Slashdot Mirror


Sweden To Outlaw File Sharing, Crypto Breaking?

Martin Kallisti writes "The Swedish Department of Justice has today proposed a bill to be put into effect, if it passes Parliament, on the 1st of January, 2004. It is in accordance to EU directives, but will also criminalize the downloading of material from the Internet without the explicit permission of the copyright holder. Furthermore, it will become illegal to break cryptos, circumvent copy protection (mod chips et al), copy books, and as I understand it, use software that is designed to help with any of these tasks, and many other things." An anonymous reader points to an English-language article about this Swedish EUCD proposal, which also mentions a hefty $4 levy on blank digital media such as CD-ROMs.

40 of 578 comments (clear)

  1. DMCA by benna · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Man and I thought the DMCA was bad. This law is just ridiculus. If sweden has any free speech rights in their constitution I doubt ths law will be enforcable. Does this law really have any support?

    --
    "It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
    1. Re:DMCA by arth1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Let's not forget that some industries lobbied to have public unregistered access to Xerox machines made illegal.
      I'm sure some people saw Gutenberg's printing press as the Big Devil too. And in some ways, it was.

      Yes, copying has become easier. Live with it, and rearrange the industries around it, instead of lobbying to pass illogical laws.

      Regards,
      --
      *Art

    2. Re:DMCA by orthogonal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's simply not an option having millions of people breaking the law each and every day.

      You're absolutely right. Not only is the particular law broken, but Law in general is undermined, as it the citizenry's respect for it and their government.

      If "millions" are breaking some law "each and every day", it's a good indication the law is a bad idea, and probably is a law that attempts to contravene human nature.

      Better to repeal it, rather than teach "millions" that they are comfortable being causual criminals "each and every day", don't you think?

    3. Re:DMCA by ToW85 · · Score: 5, Informative

      We still have the problem of blank media levies in Finland. The current levy is 0.25 (euro-)cents per minute for data CD-R(W)'s and 0.19 cents per minute for (computer-writeable) DVD-R(W)'s. Per CD/DVD, the levy is about 20 cents (little more in USD cents).

      However, not everybody has to pay the levy: if a company makes a written statement that it won't record copyright-royalty-due material on CD's, the company can then buy levy-free CD's. However, the option is only available to companies, not to private individuals.

      Of course it's common knowledge that to avoid it, you just buy your media from out of country and you don't get the levy added on. Too bad for Canadian retailers...
      Well... at least here in Finland (which is scarily close to Sweden), people do that (import CD's for their own use). The catch is that if you import more than 20 (or so) at a time, you have to pay the levy. People have tried this, and the CD's got stuck in the customs and were released only after the levies were paid.
      I mean, if you're paying a tax to pirate music on CD-R, you might as well pirate it right? You've already paid.

      Actually, an acquitance of mine met the bit^H^H^Hlady in charge of the levy department of Teosto (our local RIAA-equivalent). When this acquitance of mine suggested what is said in the quote above to the Teosto boss she just about blew her fuse... according to her, the levies are used to support domestic artists (most of whom suck big time).

      The point is that while most people who do copy music copy music composed & performed by foreign artists, the levies do not go to those foreign artists. Basically that means that the system is grossly unfair for anybody but our domestic artists.

      That said, to people living in Sweden, DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES let your law makers get ANY levy/fee/tax on blank media in at ANY amount.

      Be happy if the fee is levied only on removable media. Here they're thinking of levying that levy on ALL medias to which you can record music, up to and including computer hard disks. I really do hope that the proposed act does not pass in the parliament.

      --
      99 bottles of beer on the wall... take one down, chug it a-down 98 bottles of beer on the wall... 98 bottles of beer on
    4. Re:DMCA by JanneM · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is not a good law, to be sure, but the blurb at the top is just plain wrong.

      Most of it is just a codification of what we already know - you may not copy copyrighted works other than for specific, well-defined purposes (research, private copies and so on). And no, file trading networks are _not_ outlawed in any way, shape or form (the press release from the justice ministry was misleading on that issue).

      The thing that can rile people is that you aren't allowed to break copy protection. Well, actually reading the proposal, the picture is not as clear.

      First, any content holder _must_ provide a way for disabled to access the media (it could be by sending a different version to those asking for it, for example). Also, breaking protection on documents and the like in the public area is allowed (courts that want some material for a court case, for instance).

