Privacy

Een lezer vroeg me: Dit weekend was ik bij een café dat geen prijzen vermeldt op het bord boven de bar met alle speciaalbieren en andere drank. Daarvoor moet je een QR code scannen die op tafel geplakt is. Je bestelt nog wel ouderwets bij het personeel, dus niet via een QR app. De biertjes waren goed maar wel erg duur. Had ik juridisch een punt kunnen maken van deze manieren van prijzen communiceren? Oké, bierdrinken is nu ook al ict-recht. Maar goed, laten we eens kijken wat er geregeld is over de prijs bij een overeenkomst.

Voor veel mensen klinkt het verrassend, maar je kunt iets kopen zonder te weten dat het kost. Het is bij ‘gewone’ aankopen namelijk niet verplicht de prijs vooraf expliciet te zetten. Bij online verkoop is dat anders (art. 6:230m BW), daar is een overeenkomst niet rechtsgeldig gesloten zonder voorafgaande duidelijke vermelding van alle prijzen.

De wet (art. 7:4 BW) bepaalt voor de situatie van een niet-vermelde prijs het volgende: Wanneer de koop is gesloten zonder dat de prijs is bepaald, is de koper een redelijke prijs verschuldigd; bij de bepaling van die prijs wordt rekening gehouden met de door de verkoper ten tijde van het sluiten van de overeenkomst gewoonlijk bedongen prijzen. Hier staan twee dingen. Allereerst ben je in zo’n geval verplicht een “redelijke prijs” te betalen. Ten tweede is de prijslijst van de verkoper een belangrijke input bij bepalen of de prijs redelijk is.

Meestal komt de redenering neer op eerst kijken of de prijs op de prijslijst redelijk is. Zo ja, dan is dat de prijs. Zo nee, dan gaat de prijs naar een marktconforme prijs, zeg maar wat een biertje van die categorie gemiddeld kost in die stad.

Het maakt dus uiteindelijk niet uit of de prijs achter een QR code verstopt zit of op een prijslijst die je apart moet vragen bij de balie. Waar het om gaat, is of deze vooraf gemeld is – dan zit je eraan vast, hoe onredelijk ook – of dat je het pas achteraf kon ontdekken.

Een discussiepunt is nog wel óf de prijs gemeld is of niet, als op de tafel staat “scan de QR code voor de prijzen”. Het is immers niet verplicht om vooraf te melden wat de prijs is, mensen ergens heen wijzen waar ze deze kunnen zien is ‘gewoon’ een manier van de prijs melden. En anno 2024 is het denk ik wel redelijk te verwachten dat men QR codes kan scannen, of dat men aan de bel trekt “mijn telefoon is leeg, heb je een papieren prijslijst?”

Arnoud

Het bericht Wat kost een biertje als de prijs achter een QR code zit? verscheen eerst op Ius Mentis.

This interview has been edited for clarity and length.*

Obioma Okonkwo is a lawyer and human rights advocate. She is currently the Head of Legal at Media Rights Agenda (MRA), a non-governmental organization based in Nigeria whose focus is to promote and defend freedom of expression, press freedom, digital rights and access to information within Nigeria and across Africa. She is passionate about advancing freedom of expression, media freedom, access to information, and digital rights. She also has extensive experience in litigating, researching, advocating and training around these issues. Obioma is an alumnus of the Open Internet for Democracy Leaders Programme, a fellow of the African School of Internet Governance, and a Media Viability Ambassador with the Deutsche Welle Akademie.

 York: What does free speech or free expression mean to you?

In my view, free speech is an intrinsic right that allows citizens, journalists and individuals to express themselves freely without repressive restriction. It is also the ability to speak, be heard, and participate in social life as well as political discussion, and this includes the right to disseminate information and the right to know. Considering my work around press freedom and media rights, I would also say that free speech is when the media can gather and disseminate information to the public without restrictions.

 York: Can you tell me about an experience in your life that helped shape your views on free speech?

