Slashdot Mirror
Spain Codifies the "Right To Broadband"
Reader adeelarshad82 writes to lets us know that Spain has now codified a "Right to Broadband," thus following the lead of Finland. Spain's industry minister announced that citizens will have a legal right from 2011 to be able to buy broadband Internet access of at least 1 Mb/sec at a regulated price wherever they live. The telecoms operator holding the so-called "universal service" contract would have to guarantee it could offer "reasonably" priced broadband throughout Spain.
What is the legality of this bill? On 1st December 2009, the EU will have in law the hated Lisbon treaty, which gives the EU carte blanche to do what the hell it likes with laws in the former 27 EU countries, and is accountable to nobody.
The EU wish to have some sort of three strikes laws for "illegal" copyright downloaders and cut off "offenders", this conflicts with what the Spanish have just done.
So who is going to win Spanish law, or EU law?
Take Nobody's Word For It.
>>>I have a right to free speech however I do not have the right to libel anybody I wish.
You do in the land of the free (U.S.). Libel is extremely hard to prove, such that the accuser must prove he was finanically harmed by the words. If he can not prove it, then the case is thrown out. Few bother to sue for such a triviality. ----- Personally I think libel/slander laws are stupid. The right of free speech should be absolute, unless you're on somebody else's property (like a theater). If I insult Dunkin Donuts as having cockroaches in their kitchen, well that sucks for them, but they shouldn't have a right to block me from speaking my opinion. Maybe I really did see cockroaches in their kitchen.
Anyway back on topic:
>>>Fox News has a right to free speech, but they don't have the right to force people on the air...
Okay. Likewise citizens have a right to buy internet, but they don't have a right to force corporations or their neighbors to hook them up to high-speed. Dialup works just fine.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
>>>they could have gone for either of the others; but nothing obviously prevents them from going with this one.
Yes there is. The third option requires stealing money from neighbors to fund the installation costs. i.e. The third one is a violation of property and labor rights.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
You're welcome to leave the country anytime you wish. Nobody's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to live here.
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
Why are you talking about the utility? I don't give a frak about megacorps. I was discussing the neighbors.
They are the ones who will see an additional tax on their bills (universal service fee) in order to provide the extra funds to install broadband to people who have just dialup. It's the average Joes who are having their wallets raided (and therefore rights violated).
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
>>>It is too expensive to maintain copper in sparsely populated areas when people are mainly using cellphones
Okay. So now Northern Finns have dialup over their cellphones instead of wired phones. (shrug). Same difference. My original statement was correct.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall