In the past couple of days the EU Parliament has adopted a document on the internet, our rights and policing it. Handily, OUT-LAW has an article covering bits of it. "Handily" because the text itself is impenetrable; it's a collection of sentence fragments and legal phrases (I find mentally deleting the word "whereas" every time you see it makes the text infinitely more readable). The first part of the report is the facts and opinions the text relies on to produce the recommendations in the second part. I've been at this for four hours this evening (in between making and eating dinner) and I am completely whacked from trying to decipher it. I'm sure I've missed stuff I want to say, but I'm done.

However, the main point of this post is to look at what Britain should be taking from this declaration - in particular Stephen Carter and the Digital Britain team.

The Digital Britain Interim Report focuses almost exclusively on business aspects of our new digital culture: getting people signed up, setting up the next generation access, allowing "rights holders" to combat online piracy - it's only concession to the real people in Digital Britain is the Universal Service Obligation of 2Mb/s broadband target for 2012. This target has been much ridiculed on the official report website for being far too low for the next generation of cyber-life.

However my concerns with the Digital Britain Interim Report revolve around the potential loss of Net Neutrality and the continuing elevation and empowerment of existing big companies in terms of a Digital Rights Agency, copyright amendments and the government's love affair with DRM along with other ideas I fear will discourage or silence innovation.

In contrast, the EU Parliament position covers digital citizens rights and many of the identified issues overlap those currently considered by the Digital Britain Team and those that don't should almost certainly be taken on as part of our Digital Future.

Existing Digital Britain Concerns

Net Neutrality

Point Q in the EU Text refers to Network Neutrality and punitive network restrictions as issues to be concerned with regarding e-illiteracy.

Expansions to the Digital Britain Report

Privacy

Points M and J of the EU Text couple together to produce a scary prospect:

J. Whereas technological leaps increasingly allow for the secret surveillance, virtually undetectable to the individual, of citizens" activities on the Internet...

M. whereas, on the Internet, there is a major power and knowledge divide between corporate and government entities on the one hand, and individual users on the other...

A "major power and knowledge divide" allowing "secret surveillance, virtually undetectable to the individual".

As such it is important that the Digital Britain Team look into this as an important aspect of Digital Britain. Thankfully, the bits I missed out from the points above do spell out some suggestions and ideals:

• J. ...the mere existence of surveillance technologies does not automatically justify their uses, but whereas the overriding interest of protecting citizens' fundamental rights should determine the limits and precise circumstances under which such technologies may be used by public authorities or companies...
• J. ...combating Internet crime and the threats to an open democratic society ... must not mean that Member States assume the right to intercept and monitor all data traffic on the Internet...
• J. ...the combating of crime must be proportionate to the nature of the crime
• M. ...a debate must be launched on necessary limitations to "consent," both in terms of what companies and governments may ask a user to disclose and to what extent individuals should be required to cede their privacy and other fundamental rights in order to receive certain Internet services or other privileges

This, to me, smacks unequivocably of the inappropriateness of Phorm/Webwise and the cookie-based opt-out system and the government's Intercept Modernisation Programme. The Digital Britain Team should spell out the right of privacy that UK citizens should expect from their digital life and look to launch that debate on consent the EU asks for.

Accessibility

Point Q, mentioned earlier, also mentions the use of Open Standards. I would hope that the final Digital Britain report can include a commitment within government to use only standards available without restriction or limited to proprietary applications.

This will enable all people to interact with government without the need for individuals to rely on or pay for any one company to maintain software to read documents.