Hello from the Other Side
This is a modal window.
The media could not be loaded, either because the server or network failed or because the format is not supported.
Formal Metadata
| Title |
| |
| Subtitle |
| |
| Title of Series | ||
| Part Number | 180 | |
| Number of Parts | 188 | |
| Author | ||
| License | CC Attribution - ShareAlike 3.0 Germany: You are free to use, adapt and copy, distribute and transmit the work or content in adapted or unchanged form for any legal purpose as long as the work is attributed to the author in the manner specified by the author or licensor and the work or content is shared also in adapted form only under the conditions of this | |
| Identifiers | 10.5446/20637 (DOI) | |
| Publisher | ||
| Release Date | ||
| Language |
Content Metadata
| Subject Area | ||
| Genre | ||
| Abstract |
|
00:00
Hypermedia.NET FrameworkPoint cloudPhysical lawInformation systemsInsertion loss3 (number)Game theoryRule of inferenceMereologyService (economics)Online service providerFacebookPresentation of a groupDifferent (Kate Ryan album)Independence (probability theory)Goodness of fitTwitterInstant MessagingMultiplication signSummierbarkeitMessage passingPhysical systemTelecommunicationVideo gameXMLComputer animationJSONLecture/Conference
02:26
Digital photographyRight angleGame theoryRule of inferenceForcing (mathematics)
02:45
Moment (mathematics)Right anglePhysical lawRule of inferenceSoftware frameworkProcess (computing)InternetworkingSet (mathematics)Lecture/Conference
03:55
Digital photographyMechanism designSoftware frameworkArithmetic meanLocal ringBitInsertion lossFacebookPhysical lawReading (process)Server (computing)Service (economics)Lecture/Conference
05:17
Online helpWordProcess (computing)Hecke operatorPersonal digital assistantWechselseitige InformationLecture/Conference
05:56
Dimensional analysisInternetworkingProcess (computing)SoftwareSinc functionPersonal digital assistantWechselseitige InformationWordLecture/ConferenceMeeting/Interview
06:37
Visualization (computer graphics)Right angleLengthProcess (computing)Level (video gaming)Game theoryWordPerfect group
07:47
Office suiteVideo gameMultiplication signTwitterTouch typingMeeting/InterviewLecture/Conference
08:40
Dimensional analysisOffice suiteMeeting/Interview
09:02
Online helpProcess (computing)Order (biology)Proof theoryTwitterPersonal digital assistantLecture/Conference
09:43
MereologyMultiplicationMeeting/Interview
10:03
TwitterLevel (video gaming)Instance (computer science)Order (biology)Latent heatLecture/Conference
10:32
TwitterOrder (biology)Right angleMultiplication signMeeting/Interview
11:05
Process (computing)Multiplication signLevel (video gaming)Ultraviolet photoelectron spectroscopyLecture/ConferenceMeeting/Interview
11:40
TelecommunicationContent (media)CausalityProcess (computing)2 (number)Point (geometry)Black box3 (number)Meeting/Interview
12:28
Process (computing)Proof theoryCuboidCausality
12:59
Multiplication signProof theoryOffice suiteEndliche ModelltheorieDataflowAreaScaling (geometry)Point (geometry)Meeting/Interview
13:37
TelecommunicationOptical character recognitionProcess (computing)Basis <Mathematik>Point cloudService (economics)InternetworkingCivil engineeringScaling (geometry)Meeting/Interview
14:06
Digital photographyLocal ringInsertion lossPhysical law
14:33
Addressing modeStandard deviationCausalityIndependence (probability theory)Traffic reportingDigital photographyPhysical lawSystem callRight angleSet (mathematics)Maxima and minimaGame theoryMereologyEntire functionMeeting/InterviewComputer animation
15:10
Standard deviationMaxima and minimaCausalityRight angleMultiplication signProcess (computing)Lecture/Conference
15:35
Standard deviationAddressing modeCAN busLatent heatCausalityIndependence (probability theory)Traffic reportingDigital photographyTraffic reportingType theoryComputer animation
16:00
Multiplication signProcess (computing)Order (biology)Latent heatStreaming mediaDecision theoryLecture/Conference
16:25
Standard deviationRight angleSpeech synthesisFreewareFreezingMetric systemMaxima and minimaDegree (graph theory)Category of beingTerm (mathematics)Universe (mathematics)Goodness of fitMatrix (mathematics)Meeting/Interview
17:23
CausalityContent (media)Standard deviationCivil engineeringMeeting/Interview
17:53
Civil engineeringDimensional analysisProcess (computing)Lecture/ConferenceMeeting/Interview
18:15
