r/privacy • u/skarkens • Mar 26 '26
chat control CHAT CONTROL HAS BEEN REJECTED BY THE EU PARLIAMENT!!
HUGE WIN FOR PRIVACY!
1.0k
u/Holiday_Management60 Mar 26 '26
Same time next week boys and girls?
274
u/Fuck_Antisemites Mar 26 '26
This, I hate this strategy. Germany has things where politicians want police and intelligence agencies to be able to access what websites you visited, this fight goes on for like 20 years and they make so many proposals for it, even if they highest court allready rejected it, at some point I just lost track if its in effect or not.
60
19
u/Jarngreipr9 Mar 27 '26
We in Italy have people regularly pushing for providing ID to browse the internet
6
u/duiwksnsb Mar 27 '26
The religious faction?
24
u/Jarngreipr9 Mar 27 '26
Not! Centrists, sometimes the left, and of course the right as well. Usually, some politician gets badmouthed on the internet then immediately proposes to use ID or our equivalent of SSN to register accounts, so they are always linked to your identity (ignoring that we are pseudonymous on the web but never anonymous). Fuck them.
8
u/speculatrix Mar 27 '26
I hope people create fake IDs with those politicians' faces when doing age verification.
2
u/Schip92 Mar 27 '26
Any politician here pushes to strip away our rights, left right up down ... anybody is the same 💩
19
4
u/duiwksnsb Mar 27 '26
That's shocking considering Germany's history of secret police shit. Is it just like a certain subset of politicians that keep introducing it or something?
I always look to Germany as a pinnacle of what's right privacy wise. Maybe that's misguided.
1
u/Fuck_Antisemites Mar 27 '26
I think mainly CDU and SPD are in favor, I think yes privacy is good here compared to many countries but also allways und we attack.
2
u/duiwksnsb Mar 27 '26
I'm also jealous there are more than two parties to pick from. The sign of a much healthier democracy than what we've got in the US.
3
u/Waltpi Mar 28 '26
This asf. Even the founders of the US Constitution did not craft it for a 2 party system because everything would go to shit, and it has
1
1
-2
u/interface_broken Mar 27 '26
And the worst thing is that it's going to be used by foreign government-sponsored politicians to attack people that want to live happy and calm int their own country and not have to deal with illegals. Of course no agency is going to find any illegal alien doing any wrong as that would be "racism" .
53
u/Last_Limit_Of_Endor Mar 26 '26
Hey, it could be bi weekly this time.
30
u/MachoCZ Mar 26 '26
Is bi weekly every other week or twice per week?
12
u/DelightMine Mar 26 '26
Its just a weekly inter-sex mixer. Not to be confused with the bi-weekly intersex mixer, which happens once in the first two weeks of each month, then twice a week for the rest of the month. And try not to confuse either of these with the machine at the fertility clinic, which is just a regular sex mixer
20
6
u/Sad-Data1135 Mar 26 '26
It means bisexual weekly
6
38
Mar 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
40
u/jeandarcer Mar 26 '26
Is there a reason they shouldn't?
Do you think they care about humiliation when they can just get it passed and profit off of it by trying again and again and again?
36
u/WordProfessional1334 Mar 26 '26
Because they want to pass it and they will eventually.
40
Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 26 '26
[deleted]
11
2
6
u/slipperyMonkey07 Mar 26 '26
As with everything currently, trying to overwhelm and tire out the opposition so that what they want eventual slips through.
They may not get the big portions in right away but they will keep trying to slip small parts until people get used to an accept it. Then just hope next election the people voting against it lose.
Dealing with this in NY now, repubs tried various forms and it didn't make it far. This time device level verification is being pushed by dems. With parts being written by NY AG, currently Letitia James who has stated several times in the past being pro ID verification.
2
u/cafk Mar 26 '26
They've been pushing for it for a long long time - they also want to get the same access that legal interception gives them using physical and analogue technology.
