Slashdot Mirror
EU Paves the Way For Three-Strikes Cut-Off Policy
Mark.JUK writes "The European Parliament has surrendered to pressure from Member States (especially France) by abandoning amendment 138, a provision adopted on two occasions by an 88% majority of the plenary assembly, and which aimed to protect citizens' right to Internet access. The move paves the way for an EU wide policy supporting arbitrary restrictions of Internet access. Under the original text any restriction of an individual could only be taken following a prior judicial ruling. The new update has completely removed this, meaning that governments now have legal grounds to force Internet providers (ISPs) into disconnecting their customers from the Internet (i.e. such as when 'suspected' of illegal p2p file sharing)."
That nice French law which got pushed through late at night when most members of the parliament had already left the building...
To be fair, it got revoked later on, and was voted on honestly. But the first passing of the law was a big sham.
This will adversely affect small businesses - why should someone's business be made unviable cos they can't stop their kids downloading a few bits and pieces.
Imagine if you weren't allowed to use roads because a bus company complained about your driving 3 times.
SURELY NOT!!!!!
Oh well... as they always say... one must forsake freedom for the sake of preserving liberty.
If hackers like ParMaster still exist, the best way to ensure this law is repealed is to ensure that MPs and Ministers are caught under this law and disconnected from internet.
Like the immortal Jim Hacker once said: "Not until you face it yourself do you realize what a stupid law you have passed."
"Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
I believe that this goes against pretty much any nation of EUs constitutions. You are innocent until proven guilty. France with their Dear Facist Leader, Sarkozy can fuck off.
now we can lock out sarkozy :-P
In an ideal world this would be too big of a strain on EU relations and member states would start pulling out until it's just France. What would be left? FU.
My webcomic
They are fighting against the tide here. These provisions won't last long when the courts start hearing cases brought by people cut off from the internets.
Whenever I see stories of other countries governments and corporations (or is there a difference anymore?) trampling over citizens' rights even worse than is done here in the States, it just gives me this warm glowing feeling inside for some reason.
Hey what about articles 5, 6 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights?
ilovegeorgebush
...a provision adopted on two occasions by an 88% majority of the plenary assembly, and which aimed to protect citizens' right to Internet access.
European democracy, defined: 88% Majority beaten by %0.001 business owners.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
I'm sorry if something is adopted by 88% of the people then it should not be allowed to be removed by a smaller subset of people. If older prestige European countries are able to railroad the EU this way then what is the point for other less-prestigious members to stay?
I wonder how this will affect the recently passed law here in Finland that internet access is a legal right for all citizens. I'm getting pretty tired of France running the show in the EU and getting their ridiculous laws enacted at the EU level.
While we have plenty of bad things going on in the US, the frequency that we hear stories like this (or spying on the public, arresting kids for climbing trees, etc) from the EU really amazes me that there are people who try to claim that you have more freedom in Europe than in the US.
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
Finland is considering to legalize unauthorized use of unsecured wireless networks. Wonder how such a policy would work in combination with a three strikes rule :)
The shitbags that we elect to supposedly represent us are once again bowing down before their corporate masters and sucking their dicks. However, we should celebrate this for the good news it undoubtedly is. Actions like this will ensure that our software wizards are truly motivated to design and implement a new system for file sharing that is proof against government interference.
What is the basis of this bias they have against our basic human right to download free porn?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
The French President's already demonstrated the vulnerabilities. If they want to put in 3-strikes disconnection based on accusations alone, target the people who approve of it. They've almost certainly done something that'll justify at least an accusation. Once they've got 3 of them, make a huge stink about the law they insisted be passed and demand that they be subject to it.
Old Shin'a'in proverb: "If the enemy is in range, so are you.".
Seems to me like a pretty classic case of France engaging in policy laundering after this law was overturned by its own constitutional court.
Ignoring the fact that they are punishing people before it is even proven they did anything wrong, why are they taking away internet access?
For most crimes that I know of, you pay a fine or spend some time in jail. Are they taking away internet access because that is what was used to commit their "crime"?
If that's the case, they should chop off your legs the third time you illegally cross a street.
This is a public call for a worldwide boycott of all products coming out the entertainment industry, be it movies, music, tv programs, computer games of all sorts and whatever else.
this boycott shall continue until they all close shop.
