Slashdot Mirror
France Moving Forward on Legalized P2P
Romerican writes "Over a month ago, Slashdotters joked about France's efforts to legalize P2P. Originally dismissed as a trivial coup by a small group, the French government continues to entertain the topic. News.com is reporting the French Minister of Culture will advocate P2P as a flat-fee service." From the article: "The draft law, which originally aimed to tackle online piracy, is backed by consumer groups in France but heavily opposed by such companies as Vivendi Universal, which owns Universal Music, the world's biggest record company, and a stake in film and TV company NBC Universal. French cinema and music trading associations together with rock stars such as Johnny Hallyday have spoken out against the law, arguing it would kill their work. "
perhaps I am naive...
0xB315AA8D852DCD3F3DCA578FD2E0BF88
Free p2p sounds great and all, but what's to stop the fee collecting agency from discriminating against artists in the disbursement of the funds?
I think with all the contraversy about p2p -- I think want should be done is that the US government spend a couple million/billion and work with people in providing a free online libary and a free place where people can show off their work if they want. It would be considered P2P because that would be nessesary for that much storage and the government wouldnt have to buy tons and tons of servers because its p2p. Thoughts? I know it has flaws but I just thought of it. -Jonny
The length of a
I believe it has been stastistically shown (take that with as much salt as you like) that if everyone pays a flat fee, and Nielsen-box equivalents are used, the Entertainment Industry would actually make more money by allowing unlimited downloads via any medium than they get through current means.
In other words, well done the French.
We are French. Fuck you, Americans, I don't care!
So Hasselhoff was unavailable, then?
Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
It'd be tragic if truly free music ended up contributing to the cartels through p2p fee collection.
Man, you really need that seminar!
I get my music and movies for free right now. Why would anyone support this?
"Everything we're hearing from the government is that it won't happen," said Geraldine Moloney, a spokeswoman for the Motion Picture Association in Europe.
Being French, I don't see "legalize p2p" anywhere near...
In our northern province of Ontario, Canada. A few years back they decided that it was ok for women to go topless, as long as it wasnt sexual. Men can take off their shirts, so know women can too. Now of course the right-wingers were freaking out. We'd hear that these women would be walking through downtown with no shirts on.. and that the kids would be exposed to it. Not too mention the idea that all these women are going to be raped, not too mention the locusts. Now, none of this has come to pass. This is also the same rhetoric spwed over gay--marriage. Who cares?? Somehow they get all upset when they get married. Somehow they think that their rights are being violated. Not to mention the locuts, and that churches would be forced to marry these folks..Have I mentioned the Locusts ? We also have a system in place that allows the governement to collect a tax on blank cds.. (works out to maybe a nickel a cd maybe?). What that is supposed to do is go into the Canadian Musicians, that work hard to earn that. The idea is that they can go after copyrights here, because they are making some money there. There is another argumnet too be made about how little money the artists are making. The noises that the music industry is making because that is all they know. No matter how much you try to guide their hands they react out of the fear of the unknown. Maybe they need better terms in the contract over how the industry pays out these 'monthly' fees. Thats the big 'white elephant in the room' as it were. How do you determine the scale? Its a great idea, but thats what scares them. The idea of deciding who gets what is a big new thing. Of course the artist are afraid because tey think that they will get any of the money that will come from that. Anyone remember Courtney Love and her lawsuit?: She was filing after they got all that money from napster and others "in the name of the artists"? Nobody ever got dime. Did anyone see the locusts yet ?
I have mod points and I am not afraid to use them.
What happens when a normal company's business model no longer works due to new technology or social/economical changes? You adapt or go under. What happens when a massively powerful organization's business model starts to fail like the RIAA or MPAA (or whatever else their respective counterparts in other countries are called)? They sue the pants off as many people as it takes to stop the change. Well not only are they hindering the advancement of technology they are attacking their customer base. Remember what happened to Napster - they turned "legal" and started offering a pay-per service. That is called adaption, it is what makes companies stand out from the rest. Maybe this specific proposal going on in France is not the most ideal method to go about but it, but that is not why there is opposition to it. They are opposing it because it will remove power and influence and force these companies to adapt, or more hopefully go away. They are against the fundamental principals not the methods.
As for the argument of the artists losing money, etc. Well guess what, you're in the same boat. Adapt or learn a new skill. The internet is NOT going away any time soon and the entire purpose of the internet is to SHARE IDEAS. Guess what, your artwork is just an idea. If people want to share your idea with others then you should be glad, you are appreciated.
I don't mean to sound cruel as I am not NOT giving the bird to anyone who complains. I understand some people are losing money but it is not the fault of P2P. It is the people who are not paying for the product/service when they should be. If by some miracle P2P becomes extraordinarily unusable legally or technically, something else more grandios will emerge. Sharing stuff on the internet will never stop. Get used to it.
ZERO ZERO ONE ZERO ONE ZERO ONE ONE! Just brushing up for my next big invention: Ethernet over Voice (EoV)
Declaring certain protocols to be "illegal" is silly enough (just like the April Fool's joke of the "evil bit" and the CP80 project that requires labelling all p0rn traffic), but then they propose slapping a flat-fee on it, essentially saying, "We don't want you to do it, but we realize we can't stop you. So we'll at least try and make some money off you."
Ridiculous.
