//
Apologies for cross-posting - Read online:
http://netcommons.eu/?q=
content/letter-eu-policy-
makers-making-regulation-work-
community-networks
//
Dear all,
After many discussions with many European
Community Networks (CNs),
researchers from the netCommons project
on network infrastructure as a commons are happy
to present a draft open letter on "policy
recommendations for sustaining Community
Networks". The letter is targeted at European
policy-makers, who recently started working on
an overhaul of the telecom regulatory framework.
https://lqdn.co-ment.com/text/
Rl42W44XAc6/view/
This letter, drafted in collaboration with
several European CNs and advocacy groups, is
meant to offer a collective voice to this
growing movement.
*Until March 8th*, we would like to collect
signatures from as many European CNs as
possible, as well as other supporting
organizations (from Europe and beyond, be they
advocacy groups, research projects, non-profits,
SMEs, local authorities, etc.).
After this consultation period and the
collection of signatures, we would like to send
the letter to members of EU Parliament, national
delegations at the Council of the EU, as well as
to key officials from the EU Commission.
Several outcomes can be expected, including:
- The publication of a joint press release by
all signatories to disseminate the open letter
as widely as possible (by the end of March).
- Proposals for amendments reflecting the
recommendations of this open letter, to be sent
to key members of the EU Parliament before the
first crucial vote on the Telecoms Package in
late April.
- A policy workshop to be organized later this
year in Brussels.
Of course, all of these potential outcomes will
depend upon the involvement of signatory
organizations, and in particular of the
willingness of CNs to work together.
But first, we are sharing the draft to a wider
circle of CNs and other people interested in
their activities for consultation and potential
amendments to the text. Until March 8th, you can
read and comment on the draft letter, offer
corrections and suggest changes or additions by
using co-ment, an online tool for collaborative
writing:
Please read and comment on the open letter.
If and when you agree to sign the letter,
*please send the name of your organization, the
country where it is based and its
high-resolution logo at: advocacy@netcommons.eu*
(note that if your signature is dependent on the
response brought to a specific comment you have
made, please be sure to tag comment as
"blocking").
Thanks,
Federica Giovanella
University of Trento (http://www.lawtech.jus.unitn.it/index.php/people/federica-giovanella)
Partner
of netCommons project on network infrastructure
as a commons
http://netcommons.eu/
========Text of the open letter==========
OPEN LETTER TO EU POLICY-MAKERS:
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SUSTAINING COMMUNITY
NETWORKS
PREAMBLE
We represent European Community Networks, a
growing movement of
organizations that operate local communication
infrastructures,
sometimes federated at the regional or national
levels. These networks,
most of which also provide access to the global
Internet, are operated
as a commons. That is, rather than being driven
by for-profit motives,
our key focus is on providing connectivity while
striving for democratic
governance, social inclusion, education, and
human rights with respect
to communication technologies.
Our organizations vary considerably in terms of
sizes, types of network
infrastructures and political cultures. Yet,
despite this diversity, we
are united by the common objective to build
networks that meet the
communication needs of humans (rather than those
of objects and
machines), through networks that are built and
run by our communities,
for our communities, focused on local
empowerment, affordability and
resiliency.
Today, we collectively provide broadband
connectivity not only to tens
of thousands of individual European citizens and
residents, but also to
organizations including small and medium sized
companies, schools,
healthcare centers, social projects and many
more. In many cases, we
have out-competed mainstream operators, by
providing cheaper and faster
Internet connectivity than incumbent players.
Thanks to our
infrastructure and through our various
activities, we foster scientific
and engineering experiments, we help local
hosting and service providers
come together to mutualise investments and share
costs, we support
digital literacy and data sovereignty through
workshops and other
educational activities.
Yet, despite our achievements, policy-makers at
the national and
European levels have so far mostly neglected our
existence and specific
regulatory needs. Worse, regulation is often
hampering our initiatives,
making the work of our participants and
volunteers harder than it should
be. This is why, as you start working on a
European code of electronic
communications, we decided to contact you and
voice our ideas and
recommendations regarding the future of the
legal and policy framework
regulating our activities.