Always trying to keep the man down! Censorship, holding back rights, they.. wait.. what? This is from the "Enlightened Europeans"!?
Nevermind, it's OK then.
Swing to the right for Europe meant dropping 138 was just a matter of time: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/parliament/archive/elections2009/en/index_en.html
I will be very interrested in seeing the trial suites that will be launched if one internet access is cut.
Plus here in France, most of us have multiaccess boxes (DSL bring : internet + TV + phone). Cutting internet means that it would but TV + phone. I don't think this is legal (no consequence). Plus, most ISP provides free wifi access to other customer "boxes". Will they cut also this ? because, if not you will still be able to download ... again, will they cut also the 3G network you can have on your phone as well ...
Again, this is a stupid law brought by politicians that does not even daily use a computer and that are all lawyer :( Even Sarkozy himself is a lawyer my friend :( They are only doing this to "improve" their incomes.
But the interresting point about a law, is that the next parliament can remove/break/anihilate it easilly ... so if French citizen are not happy, they just have to vote correctly the next time ;-)
Never forget & vote accordingly !
There have already been some moves to push for HADOPI laws in the USA. Just wait and watch. The same thing will happen here. It's inevitable.
EU citizens feel better when they read of US civil rights violations.
US citizens feel better when they read of EU civil rights violations.
Maybe that warm glowing feeling is you getting shafted.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
This would pave the way to mesh networking. No ISPs. Right now, mesh is in it's infancy. 10 years from now, people will be rolling their own mesh inter-network to get to these resources.
If you read the original article (website) you see a small but important editing: governments now have legal grounds to force UK ISPs into disconnecting!!
No idea what powers the government in the UK might have, in germany no one can cut me from my internet connection without a judges ruling.
Furthermore, if you read the mentioned article then I see no paragraph that suggests that a "EU Paves the Way For Three-Strikes Cut-Off Policy" is happening at all.
The article clearly states: restrictions may only be taken in exceptional circumstances and imposed if they are necessary, appopriate and proportionate within a democratic society. Copyright violations by no means are a danger to society ... unless ruled by a judge otherwise, nor is a cutting of the line in any way appropriated.
So I have the impression that the anti FUD is FUD itselv, very disappointing ;D
angel'o'sphere
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
The Irish rolled over on the Lisbon treaty after they got thrown a crumb about abortion ... and now the bastard Brussels bureaucrats think they can do as they like. Coincidence? Mais non, my dear 'Astingz.
Remember when they tried to sneak software patents in on page 637 paragraph 4 subsection B(2) of a bill about fishing net sizes? You can't trust the fuckers, half are mad, half are corrupt and half are both.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
It is now the only courageous, moral and ethical stance.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
in the usa, the story is purely idiot distributors fighting their irrelevancy in the age of the internet
in europe, there is another potent issue that does not exist in the usa: cultural irrelevancy. the french have been fighting to retain french culture for decades: funding french arts, fighting the emergence of english words into french usage, etc
its all rather silly and absurd from an american perspective: hey france, history spoke, and you lost, and the british won. now everyone speaks english in the world, shut up, get over it, and deal with it
but from the point of view of french national pride, you can see why the fight here is not simple and straightforward as it is in the usa
heck, even if you are danish, or belgian: how the hell are you suppose to preserve danish and belgian culture in the face of the english onslaught? protectionism seems appealing. even if, of course, it really makes no difference. its just nostalgia. resistance is futile
perhaps the canadians know best how to deal with being in the cultural shadow of a dominant neighbor: they send their comedians and actors to the usa where they feed that culture sometimes even better than the americans do. i always wondered why the hell there are so many successful canadian comedians in the usa: is there something fundamentally more absurd about being canadian? (snicker)
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
The Democrats and Socialists are on the "right" in Europe?
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
It would reduce the number of unsecured wireless networks. Either because they get secured, or because they get cut off.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
Yes.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
That is the revenge of the Nazi Dwarfs, Mr. S. and Mr. B.
The end for Europe is closer and closer...
I think access to internet will be, if not already is, a basic necessity. As such, I think the following articles from a stuff called "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" should be remembered by those greed politians:
-Article 9
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
-Article 10
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
-Article 11
Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.
