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.)

31 of 76 comments (clear)

  1. sharing by pizza_milkshake · · Score: 3, Funny

    they told me in kindergarten that sharing was a good thing

  2. OH MY GOD! by gazbo · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Any of these powers could be used against a 12-year-old file sharer

    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.

  3. danger! danger! by hookedup · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "confiscating and ISP's equipment on suspicion"

    I can see this being a real problem to any isp with a newsgroup server.

  4. Ummm, NO by Ummagumma · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Disclaimer: I am a US citizen. And please don't construe this as a flame.

    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.

    When I was in the US Army years ago, I took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States - I am no longer in the Army, but still consider that oath to be valid.

    "I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the president of the United States and the orders of the Officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the uniform code of military justice.

    So help me God!"

    --
    "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." - Thomas Jefferson
    1. Re:Ummm, NO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

    2. Re:Ummm, NO by Ummagumma · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not neccisarily. I sure don't recognize that as a proper search warrant, and recent court rulings back me up on this.

      Besides, they can't issue search warrants, only subpoenas, big difference.

      http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,113961 ,0 0.asp

      --
      "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." - Thomas Jefferson
    3. Re:Ummm, NO by a+whoabot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

    4. Re:Ummm, NO by Ummagumma · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're reading a bit too much into my writing. I'd resist, violently, without resorting to deadly violence, then sue the crap out of everyone involved. Failing that is when I turn to more drastic measures.

      I hope I don't sound like some kind of extremist whacko here, I'm not. I don't even own a gun. But thats not the point. I'll get one soon enough, should the American justice system not overturn these illegal laws first, and the standard-issue starts kicking in doors willy-nilly. You HAVE to give the justice system its due course before turning to more drastic measures. Lets just hope the SJC doesnt uphold some of these more draconian laws. I have faith in them for now.

      --
      "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." - Thomas Jefferson
    5. Re:Ummm, NO by Phillup · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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
    6. Re:Ummm, NO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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.

    7. Re:Ummm, NO by Phillup · · Score: 2, Interesting

      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

      You are probably right for those people. Which, in a way, drives home my point. They were victims of their own apathy. It took a threat to their own life to make them care enough to fight back.

      And, it was too late by then.

      I think the two (oppression and survival) are linked. The more oppressors win, the lower you chance of survival.

      To me, "surviving" isn't worth it on its own. Someone once said "the purpose of life is to live, not to exist".

      So, the origial topic was about fighting... vs. waiting for a better chance later... and, I still hold that later may be too late.

      And... I believe that if the people on the other planes, and planes for the last decade or more, had insisted on confronting hijackers instead of "going along for the ride" then the incidence of hijacking would have been much lower. And, 9/11 probably would not have even been attempted... at least not on a passenger airline.

      Same goes for our government. If people would start acting at the earliest sign of trouble... instead of not caring until it affects them personally... then things would be much better.

      IMHO

      --

      --Phillip

      Can you say BIRTH TAX
    8. Re:Ummm, NO by salesgeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      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
  5. With a name like this... by MainframeKiller · · Score: 4, Funny

    The bill has been proposed by the French MEP Janelly Fourtou...

    BTW, Fourtou is translated in english as "fuck-all", I kid you not!

    --
    http://www.club977.com/ - The 80's Channel!
    Your source for commercial free 80's music!
  6. Here's the article text by scumbucket · · Score: 3, Informative

    Kill the EU IP Rights Enforcement Bill!

    Civil liberties and consumer rights groups are calling on MEPs to reject the EU Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive.

    Today (3 March) is the last day that amendments can be tabled before the final debate and vote, from 8-11 March.

    IP Justice, an international coalition of civil liberties groups and consumer rights activists, is organising a protest in Strasbourg to "uphold traditional civil liberties against the over-zealous enforcement of intellectual property rights". The meeting will be held outside the EU Parliament on 8 March between 4.30pm and 6.30pm.

    The bill was introduced to make it easier to tackle large scale pirating operations, and to create a consistent, pan-European approach to intellectual property law. But many groups, including Campaign for an Open Digital Environment (CODE) and the EFF, are concerned about the way the bill has been rushed through the European Parliament.

    The directive's Rapporteur, French MEP Janelly Fourtou, (who, incidentally, is wife of the head of Vivendi Universal) has placed it on a "First Reading". This is usually reserved for directives on which there is already unanimous agreement, and does not allow for public debate. This meant the directive could be drafted behind closed doors.

    Civil rights groups want the proposal sent into a second reading, where its provisions can be publicly considered.

    According to the BSA, 25 per cent of software in use in the UK is illegal. It claims that reducing this to 15 per cent would generate an extra 2.5bn in tax revenues and 40,000 jobs in the IT sector. It points out that organised crime gangs have moved into software piracy on a large scale, and argues that tough legislation is needed to stop this.

    Few people would seriously oppose a law that would tackle these problems, and make it easier for industry to go after real criminals: the organised crime gangs, the people selling sub-standard software, or pirating thousands of videos.

    However, this directive fails to distinguish between commercial counterfeiting, and inadvertent individual copyright infringement. This means a 12-year old P2P file sharer, or someone photocopying pages from a library text book at university, is seen as identical to a large scale piracy operation filtering money into organised crime.

