Serbien: Was wir über die mysteriöse Waffe wissen, die in Belgrad gegen friedliche Proteste eingesetzt wurde
netzpolitik.org/2025/serbien-w…
Einladung Mitgliederversammlung PPS, 5. April 2025
Wir laden Dich herzlich zu unserer nächsten, ordentlichen Mitgliederversammlung 2025 ein.
Präsenzveranstaltung; keine online Teilnahme möglich.
Samstag 05. April 2025
Ort: kultur & kongresshaus aarau
10:00 Uhr : Welcome Desk, Zählung Stimm- und Wahlberechtigte
10:30 Uhr : Versammlungsbeginn
Traktanden
Die Traktanden werden spätestens eine Woche vor der MV kommuniziert.
Organisatorisches
Unsere Versammlungen sind öffentlich und alle sind herzlich willkommen, aber stimmberechtigt sind nur Mitglieder, die den Jahresbeitrag 2025 bezahlt haben.
Die Zahlungsinformationen findest du hier: Mitgliedschaft
Danke für deinen Beitrag!
Anträge
Anträge an die Mitgliederversammlung müssen bis Samstag, 22. März 2025 / 10:00 Uhr eingereicht werden und durch mindestens 2 Piraten (= Quorum gemäss Statuten) unterstützt werden. Wir bitten auch um Übersetzungen der Anträge ins Französische/Deutsche oder auf Englisch, damit möglichst alle verstehen, was verhandelt wird. Änderungs- und Gegenanträge sind bis 1 Woche vor der Versammlung einzureichen. Die Anträge werden im Redmine erfasst und sollten mindestens folgende Kriterien erfüllen:
- Antragstext mit Begründung
- Für Statutenänderungen: alter & neuer Text im Vergleich
- Liste der Unterstützer (Quorum)
An und während der MV sind nur noch Ordnungsanträge zulässig.
Wir freuen uns, dich und viele andere Mitglieder wiederzusehen!
Liebe Grüsse
Vorstand Piratenpartei Schweiz
Version française
Nous avons le plaisir de t’inviter à notre prochaine assemblée générale ordinaire en 2025.
Événement en présentiel; aucune participation en ligne possible.
Samedi 5 Avril 2025
Où: kultur & kongresshaus aarau
10:00 : Welcome Desk, comptage des votants et des éligibles
10:30 : Début de l’assemblée
Ordre du jour
Les détails de l’ordre du jour seront communiqués environ une semaine avant l’AG.
Organisation
Nos assemblées sont publiques et tout le monde est le bienvenu, mais seuls les membres à jour de leur cotisation 2025 ont le droit de vote.
Tu trouves les informations de paiement ici : Adhésion
Merci pour ta contribution !
Motions
Les motions à l’assemblée générale doivent être soumises au plus tard le samedi 22 mars 2025 / 10:00 et être soutenues par au moins 2 Pirates (= quorum selon les statuts). Nous demandons également une traduction des motions en français/allemand ou en anglais, afin que tout le monde puisse comprendre ce qui est négocié. Les motions et les contre-propositions doivent être déposés jusqu’à une semaine avant l’assemblée. Les motions sont saisies dans Redmine et doivent remplir au moins les critères suivants :
- texte de la motion avec justification
- Pour les modifications des statuts : ancien & nouveau texte en comparaison.
- Liste des soutiens (quorum).
Lors et pendant l’AG, seules les motions d’ordre sont autorisées.
Nous nous réjouissons de te revoir, toi et de nombreux autres membres !
Meilleures salutations
Comité directeur Parti Pirate
KW 11: Die Woche, in der wir globale Ungerechtigkeit zum Thema machten
netzpolitik.org/2025/kw-11-die…
Bundesrechtsanwaltskammer: Vorratsdatenspeicherung von IP-Adressen unzulässig
netzpolitik.org/2025/bundesrec…
Interview mit Paris Marx: Das falsche Narrativ vom guten Silicon Valley
netzpolitik.org/2025/interview…
Interview with Paris Marx: The false narrative of a good Silicon Valley
netzpolitik.org/2025/interview…
Make the Investigatory Powers Tribunal on Apple Encryption a Public Hearing
Rights groups call for Apple’s closed appeal against the Home Office’s encryption-breaching order to be opened to the public.
