[Members] Re: "Chat Control" EU project and impact on XMPP community ?

Thanks again Michaël for writing this. I fully agree that this legislation is misguided, counter-productive and actively harmful, even just on technical grounds. I support referencing the post already published over at Process One. Gonzalo, I think the blog post should not copy the text wholesale, but instead reference it by link and provide context from the perspective of a standards organization like ours. Cheers, ralphm On 23 September 2025 15:59:20 CEST, Gonzalo Raul Nemmi <gnemmi(a)cpacf.org.ar> wrote: > >Dear Mickaël and Emus: > >As the author of the referenced PR, I think it goes without saying that I >agree with Mickaël's argument, even if personally and as a lawyer I may have >a more pessimistic and darker view about the most likely outcome of a piece >of legislation of this nature. > >As I have come to learn way back at the university and over my 20+ years of >experience as a lawyer, nothing good ever came out from the truncation of >civil liberties nor, like in this case, basic Human Rights like privacy >(Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 12) or free speech ( see the >Preamble of the same document ), with complete disregard of how good the >arguments used as a cause may have been. > >It is my understanding that, shall the 'Chat Control' proposal come to pass, >it will have a direct and undeniable impact on the XSF and its main product: >the XMPP protocol ... and the whole ecosystem it sustains. > >With the impending voting so close on the horizon ( October 14th ), it >is my most humble opinion that this matter should be treated as soon as >possible by the relevant persons and with the due diligence it deserves. > >El Mon, 22 Sep 2025 21:41:21 +0200 "E.M." <emus(a)mailbox.org> escribió: >> Dear Mickaël, >> >> many thanks for reaching out and also many thanks for this article. >> >> I second what you state and formulate in this text. There are very >> strong statements, especially the quotes below. >> >> If the others agree, we could reference this in our blog. I believe this >> is important and we should even consider to forward this to relevant >> persons. One of our members already stepped ahead: >> https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/1563 >> >> (Mickaël, I assume you are okay with this?) >> >> Best regards, >> Eddie >> >> _________ >> * "The concern isn't about protecting illegal content, it's about >> protecting democratic discourse. Private conversations could become >> subject to monitoring based on shifting political definitions of harmful >> speech. What begins as child protection infrastructure could evolve into >> a tool for suppressing political opposition or monitoring dissenting >> opinions in private communications." > >And it will .. as studied in detail in Michel Foucault's "Discipline & >Punish". > >> * "The programmed death of European alternatives. This regulation >> creates a structural disadvantage for European communication services >> trying to build alternatives to US tech giants." >> >> * "The October 14th vote represents more than a policy choice about >> child protection. It's a decision about whether Europe will cripple its >> own communication infrastructure in pursuit of surveillance capabilities >> that won't work as promised." >> >> >> >> On 22/09/2025 15:45, Mickaël Rémond wrote: >> > Hello, >> > >> > I tried to make a technical argument here: >> > https://www.process-one.net/blog/chat-control-2025/ >> > >> > Feel free to send me your feedback if you find any mistake or inaccuracy. >> > >> > Thanks ! >> > >> > >Thank you Mickaël for your article, and Emus for your prompt and diligent >reply to Mickaël's call and my PR. > >Best regards >Gonzalo