Slashdot Mirror

These pseudo-privacy-friendy search engine companies cause me grave concern. There are very few of them (DuckDuckGo, Disconnect.me, Startpage) and all promise something entirely unverifiable: where it the source code to their search engines? Even more concerning: where on earth did DuckDuckGo get all of that money if not from ad revenue and selling user search information?

The only positive advance can come from decentralizing search, but in the meantime there are Searx instances where at least the source code is available to all under the Affero GPLv3+ license, which is the only decent license for software that users access through a network. "Cloud computing" is a terrible name for this. It is using software executing on someone else's computer: that is essentially what so-called "Web apps" are, and AGPLv3+ protects the deserved liberties of users in a global internetworked world.

Now the benefit of Searx is the fact that anyone can run an instance of it, so we can choose where we proxy out from, but it still is merely a centralised glorified proxy to Google/Bing/Yahoo/etc. It does however have one of the best user interface and features of any search engine I have ever used.

There is an instance in the USA that is perhaps most popular:

http://searx.me/

And one in France from La Quadrature du Net (and associated Onion hidden service):

http://searx.laquadrature.net/
http://searchb5a7tmimez.onion/

And here is another Searx hidden service instance, no idea which country it is in:

http://ry2yhmjtylb6vtta.onion/

If one wants any decent level of anonymity, stop accessing search engines running non-free software and stop sending clearnet DNS requests and use an .onion Searx instance. Only then can one begin to have even an iota of defense searching the web.

Yes, it's not Net Neutrality.

The news's title is poorly chosen and should be changed. Right now it's just Europa propaganda. I'm a little sad to see Slashdot spread this false information.

Here is the reaction of the Quadrature du Net, a French association fighting for net freedom:
https://www.laquadrature.net/e...

Here is what La Quadrature du Net has to say about it: Citizens' Privacy Jeopardized in EU Parliament Committees Again

The sad thing is that "negligence" is exactly what the French 3-strikes HADOPI law is based on (Article 6 11): http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/HADOPI_translation Or maybe it's not so sad, because if that's the only way the MAFIAA found to get this law passed, they must indeed have been running out of options...

It's not like if we weren't warned; some Euro-MPs had announced this: https://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Translation_Interview_Marielle_Gallo_ACTA_pcinpact

Don't forget, IPRED is already in force, so the announced revision is not a 'new law' nor a 'treaty'.

URL: http://activepolitic.com:82/News/2012-01-26d/EU_ACTA_chief_resigns_in_disgust_over_disrespect_at_citizens.html

        Connection to 64.30.66.124 failed.

The system returned: (111) Connection refused

Here's some alternative, https://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/ACTA_rapporteur_denounces_ACTA_mascarade which quotes from Kader Arif's blog:

http://www.kader-arif.fr/actualites.php?actualite_id=147

Once again the French come through:How to act against ACTA.

In addition, if you're a member or supporter of any national party in Europe, lean on your party's committee members as well. Often they have a large influence on their EU counterparts, and don't forget that your own governments still have to ratify the treaty.

Sadly, it looks like in many countries ACTA will sail through the ratification process: at that point most ruling parties will already have given it their implicit endorsement, and they might look silly nacking out now. Rebelious coalition members might vote in favour as well, out of political expedience. If the EU parliament does not kill this, I guess it'll be too late.

It is not enough. The process is skewed heavily in favor of the right holders and their government representatives. Even the rapporteur for ACTA at the European Parliament thinks so: https://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/ACTA_rapporteur_denounces_ACTA_mascarade

It is a lost fight unless everyone in Europe picks the phone to their EMP and tells them in no uncertain terms to vote ACTA down or lose votes. And then have all your friends do so too.

https://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/How_to_act_against_ACTA

Then it did its job, I think. It is probably intended to spur your interest, not really inform you.

Note that you are allowed to use your mouse to click through to the other information on that site. For instance, try clicking the link below in the blue box leading to their wiki. Plenty of information there.

Then it did its job, I think. It is probably intended to spur your interest, not really inform you.

Note that you are allowed to use your mouse to click through to the other information on that site. For instance, try clicking the link below in the blue box leading to their wiki. Plenty of information there.

That video generates more questions in my brain than it answers.

What questions?

"ACTA is bad, nnkay?" it says, which is not enough.

It's enought for the video. Nobody would watch a 30 minutes boring video quoting obfuscated texts refering to more obfuscated texts already signed by countries dozens of years before that.