Information privacyLattice (order)System callMaxima and minimaForm (programming)Shared memorySelf-organizationCausalityCivil engineeringMultiplication signStandard deviationRight angleLecture/Conference
19:28
Standard deviationPhysical lawProcess (computing)Digital photographyProcess (computing)Insertion lossLocal ring
19:48
Independence (probability theory)Office suitePhysical lawLecture/ConferenceMeeting/Interview
20:23
Right angleGoodness of fitTwitterOffice suitePhysical lawRule of inferenceMaxima and minimaStandard deviationDecision theoryLecture/Conference
21:14
Line (geometry)Multiplication signLecture/Conference
21:38
Metropolitan area networkMultiplication sign
22:01
CausalityStandard deviationAuthorizationMeeting/Interview
22:25
TelecommunicationCausalityInformationExpert systemCASE <Informatik>Traffic reportingTheoryMeeting/Interview
23:02
CASE <Informatik>SummierbarkeitCausalityThresholding (image processing)Right angleMeeting/Interview
23:38
Canonical ensembleRight angleMereologyWechselseitige InformationPersonal digital assistantProcess (computing)Moment (mathematics)Online helpMeeting/Interview
24:28
ArmMultiplication signMereologyRight angleLecture/ConferenceMeeting/Interview
24:53
Wechselseitige InformationPersonal digital assistantProcess (computing)Meeting/Interview
25:17
JSONXML
Transcript: English(auto-generated)
00:21
Good morning everybody. Thanks for waking up early and thanks for being here and the interest in my talk. Appreciate that. I'm Peter. I work at Stiftung Neue Farandwertung, a non-party charitable independent think tank in Berlin. Since we have a lot of talk about,
00:42
and I really want to talk with you about many different issues, talk to me later if you're interested in what we're doing at the Foundation, our work, and what I do for a living. To start with the topic before the presentation is up,
01:02
if you think about the online services that Rika just just told us about, so Google, Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, Yahoo, Instagram, Snapchat, whatever you can think of. They obviously
01:23
play an important role in our daily lives. So, imagine how you would communicate through the three days of Republika without any of those services. Some of you may do that because they're comfortable not using the service, but for a huge part of us, these services
01:43
play a central part in our lives. So for me, it was interesting to look at what are the rules of the game for the public? For law enforcement to access the data of these services, because obviously, since they are a central part of our lives, they play a central part often in crimes.
02:01
And there may be relevant data in Facebook's private messages, or Twitter messages, or Instagram pictures that are relevant for an investigation. But at the same time, we have an international dimension, because these are services that are hosted outside of Europe, outside of Germany.
02:23
So, why is that important? Well, as I told you, since they play such a central role, if the rules of the game are outdated, there may be human rights violations. So, for example, if there's a lack of transparency, how law enforcement may access this data, or
02:46
if they are not accountable to what they are doing. So up-to-date, as with every other aspect of the internet, up-to-date rules and up-to-date laws that really focus on central issues are extremely relevant.
03:03
Another issue is that the US is aware of this problem, that we are working with outdated legal frameworks and outdated rules, so to speak. And they are updating these right at the moment. It's, of course, a long process. It's not like after the Republic, everything is done and set, but
03:26
the striking thing for me is that they're deciding rules for the rest of the world, because it's essentially how foreign law enforcement agencies may access data that is stored in the US. And they're doing it for the rest of the world, and the rest of the world
03:42
is sadly silent. So there's very little engagement, very little knowledge about this issue. And thirdly, even if you think that, well, if it's outdated for law enforcement, that's a good thing, because that means law enforcement doesn't use it, and they don't get access to our data so easily. Well,
04:02
you're mistaken, because what happens is, if they are not using these legal frameworks, they try other mechanisms. So you see a lot of data localization, so that Brazil says to Facebook, if you want to do this business in our country, you have to store the data inside our country.