      But, and here what's interesting: the law only protects protection mechanisms that are _solely_ for hindering copying.

      * It does explicitly _not_ protect stuff like region coding on DVD:s (they have that as an example in the text). You are _always_ allowed to break stuff to make use of the media in intended ways, and as DVD:s are meant to be played, region coding has no protection.

      * When one mechanism is used for copy protection, and has as a consequence that intended use is hindered, it no longer has protection. Intended use trumps protection in other words. So DeCSS is likely perfectly legal to use.

      * The law explicitly does _not_ require device manufacturers (or OS writers) to include support for any copy protection mechanism. Media giants can thus not stop the sale of players that do not include some protection scheme. Nobody can ask for operating systems to include DRM.

      Oh, and $4 for blank media? I suggest somebody brush up on their mathematics: the suggestion is about $0.4 - still too much (and gives rise to the question if you haven't actually paid for the right to make a copy of something on the media), but it's nowhere near the outrage implied in the blurb.

      So, the law is not good, but it is not the kind of disaster people here seem to think it is either. With some adjustments (not making private copies a permissive right), it is quite livable.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
  2. Cracking Down by Zarxos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well I don't think this will do much. It's like when the US outlawed the selling of Alcohol. People continued to buy it, just illegally. It will be the same here, just with file sharing instead of alcohol.

    1. Re:Cracking Down by mumblestheclown · · Score: 5, Interesting
      "people continued to buy it" is a meaningless first-pass approximation of what happened. Actually, counter to popular belief, prohibition curbed the actual consumption of alcohol significantly. however, criminalization led to every manner of sensationalism such as organizes crime, speakeasies, bootlegging, moonshining, and so forth.

      people continue to murder despite murder being illegal. your argument about file sharing is as naive as it is unquantified.

    2. Re:Cracking Down by DarkSkiesAhead · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well I don't think this will do much. It's like when the US outlawed the selling of Alcohol.
      It may not prevent all filesharing or CD burning, but it certainly could take a heavy toll. Marijuana usage is farily common in the US becaues it's easy to get. However, about 1/4 of the prison population are in for drug offenses. I don't doubt that people will continue to fileshare, but not without a great deal of punishment dealt out. And Sweden has shown (with regards to drugs) that it is able to enforce behavior laws more strictly than the US. I would hate to think of Sweden's prison population swelling with college students who can't pay the fines for downloading kazaa.
  3. pr0n by eniu!uine · · Score: 4, Funny

    This isn't going to affect Swedish porn is it?

    1. Re:pr0n by orthogonal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh dear lord in heaven, the "pr0n" reference with an obligatory +3 to +5 Funny rating! I tell you, I never get tired of seeing that one, no sir.

      Back in the '70s and '80s, before the World Wide Web had made porn ubiquitous, and before Hustler and Penthouse had made hard core porn at least tolerated by "community standard" across the U.S., a lot of porn was advertised as "Swedish", the implication being that more liberal European attitudes towards it made for harder, more prurient porn.

      (Given the tendency to think that cultures we don't know as much about as our own are more exotic, and possibly more erotic -- witness the European fascination with Polynesia, as typified by Paul Gauguin, or Margret Mead's willingness to be deceived in Samoa -- I wouldn't be surprised if porn advertised during the same period in Europe featured "hot American cheerleaders" or some such.)

      So "Swedish porn" isn't just another porn comment, but a (somewhat sly) historical allusion to a time when porn was harder to come by, and the hardest was, if not actually Swedish, often labelled as such. I think the original poster may also have been suggesting, that given explosion of porn now available at the click of a mouse, we'd actually not nowadays miss the (putatively) Swedish contribution were it to, ah, um dry up or go soft.

  4. but what if you don't KNOW?? by Surak · · Score: 5, Insightful

    but will also criminalize the downloading of material from the Internet without the explicit permission of the copyright holder

    How do you KNOW if what you're downloading is copyrighted or not and whether or not you have permission. For instance, variouis sites have ripped off Slashdot's icons, which I believe are copyrighted by OSDN and/or Rob Malda.

    By accessing the above link, you are downloading copryighted material without the permission of the author.

