EU Wants Your Search Results to end Child Pornography

[villain_the_foe]

Agree 100%...this reminds me when I was in the military. They strip you of all your rights and that isn't something I would hope this country doesn't want to venture into.

+1. We need to pay serious attention. If you think our court system is serious try court martial.

We need to really get indepth into what is going on that affects us. We certainly have the technology to access this information now.

[greenerdaze]

I would like to be the first law enforcement official to try your new personal openness policy.

Please send me your address and I will show up with a few of my uniformed friends, at some time during the day (or night) and search your home/apartment/car to insure that you're not trafficking any form of illegal activity. All I'm saying is, if you have nothing to hide, it's not a huge inconvenience to you, right?

Why exactly should anyone trust the foons conducting the search? Cuz they're wearing uniforms and guns, and got loud-ass radios? Who's to say their honesty's been tested and they won't abuse their power, plant evidence, etc.? And what if those snapperhead clods accidentally damage something? Will they pay?

There are many issues here ...

[Bob]

Why exactly should anyone trust the foons conducting the search? Cuz they're wearing uniforms and guns, and got loud-ass radios? Who's to say their honesty's been tested and they won't abuse their power, plant evidence, etc.? And what if those snapperhead clods accidentally damage something? Will they pay?

There are many issues here ...

GOB was using something called "sarcasm." Look it up.

[greenerdaze]

GOB was using something called "sarcasm." Look it up.

Thanks. Was adding to the argument against Falcon63's.

[Greenranger]

It'll be here soon. It's all going to start out with a "National ID Card", then they will begin tracking our seaches for crimes, then they expand that into searching for whatever the hell they want. The death of our freedom is nearing and no one in the Government will give a damn about it.

[war ensemble]

All hail net neutrality.

[Panzer Division Marduk]

F**k the EU.

[Biggs]

All I'm saying is, if you have nothing to hide, it's not a huge inconvenience to you.

We have the highest prison population in the world and the entire system is a Unionized cottage industry. Nothing to hide carries a 5 year mandatory sentence.

"Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose"

[RutgersJetFan]

Directive 2006/24/EC is also known as the Data Retention Directive, and permits (nay, compels) states to keep track of all electronic communications, including phone calls, emails and browsing sessions.

Not exactly correct. But then again I wouldn't expect engadget to be qualified in the area of international legislation. The directive's original agenda is concerned with sources and results, not the exact contents of all conversations or sessions. Meaning if search results lead to suspicion that Person A is communicating with Person B about, in this case, child pornography, then their communications are examined from angles that actually aren't the exact content. Meaning location, duration...etc. This is done over time when patterns present themselves. So if someone is doing research on child pornography for a few nights for school from only one or two locations, obviously it's not going to be a problem. The goal of something like this is to catch pornography and prostitution rings via email and internet searches over extended periods of time, it's not to monitor everyone for every single search result they get individually.

Look, child pornography is absolutely rampant in parts of Europe, I don't think Americans really grasp the scope of how big an underground industry it's become in certain parts of the EU. It's nothing short of disgusting when you get in to the depth of some of it. It's important to recognize that the source of this problem is due to the ease in which offenders in this particular area can communicate, especially since the travel floodgates have opened over the years throughout the continent. And, if you want to combat technologically innovative criminals, you have to monitor their modes of transmission. It's really the only way at this point considering almost the entire industry exists and is controlled online.

I'm not exactly the biggest fan of the '06 directive and haven't been since its inception, but this is actually a good use for it.

[war ensemble]

Meaning if search results lead to suspicion that Person A is communicating with Person B about, in this case, child pornography, then their communications are examined from angles that actually aren't the exact content. Meaning location, duration...etc. This is done over time when patterns present themselves. So if someone is doing research on child pornography for a few nights for school from only one or two locations, obviously it's not going to be a problem. The goal of something like this is to catch pornography and prostitution rings via email and internet searches over extended periods of time, it's not to monitor everyone for every single search result they get individually.

.

So it does keep track of electronic communications, but uses patterns rather than the individual data to track down sex offenders? Either way they need this individual data to compile and interpret patterns, so whether or not they explicitly search through all your google searches, they still have that info and the ability to do so at any time.

It's an invasion of privacy justified by fancy rhetoric that tries to mask the fact that they just took all your google search results.

[RutgersJetFan]

So it does keep track of electronic communications, but uses patterns rather than the individual data to track down sex offenders?

Not exactly. Individual data is still used, just different aspects of it other than the specific content.

Either way they need this individual data to compile and interpret patterns, so whether or not they explicitly search through all your google searches, they still have that info and the ability to do so at any time.

Somewhat correct, but there's really no interest that European government agencies assigned to fight child pornography are going to have in Pierre Shmierre's visits to FC Barcelona's website or Frenchmenaregay.com. That being said, possessing the right to use it is still questionable, the info is technically there but if they're under strict supervision (which is still doubtful considering the Union's incompetence as of late), it becomes a power v. right issue and they're skating on thin ice if they encroach on it. You're also off on the "at any time" point due to the fact that there's express time restrictions on data retention.

It's an invasion of privacy justified by fancy rhetoric that tries to mask the fact that they just took all your google search results.

In some of the original language of the directive? It sure is. But while it's there, getting pissed at the fact that law enforcement is taking advantage of it to fight child pornography isn't really justifiable criticism. Can't say I blame them.

[RutgersJetFan]

I've always wanted to visit Belgium actually.

So, I just googled "armpit licking", "hampster insertion", and "setting fire to bunnies".

I'll bring you guys back some t-shirts.

Nice. Bring me back a mug from one of the brothels that pimp out 13-year-olds.

[Larz]

I've pretty much assumed since 9/11 everything is being monitored by the man

I'd like to take this oppty to apologize for the 5/05 to 8/05 time period in my life, just chalk it up to stress

[RutgersJetFan]

Notice how the rallying cry is always "It's for the children".

Except in this case it has to be. Child pornography law is woefully behind the times and this is good use of poor legislation. Why? Because more than half of Interpol countries have either no laws on the books concerning it or outdated ones. And by outdated, I mean that there's nothing on the books concerning the use of computers and the internet to combat child porno. The necessary means and knowledge to combat it just isn't there. And in the meantime it's turned into an entire industry that's also intertwined heavily with arms and drugs.

You're talking about a country where 1 in 5 girls is sexually exploited by the time she's an adult, (some of them being Americans mind you). In a time where the number of missing children reported have increased by a whopping 13 times over internationally. And an industry that's become more professional by the year due two factors; 1)The inadequacy of law enforcement as they've been hampered by bad law and lack of education in the area; and 2) Increased, unmonitored means of communication and trafficking. You, better than anyone on this forum, should know that the way you solve the problem, given those two factors, is to increase the former and decrease the latter.

The Belgians are the good guys in this case people. Yeah, the directive sucks, but I can't blame them for making use of it in an area that's sorely needed.