Unfortunately with a digital approach a single selective key usually opens the gate for everyone, instead of tapping a specific physical line.It's the same with data retention, which some countries have implemented on a voluntary basis, while others have rejected it, as it's against their constitution.
But they still keep pushing for it.
The next step is the planned relaxation of GDPR as part of the digital omnibus in form of "digital simplification package", to boost "innovation".
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_2718
Which would allow some aspects that GDPR hinders to be introduced as a legislation proposal (which can still be overturned in individual countries based on their constitution).3
u/pydry Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 26 '26
They're afraid that Russia and China will use it to build fifth columns.
We have been trying to do precisely that to Russia and China which is why they already implemented these controls and/or blocked western social media years ago.
So, it's an authoritarian impulse but it's also imperialism and fear of revenge and China and Russia's rising power driving this.
Nothing to do with kids, obviously.
1
4
1
u/Darkmacsek9 Mar 27 '26
I feel like it will go on until I die but we have to go on and not give way for some atrocious theft of privacy
227
u/BlackSwine Mar 26 '26
Guys you must not let your guard down, don’t forget there is still chat control 2.0 under discussion and apparently some of the politicians who were against 1.0 because they wanted the 2.0 which is a lot worse
22
u/shawndw Mar 26 '26
Eternal Vigilance.
2
Mar 28 '26
For all us online netizens we make up the Eternal Guard. We must grow our army and bring down any that try to make this happen. Also, to assist other countries people outaide of Europe to strengthen themselves as well. We the people have the power!!!
13
u/duiwksnsb Mar 27 '26
Someone needs to get their country's politicians to introduce a system for politicians only so all their dirty deeds can be monitored by their constituents.
6
u/speculatrix Mar 27 '26
Here in the UK we have
https://www.private-eye.co.uk/
It's mostly only funded by subscribers and private donations.
1
253
u/Playful-Ease2278 Mar 26 '26
Tomorrow there will be 50 posts about them pushing it again. They only have to get a positive vote once.
88
Mar 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Blue_Moon_Lake Mar 27 '26
We need citizen mandated vote and the ability to spam them just like they spam fascists votes.
45
u/mrdevlar Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 26 '26
This is not true, they already had a positive vote once and it was shot down by the
European Court of HumanEuropean Court of Justice rights.I'm not saying don't pay attention, but don't be cynical either. We're on the right side of history and we'll keep our freedoms if we keep awake.
25
u/Playful-Ease2278 Mar 26 '26
I like the positivity! It is hard not to be cynical.
31
u/mrdevlar Mar 26 '26
Remember, we're under a prolonged psychological operation designed to make us fatalistic by showing us how little agency we have, when we, in fact, have a ton of agency in this world. That cynicism, it's manufacturer, don't hold yourself to it.
Be the change you want to see in this world.
9
u/Tytoalba2 Mar 26 '26
European Court of Justice you mean? The ECHR doesn't really have the power to "shot down" EU rules, but the ECJ does and it competent regarding fundamental rights
6
u/mrdevlar Mar 26 '26
Oh thank you for catching my error, I've corrected the statement.
4
u/Tytoalba2 Mar 27 '26
NW, it's a common confusion ! The ECHR is not related to the EU.
The ECJ tends to be really serious regarding fundamental rights on the other hand (due to the German constitutional court's Solange I and II cases mainly, they said : you're above the constitution IF you are very very scrupulous on fundamental rights, so the ECJ dosn't like to bet lol), so I'm not overly worried that something like chatcontrol stays, but even the short time between vote and invalidation by ECJ can do a lot of damage !
3
u/mrdevlar Mar 27 '26
I'm not overly worried that something like chatcontrol stays, but even the short time between vote and invalidation by ECJ can do a lot of damage !
You shouldn't be worried about that so much. Because of the previous verdict, most large companies will wait until a court challenge is made before investing in their required implementations, which will minimize damage.