-Article 12
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
-Article 19
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights
I was about to start a big ass rant here, but I guess I am too pissed to write it all down :@:@:@
Here be signatures
Legalizing?? That would require it to have been illegal in the first place. Those crazy finns.
By the way, my router supports multiple wireless networks; one of them is unsecured and named "freeinternet", please consider doing the same.
What the hell, every group on that list has the same words in their names. Either every party over there is honest about being basically the same, or you just had to take America's different-name/same-thing idea and go completely opposite.
The democrats in the US are on the right as well, they're just farther left than the republicans. FYI:
politicalcompass.org
This is why I find it so amusing when the hardcore republicans refer to the "extreme left" democrats, which happen to be far to the right of people like myself. I'm down there somewhere near Nader:
http://politicalcompass.org/uselection2008
We're in good company though, we've also got Ghandi, the Dalai Lama, and Mandela:
http://politicalcompass.org/analysis2
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Meh, where I live (Spain), the left wing is in bed with the (equivalents of the) *AAs and it's in fact the right wing which is promising to abolish compulsive levies on digital storage media (HDDs, cellphones, flash drives, you name it) if they get elected.
These days I find that "left" vs. "right" means pretty much squat. Just vote for the least evil.
One would think this idea also violated the EU's Charter of Rights
Rights without limits are the stuff of fantasy.
You want to stay online at home? You want to keep your family online at home?
Then don't go for that third strike.
It's that easy.
There are thousands of online sources for media of every sort - almost all of it free, but some of which you might have to pay for - or go without ---
Rather like the stateside peons without broadband -
who must make do with radio and TV, shop WalMart and Blockbuster, borrow videos from their local public library, or go without.
is write a bot/virus that downlods/shares music/software automatically with out the windows user knowing it. It them could send an email to the bits and bytes police stating that this person is sharing illegal files. This should shut down big chunk of windows users and people that use computers at work. I can see quite the profit drop for the ISP's and other mayham.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
that was either the best i've ever trolled anyone ever, or, in turn sir, i salute you as the best troll i have ever met, to play the easily offended pointlessly indignant dim-witted fop so seamlessly
so many chips on the shoulder, so easy to knock off, so confused by the concepts in play...
CLASSIC INTARWEBS STUPDITNASS
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Were I to sing a copyrighted song, and a recipient of the call tip the copyright holder and they file a complaint, and this was to happen 3 times, would I get my phone line disconnected?
How does this mesh with the earlier article regarding the Finnish law declaring internet access to be a right ? I've always been a little hazy of the issue of national sovereignty and membership in the EU.
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/10/14/2229231/-1Mb-Broadband-Access-Becomes-Legal-Right-In-Finland?from=rss
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
so of course everyone in the eu should ... immediately strike three times. bye bye isp's in europe! i wonder how many jobs and how much revenue would be lost.
But you don't have to commit any strikes, or do anything at all, just be accused.
This is not the funny you're looking for.
>>>Then don't go for that third strike.
Do you work for RIAA? You seem to share the same inability to understand basic human rights. No matter. You falsely-presume I'm guilty of strikes one and two. This is what Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter of Rights is about: The government has to PROVE guilt, not just assume it. The law should be written that FIRST they prove the three strikes are your fault and THEN you get internet cutoff. As currently written they don't have to prove anything - an open invitation for abuse (President Sarkozy could turnoff those he doesn't like, even if they did nothing wrong).
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
nice to interact with you in english, the language of international business, and therefore, the language that every school in the world puts some sort of emphasis on
http://www2.ignatius.edu/faculty/turner/worldlang.htm
do you think we still would be first touristic destination if we dropped our cultural identity ? and for what ?(cultural irrelevancy my ass, as if culture could ever be irrelevant) and please we do not need to fight to retain our culture, it sustain itself on its own pretty good imo
the japanese have been pretty busy studying, incorporating, and adapting western ways for over a century, and there is no such thing as no japanese culture. in fact, its pretty easy to identify japanese culture, and japanese culture is very strong in its own right
the value and strength of a culture is derived in fact from this cross pollination with other cultures. meanwhile, if you isolate or protect a culture, you weaken the culture
culture stands on its own, it requires no support, regardless of how INSECURE the people of that culture are:
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-184761138.html
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
which sounds like this only affected the UK, but it seems to me like this is a british website debating what the decision means FOR THEM - but the text of amendment 138 affects ALL states of the european union!...
