Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

French Record Labels Go After Limewire, SourceForge

Posted by kdawson on from the lawyers-on-airplanes dept.

An anonymous reader notes that TorrentFreak is reporting: "French record labels have received the green light to sue four US-based companies that develop P2P applications, including the BitTorrent client Vuze, Limewire, and Morpheus. Shareaza is the fourth application, for which the labels are going after the open source development platform SourceForge. ... Putting aside the discussion on the responsibilities of application developers for their users activities, the decision to go after SourceForge for hosting a application that can potentially infringe, is stretching credibility beyond all bounds." SourceForge is Slashdot's corporate parent.

59 of 326 comments (clear)

  1. Juristiction? by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 5, Funny

    SPFF had already sued the various companies and organizations last year, but until now it has been unclear whether the US based companies behind the applications could be prosecuted under French law. A French court has now ruled that this is indeed possible, which means that they can proceed to court.

    How are non-french companies not operating in France (so far as I know) subject to French law?
    Someone should let them know that only America can get away with that.

    1. Re:Juristiction? by saihung · · Score: 5, Informative

      That would depend on France's conflict rules, which (unusually, if I remember correctly) are that the courts of France have jurisdiction over any matter harming a French national. You are broadly correct - in the USA or most other countries, the courts would likely NOT have jurisdiction over the case. But France is France. That doesn't mean that the defendant would be able to enforce the judgment though. A US court could examine the question of whether the French courts had jurisdiction over the matter before agreeing to enforce the judgment, and that probably wouldn't fly.

    2. Re:Juristiction? by Xenographic · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I just hope there are no French people who have contributed code to Shareza. I wouldn't put it past them to go looking for someone with any sort of connection to the project at all to hold accountable for the entire thing...

      Then again, maybe French law is different in that regard, but these crazy litigants all seem to be the same about doing that sort of thing, no matter what country they're suing from.

    3. Re:Juristiction? by lysergic.acid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      that's because stupid is contagious. it's no big secret that other countries emulate the U.S. culture is our greatest export, and so what happens in the U.S. becomes a precedent for other nations. unfortunately, this also includes our political/legal culture.

      the U.S. passed the DMCA in 1998, and soon other countries started getting their own DMCA-analogs. so it shouldn't be surprising the RIAA's legal shenanigans are being copied by their foreign counterparts. that's globalization for you.

    4. Re:Juristiction? by sumdumass · · Score: 4, Informative

      You really need to look past your ignorance. The DMCA was required by WIPO treaty and as an extension to part of the berne convention as changed to allow the US to ratify it (which BTW, caused the copyright extensions).

      The US didn't create the DMCA out of nothing. It was literally response to a treaty that all of Europe and other countries signed on to before we made the DMCA. The DMCA goes beyond the treaty a little but the meat is the same as the treaty requirements. The other countries creating their own DMCA are doing it for the same reason's the US did and that is because of treaty obligations.

      Now you can claim that RIAA influenced the treaty and so on, this might be true, The recording industry was responsable for implementations of other treaties which more or less made Phonographs, tapes and CDs compatible across country borders which I would think most people see as a good thing.

      Something else about the WIPO treaties, there are portions of them that basically say if the law in one land doesn't address something in the treaty, then the law of the aggrieved land can prevail. This will give France's court Jurisdiction over an American country just like it gives the US courts jurisdiction (including extradition rights) over other countries when violations occur that aren't violations in the other land. If France can pin the Source Forge action to a treaty, a US court must honor it unless the Supreme court finds something unconstitutional in some way. I suggest you look into the treaties we are obligated to if you actually want to effect any meaningful changes instead of blaming the wrong people. You can charge windmills all you want and probably never see changes in what your railing about because you don't understand the concept behind it.

    5. Re:Juristiction? by Gorgonzolanoid · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think you're wrong about one point: AFAIK US courts, according to US law, DO have jurisdiction over foreign nationals for acts committed on foreign ground, as soon as US citizens or companies are affected (as alleged victims).
      There was even some dismay in the news media here in Europe when the US adapted a law allowing US Marshals to arrest (read "kidnap") foreign nationals abroad to drag them before US courts. I don't remember what period that was exactly, but it's at least 10 years ago.