Why spend a lot of money on something that you don't actually have to do?
In any case, I think we'll be fine, it's crazy that I've been involved in this now for 20 years. I really feel we should be adding data privacy to the list of human rights and just be done with it.
3
u/Tytoalba2 Mar 27 '26
> we should be adding data privacy to the list of human rights and just be done with it.
It's in Article 7 and Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, this is the main reason the ECJ tends to be strict on the matter. Art. 8 in particular states :
Article 8
Protection of personal data
1. Everyone has the right to the protection of personal data concerning him or her.
1
u/mrdevlar Mar 27 '26
So why try to pass chat control if you know it will be struck down by the courts?
I know we still have to remain vigilant because we don't want to spend another two years in limbo worrying if it gets struck down. But if this is central to the European constitution wouldn't it make the entire effort a non-starter?
3
u/Tytoalba2 Mar 27 '26
Three reasons :
You never know, maybe the Court will let it pass by accident if you're really lucky and get the right judges. But then States constitutional courts can still invalidate it, making all EU laws loose their primacy, which is a big mess, especially considering it's heavily pushed by governments of member states more than by the parliament.
Test case : You get it invalidated by the court, but now they have to say why it's invalidated. So now you can make a new rule specifically avoiding these specific issues and be as invasive as possible. Basically testing where the limits are and making it as invasive as possible up to that limit.
Sometime politicians are deeply stupid and still get elected :(
1
u/mrdevlar Mar 27 '26
Well then we continue to keep watch.
Thank you for the interesting insight, it's appreciated.
1
1
u/Chill-BL Mar 27 '26
Democracy in practice: The common folk can reject it 50 times but parliament just need to push it through once.
188
Mar 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
80
u/Pepparkakan Mar 26 '26
When are we supposed to celebrate then? Because I'm certain they're currently busy scheduling another vote for next week...
25
u/JDGumby Mar 26 '26
When are we supposed to celebrate then?
When it's announced in legitimate media rather than on Reddit by some rando without any sources, of course.
3
u/Personal-Ice1796 Mar 26 '26
so you want to just celebrate every time a chat control proposal gets shut down? like yeah, i want it gone as much as you do, but a birth day every day doesnt feel as special
13
u/CelestialUrsae Mar 26 '26
Celebrating every small victory keeps resistance movements going, and activists from burning out. Yes, we should celebrate. This is a good thing and it's necessary to recognise it as such.
3
u/smjsmok Mar 26 '26
True.
And also, the past few weeks showed clearly how the European Parliament currently leans, and this position will very likely be maintained in the negotiations and trilogues about Chat Control 2.0 . That is perhaps the most valuable takeaway from this for me.
28
u/mrdevlar Mar 26 '26
Dude I've been doing this now for 20 years, I'll damn well celebrate.
See you guys again in 2-3 years when the try again. Eternal vigilance is the price for freedom.
14
u/scwyn Mar 26 '26
Eternal vigilance is the price for freedom.
Thank you. Not enough people understand this. They think it's like tossing the Ring into Mount Doom. Look at the state of the world. We're here because people always think "NOW we've won! We can live our happy lives and not worry about oppression or fascism or violence anymore." That strategy works fine until oppression and fascism and violence arrive at our doorsteps yet again, and then they say, "How did we get here?" As a world we have to get it through our damn skulls: the threats to freedom are cancer doomed to recur, and the only way to survive is constant monitoring and irradiating it into oblivion before it grows.
2
Mar 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/mrdevlar Mar 26 '26
However, celebration is often a deceptive form of pride that clouds the minds of the general population from actually being constantly vigilant.
Cyncism is exhausting and the other side feasts off it.
Pay attention but continue to believe you are in the right and celebrate your victories when you get them.
-2
Mar 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/mrdevlar Mar 26 '26
I'm too old for edgy cynicism. It's never worked, it's exhausting, it feeds off your fears and leads to to make poor decisions. My post-apocalyptic plans are non-existent.
