France to Legalize File Sharing

I hereby suspend my France-Bashing for 24 hours! by PenguinBoyDave · 2005-12-22 02:09 · Score: 3, Insightful

About time that someone gives the recording industry the middle finger.

--
I'm not a troll, but I play one on Slashdot.

Serves them right for pushing their luck. by Sockatume · 2005-12-22 02:11 · Score: 5, Insightful

The French Parliment over-reacted here, but it's good to see that the kind of ridiculous measures requested by record companies and their ilk are resulting in equally ridiculous responses from those who disagree. Given the way politics seems to work these days (argue for a few years then go for a 50/50 compromise) then France might wind up with sensible legislation taken from the middle-ground.

--
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?

Re:Serves them right for pushing their luck. by EzInKy · 2005-12-22 02:22 · Score: 5, Insightful

The French Parliment over-reacted here, but it's good to see that the kind of ridiculous measures requested by record companies and their ilk are resulting in equally ridiculous responses from those who disagree.

I like to think of it more as glimpse of the future the music and movie industries will face if they keep treating all thier customers as potential theives. Eventually they'll piss off so many people that no amount of money will protect them.

--
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
Re:Serves them right for pushing their luck. by Thomas+Miconi · 2005-12-22 05:18 · Score: 3, Informative

A short summary of events:

1) The (gaullist, center-right) government proposes a bill which implements the EU directive on copyright. The proposed bill is essentially a DMCA-light: circumvention of copy-protection devices is forbidden, but the copy-protection systems must allow for legally recognised exceptions to copyright (such as private copies for personal of family use). Note that making a small number of private copies is explicitly legal in France, and we already pay a tax on blank media for this.

2) Two "députés" (representatives), from the main centre-left and centre-right parties, introduce amendments to the effect of mandating "global licensing": introduce a tax on broadband internet access (about 5 to 9 euros per month), in exchange for making unlimited, not-for-profit filesharing legal. The product of this tax is then redistribute to artists (how ? nobody knows). The government voices its opposition to the amendments.

3) The amendments are adopted. This is a very rare event: many members of the gaullist party voted against the wishes of the gaullist government. All parties were divided on the issue, but in the end a majority of lawmakers present at the time supported the amendments. This unexpected rebellion indicates widespread discontent from lawmakers about the bill.

4) The government makes it clear that it wants the amendments rescinded. As the Minister for Culture said, "with the global license system, no one has found an acceptable system of redistribution (for the money collected through the tax)". Media publishers in general oppose the amendments. Artists and rights-collecting societies (French equivalents for the RIAA) are divided, with a majority against them. Consumer associations, however, express clear support.

5) Although the amendments were adopted, the law itself will only be voted on in a few days. In the meantime, the government is expected to exert pressure on the lawmakers (at least on those of the center-right party) to make them reject the amendments. So no, sharing copyrighted material is not yet definitely legal in .fr, and there will probably be some changes in the law before the definitive version is passed. I wouldn't want to bet money on the final outcome.

Thomas-

Who would have guessed it? by CodeHog · 2005-12-22 02:11 · Score: 2, Funny

France didn't actually surrender to something (not yet at least)!

--
Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life, son.

Re:Who would have guessed it? by ThaFooz · 2005-12-22 02:22 · Score: 2, Insightful

France didn't actually surrender to something (not yet at least)!

Yes, but a couple weeks ago we learned that all it takes to capture Paris these days is sticks and rocks. One sufficently angry record exec with a 2'x4' with a nail through it should be enough to reverse the legislation.
Re:Who would have guessed it? by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-22 02:46 · Score: 2, Funny

Wow. You're so funny and original. You must be from U.S.A.

I'm not convinced that the post is from an American. True, the grammar is poor, but the post contains no spelling mistakes, references to "nukes", or brain-dead cowboy-isms such as references to being "fur us or agin us". If indeed an American, the poster a member of the very small minority of relative sophisticates that inhabit a land that it seems is populated, in the majority, by frothing lunatic throwbacks who are too addle-brained to realize or care that fascism is descending upon their once great land.
Re:Who would have guessed it? by R2.0 · 2005-12-22 02:47 · Score: 2, Insightful

"You must be from U.S.A."

Or Britain.

Or Germany.

Or Canada (Well, the non-Quebec parts, anyway).

Or Russia.

Or for that matter, any other country. You seem to forget that NO ONE likes France except the French (And maybe the folks in that suburb next door, what's it's name...Belgium!). Just because the US has recently eclipsed France as the Most Hated Country in the world shouldn't obscure France's long tenure at #1, and it's current solid position at #2 (there's a bad pun in there, somewhere)

--
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson

Wording?? by cyberbob2010 · 2005-12-22 02:13 · Score: 3, Informative

I think they probably could have worded this a little better. They are making it sound like these "deputies" are not a part of the government as the "government" is going to fight them. It is not as if these are some rebels in the foot hills making their own laws.

--
We seldom regret saying too little but often regret saying too much.

Re:Wording?? by SpaceAdmiral · 2005-12-22 02:37 · Score: 3, Informative

In many countries around the world, "Government" refers to the "Executive" branch. That's what they are doing here and the wording is perfectly fine.

I can understand why that would be confusing for Americans, though. Hope that helps.
Re:Wording?? by El+Cabri · 2005-12-22 04:01 · Score: 2, Insightful

It is a too-litteral translation of the French terms : "deputy" is for "député", who is a member of the lower house of parliement, the National Assembly. "government" here strictly means the executive branch of government, more precisely, the prime minister's cabinet (the president, even though he is part of the executive, is usually not considered part of what is covered by the word "gouvernement").

