Tag: eu

New EU Rule BANS Garden Bonfires

It’s now gone a few years since the British left the EU, in part because they didn’t like all the restrictions and rules that they were coming up with.

Now there is a new rule.

People will be banned from starting bonfires in their garden to burn garden waste such as grass, leafs and sticks.

This is because the new law requires that food and organic waste be sorted and recycled.

Meaning that people who are tending their garden will have to either compost their garden waster or deliver it in for recycling.

In Scandinavia it is tradition in the spring where homeowners tend their garden and start bonfires to burn up garden waste, which will now be banned.

People are now paying with microchips in their hand.

Keep reading

Switzerland “Violated Human Rights” By Not Tackling Climate-Change Quickly Enough, ECHR Rules In Landmark Case

National governments are infringing on citizens’ human rights by not doing enough to tackle climate change, the European Court of Human Rights has held in a landmark ruling that could have far-reaching consequences and influence climate policy across the continent.

In a highly-anticipated judgment, the Strasbourg court on Tuesday sided with a group of Swiss pensioners who brought a claim against their national government for its perceived failure to act sufficiently in reducing carbon emissions, claiming that existing climate policy was violating their human rights.

The members of the KlimaSeniorinnen group, supported by environmental campaign groups such as Greenpeace, argued that elderly citizens are particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change, citing the fact that excess deaths occur more regularly among the elderly during periods of extreme heat because they are less able to regulate their body temperature.

The group also claimed that heat waves impact the mental well-being of elderly citizens more because they are less able to go outside and withstand the heat, which they argue affects their quality of life.

The association relied on Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects the general right to life, and Article 8, which guarantees the right to private and family life.

Domestic governments are obliged to take “reasonable and appropriate measures” to secure these rights, steps members of the KlimaSeniorinnen group claimed the Swiss government had not taken.

The litigation had been appealed by the group up to the top human rights court in Europe after its claim was rejected first by the Federal Administrative Court in Switzerland and then by the Federal Supreme Court, the country’s highest ruling body.

The judgment is the third of three similar cases the court was asked to consider in respect to the correlation between climate change and human rights and sets a precedent that all national courts in Council of Europe member states will be required to adhere to.

It had recently dismissed the other two cases, brought by Portuguese youths and a former French mayor who had claimed their respective national governments had infringed on their human rights by not being ambitious enough with their climate targets.

The move could see governments across Europe required to take even greater measures to press on with reducing carbon emissions and pursuing a green agenda that many citizens believe is being wrongly prioritized and expedited to their own detriment.

Climate activists celebrated the ruling outside the Strasbourg court on Tuesday, accompanied by Swedish climate zealot Greta Thunberg.

Keep reading

EU’s Plan To Mass Surveil Private Chats Has Leaked

The latest version of the proposed European Parliament (EP) and EU Council regulation to adopt new rules related to combating child sexual abuse has been made available online.

Despite its declared goal, the proposal, which first saw the light of day in May 2022 and is referred to by opponents as “chat control” is in fact a highly divisive draft of legislation that aims to accomplish the stated objective through mass surveillance of citizens’ private communications.

Now, the French site contexte.com has the full text of the newest version of the proposal – yet another controversial undertaking of the current, 6-month Belgian EU presidency. Judging by the leaked document, the key and most contentious components of “chat control” have not been changed.

German EP member (MEP) Patrick Breyer and long-time vocal critic of the proposal said on his blog that the text would be discussed by a law enforcement working party at the Council on Wednesday, with the target date for adoption being sometime in June.

That will happen once any political differences have been smoothed over at the EU’s Committee of Permanent Representatives (“COREPER”).

Commenting on the development, Breyer remarked that the Council’s legal service has also confirmed that the new version “does not change the nature of detection orders.”

“Limiting bulk chat searches to ‘high-risk services’ is meaningless because every communication service is misused also for sharing illegal images and therefore has an imminently high risk of abuse,” the MEP noted of the latest proposal, adding:

“Informing law enforcement only of repeat hits is also meaningless, as falsely flagged beach pictures or consensual sexting rarely involve just a single photo.”

He went on to explain that the upcoming regulation is set up in a way that will result in the end of the privacy of people’s digital communications, since the subject of content searches will be “millions” of chats and photos, including those belonging to persons who have no links to child sexual abuse.

And because the technology proposed to carry out the mass surveillance is unreliable, there are also risks of this content getting leaked.

