Call for Papers

Amsterdam Privacy Conference 2015

23-26 October 2015

Read more

Announcement

Privacy Law and Policy Summer Course

6-10 July 2015

Read more

Actueel

Publicaties

  • Op basis van de Wet op de inlichtingen- en veiligheidsdiensten 2002 (WIVD 2002) zijn de Nederlandse geheime diensten bevoegd om gegevens te verzamelen, op te slaan en te verwerken. Hieronder valt de bijzondere bevoegdheid tot ongerichte interceptie van de ether, en er komt een wetsherziening aan waarmee deze bevoegdheid wordt uitgebreid naar de kabel. De precieze uitwerking van de nieuwe wet wordt nog voorbereid, maar het kabinet benadrukt dat er acht wordt geslagen op de eisen die volgen uit onze Grondwet en het Europees Verdrag voor de rechten van de mens (EVRM). De auteur stelt dat de Grondwet en het EVRM onvoldoende tegenwicht bieden aan deze nieuwe bevoegdheid, en dat ‘acht slaan op die eisen’ niet volstaat.

    22.05.2015

  • Interview.

    In theorie lijkt de bescherming van persoonsgegevens op orde: internetbedrijven moeten mensen informeren over wat er met hun gegevens gebeurt, en doorgaans toestemming vragen voor ze die gegevens gebruiken. Maar in de praktijk schiet die ‘geïnformeerde toestemming’ als privacybeschermingsmaatregel tekort. Om privacy beter te beschermen moet volgens onderzoeker Frederik Borgesius de privacywetgeving beter worden nageleefd en gehandhaafd én op de schop. Hij pleit voor een breder privacydebat. “We móeten dat mijnenveld in.”

    12.05.2015

  • Personalized recommendations provide new opportunities to engage with audiences and influence media choices. Should the public-service media use such algorithmic profiling and targeting to guide audiences and stimulate more diverse choices? And if they do, is this a brave new world we would like to live in? This article outlines new opportunities for the public-service media to fulfill their commitment to media diversity and highlights some of the ethical and normative considerations that will play a role. The article concludes with a call for a new body of “algorithmic media ethics.”

    07.05.2015

  • Interview in Het Parool van 6 mei 2015.

    06.05.2015

  • Opinie in De Volkskrant van 5 mei 2015.

    Het bewaren van communicatiegegevens van alle Nederlandse telefoon- en internetgebruikers is terecht door het Europese Hof van Justitie verboden.

    05.05.2015

  • Column in Het Financieele Dagblad van 22 april 2015.

    28.04.2015

  • 17.04.2015

  • Opinie.

    17.04.2015

  • Gepubliceerd op IE-Forum.nl op 13 maart 2015, IEF 14755.2015.

    17.04.2015

  • De huidige privacyregels leggen veel nadruk op de geïnformeerde toestemming van internetgebruikers. Met zulke toestemmingsregels probeert de wet mensen in staat te stellen om keuzes te maken in hun eigen belang. Maar inzichten uit gedragsstudies trekken de effectiviteit van deze wetgevingstactiek in twijfel. Zo klikken internetgebruikers in de praktijk 'OK' op vrijwel elk toestemmingsverzoek dat op hun scherm verschijnt. De wet zou meer aandacht moeten geven aan de daadwerkelijke bescherming van de privacy van mensen die het internet opgaan.

    17.04.2015

  • De Snowden-onthullingen haalden niet alleen wereldwijd de media en het parlementair debat. Ze leidden zelfs tot een Nederlandse rechtszaak over communicatieprivacy. Een principiële rechtszaak over burgerrechtenactivisme, surveillance en politieke intrige, met een verrassende, maar ook teleurstellende uitkomst. Dit moet je weten.

    17.04.2015

  • Political Advertising Bans and Freedom of Expression dr. R.F. Fahy

    Greek Public Law Journal,  2014, p. 226-228

    In Animal Defenders International v UK, the 17-judge Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the UK’s ban on political advertising on television, as applied to an animal rights organisation, did not violate freedom of expression. The Court divided nine votes to eight, with the majority opinion abandoning the Court’s previous ‘strict scrutiny’ review, and laying down a new doctrine for reviewing political advertising bans. This article, first, examines the role the composition of the Grand Chamber played in the outcome of the case. Second, questions the basis of the new doctrine of review. And third, criticises the majority’s treatment of precedent.