The point of this video is to try to get the interest of a lot of people. The one who didn't heard of ACTA before. Once these people are interested, they can seek informations by themselves. The link provided in the video, that's a good start. Or see the wikipedia page, seek on the search engine, or seek on their favorite online newspaper.

The extremely one-side view on ACTA the video provides sickens me.

Well, what do you suggest? A more positive approach? Like "Think of the future, nobody will be able to share knowledge, wouldn't that be great?".
What if everything is bad in ACTA?

It doesn't even tell me who "The Negotiators" are.

That's the point. "The Negotiators" are not known. ACTA has been negotiated in secret during the past few years. Withoout the control of the democratically elected parliaments or other institutions. Now the treaty is finalized and signed by some Countries. The other Countries now have a gun pressed against their head "sign it or you're out".

I can't say "No" to ACTA based on this video alone.

Of course you can't.
But maybe you can say no to ACTA based on this video + my comment + few other comments on this news, + on https://www.eff.org/issues/acta + https://www.laquadrature.net/en/acta + http://www.michaelgeist.ca/index.php?option=com_tags&task=view&tag=acta&Itemid=408 + http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/acta/why-acta-declaration + http://www.ffii.org/ + your own sources of information.

And if someday you want to say no, here is how: http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/How_to_act_against_ACTA :)

That video generates more questions in my brain than it answers.

What questions?

"ACTA is bad, nnkay?" it says, which is not enough.

It's enought for the video. Nobody would watch a 30 minutes boring video quoting obfuscated texts refering to more obfuscated texts already signed by countries dozens of years before that.

The point of this video is to try to get the interest of a lot of people. The one who didn't heard of ACTA before. Once these people are interested, they can seek informations by themselves. The link provided in the video, that's a good start. Or see the wikipedia page, seek on the search engine, or seek on their favorite online newspaper.

The extremely one-side view on ACTA the video provides sickens me.

Well, what do you suggest? A more positive approach? Like "Think of the future, nobody will be able to share knowledge, wouldn't that be great?".
What if everything is bad in ACTA?

It doesn't even tell me who "The Negotiators" are.

That's the point. "The Negotiators" are not known. ACTA has been negotiated in secret during the past few years. Withoout the control of the democratically elected parliaments or other institutions. Now the treaty is finalized and signed by some Countries. The other Countries now have a gun pressed against their head "sign it or you're out".

I can't say "No" to ACTA based on this video alone.

Of course you can't.
But maybe you can say no to ACTA based on this video + my comment + few other comments on this news, + on https://www.eff.org/issues/acta + https://www.laquadrature.net/en/acta + http://www.michaelgeist.ca/index.php?option=com_tags&task=view&tag=acta&Itemid=408 + http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/acta/why-acta-declaration + http://www.ffii.org/ + your own sources of information.

And if someday you want to say no, here is how: http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/How_to_act_against_ACTA :)

That video generates more questions in my brain than it answers.

What questions?

"ACTA is bad, nnkay?" it says, which is not enough.

It's enought for the video. Nobody would watch a 30 minutes boring video quoting obfuscated texts refering to more obfuscated texts already signed by countries dozens of years before that.

The point of this video is to try to get the interest of a lot of people. The one who didn't heard of ACTA before. Once these people are interested, they can seek informations by themselves. The link provided in the video, that's a good start. Or see the wikipedia page, seek on the search engine, or seek on their favorite online newspaper.

The extremely one-side view on ACTA the video provides sickens me.

Well, what do you suggest? A more positive approach? Like "Think of the future, nobody will be able to share knowledge, wouldn't that be great?".
What if everything is bad in ACTA?

It doesn't even tell me who "The Negotiators" are.

That's the point. "The Negotiators" are not known. ACTA has been negotiated in secret during the past few years. Withoout the control of the democratically elected parliaments or other institutions. Now the treaty is finalized and signed by some Countries. The other Countries now have a gun pressed against their head "sign it or you're out".

I can't say "No" to ACTA based on this video alone.

Of course you can't.
But maybe you can say no to ACTA based on this video + my comment + few other comments on this news, + on https://www.eff.org/issues/acta + https://www.laquadrature.net/en/acta + http://www.michaelgeist.ca/index.php?option=com_tags&task=view&tag=acta&Itemid=408 + http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/acta/why-acta-declaration + http://www.ffii.org/ + your own sources of information.

And if someday you want to say no, here is how: http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/How_to_act_against_ACTA :)

You missed the irony cause you probably don't know who Christian Engström is.