Bad idea... by GreyWolf3000 · 2005-12-22 02:13 · Score: 3, Interesting

This could set precedent to undermine copyright as a whole. In which case, I predict we'll start seeing things like proprietary derivatives of GPL software emerge and not get challenged.

Unless a new paradigm for duplication and distribution of digital works is created, we need copyright to be enforced in all cases in order to protect free software.

--
Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.

Re:Bad idea... by Aim+Here · 2005-12-22 02:20 · Score: 4, Insightful

"In which case, I predict we'll start seeing things like proprietary derivatives of GPL software emerge and not get challenged. "

In the absence of copyright law, what does 'proprietary' mean?

I thought the GPL was a legalistic hack to protect the ethical right to share information. If the government goes and legalises that, then the GPL becomes almost, but not quite, entirely redundant.
Re:Bad idea... by SerpentMage · 2005-12-22 02:25 · Score: 2, Informative

Is this an undermining of copyright? I think not. In the article the following paragraph says it all.

"Legal music downloading sites such as Apple Computer Inc.'s iTunes have French-language sites, as do major music companies such as Vivendi Universal SA. Last night's amendment would allow someone having bought a song from one of those sites to share it with family or friends."

I still think that general peer to peer networks a'la Kaaza would be in hot water. What I think the law is trying to get at is the stopping of the draconian DRM law that takes away fair use. Many of the online music shops have music that only certain computers can run. This law addon says, "Hey you bought, you can share it like you would a CD among family and friends".

--

"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
Re:Bad idea... by parodyca · 2005-12-22 02:42 · Score: 2, Insightful

I predict we'll start seeing things like proprietary derivatives of GPL software emerge and not get challenged.

Maybe, but it will all be free software. You wont be able to exploit it commercially without following the terms of the GPL. Just as you wont be able to exploit (sell) commercial software or music or whatever, without following those terms.

This seems reasonable to me. So what if the GPL loses some of its wind. If copyright laws are less powerful, the GPL does not need to blow so hard.
Re:Bad idea... by Mo+Bedda · 2005-12-22 03:15 · Score: 2, Insightful

I thought the GPL was a legalistic hack to protect the ethical right to share information. If the government goes and legalises that, then the GPL becomes almost, but not quite, entirely redundant.

Your ethical right to share your own information has never been in danger. You could always release to the public domain. The GPL prevents you from taking the shared information, using it, and distributing it but not sharing the result. OSS certainly benefits from the GPL, but it does not require it.

But the article only mentions music and movies, so I'm not certain the GPL would be impacted. They are not talking about repealing copyright; they are talking about expanding fair use. It does not sound like it would be legal for me to take a movie, replace all the credits with my own, and release it to theaters or sell it on DVD. Not having read the proposal itself, I would assume that sharing means a non-profit/p2p sort of thing, not a for profit/selling movies and music online sort of thing.
Re:Bad idea... by Alsee · 2005-12-22 04:54 · Score: 2, Insightful

not that I agree that sourcecode is information

Huh? Did you mis-write that? Did I mis-read that? Or did you actually claim that sourcecode is somehow NOT information?

Under the OP scenario, copyright no longer exists as a force to make me open my sourcecode up under the terms of the GPL.

True, but it is expected that that would be far less of an issue. Pretty much all commonity software would be open source. There is very little incentive and ability to produce closed source versions (as people could redistribute the binaries anyway), and trying to go with a closed derivative of an open project would be really lousy. Either you are stuck with that version and no bugfixes or improvements, or you have the huge labor and delay of repeatedly merging all of the changes from the open version into the closed project and of hunting down any bugs that introduces into the closed version.

Or at least that is the reasoning.

So I think even ESR would be satisfied with that system of universal freedom, even though it meant that freedom to keep sourcecode secret. The GPL sourcecode requirement is mainly to keep the open ecosystem viable in the face of the overwhelming current legislatively enforced zero-freedom ecosystem.

-

--
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Re:Bad idea... by Johnny+Mnemonic · 2005-12-22 05:24 · Score: 3, Insightful

In the absence of copyright law, what does 'proprietary' mean?
No source. I suppose you could hack on the binary all you want; knock yourself out. Smart vendors would tie their code to their stuff, so you couldn't run it without buying it.

--

--
$tar -xvf .sig.tar
Re:Bad idea... by Anne+Honime · 2005-12-22 07:07 · Score: 2, Insightful

>> Amazingly, it has been proven to work pretty well for 150+ years, so that must not be that bad !
> And the system used in America has been proven to work pretty well for nearly 300 years, and traditionally hasn't had anything like moral rights. Moral rights are crap. Utilitarian copyright is where it's at.
Thank you very much for your reply, so much helpful to show the inherent flaws of copyright logic :
1) Your system has been working since mankind exists, because it amounts to jungle law : the powerful can kick the crap out of really creative people, bribe them, starve them, nobody gives a f*cking shit about it ; hence, this is not *law* as a means to create social balance.
2) If copyright was utilitarian, why the hell the end consumer would not be entitled full distribution rights on something he utimately paid for ? Well, it doesn't, because copyright obviously favors captation of the rights by industry, therefore it's not a true capitalist law, but a legislation of unbalanced privilege.
In fact, this is exactly the reason why french authors did revolt and forced the adoption of our intellectual property laws under the leadership of Victor Hugo.

Re:France are weird by Idimmu+Xul · 2005-12-22 02:14 · Score: 2, Interesting

That was supposed to be:

French Government Lobbied to Ban Free Software and
France about to get worst copyright law in Europe? but then this! I just don't know whether to hug or punch them!