Responding to news that Apple will be before the Investigatory Powers Tribunal on Friday, representatives from Big Brother Watch, Index on Censorship, and Open Rights Group have written to President of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, the Rt Hon Lord Justice Singh, calling for the case to be made public.
Read the letter
Joint letter from Open Rights Group, Big Brother Watch and Index on Censorship to the President of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal.
Read now
0
0
The letter states that the “case implicates the privacy rights of millions of British citizens who use Apple’s technology, as well as Apple’s international users”. The groups note the “significant public interest in knowing when and on what basis the UK government believes that it can compel a private company to undermine the privacy and security of its customers.”
0
According to widespread media reporting, the Home Office has served Apple with a Technical Capability Notice under the Investigatory Powers Act 2016. The Technical Capability Notice would force the company to build a backdoor into their end-to-end encrypted iCloud services. The company has previously stated it would “never built a backdoor or master key to any of our products, and we never will”. In response to the Home Office’s demands, Apple has withdrawn its end-to-end encrypted Advanced Data Protection tool from UK users.
0
“The Home Office’s shocking order to Apple to break encryption represents a huge attack on privacy rights and is unprecedented in any democracy. This Tribunal will determine whether the UK government can proceed in forcing access to all of our data – a matter of high public interest that must not take place in secret.”
Big Brother Watch Interim Director, Rebecca Vincent“From the moment the Apple news broke to tomorrow’s Tribunal, everything about this story has been shrouded in secrecy. This has to end. Breaking encryption would do away with our rights to privacy, would make us far less safe and secure online and would challenge the very notion of the UK as a democracy. With such high stakes we demand to know what could possibly justify this. We need answers, not more secrecy.”
Index on Censorship CEO, Jemimah Steinfeld“Holding this Tribunal in secret would be an affront to the global privacy and security issues that are being discussed. This is bigger than just the UK, or Apple. But most importantly, if the UK wants to claim the right to make all of Apple’s users more likely to be hacked and blackmailed, then they should argue for that in an open court.”
Open Rights Group Executive Director, Jim Killock
Petition: keep our apple data encrypted
Stop the Home Office from putting our security at risk by demanding a backdoor into Apple’s encrypted services
Sign the petition
Mass Surveillance
Save Encryption
Become a member
Join the movement
Joint letter: Make the Investigatory Powers Tribunal on Apple Encryption a Public Hearing
openrightsgroup.org/app/upload…
Download
Joint letter from Open Rights Group, Big Brother Watch and Index on Censorship.
To: The Rt Hon Lord Justice Singh
President, Investigatory Powers Tribunal
cc: Mr Justice Johnson
Dear Lord Justice Singh,
As organisations committed to defending privacy and freedom of expression rights, we are writing in response to reports that the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (‘IPT’) will be hearing Apple’s appeal against a Home Office Technical Capability Notice (‘TCN’) issued under the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 (the ‘IPA’) this Friday, 14 March 2025. Although the IPT can choose whether to hold hearings and whether to hold them in public or private, we invite you to make this process more transparent by opening this hearing to the public.
Our organisations have long been involved in surveillance issues in the UK and abroad, including in cases started at or ruled on by the IPT. Open Rights Group and Big Brother Watch originated complaints that led to the judgment in Big Brother Watch and others v UK1 in which the Court ruled that the UK’s bulk interception powers under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, predecessor to the IPA, were in breach of Article 8 of the ECHR. Our organisations submitted a joint briefing to the House of Lords on the Investigatory Powers (Amendment) Bill in January 2024, notably expressing concerns at the time on the interdiction on recipients of TCNs to disclose their existence or contents. Index on Censorship has more recently been involved in encryption-related debates due to the growing threats to freedom of expression posed by policies such as those introduced by the Online Safety Act 2023 and Ofcom’s characterisation of encryption as a risk factor in its guidance on illegal harms measures.
