Moritz Körner, Member of the European Parliament, disclosed the decision on Twitter. Swedish publisher SVG said, “The question was removed at the last moment from Thursday’s ambassadorial meeting in Brussels”.

  • MigratingtoLemmy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Find the politicians by name who voted yes for this, and display them in public.

    Let the capable open source community then take over going through their phones, since they must be OK with their phones being scanned, right?

    • zaphod@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      First of all it was in the council, so not really individual politicians but the governments/ministers of member countries, and second they didn’t vote, it was withdrawn.

      • MigratingtoLemmy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        We got lucky this time. Won’t be the case next time.

        Also, even if it’s entire governments voting, there must be a way to find politicians who are pro and against this, yes? Pretty sure governments had an internal vote and they came up with their decision based on said vote

        • zaphod@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’d assume people already know who their government is and who of them favours policies like this.

    • ripcord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      At least some of them were discussion giving themselves an exception from it. So no.

  • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Wasn’t this rejected once already? Perhaps if they wanted to do something useful, they should pass something that says that if something is majority disliked twice or something, then it should be withdrawn and not proposed again for at least 100 years.

    • PonyOfWar@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Either way they can just give it a new name and change some details to propose it again. Like how they made it “voluntary” this time (but you can only send text if you don’t agree).

    • MonkderDritte@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Better define some basic human rights as a core tenet and fire repeat offenders, because they are a danger to the population.

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      They will keep trying again and again and again. The assault on privacy has been going on for decades and it will never stop.

      • Dasnap@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’ve gotta defend for an infinite amount of time, but they’ve only gotta succeed once.

        • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes. Technically, a similar vote could repeal the law just as easily but there is a history of governments not giving their power away easily; implementing it also sets a precedent and creates technical enforcement options for other governments willing to go through with something similar in the future, or for hackers to exploit because gov-rooted devices will remain in operation for years after the potential repeal.

        • dactylotheca@suppo.fi
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yep, and as I pointed out in another comment in this thread, Chat Control isn’t the only piece of legislation like this that’s in the works.

          Considering that the extreme right just won big, I have no doubt that one of these fascist surveillance packages will go through. Yeah, at first it may be used for catching criminals, until it isn’t

          • uis@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Considering that the extreme right just won big

            Someone won big yachts from Putin.

            • PonyOfWar@pawb.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Source? In Germany at least that’s not the case, it’s mainly the conservatives who push for it. In the original vote, only the greens clearly opposed it. Later on, SPD (center-left) and FDP (liberal) changed course to also oppose it. Couldn’t find results for other countries though, so I’m genuinely curious.

              • wewbull@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                The labels get confusing especially between countries, but left and right are normally viewed as being economic policy classifications, but you can have authoritarians on right and left and all need to be fought.

              • melroy@kbin.melroy.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                I believe all parties in EU are not really understanding technology in general. So I think it’s a very bad decision to give these people power over these kinds of rules. They just have no idea what they are doing frankly.

                • dactylotheca@suppo.fi
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yep, no disagreement there. This sort of mass surveillance is a fucking terrible idea no matter who’s behind the wheel

      • dactylotheca@suppo.fi
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        And “Chat Control” isn’t even the only thing like this in the pipeline. There’s the so-called “security by design” bullshit (which does the opposite of what then name implies) that’s actually even worse than Chat Control and has also been worked on in secret, and which’d include mass scale surveillance of not just photos but pretty much everything, and is much more likely to pass than Chat Control.

    • cmeio@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Such a rule is basically un-enforceable. Because it is nearly never exactly the same text. So it is always the first time voted on.

  • MonkderDritte@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Until next try in a few months.

    What i read here sometime without source, that secret services since Snowden push for breaking of encryption, seems more and more plausible.

  • ಠ_ಠ@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Note the vote was withdrawn, not actually voted against. They’re pushing this for a later date because there was no majority.

    “The EU Council did not make a decision on chat control today, as the agenda item was removed due to the lack of a majority, (…)

    Belgium’s draft law, (…) was instead postponed indefinitely. (…) Belgium cannot currently present a proposal that would gain a majority. In July, the Council Presidency will transfer from Belgium to Hungary, which has stated its intention to advance negotiations on chat control as part of its work program.

      • Kilgore Trout@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hungary will have the presidency, not the total control. They propose discussions but the vote in the Council is still majority based.

  • EntropyPure@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    From what I understand it was withdrawn as a vote „in favor of the goals of the commission“ was not guaranteed. In part because Germany announced its decision to withdraw support yesterday. Seems to be standard behavior.

  • LordCrom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    They are just delaying the vote for another time… Hoping that next time it will fly under the radar and there won’t be a huge backlash of discontent.

    If the vote fail, they just wait a year, rename it, and try again.

    Same thing happens in the US. Law proposed that people hate, people organize, start a campaign that fights for news airtime, bringing awareness of the dickery about to happen, and then succeed after a hard battle and many many volunteer hours spent.

    In 6 months Congress just renames it the “I love kittens” act and sticks it on a must pass bill.

    Fighting bullshit laws is exhausting…

      • cows_are_underrated@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Idk about the EU(there have been cases that were exactly this, an example would be Article 13), but I can say to you, that this devinetively happens in Germany. Our conservatives party wants to pass a law, that would track and save all your online activity(Vorratsdatenspeicherung/ data preservation) to fight “paedophiles and terrorists” they bring it up once in a while, even tho, our federal court already said, that its illegal.

    • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hungary will take the EU presidency, they just name it “child protection” and will smear everyone as a pedophile who objects it.

    • Treczoks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Don’t be surprise if it reappears as an attachment to a fishing quota law or a law defining sizes for underwear…

      • uis@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        it reappears as an attachment to a fishing quota law or a law defining sizes for underwear

        Sounds very Putin.

        • Treczoks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Actually, this is a common occurance in the US and EU. One of the previous, court-captured laws actually was riding with fishing quota regulations.

          • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, Putin doesn’t have to hide anything because nobody is allowed to object to any crazy laws he invents.

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I am suspicious they realized that they weren’t going to be able to make a loophole for themselves - I’ve seen several articles in the last week on how they were trying to do that.

  • PonyOfWar@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Nice. I guess they didn’t expect to get a majority to support it anymore. Definitely a win for now, but I’m sure they’ll try again.