    14.04.2015

  • Tien privacytrends van 2014 Mr. O.L. van Daalen

    Mediaforum,  2015-2, p. 50-54.

    Het privacyrecht is inmiddels een serieus specialisme met jaarlijks tientallen beschikkingen, vonnissen en richtsnoeren. Een overzicht daarvan is nuttig, maar kan je daarin ook bredere ontwikkelingen ontdekken? Het afgelopen jaar in tien privacytrends.

    01.04.2015

  • Opinie.

    01.04.2015

  • Column in Het Financieele Dagblad van 25 maart 2015.

    01.04.2015

  • Strafrechtelijke veroordeling wegens auteursrechtinbreuk door modefotografen. Geen sprake van debat van algemeen belang. Zeer ruime beoordelingsmarge bij afweging van door het EVRM en Eerste Protocol beschermde belangen, waartoe auteursrechten van modehuizen behoort. Geen inbreuk artikel 10 EVRM.

    27.03.2015

  • Venture into the future of privacy dr. K. Irion

    ELSA Synergy Magazine,  2015-57, p. 28-31.

    At the time of writing I am at the Computer Privacy and Data Protection Conference, for insiders just CPDP 2015, one of several mega-events with more than 1,000 participants from governments, European Union (EU) institutions, corporations, civil society and privacy advocates, and plenty of lawyers and academics just like me. This is emblematic of the transformation privacy and data protection have undergone from a somewhat dull area of law to a very visible cutting-edge legal expertise.

    26.03.2015

  • 24.03.2015

  • The purpose of this paper is to explore the legal consequences of the digitisation of cultural heritage institutions' archives and in particular to establish whether digitisation processes involve the originality required to trigger new copyright or copyright-related protection.
    As the European Commission and many MS reported, copyright and in particular "photographers rights" are cause of legal uncertainty during digitisation processes. A major role in this legally uncertain field is played by the standard of originality which is one of the main requirements for copyright protection. Only when a subject matter achieves the requested level of originality, it can be considered a work of authorship. Therefore, a first key issue analysed in this study is whether – and under which conditions – digitisation activities can be considered to be original enough as to constitute works (usually a photographic work) in their own right. A second element of uncertainty is connected with the type of work eventually created by acts of digitisation. If the process of digitisation of a (protected) work can be considered authorial, then the resulting work will be a derivative composed by two works: the original work digitally reproduced and the – probably – photographic work reproducing it. Finally, a third element of uncertainty is found in the protection afforded to "other photographs" by the last sentence of Art. 6 Term Directive and implemented in a handful of European countries.
    Accordingly, the paper is structured as follows: Part I is dedicated to the analysis of copyright law key concepts such as the originality standard, the definition of derivative works and the forms of protection available in cases of digital (or film-based) representations of objects (photographs). The second part of the study is devoted to a survey of a selection of EU Member States in an attempt to verify how the general concepts identified in Part I are applied by national legislatures and courts. The selected countries are Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Poland, the Netherlands and the UK. The country analysis fulfils a double function: on the one hand it provides a specific overview of the national implementation of the solutions found at international and EU level. On the other hand, it constitutes the only possible approach in order to analyse the protection afforded by some MS to those "other photographs" (also called non original photographs or mere/simple photographs) provided for by the last sentence of Art. 6 Copyright Term Directive. Part III presents some conclusions and recommendations for cultural heritage institutions and for legislatures.
     

    03.03.2015

  • Empirical Evidence for Policy in Telecommunication, Copyright & Broadcasting Dr. J.P. Poort

    Vossiuspers UvA - Amsterdam University Press 2015, 287 p.
    ISBN 9789056297602.

    See here the table of contents, abstract and summary in Dutch of the dissertation.