That said, if your MEP is Christian Engström, maybe you could bother another one?

That's what I did for the telecoms package. I called a dozen of MEP. Of course, they are less receptive when you tell them you don't vote for them. But
1/you don't have to tell them (they tend to forget that they are paid to serve general interest and not just to make sure they will be reelected)
2/when they speak with lobbies, they are less peaky about where they're from and
3/freedom deserves me trying that (it's just a bunch of phone calls, no harm done, and it's really efficient).

For more informations: http://www.laquadrature.net/en/acta
To act, see http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/How_to_act_against_ACTA

You missed the irony cause you probably don't know who Christian Engström is.


That said, if your MEP is Christian Engström, maybe you could bother another one?

That's what I did for the telecoms package. I called a dozen of MEP. Of course, they are less receptive when you tell them you don't vote for them. But
1/you don't have to tell them (they tend to forget that they are paid to serve general interest and not just to make sure they will be reelected)
2/when they speak with lobbies, they are less peaky about where they're from and
3/freedom deserves me trying that (it's just a bunch of phone calls, no harm done, and it's really efficient).

For more informations: http://www.laquadrature.net/en/acta
To act, see http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/How_to_act_against_ACTA

From the translation of the Hadopi law (provided here: http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/HADOPI_full_translation

"Art. L. 331-27. - When it is held that the subscriber has failed to recognize the obligation defined in article L 336-3 during the year following the reception of an injunction sent by the committee for protection of rights and accompanied by a receipted letter or any other method needed to establish proof of the date that the injunction was sent and that when the subscriber received it, the committee may, after a hearing, pronounce, as a result of the gravity of the violations and the use of access, one of the following sanctions:

"1 The suspension of access to service for a duration of two months to one year accompanied by making it impossible for the subscriber to subscribe during that period to another contract giving access to a public on line communication service with any operator;

"2 A warning to take, within a time it determines, measures to prevent the renewal of the accused violation, particularly a method of security found on the list defined in the second paragraph of article L. 331-32, and to inform the High Authority, if necessary under duress.

I heard somewhere that Item 2 hints at the possibility of putting some "Approved Software" on the subscribers' PC(s) which will monitor activity and stop the PC(s) infringing copyright. No doubt it would only run on Windows. However it is very hard to find any real information about this. The referenced article 331-32 looks like it might have some meat in it but alas no...

"Art. L. 331-32. - After consultating the creators of means of security intended to prevent illicit use of access to a public on line communication service, entities whose activity is to offer access to such a service, as well as companies governed by title II of this book and duly constituted professional societies, the High Authority makes public the functionally pertinent specifications presented by these means considered, in its view, as exonerating from responsibility the owners of such access under the conditions of article L. 336-3.

"In the course of a procedure of certified evaluation of their conformity to the specifications set forth in the first paragraph and their effectiveness, the High Authority establishes a list characterizing the methods of security whose use exonerates the owner of access of his responsibility with respect to article L. 336-3. This characterization is periodically reviewed.

"A decree of the Council of State specifies the evaluation procedure to characterize these methods of security.

Maybe the referenced Article L.336-3 will explain...

"Art. L. 336-3. - The owner of access to online public communication services has an obligation to watch that this access is not being used for purposes of reproduction, representation, making available or communication to the public of works or objects protected by right of authorship or a related right without permission of copyright holders when it is required as stated in books I and II.

"No sanction can be taken against the owner of the access in the following cases:

"1 If the owner of the access has secured his access through one of the means on the list mentioned in the second paragraph of article L. 331-32 ;

"2 If the rights infringement referred to in the first paragraph of this article is committed by a person who fraudulently used the access to online public communication service;

"3 In case of force majeure.

"The breaching of the obligation defined in the first paragraph by an access owner hasn't the effect of involving his penal reponsibility.

... and maybe not.

I also understand that the line remains in service and the subscriber is billed for it (unless she chooses to pay to terminate the connection) but only commercially

From the translation of the Hadopi law (provided here: http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/HADOPI_full_translation )

"Art. L. 331-30. - The suspension of access mentioned in articles L. 331-27 and L. 331-28 does not, in itself, affect paying the price of subscription to the service provider. Article L. 121-84 of the consumer code does not apply during the period of suspension.

"The costs of a possible closure of the subscription during the period of suspension are born by the subscriber.

"The suspension applies only to access to public on line communication services and to electronic communications. When this access service is purchased as part of commercial composite services including other types of services, such as telephone or television services, the decision of suspension does not apply to these services.

