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)."
Seems to me like a pretty classic case of France engaging in policy laundering after this law was overturned by its own constitutional court.
Excuse me? 88% of the parliament used to be for the amendment in its previous form (at least in a preliminary way). The amendment was changed, no doubt because of political compromises that the EP is famous of, and it still passed. Your interpretation is just wrong: these are the same people voting, the original amendment just never ended into a vote.
The story has a similarly biased interpretation: The new update has completely removed this, meaning that governments now have legal grounds to force UK ISPs into disconnecting their customers from the Internet. This is not true at all: The original amendment would have made sure ISPs could not do that without a ruling, but the current text doesn't give any legal ground for governments because it doesn't really change anything.
There may be some fishy deals behind this, but let's stick to the facts.
Basically smaller, financially weaker nations, either play by the arbitrary rules of the EU of they face restrictions/taxation on trade and other sort of petty punishments. And of course the stronger factions reserve special privileges for themselves; allowing crap like this to happen.
The Long Now Foundation
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 !
In other news... The 3-strikes law is definitely adopted in France, after the "Conseil constitutionnel" (an equivalent of the Supreme Court) validated the law:
http://www.lefigaro.fr/politique/2009/10/22/01002-20091022ARTFIG00615-le-conseil-constitutionnel-valide-la-loi-hadopi-2-.php (French article)
Two very bad news in the same day. Believe me, sometimes, it sucks to be French....
On the other hand, I can't wait to see if they will ever manage to have the law just working.
People will just setup anonymous free access Wifi everywhere.
I'm guessing you're wrong, and people won't actually do that.
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.
That depends on where you live. In some places, the internet is a human right. Although I would guess that the law was put in place specifically to prevent the EU from enforcing laws that would cut off people from internet access.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
It was the Sheriff's office that conducted the raid. They didn't inform the local town police chief.
On that list is France. France are also the people who are pushing the 3 strike law. The "internet is a human right" is being used for evil. By making human rights that many people don't have like "internet a human right", then taking it away like this. If you lived in a state that has no freedom of speech, then was giving it. But one week later they toke it away. How would you react? How is that different then if you had the right for 7 years? They set it up so people will fight back less when "Human rights" are taking away.
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.
>>>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