 An experience that shaped my views on free speech happened in 2013, while I was in University. Some of my schoolmates were involved in a ghastly car accident—as a result of a bad road—which resulted in their death. This led the students to start an online campaign demanding that the government should repair the road and compensate the victims’ families. Due to this campaign, the road was repaired and the victims’ families were compensated.  Another instance is the #End SARS protest, a protest against police brutality and corrupt practices in Nigeria. People were freely expressing their opinions both offline and online on this issue and demanding for a reform of the Nigerian Police Force. These incidents have helped shape my views on how important the right to free speech is in any given society considering that it gives everyone an avenue to hold the government accountable, demand for justice, as well as share their views about how they feel about certain issues that affect them as an individual or group.  

 York: I know you work a bit on press freedom in Nigeria and across Africa. Can you tell me a bit about the situation for press freedom in the context in which you’re working?

 The situation for press freedom in Africa—and particularly Nigeria—is currently an eye sore. The legal and political environment is becoming repressive against press freedom and freedom of expression as governments across the region are now posing themselves as authoritarian. And they have been making several efforts to gag the media by enacting draconian laws, arresting and arbitrarily detaining journalists, imposing fines, and closing media outlets, amongst many other actions.

In my country, Nigeria, the government has resorted to using laws like the Cybercrime Act of 2015 and the Criminal Code Act, among other laws, to silence journalists who are either exposing their corrupt practices, sharing dissenting views, or holding them accountable to the people. For instance, journalists like Agba Jalingo, Ayodele Samuel, Emmanuel Ojo and Dare Akogun – just to mention a few who have been arrested, detained, or charged to court under these laws. In the case of Agba Jalingo, he was arrested and detained for over 100 days after he exposed the corrupt practices of the Governor of Cross River, a state in Nigeria.

 The case is the same in many African countries including Benin, Ghana, and Senegal. Journalists are arrested, detained, and sent to court for performing their journalistic duty. Ignace Sossou, a journalist in Benin, was sent to court and imprisoned under the Digital Code for posting the statement of the Minister of justice  on his Facebook’s account. The reality right now is that governments across the region are at war against press freedom and journalists who are purveyors of information.

 Although this is what press freedom looks like across the region, civil society organizations are fighting back to protect press freedom and freedom of  expression.  To create an enabling environment for press freedom, my organization, Media Rights Agenda (MRA) has been making several efforts such as instituting lawsuits before the national and regional courts challenging these draconian laws; providing pro bono legal representation to journalists who are arrested, detained, or charged; and engaging various stakeholders on this issue. 

 York: Are you working on the issue of online regulation and can you tell us the situation of online speech in the region?

 As the Head of Legal with MRA, I am actively working around the issue of online regulation to ensure that the rights to press freedom, freedom of expression, access to information, and digital rights are promoted and protected online. The region is facing an era of digital authoritarianism as there is a crackdown on online speech. In the context of my country, the Nigerian Government has made several attempts to regulate the internet or introduce social media bills under the guise of combating cybercrimes, hate speech, and mis/disinformation. However, diverse stakeholders – including civil society organizations like my organization – have, on many occasions, fought against these attempts to regulate online speech for the reason that these proposed bills will not only limit freedom of expression, press freedom, and other digital rights. They will also shrink the civic space online, as some of their provisions are overly broad and governments are known for using laws like this arbitrarily to silence dissenting voices and witch hunt journalists, opposition entities, or individuals.

 An example is when diverse stakeholders challenged the National Information and Technology Development Agency (NITDA), an agency saddled with the duty of creating a framework for the planning and regulation of information technology practices activities and systems in Nigeria over the draft regulation, “Code of Practices for Interactive Computer Service Platforms/Internet Intermediaries.” They challenged the draft regulation on the basis that it must contain some provisions that recognize freedom of expression, privacy, press freedom and other human rights concerns. Although the agency took into consideration some of the suggestions made by these stakeholders, there are still concerns that individuals, activists, and human rights defenders might be surveilled, amongst other things.

 The government of Nigeria is relying on laws like the Cybercrime Act, Criminal Code Act and many more to stifle online speech. And the Ghanaian government is no different as they are also relying on the Electronic Communication Act to suppress freedom of expression and hound critical journalists under the pretense of battling fake news. Countries like Zimbabwe, Sudan, Uganda, and Morocco have also enacted laws to silence dissent and repress citizens’ internet use especially for expression.

 York: Can you also tell me a little bit more about the landscape for civil society where you work? Are there any creative tactics or strategies from civil society that you work with?