  5. Obl Simpsons by Hogwash+McFly · · Score: 5, Funny

    And there'll be file sharing barons who'll send you your Britney Spears audio tracks in an iPod stashed in a bowling ball that rolls through a series of underground tunnels, with the authorities none the wiser

    --
    Mother, do you think they'll like this sig?
  6. un enforceble by jr87 · · Score: 5, Funny

    there is no possible way for them to enforce this.Even if they did I could imagine the headline... 1/3 of population rounded up in latest crackdown on downloading.... story at 11

  7. This can't be true by Arandir · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This can't be true. All the draconian IP laws come from the US. The MPAA and RIAA come from the US. The DMCA and UCITA are US laws. Microsoft and its DRM partners are all lcoated in the US. Alan Cox is boycotting the US. Every few weeks some random Slashdot poster threatens to emigrate from the US to preserve their dwindling freedoms.

    But this is Sweden! As with all non-US nations, it's a socialist paradise of digital liberty. Is Holland going to criminalize marijuana next? Either this is April 1st in the Mayan Calendar or this must be a transcription error...

    --
    A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
  8. Wow, talk about a levy by muon1183 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    $4 is awfully expensive for a per cd levy. The levy is 40 times what one would reasonably expect to pay for the media. If anything, this will simply cause the black market for blank media to explode. I'm already opposed to such levys, since this assumes that the only possible use of the media would be for piracy. From what I can tell, the only effect this legislation will be to elimante all IT from Sweden, since backups will be prohibitively expensive. Immagine trying to backup a 4TB database. Even backing up to 8GB tapes, at $4/tape it works out to $2048 per backup, plus the pre-tax cost of the tapes. Of course, I haven't even touched on the myriad of other issues this type of legislation brings with it, since I'm sure others will do so. This legislation is rediculous. I can only hope that the $4/cd addendum was attached so as to prevent this from passing.

    Note: IANAROS (I Am Not A Resident Of Sweden)

    --

    There's no sig like SIGSEG
    1. Re:Wow, talk about a levy by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not exactly. The 4 dollars per CD is a little off. It's actually 0.007 SEK/MB for rewritable media, and .0025 SK/MB for write once media.

      So figure 1.625 SK (US$ 0.20) for a standard 650 MB CDR, 4.55 (US$ 0.59) for a CDRW of them same size. The 31 SKR ($US 4) is really only appropriate for a 4.7 GB DVD-RW.
      And your 4TB database would cost $USD 3816 in added levies, assuming you were using 870 DVD-RWs per backup.

  9. A European solution. by rdewald · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Freedom of speech is regarded by European governments as an important component of civil government, but they don't worship at it's throne like US Citizens regard the First Amendment.

    It won't prevent pirating, I think the fact that the law doesn't address *use* is a concession to that point. It seems that they rather seek to prevent pirating from becoming a European industry. I think this is analogous to US laws against gambling, where they still exist.

    IANAL, but in Texas, the law against playing poker for money actually makes the *house cut* illegal. I think the lawmakers conceded the point that people were still going to play poker, they just wanted to prevent it from becoming an industry.

    --
    The best way to do is to be.
  10. Having their cake and eating it by Blue+Stone · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I don't get it. They're saying it's illegal to download copyright material without the copyright owner's permission, but they're saying that law abiding citizens should pay a levvy on blank media, to compensate the copyright holders for infringement.

    Don't pirate anything, AND pay for not pirating anything.

    Greedy and ridiculous.

    --
    Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
  11. Yowza! by BigRedFish · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What a great idea! Imagine, indie bands having to pay $4 per blank CD for the privilege of recording their own original music without a label. The competition might eat into corporate-music profits, after all, so it must be piracy and the majors should be reimbursed somehow! [We all know that the reason for the RIAA's declining sales couldn't possibly have anything to do with their elimination of the single format or statements comparing Eminem to Sinatra.]

    I also like the opportunity to inderectly pay the operating expenses of a large software company, whose products I utterly refuse to purchase or use, for the privilege of creating and maintaining bootable CDs for my Linux installation.

    Way to go, Sweden!

  12. Well, this sucks! by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Has anyone else noticed that Swedes are the some of the best file-sharers in the world? It's largely because they have such awesome upload caps, typically much higher than other European broadband, and maybe 10X that of standard North American DSL. If this turns out to be enforceable, expect online filesharing to get noticeably worse.