This case implicates the privacy rights of millions of British citizens who use Apple’s technology, as well as Apple’s international users. There is significant public interest in knowing when and on what basis the UK government believes that it can compel a private company to undermine the privacy and security of its customers.
There are no good reasons to keep this hearing entirely private, not least for the fact that the existence of the TCN has already been widely reported and that Apple’s own actions in removing its Advanced Data Protection (ADP) feature for UK iCloud users leave no doubt as to what triggered them – despite reports that the government considers this removal does not comply with the TCN.
According to reporting across the globe, the Secretary of State for the Home Department has issued Apple with a TCN under the Investigatory Powers Act, requiring the company to create a technical capability enabling access to end-to-end encrypted data on its iCloud service if requested by the UK Government. End-to-end encryption cannot be broken in a targeted manner – once a ‘backdoor’ into the system has been created, it can be exploited by anyone, putting the privacy and security of all users at risk.
International human rights treaty bodies have recognised the importance of end-to-end encryption to protect the right to privacy and to promote the exercise of other rights. This is because safe and secure communications can be a precondition of being able to express one’s views, seek help and protection, share vital information, or avoid censorship.
The case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), for example, recognises the role of anonymity in “promoting the free flow of ideas and information in an important manner” including by protecting people from reprisals for their exercise of freedom of expression2. The ECtHR has also recently recognised that the very threat or potential of an obligation to decrypt communications constituted an interference with Article 8 rights3, and that undermining end-to-end encryption impacts the rights of all users to defend themselves against various threats and to exercise various freedoms4. It therefore found that an “obligation to decrypt end-to-end encrypted communications risks amounting to a requirement that providers of such services weaken the encryption mechanism for all users; it is accordingly not proportionate to the legitimate aims pursued.”5
The IPT is required to hold hearings in public, unless doing so would threaten the public interest or prejudice national security6. All Apple iCloud users in the UK who had turned on ADP are already suffering the consequences of Apple’s decision to withdraw the protection in the country, and fully aware of the reasons for this decision. It is not conceivable that a confirmation of the existence of the TCN would threaten the UK’s interests to a level or in a form that meets the conditions for derogating from the principles of open justice. The principles that have in the past allowed the UK government to maintain an NCND policy are only relevant to the targeted interception of communications and covert surveillance7. They cannot apply to such a wide and already public piece of information about the UK’s attempts to weaken the security of services used by millions of people in and outside the UK. The IPT itself has recognised its function as a judicial body to determine whether secrecy measures are strictly necessary and proportionate to the objectives of an NCND policy8. We invite you to exercise this function with rigour and in the light of the requirements of open justice.
Further, hearings in private must be strictly confined to matters that are prejudicial to the interests mentioned in Rule 7(1) of the Tribunal Rules. As the IPT recognised in its Kennedy ruling, “purely legal arguments, conducted for the sole purpose of ascertaining what is the Jaw and not involving the risk of disclosure of any sensitive information, should be heard in public. The public, as well as the parties, has a right to know that there is a dispute about the interpretation and validity of the relevant Jaw and what the rival legal contentions are.”9 We urge you to ensure that holding all or part of Friday’s hearing in private does not derogate from this ruling.
The public interest lies in conducting this hearing in public. There is significant public interest in the matter, evident in the extensive and ongoing media reporting on it, and in the impact it will have on the rights of users of lawful services across the globe. We invite you to provide the requisite level of transparency and scrutiny over an already widely reported situation.
