Slashdot Mirror
French Three-Strikes Law Ruled Unconstitutional
An anonymous reader was one of several to write with this news: "The French 'Conseil Constitutionnel' just ruled that the recently voted 'Hadopi' law, which enforces a 'three strikes and you're out' system, is actually unconstitutional [article in French; here's an English-language article at Ars]. They mainly make two points: 1) They argue that removing Internet access is equivalent to hindering a person's freedom of speech, and as such can only be decided by appointed judges. This removes all punitive power from the administrative body supposed to enforce the three-strikes rule; all it can do now is warn you that 'they're watching you.' 2) When illegal filesharing is detected, users have to prove their innocence. This is obviously contrary to the constitutional principle of presumption of innocence."
With this and the Pirate Party winning and EU seat, great news. Bad week if you are trying to force your failing business model to stay relevant like the RIAA (Sony, Warner Bros, Universal, and EMI).
Sorry Big Media Companies (tm), find another (legal) way to protect your dying business model. Or, better yet, adapt to the new reality...
lets hope that (the world) takes this further and embraces the right to encrypted speech as well as free speech.
you know what I'm referring to. those that listen in, just because they're too bored or unable to find the real 'bad guys'.
if internet access is a 'right' then the ability to communicate without some 3rd party listening in should also be a right.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Yeah, unfortunately our three branches system lacks an entity charged with removing laws with no effect.
The courts won't do it. Congress doesn't care. The executive likes them because they can threaten people with them, or ruin someone's life with them, then drop the case before it gets to the court and is thrown out.
A fourth body, who job it was to review all laws, and propose a list each year (based on criteria like "law on the books for a decade with no convictions based on it" or similar) that would be automatically stripped from US code unless congress and the president specifically re-approved and re-signed them.
That should be one of congress's jobs, but they have no interest in spending time on "old business".
It doesn't hurt to be nice.