Convertable Socks For Dancers

request to the Federal Party

Re:. Make youth protection on the Internet useful amendment to the Youth media protection treaty (JMStV-E) revise


Applicant: Sebastian Blumenthal, MP, Manuel Höferlin MP,
Jimmy Schulz MP


The national party should decide:

The current draft of the amendment of the Youth Media Protection State Treaty (JMStV-E), in the form of 12 March 2010 is rejected. The Federal Party calls on the parliamentary factions of the FDP to speak out clearly against the treaty and call for a transparent discussion of how the youth media protection can be designed in future. be
A practicable in online child safety must be the special character of a global, open and participatory network that is changing rapidly in its technical and social structures that meet. The current draft of JMStV can not meet these requirements.


the reason:
The signing of the treaty is the 10th June provided directly to the end of the application deadline of the Federal Congress met the Prime Ministers' Conference, the draft of the Rhineland-Palatinate State has first noted. To get a state contract, the minors also implements the network adequately and efficiently on the road, now the course must be made before the current draft is adopted.

This JMStV-E was negotiated largely behind closed doors.
concerns of Internet users - consumers and content providers - have been raised, so only slightly reflected in the amendment, so that ideas about as child protection work should have been transferred from the previous legislation on the radio, the internet media. An example of this are scheduled transmission time limits of inappropriate material, in a global network is neither desirable nor feasible would be.
see the new regulations of JMStV before a voluntary age rating of online content. Here, a parallel system will be established to provide under the auspices of the Commission for Youth Media Protection (KJM) age classifications.
The problem is that age ratings on the web (unlike, for example for DVDs and computer games in retail stores) do not offer legal security, but any time by the KJM or Federal Department for Media Harmful to Young Persons () can be claimed.
Due to the elimination of the "14-year-level" is to be expected that there will soon come about in some cases, in practice, differences in the youth media law age assessment and allowed access age because of other legal considerations for one and the same deal. A collision between privacy with youth media protection law here would result. Provider of social communities, which require the consent of their users to a data protection clause processing, are currently forced out for privacy reasons to keep its offer at least 14 years. Other providers of social communities hold demonstrable criminal and civil considerations for its offer users ready with a minimum age of 14. The omission of this step in the separation rule, this supplier before the practical problem that now the content for 12-year-old should be safe, the platform may be but used because of data protection and the set minimum age for the first of over 14 years of age.
It appears, for reasons of youth media protection order is neither necessary nor appropriate to development affecting the contents of the age "18" a duty AVS (age verification systems). The equality of this type with indexed content Content or "obviously difficult development harmful" content according to § 4 Paragraph 2 Paragraph 3 JMStV seems factually unjustified and disproportionate, as there are clear differences in the degree of risk. In JMStV-E is made clear at any point, that there is no obligation to a third of the active review of content by providers. Special problems of JMStV-E prepares to persons who offer free, non-commercial content for children and young people, such as political organizations or associations engaged in youth work. These would have their forums and blogs 24 hours a day to check out inappropriate material, or make inaccessible to minors. A hitherto done only by a log note clarifying that these obligations only provider of obscene content is to be imposed is insufficient.
very problematic here is that provided in the JMStV-E is a fine reinforcement for the distribution of offers is appearing on children and youth of all ages contribute entwicklungsbeeinträchtigend and where the provider fails to ensure that they are accessible only to adults. This provision is contrary to the currently planned scheme of § 5 JMStV-E, who after the provider of development services affecting only a perception of difficulty for concern need.
Given the serious deficiencies shown are called the FDP parliamentary group, to prevent the amendment of the JMStV in its present form.

- Jimmy Schulz

Keratin Treatment In Ottawa

speech before the German Bundestag on the SWIFT Agreement

22nd April 2010
speech Jimmy Schulz, MP
Top 22 for the record
SPD proposal "New SWIFT deal only with European fundamental rights and data protection standards,"

Speaking as a video blog

The U.S. is our most important partner in the fight against terrorism . To succeed in this struggle are the cooperation between partners is extremely important. But this cooperation has its limits. When cooperation is, civil rights to rely on `s game, then it is not purposeful at this point. Because we do not promote the fight, but it has not already lost.

The new negotiating mandate for a new SWIFT agreement that Friday will be adopted in the Council of EU Interior and Justice Minister means potentially millions of averaging over the data of EU citizens. This is not an easy thing and needs to be taken very seriously. As with any measure to combat terrorism must be considered necessary and proportionate. The requirements set by the European law in this context are of paramount importance and must be respected.

The new mandate, the Commission on 24 March, is presented, in front of Parliament has rejected the Interim Agreement is a significant improvement dar. We are pleased that, for example, the term terrorism is aligned with the definition in Article 1 of the Framework Decision (2002/475/JHA), and that SEPA data are excluded. Despite these improvements, the mandate is still insufficient, and it still contains several disturbing interference with civil rights.

The transfer of millions of innocent citizens in large data packets is unacceptable. It can not be that due to a single suspected case of the account activity of hundreds or thousands to be shipped! The reason that SWIFT can open the data packets read neither. But nevertheless, we can not accept such technical reasons, for the transfer of these large packages can not subsequently be revised. Supervision and control are late, if the data protection law is already injured. Of course it should as few data are transmitted and exchanges must be made subject to conditions to tight. The data must be checked on the European side and not explicitly requested data must be sorted out. To view this control falls to European law, these tasks should be entrusted to a European authority. Such authority must respect their regulatory control abilities are clearly defined.

are further provided for periods of time in no way acceptable. The storage period is considering the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court on the retention of telecommunications data related to well below 5 years are limited.

We also need strict data-as well as legal protection. Finally it comes to European citizens and we will not accept any arrangements that fall below European standards. This means transparency for the purposes of information about the data, correcting inaccurate data, deletion and compensation for affected citizens unjustly. Very important is also the effective legal protection in U.S. courts. Finally, data may be disclosed only to third countries if there first, there is a comparable level of protection and secondly, a specific request is made. In no conceivable is an event-free transmission of data.

Complete transparency is essential. The entire agreement must be published, secret facilities may not be there. Furthermore, a regular review to take place with representatives of data protection authorities of the Member States. There is evaluate how the data are used and how the data collection for the fight against terrorism is appropriate at all.

The application of the SPD contains some important goals, and of these, Mrs Justice Minister Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger achieved in the current negotiations, but much already. It is interesting at this point the following: The negotiations on the SWIFT agreement were included under the German presidency in 2007 by former SPD finance minister Steinbrueck, at the time of election, they were largely complete. We should, therefore, can save a lot of trouble if the SPD would have prevailed in the negotiations at that time a few of their own goals from now this request. Unfortunately, the SPD was not so very successful. The Justice Minister has made it into the final weeks more than the SPD in two years.

Finally, once the crucial point: We must not deviate from what we agreed in the coalition agreement, to ensure high level of data protection in the SWIFT deal! I have great confidence in our Justice Minister, Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger that it asserts itself, and thus make sure that is nothing less than the security of the data of our citizens is preserved.

- Jimmy Schulz