    6. Re:Juristiction? by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Informative

      The US didn't create the DMCA out of nothing. It was literally response to a treaty that all of Europe and other countries signed on to before we made the DMCA.

      LoL
      Yes, the USA created the DMCA out of nothing.

      Clinton formed a working group under a guy named Lehman,
      BUT, there was resistance in the USA to the anti-circumvention recommendation.
      In response, Lehman took a shortcut through WIPO and a bad international treaty obligation was born.

      As a result, the USA had to harmonize* the law with their treaty obligation.
      The real tragedy is that because the US didn't want to pass the law in the first place,
      everyone has to modify their copyright law.

      *sometimes this is good and sometimes this is bad. It is rarely good when it is used to shove an unpopular law through your country's backdoor.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    7. Re:Juristiction? by dbIII · · Score: 4, Insightful
      OK - so you are seriously suggesting Europe is to be blamed for some weird broken US IP laws inspired by Mickey Mouse and submitted by Sonny Bono? It is such a weird situation that people can easily remember such things instead of convenient revisionism a decade or two later.

      Nice urban myth you've got there, but it's not going to work on anybody over thirty or anyone of any age that has paid attention to the subject. Your IP laws are your nations own fault and even those countries that accepted them (eg. a watered down version implemented in Australia as part of a condition for a "free trade" agreement) could have chosen not to so they are also responsible for their own IP laws.

    8. Re:Juristiction? by bersl2 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Speaking of Berne, let's not forget that the French were the ones who pushed hardest for that treaty in the first place. So thanks a whole lot for the shitty version of copyright.

    9. Re:Juristiction? by Smauler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Non-french companies not operating in France are not subject to French Law. However, these companies are operating in France, if there are customers in France.

      Imagine a situation in which Massive company no. 1, based in Canada, supplies all of the US's need for one thing. Massive company no. 2, based in the US, supplies all of Canada's needs for the same thing. Why on earth should Canadian legislation apply to exclusively to company 1, and US legislation exclusively to company 2?

      Bottom line - I think if you want to do business in our country, you follow our rules, end of. And no, I'm not French.

    10. Re:Juristiction? by sumdumass · · Score: 3, Informative

      Bruce Lehman was the Assistant Secretary of Commerce and Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks under Bill Clinton. Clinton did form a working group but it didn't submit any laws until after WIPO. And yes, because of his positions in the Clinton administration, Lehman would have have direct input in the WIPO treaties, he did serve as the chair of the Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights, and so on. The WGIPR did nothing but submit reports for revew within the group's parent structure.

      Then in 96, the WIPO organization met and came away with two treaties requiring the DMCA to be corrected. These treaties were the "WIPO Copyright Treaty" and the "WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty," which were adopted by consensus by over 150 countries. A goof portion of the DMCA, especially title one and two, comes directly out of the WIPO treaties and over 150 countries are required to make the same laws.

      You should look at the report they put forward. (PDF warning) In which they recomend a general structure and highlight points that should change. If you look at the recommendations portion, you will see that the terms of the WIPO as well as the DMCA are only similar in spirit but the real meaty portions of the DMCA aren't really there. By Meat, I mean the stiff penalties and so on.

    11. Re:Juristiction? by sumdumass · · Score: 2, Insightful

      OK - so you are seriously suggesting Europe is to be blamed for some weird broken US IP laws inspired by Mickey Mouse and submitted by Sonny Bono? It is such a weird situation that people can easily remember such things instead of convenient revisionism a decade or two later.

      NO, I'm seriously suggesting that Europe is just as much to blame for a treaty that require DMCA like laws be put in place. The So called weird broken US IP laws inspired by Mickey Mouse and submitted by Sonny Bono was actually inspired by Bill Clinton, Bruce legman and two WIPO treaties that 150 of countries signed on to. In fact, Title one and two of the DMCA was almost word for word of the two treaties. Perhaps you should learn a little about what you think your talking about before demonstrating how ignorant you really are. BTW, I'm over 30 myself so I'm not sure what the hell you think Age has to do with things unless your thinking your slipping into senility.

