Article Activists v. Poland. European Court of Human Rights hearing on uncontrolled surveillance On 27 September the hearing was held at the European Court of Human Rights, following the application against Poland lodged by activists from Poland’s Panoptykon Foundation and Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights, joined by a human rights attorney. The group alleges that the state violated their right to privacy by allowing the intelligence agencies to act beyond scrutiny. Their case has been supported by the United Nations special rapporteur, Polish Ombudsman and the European Criminal Bar Association, attending the Strasbourg hearing as well. 04.11.2022 Text
Article Case challenging Meta’s arbitrary removal of Polish NGO’s accounts finally in court The first court hearing in the case between a Polish NGO and Meta took place before the Warsaw District Court on 7 February 2023. The hearing was conducted almost four years after the organisation sued the internet giant for deleting its accounts and groups without a prior warning or an explanation. 13.03.2023 Text
Article Moglen supports Snowden’s nomination for Sakharov Prize [VIDEO] Eben Moglen, famous lawyer and publicist, in cooperation with Richard Stallman created Free Documentation License GNU. Director-Counsel of the Software Freedom Center and founder of the Freedom Box Foundation at the request of Panoptykon Foundation comments on Edward Snowden’s nomination for Sakharov Prize. 08.10.2013 Text
Article 6 years in court fighting against arbitrary censorship. What about user empowerment promised by the DSA? In March 2024, the District Court in Warsaw ruled that Meta Ireland Inc. must restore the pages and content published by the Polish CSO, Civil Drug Policy Initiative (SIN), on Instagram and Facebook. 07.05.2025 Text
Article Open Source Surveillance And Online Privacy, CPDP 2014 [VIDEO] Access of the law enforcement agencies and secret services upon more or less formal warrants and request do not cover the whole problem of the online surveillance. More and more date is available out there without any warrants – just to read, take and process. It is the situation, when the data that we all publish online, with more or less awareness of the consequences, is used by authorities mention above for whatever purposes. How purpose limitation could possibly be used to limit open source surveillance? To what extent privacy settings that by default enable or enhance making data public help in conducting this type of surveillance? How open source surveillance might influence individual? 24.01.2014 Text