(Slipped and hit submit instead of preview :( )

--
The problem with slashdot is that most of its users were bullied and stuffed into lockers as kids!

It will not pass. by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-22 02:14 · Score: 5, Insightful

I am French, I know how the government works there, and I can tell it will not pass. There is going to be a second reading of the law, and the amendments voted for the "legal license" to download stuff will be removed. Some guys from the ruling party have voted for the amendments, and the government is going to sanction them for that; hence at the next session they will simply be removed.

And if by chance the amendments are still present when the law is voted at the parliament, it is going to be cancelled by the Senate.

Welcome to democracy folks. This is just an advertizing "coup" from the opposition party. In the end, we'll get DMCA too (possibly a worse version of it). I know. I'm from there.

Re:It will not pass. by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-22 02:41 · Score: 2, Informative

Welcome to democracy folks. This is just an advertizing "coup" from the opposition party. In the end, we'll get DMCA too (possibly a worse version of it)

The law in question is that DMCA equivalent. That's kind of the point - the deputies placed an amendment on the bill to completely change the spirit of it, as a protest against its restrictions.
Re:It will not pass. by Richard+Steiner · 2005-12-22 04:22 · Score: 2, Funny

Where does this forum reside? Inside of France, or outside of it?

"Yes" is a valid answer. :-)

--
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.

Merde!! by malia8888 · 2005-12-22 02:15 · Score: 3, Funny

The French Parliament voted last night to allow free sharing of music and movies on the Internet, setting up a conflict with both the French government and with media companies.

I smell a really big merde storm brewing here!...:-P..

--
Harpo Tunnel Syndrome--my wrist feels funny.

FYI by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-22 02:15 · Score: 5, Informative

This was made yesterday (21 Dec), during Chrismas holidays. As a consequence, only 58 deputies (out of 577) were present, 30 of them were for a 'global licence', 28 were against...

I don't think it's really significative

What to call this law? by corvenus · 2005-12-22 02:16 · Score: 5, Insightful

Will the Americans rename the French music piracy to "Freedom music piracy"? Ironically, in this instance the use of the word Freedom would actually make sense.

Re:France are weird by dangitman · 2005-12-22 02:17 · Score: 4, Funny

France about to get worst copyright law in Europe? but then this! I just don't know whether to hug or punch them!

I hear they are into BDSM over there, so they probably would be quite excited if you did both.

--
... and then they built the supercollider.

Heavyhanded lobbying by draxredd · 2005-12-22 02:17 · Score: 5, Funny

Not to mention iTune and Virgin prepaid cards being distributed to the parliament members in the Hall of l'Assemblée Nationale. France is not yet accustomed to such blatant lobbying, prefering more hypocritical means of pressure.
So far so good but the government is certainly going to pull a Cheney on this (as in "pulling cheney back to vote patrioct act prolongation).
If the text is finalized, i guess french ISP will see a major surge in overseas subscriptions.

--
--- Back to the trees, back to the trees !

Not yet fully voted by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-22 02:19 · Score: 2, Informative

This is only the half of the law being voted yesterday.

The government is now trying today to reverse this vote, or at least to ask every internet user to pay a tax (to download freely, but not to upload). If this seems familiar to the cd/dvd tax, you are not too far...

Let's not make any conclusion and wait till tomorrow to know the real decision (Probably not as catchy as this news' title)

Could've been said better? by Wylfing · 2005-12-22 02:19 · Score: 2, Insightful

the French Parliament voted yesterday into law...This decision goes against the French government

Eh, isn't Parliament part of government? Anyway, it's the National Assembly we're talking about here. And it wasn't "voted into law," it was simply passed by the Assembly. The chance of this becoming a real law is zero, this is just political gaming in French government.

--
Our intelligent designer has never created an animal that we couldn't improve by strapping a bomb to it.

Re:Could've been said better? by Albanach · 2005-12-22 02:24 · Score: 4, Informative

No Government refers to the Executive branch, parliament is the legislature. The givernment may be formed by members of the parliament, but that doesn't make the parliament the government - as an opposition members in the parliament would tell you!

Contradicting News... by stupid_is · 2005-12-22 02:24 · Score: 5, Interesting

The Register is running a different story:

Individuals in France who ignore copyright by downloading illegal music files will also be subject to a harsher "graduated" enforcement procedure, according to Agence France Presse.

If uploaders keep ignoring warnings, they can be put on trial. A new anti piracy bill that is being examined by French MPs would also allow record companies to include technical measures to stop users from directly making copies.

--
-- Intelligence is soluble in alcohol

Finally a copyright law I like by Yartrebo · 2005-12-22 02:24 · Score: 3, Insightful

I must say that this law actually looks good in all ways. If implemented, it will do everything from encouraging the spread of technology, increasing standards of living, saving natural and human resources, and even closing the trade deficit in France. Too bad I'm too cynical to actually think it'll stick.

Political situation in France by palad1 · 2005-12-22 02:30 · Score: 5, Informative

The current french government is not really popular, not popular at all even.

The weird thing is that there is no traditional opposition to this government. The left wing is not in good shape at all (since the 2005 elections where Jospin lost to Le Pen (our very own racist nutjob)). Which leads me to my point, these amendments were voted not because they are a Good Thing (tm) (which they are!), but because the UDF (center-right) saw this as a way to strenghten its role as the 'Real Opposition' and gain voters in the 'internet generation' demographics, which is not favorably biased towards them.

But rest assured the current government is backed by very powerful industrials who cherish their fscking IP rights, so these amendments will be vetoed to death, or stealthly removed during the holidays season, just like previous bills have been passed last summer.

