Slashdot Mirror
French "3 Strikes" Law Returns, In Slightly Altered Form
suraj.sun writes with this excerpt from Ars Technica: "The French Senate has once again approved a reworked version of the country's controversial 'three strikes' bill designed to appease the Constitutional Council. Instead of a state-appointed agency cutting off those accused of being repeat offenders, judges will have the final say over punishment. The approval comes exactly one month after the country's Constitutional Council ripped apart the previous version of the Création et Internet law. ... Not content to let the idea die, President Nicolas Sarkozy's administration reworked the law in hopes of making it amenable to the Council — instead of HADOPI deciding on its own to cut off users on the third strike, it will now report offenders to the courts. A judge can then choose to ban the user from the Internet, fine him or her 300,000 (according to the AFP), or hand over a two-year prison sentence."
Do they have the internet in French prison?
At least now it requires a judge to declare guilt. This takes the responsibility away from the ISPs which is also a good thing.
Here: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/07/its-baack-french-3-strikes-law-gets-another-go-from-senate.ars
It sounds to me like saying that the defendant doesn't have the option of defending the charge might get it torn up, but I know nothing up French law... I know remarkably little about US law, either, since IANAL.
Since there is no article linked in the summary, how long before someone links one in?
Cheers
I'm wondering if the gambit is being done of pressing for Draconian lesligation repeatedly, so something that is "moderate" ends up getting passed like how the DMCA got passed (original bills would lock someone up for 20 years if they possessed "cracking tools" like a debugger or the strings command). First, it was three strikes, now prison time. France doesn't have the percentage of population the US does that is locked up, but all this would do is put non violent people in prison, and remove potential tax revenue (people in prison are not earning taxable income, especially for something that is a white coller issue).
As Robin Williams said in a great comedy routine, "So There! You Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys!" Or Monty Python's "Your mother was a hamster and your father smells of elderberries" Well at least they are willing to put up with our merde.
This new legislation may also be declared unconstitutional.
This time they try with a special court consisting of one judge to decide cases. The judge may not hear the parties involved, but is only allowed to give his decision solely based on a report from the new state antipiracy office. He is supposed to work expediently and not use more than 45 minutes per case.
Also language has been changed in the new law text possibly making it legal to eavesdrop private communications like email for antipiracy purposes.
The law text passed the senate wednesday, and is expected to pass the national assembly soon.
Links in french: Numerama Le Monde
This parody of a law Still have to make it in front of constitutionnal council.
Naboleon Sarkozy is playing a "W Bush" card... constitution... that's just a piece of paper...
I wonder why politician who purposefully push -illegal- laws don't end up in jail...
atleast the french are likely to riot and turn over a few police cars to show their displeasure. american's will form a few facebook groups and register to show their outrage...
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
Every time you think you've defeated a bad law, it just comes back in time for the next legislative cycle. Politicians and the interests that control them are patient and persistent, while regular people can only take so much time and energy from their lives to fight these causes. Especially today, when five or six examples of gross injustice come across your average news feed every single day.
And thus corruption and greed prevail; this is how we can all belong to something that nobody wants any part of.
fine him or her 300,000 (according to the AFP)
"Your honor, on the slight chance that this court does not accept either the termite mound or the truck-load of bottlecaps, I have also brought this bag containing a sufficient quantity of dead skin cells."
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
Funny how no new laws protect us from really BIG crimes - the government and corporate crimes of willful destruction of the planet, waging illegal war, torture, etc.
I wonder if they shouldnt work on a 3 strikes law for the executive office where every time they resend the same law for vote, they have a gradual disconnection of powers to prevent abuse... that way way we'd do away with frivolous passing of laws, wasting tons of debate time in the parliament, where the whole country's legislative body is mobilized just so that a bunch of crying failing record industry stop crying wolf... especially when their apetite is not helping creativity (the original goal of copyright) because authors will continue to publish whatever the laws... and they stop increasing penalties for hypothetical loss of revenues when taxes already exist on empty media... if nothing is done, it'll be more easy to get away with murder than to download a song.
Seriously something is wrong with the system. Maybe the anti trust laws should be ammended to prevent continuous abuse from record labels on systems worldwide. Among deceptive practices that should be punished.. ... damn it if I buy a cd, I should be able to play it any way I want .... ....
1) rootkits
2) region locking
3) RIAA trials - justice system flooding, racketeering like practices, deception, borderline illegal detective work , manipulation of laws, waste of public/ defendant ressource, unfair trials
4) Law keeps changing, increasingly detrimental to consumers
5) Copyright laws keep getting extended... the original idea of 10 years was good... but damn it, life + 70... wtf? if someone makes a hit which derives continuous profit 50 years after... they have no incentive to keep creating.
