File-Sharing For Personal Use Declared Legal In Portugal

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

File-Sharing For Personal Use Declared Legal In Portugal

Posted by timothy on Thursday September 27, 2012 @04:17AM from the as-long-as-it-involves-kale dept.

New submitter M0j0_j0j0 writes "After receiving 2000 complaints regarding 'illegal file sharing' from ACAPOR regarding P2P networks, the Portuguese prosecutor refused to take the case into court on the premise that file sharing is not illegal in the territory if files are for personal and not commercial use. The court also stated that the complaints had, as sole evidence, the IP address of users, and that it is a wrong statement to assume an IP address is directly related to one individual. TorrentFreak has a piece in English with more details (original source in Portuguese)."

127 of 179 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

A little bit of sanity... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 04:23 · Score: 5, Funny

...among a lot of insanity...let's just see what German...err, the EU has to say about that.
1. Re:A little bit of sanity... by fustakrakich · 2012-09-27 04:45 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Yep, even their drug policy is a bit more same than the rest of the world's, and it's paying off with less addiction.
  More file sharing will bring increased sales.
  
  --
  “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
2. Re:A little bit of sanity... by fustakrakich · 2012-09-27 04:46 · Score: 1
  
  Um... sane !
  
  --
  “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
3. Re:A little bit of sanity... by crazycheetah · 2012-09-27 05:08 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  They proved it with the drug policy enough that the world AIDS organization (forgive me for forgetting the real name of that organization) decided to declare to the world that everyone needs to follow in suit, which they've only done prior to that in declaring AIDS is caused by HIV (because Russia was denying it). Of course, most countries have said fuck you to that.
  The question is if they're going to be able to prove that it's actually effective with file sharing, though. And then if anyone is going to give a shit that they proved it (I have a feeling the US in particular, unless a revolution happens, is going to deny any proof Portugal gives here).
4. Re:A little bit of sanity... by poity · 2012-09-27 05:28 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  It's easy to do because Portugal has little stake in copyright enforcement. Can anyone name a globally distributing film/music/software company from Portugal?
  
  --
  your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
5. Re:A little bit of sanity... by TheGratefulNet · 2012-09-27 05:39 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  your point (or, *a* point) is taken: since the country, there, is not a big producer of entertainment goods (at least not for export) - they could only be representing their people and not any one local industry. ie, this is what society is/was always meant to be about! the government sticking up for the peoples' rights and interests. even if some corp interests lose out, the people are what matters.
  USA: learn from this!
  (sigh. who am I kidding!? we'll never change. never. dammit.)
  
  --
  
  --
  "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
6. Re:A little bit of sanity... by mcgrew · 2012-09-27 05:49 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  The question is if they're going to be able to prove that it's actually effective with file sharing, though
  Multiple studies have already proven it. One study, in fact, was commissioned by a book publisher wanting to find out how much money he was losing to piracy. Since unlike MP3s and movies, books don't hit the net for two or three weeks, the researchers looked for the pirates and then at sales figures. Rather than the expected drop in sales, there was a sales spike, do doubt caused by the "buzz" the pirate version caused.
  But don't expect that to sway anyone from the MAFIAA, though.
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
7. Re:A little bit of sanity... by poity · 2012-09-27 06:03 · Score: 1
  
  I don't expect UK or France (other top IP reliant economies) to follow Portugal either. Even without cronyism the legitimate taxes that can be raised from these industries ensures that no country with a sizable stake will do the same.
  
  --
  your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
8. Re:A little bit of sanity... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2012-09-27 06:16 · Score: 1
  
  It's easy to do because Portugal has little stake in copyright enforcement. Can anyone name a globally distributing film/music/software company from Portugal?
  Why is that even relevant? What would change if there were such a company?
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
9. Re:A little bit of sanity... by crazycheetah · 2012-09-27 06:16 · Score: 2
  
  Fully agree with you. The hope (although far from expectation) would be that another country proving a policy works might have more weight than a few experiments that the government doesn't care about nearly as much apparently.
10. Re:A little bit of sanity... by Mister+Whirly · 2012-09-27 06:46 · Score: 1
  
  If there were such a company they would lobby the politicians to make sure laws like this do not get passed.
  