    This dissertation contains nine articles with an empirical focus in copyright, telecommunication, and broadcasting. These articles address different research questions and employ a variety of methodological approaches. They all share an economic foundation and the aim to contribute to evidence based policymaking in the field of information law. Topics covered range from the welfare effects of illegal downloading, to those of public television; from the effectiveness of blocking access to The Pirate Bay to stop consumers from illegal downloading, to the effect of adequate legal online services on illegal downloading; from fixed price regulation for e-books, to text and video relay services to enable the hearing impaired to use telephony services; from the valuation of commercial radio licenses, to setting renewal fees for telecommunication spectrum based on an auction. Using these nine articles as case studies, the role and impact of economic evidence for policymaking in the field of information law is investigated. It is concluded that this role is positive rather than normative: legal or social norms maintain the upper hand as guiding principles for policy, more than the economic goal of welfare maximization. However, this does not by any means render economic analysis useless. Increasingly, politicians, judges and stakeholders require economic analysis and economic evidence to make
    informed decisions about new policy measures, to make optimal decisions within existing legal boundaries and to fathom the consequences of proposed legal interventions. Without empirical evidence they may simply assume the effects of a policy measure as an article of faith.

    26.02.2015

  • Korte voordracht gehouden tijdens debatavond over plagiaat in de kunsten, Akademie van Kunsten, Amsterdam, 19 februari 2015.
    Zie ook het journalistieke verslag en de videoregistratie van deze avond.

    24.02.2015

  • Wob-procedure van RTL om de concept-Miljoenennota openbaar te krijgen. De noot gaat in op de parlementaire debatten over het tijdstip van openbaarmaking van de Prinsjesdagstukken en over de betekenis van artikel 26 van de Wet op de Raad van State.

    20.02.2015

  • Zie ook 'Vertekend beeld door afschaflobby bewaarplicht' in Netkwesties, 29 januari 2015, met commentaar van Egbert Dommering 'Niet verzamelen is uitgangspunt'.

    03.02.2015

  • Lead article in IRIS plus 2014-4.

    16.01.2015

  • The Court of Justice and the Data Retention Directive in Digital Rights Ireland M.-P. Granger, dr. K. Irion

    European Law Review,  2014-6, p. 835-850.

    In Digital Rights Ireland, the Court of Justice invalidated the 2006 Data Retention Directive, which required private providers to retain for a considerable period electronic communication metadata for law enforcement purposes. In this landmark ruling, the EU judiciary introduced a strict scrutiny test for EU legislative acts that interfere seriously with important rights protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights—in this case, the rights to privacy and data protection—and applied a rigorous assessment of the proportionality of the measure under the Charter, criticising numerous aspects of the Directive. This article presents and analyses the judgment, discussing its implications for constitutional review and constitutionalism in the European Union, and the substantive and procedural constraints that it imposes on EU and national data retention schemes. It concludes by reflecting on the ruling’s impact on European integration and data related policies.

    15.01.2015

  • Interview in Het Parool van 2 januari 2015 over veranderende positie van de social media gebruiker.

    13.01.2015

  • Re-use of public sector information in cultural heritage institutions Dr. T. Margoni P. Keller, K. Rybicka, A. Tarkowski,

    International Free and Open Source Software Law Review,  2014-1, p. 1-9.

    In 2013 the European Union amended the Directive on Public Sector Information, establishing the principle that all available information produced and collected by public sector institutions must be made available for reuse under open terms and conditions. The amended Directive also brings publicly funded libraries, museums and archives into its scope. These new rules on reuse of heritage materials, treated as public sector information (PSI), attempt for the first time to define a general framework for sharing cultural heritage information all around Europe. In this paper we argue that if Member States are not careful, the implementation of the changes required by the new Directive could do more harm than good when it comes to access to digitized cultural heritage in Europe. These concerns center on how the directive interacts with copyright legislation. The paper recommends that in order to contribute to the opening up of cultural heritage resources, Member States should ensure that all qualifying documents that are not currently covered by third party intellectual property rights fall within the scope of the Directive. Member States should also implement the Directive in a way that does not encourage or require institutions to charge for the reuse of works that they make available for reuse. For documents that are still protected by intellectual property rights but where these rights are held by the cultural heritage institutions that have these works in their collections, Member States should encourage the use of Open Definition-compliant licenses.

    13.01.2015

  • New Forms of Commercial Communications and Data Protection Law Dr. F.J. Borgesius

    In: New Forms of Commercial Communications in a Converged Audiovisual Sector, IRIS Special, p. 67-76.
    Ook beschikbaar in het Duits en Frans.