... So I think the ISPs are covered.

the fact that their website is only in 1 of the 3 official languages of the country

I heard they're looking for translators.
Publishing a press release in 3 different languages in less than 12 hours is harder than you think. How many non-profit organizations have the manpower to achieve that ? Are you suggesting they should all have 3 mother tongue ? (that's the skill involved in translating such high-level and technical text.)

How many languages are you fluent with and could *perfectly* translate this text to in less than one hour ?
If your answer is at least one, and you live in Belgium and care about what they defend, why not give them a hand, at least proof-reading ?

makes me suspect these are just a couple of guys in a garage somewhere.

Well, that's exactly how La Quadrature du Net is portrayed, and how they started..
Now they're one of the most respected non-profit organizations promoting free internet in Europe. They lead the fight against ACTA in Europe, and got the Written Declaration 12 to be adopted
It's a pretty big deal.

For the record, NURPA actively contributed to this success, and had been tackling ACTA at the EU parliament for months, setting foot on the parliament's ground on 4-5 different occasions

Oh, and they also organized their first public manifestation, "freedom not fear" which was quite successful

It's pretty big for non-profit organization with virtually no means, apart from raw motivation.

Maybe they're a couple of guys in a garage, so what ? As long as they get such huge results, they can live in MY garage any time they want.

Also, the Belgian Pirate Party was sitting in his hands for the WHOLE ACTA vs WD12 thing, and still are. Meanwhile, NURPA stayed quite active over the time, as you wan see

the fact that their website is only in 1 of the 3 official languages of the country

I heard they're looking for translators.
Publishing a press release in 3 different languages in less than 12 hours is harder than you think. How many non-profit organizations have the manpower to achieve that ? Are you suggesting they should all have 3 mother tongue ? (that's the skill involved in translating such high-level and technical text.)

How many languages are you fluent with and could *perfectly* translate this text to in less than one hour ?
If your answer is at least one, and you live in Belgium and care about what they defend, why not give them a hand, at least proof-reading ?

makes me suspect these are just a couple of guys in a garage somewhere.

Well, that's exactly how La Quadrature du Net is portrayed, and how they started..
Now they're one of the most respected non-profit organizations promoting free internet in Europe. They lead the fight against ACTA in Europe, and got the Written Declaration 12 to be adopted
It's a pretty big deal.

For the record, NURPA actively contributed to this success, and had been tackling ACTA at the EU parliament for months, setting foot on the parliament's ground on 4-5 different occasions

Oh, and they also organized their first public manifestation, "freedom not fear" which was quite successful

It's pretty big for non-profit organization with virtually no means, apart from raw motivation.

Maybe they're a couple of guys in a garage, so what ? As long as they get such huge results, they can live in MY garage any time they want.

Also, the Belgian Pirate Party was sitting in his hands for the WHOLE ACTA vs WD12 thing, and still are. Meanwhile, NURPA stayed quite active over the time, as you wan see

the fact that their website is only in 1 of the 3 official languages of the country

I heard they're looking for translators.
Publishing a press release in 3 different languages in less than 12 hours is harder than you think. How many non-profit organizations have the manpower to achieve that ? Are you suggesting they should all have 3 mother tongue ? (that's the skill involved in translating such high-level and technical text.)

How many languages are you fluent with and could *perfectly* translate this text to in less than one hour ?
If your answer is at least one, and you live in Belgium and care about what they defend, why not give them a hand, at least proof-reading ?

makes me suspect these are just a couple of guys in a garage somewhere.

Well, that's exactly how La Quadrature du Net is portrayed, and how they started..
Now they're one of the most respected non-profit organizations promoting free internet in Europe. They lead the fight against ACTA in Europe, and got the Written Declaration 12 to be adopted
It's a pretty big deal.

For the record, NURPA actively contributed to this success, and had been tackling ACTA at the EU parliament for months, setting foot on the parliament's ground on 4-5 different occasions

Oh, and they also organized their first public manifestation, "freedom not fear" which was quite successful

It's pretty big for non-profit organization with virtually no means, apart from raw motivation.

Maybe they're a couple of guys in a garage, so what ? As long as they get such huge results, they can live in MY garage any time they want.

Also, the Belgian Pirate Party was sitting in his hands for the WHOLE ACTA vs WD12 thing, and still are. Meanwhile, NURPA stayed quite active over the time, as you wan see

I dunno, man. Seems to me they're not all that far off.