      Your IP laws are your nations own fault and even those countries that accepted them (eg. a watered down version implemented in Australia as part of a condition for a "free trade" agreement) could have chosen not to so they are also responsible for their own IP laws.

      My god, a simply Google search for History of the DMCA would have told you different. Let me guess, You were burnt by Wikipedia and your favorite Bashing site again. Most people would learn but go ahead and take your time, you might get a clue before it's too late.

    12. Re:Juristiction? by djmurdoch · · Score: 4, Informative

      two WIPO treaties that 150 of countries signed on to.

      Which treaties are you talking about? The relevant one is the Copyright Treaty, and only 68 countries have ratified it. Another 26 or so have signed it but not ratified it, which means it's not in force in those countries. (Of the G8, only the US and Japan are among the ratifiers.)

      The signature on the treaty is used as an excuse by the proponents of it to say that countries have international obligations to put a DMCA-like law in place, but it doesn't mean that at all. The signature is a general sign of support for it, but it implies no legal obligations.

    13. Re:Juristiction? by Ash-Fox · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think it's quite reasonable for the French to want to protect this multi-trillion dollar industry. I mean, where would we be without all that great French music from companies like

      Like Vivendi, which own,

      • A&M Records
      • Barclay Records
      • Decca Records
      • Deutsche Grammophon
      • DreamWorks Records
      • Geffen Records
      • Hollywood Records1
      • Interscope Records
        • G-Unit Records
        • Vagrant Records2

        • Island Def Jam Records

        • MySpace Records
        • Island Records
        • MO Records (Montreal)
      • Jazzland Records
      • Lost Highway Records
      • MCA Nashville Records
      • Mercury Nashville Records
      • Mercury Records
      • Motor Music Records
      • Polydor
      • Philips Records
      • Stockholm Records
      • Triple Crown Records
      • Universal Classics Group
      • Universal Motown Records Group
      • Universal Music Group Nashville
        • Universal Records
        • Universal South Records
        • Blackground Records
        • Motown Records
        • Republic Records
        • Cash Money Records
        • Bad Boy Records
        • Casablanca Records
        • Street Records Corporation
        • Univision Music Records
        • Urban Records
        • Verve Records
      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    14. Re:Juristiction? by djmurdoch · · Score: 2, Informative

      1. Less than 100 countries signed onto either of those treaties. The page you refer to says they were adopted "by consensus", but that doesn't imply any countries signed onto them. It just says that at some WIPO meeting they were adopted by consensus.

      2. The page you referred to says:

      Both Congress and the Clinton Administration used these international treaties as an excuse for passing a broad, sweeping changes to U.S. copyright laws that were urged by the entertainment industry , despite the fact that such changes to U.S. copyright law were not required by the treaties themselves.

      This contradicts your main point, which was that the WCT and WPPT obligated the US to pass the DMCA. No, the DMCA was passed because lobbyists convinced your government to pass it. It's a US invention.

    15. Re:Juristiction? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Depending on their profile, they may or may not ever see a court."

      So, it is "USA - the most advanced country in the world, the country of freedom and laws making everyone feel safe...unless is does not suit somebody"?

      And instead of "In Europe, nobody is sentenced without a due process", it should be actually "In Europe, nobody is sentenced without a due process unless it does not suit the Americans?"

      Exactly, because we're currently a superpower and we can get away with it. And when we're not, when someone else takes the top dog position (maybe China, who knows) then they'll get to behave the same way. And believe me ... they will. Just ask the Soviets how they treated people from other countries when they were a superpower. It's just human nature and all that.

      Some of you seem to think that international politics is some kind of a popularity contest, where the nicest country wins. In reality, it's exactly the opposite.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    16. Re:Juristiction? by sumdumass · · Score: 3, Insightful

      look past my ignorance? well, aside from the fact that i prefer to identify and remedy my own ignorance rather than looking past it, i don't think i'm the ignorant one here.

      The WIPO organization created the treaty before the US created the laws. WIPO is an international organization that consist of many other countries who would have had a say in the treaty. Currently, there are 184 member countries.