    08.01.2015

  • Column in Het Financieele Dagblad van 31 december 2014.

    08.01.2015

  • Frederik Borgesius te gast bij het programma Kassa over websites en apps voor kinderen. Zie ook het artikel in De Correspondent van Dimitri Tokmetzis, Dit zijn de virtuele stalkers van uw kind, waar o.a. Ot van Daalen aan het woord komt.

    08.01.2015

  • Geschil tussen collectieve beheersorganisatie Stichting Lira (Lira) en kabelbedrijven UPC, Zeelandnet en Ziggo (UPC c.s.). Lira vordert een verbod van openbaarmaking door UPC c.s. van aan Lira door de tekstschrijvers overgedragen werk. De rechtbank oordeelt dat die overdracht geldig is en dat voor zover daarbij rechten m.b.t. toekomstige werken worden overgedragen deze voldoende bepaald zijn om te kunnen worden overgedragen. Artikel 45d Auteurswet staat daaraan niet in de weg.

    06.01.2015

  • Adviesraad Internationale Vraagstukken (IAV), Den Haag: AIV 2014.

    See also the English version of the advisory report:
    The Internet: A Global Free Space with Limited State Control, No. 92, Advisory Council on International Affairs, November 2014.

    Op 20 februari 2014 vroeg het kabinet de Adviesraad Internationale Vraagstukken (AIV) te adviseren over internetvrijheid. Volgens de adviesaanvraag zijn het recht op privacy, het recht op bescherming van data, het recht op vertrouwelijke communicatie en de vrijheid van meningsuiting voorbeelden van internetvrijheid. Het basisbeginsel is dat rechten die offline gelden, ook online gelden. Het ontstaan en de snelle groei van het internet hebben geleid tot nieuwe vormen van communicatie, die op hun beurt hebben geleid tot nieuwe vragen hoe deze rechten gewaarborgd kunnen worden, mede omdat deze rechten soms moeten worden afgewogen tegen veiligheidsbelangen. Het kabinet legt aan de AIV de vraag voor hoe internetvrijheid verder bevorderd kan worden in nationaal en internationaal beleid, hoe ver de Nederlandse jurisdictie strekt en wat de rol van het bedrijfsleven is bij het bevorderen van internetvrijheid.
    De AIV heeft een gecombineerde commissie ingesteld om dit advies voor te bereiden onder voorzitterschap van prof.mr. E.J. Dommering (Commissie Mensenrechten, CMR). De leden van de commissie waren mw.mr. dr. B.T. van Ginkel (Commissie Vrede en Veiligheid, CVV), mw. prof.dr. M. de Goede (CVV), prof.dr. E.J. Koops (CMR), mw. dr. P.C. Plooij-van Gorsel (AIV / Commissie Europese Integratie) en mw. mr. H.M. Verrijn Stuart (AIV / CMR).

    06.01.2015

  • Onderzoek in opdracht van het Ministerie van OCW, Amsterdam, 1 september 2014.

    In dit rechtsvergelijkend onderzoek wordt geanalyseerd welke voor- en nadelen de invoering van een wettelijk stelsel van extended collective licensing (‘verruimde’ collectieve licentieovereenkomsten) kan hebben om de rights clearance van digitaliseringsprojecten van erfgoedinstellingen te vergemakkelijken. Daarbij wordt een vergelijking gemaakt met de situatie waarin collectieve licenties zonder ondersteunende wettelijke maatregelen tot stand komen. De jurisdicties die zijn onderzocht zijn Denemarken, Noorwegen, Duitsland en Nederland.

    19.12.2014

  • C-201/13

    Grote Kamer. Auteursrecht. Uitleg parodie-exceptie. Vrijheid van meningsuiting. Politieke spotprent.

    18.12.2014

  • Seminar and Inter-regional Dialogue on the protection of journalists, Strasbourg, 3 November 2014, organised by the Council of Europe, UNESCO, Centre for Freedom of the Media (CFOM), University of Sheffield and European Lawyer's Union/Union des Avocats Européens (ELU/UAE).

    09.12.2014

  • Interview verschenen in het Financieel Dagblad van 29 november 2014.

    02.12.2014

  • The Independence and Functioning of the Audiovisual Media Authority in Albania dr. K. Irion Ledger, M., Svensson, S., Fejzulla, E.,

    Amsterdam/Brussels/Budapest/Tirana, 2014.