Yours sincerely,
Jim Killock, Executive Director, Open Rights Group
Jemimah Steinfeld, Chief Executive Officer, Index on Censorship
Rebecca Vincent, Interim Director, Big Brother Watch
1 App Nos 58170/13, 62322/14 and 24960/15, 25 May 2021 (GC)
2 Delfi AS v Estonia (2015) EMLR 26, (147) and (149)
3 Podchasov v Russia (2024) ECHR 134, (58)
4 Podchasov v Russia (2024) ECHR 134, (76)
5 Podchasov v Russia (2024) ECHR 134, (79)
6 The Investigatory Powers Tribunal Rules 2018, Rules 10 and 7(1) – The Investigatory Powers Tribunal website, accessed 12 March 2025
7 Kennedy and Other (2003) IPT/01/62 and IPT/01/77, (46)
8 Kennedy and Other (2003) IPT/01/62 and IPT/01/77, (58)
9 Kennedy and Other (2003) IPT/01/62 and IPT/01/77, (172)
Petition: keep our apple data encrypted
Stop the Home Office from putting our security at risk by demanding a backdoor into Apple’s encrypted services
Sign the petition
Mass Surveillance
Save Encryption
Become a member
Join the movement
Hinweisgeberschutzgesetz: Wie Polizist:innen vom Whistleblowing abgeschreckt werden
netzpolitik.org/2025/hinweisge…
Going Dark: EU-Sicherheitsstrategie könnte „Einfallstor für globale Überwachung“ werden
netzpolitik.org/2025/going-dar…
Neuer Verordnungsentwurf: EU-Kommission will mit allen Mitteln abschieben
netzpolitik.org/2025/neuer-ver…
Staatstrojaner in Italien: „Wir kämpfen gegen Repression, nicht gegen Menschen“
netzpolitik.org/2025/staatstro…
Take It Down Act: Wie ein US-Gesetz gegen sexualisierte Deepfakes zum Zensurinstrument werden könnte
netzpolitik.org/2025/take-it-d…
Jährlicher Shutdown-Bericht: Zahl der Internet-Blockaden erreicht trauriges Rekordhoch
netzpolitik.org/2025/jaehrlich…
KW 10: Die Woche, in der Tech-Medien die politische Berichterstattung anführten
netzpolitik.org/2025/kw-10-die…
Raccoon for Friendica is finally available on the PlayStore too. And is compatible with Mastodon and Mastodon glitch-soc
Raccoon is a free and open source mobile-first client for Friendica and Mastodon.
-:-
Friendica is an outstanding social plaftorm, featuring powerful characteristics which make it unique in the federated world:
• rich text editing, long posts, support for titles and spoilers;
• native support for ActivityPub groups;
• direct messages;
• media gallery where you can manage photos and albums;
• possibility to organize your contacts in circles;
• ability to quote (cross-post) other people's posts;
• RSS feed import;
• integrated event calendar;
• of course, much more (see the official documentation)…
The web interface is great to access all of these features but on a mobile device there are different constraints for usability and readability, so it comes in handy to have an app to use the most important functions of the platform.
Main features:
• timeline view with ability to switch feed type (public, local, subscriptions, user-made lists);
• post detail, i.e. opening a conversation in its context and see the replies, number of re-shares and people who added it to favourites;
• user detail with ability to see posts, post and replies, pinned posts and media, subscribe for notifications from a user, follow/send a request or unfollow them, see following/followers;
• support for ActivityPub groups, with the ability to open threads in forum mode;
• see trending posts, hashtags, links and following recommendations;
• follow/unfollow an hashtag and view all the posts containing a given hashtag;
• post actions (re-share, favorite, bookmark) and – for own ones – edit, delete or pin to profile;
• global search hashtags, post and users containing some specific terms;
• customize the application appearance with color themes, font face and size, etc;
• login via OAuth2;
• view and edit one's own profile data;
• view incoming notifications and filter the list;
• manage one's own follow requests and accept/reject each one of them;
• view the list of one's own favorites, bookmarks and followed hashtags;
• create a post/reply with formatted text, image attachments (and alt text), spoiler and title;
• schedule a post (and change its schedule date) or save it to drafts;
• report posts/users to administrators for content moderation;
• mute/unmute, block/unblock users and manage the list of muted/blocked users;
• manage one's own circles (user-defined lists);
• see polls (read only);
• multi-account with easy ability to switch between accounts (and, in anonymous mode, switch instance);
• send direct messages to other users and see conversations;
• manage one's own photo gallery;
• view one's own event calendar (read only).
