Slashdot Mirror


HADOPI To Disconnect 60 People In France

bs0d3 writes "Today in France under the new HADOPI law, 60 people have received their third strike and are facing disconnection from the internet. The first 60 may only be the beginning. 650,000 people have received their first strikes, and 44,000 are on their second."

255 comments

  1. There were supposed to be 61... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...but they haven't caught me ye^#a$s%!_5%j~NO CARRIER

    1. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by Elbereth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That "NO CARRIER" thing hasn't been funny in 20 years.

    2. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by toQDuj · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Hear, Hear. It wasn't even funny when it was a real message on my terminal screen. ...

      Fuck, I'm getting old.

      --
      Every experiment which ends in a big bang is a good experiment.
    3. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      Yes, you're getting ve/()#&/#()&")"!/(!"()))==\+\ NO CARRIER

    4. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Especially with IPoAC you tend to run out of carriers quickly.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    5. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by AbRASiON · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes it has, stop posting.

    6. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by MacTO · · Score: 0

      I guess they were too busy laughing at you downloading music with a 9600 bps modem to disconnect you.

    7. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by m50d · · Score: 0

      Your mom hasn't been funny in 20 years

      --
      I am trolling
    8. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by geekmux · · Score: 2

      That "NO CARRIER" thing hasn't been funny in 20 years.

      Not to mention watching an entire generation trying to figure out what the hell that means or grasp the concept of being disconnected at any time as they read this from the top of a mountain in the middle of nowhere from their 3G cell phone...

    9. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by malkavian · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Informative Post over Anonymous Coward?

    10. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by arielCo · · Score: 1

      Actually we'd never get the NO CARRIER notification from your modem, and even then you'd need to be on a plain-text BBS without PPP+TCP.

      There's more: to get the unfinished message, it'd have to be a char-by-char chat protocol like ICQ or the olden Unix chat. Otherwise, how did you hit [Submit] ?

      --
      This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
    11. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by h00manist · · Score: 2

      That "NO CARRIER" thing hasn't been funny in 20 years.

      Yeah, the modern equivalent would be something like
      -> www.google.com [enter]
      "Page failed to load. Server not found. Program failed to locate www.google.com."
      "Check the spelling, your network connection. If you are in France, check if someone has been downloading music and videos they love."

      The numbers are interesting. The "connection-less" will start being really interesting in real lively form, as soon as thousands of people start getting cut off and a social reaction starts. Perhaps the Pirate Party will elect some in France too.

      --
      Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
    12. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by poofmeisterp · · Score: 0

      That "NO CARRIER" thing hasn't been funny in 20 years.

      That's why it's funny now! :)

    13. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by h00manist · · Score: 1

      Actually everyone downloaded stacks of 1.44MB diskettes over 9600bps. Mp3 could easily be done too, especially with 56Kbps modems. But alas, MP3 took some time to come around.

      --
      Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
    14. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by foobsr · · Score: 0

      a social reaction starts

      And those 'social reactions' have some epic highlights in France.

      CC.

      --
      TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
    15. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2
      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    16. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      I remember downloading movies with a 26.4Kb/s modem (well, the modem was rated higher but that was all the phone line could support). They'd be uploaded in 1MB chunks to some of the free hosting sites. A load of us would each download a few of them, and pass the chunks on ZIP disk to someone who would burn a VideoCD of the final version for each of us. It took about a decade for the movie industry to give a legal way of doing something similar, and even then the client is crap and they only do streaming of a limited selection...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    17. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by inasity_rules · · Score: 0

      Submit has been made automatic on slashdot. Didn't you not@^%#&&@* NO CARRIER

      --
      I have determined that my sig is indeterminate.
    18. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by dyingtolive · · Score: 1

      Actually, that IS kind of funny.

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    19. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by dyingtolive · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but logic totally ruins the joke. It's like how if you post a Candlejack joke online (for those of us Freakazoid fans), you still couldn't have possib

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    20. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by Lifyre · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately the French population today probably has even less staying power than they did in '68...

      --
      I'll meet you at the intersection of "Should be" and "Reality"
    21. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by Dekker3D · · Score: 1

      While I appreciate the thought behind it, I think this line of jokes has run its!%$#$!^%!%! NO CARRIER

    22. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by trout007 · · Score: 2

      Remember asking people how to get out of the bbs board and when they typed exit they would get kicked out. Ahh the good old days.

      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    23. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wow really? What carrier do you use?!?!

    24. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by gknoy · · Score: 1

      Effectively torrenting over sneakernet. Impressive.

    25. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by MimeticLie · · Score: 1

      I thought the explanation was that Candlejack hit the submit button f

    26. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by Khashishi · · Score: 1

      Get with the times. Nobody uses dial-up anymore. Now it's NETWORK SERVICE UNAVAILABLE

    27. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny to fags like AbRASiON. People that use mixed case like that are fags.

    28. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by Lennie · · Score: 1

      Aww, do these youngsters not have Google or Bing ? ;-)

      Here, to make it easier:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NO_CARRIER

      Do you think the joke works better with "disconnected by peer" ?

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    29. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      Nowadays I'm more expecting to get serious protest actions performed on-line by disgruntled youngsters. DDOS attacks and so, Anonymous style. All they have to do is download some ... oh, wait....

    30. Re:There were supposed to be 61... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      In the meantime, that joke is only funny with Navy pilots anymore.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  2. Angry Voters by rtb61 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    650,000 warnings, that 650,000 people so far who are very unlikely to vote for Scarsleezy who snuck the law in with no public review. Guess who is going to lose the next election big time and what law will be changed by the next incoming President to ensure an extended political career.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    1. Re:Angry Voters by master5o1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think that's being just a tad too optimistic.

      --
      signature is pants
    2. Re:Angry Voters by Alarash · · Score: 0

      I didn't (and won't) vote for Sarkozy, and I hate that law, but it was not "snuck in." There was no public debate, true, and RIAA-like types did give free music download coupons and that sort of things to the deputies, but in the end it was a democratic vote where the majority (held by Sarkozy's party, the UMP) won. This is democracry or, rather, oligarchy, but you can't say it was "snuck in."

    3. Re:Angry Voters by tragedy · · Score: 2

      That's about 1% of the population of France. It seems pretty likely that those people will eventually get their third strike, but 1% of the population isn't really enough. To get the kind of network effects that would turn outrage over this into an actual movement, you'd have to hit something like 10%. Plus, since those people would be having their voice in modern society crippled by being disconnected from the Internet, it would be even harder for them. Just try to organise any sort of large movement in this day and age without Internet access.

    4. Re:Angry Voters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not quite. I believe the law was passes very late at night, after they'd indicated that no further voting would be performed until the next day. The opposition had called it a night and left.

    5. Re:Angry Voters by rtb61 · · Score: 2

      Did not not make it to the end of the article http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110906/14595315829/sarkozy-routes-around-parliament-ditches-net-neutrality-forces-copyright-clauses-into-all-isp-terms-service.shtml. "Sarkozy Routes Around Parliament, Ditches Net Neutrality, Forces Copyright Clauses Into All ISP Terms Of Service" that's the headline from linked to at the bottom of the article. Don't forget that's 650,000 households, 650,000 families and those families of course will have relatives and other associations beyond that and the law isn't even a month old, youch.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    6. Re:Angry Voters by Zocalo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      True, 650,000 is about 1% of the population. However that's not 650,000 people that have recieved HADOPI warning letters, it's 650,000 households. Figure an average of two adults plus a good chance of a late teenager about to get the right to vote and you could be looking at 1.5 million people on the first step towards disconnection. Then there's student digs and bedsits where you could potentially be looking at five or more people on a shared connection - France has a large population of immigrants from across the EU and Northern Africa so I'd imagine the actual number of individuals might be much higher.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    7. Re:Angry Voters by toQDuj · · Score: 1

      Sure, but I cannot imagine the music industry letting it get too large, fearing a backlash. Now, it's just a fringe of the populace which has been caught, enough so you have a friend of a friend who got a message, but not enough that you have mass disconnects. If the group is small enough, you will never consider yourself a possible member.

      --
      Every experiment which ends in a big bang is a good experiment.
    8. Re:Angry Voters by luminousone11 · · Score: 1

      1% of households more likely, so triple to quadruple that 1% to the actual number of people effected by the law, Also note that people most effected by the law are likely of voting age, along with plenty of non-directly effected people who can see the effects of this law by observation of those that are effected. I would bet after you weight some of these factors in that you have closer to that 10% you speak of, and if you count it based on voting eligible it is likely higher.

    9. Re:Angry Voters by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Yes, it's about 1% of the population but about 2.5% of all households. Pretty much everyone will know someone, friends or family who has gotten such a notice. I would guess those that are first hit are those renting out apartments, typically the internet subscription is in the name of the one renting out while the tenants are doing the infringing. That should quickly escalate to a debate where the person disconnected is not the "bad guy" nor are most of the tenants. My prediction is that this will turn into a PR mess soon.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    10. Re:Angry Voters by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Indeed, the French pirate party split in 3 and then merged again. Not exactly the best strategy to convince people to vote for you...

    11. Re:Angry Voters by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Plus, count friends and families of those who received letters. You can bet this conversation will come up during lots of meals and drinks. If you personally know somebody who got struck by this asinine law, it's much easier to get worked up against it than if you just read in an anonymous blog about it.

    12. Re:Angry Voters by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Indeed, the French pirate party split in 3 and then merged again. Not exactly the best strategy to convince people to vote for you...

      Maybe they can attract Catholics that way. After all, now they are also a trinity. :-)

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    13. Re:Angry Voters by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      Serious questions about this law: is it connection based, or account holder based? How's the disconnection work?

      In case of the first: how about you're disconnected, a month later move out, then new tenant/owner of the place remains disconnected?

      In case of the second: you're landlord and account holder of the Internet connection of the flat you let out, tenant downloads stuff, gets three strikes, and gets disconnected, will they also disconnect your personal connection?

      Also these disconnections, how long are they supposed to last? Is there a time span for it? All I hear is "offenders will be disconnected" but not for how long, suggesting it's a life time ban.