I should become fortuneteller - only days ago I predicted this, because germanys new government decided against the 3-strikes model without much resistance by CDU/CSU, which I found very odd and I thought they wouldn't do this, unless they knew that the EU will soon "force us" to do it (so we "can't do anything about it - it came from Brussels - WE were against this!")
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
Rights without limits may be the stuff of fantasy, but the limits should be accountable to the courts and to the people. THAT is the primary objection to this...the lack of judicial involvement. Especially given that people share Internet connections and don't know how to secure their wireless, etc. If you don't believe in the necessity of a fair trial, I wonder if you've never been falsely accused of anything in your life. It's not a fun experience. Finally, as is pointed out above, Internet connections are often business necessities -- the sense of entitlement that you mock is the right of property (note that these people are paying for Internet), one enshrined in declarations of rights throughout history.
Why is "3" such a magic number? Doesn't it pave the way for 0 strike or 1 strike policies too?
Doesn't it make sense to not allow suspected possible future downloaders to connect to the internet in the first place?
And why wait til the third strike before making it permanent, why not disconnect the first or second time?
Why not allow at least 4 chances, or probation, ec? Where does the idea come from that "3 times," and you're permanently disconnected is a good idea?
The Situation:
It is easy to claim copyright over anything you personally produce.
There appears to be no significant penalty for wrongful accusation of copyright infringement.
They are paving the way for copyright infringement accusations (*3) to cause revocation of internet access.
The Solution:
Make some copyright material.
Accuse the children of every European politician, every senior public servant and every corporate executive of copyright infringement, three times.
We have computers. This could be done quite efficiently.
Sit back and watch.
It was foolish of them to let the EU be able to completely trump individual governments laws on issues not regarding the economy or military.
It seems that you're misinterpreting what happened here: namely, that the European Parliament decided not to trump an individual government's law (i.e. the French three-strikes law). You may not like the French law, but the EP overruling it would be something of a violation of the subsidiarity principle (not that that ever stops the EU).
the chinese already learn english for international business purposes. english is already entrenched globally because of the colonial era. certainly, plenty of kids will learn mandarin as a prestige language, just like plenty learned japanese when the world thought japan was going to take over the world in the 1980s. but you might as well declare everyone speak hindi or urdu: languages that locally are extremely important, but globally not so much
in a world where china is dominant economically, which we are fast approaching, the guy in brazil will still want to learn english before he learns mandarin. why? because that brazilian will want to do business with the french and the russians and the indians as well, who are not speaking mandarin, but are already speaking english for international business transactions. certainly, learning mandarin will help the brazilian guy tweak his chinese business partner's ego, but his chinese business partner will probably smile, and reply in english
english has become entrenched as the de facto international language of business, just as a matter of historical consequence. as a secondary consequence of english being the language of international commerce, it begins to bleed into use in the sciences and in the arts. so it will be hard to de-entrench english, regardless of who dominates the world after the americans
english is on track to become the second language of everyone in the world, and it will be hard to break that momentum, noce historically established. of course, english doesn't deserve that fate, anymore than any other language. although a few languages, like spanish (easier to pronounce for nonnatives: lots of vowels... but also confusing feminine/ masculine bullshit and too many verb tenses), or korean (high relationship between spoken word and alphabet: the letters actually represent the mouth shape), i think are more deserving for technical reasons to be international languages than english. english is one of the most difficult languages to learn, like japanese, for being a melange of so many different influences. it doesn't make any sense these pronunciations: cOUGH... bOUGH. or Support... Sure
but history has spoken. you can't control these things, they just happen. otherwise, i'd be writing to you right now in esperanto
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
No, (sigh) it isn't.
The fairness of the law isn't in its intent, but rather in it's resilience to potential abuse. It's the proverbial two-edged sword.
In all the examples I've seen of a three-strikes law so far, none of them required a trial or allowed any sort of window for legal representation in the defense of the accused.
Denying people the ability to communicate in the modern world effects isolation from the modern world, and in our social context is equivalent to a custodial order. (In fact, it is a specified part of some custodial orders, such as that of the infamous "Mr. Baldy".)