    The Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure UK (FFII-UK) proposed a set of amendments that it says would reduce the directive's harm to consumers, including limiting its scope to commercial cases.

    As it stands, this directive grants some very scary powers to rights holders. Consider the Anton Piller orders: these enable rights holders to hire private police to raid a suspect's home.

    This was previously restricted to very rare, large commercial infringers. The Electronic Freedom Foundation (EFF) points out that now, anyone who infringes copyright - even unwittingly - may have his or her "assets seized, bank account frozen and home invaded".

    The bill creates a new "Right of Information" that allows rights holders to obtain personal information on P2P file sharers. An ISP's servers can be seized and destroyed with no hearing if one of their customers is alleged to have infringed a copyright.

    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.

    Neither the Business Software Alliance, nor the British Phonographic Industry was able to provide any comment on the implications of this directive for consumers before we went to press.

    --
    CMDRTACO CHECK YOUR EMAIL!
  7. Just become a rights holder by Atomizer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Just like a similar US story: License to Hack"

    Then you can have the same powers to attack the big guys. Legally.

  8. writing to MEP's by An+Onimous+Cow+Herd · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ummm - who do i write to if my MEP is an ex-artist? I don't think she'd take too kindly to filesharing.

  9. Re:The big advantage to the EU passing this law no by Earlybird · · Score: 4, Insightful
    acceptance of Internet is much slower than it is in the US.

    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.

  10. Welcome to the United States of Europe... by Dr.+Bent · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...please empty your rights and privileges into the trash bin to your left, and step through the metal detector for further processing. Have a nice day!

    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. Instead of removing economic restrictions to promote free trade, the EU is now creating new political and social restrictions. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this was never it's original intent, right?

    1. Re:Welcome to the United States of Europe... by Idealius · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

    2. Re:Welcome to the United States of Europe... by Thrymm · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Everyday we are losing rights, and everyday we are getting closer to the fictional worlds of Fahrenheit 451 and 1984... Im not condoning piracy, but this seems to give them Gestapo powers if even if they have no proof.

  11. Re:The big advantage to the EU passing this law no by cyborch · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  12. War by ka9dgx · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Its rapidly coming to a head, the fact is the corporate interests have declared war on the public. We the people lost the US, and now they want to make it official, and worldwide.

    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--

  13. Live FREE or die by ka9dgx · · Score: 3, Interesting
    If I had a gun, and they wanted to illegally enter... I'd assume they were crooks, and act accordingly... empty the clip into them, and dive for cover while reloading.

    The police aren't the law... WE are the law. We set this government up, and WE have the right to override/revise/replace it.

    --Mike--

    1. Re:Live FREE or die by DjReagan · · Score: 2, Funny

      Does "emptying the clip into them" constitute reasonable force in the US these days?

      --
      "When I grow up, I want to be a weirdo"
  14. Re: Losing rights by ka9dgx · · Score: 3, Interesting
    We lose rights if we don't exercise them. The price over liberty is eternal vigilance, and we're not vigilant. We lost control a long time ago, when the 14th amendment was used to give Citizenship to Corporations. How can we mere mortals compete with an Amoral, Immortal, purely greedy entities in a struggle for power?

    We've got an educational system that pumps out standard model consumer units, instead of concerned Citizens. Only a few of us were fortunate enough to have a nasty childhood which had the benefit of distracting us from the brainwashing.

    We unhappy few are pissed that we've got a system where the majority has been assimilated, and are willing to be sheep. We need to wake them up, or get them the hell out of the way, before this whole system implodes under its own weight... or as a last resort, figure out how to hunker down and ride out a rerun of Nazi Germany.

    --Mike--

  15. What is the solution? by tevita · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I see article after article expounding the evilness of the corporate might bullying the public for their own greedy ends. It so seems to be a losing battle, where the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many. Is this a generational thing? Are we looking at an outmoded social order whose decline can be likened to that of the Roman Empire? I dunno, except I refuse to be part of the greedy, however I can best achieve that.

  16. Re:The big advantage to the EU passing this law no by Singletoned · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Actually it wasn't true 50 years ago. It hasn't been true since the industrial revolution (which started in England and spread through Europe).

    If anything, America was most recently a cultural backwater (during the late 1800's) and has only relatively recently become 'civilised'.

  17. the right to read by wotevah · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

    ... Read the rest here: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html

  18. works both ways by ajagci · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

  19. The 14th amendment? by molo · · Score: 3, Informative

    What does the 14th amendment have to do with this? Corporate personhood is a legal fiction invented by the courts in the 1886 case "Santa Clara County vs. Southern Pacific Railroad Company".

    -molo

    --
    Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.
  20. Re:Quick, share everything Vivendi. by Mishtara2001 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    No,
    better,

    Short a Vivendi stock toady!
    They are nothing but a huge corporation in major trouble, it's going to be the "Enron of europe", very soon, and like a wounded beast they "die hard".

    Incidentally I am familiar with Vivendi's "environmental" operations, who represent a huge part of thier busines and I can tell you that thier tactics are almost solely based around bribery of officials.
    They deserve to die, especially now!

    --
    "667 - Neighbour of the beast"