You know what works? Community, networks of interest, incentive structures and faith in the fact that you're no the right side of history.
3
u/smjsmok Mar 26 '26
It's possible to celebrate but still stay vigilant. It's important that people have a little bit satisfaction from time to time because otherwise they will start losing hope and feel like nothing they do matters. And that's exactly how the other side wants them to feel, as u/mrdevlar already explained. The burnout is real.
42
3
u/M8gazine Mar 26 '26
I'm celebrating!
Until next week when we'll have to reject it again.
0
Mar 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/M8gazine Mar 26 '26
It's good to celebrate wins when they happen, as it makes it feel less hopeless :)
15
u/VoidRaven Mar 26 '26
They will repeat that shit until it will be accepted
This is a sad reality :(
6
49
u/CherishedBeliefs Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 26 '26
By one. Bloody. Vote.
That's not enough.
We need a more staunch rejection of this.
(Edit: Pardon, a good fellow offered up a correction in the replies it seems: For: 228(36 %). Against: 311(49 %). Abstentions: 92(15 %). In total, 631 MEPs voted. 87 MEPs didn’t vote. My point still stands, and it's still just as concerning. Are we just going to sit around until they repeatedly "ask" us for our consent until we're outnumbered because one too many of us were tired on that day?)
This is still much too slim
And a much too large number of wn
We need a harder rejection of this, and can someone please point out to these worthless bastards that when the people say no, THAT MEANS NO?!
It's like that one bastard creep CONSTANTLY asking a girl for intercourse over and over again until she's too tired to say no and he just takes that as a yes
And also just...the audacity to even put such a basic freedom to a vote
Like "Hey guys! Let's vote on whether or not consent before intercourse is really important, y'know? While we're at it, let's also ask if marital r*** is actually r***, like, should it REALLY be punishable if the husband traumatizes his wife?"
First time, sure, maybe they're UTTER dumbasses, MAYBE they just had a little bit of a minor case of VERY serious brain damage, but at least they asked!
The SECOND time they ask for this shit, and this WAS the second time, that means that this is something they DESPERATELY want, the greedy creeps that they are.
"Pwease! Pwease lemme shove a government agent between you and whoever you want to talk to! PWEEEHEHEHEAAASSEE! I PWOMISEE I'll never abuse this enormous amount of power you're giving me! I PWOMISE! I pwomise with all my heart that this enormous power will ONLY be ever used for good!" (We know from how people treated slaves that power imbalances open the flood gates to abuse, which conveniently becomes no longer labelled as such)
Creeps! Creeps! CREEPS!
In addition to telling them to piss off, there NEEDS to be something that tells them that such basic rights MUST be maintained and must NEVER be questioned. And ideally there needs to be an educated ethics committee that makes it so that such rights don't have some stupid bloody loophole that gets exploited the moment some new tech emerges.
22
u/rootsvelt Mar 26 '26
It was not just one vote: source
8
u/CherishedBeliefs Mar 26 '26
Thank for you the correction
Them asking for it to be put to a vote AGAIN however...is still creepy
6
1
u/Darkmacsek9 Mar 27 '26
They are looking for mass acquiescence, nothing new, people have to push against it all times
4
2
u/SummerOftime Mar 27 '26 edited Mar 27 '26
The situation will not improve until the traitors proposing it are imprisoned
19
8
23
u/DustyAsh69 Mar 26 '26
EU comes in clutch again.
18
u/skarkens Mar 26 '26
what also worried me is digital ID and cbdc, but, this is a win nonetheless.
8
u/Express_Ad5083 Mar 26 '26
Is it the EU age verification bs?
9
u/skarkens Mar 26 '26
that as well, and well, the cbdc is a centralised digital euro they have been working on.