If you can effectively incarcerate someone on the strength of an unverified accusation you have rule by Red Guards or the Army-McCarthy hearings (just pick the bloody autocratic cultural movement of your choice) all over again. I don't want to see that. I really don't want to see that.
If there must be a three-strikes rule to protect intellectual property, and preservation of that intellectual property is important enough to defend it by imposition of harsh, Draconian sanctions, then the accused must have available to them the rule of law and the ability to defend themselves under it.
Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
It may have been considered unauthorized use of a computer system (not that there have been any prosecutions on that point) but the administration woke up and is now clarifying the legislation.
This could turn out really well, actually.
Just report EVERYONE.
Just look at their farmers - they can't make money decently, and instead of making the honest choice: There are too many people trying to do this job - some have to find another business - they try and blackmail money from the rest of the EU.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Finland isn't part of the EU.
We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it
all languages evolve. what is called english today would be baffling in victorian england, and visa versa. what we call english today won't be standard english in 2109 and wasn't standard english in 1909. not that any of that matters. and grammar? random rules that shift and evolve. it doesn't mean anything. what you call corruption and the loss of something is simply the way it has always been and always will been and nothing of any value is ever really lost. stop attaching value to arbitrary pointless signifiers
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Check your facts please...
Finland definitely is in the EU. They even have the Euro, unlike some other member states.
we will crush denmark with our recent cultural output of movies starring viggo mortensen and connie nielsen, about beowulf and hans christian andersen stories, and made by lars von trier!
you will scream as american heavy metal by the likes of lars ulrich makes you weep for the light of the sun again!
we will be make something rotten in the state of denmark! ;-)
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I guess this will eventually force more people to use VPN services like remotevpn.net.
We will also have to dramaticlly increase the encryption of p2p traffic to make it much harder to proov that the cpntent that is beinf downloaded is copyrighted.
There are two principles at work here. 1. EU decides more and more over time and the member states gradually lose power. 2. The individuals right to internet access.
This is a good decision just because it leaves power with the member states. It doesn't matter for the functioning of the EU what laws the individual member states have in this area, therefore no EU-law should be written about it. If a law within the EU is against someone human rights, there is a separate way of correcting that, in the confusingly named in the Council of Europe that has the The European Court of Human Rights. This court is not part of the EU system even if their charter of human rights is referred to in the EU-treaties.
The European Court of Human Rights is a court that convict the 47 member states (among them France and UK) when they have written a law that infringes on the citizens human rights. The laws related from France and UK are most likely to be struck down by The European Court of Human Rights. Therefore the Member States are doing the right thing when not interfering in this area.
Yeah it's a mess. Britain's Labour government is seen as quite left in some circles due to their extremely socialist policies, yet when you look at other policies they're extremely right.
The problem is that parties can be left on some things and right on others, the problem with Labour in the UK is it's too far left on things it's left on and too far right on things it's right on. The only thing we can really tell from the left/right scale is that if a party is too far away from the centre in either direction on a particular issue then it's probably not a party that's particularly friendly to the idea of fairness- stray into socialism on the left and you're taking from those who work hard to give to those who don't, stray the same distance in the right and you start to see elements of fascism and bigotry.
I've not really seen a bad government that is truly centrist on just about all issues yet, but this could simply be because truly centrist governments rarely ever exist.
For what it's worth though, if the political compass is anything to go by, I'm with Ghandi!
It's the same in the UK - the government are rushing so fast into a no-evidence, no-trial, accusation equals conviction setup for this that even the ISPs are saying it's not right.
You can't be punished before first being judged.
In the UK the government has already given up on that one because they are fully aware the law will not stand the most basic legal scrutiny.
It will be painful, but eventually this nonsense will be stopped, I just hope that French voters remember who was pushing for this idiocy..
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
As long as there i no judicial order issued, this EU directive will be easily laughed out of courts all around the EU.
The UK's government already realized this and has stopped peddling the disconnection of users without a legal order.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I also wonder why member states can force their local laws to be EU wide.....