    14. Re:Angry Voters by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      Sarkozy will probably not be reelected. Polls are very bad for him. his party has tried to seduce the internet crowd a bit last year but apparently decided that it is definitely lost to them (and rightly so). They simply do not understand this network of tube through which computers communicate with each other.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    15. Re:Angry Voters by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      Anyway, without a proportional vote like in Germany and with such a high barrier to get reimbursed in your election costs (To get public funding you need 5% of votes vs 0.7% in Germany) there is no chance at all that the pirate party gets a good score ever.

      In France, the way to fame is through the presidential election : candidates have to be given equal time in the media. But the PP decided not to go.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    16. Re:Angry Voters by BlackCreek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I live in France, and don't know of any one who's got that letter. I think a lot of people in my age and income bracket would be embarrassed to mention they got suck a letter.

      What _really_ sucks (not only in France, but in most of Europe AFAIK) is that I have no way of easily renting/buying videos through the internet. All choices I've looked at had a really old and incomplete catalogue. Last I tried to check that was in the beginning of the year, and all alternatives sucked big. I live in Paris (i.e. square meters cost a lot), there is no way I will pile up DVDs in the house.

      I can understand that French parliament was lead (read: bought) into writing this legislation, but I really can't understand they did that without requiring the industry to put a legal alternative in place.

    17. Re:Angry Voters by Coeurderoy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Unfortunatelly no, that is about 550 000 people who didn't see the first letter (was sent to the wrong email address)
      90 000 who didn't read it (many people bellow 20 only use IM)
      5 000 who do not care and would not vote anyway
      2500 who would not have voted Sarcosy anyway
      2000 who would vote for sarcosy despite this because they consider it little more than a parking fine..
      500 might change their vote maybe if they can bother about it...

      Moreover the "socialist" (about as socialist as the US democrats are democratic or the republican are republican, that is very little)
      did not really fight the HADOPI, they did some populist show about a "global licence" from their "left wing" (that would be an ISP tax that would give a licence to copy, but only music not movies, so would have solved about nothing), but in reality they are thick in bed with UNIVERSAL...

      When we did a "demonstration" against DADVSI only 400 people came, for HADOPI we didn't even bother...
      We are living in a situation where government make laws that criminalize people but in a way that enforcement can be completelly arbitrary, it's very convenient, "everybody is guilty of something" we can arrest them whenever we want to... what fun...

    18. Re:Angry Voters by Joce640k · · Score: 2

      There was no public debate, true, and RIAA-like types did give free music download coupons and that sort of things to the deputies,

      Is that all it takes to buy a law in France...?

      --
      No sig today...
    19. Re:Angry Voters by Robert+Zenz · · Score: 1

      ...that's the headline from linked to at the bottom of the article.

      Headlines do not count. There was once a headline in the "Heute"-Newspaper here in Austria, (poorly translated by me) "Boy hit by subway". So, what are the first thoughts you have? A child being overrun by the subway because it fell on the tracks? Well, a little bit off...it was a 22-year old which was too dumb to get behind the orange line and got streaked by the train (broken arm).

    20. Re:Angry Voters by Pi1grim · · Score: 1

      When those 550 000 get their internet connection cut off it won't matter if they received the first letter warning or not. And, actually, for a person who got cut off the internet lifting this bas is actually quite a good reason to go vote for the first guy who promises to lift it and remove this law. Hitting 2.5% of the households is not bad. When people get hit where it hurts — it's more probable that they will start acting. Heck, if the RIAA sued every student that ever downloaded MP3 for millions of dollars, not just several of them — we would see the RIAA smashed in several month. The only reason why we have copyright lobby stomping all over people's rights is because noone cares untill it knocks on the door and so far it still hadn't knocked.

    21. Re:Angry Voters by Coeurderoy · · Score: 1

      So do not worry they will only knock after the next election, and I doubt very much that the result of the next election has any credible way to change this.

    22. Re:Angry Voters by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 0

      Maybe they can attract Catholics that way. After all, now they are also a trinity. :-)

      NAMBLA, if they had a French office, would appear a better option for Catholics looking to form a coalition.

      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
    23. Re:Angry Voters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No need to wait for the next election, just wait half a year. By then we'll be seeing France trying to force a ISP bailout as all their carriers start facing bankrupcy due to... not having any customers.

    24. Re:Angry Voters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What _really_ sucks (not only in France, but in most of Europe AFAIK) is that I have no way of easily renting/buying videos through the internet. All choices I've looked at had a really old and incomplete catalogue. Last I tried to check that was in the beginning of the year, and all alternatives sucked big. I live in Paris (i.e. square meters cost a lot), there is no way I will pile up DVDs in the house.

      In Finland several companies try to push such services down our throats all the time...

      Edit:
      Oh, dear, the captcha is "prison", is it an omen? ;)

    25. Re:Angry Voters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they're politicians under the industry's pressure

      they don't *care* if you understand.

    26. Re:Angry Voters by klapaucjusz · · Score: 1

      Serious questions about this law: is it connection based, or account holder based?

      Subscriber based -- the disconnection is linked to the real-world identity of the subscriber. (In France, you cannot even buy a pre-paid telephone SIM without showing id.)

      In case of the second: you're landlord and account holder of the Internet connection of the flat you let out, tenant downloads stuff, gets three strikes, and gets disconnected, will they also disconnect your personal connection?

      In principle, yes.

      You may want to read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HADOPI .

      --jch

    27. Re:Angry Voters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "(1) An email message is sent to the offending internet access subscriber, derived from the IP address involved in the claim. The email specifies the time of the claim but neither the object of the claim nor the identity of the claimant."
       
      I assume that depriving the accused of information is a measure to keep them from trying to appeal. If they don't know what they did, how can they say they didn't do it?

    28. Re:Angry Voters by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      These days even a mediocre computer can rip a DVD and make an MPEG4 file. Maybe you should organize a DVD-borrowing society. What you do with the disc while you have it is your business.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    29. Re:Angry Voters by Serpents · · Score: 1

      Sure, but I cannot imagine the music industry letting it get too large, fearing a backlash.

      Really? Judging by the blanket lawsuits some copyright owners filed in th US and now in Australia they seem to think that it's "the more the merrier"

    30. Re:Angry Voters by UnoriginalBoringNick · · Score: 2

      From the translation of the Hadopi law (provided here: http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/HADOPI_full_translation

      "Art. L. 331-27. - When it is held that the subscriber has failed to recognize the obligation defined in article L 336-3 during the year following the reception of an injunction sent by the committee for protection of rights and accompanied by a receipted letter or any other method needed to establish proof of the date that the injunction was sent and that when the subscriber received it, the committee may, after a hearing, pronounce, as a result of the gravity of the violations and the use of access, one of the following sanctions:

      "1 The suspension of access to service for a duration of two months to one year accompanied by making it impossible for the subscriber to subscribe during that period to another contract giving access to a public on line communication service with any operator;

      "2 A warning to take, within a time it determines, measures to prevent the renewal of the accused violation, particularly a method of security found on the list defined in the second paragraph of article L. 331-32, and to inform the High Authority, if necessary under duress.

      I heard somewhere that Item 2 hints at the possibility of putting some "Approved Software" on the subscribers' PC(s) which will monitor activity and stop the PC(s) infringing copyright. No doubt it would only run on Windows. However it is very hard to find any real information about this. The referenced article 331-32 looks like it might have some meat in it but alas no...

      "Art. L. 331-32. - After consultating the creators of means of security intended to prevent illicit use of access to a public on line communication service, entities whose activity is to offer access to such a service, as well as companies governed by title II of this book and duly constituted professional societies, the High Authority makes public the functionally pertinent specifications presented by these means considered, in its view, as exonerating from responsibility the owners of such access under the conditions of article L. 336-3.

      "In the course of a procedure of certified evaluation of their conformity to the specifications set forth in the first paragraph and their effectiveness, the High Authority establishes a list characterizing the methods of security whose use exonerates the owner of access of his responsibility with respect to article L. 336-3. This characterization is periodically reviewed.

      "A decree of the Council of State specifies the evaluation procedure to characterize these methods of security.

      Maybe the referenced Article L.336-3 will explain...

      "Art. L. 336-3. - The owner of access to online public communication services has an obligation to watch that this access is not being used for purposes of reproduction, representation, making available or communication to the public of works or objects protected by right of authorship or a related right without permission of copyright holders when it is required as stated in books I and II.

      "No sanction can be taken against the owner of the access in the following cases:

      "1 If the owner of the access has secured his access through one of the means on the list mentioned in the second paragraph of article L. 331-32 ;

      "2 If the rights infringement referred to in the first paragraph of this article is committed by a person who fraudulently used the access to online public communication service;

      "3 In case of force majeure.

      "The breaching of the obligation defined in the first paragraph by an access owner hasn't the effect of involving his penal reponsibility.

      ... and maybe not.

      I also understand that the line remains in service and the subscriber is billed for it (unless she chooses to pay to terminate the connection) but only commercially

    31. Re:Angry Voters by klapaucjusz · · Score: 1
      If you read French, you may want to see this sample of a second strike HADOPI letter.

      --jch

    32. Re:Angry Voters by citizenr · · Score: 0

      I was expecting someone throwing sandwiches :(

      --
      Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
    33. Re:Angry Voters by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 0

      The French have always been cheap.

    34. Re:Angry Voters by Feyshtey · · Score: 1

      600,000 is ~1% of the population. If the election is going to hinge on whether or not 1% of the population got their hands slapped for theft, then the whiney little entitlement Eurobrats are far more out of control that I'd thought. Only .1% are actually in danger of being punished.

      --
      "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
    35. Re:Angry Voters by BlackCreek · · Score: 1

      I either buy DVDs or get them at a local public library. Like with books before I got a Kindle, the nuisance of getting videos (ordering DVD + shelve space, physically going to the library), means we watch less movies than we would otherwise. Having a small baby means going to the cinema is not a trivial thing to do.

      My point is that the lack of convenience for getting movies at home is such that even people with the cash to spare don't buy DVDs.

      > These days even a mediocre computer can rip a DVD and make an MPEG4 file.