04:25
Another aspect is the extraterritorial reach of laws. And I know it's early. You perhaps didn't have your first Club Marte yet. I had a little bit too much. So extraterritorial reach of laws may sound a bit complicated, and it is, but it basically means that
04:47
the US says we don't care where the server is, as long as the company is headquartered in the US, we have access to the server. It doesn't matter if it's in Ireland or Singapore or Croatia,
05:01
we have access to it. And that means that you have a law that before was only relevant in your own jurisdiction, and suddenly you say, well, it's basically legal all over the world. So I jumped ahead and I talked already about the bad implications and why it's relevant,
05:22
but what the heck are we actually talking about? Well, the wonderful name is Mutual Legal Assistance Process. I like the word, you may not like it, but hopefully in the next 20 minutes, you will understand that it's a very important phrase, a very important word. And
05:42
basically, it just means that there might be international crime. So someone from country A did a crime in country B, and country B investigates and needs the help of country A to find this thief or
06:01
whatever. And this is old, this is nothing new to the internet. There have been international dimensions to crimes since hundreds of thousands of years ago. The tricky thing is that these mutual legal assistance processes or treaties are just as old as this. They are decades old, and they were
06:24
written with a mindset that didn't think about a global network that reaches every corner of the earth and could directly connect everybody. So I told you it's a wonderful word, and it's as long as the word is as long as this entire process.
06:43
So we start from the left and go all the way to the right, and then we are at the right and we go all the way back to the left. I could take the next 10 minutes to explain the process, but I think since it's not even 11 a.m., and I really want you to understand the issue, I
07:04
think it's better not to use this visualization, but the most beautiful visualization I could think of and that's you. So let's do a game. You are all, the audience is all Germany. And here at my stage, I'm the ass. And
07:22
there's a crime. So I need a valine. Who wants to be a thief or robber? Just you don't need to have, you don't need to do anything. You don't need to stand up. You just need to raise your hand. Who wants to be? Perfect. You over there. You have a lane. Awesome. What did you do? You stole, I already thought of it, so don't worry.
07:44
You stole this nice car downstairs. Did you see this nice car, this silver one? Looks awesome. He stole it. Sorry. So who wants to be a police officer? You over there. Awesome. Police officer. So you're a German police officer, and you saw that he was bragging about stealing this car,
08:05
which was stupid that he bragged about it on Twitter. So you have a lead. You have a Twitter account, and you want to look into this Twitter account. Who wants to be perhaps for the first time in his or her life? A judge.
08:21
A German judge. You over there with a yellow scarf. Awesome. You're the judge. So we need one more person, and that's the Ministry of Justice. So you're all people, but one of you can be an entire ministry. Who wants to be a ministry? You over there. Awesome. So Ministry of Justice,
08:41
judge, thief, and police officer. You're all German. That's the U.S. Don't come here. That's the U.S. So you stole the car, you're investigating, and suddenly there's an international dimension to this crime because
09:01
there may be proof on Twitter that he actually stole the car and that he was perhaps not acting alone, but that there was a gang of car stealers who might imagine. So you go to our wonderful judge and say, well, here's proof that I have enough evidence
09:23
to access this kind of data. She writes a court order and she goes to the Ministry of Justice and says, well, we need the help of the U.S. to solve this crime. And the Ministry of Justice says, well, I have a very nice process for this. It's called the mutual legal assistance process. It's very quick. So the Ministry of Justice goes to me, to the U.S.