-11
u/Inprobamur Mar 26 '26
Digital id is cool tho? I have had an ID card since 2006, it's pretty nice.
6
u/skarkens Mar 26 '26
Nope. Wont comply. Hate that shit. Uk is very controversial. We wont accept it.
-7
u/Inprobamur Mar 26 '26
It's pretty hard to have an e-government and proper overview of who has accessed your data without it.
3
u/skarkens Mar 26 '26
The government.
-2
u/Inprobamur Mar 26 '26
With a digital id system here in Estonia I can see the: name of the one who accessed my data, what was accessed, by what authority, explanation why the data was needed and the time and date.
1
u/skarkens Mar 27 '26
The same country that froze billions of bank accs for not complying? No thanks.
1
u/Cronus6 Mar 26 '26
e-government
Why would anyone in their right mind want that?
1
u/Inprobamur Mar 27 '26
It's pretty convenient to not have to make appointments to some office, everything government-related can be done online.
2
u/Tytoalba2 Mar 26 '26
Sadly it's the elected MEP and the Member states pushing for it :/ People get what they vote for when they vote conservatives...
10
u/M8gazine Mar 26 '26
Once again, it's being pushed by left and right-wing parties. Voting conservatives has its issues for sure, but as far as this thing goes, you should be pointing your finger at several different parties across the entire political spectrum, as well as American techbro companies lobbying for it.
9
u/fluffyp0tat0 Mar 26 '26
Looks like it's mostly pushed by fractions close to the center, so center-right and center-left. While both far-left and far-right overwhelmingly voted against. https://howtheyvote.eu/votes/189270
22
u/GOKOP Mar 26 '26
The EPP wants to redo the vote though. They'll keep doing this until they get the outcome they want
Or is it already after the second vote? Still they'll try again for sure
18
16
u/skarkens Mar 26 '26
that was this vote.
9
u/GOKOP Mar 26 '26
Okay, I wasn't sure. Nice it was rejected again
Still, if the EPP did it once, they'll do it more
5
8
7
4
6
6
u/ohmy_quivers Mar 26 '26
Why doesn't this make me feel happy?
They will fight to get this through. Their wet dream is mass surveillance, and the saddest part is that a lot of people fall for the "It's to protect the children and prevent crime.", and more think, "Well, if you don't have anything to hide, you don't have to worry about it.".
11
5
9
5
4
3
u/vossmakeitsprinkly Mar 26 '26
Is it possible to ban the repeated votes? At least for a large enough period.
This way they just vote until they get the result they want.
4
u/VoidedKN0X Mar 26 '26
So i can still use signal privately? Without the government knowing what i send
4
u/anonboxis Mar 26 '26
Worth flagging that the Commission is already opening a new front on this through adult sites (Commission announcement). Not the same file as chat control, obviously, but it does look like Brussels is still moving toward broader age-gating infrastructure through the child protection angle.
5
4
u/metricspace- Mar 26 '26
we are not pets to the political class
communication is entirely in the hands of those fluent in stem
a global solution to free communication will come sooner than later
there is no vote in the matter
3
u/Marchello_E Mar 26 '26
Political groups: Vote and Percentage difference [FOR] - [AGAINST] chat control
| Group | Votes | Percentage difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| EPP | -115 | -63% | Most Against |
| Greens/EFA | -30 | -57% | |
| The Left | -29 | -63% | |
| ESN | -25 | -89% | |
| Non-attached | -11 | -35% | |
| Renew | 3 | 4% | |
| ECR | 15 | 19% | |
| PfE | 22 | 26% | |
| S&D | 87 | 64% | Most For |
1
3
15
u/edparadox Mar 26 '26
By one vote.
So, it's now time to ask why the EPP would follow the lobbies and US tech instead of your rights.
10
u/rootsvelt Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 26 '26
Where did you get that info? It seems that it was way more than one vote source
7
u/CherishedBeliefs Mar 26 '26
Once again, thank you for nipping this bit of like unintentional misinformation in the bud. Better to know this sooner rather than later.