I'd like to give my props to the eucd.info/ guys for their actions though, but don't fool yourselves, even the 'good guys' that voted these bills are using us, voters for their very own agenda.

That's the sad truth... or maybe I should stop reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Culture :)

Re:France are weird by rizole · 2005-12-22 02:32 · Score: 3, Funny

Isn't that some kind of operating system?

Re:I hereby suspend my France-Bashing for 24 hours by mmalove · 2005-12-22 02:34 · Score: 4, Interesting

"About time someone gives the recording industry the middle finger" ..... Ok, while I agree with the statement, a 5 - Insightful?!?! ..... There seems to be a growing trend that you can do anything legally as long as you live in the right country at the time : abortion, file sharing, pot smoking, drinking under 21, euthanasia - all legal but in differing countries. Oh, and none of them in the self proclaimed land of the free.

--
You can get 15 minutes of fame, but you can go down in history for infamy.

Oh, tell them about the EU constitution by SmallFurryCreature · 2005-12-22 02:34 · Score: 5, Insightful

'Goverment' also wanted to push that through. The voter didn't go for it. Not in france, not in holland (where I am from).

There is a backlash going on with the voter not taking it anymore. I am not that familiar with france (language barrier) but I do get the impression that it has much the same problems as holland. With a cultural elite (media and politics) having put themselves in ivory towers where they can keep telling each other everything is alright while the real world is going to hell.

Holland had Pim Fortyun and Theo van Gogh and their murderers who upset this carefully constructed fantasy world. France had the recent riots and the continuing rise of extreme right.

With the EU constition it became painfully clear that the politicians were totally removed from the real world. They just could not get that the voters were not going to vote it through just because they told them to.

I think this "protest" vote is a sign that even certain circles of goverment are beginning to realize that something is wrong.

To dismiss this as simply a publicity stunt is cheap. It is like calling the EU constition rejection a cheap stunt by the voters, no this is a way to tell the direct leaders of a country to get their act together. The NEW rules proposed are bad for the public and this was one way to make it painfully clear that there is resistance. Sometimes you have to shoot people in the face to get their attention.

Of course the problem is that the media who are supposed to tell us about these kind of things are the people behind the whole DMCA and similar crap.

But still it is good to see some resistance. I think this battle is far from over. If your leaders got a brain they will not want to have another disaster like the referendum. Of course if they had a brain none of this would have happened in the first place.

--

MMO Quests are like orgasms:

You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

Re:Oh, tell them about the EU constitution by johansalk · 2005-12-22 04:08 · Score: 2, Insightful

"It is like calling the EU constition rejection a cheap stunt by the voters, no this is a way to tell the direct leaders of a country to get their act together."I'm sorry, but refusing a document very important to the whole of Europe without understanding it just to tell "the direct leaders of a country to get their act together" IS a cheap stunt. I think the opposition parties in the relevant countries fooled the people, and tricked them into a stupid temper tantrum of whatever-you-say-I-say-no kneejerk. Don't try to deny it, it's a fact. Most people had no idea what the constitution document entailed, and most voted, like you said, "to tell the direct leaders of a country to get their act together". I call that not just cheap, but stupid too.
Re:Oh, tell them about the EU constitution by NeutronCowboy · 2005-12-22 06:11 · Score: 2, Insightful

Don't know where you get your information from, but the EU constitution was rejected by the french voters after extensive discussions and analysis. Did you know that before the vote, the EU constitution was the best selling book in France? And it's not cheap or small either, as it clocks in at nearly 500 pages.

So to your comment that people voted on it without understanding it, I say you go read some French newspapers from that time period. Or is Fox News taking up too much of your time?

--
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.

At last! by Billosaur · 2005-12-22 02:36 · Score: 4, Funny

A country where I will be free to share my William Shatner and David Hasselhoff MP3s with others!

--
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network

This just in . . . by DrHogie · 2005-12-22 02:38 · Score: 2, Funny

The domain name http://lepiratebay.fr/ was just registered.

--
--DrH, the Sandwich with the Ph.D.

Re:I hereby suspend my France-Bashing for 24 hours by R2.0 · 2005-12-22 02:38 · Score: 3, Informative

Abortion isn't legal in the US? I thought that the big hairy deal here was that abortion IS legal.

But hey, whatever one needs to say to make one's point...

--
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson

Re:I hereby suspend my France-Bashing for 24 hours by Darkman,+Walkin+Dude · 2005-12-22 02:41 · Score: 5, Funny

I hereby suspend my France-Bashing for 24 hours!

Good man yourself... are you sure your government will let you do that? I mean they spent a lot of cash on brainwashing you to dislike France because they wouldn't join your half cocked crusade, they might be upset at the waste of their money!

--
What he can't kill, he has sex on. Trent.

Re:I hereby suspend my France-Bashing for 24 hours by ndtechnologies · 2005-12-22 02:42 · Score: 4, Interesting

Yeah, I've been trying to give them the finger for over 3 years now, but I guess it hasn't done any good! The funny thing is, File-Sharing can be a great tool for the distribution of music. It's just a matter of utilizing it in a way that will allow both the artist and the listener to benefit from it.

With our online music store, we are going to be utilizing BitTorrent technology for the distribution of some of our music.

About 2 years ago, there was a Music Industry meeting here in Nashville, and the President of Sony Music Nashville was quoted as saying "our biggest mistake was shutting down Napster", now take that for what it's worth, but it does say something.

--
I have nothing clever to put here...