If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
Perhaps a fair counter balance might be, that upon the third strike, those that accused you are now required to now prove that "you" (not just a an IP address or MAC address) are guilty beyond a shadow of doubt in court, should they fail to do so, then they should face criminal charges for, bringing false witness and, civil penalties for slander and defamation as well a bearing full cost for the court case and investigation and well as any damages suffered by the falsely accused party with regards to loss of connection and the psychological harm of being disconnected from human digital interactivity.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
as new york
why?
modern media and modern transportation: the guy in san francisco is watching the same tv show as the guy in boston, and the guy in san francisco is the grandson of a guy who got there by train in a few days
there's no balkanization as per the ancient era as people aren't isolated for centuries from the people just a few valleys over
it's the media that changes everything
because of the internet, in the future, lol and wtf will be standard english, as common acceptable and normal as any other common english phrase
the media: that drives language evolution
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
http://www2.ignatius.edu/faculty/turner/worldlang.htm
try to understand what it means for everyone to adapt english as a second language for business reasons, how that bleeds into the sciences and the arts...
now project into the future in terms of loan words, bleeding into other languages: taglish, franglais, etc...
the future is all english. its inevitable. its simply a matter of something set in motion in the colonial era. its not a good thing, nor a bad thing, it just happened, and can't be controlled, or stopped, nor changed by future developments: the die has been cast
so why do you have such an indignant little silly chip on your shoulder about all of this? no one is doing it on purpose
ps: it's been nice interacting with you... IN ENGLISH (thanks for proving my point!)
pfffft
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I don't think it takes a trial to have your driving licence taken away if you get 12 points on it.
so, great linguistic genius, why do they speak the same english in boston as they do in san francisco, but across the same geographical scale they speak different languages in prague and madrid and in patches in between? i say its modern transportation and shared media versus ancient isolation. what say you professor, since i am truly so ignorant of linguistics?
obviously, i'm just a clueless fool because "media isn't a language" (wtf?) and i "may be watching the same TV as the average californian gang member" (LOL)
"you'd already be at loss in certain suburbs of LA (where you wouldn't dare going in the first place, of course)"
yes, as you can see from my SIGNATURE BELOW, i'm frightened of scary strange brown people. you know, the gang members you say i share my tivo settings with(!?). so thanks for the fucking racist patronization, daft bitch. seriously, what the hell is wrong with you?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
What do Europeans know about 3 strikes? Shouldn't it be 3 penalty kicks or 3 head butts?
Self awareness - try it!
http://i2p2.de
The U.S. democrats over the past century have passed laws to control how much corn/potatoes we can grow in our own backyards (1930s food rationing which is still in effect), taken-over our retirement savings (SS), taken-over our childcare (schools and SCHIP), taken-over our cars (exhaust regulation), and soon will take-over our healthcare (government-run).
Economically they are authoritarian. They should be moved to the left side your political compass.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Economic policies are not authoritarian, social policies are. The democrats are authoritarian (towards the top of the map), just not as authoritarian as the republicans. The social scale goes north-south, the economic scale is east-west. The democrats are farther left economically and more libertarian than republicans, but both parties are still authoritarian/right relative to the rest of the world.
Also, I'm not real sure if exhaust regulation, which is never a bad thing, qualifies as "taking over our cars".
And this isn't "my" political compass, it's just a web site.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
that is, my attitude is not polite nor well-spoken, nor do i feel a desire to behave well, when i faced with stupidity
why the lack of respect?
because you're STUPID:
"This said, to put my reasoning in a simpler form : english as an homogenous, live, language is on the verge of explosion under the sheer weight of foreign loan words ; this will probably lead at first to localized form of english, interacting at the lowest level via a common vocabulary of limited scope (the TV one) and later on will lead to the birth of new, incompatible languages"
lady, this is some sort of moronic science fiction you've written
here's the cluebat: there is amazing new-fangled thing called "radio", "television", "internet": mdern mass media. what does mass media do? it homogenizes language, and due to its influence, it means those learning english in new delhi from the simpsons are going to wind up speaking and writing the same language as those reading slashdot in wellington
go visit manila. you'll find people there speaking american-style english. the only thing being ruined is tagalog, which has evolved into taglish. not the other way around
modern media is destroying all other languages and replacing it with southern california valley girl speak from stockholm to johannesburg
try to understand the concepts of a subject matter you've inserted your low iq self into, such as: MASS MEDIA
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it