What changes with the return of Chat Control 1.0—and what stays the same:

• What is coming back: US tech companies are once again allowed to scan private messages without a warrant or prior suspicion. This affects direct messages on platforms like Instagram, Discord, Snapchat, Skype, and Xbox, as well as emails via Google’s Gmail and Apple’s iCloud.
• What remains unchanged: Public social media posts and files hosted in cloud storage could already be scanned without this law. Furthermore, private messages can always be reported by users, or monitored by authorities using targeted, court-ordered wiretapping.
• What is still NOT being scanned: End-to-end encrypted chats, such as those on WhatsApp, have always been exempt from these scans. Additionally, European providers of messaging and email services have never implemented chat control measures.

To be fair… Currently the law also states that the data processing needs to happen locally and no data may leave the car. The new law certainly introduces potential for abuse, especially since auto makers have proven themselves in recent years to be willing to break laws if it benefits them (Dieselgate anyone?). But as of now your fears are mostly unfounded.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe_of_Sovereign_Nations_Group

Scroll down to MEPs

Some countries even explicitly allow you to break DRM to make a backup copy of your physical media.

To pick one country, Germany for example: There it’s called the “right to make a security copy”. Paragraph 69d (nice) of the copyright law states:

The creation of a backup copy by a person authorised to use the programme may not be prohibited by contract if it is necessary to ensure future use.

That means physical copies have, legally speaking, an endless shelf life.

Israel probably doesn’t need a tribunal. Not because they didn’t commit war crimes or anything like that, but because this tribunal exists for one very specific reason.

When you read “Nuremberg-style tribunal” you probably thought “crimes so bad they had to create a new court for them” but that’s not really the case. Because after the Nuremberg trials the international community set up the international courts in The Hague to deal with crimes against humanity. Unfortunately they made a mistake. They forgot to include one crime in the jurisdiction of the courts. So, to prosecute this specific crime they need an additional court, while all other crimes will be judged by the existing ICC and ICJ.

The crime in question is “aggression”, basically the “crime of starting a war without provocation”. And that’s a lot easier to prove for Russia than for Israel, where the conflict includes other parties that also acted militarily.

While most of Russia’s war crimes can be prosecuted in other courts, there is no legal entity authorized to rule on the crime of aggression — first coined to prosecute the Nazis for World War II — which means a dedicated tribunal needed to be established.

It would help if you provided a link or something. Because I have no idea what darling is.