Re:Am I allowed to do so with every other product? by ozydingo · 2005-12-22 02:42 · Score: 2, Insightful

I support filesharing as a means of distribution and hate the RIAA, but that was a terrible argument.

By offerring people sugar from that which you purchased, you are giving up your own use of that sugar. The company from which you purchased it does not need to take your word for it, there's no way you can still have the sugar if you gave it to someone else.

Likewise, offerring rides to hitchhikers is in no way comparable to copying and distributing a CD. If you instead compared it to letting a friend listen to a CD while you do, then it might have been an appropriate comparison to make. But last time I checked, noone ever got in any trouble for that, at least on the scale that could be comparable to providing individuals with rides in your car. Playing the CD at a public event is another issue, but that's not what's being debated here.

If people who made arguments like yours, clearly not having any grasp of he situation, would just shut up, we might stand a chance at giving a unified, logical, sensible argument that could stand to be heard by those in power to make a difference. But perhaps I'm just too optimistic.

Re:Am I allowed to do so with every other product? by Skye16 · 2005-12-22 02:45 · Score: 2, Interesting

First, I don't disagree with anything you said. However, I have a hypothetical situation.

Let's say we somehow manage to produce replicators, a la Star Trek. Now we suddnely CAN create duplicates of sugar or duplicates of cars.

Should we be stopped from doing that? Should it be illegal?

I'm just curious. The probability of ever being able to replicate something like that is probably right around the probability of me becoming Emperor of the Universe. But, if it were possible, what are the legal ramifications? Would Ford be right in saying "you can't put the [quantum representation schematics] (or whatever they'd be) into your replication device"? Or would you say "you know what? fuck you. i bought the car, it's mine, and i'm doing with it as i wish."

Would you like some Freedom Fries by bignobody · 2005-12-22 02:45 · Score: 2, Funny

to go with that download?

--
"Your mother's a bloody liar... That's what I liked about her." - Yellowbeard

Re:I hereby suspend my France-Bashing for 24 hours by Mulletproof · 2005-12-22 02:50 · Score: 3, Insightful

"About time that someone gives the recording industry the middle finger."

"...The initial bill's detractors who pushed for this amendment want a tax for author rights to be paid by everyone on the ISP fees."

Frankly, this is dealing with the devil to pay Paul before curiosity killed the cat ...Ok, nevermind that, but this ammendment assumes everybody is guilty of usurping copyrighted material. In fact, you will be taxed no matter what the content of your file tranfers, even if you have never used P2P software in your life.

Look, I'm all for "sticking it to the man", but this is a fine, fine example of playing off a hot issue to make easy money. I feel sorry for anybody who actually supports this legislative spam in France, thinking it's a good deal or they're "sticking it to the man" when they're in reality sticking it to themselves and their friends.

--
You need a FREE iPod Nano

This just in... by tomcres · 2005-12-22 02:52 · Score: 5, Funny

Metallica boycotts France.

Nobody cares.

Ce n'est pas une légalisation du P2P by aaribaud · 2005-12-22 02:54 · Score: 5, Informative

I've read the amendments and the law, and the minutes of the debates, and I'm even listening to the current debates right now (and yes, I'm French) and I am not sure at all that this legalizes file sharing. It might possibly make downloading licit, without doubt subject to the payment of a personal copy tax. However it does not legalize uploading at all.

Re:I hereby suspend my France-Bashing for 24 hours by Scarblac · 2005-12-22 03:03 · Score: 4, Informative

abortion, file sharing, pot smoking, drinking under 21, euthanasia - all legal but in differing countries.

All legal in the Netherlands, plus gay marriage, prostitution, gambling...

Didn't stop us from becoming a bunch of small-minded, anti-intellectual, complaining, intolerant islamophobiacs, so it doesn't really say much. Just means that we like to tax the things we can't stop anyway.

--
I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.

Re:I hereby suspend my France-Bashing for 24 hours by Anne+Honime · 2005-12-22 03:07 · Score: 5, Informative

Ok, nevermind that, but this ammendment assumes everybody is guilty of usurping copyrighted material. In fact, you will be taxed no matter what the content of your file tranfers, even if you have never used P2P software in your life.

The law states that the tax will be declarative : you want to copy, you pay the tax, you don't, you pay nothing (but there are chances you'll be monitored a bit ...)

Not everyone by Alarash · 2005-12-22 03:09 · Score: 2, Informative

It's not "everyone" that would have to pay to their ISP. That would be optional. Here's an interview (english translation) of the deputy, Alain Suguenot, that proposed the amendment. The ISP would then transfert the money their receive from their customers to the SACEM (sorry, no page in english on Wikipedia), the French RIAA, like it's already done for television broadcasts.

Wow by beforewisdom · 2005-12-22 03:09 · Score: 5, Funny

France legalizing file sharing and Canada legalizing group sex:
http://www.mytelus.com/news/article.do?pageID=news _home&articleID=2125712

It sure is dull to be an American

Re:Wow by beforewisdom · 2005-12-22 04:14 · Score: 2, Funny

LOL!

If Canada gets legal file sharing you can smoke pot there, trade music, and have group sex. Sure the climate sucks, but with all of that who cares?

I dont think this legalizes public file sharing... by llvllatrix · 2005-12-22 03:11 · Score: 2, Informative

According to the *translated article: "authors cannot forbid the reproduction of works that are made on any format from an online communications service when they are intended to be used privately." Sharing a movie on a public torrent would still be illegal. However, a nice side effect of this amendment would be the use of emulated games, provided you have coppied the ROM off of a cartridge or disk you own. This amendment still does not address my qualm with the legalities of file sharing; that is, illegal copies are a security issue for the media producers and it is their responsibility to address it. The government should not enforce any laws beyond those that apply to any other business to help them solve this problem (ie a royalty tax on cds).