  --
  "But this one goes to 11!"
11. Re:A little bit of sanity... by poity · 2012-09-27 06:49 · Score: 1
  
  Such a company represents more than just profit for the owners; It represents a influx of both domestic and foreign revenue for the economy at large; it represents a decrease of trade deficit, perhaps even an increase of trade surplus; it represents a body of money that otherwise would not have been taxed. In short it represents a goose that lays golden eggs for a country (though far be it from me to elevate companies to such levels), and governments are not stupid or crazy when they think twice before acting in ways that may cause them to take flight. Portugal has no such golden geese, and is not burdened by the fear of losing them. Which is why I said it was easy for them to do, not that it was right or wrong for them to do. You can say that it is amoral to consider such things, but amoral is not the same as immoral, as previous posters have suggested.
  
  --
  your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
12. Re:A little bit of sanity... by fustakrakich · 2012-09-27 06:54 · Score: 2
  
  But don't expect that to sway anyone from the MAFIAA, though.
  As ministry of propaganda, they must hold on to all the control they can. Look what happened to the USSR as all those bootleg satellite dishes made it into the area. They lost control of the media, and the walls came tumbling down.
  
  --
  “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
13. Re:A little bit of sanity... by jitterman · 2012-09-27 07:19 · Score: 1
  
  But... but... corporations ARE people!!!!
  
  What a sad country we've built for ourselves.
  
  --
  For conscience is the wound, and there's naught to staunch it
14. Re:A little bit of sanity... by Mister+Whirly · 2012-09-27 07:27 · Score: 1
  
  Right because the ONLY country in the world where politicians get money from special interest groups is the USA. You need to get out and explore the world a tad more. I have lived in the USA and South America and politicians are no different anywhere.
  
  --
  "But this one goes to 11!"
15. Re:A little bit of sanity... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2012-09-27 08:19 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, that's all obvious. But why would they have to be in "fear of losing them", if they had/have such companies?
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
16. Re:A little bit of sanity... by SolitaryMan · 2012-09-27 08:22 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I don't think it is important whether or not it is good for business. What important is, if it *fair* and good for society.
  Sharing some hardware tools with your neighbor may be bad for hardware maker's business, but if somebody says it should be illegal, I'd say fuck you.
  
  --
  May Peace Prevail On Earth
17. Re:A little bit of sanity... by DMUTPeregrine · 2012-09-27 10:57 · Score: 1
  
  Corporations are composed of people, and in general all those people can vote. The problem comes from pretending that the group of people is an additional super-person.
  
  --
  Not a sentence!
18. Re:A little bit of sanity... by icebraining · 2012-09-27 11:35 · Score: 1
  
  Unfortunately it won't, since the state of our economy will prevent any increase. For all intents and purposes we're the next Greece: bankrupt, with huge unemployment and surviving with bailout money that only increases our debt.
  
  --
  Dilbert RSS feed
19. Re:A little bit of sanity... by icebraining · 2012-09-27 11:56 · Score: 1
  
  Don't worry: we already didn't. With 15% unemployment, low wages and crushing taxes, we wouldn't be able to afford it anyway.
  
  --
  Dilbert RSS feed
20. Re:A little bit of sanity... by metacell · 2012-09-27 18:13 · Score: 2
  
  Isn't there likely a point where the loss of piracy may overtake the gain of the extra advertisement.
  Probably. But that doesn't have to be a bad thing. It means the most successful books will sell less, and people will have more money left to buy the lesser known books. At least that's how it works with music piracy - people who pirate music tend to spend their money on other music products instead.
21. Re:A little bit of sanity... by metacell · 2012-09-27 18:31 · Score: 1
  
  Here in Sweden, it's well-known that the workers' unions support the social democrats, and the employer's union supports the right-wing parties, either directly, or indirectly, through financing ad campaigns.
  There're are also many cases where politicians are offered jobs by special interest groups in connection with advancing their agenda. E.g, a politician pushes for a law change a special interest group wants, and after the change goes through, he's offered a job as thanks. By systematically favouring special interest groups, a single member of parliament can lift several salaries at the same time (as chairman, consultant, board member, etc), besides the one he/she gets from the state.
22. Re:A little bit of sanity... by wertigon · 2012-09-27 20:04 · Score: 2
  
  Others can work against you, like you will never be able to compete with the costs of piracy.
  That's a false misconception spread by the MAFIAA. If you can't compete with free, how come some people manage to do just that? Take bottled water for instance. Tap water is virtually free, still people pay a premium for bottled water.
  While you can't really charge for digital media, you can charge for the access to it. That's why Steam and iTunes are so successful.
  
