Call for Papers: Women in the Digital World
Women in the Digital World April 16-17, 2020 Columbia University, School of International and Public Affairs, New York CALL FOR PAPERS In recent years, awareness…
Women in the Digital World April 16-17, 2020 Columbia University, School of International and Public Affairs, New York CALL FOR PAPERS In recent years, awareness…
This press release was originally posted by The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. GENEVA (22 January 2020) – UN human rights experts…
Columbia University Calls for Nominations for Second Annual Global Freedom of Expression Prizes NEW YORK, October 11, 2015 — Columbia University today announced that it…
On 26 October 2019, Digital Freedom Fund (DFF) Director Nani Jansen Reventlow delivered the lecture “An inclusive digital age” at the Brainwash Festival. This is a…
2018 Global Freedom of Expression Prize Ceremony Low Library, Columbia University April 25, 2018 Tonight, we are celebrating both resilience and conviction. We are…
“On those grounds, the Court (Grand Chamber) hereby rules:
1. Article 25(6) of Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1882/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 September 2003, read in the light of Articles 7, 8 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as meaning that a decision adopted pursuant to that provision, such as Commission Decision 2000/520/EC of 26 July 2000 pursuant to Directive 95/46 on the adequacy of the protection provided by the safe harbour privacy principles and related frequently asked questions issued by the US Department of Commerce, by which the European Commission finds that a third country ensures an adequate level of protection, does not prevent a supervisory authority of a Member State, within the meaning of Article 28 of that directive as amended, from examining the claim of a person concerning the protection of his rights and freedoms in regard to the processing of personal data relating to him which has been transferred from a Member State to that third country when that person contends that the law and practices in force in the third country do not ensure an adequate level of protection.
2. Decision 2000/520 is invalid.”
On April 25, 2024, dozens of global free speech advocates joined us for the all-day event at the Italian Academy, Columbia University, New York City,…
Blasphemy sentence against Pakistani actors and TV channel
In June 2010, Kyrgyzstan’s Southern region experienced horrific inter-ethnic violence between Kyrgyz and Uzbek groups. Some foreign voices who attempted to shed light on the…
Following the assassination of Maltese journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia, a group of European MEPs is calling on the EU Commission to promote an anti-SLAPP EU…