  13. EUCD is a failure already by GammaTau · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The EUCD was supposed to be a law in all European Union member countries already by last December. That is after each parliament had two years to pass the law. As far as I know, only two or three EU member nations have modified their laws to comply with the EUCD.

    On the other hand, sooner or later the national laws must be passed. I personally wish that at least one EU member would refuse to implement the law so that the issue would be brought back to the EU parliament.

    After the fall of Soviet Union, EU became the new safe haven for bureucrates so it's really hard to say how the EUCD situation will develop due to lobbying and politics. What is clear, however, is that most of the national parliaments have not been all that happy with many regulations the EUCD is trying to enforce. I hope that the Swedish parliament will protect its citizens from this legislation that goes way over any reasonable balance.

  14. Charge a fee or make it illegal but not both! by erroneus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have said it in the past and the same logic still pops into my mind.

    How can a government body justify making honest people pay for "assumed criminal activity." When do they start adding cost to paper because someone might attempt to use it in counterfeiting?

    If it's criminalized to use P2P networks, then it is unfair to charge more for media to "compensate" for criminal acts assumed to be occuring without proof and due process. I can see one act or the other, but not both.

    Frankly, the act of purchasing CD media and being charged enormous prices because of assumed criminal use, then it should then be LEGAL for me to put anything on it -- legal or otherwise since I have paid for the right, in advance, to do something illegal. In effect, it's double jeopardy -- punished before the fact and then to be punished again, for the same crime if caught.

    I have no idea what recourse EU-folk have against this, but I hope it can be stopped.

  15. Fair Use in Swedish Law by drdale · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It says here that Swedish law currently includes a meatier fair use exception to copyright law than, say, US law; anyone can make one copy of a copyrighted work for personal use (computer software excepted). If this is right, then this new proposal is maybe even more surprising than it appears at first glance.

    --
    This post is dedicated to all of those /.ers who do not dedicate their posts to themselves.
    1. Re:Fair Use in Swedish Law by maswan · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, this is true. It is legal to make a copy for personal use. This has been commented upon by the Minister of Justice as a problem for getting at filesharing, where only the one sharing might be commiting a crime, the downloader is perfectly safe.

      The big difference in this new law is that for making this personal copy the thing you are copying from has to be a legal copy. Essentially taking care of a loophole in the law.

      Allowing copying for private use is also the reasoing behind the CD-fee, even if that is highly annoying for me that only use it for software (debian boot/install-discs).

      For all of those claiming "the internet is now illegal", there is both provisions for temporary copies (as in the ones your browser are making) and a discussion about "good faith" in the paper. They are expecting to be able to go after filesharers and allow ISPs to disconnect users under the "we'll cut your access if you break any laws" sections of the AUP if they detect this stuff.

      All in all, I was fearing a worse law after reading the press release, even the law against anti-circumvention tools have provisions to allow DVD-players, even if DVD-copiers might be disallowed. They even make an example of region coding not being an effective technical meassure.

  16. Laws... by Loki_1929 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Laws, laws, laws. When your business is failing, laws. When your prices are too high, laws. When you're exposed for the fraud you are, laws. Laws are supposed to ensure the safety and security of folks within a society. This round of DMCA-style laws is just the latest in series of laws designed to ensure that the few on top remain on top. Those who enact the strictest and most ridiculous laws simply hasten their own demise. The issue of copyrights will become an election-decider within two to four years. Folks like us who stay informed are the canaries in the mine shaft of laws. When those in charge get out of hand, we're the first to be alarmed, yet no one has taken notice since we started yelling about copyright abuses in 1999. What will make them take notice is when these broad, overbearing laws begin to affect a large portion of the population, thereby ensuring a backlash the likes of which copyright holders can hardly imagine.

    I predict, on this day, that within 5 years, we will see the crippling or perhaps even the complete elimination of all copyright, patent, and trademark laws. Things will get worse, much worse, before they get better. But mind you, when things get rough, we must remember to continue getting the word out to the uninformed masses while we wait for our revenge to fully take hold, that it may obliterate the copyright bastards of our time.

    --
    -- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
    1. Re:Laws... by wfrp01 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I hope you're right. Elections are non-violent revolutions, after all. Democracy doesn't mean that bad ideas can't take hold. But it does mean that one party can overthrow another without a shot being fired. At one time, that was a very revolutionary idea.