      We have an iPad, an MacBookAir, a Lenovo X220, a 5 year old desktop, and a NAS. The desktop is the only one with a DVD drive and my intention is to get rid of it, soonish. The DVD drive is not enough to keep it. I guess I should say "mediocre computers can rip DVDs, the ones I want to have at home can't".

    36. Re:Angry Voters by Feyshtey · · Score: 1

      So let me get this straight... because you dont want to have to leave your apartment, and because its a massive hardship to have a dvd binder on a shelf, you should be allowed to steal.

      http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827998006 If you bought one of these you could have 400 movies/albums in a smaller space than you would consume with one law book. If the amount of space it would take to have one shelf in one bookcase filled with those binders is such a massive financial burden, then there's no way you could afford the 1000's of disks it would contain, which brings us a hell of a lot closer to your real problem with this law....

      --
      "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
    37. Re:Angry Voters by Nikker · · Score: 1

      Maybe some one can clear this up for me. Lets just say in a month or two 200K or so people get knocked off the internet. Doesn't this mean the ISP will start to lose money in quite large proportions? Will each customer still have to pay their monthly fee regardless of being denied service?

      This looks like either economic or political suicide all balanced on the idea that the people will react the way the ISP/Politicians will want them to just by cutting a few off. Does this sound risky to anyone else? Makes no sense to me since most people can't even tell in many cases that they apparently are infringing. On top of that how long till a couple of board script kiddies start injecting this material into connections effectively shutting down a nations internet all at once?

      Does anyone ever think anything through anymore?

      --
      A loop, by its nature, continues. If that didn't make sense, start reading this sentence again.
    38. Re:Angry Voters by BlackCreek · · Score: 1

      > So let me get this straight... because you dont want to have to leave your apartment, and because its a massive hardship to have a dvd binder on a shelf, you should be allowed to steal.

      Let me get this straight: get your reading comprehension improved because it sucks.

      Hard to answer without swearing. First downloading torrents is not stealing. Second, what exactly lead you to conclude that I download illegally? Does anyone complaining of the lack of legal digital video download options is to be taken as a criminal?

      If you are so interested in my media habits I invite you to read this post (posted before your retarded reply BTW) http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2462320&cid=37624726

    39. Re:Angry Voters by nedlohs · · Score: 1, Informative

      I live in Paris (i.e. square meters cost a lot), there is no way I will pile up DVDs in the house.

      Are you serious?!? Rationalize much?

      I live in Manhattan where square meters also cost a lot. I have 100 DVDs sitting in front of me. They are on a spool which is a huge 7 inches tall. Given DVDs have a diameter of 12cm and there's a bit under half an inch of spool base sticking out all round, we have a box 14.5 cm x 14.5cm x 18cm.

      You don't have room for such a "pile"? You could hang it from the ceiling, taking up no square meters. I'm sure you have 15cm of shelf width somewhere in that house

    40. Re:Angry Voters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it does exist...the local municipal bibliotheques do lend dvd's and CD's and though not very recent releases you can find good stuff. but... ripping stuff from CD's is really a waste of time. Almost everything I need is already in the tubes

    41. Re:Angry Voters by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      650,000 people so far who are very unlikely to vote for Scarsleezy who snuck the law in with no public review. Guess who is going to lose the next election big time and what law will be changed by the next incoming President to ensure an extended political career.

      Sure, that would be great, but I am not that naive. See also: "Microsoft's last mistake is going to be the one to put them under for good" and: "This is the year of Linux on the desktop" for other bold predictions that didn't pan out.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    42. Re:Angry Voters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Love Film in the UK has a streaming side along with DVD/Blurays by post.

      Admittedly the streaming side needs more titles, but at least it is improving. Even better now there is a ps3 application.

    43. Re:Angry Voters by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      I'm betting it'd be all it takes to buy a law here.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    44. Re:Angry Voters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      - Sir, here's a free music coupon as a gift for you...

      - I surrender!

    45. Re:Angry Voters by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      Nice try. Newegg don't ship outside the USA.

    46. Re:Angry Voters by BlackCreek · · Score: 1

      I live in Paris (i.e. square meters cost a lot), there is no way I will pile up DVDs in the house.

      Are you serious?!? Rationalize much?

      Actually, yes, I am serious. But then you should not take me too literally. I meant to say, I have no basement or a big flat with spare rooms. Flat area is relatively small.

      I live in Manhattan where square meters also cost a lot. I have 100 DVDs sitting in front of me. They are on a spool which is a huge 7 inches tall. Given DVDs have a diameter of 12cm and there's a bit under half an inch of spool base sticking out all round, we have a box 14.5 cm x 14.5cm x 18cm.

      You don't have room for such a "pile"? You could hang it from the ceiling, taking up no square meters. I'm sure you have 15cm of shelf width somewhere in that house

      The point is that I don't want to have more "stuff" in the flat. I don't want to have boxes full books that don't fit the shelves, nor stacks of DVDs, or stacks of paper. I live here ;-) I'd rather have an emptier home (*looks around*: boxes of all sorts of stuff, books piled on top of the IKEA shelve, cables running around the table). (I work remotely so I get to look around the house during working hours ;-)). Of course I could stuff it somewhere but then it would be even more "stuff" stuffed at places, and I want to avoid that as much as possible. Don't tell me to buy more storage and rip it, I already own a NAS, and I want to get rid of the last computer with a DVD drive in the house.

      I donated all old books that I thought I wasn't going to read again. Unless its work related, I only buy digital books (love the Kindle). I actually donated an old printer primarily because it was not wireless and there was no good place to run the USB cable to the router or desktop (which I will hopefully get rid of).

      The local video/media library has titles but not that many. We (me+wife) buy DVDs when we really want to see something. My whole point is that the media industry puts so much money and effort to get these laws passed, but they don't really work to take the money from people like me who can afford it but really needs/wants it with 'digital convenience'.

    47. Re:Angry Voters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      5 hours+ before you posted this drivel it was posted repeatedly that it is HOUSEHOLDS, therefore closer to 2.5%. I realize you are new here, but please read.

    48. Re:Angry Voters by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I have numerous computers with DVD, and numerous ones without, and I also have an Asus USB2 DVD burner.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    49. Re:Angry Voters by ponchietto · · Score: 1

      I once lived in 18 squared meters, I had friends in 12.

      Unless you are a Tibet Monk, you will probably have something else already taking up the space.

    50. Re:Angry Voters by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      The media industry doesn't have to provide you with what you want. They'll do what they think will make them more money. They certainly don't want people downloading their stuff (and them not acting as gatekeepers). Maybe they would rather the TV stations pay them more money for broadcast rights than dealing with downloads - it doesn't matter how dumb you might think they are being it's their stuff to do what they want with.

      You can buy a DVD watch it and then throw it in the garbage if you don't want the inconvenience of storing it, for all they care. Or sell it - though they'd rather you shredded and binned it obviously.

    51. Re:Angry Voters by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      So throw out the DVD player so and put the spindle of DVDs where it was. Problem solved!

    52. Re:Angry Voters by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 1

      You realize that in Paris, they rent rooms that are 10 square meters? I.e., about 100 square feet? Nobody has a house in Paris, unless they are part of the old aristocracy or managed to get filthy rich through legal or less legal means. Which means that discussions about how much space a DVD spindle takes up is quite real.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    53. Re:Angry Voters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you have so little space, where the hell are you going to put the bloody TV??

    54. Re:Angry Voters by Alarash · · Score: 1

      Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there were others, more subtle and hidden "tips." It was also the first time people that weren't Representatives were allowed inside the Assembly during deliberations. I didn't check that fact by myself, but it was said on the news back when it happened.

    55. Re:Angry Voters by eth1 · · Score: 2

      And I'm sure it will snowball quickly. Everyone who's disconnected will be connecting to any open wireless or other access they can find, and ultimately probably getting completely innocent people disconnected as well. Then they'll just move on to the next source of access.

    56. Re:Angry Voters by Zebedeu · · Score: 1

      The media industry doesn't have to provide you with what you want. They'll do what they think will make them more money.

      Usually companies make more money by supplying their customers with what they want.

      At least that's what happens in healthy industries.

    57. Re:Angry Voters by Feyshtey · · Score: 1

      I did read. The basis for that argument is ridiculous. It suggests that the PARENTS in those HOUSEHOLDS of the MISCREANTS downloading pirated software are going to be pissed at Sarkosy for a law punishing juvenile delinquints. You may as well suggest that parents in France would rebel against government if their children were jailed for grand theft auto.

      (See how I used words in all caps, and now sarcasm to make my argument so much more compelling? You've taught me much.)

      --
      "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
    58. Re:Angry Voters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      seriously? putting dvds on a spool? tell me how many scratches you have on them in 10 years!

    59. Re:Angry Voters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Plus we now have something called "Question Prioritaire de Constitutionalité", whereby any citizen who's been indicted or convicted can request that the Conseil Constitutionel (out highest jurisdiction) pass a judgement on the law that was applied for the conviction or indictment to make sure it is indeed consistent and compliant with our Constitution, and HADOPI most certainly will fail this requisite

    60. Re:Angry Voters by Nyder · · Score: 1

      I think that the ISP will lobby the gov to change the bill after the number crunchers get done.

      Currtently they will be losing 60 less monthly subscription fees. If they had to cut off all the 650k people, that's a large chunk of monthly subscription money they are NOT getting anymore. For example, here in the states it cost roughly $65 for internet (both cable & dsl charges that for 6-12mbs Internet only subscription here in Seattle), $3900 less just for the 60, but $42,250,000 USD is how much money they'd lose a month if they had to 3 strike all they sent warnings to.

      And when it all comes down to everything, it's the money that will win out.

      The yearly cost for those 650k peeps?

      $507,000,000 USD. Half a million.

      Greed vs Greed, who will win?

      --
      Be seeing you...
    61. Re:Angry Voters by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Not really.

      I want to fly first class whenever I fly from New York to Los Angeles, but I only want to pay $50. I doubt any airlines are going to make more money by supplying what I want.

      Ah, but they do offer such a ticket it is just price you say?

      I want to watch on DVD format in the comfort of my living room whatever the new movie is on the day it is released in the cinemas. I doubt the movie studios are going to make more money supplying such a thing given the revenue they'll lose on the cinema release side.

