Slashdot Mirror
EU Rejects Law To Cut Pirates Off From Their ISP
MJackson writes "Europe has rejected plans to allow ISPs to disconnect users suspected of involvement with illegal file-sharing. In its final vote, the European Parliament chose to retain amendment 46 (138) of the new Telecoms Package by a majority of 407 to 57. Amendment 46 states that restrictions to the fundamental rights and freedoms of Internet users can only be put in place after a decision by judicial authorities. However, network neutrality remains unprotected."
As far as I'm aware it's not "illegal" to share files. It may breach someone's copyright, but it's not "illegal".
If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
On another note:
"Amendment 138 adopted: internet access is a fundamental right "
http://www.blackouteurope.eu/
It's not only an American thing. We've got the same in Italy, Europe. Check Article 27 at http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Italy
The defendant is not considered guilty until final judgment is passed.
I expect every democratic county to have the same statement in its constitutional chart even if governments (US included) sometimes find ways to work around those principles.
There is no "right" to internet access
Er...
restrictions to the fundamental rights and freedoms of Internet users can only be put in place after a decision by judicial authorities.
Fail at reading comprehension much?
Nick
Not another person banging on about Magna Carta. MC simply gave the barons a right to challenge the authority of the king, a damn good step in the right direction I'll grant you, but the peasants and middling-sort were still pretty much screwed until the plague more or less wiped half the work force of England off the map! It allowed the surfs to finally tell their landlords to get stuffed and get decent conditions and pay.
MC was an important step towards the ideas of democracy, but it wasn't until people like Thomas Payne finally started to lay ideas down that later formed the US constitution, that democracy and all it's attendant "interests", started to look like something that people could finally attain.
"Innocent until proven guilty" is not an American concept. America's legal system was derived wholesale from the British legal system. The criminal burden of proof was established long before America was even its own country.
This does not mean that a government has to provide internet access. It implies the inverse: that a government (see for example, French "HADOPI" law) or third party cannot terminate your internet access on the suspicion that you are infringing copyright, without legal recourse and due process. Seems quite reasonable...
American legal scholars, at least, claim that presumption of innocence was an established concept in ancient Rome, ancient Greece, and in the Old Testament (in addition to its present in England).
The EU human rights act has a number of fundamental rights built into it. Of course being the EU it isn't anywhere near as succinct as the earlier documents such as the US constitution.
Life, Liberty and the pursit of Happiness would be written as,
"Article 2, Article 6, and the pursuit of Article 9" (there's no reference to happiness in the HRA, but "Right to marry and right to found a family" is close enough).
source: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf
In holland, speed limits HAVE been re-adjusted several times. Raised to 120 a while ago, and then adjusted again to suit local circumstances.
Drugs laws? Well they to have changed as the times have changed.
Your argument, it is made of fail and lose.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
We're talking about private entities cutting off users of their services, not about the government doing so. Obviously I'm against the latter. Yeesh...
So you're not stupid, just blissfully ignorant. Great. Let me give you the brief summary of the French HADOPI law which is the reason this is a hot EU topic: The french MAFIAA accuse you of copyright infringement. Guilty until proven innocent. Three strikes, then the ISP is instructed by the government to cut you off. The ISP never needed a law, they have their terms of service which contains a million reason to terminate service including none at all.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
We're talking about private entities cutting off users of their services, not about the government doing so.
So if the government tells an ISP to cut someone off (by passing one of those, you know, law thingies), and the ISP does it (because it's the law), then you're claiming that it's not really the government doing it?
What colour is the sky in your world?
HADOPI-like laws will be banned thanks to a different amendment:
http://www.blackouteurope.eu/blog/amendment-13846-adopted-again.-internet-is-a-fundamental-right-in-europe..html
(thanks for think_nix)
Those who would give up liberty to obtain working drivers, deserve neither liberty nor working drivers.
Actually, piracy has long been used to refer to copyright (and patent) infringement. "Long" as in, long before the RIAA existed. Look it up.
If you don't like Wikipedia, here are historical examples from the OED:
1654 J. MENNES Recreation for Ingenious Head-peeces clxxvi, All the wealth, Of wit and learning, not by stealth, Or Piracy, but purchase got.]
1700 E. WARD Journey to Hell II. vii. 14 Piracy, Piracy, they cry'd aloud, What made you print my Copy, Sir, says one, You're a meer Knave, 'tis very basely done.
1770 P. LUCKOMBE Conc. Hist. Printing 76 They..would suffer by this act of piracy, since it was likely to prove a very bad edition.
1855 D. BREWSTER Mem. Life I. Newton (new ed.) I. iv. 71 With the view of securing his invention of the telescope from foreign piracy.
1886 Cent. Mag. Feb. 629/1 That there are many publishers who despise such piracy..does not remove the presumption that publishers and papermakers have been influential opponents of an equitable arrangement.
Sorry to burst your bubble.
"Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
Yes, it's an American concept, just like, say, democracy, or the separation of powers!
We're so glad we've got you, America!
(On a less snarky note, there's many great things that the USA contributed to the world, but you're making a fool out of yourself if you assume that anything and everything that's good, or even anything and everything that's a cornerstone of US-American society today, was actually thought up first by the USA or by US-Americans.)
America was its own country, long before it was invaded by europeans.
While North America definitely was there before it was invaded by Europeans, there wasn't a single country or state called "America", or anything similar under a different name, before Europeans established one. A bunch of independent nomadic tribes spread over a large territory and constantly quarreling between each other, with no higher authority, does not make a country.
No, it wasn't. Native Americans were divided in tribes. They didn't even have the concept of land ownership, let alone of nation states. Talk about not knowing history!