09:47
I'm multiple parts here, so goes to the Ministry of Justice, the Department of Justice, to the U.S. I get the thing. She translated it because I don't speak German. I only speak English. And I get this court order, and then I give it to
10:05
the U.S. Attorney in California, because Twitter sits in California. And then the U.S. Attorney in California gives it to the court, to the district court in California, of the district where the Twitter headquarters sits. And then it goes to the FBI, and every single stage this court order is
10:24
is analyzed. If it's correct, if it's specific enough, and so on. And then in the last instant the FBI hands over the court order to the company, to Twitter. And then all the way back. So the company produces the data, gives it to the FBI, the FBI minimizes the data, and sees if it's relevant.
10:46
Then it's at the district court, then at the U.S. Attorney of California, then at the Department of Justice, and now comes your time. I hand it back to you. You hand it back to her. She hands it back to him, and he has this data. It was really quick, right? It was like
11:02
painless. What do you think, how long does this process take? One year, you're very close, very good guess. On average, it takes 10 months. So next time we meet at this stage, perhaps, I can give you the data.
11:25
It doesn't really, if you think about Berlin startups sometimes don't last for 10 months. So it seems like a really antiquated process. And what's the problem? Well, it's a slow process based on really old treaties.
11:45
Second thing is, so basically there's no definition outside of the U.S. of what a probable cause is. And you need probable cause, it's a legal definition, to access data, to access content.
12:01
And this is a problem to the point that even the Council of the European Union wrote extensively about this issue, that there is no concept of probable cause inside the EU. And it's a very big struggle for European courts or for German courts, for German judges to agree to this probable cause.
12:28
Third thing, it's a black box. So once you started this process and you hand over the data, you don't really know where it stuck. So in the last two years, there was a lot of investigation, a lot of questioning and interviews.
12:45
And we found out that one of the central issues is this probable cause, that the Department of Justice has to constantly go back to the foreign judge and say, well, it's not enough. You don't have enough proof to reach this probable cause.
13:01
So we need more proof. And then the judge goes back to our wonderful police officer and he has to provide more proof. And that takes a long time. And of course, since a lot of companies are sitting in California, the district courts actually have too much to do with all the requests,
13:27
because all the companies are sitting in this area. And lastly, because of all the four points, it's obvious that it doesn't scale. In the edge of the internet, in the edge of the cloud, where we use these kind of services on a daily basis,
13:46
this process doesn't work. So the question that civil society and especially US civil society and US companies asked over the last, I would say, two years, academics for a lot longer,
14:06
how can we fix the process? How can we make it scale so that in the long run it's useful again? The cops are not trying to circumvent it. National governments don't try to circumvent it with data localization
14:21
and what I told you before, the extraterritorial reach of laws. And one of the most concrete proposals how to fix this is called the Daskal-Woods proposal. It's very simple. It's Jennifer Daskal, a US law professor,
14:41
and Andrew Woods, another US law professor. And what they basically do is they say, well, if your country has a minimum set of human rights, then we skip the entire US court, US Department of Justice,
15:00
US Attorney part of the game and the foreign court, so our foreign judge over there, can directly access the company, request the company in the US and ask for data. This speeds up the process, absolutely.
15:22
At the same time, we get rid of probable cause. So they try to make the minimum human rights standard as high as possible so that you don't need probable cause anymore. And at the same time, since I told you these old treaties,
15:41
they are really intransparent, unaccountable. They try to fix that too. So to make mandatory reporting by governments, how many requests they did per year, how successful they were, for which types of crime and so on. But it's not a silver bullet because if you think about this,
16:03
this takes a long time but it's actually a lot of eyes that look on the specific court order and decide if it's enough to provide the data or not. And if you get rid of all of that, there's not much left. So it streamlines, it certainly streamlines the process
16:21
but it's not by far short, not a silver bullet. Because if you think about it, how do you agree transnationally on minimum human rights standards? So there might be countries that have very good standards for child abuse
16:42
but they have very poor human rights protection for thievery or robbery or money laundering or whatever. So suddenly you have to think about, well, it's not one universal minimum human rights standard but you actually have to think in terms of categories of crime. And then you end up with a weird matrix where you say,
17:02
well, it's okay to work with this country as long as it's not thievery or religious free speech and if it's okay to work with this country, if it's child abuse but nothing else. And it's really complicated.