  --
  systemd is not an init system. It's a GNU replacement.
23. Re:A little bit of sanity... by osmifra · 2012-09-27 21:32 · Score: 1
  
  I do believe file sharing helps to spread the word and publicize less known bands, movies and books, it also brings more people to concerts and shows.
  We know a lot more albuns and songs and not only a few singles, there's plenty of alternative bands appearing and showing that is good.
  Now for already very known artists like Metallica or Movies Blockbusters that already have a name and don't need that much more publicity it does do more harm than good, but its hard to feel sorry for those that make dozens of millions of dollars per year already.
24. Re:A little bit of sanity... by fustakrakich · 2012-09-28 00:26 · Score: 1
  
  Bring what? Please elaborate, or rephrase your question.
  
  --
  “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
25. Re:A little bit of sanity... by mcgrew · 2012-09-28 01:23 · Score: 2
  
  I wouldn't count on it. Amsterdam decriminalized pot years ago and their drug use declined, studies show that pot's only negative effects are from the smoke and there are many positive effects (like a reduced risk of cancer), yet it's still illegal.
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
26. Re:A little bit of sanity... by Trogre · 2012-09-30 13:42 · Score: 1
  
  Well not with *that* attitude.
  
  --
  "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
U.S. law still applies by crazyjj · 2012-09-27 04:25 · Score: 5, Funny

Portuguese citizens need to be reminded that they're still under the jurisdiction of U.S. law, and WILL be extradited to the U.S. for breaking any IP laws!

--
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
1. Re:U.S. law still applies by ammorais · 2012-09-27 04:30 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Portugal actually have laws that even prevent an U.S. citizen from being extradited under certain circumstances.
  http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=pt-PT&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.parlamento.pt%2FLegislacao%2FPaginas%2FConstituicaoRepublicaPortuguesa.aspx%23art33
2. Re:U.S. law still applies by hpacheco · 2012-09-27 04:31 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  Portuguese citizens need to be reminded that they're still under the jurisdiction of U.S. law, and WILL be extradited to the U.S. for breaking any IP laws!
  there's no extradition agreement between the U.S. and Portugal
3. Re:U.S. law still applies by gstoddart · 2012-09-27 04:36 · Score: 1
  
  Portuguese citizens need to be reminded that they're still under the jurisdiction of U.S. law, and WILL be extradited to the U.S. for breaking any IP laws!
  Are you thinking of Puerto Rico by chance?
  Portugal is not under any US jurisdiction whatsoever. Seriously, look at a map.
  
  --
  Lost at C:>. Found at C.
4. Re:U.S. law still applies by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 04:39 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Seriously, look at a map
  I did, there's only two places on it: The US, and US Drone Territory.
5. Re:U.S. law still applies by TheGratefulNet · 2012-09-27 04:42 · Score: 1
  
  not insightful; just flat out WRONG.
  portugal is not puerto rico. maybe your thoughts got crossed?
  
  --
  
  --
  "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
6. Re:U.S. law still applies by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 04:45 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  I'm not sure the CIA will give a shit - they'll come in anyway, kidnap the people, and drop them off at the torture camps.
7. Re:U.S. law still applies by alendit · 2012-09-27 04:46 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Portuguese citizens need to be reminded that they're still under the jurisdiction of U.S. law, and WILL be extradited to the U.S. for breaking any IP laws!
  This post contains dangerous levels of sarcasm and thus required by Poe's Law to have at least a single emoticon (smiley). The poster may be considered himself warned.
8. Re:U.S. law still applies by macbeth66 · 2012-09-27 04:46 · Score: 1
  
  ::whoosh::
  crazyjj, I see you sitting back in your chair, smirking as you sip your Port.
  craptastic!
9. Re:U.S. law still applies by nedlohs · 2012-09-27 04:49 · Score: 2
  
  Please do not be alarmed by that whooshing noise above your head.
10. Re:U.S. law still applies by c0d3g33k · 2012-09-27 04:49 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  It's sarcasm, people. Whooosh!
11. Re:U.S. law still applies by jamstar7 · 2012-09-27 04:53 · Score: 1
  
  Seriously, look at a map
  I did, there's only two places on it: The US, and US Drone Territory.
  Guess that rules out that trip I had in mind to Toronto, eh?
  