Keep reading

Head of Controversial Global Engagement Center Admits Europe’s Regulatory Power Over Social Media Censorship Enforcement

The head of the US State Department’s highly controversial Global Engagement Center (GEC), James Rubin, appears to be on a “press tour” to promote more stringent regulation around social media, and more censorship.

Rubin is doing this seemingly oblivious of the “elephant in the room” – that GEC is at the center of scandals involving government/Big Tech collusion (this bureau engaged in flagging posts on social media) and even lawsuits stemming from these accusations.

Many of Rubin’s comments made on a recent Politico podcast episode compare and contrast the degree to which the EU and the US are able to regulate social media (and stifle speech).

He also seeks to reinforce the perception of GEC not as a government workaround for carrying out censorship on privately-owned platforms (which would be illegal in the US), but as an entity that is vital in combating “disinformation.”

In this case, AI is considered as a “force for good,” as Rubin revealed GEC would start using it to counter what it decides to consider as “disinformation,” and the policy is also to make sure as many other countries as possible fall in line with the US on this issue.

Regarding what the US could learn from others, Rubin singled out the EU where regulatory frameworks allow the authorities to carry out control and censorship of online information more aggressively, but also praised the work his country, the UK, and Canada are doing together to impose the use of AI watermarks.

Asked to what degree GEC “engages directly” with social platforms, Rubin first deflected by lamenting about how much better equipped the EU is to combat “misinformation” thanks to greater regulatory powers, and then claimed that GEC “does not work with them (platforms) – we meet with them.”

As for what “not working” with someone means according to Rubin, it goes like this: “We try to discuss the trends and the tactics that are used by manipulative countries or non-state actors. We work on that with them. We consult with them. They tell us what they’re seeing. We tell them what we’re seeing.”

He also asserted, “We do not ask them to take things down.”

Keep reading

E.U. Regulations Created a Port Wine Black Market

People have been making wine in the verdant hills of northern Portugal’s Douro Valley for nearly 2,000 years. Nowadays, the region is home to more than 19,000 grape farmers and 1,000 companies tending terraced vineyards that tower above the Douro River below.

Hundreds of these vineyards are small, often family-owned, properties called quintas, many of which produce port: a syrupy, sweet fortified wine. As a European Union–protected designation of origin product (similar to French Champagne or Italian Parmigiano-Reggiano), the production, labeling, and sale of port are heavily regulated—sometimes to the detriment of the small-scale operators keeping the cultural practice alive.

When I visited the Douro Valley this fall, one quinta owner shared that she couldn’t officially sell port because of burdensome government regulations. All port sellers are required to keep at least 75,000 liters in reserve at all times, she explained—a standard that large producers can meet, but one that might bankrupt a small quinta like hers. In effect, she could only participate in this important cultural heritage as a black market seller.

Francisco Montenegro, owner of the Douro Valley–based Aneto Wines, notes that would-be port sellers have to grapple with several regulations that make it difficult for them to enter the market. On top of the 75,000-liter stock minimum, port producers are allowed to sell or market only one-third of their output, “thus forcing the producer to let [two-thirds] of their wines age.” They have to register under a specific tax status “as they work with spirits,” which requires them to “pay more customs taxes.” Government regulations also mandate that producers “wait at least 3 or 4 years if they want to bottle a normal tawny” port, Montenegro says.

Keep reading

How the EU Plans to Regulate Online Influencers Towards “Responsible” Online Speech and Conduct

EU’s next target in the bloc’s self-inflicted “war on disinformation” is – online influencers.

The initiative comes with the stated goal to “educate” influencers, using regulations, about what their responsibilities are in case “harmful” content they share happens to be deemed as having a “potential” adverse impact on their audience.

You could hardly get more convoluted in trying to push through rules that are not meant to prevent unlawful behavior – because none is happening – but to, regardless, steer online narratives in a desired direction. And that’s why you know this is coming from Brussels, even if reports had failed to specify.

And “from Brussels” is a double entendre, since the idea originates from the current, 6-month Belgian EU presidency, the European Conservative reported. “Harmful content with potential impact” would be the usual collection of poorly or controversially defined disinformation, hate speech, cyberbullying, and the like.

Keep reading

EU To Start Fining Platforms up to 6% of Global Revenue if They Fail To Censor Election “Disinformation” Under New Censorship Law

The EU is about to start punishing large online platforms for not tackling “election disinformation” to the bloc’s satisfaction.

In order to make good on the threat, the EU is putting to use its censorship law – the Digital Services Act (DSA).

