8 ms·

Not really. They have been supporters for "Vorratsdatenspeicherung" / "stock data saving" / data retention for quite some time and now realize that the populace

• Sujan 13y ago
  Exactly. It's pure spin, the content stayed exactly the same, they just replaced some words. Apparently done well enough, to confuse even Spiegel Online. Here is some reporting on it: http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fnetzpolitik.org%2F2013%2Fspiegel-online-ente-union-gibt-vorratsdatenspeicherung-nicht-auf-benennt-sie-nur-um%2F http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%... http://netzpolitik.org/2013/spiegel-online-ente-union-gibt-vorratsdatenspeicherung-nicht-auf-benennt-sie-nur-um/ http://netzpolitik.org/2013/spiegel-online-ente-union-gibt-v... (German)
  • hwh 13y ago
    It's also important to note that this shift in wording predates the whole Snowden/NSA story. It is conveniently interpret in its light, now that the NSA in political discourse. Also note that Germany is facing federal elections in just a few months...
  • blots 13y ago
    Why, even the Spiegel article says right at the beginning that it's just playing with words for the sake of elections: "But for this change of course to be more than just an election ploy, the government should however advocate a change in the EU Directive in Brussels. Which prescribes a six-month storage of traffic data - and the Union confirms in other parts of its election manifesto that it holds onto the fundamental goal to implement the Directive. "Minimum retention period" is spoken in the Union for two years already - and means nothing but data retention."
• eliasmacpherson 13y ago
  A lot of US users seem to be under the impression that the EU is much better at protecting privacy. In some ways it is, and in other ways it is not. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive This has been in force since 2006. The storage is required by law. "member states will have to store citizens' telecommunications data for six to 24 months stipulating a maximum time period. Under the directive the police and security agencies will be able to request access to details such as IP address and time of use of every email, phone call and text message sent or received. A permission to access the information will be granted only by a court."
  • codesuela 13y ago
    not in Germany though
  • hwh 13y ago
    Just a quick background - that is the EU legislation that made the "Vorratsdatenspeicherung" in Germany appear on the political agenda. The comment shortly stating "not in Germany" however is partly right. The Data Retention Directive applies to Germany, too. To explain this further, one needs to know how EU legislation works. As it is a supranational state conglomerate, a lot of its legislation is not immediately binding. This is how "EU Directives" differ from "EU Regulations". The latter are directly applicable, binding law. But the Directives need to be realized by EU member states doing legislation of their own. They have some degree of freedom for doing so. Arguably, Germany didn't have the freedom to not push forward with its own realization of that Directive. However, it is disputed that the Data Retention Directive is actually conforming to EU law - and that was not checked in court yet to its full extent. So the matter is highly political in its nature. The EU Commission, which watches over the implementation of the Directives, is currently in a legal battle over sanctions regarding the non-implementation. Germany is not alone here, however. Other EU member states postponed an implementation, too.
    • eliasmacpherson 13y ago
      Thanks for the explanation, I had thought it was enforced throughout the EU.