    62. Re:Angry Voters by gknoy · · Score: 1

      Attached to the wall.

    63. Re:Angry Voters by Zebedeu · · Score: 1

      My point is that in healthy industries (i.e., where there is actual competition and they don't depend on government lobbying to conduct their business) companies risk more and try out different business strategies in order to be able to supply what their customers need while sustaining their business.

      Media companies, on the other hand, are being dragged kicking and screaming into the digital era. Hell, they've been dragged almost every time there was any kind of format shift (radio, cassettes, recordable CDs, etc).
      Meanwhile, other companies which embraced those technologies (like Apple and Netflix) are cleaning up, even if they've had to do it while fighting the media companies at every step.

    64. Re:Angry Voters by Feyshtey · · Score: 1

      Are you actually going to suggest that something comparable (or likely that exact product) cant be purchased from one of a dozen local outlets or online stores in Paris?

      --
      "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
    65. Re:Angry Voters by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      So you advocate throwing away all the dvd cases that all those movies originally came in?
      And 400 movies could easily fit on a modern HDD, which is considerably smaller than the binder, and be much easier to index/search.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    66. Re:Angry Voters by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      The problem is that it requires an application...
      It should just provide the video over a standard protocol in a standard format so you can view it on any device you choose.... Until they provide this, i won't be signing up to any such services.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    67. Re:Angry Voters by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      How large is the majority of the winners? I doubt it was more than a few %...
      What percentage of people actually vote? I bet voted turnout is well under 50%...
      Also that 1% of population have friends and family, and many of those connections being shut off will be shared by multiple people in any case. Also losing 600k customers is gonna be pretty painful for the major ISPs.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    68. Re:Angry Voters by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      By now not having internet connection is like not having electricity: unthinkable for most people.

      While your connection is cut off due to HADOPI, you continue to pay for it, and you are not allowed to go to another ISP.

    69. Re:Angry Voters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      650,000 warnings, that 650,000 people so far who are very unlikely to vote for Scarsleezy who snuck the law in with no public review. Guess who is going to lose the next election big time and what law will be changed by the next incoming President to ensure an extended political career.

      On an unrelated not, France announced plans to switch to 'internet only' voting....

    70. Re:Angry Voters by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      ISP are losing nothing. While the internet connection is cut off, it continues to get billed.

    71. Re:Angry Voters by Coeurderoy · · Score: 1

      Assuming the Conseil Constitutionel takes the case, ... wich is not so clear..
      Although some member might be interested in embarassing sarkosy

    72. Re:Angry Voters by Feyshtey · · Score: 1
      Apparently my reading comprehension is perfect, but your ability to articulate a thought sucks. Your ethics appear considerably tainted as well.

      First downloading torrents is not stealing.

      If someone produces a product, and you take that product without compensating the person who produced it, you are stealing. In the case of digital media, proving this in court might provide a prosecutor with some degree of challenge, but morally there's no ambiguity. You knowingly made the choice to take that which is not yours. The packaging of that product doesnt change this simple truth in any way, shape or form, and the fact that it's a torrent is irrelevant. If it's not a legally purchased license for your personal use, then it's theft. Period.

      Second, what exactly lead you to conclude that I download illegally?

      To start, my conclusion that you do pirate would be no more a leap than you suggesting that I've accused you of it. Did I say that you pirated? No. My arguments were quite pointedly a condemnation of a defense for piracy that involves lack of choices, lack of legal alternatives, lack of space to store disks, and a lack of desire to leave your home and go to a store to purchase a disk. These are all things you cited as reasons for piracy, and they are all crap arguments.
      1) There's no ambiguity about the space concern you have on dvd's because it's a straw man argument. You stated that you cant have dvd's because they take up too much space which costs you too much. I pointed out that you're flat out wrong. There was no misscommunication.
      2) There's no ambiguity about whether or not you should choose to go to a store to buy a legal copy or instead download a pirated version. I pointed that out and there's no misscommunication.
      3) The industry is under no obligation to provide you a way to purchase their product. The product is not a human right, nor a necessity, so any argument suggesting that you had no alternative is wholly false. The alternative of course is; Do without it. You can be pissed at anyone you want and protest all you want about the impossibility of getting a product through some legal free trade agreement or whatever. I'd be right there with you supporting your cause (and I am...). But you cant dismiss your greed for something overshadowing your ethics. Either you do what's right, or you dont.

      In response to your other post;
      How is it that you cant afford dvd's but you can afford no less than 5 pieces of hardware? That aside, "convenience" doesnt enter into the equation on a topic of ethics. Being ethical and moral can certainly be inconvenient. It's the submission to convenience at the cost of ethics and morals that should be pointed out at every turn, as I have with you.

      "I'm sorry officer. It was just far more convenient to take my neighbors new flatscreen rather than get a job, save some money, buy a tv and pay to have it delivered. What a bitch that would have been, eh?"

      --
      "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
    73. Re:Angry Voters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So we must all waste space just because you do so...

      DVDs have other disadvantages against, say, a flash drive or a hard drive. Actually looking for DVDs is also inefficient. Checking for the validity of the data is also inefficient.

    74. Re:Angry Voters by Jibekn · · Score: 1

      Actually, yes they damn well do, or I'm going to steal from them, their choice.

    75. Re:Angry Voters by Jibekn · · Score: 1

      Continue to pay for it? Im calling BS.

      I can see having to pay your final month, but do they seriously expect people to keep paying for a service they cant use? Ide be literally telling the company to blow me.

    76. Re:Angry Voters by Jibekn · · Score: 1

      Good luck collecting.

    77. Re:Angry Voters by Feyshtey · · Score: 1

      No, I advocate using a bookcase or a dvd filer like most people would. But if it really is such a hardship to put a 1' x 4' x 6' bookcase someplace in an apartment the easy managable solution is a disk binder. And what is there about the case that's so important? A pretty picture? The folks arguing the logic here are the ones saying it's far easier to use a computer.... but you cant look up anything that would be on the case on your computer instead?

      And you yourself actually provide yet another simple solution. Buy the dvd, burn it to your computer, and store the original disk (and it's case) in a box somewhere. In most cases making a single digital backup for your personal use is perfectly legal.

      --
      "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
    78. Re:Angry Voters by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      you should be allowed to steal.

      Infringe upon copyright. Not "steal."

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    79. Re:Angry Voters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just try to organise any sort of large movement in this day and age without Internet access

      Which is the very reason UN talks about internet access as part of actualizing political rights for the individual.

    80. Re:Angry Voters by zzyzyx · · Score: 1

      All the current candidates from the left parties have stated that they would repel the law, some even "within the first week". And there is a very high probability that the votes will swing to the left in the next elections, so it's not that unlikely.

      However there is a saying in France, famously put by former president Jacques Chirac : "Promises commit only those who believe them".

    81. Re:Angry Voters by Feyshtey · · Score: 1

      I've heard the argument about the lost business for the ISPs a few times now. And yet not one person has talked about the lost business, lost jobs, and loss of talented full time artists producing goods you actually desire a pirated copy of if you actually get what you want and digital copies arent subject to laws like the one under discussion here.

      In order for the thousands of people to continue to get paid for producing all this intelectual property, someone does actualy have to pay for it. Basically your position then is that you only need some number of honest people paying for them so that you can continue to get them for free. With movies, games and software costing into the millions to produce, that cost is passed on to people who are honest and pay for it. Fewer people paying, the price must necessarily be raised. So an argument could actually be made that you're stealing from me too...

      For all the self-righteous bullshit being slung around here, the bottom line is these people want their copy for free, and are perfectly happy leeching off of honest people to get it.

      --
      "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
    82. Re:Angry Voters by mhajicek · · Score: 1

      Obama promised to close Guantanamo; it's still operating. He promised to end indefinite detention, and has since endorsed it. You think any of those candidates will keep their word?

    83. Re:Angry Voters by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      It's a game of chances. Chances are simply higher that the lefties will repeal it than Petit Napoleon.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    84. Re:Angry Voters by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      People would have more sympathy for content producers if copyright terms were reasonable...

      The ISP only gets paid so long as they continue to provide service, if they stop providing service then they get nothing. It costs them money to provide service, and so its a fair exchange to pay them to continue. Do you think the ISP should continue to get paid because you were able to use their service to download data at some point in the past?

      The same should be true of content producers, they should get paid only so long as they are working for that money. They should not be getting paid for content they produced 50 years ago.
      Everyone else has to work for their money, why should someone who produces media get special treatment?

      If copyright terms become more reasonable then i am all for tougher enforcement of them. Until then, those content sellers are trying to screw us, so screw them.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    85. Re:Angry Voters by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      It may well be legal to make a single digital backup of a DVD for your personal use, but it would not be possible if CSS had not been cracked.

      Same applies to bluray, which includes a new copy protection scheme...

      This is a case of big content trying to take away our rights...

      If we buy a copy of a movie or any other media, we should have the right to:

      Make backups for personal use
      Format shift for personal use (eg onto a fileserver, or transcode for playing on a portable device)
      Sell the original when we no longer want it, assuming we delete, transfer together or otherwise destroy any other copies we have made

      And yet DRM schemes seek to take away these rights, and label those who would wish to exercise them as pirates. It's a slippery slope and only gets worse...

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    86. Re:Angry Voters by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the proper solution would be to report the president's residence, 650,000 times.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    87. Re:Angry Voters by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      Get a USB enclosure - and don't you dare throw out that desktop - some people need them - donate it, and spread the word, please.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
    88. Re:Angry Voters by KingBenny · · Score: 1

      it depends actually only about 1/5th of the french population actually voted or did he get elected with only 20% of the possible number of votes because hardly anyone voted? Anyway, i suppose the people who voted were mostly slightly to extremely right-wing so i dont know if the others can be bothered with anything at all, i sure hope he gets a spanking for using legislation as leverage for carla bruni's career

      --
      Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
  3. Just wait... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... for the first politician to get his third strike.

    Oh, who am I kidding.

  4. MPAA's Three Strikes by Sasayaki · · Score: 5, Informative

    Strike 1: http://gizmodo.com/329648/mpaas-university-toolkit-taken-down-for-violating-copyright
    Strike 2: http://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-steals-code-violates-linkware-license/
    Strike 3: http://www.amdzone.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=95638

    BOOM!