Commissioner for Internal Market Thierry Breton is quoted as saying that platforms like X, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube and Facebook, but also search engines, must operate according to the guidelines that are currently being drafted.

Reports say that companies behind these platforms and services could be forced to pay fines of up to 6 percent of their global revenue unless they fight “disinformation” related to elections.

This figure specifically concerns whatever is designated as AI or deepfakes-based “disinformation.”

Tech companies are expected to “take measures and mitigate risks,” Breton, who is DSA’s “enforcer,” said. The Brussels bureaucrats speak about this as moderation, rather than censorship, and have decided to consider this year as “pivotal” when it comes to elections.

And the EU is in a hurry to start mandating the rules – reports say this could happen in the next few weeks. It will be possible to enforce the guidelines thanks to their inclusion in the DSA, and they will come into force as soon as they are adopted.

Heaping further pressure on tech companies to censor, and regulating them in this way, is explained as necessary to prevent things like turnout suppression, fake news, and, of course – and in particular, according to EU leaders – Russia’s “malign influence” ahead of elections in the bloc this year.

Keep reading

EU Officials Start Crafting Censorship Guidelines for Big Tech Companies Ahead of 2024 Elections

The European Union has announced that it has started putting together what it calls “guidelines for election integrity” – but what critics will describe in plain language as censorship guidelines that Big Tech is supposed to follow.

The process of drafting these instructions, a part of the Digital Services Act (DSA), was initiated with a public consultation that will last until March 7, and the EU said these will be the first guidelines under the DSA.

Social media and services covered by it are referred to as Very Large Online Platforms and Search Engines, and they are the ones who will be expected to implement what the EU thinks are “best practices and possible measures to mitigate systemic risks” related to elections.

The concept of free and fair elections is long-standing, but the EU has managed to work the term “resilient elections” in there as well, as the ultimate goal of the new guidelines.

The draft also gives examples of what the bloc considers to be good ways to censor unwanted content – where censorship is referred to as “mitigating measures.” Particular attention is paid to generative AI, i.e, deepfakes.

The platforms are supposed to stick to the guidelines before, as well as after the voting, and for once, “billions of people all around the world going to the polls this year” are not mentioned as the justification for the “measures.”

At least the EU does not do it while announcing the drafting of the guidelines, although legacy media do, while reporting about it. Executive Vice-President for a Europe Fit for the Digital Age Margrethe Vestager is quoted as saying that the concern here are elections at various levels in EU nation-states, as well as those for the European Parliament.

According to Vestager, voters must discuss issues online “in a safe way.”

Keep reading

EU calls for ‘gendered language’ to be banned, with phrases such as ‘no man’s land’ or ‘Joe Public’ axed… and ‘king and queen’ phrased ‘queen and king’ to put the female first

The EU has called for ‘gendered language’ such as ‘no man’s land’ and ‘Joe Public’ to be axed.

A 61-page document advises policymakers, legislators and the media to revise the order of common phrases such as ‘King and Queen’ or ‘brother and sister’ in which the male comes first. 

It suggests to ‘try swapping the order of these phrases sometimes’. 

Bureaucrats say ‘Joe Public’ should be replaced with ‘average citizen’ and ‘no man’s land’ should be substituted with ‘unclaimed territory’.

Tory MP Nick Fletcher has called the guidelines ‘nonsense’ and argued that the EU had ‘far more serious issues’ that it should be concerned about.

The ‘Toolkit on Gender-sensitive Communication’ document compiled by the The European Institute for Gender Equality highlights language that needs to be changed and notes alternatives.

Keep reading

EU President Calls For Globalist Control Over All Information

President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen addressed elites at the World Economic Forum in Davos Tuesday, calling for overarching globalist control over the flow of all information in the digital age.

“The top concern for the next two years is not conflict, or climate, it is disinformation and misinformation,” von der Leyen proclaimed, adding “The boundary between online and offline is getting thinner and thinner, and this is even more important in the era of generative AI.”

Addressing the elite as “Excellencies,” and personally naming “dear” Klaus Schwabb in her introduction, von der Leyen further called for the development of “a new global framework for AI risks,” and a vow to “drive global collaboration” to prevent the spread of ‘misinformation’ (information they don’t want you to know about).

She continued, “Many of the solutions lie not only in countries working together but, crucially, on businesses and governments, businesses and democracies working together,” adding that “While governments hold many of the levers to deal with the great challenges of our time, business have [sic] the innovation, the technology, the talents to deliver the solutions we need to fight threats like climate change or industrial-scale disinformation.”

Keep reading