Understand the mechanics here: If engineered wrong this will simply translate into a tax on internet access for everyone under French jurisdiction, which would be paid to businesses big enough to claim they represent content creators and nothing paid to the actual content creators themselves.
For people who currently observe the law and do not download at all (or only download stuff the copyright owner has given away), this is a tax with no return.
It weakens the rights of authors and hands tax money to the publishers.
But follow me further, if you will: What happens if something like GPL'd software gets included in the definition of content that right now we think will only include songs and music? Would a French company be allowed to re-distribute GPL'd software in violation of the terms of the GPL by claiming this law frees them of the constraints of copyright?
Compulsory licenses are a threat to the Free Culture movement. Copyright is not the problem, copyright violators are the problem.
The thing about things we don't know is we often don't know we don't know them.
You don't frighten us, American pig-dogs! Go and boil your bottoms, son of a silly person! Ah blow my nose at you, so-called "RIAA"! You and all your silly American Record Industry Executives!!! Ay don' wanna talk to you no more, you empty-headed animal food-trough wiper! Ay fart in your general direction! Your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberries! Now, go away, or I shall taunt you a second time!
Most slashdotters feel that if they don't agree to the law then they don't have to follow it, now they don't have to feel guilty!
Why should they feel guilty if it's legal? Do you want people to use the law as a guide for their behavior or not?
Is stealing physical property going to be legalized next?
Of course not, because there are huge fundamental differences between physical property and intangible "property", and reasonable people know that the analogy between downloading music and stealing CDs (or any other physical property) is as far-fetched as the analogy between gay marriage and interspecies marriage.
If it ever becomes possible to "steal" a copy of a physical object, leaving the original in place, then your analogy would hold up - but then we'd have to ask ourselves what's so bad about making a copy of a car if the owner still gets to keep the original.
Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
We joked about France being cowards telling us we shouldn't go to Irak.
Reasons given by France were:
1) no links to Al-Quaeda or 9/11
2) it will cause havoc in the middle east and the rest of the world
3) WMDs aren't present like they used to
Today we still haven't found WMDs, it's clear that Bush and Co lied about Saddam Hussein's ties to Al-Quaeda and it did cause havoc and cost billions.
France now fights for people's rights to use the music they payed for in ways they should be free to do so. They also legitimise the use of the p2p technology rather than attempt to make it illegal like some senators in the US.
Sadly friends it seems the US is falling behind both on a freedom level and a moral level.
So to all those people with their surrender jokes that aren't funny I say at least France isn't selling it's soul. It remains true to Freedom. More so in actions than in speech.
Most slashdotters feel that if they don't agree to the law then they don't have to follow it
Don't most people feel that way? Judging by the amount of traffic tickets given out and the amount of people that pass me on the highway, I'd imagine they do.
French laws issue related to P2P are related at http://www.ratatum.com/ Check in particular http://www.ratiatum.com/news2755_DADVSI_remaniemen t_du_texte_vers_moins_de_sanctions.html
(in French, sorry)
Basically:
* Just before Chrismas, the government has attempted to vote a law allowing more sanction against P2P
* Some parlement members (both left&right) has decided to modify the law in a direction allowing P2P if a flat fee is paid by the user ("license globale")
* This modification has been voted
* The leader from both political party UMP (government) and PS (opposition) are against this modification of the law
* The goverment want to modify against the law, to remove what has been added in december and to ask the parlement to revote, but with less sanctions as before : 38 Euro in case of infrigement (~ 45$)
* Both side are trying to petition the public. In particular the media company are pushing the artist to says that "Allowing P2P will kill artistic creation"
Now, the debate around this law is very alive in French media, which is a good thing IMHO, because it will be very difficult to make a very restrictive laws.
The new law will contains also provisiond enforcing "fair use" (or "private copy" in French), i.e. to allow to bypass DRM to allow interop (between iTune and some MP3 players for example).
French rock singer, one of the best-selling french artists with Aznavour with around 200 million albums sold worldwide during his (nearly 50 years long now) career. As of 2005, he's cranked out 1000 songs, 400 tours (for ~25 millions spectators), 18 platinum albums and 1 diamond album. He also participated in 29 films and around 80 books have been written on him.
"The way we can tell it's C# instead of Haskell is because it's nine lines instead of two." -- wadler
So for the love of music and all things musical, go out and buy a massively DRM encumbered CD today! Better yet, buy two...for the alternative is unthinkable!
The advantage of buying two is that it provides a practical way for two people to listen to the music, at the same time! You could even give the second copy to a friend, so that they may listen to their copy whenever they like: but under no circumstances are you to listen to their copy! Your best bet is to bring your own copy with you, and listen to that. This serves two goals. First, it will drown out the sound of your friend's CD, to which you do not have access and which he is not permitted to use as a public exhibition. Second, it will allow you to hear the music to which you otherwise would not have access.
---GEC
I'm but the humble pupil, seeking to snatch the scratchbuilt pebble from the master's fully articulated hand
Under a system proposed by Harvard University Professor Terry Fisher:
l _downloads/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/02/01/free_lega
Laughing is good for you - so continue. In the meantime your missing something or perhaps I am , but it seems to me that while the RIAA are suing unborn babies in America (the land of the free), we still have the right to P2P here in France.
How many beans make five, anyhow ?