      The idea that the US is forcing something onto other countries who had a full say in the treaties that they signed on to as well as the US laws being made after words is nothing but ignorance. That's like saying if I asked you if you wanted to watch some movies, then I asked you what movies you wanted to watch, then when your watching them, you attempt to claim I forced you to watch the movies you picked just because I got them from the video store first.

      And no, it doesn't matter if the same industry insiders were promoting their agenda, it still doesn't mean that anyone pushed anything on a sovereign nation and I seriously don't think that Mickey Mouse held 150 countries at gun point and said make this treaty and sign this law. The signatory countries negotiated on their own behalf and found enough common ground that they felt comfortable enough with the treaties that they signed on or signed their intent to sign on.

      BTW, what legal president have we set? I'm interested in hearing how based in reality you really are.

    17. Re:Juristiction? by HiThere · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The DMCA is an evil law. It may have not evil applications, but they appear to be in the vast minority. That it would be such a law was predicted before it was passed.

      I've seen the way the US implements treaties. The US only implements treaties to the extent that the government wants to. The DMCA goes far beyond what the treaty requires, and is probably, in a logical system, unconstitutional. (Granted the constitution is too vague to form a complete specification as a logical basis. Many terms are undefined, and much is presumed as common knowledge...including much that is no longer common knowledge. Still, this seems to clearly be a law regulating speech or the press.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    18. Re:Juristiction? by carou · · Score: 3, Informative

      just look at all the $country's Got Talent spin-offs that were launched after the success of American Idol.

      Ah yes, American Idol, 2002, spin-off of the popular British series, Pop Idol, 2001.

      If America's biggest export is culture, then its biggest import is credit for other people's ideas.

    19. Re:Juristiction? by djmurdoch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What did is say, the treaty enabled Clinton to pass sweeping changed to copyright law.

      I think you should read your own post, difficult as that may be. "Required" is stronger than "enabled". Even "enabled" is stronger than the page you cited, according to which "was used as an excuse" is more accurate.

  2. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  3. Cool! by zmollusc · · Score: 5, Funny

    I hope they go after those evil, piracy-enabling, hard disk manufacturers next.

    --
    They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
    1. Re:Cool! by Arimus · · Score: 4, Funny

      No, they need to go after the evil people who produce the silcon used in chips, no wait - add the mining companies who mine the metals used, the oil companies for the oils used to make plastics, for producing the stuff in the first place for us to find it and (ab)use it.

      --
      --- Users are like bacteria -> Each one causing a thousand tiny crises until the host finally gives up and dies.
    2. Re:Cool! by MrNaz · · Score: 5, Funny

      You're not seeing the real force behind the evilness here. They need to sue monkeys for evolving into humans who would then go on to commit copyright infringement. Damn those tree-dwelling purveyors of immorality!

      --
      I hate printers.
    3. Re:Cool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Humans did not evolve from monkeys. Humans and monkeys evolved from a common ancestor. We're their distant cousins, not their children.

    4. Re:Cool! by eddyk · · Score: 3, Informative

      Already done. In France there is a special tax on hard disks (and CD, DVD,..) to pay for private copies ! (Even if you don't use your hard disk for music...)

    5. Re:Cool! by Gorgonzolanoid · · Score: 2, Funny

      Absolutely! Who needs a terabyte of storage at home, if not for illegal purposes?
      640K should be enough for anyone, even Gates already knew that in '81.

    6. Re:Cool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This just reveals how poor the knowledge of everything open source, and of IT itself is among the french top-rankings. As a french citizen, I'm ashamed of that clueless, inquisitorial attack. I just hope the french judges (who are often as IT-ignorant, but more open-minded and impervious to big companies pressure) will realize how ridiculous the grounds of the complaint are.

  4. Pricks by kramulous · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This scares me a little. I mean, we should sue the gun makers because guns kill people. We should sue the ore miners because they produce the steel that is used in the guns.

    If the French have such a problem with P2P why don't they just block it at the ISP level? Why go after the FOSS developers who just write a program? Because you can't possibly blame the citizens who breach copyright.

    This is coming from a country that were happy to set off nukes in the pacific because they didn't what to bow to international pressure. Pricks.