Ah, the further Socialization of entertainment. by ScentCone · 2005-12-22 03:12 · Score: 3, Interesting

So, they propose collecting a tax from French citizens to offset the income that musicians and their businesses will lose once there's no limit on freely distributing those musicians' works. So, where do you supposed the French government will send the checks to British, or American, or Italian musicians? Will the National Symphony Orchestra in DC be getting some of their income, now, from French taxpayers who only like listening to Eurotrash Disco Remixes? Will urban Parisians have to subisdize the production of Morroccan ex-patriate class-warfare Islamo-rap?

--
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.

Re:Ah, the further Socialization of entertainment. by trollable · 2005-12-22 04:12 · Score: 2, Informative

FYI, the money (radio, tv, ...) is already collected by the SACEM and then sent to the corresponding foreign organization and dispatched to the foreign artists. There is no change at this level.

--
Million Dollar Screenshot

Re:I hereby suspend my France-Bashing for 24 hours by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-22 03:12 · Score: 2, Informative

This is exactly the law that was being discussed at the time, being transformed to what you read in the headline, so your linked article is a tad out of date.
Also note that the fee will not have to be paid by everbody, only to those declaring that they use p2p software.

Mod parent troll by Darkman,+Walkin+Dude · 2005-12-22 03:13 · Score: 2, Insightful

The US doesn't spend any money on making us dislike France.

Hahahahah, ohh, ah thanks man, that made my day...

France has got making us dislike them pretty much covered.

And how did they do that, denouncing the illegal invasion of Iraq, which lead to the current ongoing train wreck in said country? How dare they, the gall, the nerve, the brass of the beggars! Don't they know they owe their very existence to the Yooo Esss? Why its not like they ever helped the US in any way... Heheh...

--
What he can't kill, he has sex on. Trent.

Re:Mod parent troll by Darkman,+Walkin+Dude · 2005-12-22 04:11 · Score: 2, Interesting

Did the French sell them chemical weapons? Is that why Dubyaw was so sure he would find WMD in Iraq, he still had the receipts?

campaign to outlaw the use of English words in french advertising

What do you care, I thought you were american, not english...

France and the french (yeah, I've been there several times on business) are a bunch of snobs

I think you'll find that people everywhere are less than pleasant when you start acting as though you have some natural advantage purely by dint of being american. Now I realise I'm making an assumption here, but based on your previous diatribes, I'd feel fairly confident putting money on it.

responsible for their own reputation

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, buddy.

--
What he can't kill, he has sex on. Trent.
Re:Mod parent troll by Darkman,+Walkin+Dude · 2005-12-22 04:51 · Score: 2, Insightful

Tell me, have you travled so much as to be able to render these valid opinions?

Yup, more and wider too. Additionally I speak a half dozen languages, two of which are asian, and a smattering of a dozen more. You see I like to immerse myself in different cultures, to try to completely understand them. Thats why you won't catch me staying in a hotel; I'm the guy living in a hut halfway up a mountain in the triple canopy jungle.

have you spent time in the US

No, I choose to avoid countries that treat me like a criminal by fingerprinting me before I set foot inside their borders. And I do believe I am a member of a very large and growing club on that one.

still didn't treat me like dog dung for simply being American

Two words, "freedom fries". Oh and by the way you are aware that the term french in french fries is describing the method of cutting them, not country of origin? I mean that by itself says it all. As far as I can see, no one made the US invade Iraq. So remind me, who started looking down on who first again?

--
What he can't kill, he has sex on. Trent.

Media should be free by gamer4Life · 2005-12-22 03:14 · Score: 2, Interesting

This would save so much money paid to lawyers. The media industry was created through the advancement of technology (reproduceable media), and now that technoogy has advanced further, they are trying to stop the natural progression.

Artists can still make alot of money by performing in concerts, where people will still pay alot more to see them perform live. Movies can still play in theatres where people will want to see the big screen and hear the big sound. The only areas where they will suffer are in the CDs and DVD market.

Sure there will be some pain (to the RIAA and MPAA), but the economy will adjust, and a new business model will arise.

Re:I hereby suspend my France-Bashing for 24 hours by Anonymous Coward · 2005-12-22 03:14 · Score: 2, Funny

"The French government has vowed to fight this decision (babelfish link)."

LOL, they said France and fight in the same sentence.

This just in...

France surrenders to Kazzaa...

Re:I hereby suspend my France-Bashing for 24 hours by hackstraw · 2005-12-22 03:16 · Score: 2, Informative

I hereby suspend my France-Bashing for 24 hours

TFA says:

The amendment, which is attached to a bill on intellectual property rights, states that ``authors cannot forbid the reproduction of works that are made on any format from an online communications service when they are intended to be used privately'' and not for commercial use.

I am no copyright lawyer, but somewhere it does not seem for the inverse to make sense. Meaning, how could authors forbid the reproduction of works that are intended to be used privately? But this also kills the entire notion of copyright altogether. The GPL appears to be null and void in France now, even though it has never been "proven in court" anyway.

What does copyright actually mean? How is it binding? Can I say at the bottom of this post:

(C) 2006 by hackstraw

Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this post, but changing it is not allowed. If you read this post twice (copying it from the computer to your brain more than one time), I am therefore explicitly granted the right to kill your gerbil if I see fit.

Everything but the last sentence was taken from the FSF's copyright on the GPL. To me, that statement seems like an EULA, and what validity do either of those have?

