Slashdot Mirror
EU Speaks Out Against US Censorship
bs0d3 writes "The EU Parliament has adopted, 'by a large majority,' a statement warning the US to refrain 'from unilateral measures to revoke IP addresses or domain names' due to the 'need to protect the integrity of the global internet and freedom of communications.' This resolution highlights both the practices prescribed in SOPA/PIPA... but also the actions of Homeland Security and ICE in seizing domain names. By adopting a resolution against domains seizures the European Parliament recognizes the dangerous precedent the pending SOPA legislation would set, and it wouldn't be a surprise if more foreign criticism follows. No country should have the ability to simply take over international domain names, and surely the US would feel the same if this plan was put in motion by a foreign country. Or as some 60 press freedom and human rights advocate groups put it in their letter to the US representatives: 'This is as unacceptable to the international community as it would be if a foreign country were to impose similar measures on the United States.'"
As an EU citizen, I find US practices completely unacceptable. Even China doesn't try to restrict other countries. They do what they have to do inside their country, but they have never tried to block or manipulate other countries to do the same. Yet US has the balls and hypocrisy to accuse China about its censorship practices, as do most US citizens here on Slashdot.
US is much worse than China. They try to force their views and laws globally. They install their own law enforcement agents inside other countries in the name of "providing training" to manipulate. They revoke IP addresses and domains used by non-US people. They try to extradite people from other countries to jail them for years in US soil. Have you noticed that most of world has actually sane amount of years you have to spend in jail if you do something bad? In US the minimum seems to be at least 10 years. Usually you can go in for life. Sometimes several lifes. In most civilized countries, you're only going to be spending more than 10 years if you kill somebody. In the same way, the sentences are longer if you physically harm someone. Not for downloading a fucking song off the internet.
This doesn't even only apply to copyright laws. This is just common practice with everything. For example, in most of Asia and South America there was nothing wrong with using some drugs. That is, before US started their whole war on drugs thing and couldn't just keep it within it's own borders. They had to start going around the world telling people what to do. Don't you seriously have better things to spend money on, like fixing your damn problems first? Regardless, there is nothing wrong with smoking some pot. It's both more relaxing and healthy than alcohol, which causes several health problems in people (and makes some people really aggressive).
And yet, US acts all surprised when they are told to get the fuck out, after which they bring out the guns and start shooting people. US is the only country in the world that has been constantly in war with at least one country. Usually there is several enemies. The whole world would be much saner, happier and peaceful place without US.
3.. 2.. 1..
For all the ills of Europe, they seem to have a pretty good grip on freedoms which are eroding in USA and Australia.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
We've lost. The Republicans in Congress will get their panties in a bunch and insist on passing this bill, even if they might have been convinced otherwise before. They simply can't have it appear that they're taking orders or even advice from Europe.
At the same time they release a directive that includes optional web censoring. For the sake of our children, of course!
I think this is a sign that DNS needs getting replaced with a non-centralized system.
Is there anybody working on such a thing?
I wrote my senators and representative, and told them I oppose SOPA and PIPA. It may not be much, but it is worth it and it is ridiculously easy now that they have websites that accept messages.
Have you voiced your opinion, other than on some website that the policy makes never see?
The music and entertainment industries don't like you meddling with the affairs of their puppets...
I think they can and should condemn us when we act in ways contrary to the universal declaration of human rights. They aren't telling us what to do, just telling us we are being jerks.
It was only a few years ago that the US was complaining that the Voice of America broadcasts were banned via jamming in Cuba and Ethiopia, let alone the many years of jamming under the Iron Curtain. The EU is aware of the slippery slope, once you start blocking copyright stuff then they'll move on to politically undesirable stuff. The Bush administration actively worked to block Al Jazeera, for example.
The basic problem arose when the Pilgrims migrated from Europe to the New World, splitting society in half. This left Europe with brains and no backbone, whereas the US has backbone and no brains.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
"Repression Fries"
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
but if you think you have the right to tell another sovereign nation what they can and cant do like this
Surely you are saying this in a tongue in cheek manner? The bill is behind this which is from the US does exactly what you say. It effectively kills a website off the internet because the US doesn't like it. At least all the other "Great Firewall" countries have the decency to only kill it off for their own countries. Do you really think that it is okay for the US to vanish a website hosted in another country, under a .com or .net TLD (which has nothing to do with the US) just because a judge in the US says it is okay? Can you really be that hypocritical?