    --
    .
    1. Re:Pricks by KDR_11k · · Score: 4, Funny

      Meh, just specify that all copyrighted works must be flagged with the Evil Bit.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    2. Re:Pricks by HuguesT · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hello,

      Actually the HADOPI proposed law, which I think is the one you are referring to, has only gone through French Senate for a first reading, but this only means the deputies' Assembly can now vote on it, which is scheduled for early 2009. Then assuming it goes through it must go back to the senate, then to the constitutional council and finally be published for it to become law.

      HADOPI is a broad permission and obligation for ISPs to cut off internet access for a set time if users are caught sharing "illegally".

      Already there are problems with this proposed law as it is contrary to European rights, in particular rights to access to communications. According to European principles, people cannot have their internet access cut off without a proper trial.

      In addition I think technically it will not work as expected, and the results will be unmitigated disasters for all parties involved. I can't wait until deputies and senators have their internet access cut off by some automated script.

    3. Re:Pricks by bahstid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A little aghast as to the fact that you got an insightful mod for this.

      This scares me a little. I mean, we should sue the gun makers because guns kill people. We should sue the ore miners because they produce the steel that is used in the guns.

      Yes, I agree 100%

      But

      If the French have such a problem with P2P why don't they just block it at the ISP level? Why go after the FOSS developers who just write a program? Because you can't possibly blame the citizens who breach copyright.

      How do you get to equate "French Record Companies" with "the French"? For the next story about RIAA shenanigans, are we all supposed to come troll about "the Americans" being nuts.

      This is coming from a country that were happy to set off nukes in the pacific because they didn't what to bow to international pressure. Pricks.

      Yes? Nuclear tests bring me no joy either, but do we get get to rant about Hiroshima on RIAA threads??? wtf? or considering your barb about international pressure, are you trying to tell us that almost 100000 civilian deaths are somehow connected to the RIAA, or even most of "the Americans"???

  5. Enlightenment? by imroy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Once again the Enightenment category/icon is misused on a Slashdot story.

    I guess it goes to show how long Slashdot has been around, that it has a category for the Enlightenment window manager. And how certain software packages can come and go. But I hear that E is being used on mobile phones now...

    1. Re:Enlightenment? by Osty · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Once again the Enightenment category/icon is misused on a Slashdot story.

      Not Slashdot. KDawson. He's the only one who keeps using the category incorrectly.

  6. Why stop with SourceForge by isBandGeek() · · Score: 5, Funny

    They should sue Google for not censoring results to sites that host P2P applications.

    Then they should target ISPs for not blocking access to Google and all the other "infringing" sites.

    And while they're at it, sue Slashdot for talking about this.

    1. Re:Why stop with SourceForge by Walpurgiss · · Score: 2, Funny

      Of course! Printers already are programmed to not print US legal tender, and to include identifiable codes in all things printed for tracebacks, why can't keyboards and mice be made to refuse input of anything covered by copyright?

    2. Re:Why stop with SourceForge by El_Muerte_TDS · · Score: 2, Informative

      And while they're at it, sue Slashdot for talking about this.

      /. is owned by SourceForge inc., so that's aready covered.

  7. Re:And Blame Microsoft in... by retech · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ok, but just out of boredom. I can easily see Balmer shouting: "développeurs, développeurs, développeurs!"

  8. Re:Good luck .. by Hansu · · Score: 4, Funny

    If US won't do as we tell you, we mobilize our mighty war machines and invade your puny little country. Just like we did with.. ehm... just like... umm...

    Ahem, never mind.

    --
    .signature: Command not found
  9. Re:Overlord? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's a conspiracy involving CmdrTaco, CowboyNeal, SourceForge, the French government and the Illuminati. I'd tell you more, but I've probably said too much already.

    Posted AC for the obvious reasons.

  10. Re:Overlord? by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yes. Yes of course... It, it all makes sense now! The single user that has posted the most comments on slashdot: Anonymous Coward!. He's involved in this. No, wait, he is this! This whole "conspiracy" is just one of his mind games to increase ad revenue and developer mind share. No one is really suing Sourceforge, except Sourceforge itself!. Also the french nation is a proxy for Sourceforge. Their crazy laws are just more of his humor. Like troll here on slashdot, but funnier because it actually effects people's lives.