  --
  Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
12. Re:U.S. law still applies by dabadab · 2012-09-27 04:58 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Well, then you fall back to drones, I guess.
  
  --
  Real life is overrated.
13. Re:U.S. law still applies by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 04:58 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Please do not be alarmed by that whooshing noise above your head.
  Cut him some slack ... it's very difficult to tell the difference between a stupid American who has no idea where other countries are, and an asshole American who thinks their laws apply everywhere else.
14. Re:U.S. law still applies by mhajicek · 2012-09-27 05:15 · Score: 2
  
  It's just a drone.
15. Re:U.S. law still applies by jamstar7 · 2012-09-27 05:41 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Portuguese citizens need to be reminded that they're still under the jurisdiction of U.S. law, and WILL be extradited to the U.S. for breaking any IP laws!
  there's no extradition agreement between the U.S. and Portugal
  Didn't stop then from going after Noriega in Panama and it's not stopping them from going after Assange in Sweden and Dotcom in New Zealand. Does the term 'extraordinary rendition' ring a bell?
  
  --
  Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
16. Re:U.S. law still applies by TheGratefulNet · 2012-09-27 05:42 · Score: 1, Funny
  
  old and busted: calling non-US territory 'rest of world' or ROW.
  new hotness: calling the ROW 'fair game for US drones'.
  uhm, can we go back to the first one, again? maybe its not so bad.
  
  --
  
  --
  "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
17. Re:U.S. law still applies by Baloroth · 2012-09-27 05:59 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Those laws all look like pretty standard extradition terms, actually. Many countries forbid extradition if it might carry the death penalty, for example, only do it for serious crimes, and only do it for crimes they recognize as crimes.
  Which is not to say all countries always follow those laws (exceptions are made, for example, if they requesting country agrees not to pursue the death penalty in that case), but those are pretty standard extradition laws.
  
  --
  "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
18. Re:U.S. law still applies by Baloroth · 2012-09-27 06:04 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  First, they haven't gone after Assange in Sweden because he isn't in Sweden, and it would have made more sense to just do straight from the UK anyways since the US has a better treaty with them, and second, at least the latter two actually have extradition treaties with the US. Noriega was captured in a straight-up war (as a POW), and eventually extradited back to Panama (via France) to serve his sentence there. So, none of those were actually cases of "extraordinary rendition" at all.
  
  --
  "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
19. Re:U.S. law still applies by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 06:59 · Score: 1
  
  No, we're relatively safe from drone strikes in the US.
20. Re:U.S. law still applies by ammorais · 2012-09-27 07:15 · Score: 1
  
  Those laws all look like pretty standard extradition terms, actually.
  Yes they are, in countries that abolished the death penalty . Wasn't implying they weren't or trying to make them notable in some way.
  Wasn't sure if GP was being sarcastic and wanted to point out that his assertion didn't even apply to U.S. citizens, even more to Portuguese.
21. Re:U.S. law still applies by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · 2012-09-27 07:43 · Score: 1
  
  Many countries forbid extradition if it might carry the death penalty...
  
  Which is not to say all countries always follow those laws (exceptions are made, for example, if they requesting country agrees not to pursue the death penalty in that case),
  
  That hardly seems like an exception. The extraditing country agrees not to enforce the death penalty. An exception would be if it was a "we won't*wink wink* execute him" statement.
  
  --
  Your ad here. Ask me how!
22. Re:U.S. law still applies by nedlohs · 2012-09-27 08:02 · Score: 1
  
  It was neither of those. Hopefully that whooshing isn't a US drone.
23. Re:U.S. law still applies by joaosantos · 2012-09-27 09:20 · Score: 1
  
  Portugal doesn't extradite portuguese citizens, it's a constitutional matter.
24. Re:U.S. law still applies by jamstar7 · 2012-09-27 16:41 · Score: 1
  
  Um, the US was not at war with Panama. Noriega ducked into an embassy in Panama until they got tired of listening to rock and roll music played so loud it rattled their fillings. Arguably an act of war, even though nothing 'physical' went off Panamanian soil. And Noriega was El Presidente in Panama at the time, which meant no way he was gonna be extradited in the traditional manner.
  
  --
  Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
25. Re:U.S. law still applies by TeknoHog · 2012-09-27 17:05 · Score: 1
  
  Whooosh!
  Ah, the sound of a drone flying over your head.
  
  --
  Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
26. Re:U.S. law still applies by metacell · 2012-09-27 18:35 · Score: 1
  
  Portuguese citizens need to be reminded that they're still under the jurisdiction of U.S. law, and WILL be extradited to the U.S. for breaking any IP laws!
  Trolled much lately?
27. Re:U.S. law still applies by metacell · 2012-09-27 18:39 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  I'm not sure the CIA will give a shit - they'll come in anyway, kidnap the people, and drop them off at the torture camps.
  That's preposterous. That's not at all how it works. The US government will make a diplomatic call to the local government, who will conveniently lose the prisoners or forget what the local law says, and THEN CIA will kidnap them and drop them off at torture camps.
  That's exactly what happened to two asylum seekers in Sweden, who were illegally handed over to the CIA by Swedish authorities and fell off the map.
28. Re:U.S. law still applies by metacell · 2012-09-27 18:41 · Score: 1
  
  That hardly seems like an exception. The extraditing country agrees not to enforce the death penalty. An exception would be if it was a "we won't*wink wink* execute him" statement.
  Yes, and that probably happens too.
29. Re:U.S. law still applies by Scarletdown · 2012-09-27 19:51 · Score: 1
  
  Violations of Poe's Law will be tried in the U.S. after extradition.
  Quoth me, "Never more."
  
  --
  This space unintentionally left blank.
WHAT THE FU^$ by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 04:25 · Score: 2, Funny

Someone better stop this sh*t before it spreads!... Common sense that is!
Where's the RIAA/MPAA/1% at with damage control?
Oh thats right, they are buttering up the EU and other large groups instead of small member or non-member nations...
If they suddenly went POOF, I wouldn't have a care in the world
In English by darkfeline · 2012-09-27 04:27 · Score: 1, Troll

I'm no legal expert, but doesn't that mean piracy is legal as long as you aren't charging for it? Awesome stuff.
1. Re:In English by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 04:32 · Score: 1
  
  Why you call it piracy at first if there is no damage involved when it is for personal use?
2. Re:In English by Sarten-X · 2012-09-27 04:37 · Score: 1
  
  No. It means (proabably... IANAL, and IANAPortugueseL) that as long as you aren't engaging in any commerce (including building reputation), and you're using it personally (meaning not distributing to the public at large), it's legal. In other words, downloading a song to listen to yourself is probably fine, but putting music on your Portuguese-hosted website probably isn't.
  
  --
  You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
3. Re:In English by V-similitude · 2012-09-27 04:37 · Score: 1
  
  Sort of, but "not charging for it" is not exactly the same thing as "for personal use". I suspect they'd say running a large scale website would qualify as commercial, regardless of whether you charged users explicitly.
4. Re:In English by CanHasDIY · 2012-09-27 04:43 · Score: 1
  
  No - it means that, in Portugal, sharing files on a peer-to-peer network is not piracy, assuming the files aren't being used commercial purposes.
  
  A real win in my book.
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
5. Re:In English by arielCo · 2012-09-27 04:45 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  No, I'm pretty sure that assaulting ships at sea and robbery in general is still punishable, even if you don't charge for your services.
  