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
Why does the fall of empires have to be a bad thing? Some people think the fall of the Roman Empire was bad - but the most immediate consequence for people living in Europe in the time was fewer legions pointing swords at them demanding tribute.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
I guess it's pointless to argue with people like you, you might be a little bit upset perhaps, but your claims are all more or less unfounded.
The EU is more than capable in many respects, however it currently lacks a [full] military arm [which will eventually replace NATO]. The Eurocorps is changing that.
The EU has taken charge of military missions using European national forces in Europe, Africa and not least the naval operations outside Somalia in the Indian Ocean. I would love to see [my]Europe leave NATO, never again aiding the US
To accuse Europe of not being capable is both laughable and imprecise, there is no "Europe" as such to accuse. We will see in the future however as the EU consolidates. NATO has been the foundation of both American and European operations. You fight your wars with our help, not just the other way around. Despite your [increasingly invalid] superiority complex and extreme nationalism, you're not actually protecting Europeans at all, just your own interests. How exactly does the Ramstein Air Base protect Germany? Why are Europeans fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan?!
It's ironic that you dare to speak about nationalism and facism, your country is the prime representative of both at this point in time! Oh, and you're awfully good at both genocides and apartheid. Your own history is far from respectable. And if we're to be blamed for past mistakes we also take full credit for Democracy, Magna Carta and the Republic!
The NATO committments you referred to are not exactly in our best interest. What possible reason do we have for spending a fixed percentage on non-essentials? The Cold War is over, that threat has passed, the need for arms has changed for Europe. The US uses its arms for other less admirable goals than promoting peace!
Why should we care about your strategic and economic goals? Defending Israel and other dicators (from Egypt to Saudi Arabia)! We should use our[European] armed forces and funds on other fronts such as border patrols, anti-terrorism and rapid reaction forces.
Europe (EU) is at peace for now, but our neighbors are not (see the Middle East, ex-Soviets and Africa). That's what we should care about!
This is not so-called anti-Americanism, that passed decades ago. The US isn't even remotely on the agenda in Europe in general. Why would we hate you? The EU is actually a lot more "hated" by people than your irrelevant foreign government. I think you're an old man, stuck in the past.
The Libyan operation is testament to Europe's growing self-confidence and ability. The French lead those attacks on Libya, joined by the British, before the US even acted! That's despite the lack of NATO and EU support.
At least you are correct when you claimed that what's going on is exactly what some European nations did in the past; playing The Great Game. The empires of Britain, Spain and France fell, and the American empire will also fall...
The ".com" domain is the domain for US commercial entities; there is no other. Because the US is fairly laissez-faire about it, a lot of foreign registrants have been able to get .com domains, but that doesn't make the TLD "international".
Europe has jurisdiction over .eu, .fr, .de, and other TLDs. The US has jurisdiction over .com, .edu, .org, ..net and a few others.
Why on earth is this +4 Insightful? This is the sort of information that most /.'ers mock Fox News for. Seriously.
The TLD for the US is *gasp* .us - unsurprisingly similar to just about any other TLD suffix denoting a particular country. Spend 5 seconds researching something before modding this rubbish up.
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
> The .COM TLD is managed by the US according to US rules because the US created it.
The US rule you are talking about is RFC920. RFC 920 is an official DARPA document: "This is an official policy statement of the IAB and the DARPA."
It explicitely has an international scope. It lays the rules for registering a second level domain in .com and does not restrict it to US companies.
While at that time almost all ARPANET nodes where in the US (European nodes have been part of the network since 1972), that does not mean that it was intended to stay that way.
Otherwise it would not have made much sense to specify .us and .de domains in RFC 920.
I've never had a problem with idea that 2000 years ago a hippy Arab black guy called Jesus was walking around telling people to stop being a bunch of cunts to one another. I even agree with most of the stuff he thought made you a chilled out cool dude. I happy to believe that the Romans didn't like him much and nailed him up for it too. It's just the other bits that seem far far-fetched.