    Study commissioned by the Council of Europe, October 2014.

    27.11.2014

  • Verschenen op de Opiniepagina van NRC Handelsblad, 26 november 2014.
    Publicatie ook beschikbaar op Netkwesties.

    27.11.2014

  • Column van 25 november 2014.

    25.11.2014

  • Pre-publication.
    In: E. Psychogiopoulou (ed.), Cultural Governance and the European Union, Houndmills and New York: Palgrave MacMillan 2015 in press.
    Also available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2529044

    Cultural diversity is a multifaceted concept that differs from the notion of media pluralism. However, the two concepts share important concerns particularly as regards content production, content distribution and access to content. This chapter considers the EU’s role in contributing to diverse audiovisual and online content and assesses its limits.
    Although a signatory of the UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, the ability of the EU to foster cultural diversity in the digital environment is confined on account of its constrained competences in the field of audiovisual media and online content. Notwithstanding, the EU develops a number of substantive policies that benefit the creation and circulation of cultural content either in an explicit or in an implicit manner. Following a value-chain approach, this chapter discusses the complementary role of various EU sectoral regulations towards this aim. The analysis focuses on the Audiovisual Media Services (AVMS) Directive (Directive 2007/65/EC – 2010/13/EU) and various aspects of the EU regulatory framework for electronic communications, particularly in relation to non-discriminatory access to bottlenecks in the distribution infrastructure and online platforms.
    The chapter advances the argument that existing EU policies have an important role to play for ensuring the free circulation of, and access to, cultural content. At the same time, aside from the cultural quotas in the above mentioned AVMS Directive, EU activity is less prominent in the field of content production. The analysis concludes by stressing the complexity of promoting cultural diversity in light of both cultural content supply and demand considerations. It also emphasises the importance of emerging policy issues, in particular net neutrality and findability.

    21.11.2014

  • In: M. Rotenberg, J. Horwitz & J. Scott, eds., Visons of Privacy in a Modern Age, New York: New Press, 2015 in press.
    Also available at SSRN: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2528999

    The innovations on which today’s Internet proliferated have been a major gift from its founders and the US government to the world. Ever since the rise of the Internet it has attracted utopian ideas of a free and borderless cyberspace, a men-made global commons that serves an international community of users. First commercialization and now the prevalence of state surveillance have significantly depreciated the utopist patina.
    Internet’s borderless nature which was once heralded to rise above the nation state has actually enabled some states to rise above their borders when engaging in mass surveillance that affects users on a global scale. International human rights law and emerging Internet governance principles have not been authoritative enough to protect users’ privacy and the confidentiality of communications.
    More or less openly, Western democracies embarked on the path of mass surveillance with the aim to fight crime and defend national security. Although country specific approaches vary, reflecting political and ideological differences, mass surveillance powers frequently raise issues of constitutional compatibility. Beyond striking the balance between public security and privacy, systemic surveillance carries the potential to erode democracy from the inside.
    This chapter’s focus is on the safeguards and accountability of mass surveillance in Europe and the US and how this affects transatlantic relations. It queries whether national systems of checks and balances are still adequate in relation to the growth and the globalization of surveillance capabilities. Lacking safeguards and accountability at the national level can exacerbate in the context of transnational surveillance. It can lead to asymmetries between countries which are precisely at the core of the transatlantic rift over mass surveillance. The chapter concludes with a brief review of proposals how to reduce them.

    21.11.2014

  • Pre-publication version also available at SSRN.

    International media assistance programs accompanied the democratic media transition in Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Macedonia and Serbia with varying intensity. These countries untertook a range of media reforms to conform with accession requirements of the European Union (EU) and the standards of the Council of Europe, among others. This article explores the nexus between the democratic transformation of the media and international media assistance (IMA) as constrained by the local political conditions in the five countries of the Western Balkans. It aims to enhance the understanding of conditions and factors that influence media institution building in the region and evaluates the role of international assistance programs and conditionality mechanisms herein.