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
  11. Long story short... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The French courts ruled that the French record labels have the legal right to make stupid lawsuits. Duh.

    It does not mean that the French court system agrees that SourceForge should be tried, it does not mean that SourceForge will be found guilty, and it does not mean that even if they ARE found guilty that it would actually mean anything. (Good luck trying to enforce a ruling made in France, over a company not there.)

    My guess is that the French courts are rolling their eyes over the thought of having to hear these cases out. They basically said "yes yes, technically you're right, we have to hear these cases too, however stupid they may be. "

  12. Re:Good luck .. by Walpurgiss · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I believe the territory you are looking for is most of Europe.

    Of course, that was quite some time ago, only 30 years or so after the US became a separate country.

  13. What will happen? by w0mprat · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So the french MafRIAA think they are merely suing a software download host?

    What they are doing is prodding the FOSS community in the ribs with a stick, which is likely to make it angry. This is not a good idea.

    --
    After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
  14. computer and electric companies, etc by _Shorty-dammit · · Score: 2

    Why aren't they suing the computer and electric companies, too? The programs all need computers to run on. The computers all need electricity to run on. And how about suing the schools/books/etc where the programmers learned their programming skills? Obviously they should be suing them, too. And the elementary schools and even their own parents for helping them learn to speak a language that allowed them to communicate in the first place. If they couldn't communicate, they wouldn't have been able to learn any of the skills they needed to write those programs. Evil song-stealing parents!

  15. Stretching credibility? Not in France. by Gorgonzolanoid · · Score: 5, Informative

    In France, using encryption has long been illegal. I believe even SSL connections weren't allowed until the law changed in 1999.
    So I wouldn't call this "stretching credibility", it's just on par for the course in that country where the government clearly doesn't have a clue about IT.

    Worse, they're learning about IT - from the media mafia. For example, a year ago there were voices calling out for a complete internet ban for whoever is caught sharing a file, enforcing ISP's to act as police, attorney, jury and judge. Who came up with that idea? The IFPI. Who fell for it? The government.

  16. Re:Good luck .. by techno-vampire · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes. Thirty years after the US became a separate country with the help of France.

    --
    Good, inexpensive web hosting
  17. This must be handled in the French way! by Heddahenrik · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Whenever a stupid (or actually it's mostly about a smart) law is passed in France, they start to block freeways and throw stuff at the ones responsible (and some others).

    So now it's up to the French to DOS http://www.sppf.com/ and raise their voice!

  18. Problem is French lawmakers not having a clue by loopkin · · Score: 2, Informative

    The thing is the French political system is built only on ideas, not people (politicians). As such, there is right wing party, left wing party... but most of our politicians are professional bureaucrats (and the rest are professional politicians, often with a lawyer background). Very very few of our politicians have a clue on science (i mean physics, medicine, ...) in general, let alone IT.
    All this gives a pretty one-sided view on a lot of problems, "culture"-related issues being one of them.
    About these stupid laws TFA is referring to, the worst is yet to come: a new big law (nicknamed Hadopi) is about to pass, as well as new ISP rules (they want ISPs to filter everything, using such wonderful technologies as DNS blacklisting). And you know what, most of these topics are handled by our culture minister, which, as a job reference, is the former director of the Versailles Palace museum.
    But the worst part is that they will sell the ideals of the French Revolution to pure incompetence, helped by our undemocratic mass media system.

    Well, thanks god, everybody in France know that freedom and human rights problems are only in Iran, China, Russia and Guantanamo...

  19. Re:the usa does plenty wrong in this world by Haeleth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Perhaps if the US had not spent the last 8 years riding roughshod over human rights a basic legality you might have a point.

    So, to repeat your argument:

    1. The USA has spent 8 years riding roughshod over human rights
    2. ????
    3. PROFI^H^H^H^H^H Therefore, the USA is to blame for every aspect of French law

    I think you might want to work a little on filling that gap.

  20. "Backdoor" by Mathinker · · Score: 2, Funny

    > It is rarely good when it is used to shove an unpopular law through your country's backdoor.

