Slashdot Mirror
The French Government Can Now Censor the Internet
Psychophrenes writes "A new episode in French internet legislation — French ministers have passed a bill (original in French) allowing the government to add any website to a black list, which access providers will have to enforce. This black list will be defined by the government only, without requiring the intervention of the legal system. Although originally intended against pedo-pornographic websites, this bill is already outdated, as was Hadopi in its time, and instead paves the way for a global censorship of the 'French internet.'"
...that Wikileaks is on that list? Or similar sites?
I think China may actually be worse, but I am not sure, I can't get anyone their to comment.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
The business of government only expands in power and revenue throughout its lifetime, never willingly or permanently reducing power or revenue. History has proven this over and over again, to the point where one could argue that the entire objective of government is power and revenue.
I remain absolutely shocked that the common man doesn't consider this a giant red flag.
I wonder if they will add Google's list of French military victories to that blacklist...
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!
There goes that "Liberté" thing you fought for. Better luck next time.
The problem with that is that France is now what the US will be in a few years... pissed off that it's no longer a global superpower, and pissed off that it's language is no longer considered the "lingua franca" for global commerce.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Where is that legendary fighting French spirit?
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
I think China may actually be worse, but I am not sure, I can't get anyone their to comment.
That may be a good thing. Making contact with China only to get a lecture on the difference between 'there,' and 'their' would be embarrassing ;)
Once again a western government uses the drummed-up fear of pedophiles as a stalking horse to eradicate human liberty. The damnedest thing is that pedophiles are about as peaceful a group of people as can be found - but I suppose that is why the government has chosen this target. It's harder to crack down on minorities who are inclined and strong enough to strike back.
It's easier to hire the angry people to put down the peaceful people than the other way around, and get the angry people to accept the loss of freedom as "necessary" to the struggle.
A few facts about the bête noire du jour. Remember, the loss of your freedom depends on the people never learning the truth ... at least, until it is too late.
Only with Drugs. The FDA, HHS, and DEA have this exact power, completely unchecked by the legal system to basically make laws on the fly about individual substances by changing their classification.
If they wanted to make Asprin a felony tomorrow, they could... and stores would have to comply in a hurry. It is not subject to Judicial review
Although on the surface it would seem like the two have not much to do with each other, drug convictions are a great way to imprison people and deny them their right to vote, which is perhaps more powerful than merely limiting free speech online.
I too, but thanks to this, we now have an extremely effective rally cry...
"No Internet Blacklists No! You Don't Want To Be Like France, Do You?!"
Of course, the most impact it could possibly have is that they'd probably just implement a freedomwall instead of a firewall :-/
Je t'aime, au revoir! ;-)
As terrible as the news is, there is still hope. The law isn't passed yet. The article was voted in the National Assembly (lower chamber). It still requires, before being a valid law :
1. A vote on the law as a whole in the lower chamber.
2. A vote on the article in the upper chamber (Senate).
3. A vote on the law as a whole in the upper chamber.
4. If the two versions are different, even a coma apart (which is almost always the case), a full new vote on each of the chambers.
5. A validation by the Constitutional Council.
Points 1. and 3. are very likely to succeed, saddly. But point 2., the vote on the article in the upper chamber can reasonably change the law, adding a validation by a judge for example. The UMP (Sarkozy's party) doesn't have absolute majority in the Senate, so they need to compromise with the center-right which may obtain that.
And then the validation by the Constitutional Council is unlikely, they censored the HADOPI (three-strike law for "illegal downloading"), stating clearly that Internet in the XXIest century is protected by the article 11 of the Declaration of Humans and Citizen Rights (which is part of our Constitution) : The free communication of thoughts and of opinions is one of the most precious rights of man: any citizen thus may speak, write, print freely, save [if it is necessary] to respond to the abuse of this liberty, in the cases determined by the law. , their interpretation being that abuse of this liberty, in the cases determined by the law can only be confirmed by a court after due legal process. It would surprise me for them to turn back on this stance, and allow Internet censorship without decision of a court.
But since the UMP has more friends than foes in the Constitutional Council, and that it is to protect the children will they will validate it :(
But anyway, it's still not a lost battle, and we are still fighting against the law.
That may be a good thing. Making contact with China only to get a lecture on the difference between 'there,' and 'their' would be embarrassing ;)
Haha. These slashdotters are relentless with the grammar. I gotsed nailed yesterday for a small handful of mistakes which I will never make again.
I've heard of grammar nazis, but goatse-ing someone for poor grammar is rude.
What were all those "The south will rise again" bumper stickers ...
Viagra ads.
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
It's not just France, though. There's also the Great Firewall of China, the Great Australian Firewall, the US Department of Homeland Security shutting down domains (with COICA in the works to make take-downs even easier), and probably others I'm not aware of.
The Internet was a nice experiment in global freedom of expression, but now that governments are catching up those freedoms are beginning to disappear.
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
No, US citizens have small guns.
The US government has *much* bigger guns.
My point is that, as a Canadian, I don't really care if people who live in the USA call themselves "American." It's the generally-agreed upon term. I'm not refusing to call myself "American" because of some insecurity complex or because I'm on some high horse - I'm simply not going to call myself "American" because it's not the correct term to describe a Canadian or Mexican. If you live in North America, you're Canadian, American or Mexican. That's just how it is.
pissed off that it's no longer a global superpower, and pissed off that it's language is no longer considered the "lingua franca" for global commerce.
They have the third largest nuclear arsenal in the world, and their economy, while unstable, is still ranked 9th in the world. That instability is caused by transitioning to a more capitalistic economic model. And before you go bad-mouthing France, I'd like to point out that the average French citizen has a higher cut of GDP than the average United States citizen, despite the economic crisis for one simple reason: The French didn't bend over and take it in the ass at the behest of corporate interests who sold out their future for a few SUVs and a bank-owned home that's not worth half of what it was paid for.
Frankly, France has a rosier future than the United States does -- they're making a difficult transition that will improve the standard of living for its citizens in the long run, at the cost of some short term pain. The United States is making a transition for the worse because our government has systematically chosen short term gain at the expense of sustainability and long-term growth.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
Right behind the land of the brave, cowering and allowing their leaders to strip them of their liberty over a single terrorist attack that happened a decade ago.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
They're just crazy with punctuation. Especially colons.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Actually gun ownership is legal in France and many other European countries. In France gun ownership is a right (though not an unrestricted right) but not having a right to arms doesn't mean it's forbidden or that it would necessarily be difficult to legally own one. (E.g. join a shooting club in Germany or get a license from the police in Italy.)
I suspect there are more than a few Hondurans, Guatemalans, Nicaraguans, El Salvadorians, Belizians, Costa Ricans, and Panamanians who would take exception to that statement
Have you been to any of those countries? When you travel down there, you'll see that they all proudly proclaim that they're part of "Central America." They puposely distance themselves from North or South America. For example, here's a Belizean license plate:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_1AAaANrTdAM/SgHAxpUOqcI/AAAAAAAABKg/MVvHKJR7EWI/s400/belize.jpg
The C.A. on the plate stands for "Central America."