    No more MPAA! They're offline forever! After all, the law is just and equal and fair and blind, right? And the MPAA -- the people who, let's face it, basically *wrote* this law -- should be held to the highest standard themselves. They, more than anyone else, cannot call it a youthful mistake, or a silly error in judgement, or ignorance or anything else... they have zero excuse and so accordingly they will be punished for their obvious and flagrant transgressions!

    Right? ... right?

    --
    Check out my sci-fi book "Lacuna" at http://goo.gl/MVxX8
    1. Re:MPAA's Three Strikes by Jbcarpen · · Score: 0

      Oh for mod points. Someone mod them up please.

      --
      GENERATION 667: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation
    2. Re:MPAA's Three Strikes by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      The MPAA is an American organization and does not fall under French authority.
       
      Thanks for playing, karma whore.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    3. Re:MPAA's Three Strikes by Sasayaki · · Score: 1

      Their reach certainly seems to stretch into French courts and French lawmakers.

      And if that's the case, why don't I just create a new corporation every time I download a file (or every time I get caught) so I never, personally, get any strikes, but each of my corporations gets one each before being discarded?

      Oh, you're saying that hiding behind a corporate veil only works for the rich and powerful?

      Damn.

      --
      Check out my sci-fi book "Lacuna" at http://goo.gl/MVxX8
    4. Re:MPAA's Three Strikes by mgiuca · · Score: 1

      You're deluded if you think that the MPAA has nothing to do with writing copyright laws either in the US or abroad. They do.

      And this is not just a French issue. MPAA has been lobbying across the world to get three-strikes laws implemented. I don't have time to find citations now but if you argue with me, I will.

  5. Friend to sign up /mobile internet /Human Rights by dredwerker · · Score: 1

    Surely you get a friend or relative to sign up for the connection. Also what happens if you work from home ? What Internet on your phone? Pay as you go etc.. Then I can see a human rights problem, if a cat gets you to say in the UK surely the Internet and connectivity in general will be an abuse of human rights :) Then there is open wifi etc.. Community wifi for banned people :)

    --
    On a long enough timeline. The survival rate for everyone drops to zero. Chuck Palahniuk, Fight Club, 1996
  6. My roleks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    My Roleks wrist watch was about $10, but original Rolex is about $8000. Does that mean i stole $8000 from Rolex, because that's a sale they didn't make?

    1. Re:My roleks by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2

      My Roleks wrist watch was about $10, but original Rolex is about $8000. Does that mean i stole $8000 from Rolex, because that's a sale they didn't make?

      Of course. Also, by buying the Roleks, you helped the manufacturer to build even more Roleks watches, thus increasing the damage. Also, since you wear that Roleks watch, people who see it might be led to buy one, too. So I'm sure the WWAA (Wrist Watch Association of America) will sue you for about $100 billion.

      Oh, wait, make that $200 billion, because you posted on Slashdot about it.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    2. Re:My roleks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget all the terrorism, human trafficking and child porn he supports by buying a Roleks!

  7. Can't stop everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now watch as there will be a sudden increase of Backtrack downloads from France IP's.

  8. Re:Friend to sign up /mobile internet /Human Right by Dark+Lord+of+Ohio · · Score: 1

    Surely you get a friend or relative to sign up for the connection. Also what happens if you work from home ? What Internet on your phone? Pay as you go etc.. Then I can see a human rights problem, if a cat gets you to say in the UK surely the Internet and connectivity in general will be an abuse of human rights :) Then there is open wifi etc.. Community wifi for banned people :)

    I am not sure they are able to ban these people permanently or put hard limitations for Internet users. Internet is too decentralized for one governmental entity to control it, so until there is no Thought Police there is no danger for freedom of the internet. But, someday one government may break the thin line between democracy and totalitarism and will cut all the cables. Look what happened in Libya or Egipt. They shut down internet services but somehow still were able to communicate with the "outside" world. But this requires more just a few bad men.

  9. Satellite by argee · · Score: 0

    I can predict the future: A Satellite Internet Provider is going to gain 60 new customers.

  10. Re:This is rediculous by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 1

    You can't possibly allow people to be permenently disconnected from the internet. To me personally, that is denial of freedoms. We couldn't enjoy things like Facebook.

    I would think any law forcing people out of Facebook is a good law.

    Perhaps you should have used denied access to Wikipedia as an example of a true loss in the lives of HADOPI victims instead...

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  11. I, for one, find this a welcome development by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1, Funny

    Let's face it - this is France we're talking about, so some significant percentage of these people adore Jerry Lewis. That, in and of itself, is worthy of a lifetime ban from all internet activity. Heck, those people should be required never to interact with another human being again.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:I, for one, find this a welcome development by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please, next time, go buy a brain to the nearest store before posting. :-D

    2. Re:I, for one, find this a welcome development by Feyshtey · · Score: 1

      Please, next time, go buy a brain to the nearest store before posting. :-D

      Pure ironic gold. Thank you.

      --
      "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
  12. Re:Friend to sign up /mobile internet /Human Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The cat thing is getting annoying. Don't believe everything you hear/read. That stupid woman ranting about how a cat allows an illegal immigrant to stay in the UK is just trying to scare the public about how bad the Human Rights Act is. There is a lot more to the story than a cat.

  13. Silly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The question is how many of those 650,000 are high-profile people (eg people who definitely could afford it, but are too lazy and/or cheap to) eventually reach the third strike.

    As for "what was stolen" this is often a straw argument to deflect the blame.

    With physical media, making a copy, is often a labour intensive process, it only became cheap with the advent of the printing press, and subsequent technology. So back when copyright laws were invented, there was still a time and effort required to copy anything, so making copies of something someone else made required access to the original item and significant amount of time to produce a copy.

    We hit the slippery slope with the advent of cheaply produced CD and DVD's. The cost to make a CD or DVD is in the pennies, but the time to produce the original work is extremely high. The time to produce a copy? a few seconds. How else would China get away with copying all of Disney's films and putting them into a 110disc box to sell it for 50$? Look around, you'll find most of the chinese piracy is for popular TV shows and movies that aren't yet available legally, or in the case of EU and AU, only available in the US. The region coding system has in fact increased piracy (because chinese produced counterfeits are all region 0, and NA/JP/EU/AU players will all play region 0 discs, oops someone didn't think region codes through very much.)

    So who loses money when people pirate using the internet? You may laugh, but it's other pirates. The people who pirate TV shows, DVD's and games are all cheap bastards who weren't going to buy it anyway, but the instant-availability of this stuff on the internet means only really stupid people buy chinese bootleg copies. So that's actually more of a win. The difficulty is getting people to pay for the content instead of simply pirating it.

    So how do you do that? You don't. Not directly anyway. What you instead do is appeal directly to the fans (eg the very people who buy the product) to pre-order/pre-pay in advance to first to see/watch/listen/play, Once enough pre-orders are queued to produce, make sure the costs are all fixed, and go. All purchases after-the-fact are then considered gravy. If your product stinks, people won't order the next one. Simple as that. Start with digital distribution and produce physical media only while there is a demand for it.

    So that's what needs to happen, is that the business model needs to change from "large investment, and attempt to recoup costs with sales" to "pre-budget the investment, rewarding the investors first", removing most of the middle-men in the process.

    1. Re:Silly by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      With physical media, making a copy, is often a labour intensive process, it only became cheap with the advent of the printing press, and subsequent technology. So back when copyright laws were invented, there was still a time and effort required to copy anything, so making copies of something someone else made required access to the original item and significant amount of time to produce a copy.

      You have that completely backwards. The entire reason for copyright law was to ensure the people who created, or had created as work for hire, were able to profit from creating the work. When it was hard and expensive to copy an item, there were no copyright laws. There was no upside to making copies because it was so expensive and time-consuming that one was better off just creating an original work. As copying gets easier, copyright laws are MORE important because it becomes easier for someone to make copies of a work and sell them or give them away thus destroying the copyright holder's market for the work.

      So who loses money when people pirate using the internet? You may laugh, but it's other pirates

      No, because other "pirates" don't invest any money into making the work. The people who lose money to pirates are the people who create a work or pay for a work to be created as work for hire, also known as the copyright holders, for the purpose of selling the work, hopefully for a profit.
       
      Seriously, it sounds like you think it costs nothing to create a work or that they fall from the sky to be picked up off the ground. TV shows, movies, musical performances, plays, paintings, pictures, etc all cost money to create. From models and actors, to instruments, to cameras, to the writers, etc., it takes money and effort to create a work. Do you think models pose for free? Do you think cameras are free? Do you think musicians, actors, directors, choreographers, cameramen, recording engineers, editors, etc work for free? Don't you think they want to get paid for their work just as you get paid for yours, assuming you actually work and don't get an allowance from your parents? Who do you think pays them, and where do you think those people get the money?

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    2. Re:Silly by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      this is often a straw argument to deflect the blame.

      No, I'd say it's someone trying to 'correct' someone's use of the word "stolen."

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  14. It just begs for civil disobedience. by sanermind · · Score: 2

    Myself, I generally don't bother to pirate things much... but if anyone pulled that sort of nonsense, I'd be seriously tempted to start downloading crap left and right, and encourage all of my friends to do so as well.

    Let's see them kick -everybody- off the internet, and see how that works, hmmm?

    --

    ---
    the pen is mightier than the sword, the sword is mightier than the court, the court is mightier than the pen.
    1. Re:It just begs for civil disobedience. by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      Oh, so you know everybody and are sure everybody will download illegal copies because you say so. Good luck with that.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    2. Re:It just begs for civil disobedience. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RE: Your sig: I've read some of your comments, I think people simply don't like to hear (read) what you have to say (type).

  15. Oi, French, civil disobedience! Now! by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 4, Interesting

    All 650,000 people on your first strike, please proceed to your second. The 44,000 on your second, proceed to your third. The rest of you, endeavour to earn your first over the coming weeks.

    Come on, France. You still understand the effectiveness of collective withdrawal of labour. So call the government on its own foolishness by forcing the law to take steps which withdraws you from effective contribution to the country. Do not stop until you can proudly call yourself the nation with the most people individually forbidden from using the Internet.

    First, other countries will laugh at you. Then your businessmen will realise what they've just done to their chances to make money. Then your government will listen to that whispering, gold-plated voice in their ear and the law will be repealed. Foreign governments and business will realise what will happen if this sort of law is enacted in their own precious fiefdoms and global attitudes will start to change.

    But you have to start yourselves by taking a risk and standing up.

    Thank you.

    1. Re:Oi, French, civil disobedience! Now! by sanermind · · Score: 1

      (I was first... lol)

      --

      ---
      the pen is mightier than the sword, the sword is mightier than the court, the court is mightier than the pen.
    2. Re:Oi, French, civil disobedience! Now! by sanermind · · Score: 0

      MOD PARENT UP! Seriously.

      --

      ---
      the pen is mightier than the sword, the sword is mightier than the court, the court is mightier than the pen.
    3. Re:Oi, French, civil disobedience! Now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is France. If they're upset by it, they will block the ports and burn cars in the street. The French know how to riot.

    4. Re:Oi, French, civil disobedience! Now! by dolmen.fr · · Score: 3, Funny

      they will block the ports and burn cars

      We do it in just one step: burning a car is building a fire wall.

    5. Re:Oi, French, civil disobedience! Now! by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      Please explain in detail how surfing the web and illegally downloading copyrighted works is an "effective contribution to the country".

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    6. Re:Oi, French, civil disobedience! Now! by Syberz · · Score: 1

      Your suggestion is just like the "boycott " emails that we routinely get. Sounds awesome on paper, but it'll never get the required momentum to actually achieve anything.

      However, the French are pretty good at taking over the streets for strikes and such though... perhaps if these 650 000 showed up at the front steps of parliament, the message would go through?

      --
      ~Syberz
    7. Re:Oi, French, civil disobedience! Now! by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 1

      Yes, only idle teens who use the net to jack off will get accused of copyright infringement.

      History has demonstrated this to be true, after all.

    8. Re:Oi, French, civil disobedience! Now! by Fned · · Score: 1

      People who illegally download music, as a group, also buy more than, collectively, people who don't.

      They also buy actual stuff over the internet.

      They also express themselves online, contributing to the culture.

      That enough detail for you?

  16. Human Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The UN declared internet access a human right:
    http://www.osnews.com/story/24821

    1. Re:Human Right by ThePhilips · · Score: 1

      Inapplicable. Criminals commonly lose some of their human rights, while making up for their crimes.

      Another question is whether the government does really want to turn a sizable chunk of the populace into criminals. After all, if a person crossed the line once, crossing it again becomes much less of a moral issue.

      --
      All hope abandon ye who enter here.
    2. Re:Human Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Inapplicable.

      This is wrong. You need to look up the definition of 'right' asap. It is an important word to know in this world.

      Criminals commonly lose some of their human rights, while making up for their crimes.

      You can not lose a right. You are correct that many countries violate the UN's definition of human rights, but it still pulls a lot of weight.

    3. Re:Human Right by 91degrees · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The right to a fair public trial is also a human right as well though, and these alleged criminals didn't get one.

      Article 10: "Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him."

    4. Re:Human Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except it's not a "criminal" charge, it's a misdemeanor. And they have the way speed tickets are handled for automatic radars as a precedent for punishment without court.

    5. Re:Human Right by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      If it's not a criminal charge, then there's no justification to take the rights away.

      You can't have it both ways. Either it's a criminal charge and requires a fair and public trial before the right to an internet connection is taken away, or they haven't committed a criminal act so still have the basic human right to an internet connection.

    6. Re:Human Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where does it say this is a criminal penalty?

      I would have thought without being convicted of a crime it could only be considered a civil penalty.

      As such exclusion from some human rights would surely not apply.

    7. Re:Human Right by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Except it's not a "criminal" charge, it's a misdemeanor. And they have the way speed tickets are handled for automatic radars as a precedent for punishment without court.

      You can't dispute it? I'm quite sure you can here in Norway, it's just that 99.9% don't have any reason to. If you do, then it starts in the court system at the lowest level. This is typical for many minor infractions, you get a fine from the police that you can either pay or dispute. As far as I know there's no requirement that you get a tribunal first, only that you get it by request.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    8. Re:Human Right by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      There is no "basic human right to an internet connection" in the same way there's no "basic human right to drive a car" "basic human right to get credit" or "basic human right to own land". If you can pay the tolls and don't break the law, you can have an internet connection.

      This law is unjust and needs repealing because it bypasses the right to a fair trial. Don't screw things up by making up rights which don't exist.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    9. Re:Human Right by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      Really? So, the people who live in the Amazon rain forest, the jungles of Borneo, the wilds of Africa, etc without internet access are being denied their human rights? Is the UN going to create a free global wireless internet access system and give out free generators, computers, and devices to access this free global system they are going to build to everyone on the planet?

      Declaring such a thing a "human right" is stupid and arrogant in the extreme. One does not need internet access, at all, period. It is a convenience, nothing more, not less. They may as well declare access to underarm deodorant a human right as well.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    10. Re:Human Right by kiwix · · Score: 1

      Yes you can dispute automatic radar ticket in France. However, if you get disconnected by the HADOPI, you can only dispute it after they disconnect you, which is an obvious violation of basic rights.

      My guess is that as soon as they start to actually disconnect people (which as not happened yet, AFAIK), someone will fight this, and win, and the HADOPI will collapse.

    11. Re:Human Right by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      The UN would disagree with you

      This is the point that started off the thread. I'm not addressing whether they're right or not. the responder accepted that (at least for the sake of argument).

      However, the UN has justified Internet access being a human right. If it's not, then the French government needs to explain why the UN is wrong or why it does not apply in this case.

    12. Re:Human Right by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      So you can't put a murderer in prison? That causes the loss of liberty (the second right listed in the UN declaration of human rights, after life). The right to freedom of movements and residence is also lost.Plus the loss of their right to peacful assembly and association. Hard to have free choice of employment when in prison too. A little hard to freely participate in cultural life too.

    13. Re:Human Right by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      The UN made it up, not the poster. Why does your opinion of what is a right have more weight than theirs?

    14. Re:Human Right by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected. Thank you.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    15. Re:Human Right by Jibekn · · Score: 1

      Article 10 and 11 dumb-ass.

    16. Re:Human Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ugh, please shut up now. I'm sure I speak for a large percentage of /. readers when I say you are full of yourself & we have no desire to hear what yo have to say.

    17. Re:Human Right by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't they need to be part of the rest of society where it's a right and desire an internet connection in the first place?

      One does not need internet access, at all, period.

      Define "need." Some people "need" it for their jobs. It's a very useful tool to communicate with other people, as well. The fact that you don't think it should be a right does not mean that it should not be.

      And I'm sure that some don't agree with the fact that you can have your internet access taken away because you're accused of copyright infringement.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    18. Re:Human Right by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      No one needs internet access. Even people who "need" it for work don't actually need it. I should know. I "need" it for work.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    19. Re:Human Right by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      They do need it for work, though. You don't need much of anything. If you're willing to die, you don't even need food. The internet has become so useful and widespread that some people do believe that having it (or at least not having to worry about your access getting cut off because someone accused you of something) should more or less be a right.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    20. Re:Human Right by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      Few people actually need internet access for work, even in the United States, and most of those exist to support the internet.
       
      There are people who believe that paying a 15% or less tax rate on the billions of dollars they make "should more or less be a right", They are wrong and so are the people you reference. Internet access is a luxury. Absolutely no one needs it to live.
       
      Not having internet access is a problem only for overly entitled first world people. Most of the human population does not have nor needs internet access. Calling internet access a human right is like declaring access to Starbucks a human right and just as stupid.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    21. Re:Human Right by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Few people actually need internet access for work

      I don't care about the number.

      Calling internet access a human right is like declaring access to Starbucks a human right and just as stupid.

      Rights are just something that the government gives you (and things the people usually try to protect). They can declare pretty much anything they want a right if the majority demand it.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    22. Re:Human Right by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      Apparently, you don't understand the meaning of the word "right" or the phrase "human right". A right is something the government is required to give you and if they don't they are being evil. A human right is something you are do for simply being human. According to the U.N., every single person on the face of the planet deserves internet access simply for existing and not providing it is a grave moral failure.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    23. Re:Human Right by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      I understand it. I just don't believe in universal, inherent rights. I only believe in rights that the government grants you.

      they don't they are being evil

      By whose definition?

      A human right is something you are do for simply being human.

      Does the magical rights fairy grant these rights? It's fine if you believe in them, but I suggest not stating their existence as a fact.

      According to the U.N., every single person on the face of the planet deserves internet access simply for existing and not providing it is a grave moral failure.

      Good for them.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    24. Re:Human Right by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      Human rights are " universal, inherent rights."

      Look at every government that has been accused of violating human rights and tell us how they are described.

      No, bad for them as they are stating that YOU are required to pay for everyone to have internet access.

      Try reading what wikipedia says about human rights Human rights are conceived as universal and egalitarian, with all people having equal rights by virtue of being human.

      Really, before you go spouting off about things, maybe you should learn what the words you are using actually mean. Your personal definitions don't mean anything.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    25. Re:Human Right by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Human rights are " universal, inherent rights."

      Where do they come from? The magical rights fairy? Can you prove that they even exist?

      No, bad for them as they are stating that YOU are required to pay for everyone to have internet access.

      I don't live there. But if a majority of people want it, then that is probably the end of that. If they don't, then they'd have better luck organizing against it than the minority would.

      Really, before you go spouting off about things, maybe you should learn what the words you are using actually mean. Your personal definitions don't mean anything.

      Yours don't mean anything to me, either. I've never seen evidence that rights are anything more than things granted by the government (perhaps multiple governments). They can be taken away, they can be infringed, and new rights can be added. Linking to a Wikipedia article likely doesn't prove that there are some sort of god-given rights inherent in every human being.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  17. Re:Friend to sign up /mobile internet /Human Right by wvmarle · · Score: 1

    Anonymous pre-paid Internet. Hard to send account owner a notice; even harder to have them disconnected let alone keep them disconnected (the latter of course being the actual punishment).