Projekte für Internetfreiheit: „Das gesamte Ökosystem wird gerade zerstört“
netzpolitik.org/2025/projekte-…
Gezielte Reform der DSGVO: Wenn Axel Voss und Max Schrems einer Meinung sind
netzpolitik.org/2025/gezielte-…
Spionage-Apps: Politiker*innen fordern, heimliche Smartphone-Überwachung zu verbieten
netzpolitik.org/2025/spionage-…
Home Office announces further delays to the e-Visa scheme
The Home Office has again extended the deadline for implementing its eVisa scheme. The scheme was initially due to come into effect on January 1, 2025 but because of multiple problems, it was delayed until April 1, 2025. People with the right to be in the UK were told they could use expired documents to prove their immigration status. The Home Office has now updated its guidance to say that migrants should continue to use these expired documents until June 1, 2025.
Digital Windrush scandal in the making
This is particularly worrying for people travelling to the UK, who have to hope that these expired documents will be accepted by carriers and customs officials in other countries.
ORG’s Migrant Digital Justice Programme Manager, Sara Alsherif said:
“The eVisa scheme continues to be beset with problems and this is causing huge anxiety for migrants who have the right to be in the UK.
“Since January, ORG has heard of people who have been stopped at borders, denied benefits, and even one man who was made homeless because of an issue with his eVisa.”
Back-up documentation
The term eVisa is misleading. People will not be issued with a digital visa that they can store on their devices to be used as and when they need to prove their status. Instead they have to register for an account that will allow them to generate a share code. As users don’t have a physical or saved digital proof of status, they are susceptible to data errors, system crashes and the stability of Internet connections.
Alsherif added:
“We urge the Home Office to follow the recommendations of ORG and many other campaigners, to ensure that people can have a version of their immigration for use offline that can be saved, such as a QR code, or print out.
“While this won’t fix all the problems with the scheme, it will help people be able to prove their immigration status.”
Refugees
At the start of February, the Home Office admitted that refugee’s travel documents can’t be linked to their eVisa. The Home Office have insisted that refugees won’t be prevented from travelling because they can still use their eVisa to show that they have refugee status and border guards have been told to accept Refugee Travel Documents. The government has to issue clear and public guidelines that exempt Refugees from the requirement to link their travel documents to their eVisa.
Issues for legacy document holders
There are ongoing issues for people who have legacy documents proving their right to remain. These are typically older people who have been in the UK for years. These people were previously advised to apply for a Biometric Residence Permit (BRP) which would then enable them to apply for an eVisa. However, the Home Office stopped issuing BRPs at the end of October 2024.
Kate Harper, who applied for a Biometric Residence Permit (BRP) in September, paid £86 to the company Sopra Steria to take her photo and fingerprints and ensure they were sent to the Home Office. Ms Harper, who has had indefinite leave to remain since 1974, never received a BRP nor a refund for the money she spent. She has had no further information from the Home Office about her application.
Write to your mp
Tell the government to change the eVisa scheme, so migrants can prove their immigration status with an offline saved digital or physical document
Take Action
Digital Privacy
Stop the e-Visa scheme
Become a member
Join the movement
Forderungen aus der Zivilgesellschaft: Diese digitalpolitischen Ziele müssen in den Koalitionsvertrag
netzpolitik.org/2025/forderung…
Through the Spyglass: Pirates for Water
In 2006, the United States Pirate Party broke onto the scene as the second Pirate Party to form in the world, and the first to do so outside of Europe.
Like the first Pirate Party, we followed the calls for copyright reform and patent abolition. We called for free culture and an open society. Free and open has been the way from the beginning.
After all, sharing is caring.
The reason for bringing this up is two fold:
- To show that, since the beginning, Pirates have fought for the commons; the shared aspects of our culture and society.
- To reiterate that commitment.
When you think about “pirates”, a couple things come to mind: treasure, peg legs, eye patches, ships and swashbuckling spirits.
But like how you walk everyday and almost never think about the ground, it is “water” that you should be associating with Pirates.
