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)."
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.
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
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.
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.
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