Slashdot Mirror
EU About To Consider Stringent Anti-Sharing Law
chrestomanci writes " The Register have just posted a news item about the EU IP Rights Enforcement Bill. Theres is an editorial about the issue in PC Magazine. The bill if passed would give intellectual property holders draconian powers to enforce their IP against infringers. The powers available include sending rent-a-cops to private homes, seizing assets, freezing bank accounts, and confiscating and ISP's equipment on suspicion.
Any of these powers could be used against a 12-year-old file sharer, as easily as against a large scale commercial piracy operation
The bill has been proposed by the French MEP Janelly Fourtou, whose husband is the the head of Vivendi Universal. She has placed the bill on a 'First Reading' track that does not allow debate, and is normally reserved for bills with near unanimous support. The deadline for amendments is today.
If you are a European citizen it is time to write to your Member of the European Parliament. The final vote will be between the 8th and 11th March." (We mentioned this a few weeks ago, too.)
Won't somebody please think of the children? This is exactly why we have exemptions in the law for children who murder and steal, as they should be protected. The little darlings.
"confiscating and ISP's equipment on suspicion"
I can see this being a real problem to any isp with a newsgroup server.
is that acceptance of Internet is much slower than it is in the US. It is hard to remove a perceived right in the US but in the EU most people aren't sharing files yet so it will be easier for them to implement such laws.
Ahem. Are you quite sure about that? And just to drive the point home: Are you quite sure about that?
I am guessing you don't live in Europe. I am constantly amused by Americans who think Europe is this backwater continent which is not quite up to date with respect to the rest of the world. It may have been true 50 years old. It's no longer the case.
When the standard-issue starts kicking in my door, without a PROPER search warrant, executed and issued by a JUDGE, is when I start considering violence, and start shooting back.
The issue here is that a "proper" search warrant could now be issued by a music label. Scary.
Not neccisarily. I sure don't recognize that as a proper search warrant, and recent court rulings back me up on this.
1 ,0 0.asp
Besides, they can't issue search warrants, only subpoenas, big difference.
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,11396
"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." - Thomas Jefferson
I would have modded you wrong. Sadly there is no "wrong" mod so I'm replying in stead...
Please tell me where you have your information. How is internet acceptance much slower in EU than in US? 81% of the danish population have internet access at home according to Dansk Statistik.
For the most blatent example, see the "free market" sell off of the assets of Iraq, completed before its people get a chance to react.
--Mike--
Seeing as file sharing allows millions to avoid paying for commercial music, software, movies, etc. I would say that this is more of an economic issue than social or political.
You would actually get into a gunfight with police officers? I'm not saying you have a wrong stance, but, would you actually try to battle guys who you know would win? Maybe you could kill the two who had come originally, but after you've killed two cops is when they bring in the swat team and you're gonna die. It's cool to die by your principles, but would you?
I guess maybe there is a very small chance that while your noble struggle goes on, your neighbours may see and just decide they want to help, and perhaps this could snowball and create a proletariat revolution, but I really don't think so. It's definitely better to get arrested, and then create a better strategy for the revolution.
Worth rehashing, because this story looks more and more normal every day, until we're going to discard it with a "naturally! and what are you complaining about ?"
Excerpt from the "The Right to Read" article:
For Dan Halbert, the road to Tycho began in college--when Lissa Lenz asked to borrow his computer. Hers had broken down, and unless she could borrow another, she would fail her midterm project. There was no one she dared ask, except Dan.
This put Dan in a dilemma. He had to help her--but if he lent her his computer, she might read his books. Aside from the fact that you could go to prison for many years for letting someone else read your books, the very idea shocked him at first. Like everyone, he had been taught since elementary school that sharing books was nasty and wrong--something that only pirates would do.
I'm not saying you have a wrong stance, but, would you actually try to battle guys who you know would win?
OK... I know you didn't intend this... but...
This kind of thinking, being totally subservient to "authority" figures... is one of the reasons that three airplanes made it to their intended target.
And, the government response has been to make Americans even more subservient by standing in long lines, taking their shoes off and bending over... for the real screwing. (and yes, I know that it is totally off topic... and the OP wasn't anything about America... but this particular thread of it is.)
The real solution is to constantly question and push back at "authority". That is the only way you are going to avoid being taken somewhere you don't want to go.
It's definitely better to get arrested, and then create a better strategy for the revolution.
See, I think the real lesson that every American should have learned from 9/11 (and applied to every part of life) is this:
Fight. Right now. You may never get another chance.
--Phillip
Can you say BIRTH TAX
The Eurpoean Union was a good idea when it was an economic union. Increasingly, however, European countries seem to be giving up thier individual sovereignty, and the result is legislation like this.
I disagree. The EU also gives us good laws, like the Bill of Human Rights. What you are complaining about is that any given lawmaking body is prone to having stupid laws proposed and occasionally passed.
Speaking as somebody from the UK, I have no inherent problem with giving up the UK's sovereignty in favour of laws that are decided across the whole of Europe, as long as it's executed correctly. The UK government makes cockups all the time, I see no reason why things would be any worse under EU law.
This kind of thinking, being totally subservient to "authority" figures... is one of the reasons that three airplanes made it to their intended target.
No it isn't. The passengers on those planes were quite simply rational. They knew that what usually happens in this situation is that they get flown off to some odd country, then get flown back. Compared with the cost of your own life when struggling with armed hijackers, it's easy to see that this has nothing to do with "subservience" and everything to do with self-preservation. How many plane hijackings resulted in deaths of passengers before Sept 11? It was an unprecedented occasion.
The passengers had no idea they would be taking down the WTC buildings. As I understand it, the one plane that didn't make it to its target due to passenger intervention is the one plane where the passengers did learn about what was happening, which kinda blows your whole theory out of the water.
It fails to define the term 'intellectual property rights', so interpretation will vary hugely from country to country when/if the directive becomes law, undermining one of the main objectives of the legislation: harmonising EU law.
OK, good, so when we believe Vivendi Universal is using GPL'ed software in violation of the provisions of the license, I guess that means we can have their corporate hardware and software seized and the homes of their corporate officers searched.
Furthermore, the amount of encrypted (so-called VPN) traffic entering and leaving their site clearly indicates that they must be running a covert file sharing network and using cryptography to share illegally obtained content.
These people are still living in the intellectual dark ages, where they think that they are the only ones who hold copyrights. I think if they started becoming aware what risks they expose their own companies to, they might tread a little more carefully with such proposals.
They refused to be subservient.
No, they were confronted with the fact that the hijackers were intending to crash the plane. Their previous rational decision to not fight back was merely self-preservation, and when that changed, they fought back. It highlights the fact that the determining factor of whether they fight back or not is motivated by self-preservation and not some weird notion of oppressors always winning.
I am not talking about how one individual can increase their own chance for survival.
You used the hijacks as evidence supporting your theory. The determining factor in whether the passengers fought back was almost certainly their chances of survival, which means this particular piece of evidence doesn't support your theory.
The French used to have the right idea about how to deal with uppity rich people. In case you're unfamiliar with it, it starts with 'g' and ends with "uillotine". I do hope the French people keep in mind that the old ways are the best ways. :)
You would actually get into a gunfight with police officers?
Why do you think the right to keep and bear arms is important? Governments are very scary unless the price of tyrrany is to high to be realistic.
It's cool to die by your principles, but would you?
Living by your principles is what matters. If you die because you live a principed life, then you die rich.
just decide they want to help, and perhaps this could snowball and create a proletariat revolution
Unfortunately, I live in a bujoise neighborhood.
-- $G
America and Europe still have their differences.