Yesterday, as of the publishing of this article, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cannot limit sewage discharge into water. This leaves the door open for cities to dump even more sewage into bodies of water.
Effectively, they are trying to make clean water a luxury.
The ruling spurred immediate, visceral responses from members of the Pirate National Committee.
“Clean water is a requirement for a healthy life and is a right for everyone in the US and the world.
“The Supreme Court members who voted to allow corporations to poison our waterways must be removed from office.”
“Water is a shared common/resource.”
“We should be able to all access one of the most vital resources we have.”
“They are trying to create more [of Chicago’s] Lake Calumets”
One of the biggest tragedies in the world is the fact that people do not have access to clean drinking water. Those without profit constantly on the brain may struggle to tell you why this is a good thing.
But make no mistake about it: this was a ruling made with profit in mind.
Rarely does the board find unequivocal support over something that isn’t expressly Pirate advocated. The ideological diversity and shared commitments to our common goals is what makes us special.
The commons have always been expressly Pirate advocated. The United States Pirate Party has called out corporate influence and greed since our origins.
This, the green light to pollute our water further, is a step too far for many of us.
Pirates are now and always have been for clean seas and water.
This cannot stand as simply “one of the many bad things this Supreme Court did”. This cannot simply be a footnote.
The United States Pirate Party, in remaining true to our commitment to protecting and advocating for the commons, say it expressly:
We will be the voices of clean water and water rights
Halluzinationsverhinderungswerkzeugkasten: KI-Märchen und die Wirklichkeit
netzpolitik.org/2025/halluzina…
Save our Sites: Deadline 17 March
Incredible as it may seem, thanks to the Online Safety Act, dozens of harmless, safe, small websites are closing down by 17 March, rather than face threats of fines that could lose their operators their homes. Other websites, based outside of the UK, are likely to stop UK users from accessing their services, to avoid liability, through “geo-blocking”.
A Threat to Net Plurality
There are over 450 million WordPress blogs, for example, many of which allow user comments: these face liability and sanctions, under the OSA. Many will ignore the OSA, others will shut the UK out.
Federated social media, mostly based in the USA and EU, is also faced with OSA obligations, which are frequently likely to be onerous and pointless, given they are well run and designed to be safe spaces.
This is the inevitable result of dragging literally any website, including personal blogs with comments, into the Online Safety regime. These simple websites are obliged to:
- Check if they have UK users
- Perform a risk assessment to assess whether children might access the content, or of CSAM or terrorist material might be posted in the comments
- Register and send the results to Ofcom
- Place themselves at the risk of fines, and even personal liability for prison sentences, should they fail to comply with Ofcom’s future directives.
These kinds of measures are the sorts of headaches that organisations can take on – although most NGOs and businesses running blogs probably do not know these duties apply to them, and may therefore unwittingly be placing themselves at risk.
A flurry of sites are promising to close down – all very safe websites and forums, generally small scale and non-commercial.
Urgent Action Needed
Is the intention of the Online Safety Act to push users from safe services, into Facebook and other commercial services that are causing the problem? It hardly seems likely, but that is the result.
There is in fact an easy solution to this mess. The Secretary of State has powers to change the categorisation of sites under the OSA, and could act quickly to exempt small and harmless sites that do not experience problems. This change could be enacted within a few weeks.
If the Secretary of State promises to act before 17 March, then these sites may well be saved, and more besides as people understand the new duties. Action is needed – quickly.
If you are concerned, or impacted, then please email your MP, asking that small, harmless sites are exempted, before they are closed down.
WRITE TO YOUR MP
Exempt websites that are small and at very little risk of hosting harmful content from the Online Safety Act provisions.
Take Action
Free expression online
Defend Online Speech
Become a member
Join the movement
Geopolitik und Demokratie: Riesiges Bündnis fordert wirksame Kontrolle von Plattformen
netzpolitik.org/2025/geopoliti…
Privatsphäre und Sicherheit: Mehrere europäische Länder greifen Ende-zu-Ende-Verschlüsselung an
netzpolitik.org/2025/privatsph…