17:22
And again, just what I told you before, the probable cause is really tricky but it's a really high standard so it's actually a very good protection for our content. So with that proposal, it came up like middle of last year,
17:41
it has been discussed amongst mainly US civil society, US Department of Justice, there was a senate hearing in the US that talked about this issue. So the US is slowly picking up on the issue and they slowly understand all the dimensions but the problem is they're talking amongst themselves.
18:03
They're talking with other US companies, with other US civil societies to decide what would be best for the rest of the world. And that doesn't sound like the right process but you can only partly blame them because especially European civil society is fairly silent.
18:23
A few weeks ago there was a conference call and a meeting in the UK where Privacy International was involved and other organisations but that was a very small share of the European NGOs.
18:41
Not to speak of international, so not EU NGOs for whom this would be really relevant. So yes, there might be a lot of problems and there might be a lot of obstacles to take and we should be very careful to get rid of probable cause
19:02
and we should be very careful to decide what is the minimum human rights standard to access our data that is stored in the US by a US company. But at the same time we have the chance to really improve the process because if we get it right, if we involve more non-US civil society NGOs
19:23
if we involve more academics that are not US then we really have the chance to make it faster and more responsive so that the police actually has to use it and governments cannot circumvent it by saying well, the process is broken, we have to do data localisation or we have to apply our laws extraterritorially.
19:44
We can make it transparent and accountable. As I said, in the Daskalbud proposal there's also the mentioning of sanctions, of independent audits if you comply with a proposal.
20:04
Essentially, if you think about it why in our scenario where he stole the car and a German police officer investigated why should we play by US law if it's a crime completely inside Germany
20:21
or completely outside of the US. So suddenly just because he stored the picture on Twitter suddenly we have to agree to US law and that doesn't make sense. Even if it's a good law and for other countries it might better protect the human rights than their own standards
20:42
for a lot of countries it doesn't make sense. So in my opinion it's better to come up with international standards minimum human rights protection or the best human rights protection we can think of and have a really international approach
21:00
instead of just playing by the rules the US decides. With that I come to a full turn and if you think about our wonderful police officer who waited for 10 months desperately hoping to get this evidence
21:22
to find the real responsible guy the lines from Adele's song Hello from the other side I must have called a thousand times suddenly seemed very fitting. Thank you very much.
21:46
Do we have time for questions? Awesome. Any questions? Yeah. Thank you. Your talk was really interesting to me
22:01
I have just one question about the lack of definition of probable cause because you said it's a mutual agreement and I would guess that this indicates that when some US authorities come to a German company to a German court they have to apply a legal standard as well
22:20
How can it be then that there is no definition in Germany or what do the German courts apply then? I'm actually no legal expert I'm an information scientist and communication theory but what I understood from the talks with US lawyers and with European lawyers
22:42
and again what the Council of the European Union wrote in their reports of course they understand what probable cause means but it's sometimes hard to quickly adapt this concept to a German case
23:00
or to an Italian case or basically to a case outside of the US because for every case you might need different evidence and the threshold of probable cause might be proven in a different way Do you understand what I mean?
23:21
Thank you One more question Would it be fair to say that human rights are never going to top economical interests so to get this through human rights
23:44
would have to be more important than economic interests like US interests Well that's the thing I don't think there is a lot of economic interests because what happens in a mutual legal assistance process
24:02
is that you ask another country for help in an investigation and you don't compensate them for this So actually the US has an incentive to update and streamline this process because at the moment this old process just creates a lot of costs
24:22
but the tricky part is if we don't have a voice in this then we streamline it just out of efficiency in an economic way but we have a chance to streamline it and at the same time make it more accountable and have a strong human rights protection in there but it will only happen if we find a voice
24:44
if we engage the US parts I think there was maybe one last question over there It's okay Okay So thank you Jan Peter Kleinhans for this very insightful talk
25:04
I hope all of us now know what's about mutual legal assistance processes Awesome Thank you very much Give a warm applause