      But democracy presumes an informed public. What happens when big media becomes conflicted about political issues? What would have become of the American Revolution without anonymous pamphleteering? Now we see states outlawing any attempt to hide the origins of communication. These are troubling issues.

      How much will people tolerate? I think there's an ironic trend at work: the better off people are, the more oppression they will tolerate. "I have food on the table, why should I cause any trouble?"

      I don't think the issue of copyrights will become an election decider because the media have a vested interest in promoting copyright. It will never become an election issue. People like us may be canaries in the mine shaft that collapses. Yippie.

      --

      --Lawrence Lessig for Congress!
  17. (c) by NanoGator · · Score: 4, Funny

    I hereby copyright this post. I expressly forbid these words from being read anywhere inside of Sweden.

    Man I can't wait to see how many people end up in jail now.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  18. I actually had an e-mail conversation with them by Leo+Giertz · · Score: 5, Informative

    Asking them to clarify a few things.

    It won't actually be as dreadful as the DMCA, since it will only be illegal to break a copyright protection system if you're going to make a copy, it won't be illegal to circumvent it to use it as it's meant to be used. I.e. watching a DVD movie on your linux computer using DeCSS to "break" the crypto won't be illegal.

    Neither will these redicilous "region codes" be protected, they can still be legally circumvented.

    Further, it won't be illegal to break the copyright protection system on these new "CD's", if you're only going to play them in your computer.

    If anyone has any questions regarding this, just send them a well written e-mail, since they're very helpful and will answer all of your questions quite fast. (a few hours for mine) -L

  19. Insane I tell you by pjdepasq · · Score: 4, Interesting
    As someone that is about to finish his Ph.D. dissertation, I have to copyright my work as I publish it to my school's on-line dissertation initiative.

    Reading the /. blurb (and not the full article), doesn't that mean no one in Sweeden can then download my (freely available), yet copyrighted dissertation without asking my permission first? That's nuts.

    First off, it's tied to the web, and unless I specify, anyone can download the PDF we deliver to the ETD project. I don't care who dowloads this crap.

    Secondly, I don't want emails asking for my permission to download this, or anything else I work on, yet copyright.

    Ugh, this RIAA/DRM/patent nonsense really makes me loathe working with computers now.

  20. When is it tea time? by wfrp01 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Back in the day, being asked to give a couple bucks to King George III for some tea caused quite an outrage. First there were tea boycotts. Then some guys dressed up like Mohawk Indians, boarded three ships and threw their tea into the harbor. Later guns started firing. Lots of people died. A new country was born. And we're all (those of us in the US) very proud of all this.

    All because of tea.

    Now money that is spent on the media used to promote free communication should be taxed? Certain senators want to destroy people's computers? The US attorney general wants to circumvent the right to a fair trial? Blowing up Palistinian families, children and all, with US missles is "defense", but the impoverished occupied Palistinian nation's response is "terrorism"? Launching thousands and thousands of sorties, killing tens of thousands of unwilling soldiers to prevent "mass destruction" by weapons that cannot be found is not ironic? Our economy is a shambles. The rich are laughing. And our commander-in-chief wants to appoint this penis to the bench!

    Osama bin Laden is free today. US citizens are not. And we would like the rest of the world to follow our lead. God bless Sweden for seeing the way. I'm Swedish. American. And pissed.

    Flamebait? It's a /. high crime. Fomenting an uncomfortable discussion. And that's just talking! God forbid anyone ever actually did anything!

    --

    --Lawrence Lessig for Congress!
  21. Ridiculous is right... by The+Monster · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Let's start with this:
    criminalize the downloading of material from the Internet without the explicit permission of the copyright holder
    How, pray tell, am I to get that permission? via a notice that says:
    Copyright 2003 BigMediaConGlomCo. All rights reserved. You are hereby explicitly authorized to download this material for your own personal, noncommercial use. Redistribution without permission is prohibited . . . .
    But here's the glorious Catch-22 of it all. The act of typing an URL into an address field of a browser, or of clicking on a link, causes that browser to attempt to . . . wait for it . . . DOWNLOAD material, which by definition is itself copyrighted! Unless you want to send snail mail to a company to secure written authorization to access their website in advance, you are illegal.

    This law would effectively outlaw the Internet, which is based on the premise that it provides an infrastructure for moving data between consenting parties. In its place would be the presumption that moving data is illegal unless proven otherwise.

