Slashdot Mirror
Free P2P In France?
cyberbian writes to tell us that earlier in the week the French Parliament voted to allow free sharing of music and movies on the Internet. This ruling puts them in direct conflict with both the Media companies and the rest of the French government. From the article: " If the amendment survives, France would be the first country to legalize so called peer-to-peer downloading, said Jean-Baptiste Soufron, legal counsel to the Association of Audionautes, a French group that defends people accused of improperly sharing music files. The law would be a blow to media companies that increasingly use the courts worldwide to sue people for downloading or sharing music and movie files. Entertainment companies such as Walt Disney Co., Viacom Inc. and News Corp.'s Fox say free downloading of unauthorized copies of TV shows and movies before they are released on DVD will cost them $5 billion in revenue this year."
It's a duplicate, same URL as before. I know because I saved the page from a few days ago.
This was the DADVSI bill that was supposed to turn free software into crime.
You have to admire an independent parliament!
"If the amendment survives, France would be the first country to legalize so called peer-to-peer downloading"
I was under the impression that it's already legal in Canada.
Or does Canada not count?
Same place BSA pulls its figure from. Out of its ass.
People will freely distribute Celine Dion songs without any fear of retribution.
Please please stop saying that P2P is illegal. P2P is legal everywhere, downloading/uploading copyrighted material is illegal.
By the way, stop using IP as an acronym for Intellectual Property, IP is Internet Protocol.
It is also important to note that among those so called pro P2P stand some of the most right winged politicians, namely Christine Boutin, known for her brain washed positions against abortion, homosexuality et al ... You would think of some better advocatee to defend freedom .
IMO this pro P2P stand is taken by a bunch of know nothings politician that just want the free exposure and a chance to look modern and up to date, as the majority of the population here is pro P2P. All this noise is a real shame too as you would think that after 2 weeks of urban riots these people would have some more important things to care about.
One good thing tho is that the actual "ministre de la culture" who is a total dick is in a real bad position now, being defeated by the left and right of the parliament.
Rest assure that the right wing government will promptly deal with this situation and burry the problem fast.
With that aggravating beauty, Lulu Walls.
Just to be precise : the 2 amendments voted are first steps towards the introduction of a global licence for download of video and musical content. People will be able to download content legally if they pay somehow for it. The next step should be to introduce a tax in the internet access fees in order to make the download fully legal.
BUT, that is if the amendements are really fully accepted. The government is trying to reverse the movement and cancel the amendments (the bill intended at first was supposed to forbid P2P and be a real pain in the a**). The debates should start over in mid january.
(Sorry, no english links to provide, everything I wrote is from french sites (ratiatum.com, liberation.fr))
... or not.
Poor babies. If they don't want me downloading movies before they are released to DVD (officially), then they need to release the damn things sooner.
I buy a lot of DVDs. I have a small shelf, four levels, full of DVDs, with a box filled with more DVDs right next to it. I despise movie theaters. I'm not going to one, except in very rare cases. But I will see the movie, regardless.
I can't wait for that company Morgan Freeman has founded to start operating. Downloads of movies released at the same time they are released to the theaters.
The MPAA and RIAA needs to accept the fact that they cannot ignore the internet or the consumer. They don't want to work with the internet, because they fear piracy. So either they won't release anything on the internet or they wrap it in obnoxious DRM and at low quality. And in doing that, they are directly responsible for most of the file trading. If the INDUCE Act ever becomes law, they will be its biggest offenders.
Only on
Seems bad, really bad... You can always break the law, as Heinlein once said: "But I will accept any rules that you feel necessary to your freedom. I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; If I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am responsible for everything I do." ("The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress", 1966). It's much harder to avoid paying a tax that's built into the price you pay for access to the web.
As I mentioned this morning on another story, the problem with illegal copying is that products are priced much higher than their true value. I was in France a couple of weeks ago and saw some fruit stands in Paris that worked based on customers' honesty. The fruit were in cardboard boxes on the sidewalk, you picked whatever you wanted and stepped into the store to pay. Are French people so honest that they will always pay the price? I don't think so. Although I wouldn't mind picking a few 500 euro bills from a box on the sidewalk and then step inside to write a check, no bank in France works the same way grocers do.
Each business must work according to the product being sold. What's so wrong about this bill in France is that they seem to be transfering the duties of the merchant to others. Jewelers in France must provide their own safes and break-proof glass showcases. Fruitstand vendors must keep an eye for people who walk away without paying. Yet the media industry want to transfer to the ISPs the chore of making sure that no one copies a song without paying...
For those that can't be bothered to RTFA, down the bottom you'll see:
"The amendment was approved 30 to 28, with 22 members of the UMP voting in favor. While there are 577 members of the lower house, few were present for last night's vote."
And if you look back up the article (obviously the author was trying to sensationalise this):
"The government can overturn the amendment, either by re- opening debate or if the Senate votes it down when the bill moves to the upper house. French Culture Minister Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres has asked that parliament re-open debate on the amendment today, Agence France Presse reported."
So only one-tenth of the house were present for the amendment. It seems like everyone else had gone home. 22 of the votes in favour were by a (what appears to be) minority party. As soon as parliament reconvenes, this will be gone. It's way too crazy/stupid/radical, I very much doubt the majority party want this, and you'd need a serious rebellion from that party in order to push this through.
It's not news so much as a political machination that happens all the time ("Quick! They're asleep! Slip in that amendment!")