administration has taken steps to potentially reduce the drain on the tech economy stemming from frivolous patent lawsuits, there's no denying that patent trolls are still able to earn ill-gotten fortunes in patent troll-friendly courts around the country. Now, Apple and 13 other companies recently signed their name to a letter sent to European officials expressing their concern that the patent troll problem may soon sprout up in Europe in light of plans to implement a unified patent system across most of Europe. Some of the other companies signing off on the letter include Cisco, Deutsche Telekom AG, Google, Intel, Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard and Samsung. As it stands now, individual European countries typically have their own unique patent rules, procedures and regulations; which helps explain why Samsung and Apple currently have patent infringement cases pending in places like the Netherlands, Germany, France, the UK and Italy. So while a unified patent system may operate to improve efficiency in some respects (reduced cost in obtaining patents, for example), the aforementioned companies worry that the plan in its current form may actually serve to benefit patent trolls in the long run. For instance, the current draft of the rules of procedure for a Unified Patent Court (UPC) details a two-court system wherein one court would rule whether or not a party is guilty of infringement while another would rule on the validity of the asserted patent. The letter highlights how this bifurcation of duties might potentially lend itself to mischief: This could, in some cases, allow plaintiffs to obtain a quick infringement ruling, along with an injunction barring products from most of the European market, before any determination of whether the patent in question is actually valid. Given the drastic impact of such an injunction on the defendant, unprincipled plaintiffs would be able to extract substantial royalties (through settlements or verdicts) from European and other companies based on low-quality, and potentially invalid patents. Consequently, the proposed patent system, the letter argues, "could undermine rather than promote innovation in Europe." Naturally, the signed parties ask that a framework be put in place wherein injunctions would be put on hold until a "decision on patent validity has been reached." The signed parties also take umbrage with the fact that there are no guidelines regarding the rigidity with which injunctions will be handed down. If injunctions are handed out too freely, the letter reads, the result would be particularly harmful as rulings from the UPC would "extend beyond a single country to most of Europe." As a result, patent trolls operating under a UPC could abuse the system and force settlements from company's fearing adverse rulings that would have ramifications across a number of European countries. The letter concludes: We believe that these concerns can and should be addressed through targeted changes to the proposed UPC rules of procedure. Several of the undersigned organizations will recommend specific changes to the proposed rules to the Preparatory Committee, which is responsible for establishing and implementing the UPC. These changes will include guidance to the judiciary on how to handle bifurcated proceedings when validity is raised, when to issue a stay of an infringement action and when to issue injunctions. Adoption of these amendments will allow operating companies to focus on innovation instead of litigation, thereby fostering economic growth and prosperity in Europe. Lastly, it's worth noting that not every European country is on board with a Unified Patent Court. The New York Times relays that Spain, Poland and Italy have all expressed concerns and reservations with the idea.
European Commission proposal would end some roaming fees, enshrine net neutrality
The rumors were on the mark -- as part of a larger telecom plan, the European Commission's Neelie Kroes has proposed regulation that would largely scrap roaming fees. The measure would ban all charges for incoming calls within the EU after July 1st next year, and give carriers incentives to drop many other roaming fees altogether. Companies would either have to let customers use "roam like at home" plans in EU countries or offer a choice of roaming providers with cheap rates. Outbound, mobile-to-mobile calls within member states would cost no more than €0.19 per minute. The strategy also includes rules for enforcing net neutrality across the EU. The proposal bans internet providers from blocking and throttling content. Firms could offer priority services like IPTV only as long as these features don't slow down other subscribers, who could walk away from contracts if they don't get their advertised speeds. There's no guarantee that the European Parliament will vote in favor of the new measures, but it's already clear that the Commission is far from happy with the telecom status quo. [Image credit: The Council of the European Union]
Rumored EU law would scrap cellular roaming fees, let travelers choose providers
It's no secret that European Commission regulators dislike roaming charges. However, The Guardian now hears from sources that the Commission may propose legislation next week that eliminates those charges altogether. Carriers would reportedly have to charge the same service rates in every European Union country, forming alliances in nations where they don't operate. Networks that don't scrap roaming fees by July 2014 would also have to give customers a choice of foreign providers. Subscribers wouldn't even have to swap SIM cards or phone numbers, according to The Guardian. A spokesman for the Commission's Neelie Kroes declined comment on the rumor, but noted that the agency wants roaming "out of the market" -- clearly, the cellular status quo won't last for long.