  --
  This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
6. Re:In English by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 04:46 · Score: 1
  
  What it means is that the judge doesn't think it's a good idea to criminalize young kids and teenagers that just downloaded some songs to play at home.
7. Re:In English by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 04:48 · Score: 1
  
  No. Piracy refers to the commercial distribution of copyrighted works without the authorization of the copyright's owners. Just because some american industry associations spend tons of money convincing you otherwise, copying stuff for personal use is not piracy. Nor is it stealing.
8. Re:In English by miknix · 2012-09-27 05:31 · Score: 2
  
  and you're using it personally (meaning not distributing to the public at large), it's legal. In other words, downloading a song to listen to yourself is probably fine, but putting music on your Portuguese-hosted website probably isn't.
  Exactly. Playing music at your private parties is also illegal, unless you own the music or you have been licensed to do so.
9. Re:In English by Anarchduke · 2012-09-27 16:39 · Score: 1
  
  Disgraceful. Its probably because Portugal has those socialist state run prisons. If they had a proper US-style corporate prison system, I'd bet they'd re-criminalize it pretty quickly.
  
  --
  who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
10. Re:In English by Anarchduke · 2012-09-27 16:40 · Score: 1
  
  I saw the "downloading is stealing" video at the beginning of my Wall Street DVD. So I know you are wrong. The DVD told me so.
  
  --
  who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
11. Re:In English by metacell · 2012-09-27 18:59 · Score: 1
  
  In Swedish law, "personal use" means you can make a few copies for your family and closest friends. More than that, and you infringe copyright. To qualify for "commercial use", you need to actually earn money from it, and it will result in a harsher punishment.
Common sense and reason by MindPrison · 2012-09-27 04:27 · Score: 2

Nice.
Portugal is also a very pretty country with lots of nature, and did I mention CHEAP housing with LOTS of land for pocket change? Plus low taxes, and even lower for the seniors.
Perfect retirement country, I may be heading there one day...who knows.

--
What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
1. Re:Common sense and reason by dirtypoole · 2012-09-27 04:30 · Score: 1
  
  This...sounds quite lovely.
2. Re:Common sense and reason by Hatta · 2012-09-27 04:38 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Also, possession of personal quantities of just about every drug has been decriminalized in Portugal, for about 10 years now. The result has been a decrease in drug use and all associated problems.
  
  --
  Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
3. Re:Common sense and reason by daem0n1x · 2012-09-27 04:39 · Score: 1
  Don't forget many others greats:
  
  Weather;
  
  Food;
  
  Wines;
  
  History;
  
  Beaches;
  
  Safety.
  
  Just don't come here to work. Business and State are completely disorganised and pay is absolute shit, unless you are an executive. In that case, please come. We desperately need competent management. Not sure if the useless bloodsuckers we have now will yield their comfortable positions easily, though...
4. Re:Common sense and reason by rjlouro · 2012-09-27 04:43 · Score: 1
  
  Low taxes? You obviously don't live in Portugal.
5. Re:Common sense and reason by macbeth66 · 2012-09-27 04:48 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  And drug abuse has not gone up as a result. Just think of the money the country saves on not prosecuting these cases. A small island of sanity.
6. Re:Common sense and reason by jamstar7 · 2012-09-27 05:03 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  And drug abuse has not gone up as a result. Just think of the money the country saves on not prosecuting these cases. A small island of sanity.
  Well, we can't have that. Cue 'discovery' of Al-Quaeda terrorist cells/terrorist training camps/oil/nuclear weapons programs/Julian Assange in Portugal in 5... 4... 3...
  
  --
  Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
7. Re:Common sense and reason by RobertLTux · 2012-09-27 05:14 · Score: 1
  
  To bad this is not the Dresden Files Universe
  about 2 books back in The Dresden Files the Bloodsuckers got made extinct.
  (oh you are talking about Managers Not Vampires never mind)
  btw Cold Days comes out on November 27 (read the previous 13 books first!)
  
  --
  Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
8. Re:Common sense and reason by davester666 · 2012-09-27 05:18 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, it's wonderful IF you already have a significant bucket of money. It's not so wonderful if you move there and then have to earn a living.
  
  --
  Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
9. Re:Common sense and reason by cp.tar · 2012-09-27 05:21 · Score: 1
  
  If it weren’t for your unemployment rates, which almost rival the ones here in Croatia, I’d be considering emigrating to Portugal. This way, I’m primarily considering Australia.
  