    --

    [100% ISO 646 Compliant]
    SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.

  22. Re:You Own the Bits, Not the Music by Temsi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You've apparently never heard of Fair Use.

    You don't own the bits. You own a license to play the music on the CD, for your own personal use.
    If you own the CD, you've already paid for the license to listen to its contents whenever you want, at your leisure.
    Since you are legally allowed to make a back-up of said music, downloading an mp3 file someone else made, is the equivalent of skipping that process. You could just as well have a friend come over and rip the cd for you on your pc, the end result is the same. You wind up with a perfectly legal backup copy of a song, for which you've already paid.

    As for your last comment, it's quite idiotic, and seems more like a deliberate flaimbate or trolling, so I won't respond to it.

    If I OWN something, I can do whatever the fuck I want with it. Period.
    If I OWN a system, and forget my password, but can use another system I own to crack it, no law can stipulate that I cannot do that.

    --
    -- This sig for rent.
  23. Re:You Own the Bits, Not the Music by Jordy · · Score: 4, Informative

    In the US at least, this is quite wrong in the case of all media except for software. Here you are sold music and books, not licensed except for digital distribution, but even then I've yet to see a license agreement stuck in front of all but a few instances.

    In the case of an audio CD, you own the bits itself. You can hand your CD to anyone else or sell it without contacting the copyright holder. You are restricted by law against copying it and using it in public performances.

    More importantly, with a license the company handing you the media can restrict how you use copyrighted media. A record label can not mandate that you can only play a CD on weekends no more than a book publisher can say you can only read a book once.

    One might argue that the government is issuing an implicit license for copyrighted media on behalf of the copyright holders, but even then the contract contains only things you can't do, not things you can.

    --
    The world is neither black nor white nor good nor evil, only many shades of CowboyNeal.
  24. *sigh* People are morons by Caine · · Score: 5, Informative
    This is what happens when a major swedish newspaper prints a completly incorrect article. In reality what's proposed doesn't change much, i.e it's still allowed to backup for private use (those laws are much more generous in Sweden than in for example the US) and all the other things Swedes all love and use.

    In fact, it actually widens some rights, for example, the right to copy digital materials to help disabled people and easing the process for schools to make digital copies of material. But alot of people read the article and got up in arms. *Rabble rabble rabble*. The real proposal from the Justice department (in Swedish):


    Press release

    Part 1 of the proposal

    Part 2 and appendixes

  25. A little more info about this proposal... by Jugalator · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is from an article at Aftonbladet (swedish);

    - It will still be allowed to make a "few" copies of CD/DVD's for personal use, and also to use VCR's and similar devices.

    - You will only be allowed to copy parts of a book (right now, I suppose you can copy entire books), to prevent the large scale copying of those especially on universities.

    - A quote from the swedish minister of justice: "We have not done this to meet the demands of the international movie and music companies. Ultimately, it is about preserving earlier views on copyrights, and when the technology evolves, so need the laws to do."

    - The penalty for violating them by sending or receiving illegal copies on the internet will normally be fines. If it's about organized violations (read: warez groups, etc), the penalty can be prison for up to two years. The law will mostly be used to give copyright holders a right to demand compensation from the person violating the law.

    - The swedish minister of justice hope that these laws will frighten people from using file sharing software. He admitted that the law will not get a high priority by the swedish judicial system, and continued: "It's not like the police will run into peoples' homes to look for these things. It is also obvious that some persons will continue, but that is not a reason to not do anything".

    So it seems like this will be another low-priority law that won't be very enforced, which mostly just adds unnecessary complexity and "grey zones" to the judical system. :-( The minister of justice even admits the law is created to spread fear (!). It's a very controversial law that judge people before they violate it (much like the discussed $4 CD fees) and I especially don't like how they seem to be willing to ban an entire software genre (P2P software). Amazing...

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  26. all that bandwidth and nothing to do by vnv · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The irony of this new Swedish law has got me laughing at the sheer folly of modern life. Our era seems to have been 'gifted' with a pandemic of corruption in our culture and moral fabric.

    Consider the fact that VDSL is just rolling out in Sweden and that it is quite affordable. Imagine 26 mbits/sec for $40 euros a month. In fact, it's a much better deal than almost anywhere else. Especially Greece, where broadband will run you approximately 850 times as much.