  18. Re:This is rediculous by Kjella · · Score: 1

    Wikipedia? Nice, but hardly required. Granted, Norway is really high up there on online banking but I'd go nuts just paying bills. I had to fix some complicated paperwork so instead of a lot of back and forth and verified copies and whatnot I figured I'd just drop by the bank. For one, almost all the local branches are gone because just do it online. You can find ATMs to take money out and almost all have their paycheck electronically deposited, but to find an actual cashier where you can pay a bill is practically gone. When I finally dug one up, the queue was forever, the clientel left who didn't pay their bills online dubious and the fees asoociated with it outragous. Expect paying anywhere between $5 and $8 in fees per bill you pay manually. Anything and everything about it screams "Please don't come here, go online and do it". I suppose you could find a web cafe as your "bank", but with everyone having Internet at home and on their phones they're going the way of the payphone too. I'd probably end up doing my banking at McDonalds in exchange for a burger, how fucked up is that? No Internet is like banning you from streets because streets have stores and you were caught shoplifting in one of them. Not that copyright infringement is equal to stealing in any case. The only thing I hope is that this is some weird French thing that hopefully won't spread anywhere else.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  19. Anonymity is dead by stooo · · Score: 0

    Only surveillance remains. You are not anonymous. You are tracked by your own technology.

    --
    aaaaaaa
  20. put on hold by jevring · · Score: 1

    Wasn't the enforcement of this law put on hold due to some irregularities with the company collecting the data to base these things on?

    --
    Move sig!
  21. To quote Shao Kahn by deimios666 · · Score: 1

    It has BEGUN!

    --
    I think, therefore you are.
    1. Re:To quote Shao Kahn by Sodki · · Score: 1

      Actually, it was Shang Tsung. Big Fail.

  22. Resilient Network by stooo · · Score: 0

    Build a public open Wifi network. It can withstand a loss of nodes.

    --
    aaaaaaa
  23. Re:This is rediculous by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

    You can find ATMs to take money out and almost all have their paycheck electronically deposited, but to find an actual cashier where you can pay a bill is practically gone.

    Here in Germany, many ATMs allow to make payments as well. Also, I can send in my payment orders by (non-electronic) mail.

    I suppose you could find a web cafe as your "bank", but with everyone having Internet at home and on their phones they're going the way of the payphone too.

    With everyone carrying a laptop, smartphone or similar computer with him, I guess access points will remain common. What will likely become rare is the cafe also providing the actual computers.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  24. Re:Friend to sign up /mobile internet /Human Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You say that this is a human rights issue, but I fail to see how this is any worse than the million dollar fines and blackmail going on in the United States of America.

    Yes, losing your internet connection for a month and a 1500 Euro fine would be a hassle, but it would not be the life crushing burden of paying back the exorbitant fines imposed by the US courts, nor the immediate $3000-$5000 settlement letter other companies would hit you with.

  25. I wonder by Anarchduke · · Score: 1

    I everyone connected to the internet in France were to willingly violate 3 times as a form of protest, would the suddenly bankrupt ISP's in France look at reversing the law?

    --
    who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
    1. Re:I wonder by Chatterton · · Score: 1

      They will not go bankrupt because they also do phone and TV on the link. They will cut the Internet transfert but not the 2 others and thus keep some revenue stream. And to be checked: They could keep all their revenue stream as they still provide TV and phone on the link saying the internet is gratis if the customers take the phone and the TV...

    2. Re:I wonder by UnoriginalBoringNick · · Score: 2

      From the translation of the Hadopi law (provided here: http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/HADOPI_full_translation )

      "Art. L. 331-30. - The suspension of access mentioned in articles L. 331-27 and L. 331-28 does not, in itself, affect paying the price of subscription to the service provider. Article L. 121-84 of the consumer code does not apply during the period of suspension.

      "The costs of a possible closure of the subscription during the period of suspension are born by the subscriber.

      "The suspension applies only to access to public on line communication services and to electronic communications. When this access service is purchased as part of commercial composite services including other types of services, such as telephone or television services, the decision of suspension does not apply to these services.

      ... So I think the ISPs are covered.

    3. Re:I wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's providing that you actually have the TV and land line phone. I personally dont have tv over several years now and i dont suffer from that, I never had landline phone to begin with.
      GTFO from /. you are not nerd enough!

    4. Re:I wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And download the same thing, maybe that show where they cut off the heads of the nobles.

    5. Re:I wonder by Narishma · · Score: 1

      People disconnected will still continue to pay their ISP contract.

      --
      Mada mada dane.
    6. Re:I wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is even worse than that. People with a pure internet connection (no phone nor tv) will be disconnected but the contract with their provider will remain valid and so they will have to pay for nothing until they are eventually reconnected.

    7. Re:I wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know how it is in France, but I have a contract that is only valid for one month.

    8. Re:I wonder by pla · · Score: 1

      People disconnected will still continue to pay their ISP contract.

      Or what? They'll threaten to reconnect them just so they can disconnect them again?

    9. Re:I wonder by Narishma · · Score: 1

      That's also how it works in France. You pay your internet subscription every month. But it's explicitly stated in the HADOPI law that you'll have to continue to pay the subscription even when you've been disconnected.

      --
      Mada mada dane.
    10. Re:I wonder by gknoy · · Score: 1

      They're covered unless their now-disconnected customers say, "well, if I can't get the internet from you, why am I paying you?", and cancel their service.

    11. Re:I wonder by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      The law says you can't get new service while the suspension is in effect. The ISP are well and truly covered.

    12. Re:I wonder by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      The ISP will continue to send them bills and they will have to pay up or face bad credit ratings, won't be able to get mortgages or car loans and so on.

    13. Re:I wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So they cannot get internet from anywhere, I still do not see why they should pay the provider for not providing them anything.

      Ultimately it is a question of standing for your rights. I guess if everyone would stand the discomfort of not having internet for a few months, if would show that people cannot be bullied so easily.

      Do not wait to get a termination notice - disconnect now, and complain loudly as to why. Organize an Internet Termination Day where thousands of people queue in front of the ISP offices to terminate their internet account.

      That will get them scared.

    14. Re:I wonder by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      This is France dude - your worth as a person is not judged by your credit rating.

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  26. Re:Friend to sign up /mobile internet /Human Right by __Paul__ · · Score: 1

    If I remember correctly, you can't get an anonymous pre-paid card in France - you need to provide a passport or other ID when you buy it.

    And that said - France's prepaid plans are utterly shite. Possibly the worst in Europe. The only card that is even vaguely worth the money is one from Orange, and they have very onerous conditions attached, including blocking SMTP/POP and disallowing tethering - with the possibility that they'll null all your credit if they catch you doing it (not sure how they can tell, though).

    --
    worldmobilenet.com -- World Prepaid Wireless Internet plans
  27. Re:Friend to sign up /mobile internet /Human Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless it is a wireless internet, at some point that account is going to be terminated at a fixed address.
    Kind of hard to be anonymous unless you pay cash for rent and not having *any* mail/package delivered.
    Think utility/credit card/bank bills.

  28. Re:Big foot by qxcv · · Score: 1

    Why can't you be banned from the Internet?

    --
    "The most dangerous enemy of a better solution is an existing codebase that is just good enough." -- Eric S. Raymond
  29. RE: Tools by Archon-X · · Score: 2

    I know a few people who have received their first strikes. For what it's worth, they were using eMule to get themselves nabbed.

  30. Re:Big foot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why? look at where he is hosted
    http://www.robtex.com/ip/66.147.244.85.html
    Since when has America taken spam seriously ?

  31. Seems strangely obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well if people don't consume content they're not entitled to, they won't have to run the risk of disconnection. If the content is good enough to consume, it's good enough to pay for. If it's not good enough to pay for or too expensive, why are you bothering with it? The consumer doesn't have the right to dictate the value of content to the content creators other than by feedback in the form of purchasing decisions.

    i'd prefer to see the rights holders taking people to claims court instead, but piracy is so widespread I can see why this has happened. You reap what you sow - try not pirating things, it's surprisingly easy.

    1. Re:Seems strangely obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well if people don't consume content they're not entitled to, they won't have to run the risk of disconnection. If the content is good enough to consume, it's good enough to pay for. If it's not good enough to pay for or too expensive, why are you bothering with it?

      because it's good stuff but the price set for it is too high ?

      The consumer doesn't have the right to dictate the value of content to the content creators other than by feedback in the form of purchasing decisions.

      Obviously they made no-purchasing decisions that should give a clue to the seller about the actual value of content being much lesser than what the creator is asking for.
      Oh, wait, noooo way ! It's much easier to sue them, cut their Internet off and accuse them of an imaginary lost purchase.

    2. Re:Seems strangely obvious by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 2

      Dom Perignon and the price is too high for most people. Most people just don't take it, they do without. "The price is too high" is not an excuse nor a justification. If the price is too high, then you don't buy it.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    3. Re:Seems strangely obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Noone can send a bottle of Dom Perignon through the Internet.
      In other word, if production is cheap and almost limitless, costs (and prices) should go down which is the case for digital music and movies and is certainly not the case for Dom Perignon. (see Supply and demand)
      After that we can digress on the price premium for products where you pay for a trademark, which in no case should apply to a simple plastic CD/DVD case (as opposed to a pretty box with nice goodies)

    4. Re:Seems strangely obvious by godrik · · Score: 2

      That's exactly what they do. They don't buy it! :)

  32. vpn time by jupiter126 · · Score: 1

    People receiving their first advice probably will punish their children, kick intruders out of their wifi or look for alternatives either changing protocols (http, torrent, ftp, irc, ...) or hiding trough proxies, TOR or VPN's. People receiving their second advice are already more likely of knowing what's happening and why they receive it, they are also probably starting to consider paying an anomiser/VPN service. People disconnected after 3 warnings probably know what they are doing wrong and how they do it. They are pissed off from being cut off the internet, and most probably will try to seek revenge in some way against the one responsible for their cut off (ISP, political party, ...). Although I think this law is abusive, without wanting it, Hadopi is a great way to push users towards securing their communications and greatly contributes towards the concept of anonymity on internet on a large scale. Not only will geeks, corps, govs and criminals use 4096 bit rsa vpn's, but the average "joe" in his garage will now also want to use it. This is gonna be fun to decrypt : enjoy :p

  33. Re:Friend to sign up /mobile internet /Human Right by 91degrees · · Score: 1

    It's curious how

    "This is a real relationship! We love each other dearly, and have made a life here. We have friends and are part of the community. This is our home. We even have a cat!"