1. Lifting unnecessary regulatory and financial
burdens
We first ask you to review the regulatory
framework and get rid of
unnecessary regulatory burdens, such as fees or
red-tape that are
unnecessary or illegitimate when imposed on
small non-profit entities.
In Belgium for instance, the registration fee
that telecom operators
must pay to the NRA is at 676€ for the first
registration, plus 557€
every following year (for those whose revenues
are below 1M€, which is
the case for many community networks). Even such
small fees can hinder
the growth of small networks that efficiently
serve tens of households.
In France, Spain and Germany, it is free, which
might explain why the
community network movement is much more dynamic
in these countries. The
proposed code for electronic communications aims
to harmonize procedures
for declaration fees (first registration) as
well as administrative
charges (annual fees). EU lawmakers must ensure
that the fees and
charges imposed by national NRAs are null or
negligible for non-profit
ISPs and micro and small businesses. Likewise,
taxes designed for large
corporate firms in the telecom sectors should
not apply to smaller,
non-profit operators.
2. Getting rid of third-party liability when
sharing Internet access
Several laws seek to prevent the sharing of
Internet connections amongst
several users by making people responsible (and
potentially liable) for
all communication made through their Wi-Fi
connection, and create legal
risks for people sharing their connection. In
Germany, rights-holders
have used a "secondary liability" doctrine to
chill the growth of the
community networks movement. In France too,
copyright law imposes a
secondary liability regime that creates
significant legal uncertainty
for people sharing their network connections
with other users. The
so-called "mere conduit", inscribed in EU law
since 2000 in the
directive on the information society, needs to
be guaranteed and
expanded to small-area wireless access points.
In the same spirit,
contract clauses that forbid subscribers to
share their connections with
others should be prohibited. Promoting a right
to share Internet
connections is all the more vital considering
the economic and
ecological crises, as well as the rapid increase
of populations that
cannot afford access to the Internet. In this
context, connection
sharing can play a critical role in fostering a
more equitable and
sustainable use of telecommunications
infrastructure.
3. Expanding the spectrum commons
It is not just Internet wireless access points
that can be shared, but
also the intangible infrastructure on which
radio signals travel. Wi-Fi,
as an unlicensed portion of the spectrum and
therefore a commons, is a
key asset for community networks willing to set
up affordable and
flexible last-mile infrastructure. However,
these Wi-Fi frequency bands
are currently very limited. Not only are they
getting increasingly
subject to congestion in densely populated
areas, they are also exposed
to new technical standards that use the
so-called ISM frequency band
(like LTE-U) that hamper the reliability of
Wi-Fi communications. Last
but not least, existing frequency bands for
Wi-Fi (5,6 Ghz and 2,4 Ghz)
have physical constraints that prevent them for
being used for longer
radio links. In the face of such challenges, a
new approach to spectrum
policy is needed. Policy-makers should expand
unlicensed Wi-Fi bands.
Two other types of frequencies should also be
made available either on
an unlicensed (preferred scenario) or, if not
possible, based on
affordable and flexible authorization schemes:
so-called white spaces in
lower frequencies (which allow for cheap and
resilient long-distance
links) and the 12Ghz and the 60Ghz bands (for
which radio equipment is
affordable and which can help us build
high-bandwidth point-to-point
radio links). Once made accessible to community
networks, these
frequency bands will help these networks
roll-out and expand cheap and
resilient wireless infrastructures.
4. Updating open-access rules in telecom
infrastructures
Networks built with taxpayers money should also
be treated as a commons
and, as such, remain free from corporate
capture. Today, their
management and exploitation is often delegated
by public authorities to
corporate network operators. These entities
usually adopt aggressive
pricing schemes designed for incumbent players
that make it extremely
costly for small access providers to
interconnect with these networks.
Access to these publicly-funded networks for
non-profit entities like
community networks as well as small businesses
should be guaranteed, at
a reasonable and proportionate cost. Similarly,
community networks often
cannot have access to the private local
infrastructures of incumbent
players, despite the fact that these are the
only way to connect willing
subscribers. Indeed, in many European markets,
the deployment of optical
fiber networks is (re)creating monopolistic
conditions on local loops
through pricing schemes which preclude small
actors from accessing these
private networks. Policy-makers and regulators
should ensure that every
area is covered by at least one telecom operator
with a so-called
"bitstream" offer affordable for smaller
players.
5. Protecting free software and user freedom in
radio equipment
In 2014, the European Union adopted Directive
2014/53 on radio
equipment. Although the Directive pursues sound
policy goals, it might
actually impair the development of community
networks. Indeed, community
networks usually need to replace the software
included by the
manufacturer in radio hardware with free and
open source software
especially designed to suit their needs, a
collective process that
improves security and encourages the recycling
of hardware, among other
benefits. Article 3.3 of the said Directive
creates legal pressure for
manufacturers of radio devices to ensure the
compliance of the software
loaded on these devices with the European
regulatory framework. As a
result, there is a strong incentive for
manufacturers to lock down their
devices and prevent third-party modifications of
the hardware. We
therefore ask policy-makers to provide a general
exception for all free
software installed on radio devices by
third-parties (the latter being
liable if their software lead to violations of
the regulatory
framework), so that users' rights are
safeguarded.
6. Abrogating blanket data retention obligations
Community networks strive to safeguard human
rights in communication
networks, and in particular the right to privacy
and the confidentiality
of communication. While we welcome recent
rulings by the Court of
Justice of the European Union holding that
indiscriminate retention of
metadata violates the Charter of Fundamental
Rights, we are concerned
about several member states' willingness to
circumvent these rulings to
protect capabilities for indiscriminate
surveillance. As EU lawmakers
start discussing the overhaul of the ePrivacy
Directive, we call on them
to oppose any blanket data retention obligations
and close existing
loopholes in EU law to ensure that only targeted
and limited retention
obligations can be imposed on hosting and access
providers.
7. Bringing direct and targeted public support
Countless other policy initiatives can help
support community networks
and the associated significant benefits they
bring, such as small
grants, crowd-funding and subsidies to help our
groups buy servers and
radio equipment, communicate around their
initiative, giving them access
to public infrastructures (for instance, the
roof of a public building
to install an antenna), but also to support
their research on radio
transmission, routing methods, software or
encryption. As many local
authorities have found, supporting community
networks is a sound policy
option. As EU lawmakers move forward on the
WiFi4EU initiative, we would
like to remind you that we have pioneered
various models for the
provision of free public access points. We
believe that public money
invested in this initiative should primarily go
to groups pursuing a
bottom-up logic, seeding local groups that can
foster the empowerment
and cohesion of local communities, nurture
competition, and meet the
same policy-objectives at a fraction of the cost
that would be charged
by mainstream telecom operators.
8. Opening the policy-making process to
Community Networks
Although we have often partnered with
municipalities and local public
authorities, we ask that national and European
regulators pay more
attention to our activities when drafting
regulation. Community networks
have both the expertise and legitimacy to take
an integral part in
technical and legal debates over broadband
policy in which traditional,
commercial ISPs are over-represented. Community
networks can bring an
informed view to these debates, allowing for a
policy-making process
more attuned to the public interest.
We thank you for your attention and very much
look forward to engaging
with you on these important issues,
First signatories (EU-based community networks)
Aquilenet (France)
Franciliens.net (France)
Freifunk Hamburg (Germany)
(Incoming)
Supporting organizations (advocacy groups,
research projects, public
authorities, SMEs, etc.)
La Quadrature du Net
(Incoming)
For any inquiry regarding this open letter,
write to: advocacy@netcommons.eu
http://netcommons.eu/?q=content/letter-eu-policy-makers-making-regulation-work-community-networks