Those legislations is based on EU directives, more then half of the governments in EU don't even want them (no one have asked the citizens of EU about them, but likely a majority don't want them either). Despite that most EU members don't want them, they are forced upon them because EU is not a democratic organisation.

Turkey far surpass that EU directive. But they are in their "right" to do so, as EU directives only states minimal requirements.

I dunno, man. Seems to me they're not all that far off.

Sarkozy doesn't want any freedom of expression on the Internet:
http://www.laquadrature.net/en/frances-g8-focuses-on-control-and-restrictions-to-online-freedoms
http://kcrg.biz/2011/05/sarkozy-expels-the-freedoms-of-its-civilized-internet/

Nothing in the BBC story or the Slashdot submission gives a link to actual useful details.

There's nothing on the ASIC site, nothing on http://www.laquadrature.net/

All I can find online is http://www.zdnet.fr/actualites/conservation-des-donnees-sur-internet-l-asic-se-fache-39759703.htm

Turns out that the law was passed in 2004. This is about the "decret d'application", i.e. the note from the government that specifies exactly what the retention period is.

Officialy, this is only for child-pornography websites but since there will be no external control, who knows Last week, one of our minister (the guy who expulse Romanians) already tried to block wikileaks to be partially hosted in France, without any justifications We're still fighting to preserve Freedom of Speech in France, there is still a chance that a judge approbation can be added in the law. If you want to learn more or help us out, check out: http://www.laquadrature.net/ Sarkozy is proud of its Hadopi and Loppsi laws, we know that he's already trying to export it, be warned :)

Way to miss the point. I was just stating that not every impediment to copying data is automatically censorship, and gave an example to support it. I wasn't defending ACTA in any way, and I've congratulated my MEP for voting against it.

The 369 signatories (377 now) are all MEPs (members of the European Parliament). 369 is significant because it is a majority of the eligible votes.

The linked page is just one of the relevant pages - you have to follow the links on the left to get at the rest. Here's a couple of interesting pages:
http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Written_Declaration_12/2010_signatories_list
http://www.laquadrature.net/en/ACTA

The 369 signatories (377 now) are all MEPs (members of the European Parliament). 369 is significant because it is a majority of the eligible votes.

The linked page is just one of the relevant pages - you have to follow the links on the left to get at the rest. Here's a couple of interesting pages:
http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Written_Declaration_12/2010_signatories_list
http://www.laquadrature.net/en/ACTA

Members of the European Parliament can endorse the Written Declaration 12 and ACTA provisions for political corruption may be unlawful.

If you already has a party that has the politics you want (The Green Party) then join them and work from the inside if you feel that going the new-party-road is to hard in France. The swedish pirates has a culture of seeing their party as a way to 'hack' the political system, just as one would hack a computer system. The new-party-exploit might be patched in France, but there usually is another way to get influence.

And also, you French guys have La Quadrature du Net which is doing some great work. Joining them would be a good start if your not already active there.

Many volunteers from La Quadrature du Net did an amazing job at transcripting the ugly PDF scan, the result is available here:
http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/ACTA_20100713_version_consolidated_text

France is probably the most "big brother like" european country. the government is also quite corrupt.

Actually you can find most stuff in english here: http://www.laquadrature.net/en
there's also not directly france related stuf there.

Nonetheless, to say these were contributed by EU countries is very much a stretch.

I think other posters hit the nail on the head when they say its more a representation of lobbying groups than countries.

You can blame lobbying groups (I do too), but they are not in the room with the negotiating parties. The leaked draft text with country positions (available here) clearly indicates that this Option 2 comes from the EU party, so it's not at all a stretch to say that they've contributed it.

Also, even if that specific provision of ACTA is struck down after the fact by the EP, that's not going to make it disappear from the treaty, where it will still affect non-EU countries. I.e., if the EU proposal for this text makes it in, it's setting a precedent for the rest of the world.

If you're going to blame lobbying groups entirely for everything bad in ACTA, you may as well absolve the US government of all responsibility in this as well, since our negotiating party (the USTR) essentially parrots anything the IP industry says.

Brussels, March 22nd, 2010 - With the current debates surrounding the Gallo Report on "Intellectual Property Rights" (IPR) enforcement1 and rumours about an imminent revival of the IPR criminal enforcement directive (IPRED2), a holy war is taking place in the European Parliament. Members of the Parliament are being flooded with false figures and statistics from the entertainment industries' intensive lobbying. They are also being heavily pressured by the French authorities.

