XSF Discussion - 2022-05-12

  1. rebeld22

    > EU law is > state law, (see Poland crisis) > But if multibe country's high courts rule against this madness, then it'd unlikely it will ever be installed.. > As I suspected from the start Sorry, but this is not true; "EU law" is not above "State law". Community law is above ordinary state law but below the constitutional law of each member state. In fact, there was never the slightest doubt about it. In Portugal, for example, the Constitution itself expressly states this, so that whenever European Union legislation (the so called community law) is in contradiction or violates the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic, the courts apply the Constitution and disregard Community law.

  2. rebeld22

    > rebeld22: luckily I don't live in Portugal, poor ISPs > Live and work > Actually Your problem is that you don't understand law, let alone the Internet traffic. We are not talking about "base data", but about "traffic data", "contents data", and "localization data". Read the court decision. The court decision is very clear and explains all that.

  3. rebeld22

    In Portugal, the collection or storage of communications content (data relative to the contents of communications) is strictly prohibited. As for traffic and location data, the situation is different: in fact, these categories of data have been stored for a period of one year. But one thing is data storage; another thing is having access to that data... In order to have access to those kinds of data (traffic data or localization data), it is necessary that a Public Prosecutor requires it and that an investigation judge (pre-trial judge) allows it... It turns out that, in the exclusive scope of criminal proceedings, it has already happened, on several occasions, that a pre-trial judge has authorized access to such data. But when the judicial cases come to trial the courts invariably annul the evidences collected in such a way, as they decide that access to said traffic and location data is unconstitutional. As the Portuguese Lawyers Association itself come to clarify a few days ago, in Portugal no one has ever been convicted on the basis of collect or accessed traffic data or localization data. It is also necessary to clarify the following: in Portugal any judicial court is competent to not apply legal rules that it deems unconstitutional... And that is exactly what the Portuguese courts have being done in all these years, that is, when the proceedings arrive at the trial, courts don't admit evidences based on the collection of traffic data or location data, as they consider that the law that would supposedly allow such access is unconstitutional... So, what's new? The recent novelty is that the Portuguese Constitutional Court, itself, came to declare, with general biding force, that the law on the basis of which the aforementioned traffic and localization data were being stored or collected is unconstitutional. And, in addition to declaring that such norms are not applicable and, as such, cannot be considered as being in force, as they violate Portuguese Constitution, the Constitutional Court also declared the following: even if such norms/law were constitutional (and we've already seen that they are not), they would still not be able to be applied, because they also violate the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Convention of Human Rights.

  4. wgreenhouse

    rebeld22: yep, ECHR is also separate from EU law and nation state law. so if this is done elsewhere as well...very interesting

  5. Steve Kille

    Can anyone let me know the status of the update PR I did for XEP-0365?

  6. MattJ

    Board this week?

  7. moparisthebest

    no I think it's been a pretty exciting week so far (sorry)

  8. arc

    I was having the same question

  9. MattJ

    Oh wow, someone!

  10. MattJ

    I was just writing an email

  11. arc

    Yeah this time works really well for me but only if we actually have board meetings

  12. arc

    My XMPP server is currently down due to power supply issue

  13. MattJ

    It doesn't work well for me, which is why I'd like to at least know in advance if noone else is going to show up

  14. arc

    Would you prefer to start later?

  15. MattJ

    I probably could do 3 hours later. It wouldn't always be better, but probably overall.

  16. arc

    Ok. It's currently 9am Thursday. And I specifically requested Thursdays off to attend these meetings.

  17. arc

    So I can do later. If absolutely necessary I can do earlier

  18. MattJ

    I think realtime meetings just aren't really working though. I think I'd like to see more action completed asynchronously by email, reduce the target meeting frequency (which is nothing but a target at this point), and save them for votes and topics that really need a lot of back-and-forth discussion.

  19. MattJ

    and then if I have to make a little effort once a month or once a quarter for a board meeting, that's fine

  20. MattJ

    But doing it weekly for no meeting is just a waste of time

  21. arc

    I actually agree with that

  22. jcbrand

    Me too

  23. Steve Kille

    Can someone tell me who I should chase on my PR question of earlier today?

  24. MattJ

    Steve Kille, the editor team, so Sam or jonas’

  25. Steve Kille

    MattJ - thanks!