Kui Postimehes avaldati artikkel "Eesti eesistumist asuti trollima ja spinnima", kus süüdistati europarlamendi autoriõiguse raportöör Julia Redat Eesti eesistumise "mõjutamises avalike süüdistuste, veebitrollimise ja meediapinnimise teel" ning püüti sellega diskvalifitseerida ERR uudisteportaali artiklis "Europarlamendi piraat: Eesti toetab tsensuurimasinaid" kirjeldatud kriitikat eesistumise raames tehtud kompromissettepanekute kohta, siis vahendasime Postimehele Julia Reda palvet vastulauseks. Ajakirjanik palus saata vastulause meilile, kuid lõpuks ikkagi keeldus seda avaldamast, kuigi oli oma artiklis küsinud põhjalikke kommentaare debati vastaspoolelt ehk eesistumise ametlikelt esindajatelt.
Avaldame selle vastulause nüüd ajaloo huvides oma veebis:
The planned new EU copyright law threatens to restrict how Europeans can share links and upload files – two functions critical to our ability to participate and exercise freedom of expression on the internet.
This is not just my assessment as a Pirate politician – it has been confirmed by independent academics, digital rights advocates, independent publishers, internet startups and many others. Only days ago, a broad coalition including the European University Association and the International Federation of Library Associations warned in an open letter that the proposals "pose a significant threat to an informed and literate society". Those are not warnings to easily dismiss! It can therefore not come as a surprise if concerned individuals make efforts to try and bring the topic to the attention of journalists.
If such attempts included spam-like emails using fake names, as has been alleged, those are of course not the right methods. In either case, journalists hardly need email campaigns to consider interviewing me on the topic, given that I authored the European Parliament's copyright evaluation report in 2015 and just last week invited a representative of the Estonian Council presidency to the Parliament to discuss the proposals at a public event.
Estonia now plays a crucial role, tasked with shepherding the new copyright law through the Council. The balance that it must help find should not just be between opposing commercial or national interests – it must also incorporate the dire warnings expressed by civil society. Six other Member States have taken these concerns on board, expressing doubts about the legality of the copyright plans. Sadly, however, Estonian officials seem to have ignored them when drafting their compromise proposals.
Any text Estonia proposes as a compromise will be understood as one the Estonian government itself agrees with. Given its excellent reputation on digital issues, we have come to expect more. We are counting on Estonia to rise to the challenge of using the unique position it finds itself in to defend internet freedoms, rather than becoming an accessory to their restriction.