    The cross-national analysis concludes that the effects of IMA are highly constrained by the local context. A decade of IMA of varying intensity is not sufficient to construct media institutions when, in order to function properly, they have to outperform their local context. From today’s vantage point it becomes obvious, that in the short-term scaling-up IMA does not necessarily improve outcomes. The experiences in the region suggest that imported solutions have not been sufficiently cognitive of all aspects of local conditions and international strategies have tended to be rather schematic and have lacked strategic approaches to promote media policy stability, credible media reform and implementation. To a certain extent, the loss of IMA effectiveness is also self-inflicted.

    21.11.2014

  • C-387/12

    Internationale bevoegdheid rechter bij grensoverschrijdende inbreuk auteursrecht. EEX-Verordening (EG) nr. 44/2001. Bepaling van plaats waar schadebrengende feit zich heeft voorgedaan. Plaats van intreden beweerde schade.

    13.11.2014

  • Vordering wapperverbod. Software door auteurs in meerdere landen gemaakt. Internationaal privaatrecht. Conflictregel. Vraag aan wie auteursrechten toekomen beheerst door recht van elk land waarvoor bescherming wordt ingeroepen (lex protectionis).

    13.11.2014

  • Column, 28 oktober 2014.

    06.11.2014

  • Draft chapter for the book 'Nudging and the Law - What can EU Law learn from Behavioural Sciences?', editors A-L. Sibony & A. Alemanno, Hart Publishing.

    This chapter examines the policy implications of behavioural sciences insights for the regulation of privacy on the Internet, by focusing in particular on behavioural targeting. This marketing technique involves tracking people’s online behaviour to use the collected information to show people individually targeted advertisements. Enforcing data protection law may not be enough to protect privacy in this area. I argue that, if society is better off when certain behavioural targeting practices do not happen, policymakers should consider banning them.

    30.10.2014

  • In this note we discuss the controversial judgment in Google Spain v. González of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Our focus is on the judgment’s implications for freedom of expression. First, the facts of the case and the CJEU’s judgment are summarised. We then argue that the CJEU did not give enough attention to the right to freedom of expression. By seeing a search engine operator as a controller regarding the processing of personal data on third party web pages, the CJEU assigns the operator the delicate task of balancing the fundamental rights at stake. However, such an operator may not be the most appropriate party to balance the rights of all involved parties, in particular in cases where such a balance is hard to strike. Furthermore, it is a departure from human rights doctrine that according to the CJEU privacy and data protection rights override, “as a rule”, the public’s right to receive information. In addition, after the judgement it has become unclear whether search engine operators have a legal basis for indexing websites that contain special categories of data. We also discuss steps taken by Google to comply with the judgment.

    30.10.2014

  • Uitspraak van de maand: HvJEU, Y.S. en M. en S. tegen Minister voor Immigratie, Integratie en Asiel, C-141/12 en C-372/12.

    30.10.2014

  • In Europa zijn globaal drie regimes van toepassing op de aansprakelijkheid van internetintermediairs voor privacyschendingen begaan door hun gebruikers via hun netwerk. Dit zijn de e-commercerichtlijn, die providers onder bepaalde voorwaarden uitsluit van aansprakelijkheid, de Richtlijn bescherming persoonsgegevens, die providers die actief persoonsgegevens verwerken tal van plichten en verantwoordelijkheden oplegt, en de in het EVRM vervatte vrijheid van meningsuiting, die internetproviders onder voorwaarden bepaalde privileges en vrijheden toekent. Deze stelsels zijn ieder op een eigen gebied van toepassing, maar kennen ook een gedeeltelijke overlap, terwijl ze elk een geheel eigen ration en beschermingsregime kennen. In de praktijk brengt dit rechtsongelijkheid en onzekerheid met zich mee, voornamelijk voor providers die actief betrokken zijn bij de inrichting van online platforms.

    30.10.2014

  • Currently under discussion is the European Commission's proposal for a General Data Protection Regulation, which will replace the Data Protection Directive from 1995 over time.
    The Regulation proposes introducing a number of specific obligations and rights in order to protect the interests of citizens and consumers and provides far-reaching powers for governmental agencies to enforce these rules.
    However, this is directly against the original purpose of and rationale behind data protection rules and, moreover, an increased emphasis on consumer interests and rights to control personal data seems like an inadequate tool for solving the current problems involved with Big Data.

    28.10.2014

Meer publicaties