 Nigeria is home to a wide variety of civil society organizations (CSOs) and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). The main legislation that regulates CSOs are federal laws such as the Nigerian Constitution, which guarantees freedom of association, and the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA), which provides every group or association with legal personality.

 CSOs in Nigeria face quite a number of legal and political hurdles. For example, CSOs that wish to operate as a company limited by guarantee need to seek the consent of the Attorney-General of the Federation which may be rejected. While CSOs operating as incorporated trustees are mandated to carry out some obligations which can be tedious and time consuming. On several occasions, the Nigerian Government has made attempts to pressure and even subvert CSOs and to single out certain CSOs for special adverse treatment. Despite receiving foreign funding support, the Nigerian government finds it convenient to berate or criticize CSOs as being “sponsored” by foreign interests, with the underlying suggestion that such organizations are unpatriotic and – by criticizing government – are being paid to act contrary to Nigeria’s interests.

 There are lots of strategies or tactics CSOs are using to address the issues they are working on, including issuing press statements, engaging diverse stakeholders, litigation, capacity-building efforts, and advocacy.  

 York: Do you have a free expression hero?

 Yes, I do. All the critical journalists out there are my free expression heroes. I also consider Julian Assange as a free speech hero for his belief in openness and transparency as well as taking personal risk to expose the corrupt acts of the powerful, an act necessary in a democratic society. 

At least twice each year, we invite current EFF members to gather with fellow internet freedom supporters and to meet the people behind your favorite digital civil liberties organization. For this year’s Bay Area based members, we had the opportunity to take over Babylon Burning’s screen printing shop in San Francisco, where Mike Lynch and his team bring EFF art(work) to life.

To kick off the evening we had EFF’s Director of Member Engagement Aaron Jue, talk about the near-20-year friendship between EFF and Babylon Burning, the shop that has printed everything from t-shirts to hoodies to hats, and now tote bags. At EFF, we love the opportunity to support a local business and have a great partnership at the same time. When we send our artwork to Mike and his staff, we know it is in good hands.

Following Aaron, EFF’s Creative Director Hugh D’Andrade dived into some of EFF’s most popular works such as the NSA Spying Eagle and the many versions of the EFF Liberty Mecha. The EFF NSA Spying Eagle focuses on mass surveillance found in the Hepting and Jewel cases. The EFF Liberty Mecha has been featured on four different occasions, most recently on a shirt for DEF CON 29, and highlights freedom, empowerment through technology, interoperability, and teamwork. More information about EFF’s member shirts can be found in our blog and in our shop.

Mike jumped in after Hugh to walk members though a hands-on demonstration of traditional screen printing. Members printed tote bags, toured the Babylon Burning print shop, and mingled with EFF staff and local supporters.

Thank you to everyone that attended this year’s Spring Members’ Speakeasy and continue to support EFF as a member. Your support allows our engineers, lawyers, and skilled advocates to tend the path for technology users, and to nurture your rights to privacy, expression, and innovation online.

Thanks to all of the EFF members who participated at our annual Bay Area meetup. If you're not a member of EFF yet, join us today. See you at the next event!

Earlier today, the European Parliament voted in favour of the Directive on common rules promoting the repair of goods. With this Directive, the EU aims to increase the level of consumer and environmental protection by encouraging consumers to repair defective products instead of replacing them. To that end, the proposal takes a number of important steps which include prohibiting contractual and technological practices that prevent the repair of goods and facilitating the access of professional repairers to technical documentation and spare parts. Unfortunately, the Directive fails to address one of the key obstructions to repairs, especially in modern products: Copyright restrictions.

As we have highlighted in a previous blog post, copyright claims are already being used to fully prevent any third-party repair attempts. Failing to address this issue in the Directive creates a serious backdoor for bad-faith actors who are free to continue to prevent repairs under the guise of copyright.

Shortly after the adoption of the Parliament’s proposal at committee level, the file’s rapporteur René Repasi admitted in a video-message that intellectual property rights are still an unresolved issue in the context of the right to repair. He reiterated that sentiment during yesterday’s plenary debate. While it is encouraging to see this level of awareness, it remains to be seen whether this will be addressed during the next mandate.

As it stands, it seems that European consumers have to continue to wait for a rigid, reliable and meaningful right to repair.

The post After the vote: Do we now have a meaningful right to repair? appeared first on COMMUNIA Association.