Another thing, is I'm confused after this stuff that has come from France in the not so recent past.

Re:France are weird by A.K.A_Magnet · 2005-12-22 03:42 · Score: 3, Informative

OK some much needed explanation. I have been following all parliament debate over streaming (and I have to use a w32codec ;)).

The things were bad. We were horrified. Our bastard government and so-called "Culture" minister wanted to pass something very much like your Digital Content Security Act along with the transcription of the European Copyright Directive (EUCD) in the "DADVSI" law. So they wanted DRMs to be forced in each "cultural" format and forbid to bypass DRMs. It would have effectively banned all free software that act as a "transmitter" or makes copies because they would have needed them to implement DRMs and force the software editor to prevent people from bypassing the DRMs. However, it's in the 4 fundamental freedoms of free software that people are allowed to modify the source code, so it would have been bad.

The project is in parliament since tuesday. Yesterday, the socialists and communists MEPs (along with very few right-wings) surprised everyone with the approval (59 MEPs, 30 for, 28 against) of the "optionnal global license": those who want to pay 7euros/month will be able to download any music (or movie older than 4 years) from p2p networks, FTP servers, newsgroups, etc. Software is excluded. But the global license removes the need of obligatory DRMs.

Only few amendments (included the global license) was voted yet. The law isn't voted, and it is being (as I watch right now) delayed because this amendment changes pretty much everything. They will certainly do whatever they can to cancel it. However they'll have a hard time doing it. They're trying to remove the amendment as we speech.

Re:I hereby suspend my France-Bashing for 24 hours by wonko_el_sano · 2005-12-22 03:43 · Score: 2, Interesting

Even if this fee were mandatory (which it's not) it's no different than the 'fee' you pay when you go to a restaurant that plays music. Regardless of whether you listen or not, the restaurant still has to pay a fee to a PRO (Performance Rights Organization) and they pass the bill onto you.

To me it makes sense that the laws that govern the distribution of music through the air waves be similar to the laws that govern music through the ethernet.

Re:I hereby suspend my France-Bashing for 24 hours by pegr · 2005-12-22 04:04 · Score: 4, Funny

Abortion isn't necessarily "legal" but it's not "illegal" either.

JULES
Well, abortion is legal there, right?

VINCENT
Yeah, it's legal, but is ain't a
hundred percent legal. I mean you
can't walk into a restaurant, roll
an abortion, and start puffin' away.
You're only supposed to abort in
your home or certain designated
places.

JULES
Those are abortion bars?

VINCENT
Yeah, it breaks down like this:
it's legal to buy it, it's legal to
own it and, if you're the
proprietor of a abortion bar, it's
legal to sell it. It's legal to
carry it, which doesn't really
matter 'cause -- get a load of this
-- if the cops stop you, it's
illegal for this to search you.
Searching you is a right that the
cops in Amsterdam don't have...

(Welcome to my twisted stream of consciousness...)

Taxed Instead by jtwJGuevara · 2005-12-22 04:12 · Score: 2, Interesting

. The initial bill's detractors who pushed for this amendment want a tax for author rights to be paid by everyone on the ISP fees.

If this happened in America I would have a shitfit. As someone who is online frequently but does not trade music or swap files online, I couldn't fathom the government taxing me through the service I use on the pretense that I might optionally do something the service allows, in this case sharing files that are copyrighted by others.

Then again, I'm willing to wager the American government is already doing something similar to me through another commercial service that I'm not aware of at the moment.

Re:Am I allowed to do so with every other product? by jonnythan · 2005-12-22 04:16 · Score: 3, Insightful

"If I buy sugar am I allowed to then offer people sugar in their tea to my hearts content? If I buy a car can I offer rides to hitchhikers as much as I want?"

Sure you can. Just the same way as you can lend out or sell your entire CD collection to your heart's content.

However, you are not allowed to set up a manufacturing plant and produce identical copies of that car that you bought. Nor are you allowed to buy an Aeron chair and sell an identical copy of it, or buy that brand new John Grishma novel and print and sell your own copies of it.

Allowing the absolutely unrestricted distribution of music is the exact same thing as allowing people to print and sell as many copies of any book they wish. The fact that one is via computer has nothing to do with it. You can't set up your own print house and produce and distribute copies of bestsellers just because you feel like it.

Re:I hereby suspend my France-Bashing for 24 hours by Darkman,+Walkin+Dude · 2005-12-22 04:18 · Score: 2, Funny

Sorry.

Apology accepted.

--
What he can't kill, he has sex on. Trent.

Is P2P private? by trollable · 2005-12-22 04:30 · Score: 2, Interesting

Every one is focusing on the tax, payment and copying. But there is nothing new there. Tax is already collected for CD and tapes, rights are already payed by radios, ... and you have the right for private copies. Nothing new here, every thing is already working. The real question is: Is P2P a private copy? If yes (as stated by the vote), then there is no more restriction to share (privately and so non-commercialy) but a tax is collected. Side note: the fact there is a tax is mainly because of the inability to trade rights at the individual level. An "ideal" system would be to pay each time you listen a song, for example $0.01. That would lower the entry price a lot. Additionaly, every thing should be promoted to the public domain in a reasonnable time frame.

--
Million Dollar Screenshot

US was hip-deep involved in Iraq's oil sales by intnsred · 2005-12-22 04:47 · Score: 2, Insightful

how about France's illegal trade of oil with Iraq against the UN sanctions and Oil for Food programs?