European Commission proposes framework for unified patent court
Getting a patent in Europe is hard. Making sure it's protected in every European Union member state is even harder. That's why the European Commission announced today that it plans on simplifying this notoriously convoluted process by proposing the legal framework for a unified patent court. Currently, patents must be validated in each member state to gain EU-wide protection, but as you know, patent litigation is everyone's favorite past time. Companies can incur prohibitively high costs simultaneously defending their claims in multiple countries. By cutting the number of patent courts down from 28 to one, a unified system would streamline the process of handling infringement cases, and perhaps even promote growth and innovation. While the measure must be approved by the European Parliament and individual EU states in order to become law, the proposal appears to be a step forward in the right direction.
UK government issues ultimatum on Google's troublesome privacy policy
A year and a half after Google introduced its new, "simpler" privacy policy, UK regulators have come to a verdict: Mountain View must now change that policy by September 20th or face the possibility of "formal enforcement action." In a statement, the Information Commissioner's Office said: "We believe that the updated policy does not provide sufficient information to enable UK users of Google's services to understand how their data will be used across all the company's products." German and Italian governments have reached much the same conclusion, while France and Spain also wrote strongly-worded letters to Google last month. For its part, Google has the following response: "Our privacy policy respects European law and allows us to create simpler, more effective services. We have engaged fully with the authorities involved throughout this process, and we'll continue to do so going forward." As The Guardian points out however, Google's statement doesn't really explain how its privacy policy can "respect" EU law and yet be considered objectionable by five major EU governments.
EU toughens penalties for internet-based crimes
Virtual crime can lead to very real damage, and the European Parliament knows this well enough to have just issued a draft directive toughening up the EU's penalties for internet-based violations. Get caught running a botnet and you'll face a minimum of three years in prison; dare to attack critical infrastructure and you may spend five years behind bars. Don't think of hiring someone for corporate espionage, either -- the directive makes whole companies liable for online offenses committed in their name. EU nations will have two years to adopt the directive as law, although an existing, unofficial agreement suggests that at least some countries won't wait that long to enforce the new rules.
European Parliament votes to investigate US surveillance of EU residents
Not surprisingly, the European Parliament isn't happy to hear that the NSA and other US agencies are allegedly snooping on communications in Europe and elsewhere. It isn't just complaining loudly, however -- the Parliament just voted 483-98 in favor of a resolution that will investigate US surveillance activities in Europe and report on their impact before the end of the year. The measure also asks EU officials to consider limiting the data they voluntarily provide to American authorities, such as shutting down programs that forward air passenger and bank records. There's nothing in the resolution that would immediately affect the EU-to-US communication pipeline, but that could change in half a year -- US intelligence outlets may not get their European information served on a silver platter for much longer. [Image credit: JLogan, Wikipedia]
EU ending mobile roaming charges in 2014
Rejoice readers who live in the European Union! Soon you'll be able to pay the same rate for calls you make while traveling the 27 countries in the EU as you do at home. According to the UK newspaper the Telegraph, the European Union has announced an end to mobile roaming charges in 2014 as part of a package of major telecom reforms. Roaming fees for voice calls, texts and internet access will effectively be completely scrapped under the proposals, which are part of a broader effort to create a single European telecoms market. The group of 27 European Commissioners voted in Brussels on Tuesday to drive the package through in time for the European elections in May next year, to come into force as soon as 1 July 2014. Sadly these changes only apply to customers who live in the European Union; travelers from other countries are still stuck paying the fees.
EU Commissioner teases net neutrality rules: no throttling, easy switching
The European Union has only taken baby steps toward proper net neutrality legislation so far. Today, however, the European Commission's Neelie Kroes just gave the first glimpse of what those continent-wide rules could look like. Her proposals would let companies prioritize traffic, but not block or throttle it. The measures would also prevent gotchas once customers have signed on the dotted line: internet providers would not only have to offer clear terms of service, but make it easier to jump ship for something better. There are concerns that the proposals would let providers favor their own services, but Kroes also makes no arbitrary distinctions (and thus exemptions) between wired and wireless networks, like we've seen in the US -- can we get these rules elsewhere, please? [Image credit: The Council of the European Union]