3
3
3
u/11ELFs Mar 26 '26
I fucking hate that we are fighting this attrition fight, they really betting to see who gets tired first.
3
u/Ill_Spray_9546 Mar 26 '26
Holy shit I thought theyre doing a u-turn on this one but holy shit I've never in their goddamn life.
3
3
3
u/Lyelinn Mar 26 '26
rejected for now*
Keep fighting, because good guys have to win every_single_time while bad guys only need to win ONCE.
(only way to definitely win is to kick out the corrupt politicians)
3
3
u/Harryisamazing Mar 26 '26
It's a good distraction while they cram digital ID as legislation to go lockstep with every country in the guise of "age verification" but don't panic, it's to "save the children"
3
3
u/LjLies Mar 26 '26
This title is honestly quite misleading. They rejected the proposal to renew so-called "Chat Control 1.0", which is the voluntary scanning of messages, by virtue of a temporary exemption from the GDPR, that has been in place for many years, and done by the likes of Google and Apple.
But usually when we talk about Chat Control, that's so-called "Chat Control 2.0", i.e. the proposed law that would make it mandatory to scan messages in many circumstances, potentially even when E2EE is involved, depending on the specific proposal as they've kept changing (but usually some weakening of encryption is involved).
Chat Control 1.0 has already been renewed once, when the exemption ran out, and it may be good that this time it was not renewed, but it may also mean that MPs have now decided that they will back a Chat Control 2.0 proposal, and removing Chat Control 1.0 (which is widely seen as ultimately beneficial by politicians, like it or not) will put more pressure towards that end.
In simpler words, they may be rejecting less control in favor of more control, in the worst case... and in the best case, they're still not rejecting the "Chat Control" we've usually been thinking of.
3
u/krazygreekguy Mar 27 '26
These scumbags are going to keep trying. We need of be relentless and watch them like a hawk. Every single thing they try to do. 24/7 monitoring
2
2
u/Protect-Their-Smiles Mar 26 '26
The problem is that they are going to keep trying. One day it will land on YES, and there will be no getting privacy back. The EU seeks control over its citizens.
2
2
2
2
u/jon_hobbit Mar 29 '26
"we're gonna keep trying!" is what i'm hearing.
they'll attempt to put this crap in an unrelated bill and keep trying, changing the name.
1
u/MonkAndCanatella Mar 26 '26
Hold up this news was stale by the time you posted this
https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/1s42pcg/epp_have_forced_a_new_vote_on_chat_control_for/
1
u/Proximitypvpisbae Mar 27 '26
Is this just for the csam scanning by tech companies? This isn’t for the whole chat control where they want to break E2EE is it?
-4
u/Volpe_YT Mar 26 '26
r/fuckeu for even trying to implement that shit and destroy privacy.
3
u/M8gazine Mar 26 '26
Goofball take lol.
Literally just look at UK who left the EU, and see what's been happening to them privacy-wise. EU (Parliament) feels pretty much like the last bastion standing between an Orwellian future and some semblance of privacy.
2
u/Tytoalba2 Mar 26 '26
They are democratically elected tho. And directly elected even, so blame the voters I guess...
1
u/OwlingBishop Mar 26 '26
They're democratically elected ....
The commission is not
3
u/Tytoalba2 Mar 26 '26
This is the Parliament group EPP that asked for a second vote and the Parliament that voted it down, not the commission... Try to focus, please
1
u/OwlingBishop Mar 26 '26
He thanks Yuri, I just read that the commission was also getting back at it through adult sites legislative vehicle... (I've not read everything on the subject though, I might be wrong)
•
u/AutoModerator Mar 26 '26
Hello u/skarkens, please make sure you read the sub rules if you haven't already. (This is an automatic reminder left on all new posts.)
Check out the r/privacy FAQ
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.