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If hackers like ParMaster still exist, the best way to ensure this law is repealed is to ensure that MPs and Ministers are caught under this law and disconnected from internet.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.
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
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.
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 !
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.
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 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
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.
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.