Far be it for me to shed some reality on this nationalistic rhetoric, but if you research the issue, you'll find two interesting items about that oil for food scandal: (1) US companies made far more money on the corruption than did companies of any other country, and (2) the US gov't was very aware of Iraq's violations of sanctions in selling oil. The US even tacitly approved the breaking of sanctions by Iraq exporting oil through Jordan and Turkey since it helped two of our "allies" and would have had an adverse economic impact on them if the smuggling was stopped.

Or perhaps their ongoing (since 1975) campaign to outlaw the use of English words in french advertising and government and scientific papers, like the word "email" because it's too English?

The Canadian province of Quebec has a lot of bizarre laws regulating the use of French in commerce, specifying the size of French text vis-a-vis English on billboards, etc. So what? Why should I care what language the people of another country speak?

The way you portray this is as if it's a human rights violation -- they're regulating commercial speech, not torturing people...

Re:"get their act together" IS a cheap stunt by RedLaggedTeut · 2005-12-22 05:57 · Score: 2, Insightful

Most people had no idea what the constitution document entailed

Indeed, and this would have been reason enough to vote against it.

--
I'm still trying to figure out what people mean by 'social skills' here.

How many governments does France have? by serutan · 2005-12-22 07:42 · Score: 2, Funny

Parliament voted this into law, but the Senate could overturn it, then the Upper House can do something else...
and I thought U.S. government was confusing.

Re:I hereby suspend my France-Bashing for 24 hours by serutan · 2005-12-22 07:49 · Score: 2, Informative

they spent a lot of cash on brainwashing you to dislike France because they wouldn't join your half cocked crusade

Not my half-cocked crusade, mate. Bush won by less than 3%. Nearly half of us over here know he's a lying bastard.

Life in Pre-Revolutionary America is an interesting experience.

Re:Abortion Legality by djp928 · 2005-12-22 08:46 · Score: 2, Insightful

Uh, no. If that were the case, instead of having to overturn a SCOTUS decision, the Republicans would only have to pass new laws saying the old laws "legalizing" abortion are void, and that abortion is now illegal in all cases. The fact that they haven't done that shows the fallacy of your statement.

What Roe v Wade decided was that a woman has a constitutional right to an abortion, and therefore the government has no power to prevent her from having one in most cases. It struck down state laws outlawing abortion as un-constitutional, and thus abortion became legal by default. States can (and have) try to restrict abotion in other ways, but outright banning of it has certainly been declared un-constitutional.

The decision said nothing at all about it being the Federal government's job to decide. In fact, it said it was nobody's job except the woman herself. That's why in order to outlaw it again, pro-lifers need to either get a constitutional ammendment making it illegal, or have the SCOTUS revisit the decision and decide they were wrong the first time, there's no constitutional right to an abortion. To do that, however, would probably *also* overturn our dubious "constitutional right to privacy", since the Roe v Wade decision was based on that right in the first place.

-- Dave

--
Making fun of dumb people since 2009

No, the cat does not "got my tongue." by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2005-12-22 10:47 · Score: 2, Interesting

> The initial bill's detractors who pushed for this
> amendment want a tax for author rights to be paid
> by everyone on the ISP fees.

Lovely. So we get the choice of a tax everyone pays whether stealing music or not, or legalizing stealing music.

Stupid 1 or stupid 2.

Sigh.

This is why nobody should have power, ever.

--
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.

Re:What? by Mr2001 · 2005-12-22 12:13 · Score: 3, Insightful

Next time I am down at the store I get to walk out with French cheese and wine for free. It would only be the fair thing to do.

No, the fair thing to do would be to copy some French cheese and wine. (You do realize that copyrighted works aren't the same as physical objects, don't you?)

--
Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.

Re:I hereby suspend my France-Bashing for 24 hours by Hieronymous+Cowherd · 2005-12-22 14:19 · Score: 2, Insightful

Ah, I'm replying to an AC, but I remember back when AC didn't immediately mean "troll", so I'll reply.

Of course, all of the religions spawned in that place and at that time are fanatical. Why is this surprising?

Let's compare the Old Testament, shared by the other main religious competitors:

From Numbers:

31:9 And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones, and took the spoil of all their cattle, and all their flocks, and all their goods.
31:10 And they burnt all their cities wherein they dwelt, and all their goodly castles, with fire.
31:11 And they took all the spoil, and all the prey, both of men and of beasts.
31:12 And they brought the captives, and the prey, and the spoil, unto Moses, and Eleazar the priest, and unto the congregation of the children of Israel, unto the camp at the plains of Moab, which are by Jordan near Jericho.
31:13 And Moses, and Eleazar the priest, and all the princes of the congregation, went forth to meet them without the camp.
31:14 And Moses was wroth with the officers of the host, with the captains over thousands, and captains over hundreds, which came from the battle.
31:15 And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive?
31:16 Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against the LORD in the matter of Peor, and there was a plague among the congregation of the LORD.
31:17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
31:18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

Hmm...sounds pretty freaky and fanatical to me. In fact, sounds downright genocidal, in addition to any squickiness about stealing away all of the virgin girls for sex slavery.

thanks by BokLM · 2005-12-23 01:31 · Score: 2, Informative

Many thanks to eucd.info and all the people who helped this. Without them, we would have DRM everywhere, p2p illegal (even for sharing free software or other free content), and free software would be illegal as well (as any software which does not respect DRM). Ok, maybe this is what will happen finally (that would be sad), but there is still hope ... Thoses people wanted a law that make DRM mandatory, hopefully we'll get a law that allow us to share music legally.

We'll see in January what happens ...

--
wtf.n0x.org

Slashdot Mirror

France to Legalize File Sharing

81 of 446 comments (clear)