Slashdot Mirror
EU Considering Regulating Video Bloggers
Aglassis writes to tell us that recent proposed EU legislation could require anyone running a website featuring video content to acquire a broadcast license. From the article: "Personal websites would have to be licensed as a "television-like service". Once again the reasoning behind such legislation is said to be in order to set minimum standards on areas such as hate speech and the protection of children. In reality this directive would do nothing to protect children or prevent hate speech - unless you judge protecting children to be denying them access to anything that is not government regulated or you assume hate speech to be the criticism of government actions and policy."
I, for one, am grateful to the EU for characterizing the undesirability of the ueber-state.
It's one of those differences between what was said and what was meant.
Marx said "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."
As distorted by time and human nature, this has become "If I can't have it, neither can you."
Modulo the northeast, I think the rest of the US grasps that we don't want to follow in the footsteps of Eurabia.
Yeah, that works just fine for me. OR, you could post your anti-US government rants in one of the innumerable discussions on Slashdot about bad US policies.
By your tone, you'd think that Slashdot was a haven for anti-EU propaganda, when in truth this site far more frequently demonstrates a distrust of the US government and distaste for many of its policies (especially in terms of violations of the Bill of Rights).
Again, though, you're right. You should definitely just shed a tear, turn off your PC and refuse to discuss things with we meanies here on the US-based Slashdot. Perhaps you could cry on the shoulders of a webmaster of a
Bush is Hitler
0 &ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozill a:en-US:official
Haven't seen it? You haven't searched it!
http://www.google.com/search?q=Heil+Bush&start=
I have nothing to say.
As a foreign national living in the USA, it obviously concerns me a lot more than your average slashdotter, but the language of who this bill affects is sufficiently vague as to probably include US citizens as well.
Two points: as long as you don't take part in acts of agression against our country, you're safe. If you're planning on taking part in those things, please leave, and quit bitching about your "rights".
Second, the bill doesn't trump the Constitution, it just points out that foreign enemies don't get the benefit of the Constitution. Nothing in it applies to American citizens, unless they first renounce their citizenship and take up arms against the country.
This isn't the end of the world, not by a long shot. Quit being such a cry-baby.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
What a load of horseshit. The only people this affects are people who were captured actively plotting or engaged in warfare against the United States, its armed forces and or its allies. Why the fuck you idiots are so dead set on protecting their rights, and think its some kind of slippery slope to let us do what we need to do to protect the country and other free societies from those whose stated objective is the wholesale slaughter of you, your family, and even your dog if it came down to it, is completely beyond me or anyone else with two synapses to rub together.
What a load of turd
1.They were not captured on a battlefield, they were often kidnapped and sold to the US by Northern Alliance.
2. Lets see the declaration of war from your congress- ah there isnt one
3. And the US does not abide by the Geneva convention, see Guantanamo Bay
You sir are a Dickhead