    "Backdoor"? Is that what they're calling it now on Slashdot???

  21. The *French* recording companies suing P2P apps? by fgaliegue · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just a question, has any of you ever downloaded any French music in your lifetime?

    People can't be that stupid, can they?

  22. Three strikes file sharing law nearly there by horza · · Score: 2, Informative

    The French Senate has already passed the law banning people from the Internet if they are caught sharing files with each other. It now just one final vote in the National Assembly before it becomes law.

    Phillip.

    --
    Property for sale in Nice, France
  23. So, where are the price fixing lawsuits? by zogger · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It is illegal for companies to collude to fix prices, to keep them artificially high, the recent LCD screen manufacturers article is an example. Digital copies of music and movies and so on can be made by the billions for relatively cheap. No matter their upfront cost, even if it is 100 million dollars or whatever, copies of that can still be produced for micropennies at most. So,where in the legal market are the really cheap digital copies for sale?

      It seems to be beyond obvious there is a "gentleman's agreement" across the entertainment industry, internationally, to keep prices artificially high, to maintain some vague "per unit" profit margin at the serious price gouging thousands of percent markup level, and extremely so for these contentious digital copies. When are all these governments going to address that, and where is a consumer advocate organization that would push for such investigations?

      Perhaps there wouldn't be so much alleged piracy if the market regulations were enforced across the board more fairly and consumers had a place to legally get a copy of some song for a penny or two, which is beyond what it would cost to have a server serve you a copy. Even a nickle a song would be more than adequate, this 99 cents or whatever for example at itunes is still outrageously high. Why haven't prices dropped right along with technological advances, like you expect to see in every single other industry?

      If they came out with the Mr. Fusion unit, and everyone knew that electric power was now ridiculously cheap to produce, would consumers still be forced to pay a dime to a quarter per kilowatt hour, just because that is what the electric companies used to get "per unit" pre Mr. Fusion?

    Maybe we need a consumers "per megabyte" law, or define price gouging better, where there is a cap on how much some company can charge for transferring a megabyte of 1s and 0s, and that charge reflected technological and engineering reality, with a good enough profit margin, call it 100% markup over cost of serving. That would still be loads cheaper than what is out there now "legally", and what business could really argue that a 100% markup wasn't enough? And if that causes changes to the entire entertainment industry stack, well, too bad, that's the reality of technological change. Everyone else on the planet in every other possible form gets to deal with that as regards their job, so why are these entertainment people "special" and get to stay legally locked into mid 20th century pricing models, no matter engineering changes, at the point of the government's gun?

  24. Symptoms of a bigger problem by symbolset · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Copyright was created as a bridge between creators and the market to promote progress. It has mutated into a troll that prevents progress. Copyright is now a monster that must be slain.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
    1. Re:Symptoms of a bigger problem by ScrewMaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Copyright was created as a bridge between creators and the market to promote progress. It has mutated into a troll that prevents progress. Copyright is now a monster that must be slain.

      Well, there's not much question that the big media companies are little more than international rogue organizations. They're causing damage to legal systems, corporations and individuals around the world. At some point, there are going to have to be international treaties banning such "industry trade organizations", at least the kind that like to sue everyone and corrupt governments.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  25. Re:Jurisdiction? (there, fixed that typo) by djmurdoch · · Score: 2, Informative

    Thanks for fixing the typo.

    I'm Canadian. We have more or less the same movies and music available as in the USA, and no DMCA, though there have been a couple of attempts to pass one. (Canada signed the WCT, but has not ratified it). The Canada-US trading relationship is still the largest bilateral trading relationship in the world.

    So the repercussions of not having a DMCA are at least not immediate.

    Duncan

  26. Yahoo Vs. France by ducomputergeek · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Didn't Yahoo go before the 9th circuit of appeals about 10 years ago and get a ruling that a US company need not know or comply with all the laws of other countries if they are operating a business out of the US and designed for a US audience?

    --
    "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
  27. Next target: Microsoft and Apple? by Hotawa+Hawk-eye · · Score: 2, Insightful

    After all, both Windows and OS X allow users to share files across a network. Hmm ... French equivalent of the RIAA versus Microsoft. Who to root for?