    Now what can someone legally do with that bandwidth under the new law? You guessed it. They can watch government-okayed programming channels and view government-okayed content. These are the websites that will have gone through some sort of copyright review and approval process.

    With these new laws, the powers that be will have successfully turned the European internet into something resembling interactive television. The existing media lords are of course quite happy with the new laws as their sphere of control has been strengthened. And the existing governments are of course quite happy with the new laws as it gives them even more control over their respective populaces.

    It's hard to say how the Swedish populace and the rest of Europe will react to these new laws. Most likely nothing significant will happen beyond a few protests. But as someone pointed out, sooner or later the government will put one too many chains of laws and taxes on the people and the people will start to exhibit some very interesting non-linear behaviors. As history has taught us, there is only one way to take liberties back from an oppressive government.

    However, for the time being, we do know one thing for sure. Sweden's rank ranking on the "most corrupt governments list" is going to take a hit. And it's about time -- Sweden is the only country on record for filing criminal charges against a news company for second guessing URL's.

  27. Free speech in Scandinavia by Capacitor · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Being a Dane myself, I know that free speech is not that well integrated into Scandinavian constitutions. It is possible, however unlikely, that this completely outrageous violation might actually pass in Sweden. In Denmark, general taxes are already being levied on CD-Rs, which means that the government has to some extent sanctioned a reversal of the burden of evidence: as a user of blank media, you are assumed to be a criminal until you specifically sign a document guaranteeing you won't replicate copyrighted material. Personally, I'm still reeling from that one, but as this Swedish example points out, things might get a lot worse in Scandinavia.
    Fortunately, as others have pointed out, free speech is a human right, and issues such as this may ultimately have to be resolved by the Human Rights Tribunal. Interestingly enough, the amount of Danish cases that are being referred to that particular institution is skyrocketing these years, which is good in a sense - people are aware that their rights are being violated. I just think it is infinitely sad that Scandinavian countries that have prevoiusly been shining examples of well-tuned democracies choose to shaft basic human rights For a Few Dollars More.

  28. on second taught by oohp · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hey. What if someone makes an *encrypted* P2P distribution application. It would be illegal for them to crack the encryption in the first place and obtain proof that you are indeed distributing illegal content.

  29. Sweden is pirating heaven right now. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Having seen too many "no more free speach in Sweden" quotes, I don't think the majority of slashdot users really know about the current laws in Sweden.

    The laws PROTECT anyone downloading copyrighted material. ISPs are not allowed to snif or analyse your IP trafic. That means, if you set up a warez site at home and do >1 TB/month (yes TERAbyte), they cannot do anything (and the networks support this amount of trafic without being congested). Try that in other countries.

    Broadband (10Mbs) connections are very common. No need to download movies to disk anymore, you can watch them on-the-fly =) Last summer, some CTO/CIO at one of the broadband companies sayd (can't remeber which one) "We think it's good thing that people use their broadband connections (read: download movies). Otherwise, we would not get as many subscribers, would we ?"

    Also, the swedish police lack in funding and hardly investigate crimes anymore.

    Being a first class computer geek and living in Sweden, i'm not worried at all.

  30. Not as bad as it may look. by hdw · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There's three different issues here.
    1. It will become illegal to download material that have been made available in an illegal manner.
    It's simply the law about recieving stolen goods applied to electronic media.
    If it's illegal to make copyrighted material available for download, it's only logical that it's also illegal (albeit to a lesser extent) to download it.

    The right to make private copies are made clearer and allows anyone to make backups or move material to another media for private use.
    Including recording of TV, radio or other streaming media for private use.

    2. The law makes it illegal to create and distribute tools for breaking copy protection and likewise to use such tools.
    It does _not_ outlaw generic crypto tools, just tools used to bypass copy protection.

    This will not make it illegal to backup your DVD, but you can't rip it, recode it and store it in another format.

    It will make it illegal to decode encrypted DVDs using anything else than the tools blessed by the copyright holder.
    But that's a commercial decision taken by the DVD distributors.

    3. The levy on recordable media has been there for ages, it has been extended to cover new forms of media.
    It's intented to cover the _legal_ copying, like recording streaming media.

    // hdw

    --
    Executive Pope (small) Kallisti Engineering