Never antropomorphize computers, they do not like that
and remove potential tax revenue (people in prison are not earning taxable income
Duh, haven't you read the financial impact studies from music industry? Putting these people in prison will prevent six hundred trillion dollars in piracy, which means eighty two hundred trillion in extra tax revenue to the government.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Not just that. I always wonder what an Anonymous Cowardon is. Is it like a simpleton aka Slashdot programmer, or what?
Have you tried getting _all_ comments to show with a single click without being logged in? As in, don't drag a slider and click dozens of times on "More". That would really help on a mobile device.
But whatever, fucking Slashdot is unusable on anything under 2GHz anyway. Seriously, has anyone tried using /. on Opera mobile? Rendering takes fucking ages.
QUIT FUCKING AROUND YOU WANNABE SLASHDOT CRACK WHORES AND HIRE SOME PROS TO FIX THE FUCKING SITE.
The idea of a "3 strikes" law makes me irate. Murders', rapists', and child molesters' past offenses are assessed during sentencing, but someone selling small quantities of pot is treated like a drug lord for their third offense. Of course, someone with two murder convictions will be sentenced appropriately in most cases. If you need a law that mandates outrageous sentences against the will of judges and juries, the punishment doesn't fit the crime.
Like so often before, the devil is in the details.
While I have no major principal objections to copyright infringers being kicked off internet (if they use internet for the infringement), I would want to know more of the details before making my mind up.
For starters, I would want everybody to be given a fair trial, and only when they have been found guilty three times should they be kicked off internet. I get the impression that with the present suggestion it's enough to be accused of copyright infringement three times to be kicked off. That is taking other people's right too easily: it should require a trial according to the country's requirements.
Secondly, I think there should be a time limit to how long you are banned from internet. I see no reason why a mere copyright infringer should be banned from internet for life. It's not like you can use copyright infringement to kill someone...
Thirdly, I would like to know what provisions the law provides to protect the technically challenged. Suppose my neighbour hacks into my WLAN, and starts sharing files. I suppose the recording industry would like to hold me responsible, but should they be able to do so? In my opinion, no. Granted, the recording industry will not like the "I am an idiot with technology"-defence, but this kind of trial should be held to the same standards as all others: the accused are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable (or similar) doubt.
Fourthly, what of family members? Suppose I get kicked off internet for copyright infringement. What of my wife and my children? As far as I know, no modern democracy allows collective punishment, so it should be acceptable for my wife and children to get internet access at home. So why then bother with banning me, if the effect is that the internet connection is simply passed to my wife?
For an interesting comparison, move the "getting banned from internet for copyright infringement" to the world of printed matter: any person or company thrice accused of copyright infringement gets banned (for a short period of time, eg a year) from reading and writing. The effects would be quite devastating... You would have to have somebody read the bus timetable to you, you would have to have somebody write your checks for you, you would have to have somebody read your letters to you... And if a newspaper were accused of infringing someone's copyright three times, they could obviously not print a single letter the next year!
It is home sickness. If you ever lived abroad you will know just how strong the desire can become to have something familiar.
I have lived abroad in several cultures where I was welcome. Nobody looked overly down on me. Oh they might think I was a crazy foreigner and a bit akward but nobody wanted me deported. And still the desire for even something as simple as a "boterham met pindakaas" can become overwhelming. No, peanut butter is NOT the same thing. That american stuff is disgusting.
It is also sometimes a great relief to read or hear something in your mother tongue. Almost all media to me is english even in Holland but when I am abroad for a while, it is comforting to hear something in dutch. I never follow soccer at home but when I am abroad and read something about Oranje, then it... well it feels like a bit of home.
No greater patriot then those abroad.
If your new enviroment is not accepting you and you are unwilling/incapable of fitting in then this desire can become extreem. People want to belong to something. Gangs work on this principle as does religion (the institution, not the faith). It becomes a downwards spiral. The (often second generation) immigrant (is a second generation still an immigrant?) rejects the new culture he is in by having differently from that culture. His new culture sees this behavior and becomes more resistant. He feels more rejected and starts to rebel more and try to find a group that does welcome him. Voila, an extremist is born.
Both sides are at fault here. Europe has two choices, keep immigrants out or accept them into their culture. You can't want the cheap labor immigrants supply and not give them some space to life their own lives. On the other hand, immigrants should realize that it was their choice to move to a new enviroment and that the price for that is giving up part of your identiy and adopt to a new culture. Naomi Campbell does not walk around in her native costume does she?
The original turkish immigrants were NOT pissed off. But new immigrants are arriving in an enviroment where they are resented for the problems caused by others and there are subcultures willing to accept them and give them a home.
This is similar to the reborn christians with their holier then thou attitude. Alienation is a ripe breeding ground for extremism. Wether that is gangs, religion or politics. White kids who feel alienated by society join extreme enviromental groups or become neo-nazi's. Muslims become members of extremist muslim groups. Simply because those groups give them a home.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Bruni is an artist/singer.
Please, call her anything but that. She has next to no musical talent.
She's just a model who got the idea into her head she can sing. Her songs are truly sleep inducing.
No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.