Brussels, March 22nd, 2010 - With the current debates surrounding the Gallo Report on "Intellectual Property Rights" (IPR) enforcement1 and rumours about an imminent revival of the IPR criminal enforcement directive (IPRED2), a holy war is taking place in the European Parliament. Members of the Parliament are being flooded with false figures and statistics from the entertainment industries' intensive lobbying. They are also being heavily pressured by the French authorities.

"However, the text only speaks of "a prior fair and impartial procedure" instead of a prior ruling by the judicial authorities, guaranteed by the original "amendment 138", and contains loopholes and ambiguities. The invalidation of freedom-killer measures such as "three strikes policies" will now depend on interpretation by the European Court of Justice and national courts. Moreover, the text only relates to measures taken by Member States and thereby fails to bar telecom operators and entertainment industries from knocking down the founding principle of Net neutrality."

"...Member States often use European Union to achieve what can be spelled as âoepolitical launderingâ. The âoeTelecoms Packageâ gives a perfect example of such a deceptive maneuver, aimed at legalizing an european-wide "graduated response" against citizens, and stretching it even deeper as usual. How does it work?..."

How French Presidency Hides a Political Laundering Inside EU Telecoms Package

La Quadrature du Net

Ah well, I can't say I'm surprised that several people have been faster than myself to submit that story.

Anyway, since I'd be offtopic if I posted just to say that, here's a link to the reaction of the association "La Quadrature du Net", spearhead of opponents to the law: Hadopi is dead: "three strikes" buried by highest court. They deserve credit for their hard work.

Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) committee Members contact details (Including emails), by country: http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/MEPs_ITRE
Two clicks and a quick email/phone call to "urge [your] MEPs seating in ITRE committee to support the rapporteur by refusing any compromise neutralizing amendment 138 (now renumbered 46) on April 21st vote.".

(Thanks to Shawb for pointing out it is not bad form to reply to own post :)

Contact information for the MEPs on the ITRE committee (along with their original votes on the first reading of the amendment).

Bad form to reply to own post, but I just saw this related news item at http://www.laquadrature.net/en

URGENT: Two days to help Catherine Trautmann protect EU citizens.
Paris, April 20th 2009 - The Council of the EU is strongly pushing Catherine Trautmann - rapporteur of the main directives of the "Telecoms Package" - to accept a useless, neutralized version[1] of amendment 138. This amendment, opposing to "graduated response - or "three strikes" â" schemes, has been overwhelmingly adopted by the European Parliament in its first reading on September 2008, and is crucial for safeguarding EU citizens' rights and freedoms. La Quadrature du Net calls European citizens to urge their MEPs seating in ITRE committee to support the rapporteur by refusing any compromise neutralizing amendment 138 (now renumbered 46) on April 21st vote.

[1] The Council wants to make it a merely indicative recital instead of an article that Member States must transpose into their law

Send a clear message that this nonsense will not be tolerated... to help make an intelligent decision when voting in European elections, see:

http://www.laquadrature.net/en [laquadrature.net]

Check out the Political memory resource:
http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Political_Memory [laquadrature.net]

especially the "List of recorded votes" section to see who voted for what - before you reward them with your vote for them.

Also of interest, the Telecoms Package section: http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Telecoms_Package [laquadrature.net]

Send a clear message that this nonsense will not be tolerated... to help make an intelligent decision when voting in European elections, see:

http://www.laquadrature.net/en [laquadrature.net]

Check out the Political memory resource:
http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Political_Memory [laquadrature.net]

especially the "List of recorded votes" section to see who voted for what - before you reward them with your vote for them.

Also of interest, the Telecoms Package section: http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Telecoms_Package [laquadrature.net]

Send a clear message that this nonsense will not be tolerated... to help make an intelligent decision when voting in European elections, see:

http://www.laquadrature.net/en [laquadrature.net]

Check out the Political memory resource:
http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Political_Memory [laquadrature.net]

especially the "List of recorded votes" section to see who voted for what - before you reward them with your vote for them.

Also of interest, the Telecoms Package section: http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Telecoms_Package [laquadrature.net]

There you go : http://www.laquadrature.net/en/hadopi-rejected-by-the-assembly

Stay tuned : http://www.laquadrature.net/en/rss.xml

There you go : http://www.laquadrature.net/en/hadopi-rejected-by-the-assembly

Stay tuned : http://www.laquadrature.net/en/rss.xml

http://www.laquadrature.net/files/UK_PROPOSED_AMENDMENTS_on_net_neutrality_DRAFT_20090223_print.pdf [laquadrature.net]