    Gets reduced to "I must be allowed to stay because I have a cat".

  34. Increased popularity in darknets by gellenburg · · Score: 1

    The only thing laws like this will do is force I2P and Freenet to become more popular.

    Which — ironically — is a blessing for those that use both of those services as it would make both of those networks more robust and viable.

  35. LOL by koan · · Score: 1

    Yes I LOL'ed, how long will this stupidity last? Until they are out of business?

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  36. Socialist primary candidate to keep 3-strike by Balaitous · · Score: 2

    The info about the 60 people at 3rd signaling is a week old. Latest news is that François Hollande, a Socialist (main opposition party) primary candidate leading the polls, has announced in a film industry lobby meeting that he will keep the HADOPI including the repressive part, just "adapting" it. That's contrary to his party programme and we will see how that fares in the primary and later.

    1. Re:Socialist primary candidate to keep 3-strike by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please note that Socialist in France doesn't have the same meaning as in the US. The closest thing to compare to would be left-wing (and not so left) democrats

    2. Re:Socialist primary candidate to keep 3-strike by Jibekn · · Score: 1

      They're called real Socialists.

      In America Socialism == Communism.

      The rest of the world knows how to read the definition of a word.

  37. My suspicion by way2trivial · · Score: 1

    is that it's 650,000 households with a very late teen/young adult still at home and responsible for the warning.

    I also wager this therefore represents 650,000 young adults that will vote to oust the lawmakers involved.
    countered by 1,300,000 parents to vote back in the lawmakers involved, to get junior the hell out of the house/basement....

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
    1. Re:My suspicion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because parents never ever use facebook or send emails.

  38. media industry is killing itself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would someone disconnected from the Internet by HADOPI buy any CD, DVD or Blueray disc in the future? I doubt so. The media industry will blame the lost sales on pirates and urge governments to even more drastic measures. At the end no-one will buy any media any more and the media industry will be dead. Dead simple :-)

  39. comparing apples with apples by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't think anyone would argue that 650,000 people are running around France stealing things out of stores

    No, but suppose that it was widely believed that stealing things out of stores was anonymous and would have no repercussions. Many people who do not currently steal things out of stores would probably do so. Does anyone seriously believe it would be less than 1% of the population?

  40. Re:This is rediculous by Serpents · · Score: 1

    You can't possibly allow people to be permenently disconnected from the internet. To me personally, that is denial of freedoms.

    Although the UN has already recognized internet access as a human right relatively few countries have adjusted their legislation to reflect that.

  41. French peoples unite! by fran6gagne · · Score: 1

    To get this stupid law repealed, all the french should try to get their three strikes so everyone get disconnected and the providers go bankrupt. When the providers will will lost clients by the thousands, something will happen.

    1. Re:French peoples unite! by xmorg · · Score: 1

      Whats wrong with streamlining corporate greed? Courts and juries are too much trouble. We need direct access to the connection of anyone who is suspected of infringing on anything we think is infrignable.

    2. Re:French peoples unite! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they should just cancel their internet subscription, with a loud message and in an organized way, by having Internet Disconnect Days to clog the ISPs desks, standing in line and blocking the traffic because they cannot fit in the ISP's halls.

      That should be more effective.

  42. Re:This is rediculous by Serpents · · Score: 1

    Sooo... you have to show an ID to buy a pre-paid card but you can use an access point anonymously? Strange... Not that I want to give anyone funny ideas

  43. Where are the Germans... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... When we need them to give another lesson vm the French?

  44. like the all motto says: by chomsky68 · · Score: 1

    Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité, No Interneté!

    --
    I'm Not Antisocial, I'm Just Not User Friendly
  45. Cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am wondering if the costs of implementing the HADOPI policy have been estimated. And also is there any published study on its impact on the usage of internet?

  46. Re:This is rediculous by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

    Well, typically you need a credit card if you are not (or do not reveal to be) a customer, so in principle they could track you through this. However you could always ask a friend for permission to use his card. Not a viable strategy to do illegal things (they will probably find you via your friend; also he may not stay your friend afterwards when the cops come to him), but probably enough to get around an internet ban in order to do legitimate things like online banking (assuming an internet ban would actually include checks on access points).

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  47. Disconnection is just not going to happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Considering the objective of the Hadopi was initially to sanction 50 000 infringer per year, this is indeed pretty low (http://www.ecrans.fr/Hadopi-50-000-sanctions-26,7604.html).

    But in any way, as some of you may know if you can read French, the Hadopi law has suffered both from the consequences of judicial review and from an awful redaction... Therefore, according to French lawyer and blogger Eolas, the legal provisions concerning the offence of "lack of surveillance of one's Internet connexion" (which is the legal basis of the condemnation to Internet suspension) are pretty much clumsy, and still require a rather long judicial procedure. Which is exactly the opposite of the goal of the law.

    (http://www.maitre-eolas.fr/post/2010/06/29/HADOPI-%3A-l-op%C3%A9ration-Usine-%C3%A0-gaz-continue)

    So I doubt the sanctionning machine is going to be as effective as the techcrunch writer fears.

  48. Seriously? by Feyshtey · · Score: 1

    So you want to start a movement encouraging people to knowingly break the law in order to protest a law that punishes people for taking that which is not their own and contributing nothing in return....

    It is frighteningly sad that there are any people that actually see logic in this train-wreck of an idea, let alone enough to mod this up and post in support.

    --
    "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
    1. Re:Seriously? by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 1

      So you want to start a movement encouraging people to knowingly break the law in order to protest a law

      That's what civil disobedience is. If you simply have a problem with the notion of breaking an unjust law, your ailment is far more fundamental.

      that punishes people

      First, let's note that punishment isn't justice: if we restrict someone's liberty, it's to protect the interests of society while they are rehabilitated, if they can be. Second, let's observe that deliberately denying people access to a tool which allows them to work and contribute effectively is cruel and degenerate. You might as well ban a man from reading every book merely because he read a couple of censored publications (e.g. Holocaust revisionism in France). Reducing opportunities for criminals to integrate as law-abiding residents - that always works!

      for taking that which is not their own and contributing nothing in return....

      I wouldn't steal a car. I wouldn't steal a baby. I wouldn't shoot a policeman. Bla bla bla. Intellectual property is a recently fabricated fiction. Copyright infringement is not theft. Culture is built on sharing and we don't have to make a payment to the gods of culture each time we benefit from it. See a thousand essays already written on this topic.

      I know you agree with me because you're speaking English right now with no payment whatever to the heirs (real property is heritable!) of the generations before you who developed the language, divided carefully according as their relative contributions. Where is your receipt for using all those letters, citizen-consumer?

    2. Re:Seriously? by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      for taking

      Copying.

      It is frighteningly sad that there are any people that actually see logic in this train-wreck of an idea, let alone enough to mod this up and post in support.

      Different people have different preferences. You may support copyright laws, but others may not. Just because you do, that doesn't mean that people who don't are somehow illogical. They're preferences.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
  49. Jesus H Christ! I have 2 broken ribs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...you insnsirtive clod! Next time, please think before posting something so funny!!

    Does it hurt? Only when I owwwwwwwwwwwww!!!

  50. Did I just type 'insnsirtive' ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never type a comment before your first gallon of coffee for the day (or with broken ribs)!

  51. Ad-hoc+TOR+1 working link to the Internet by jishak · · Score: 1

    I suspect that this is a form of censorship like what we saw in the arab spring. The internet is self-sustaining at this point. There is much angry sentiment against these kinds of laws and much support among technical crowds. While a few greedy and dishonest legislatures may be able to pass laws that attempt to control this behavior (filesharing), there are many more people who have the know-how to bypass it. Perhaps it is time that people who are disconnected start connecting ad-hoc networks to bypass the ISP points of failure. If this can be done to topple dictatorial regimes in the 3rd world, why can't it be done in dictatorial regimes in the 1st world?

  52. Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't the original HADOPI logo use a pirated font? Or am I just mistaken?

  53. Re:Friend to sign up /mobile internet /Human Right by Bert64 · · Score: 1

    They look for non mobile user-agents in http requests mostly...
    You could VPN your traffic, gets around the smtp restrictions and hides what your doing.

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  54. Internet access is a fundamental need by Hentes · · Score: 1

    In most developed countries the internet is very important to a person's daily life. People need it for work, they use it for shopping, for relaxation, for socialising or to order food. Disconnecting someone from the net for violations that should be settled with a minor fine is very disproportionate. Even if we accept the flawed shoplifting analogy, that would be like banning someone from all shops.

    1. Re:Internet access is a fundamental need by WorBlux · · Score: 1

      It's not flawed, it's completely wrong.

  55. Re:This is rediculous by Serpents · · Score: 1

    How about cafes or bars? Here they sometimes give you free (although very slow) access to their wifi if you're customer. So in theory you could buy a beer, pay in cash and start downloading torrents

  56. Re:Friend to sign up /mobile internet /Human Right by coolmadsi · · Score: 1

    The cat thing is getting annoying. Don't believe everything you hear/read. That stupid woman ranting about how a cat allows an illegal immigrant to stay in the UK is just trying to scare the public about how bad the Human Rights Act is. There is a lot more to the story than a cat.

    Indeed, this has been disproved already by people who know what they are talking about: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15171980

    I even read the other day an article by one of the lawyers involved saying it was not the reason, but don't have the link at the moment.

  57. news alpost undisclosed in France? by Herve5 · · Score: 1

    At least from my average french window, this info is absolutely unknown here in the ordinary news :-/
    Thanks /.

    --
    Herve S.
  58. VPN by O'Nazareth · · Score: 1

    So it means that more than 99.99% succeeded to set up a VPN before the third letter. I see HADOPI is having a big success.