  --
  Ignore this signature. By order.
10. Re:Common sense and reason by daem0n1x · 2012-09-27 05:22 · Score: 1
  
  He lives in Denmark. I'm pretty sure taxes are a lot lower here in Portugal. The same happens with salaries, though :-(
11. Re:Common sense and reason by daem0n1x · 2012-09-27 05:27 · Score: 1
  
  Why would you want to come to Portugal? You already have what we have, great beaches and a shit economy.
12. Re:Common sense and reason by ZeroSumHappiness · 2012-09-27 05:28 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 prize
  
  FTFY.
13. Re:Common sense and reason by Kreigaffe · 2012-09-27 05:41 · Score: 1
  
  *MOST* places with great beaches have a shit economy. I don't understand it exactly but suspect the two may be related..
  
  --
  ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
14. Re:Common sense and reason by jgtg32a · 2012-09-27 05:43 · Score: 1
  
  Only the Red Court went down; the Black Court is still around, not many of them though; and White Court is still alive and kicking and appears to be on the rise.
15. Re:Common sense and reason by daem0n1x · 2012-09-27 05:45 · Score: 1
  
  Tell that to Brazil...
16. Re:Common sense and reason by smooth+wombat · 2012-09-27 05:55 · Score: 1
  
  Lackadaisical attitude since you're near the beach why not enjoy it and drug use commensurate with the lackadaisical lifestyle. There's a reason Jamaica isn't a powerhouse in anything except murders, drug use and beaches.
  And yes, I heard the whoosh.
  
  --
  We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
17. Re:Common sense and reason by trancemission · 2012-09-27 06:05 · Score: 1
  
  More than that - I have a number of friends 35 who have 'retired' over there - and more who are planning to do the same.....
  UK citizen....
18. Re:Common sense and reason by trancemission · 2012-09-27 06:07 · Score: 1
  
  That is younger than 35 - cheers slash
Hey.. by wbr1 · 2012-09-27 04:35 · Score: 4, Funny

Anyone got a lead on good Portuguese proxy servers I can torrent through?
Want to help me set some up?

--
Silence is a state of mime.
1. Re:Hey.. by Anubis+IV · 2012-09-27 05:12 · Score: 1
  
  So, IANAL, but isn't this saying that the court ruled it is not a criminal offense to share files for personal use? I.e. These were not lawsuits that were thrown out, but rather a trade organization trying to get the Attorney General to prosecute 2000 file sharers for illegal activity?
  If so, then this doesn't exactly seem like a landmark or very important decision, since isn't the same pretty much true everywhere else? Even in the U.S., it's not a criminal offense unless you're profiting from it (or engaging in it at a massive scale?), I thought, which is why all of the file sharers are being pursued in the civil courts via lawsuits and the like. It would seem to me that this trade organization could still pursue the 2000 file sharers via civil suits, and, if so, that the burden of proof may be substantially lower as well, since civil cases tend to rely on a preponderance of evidence, rather than beyond a reasonable doubt.
  So, even though I know you were probably kidding around, I'll still be a wet blanket and point out that I don't see how this really changes anything for anyone.
2. Re:Hey.. by metacell · 2012-09-27 19:13 · Score: 1
  
  Don't know about Portugal, but in Sweden, small-scale copyright infringement for personal use is a criminal offense, as well as a civil liability. In fact, it needs to be a criminal offense in order to force the ISPs to reveal the identity behind an IP address.
  (Making copies for personal use is only allowed in Sweden if you make them directly off an authorised copy, e.g, a store-bought DVD. If you make copies by downloading off the Internet, private use is not a defence.)
Bailout by arthurpaliden · 2012-09-27 04:36 · Score: 2, Insightful

And this is how it will remain until the bribe I mean the interest free financial bailout monies are forwarded. At which point the subject will be revisited.
Why Portugal May Be the Next Greece

--
Undetectable Steganography? Yep, there's an app fo
1. Re:Bailout by ammorais · 2012-09-27 05:01 · Score: 1
  
  [sarcasm] Perhaps if we send file sharing teenagers, or their moms to jail, we bail the crisis then. [/sarcasm]
2. Re:Bailout by daem0n1x · 2012-09-27 05:04 · Score: 1
  
  What bribe are you talking about?
  The billions of euros that we, the Portuguese taxpayers, dumped into saving banks? Banks that got themselves in dire straits because of serious criminal activities that lasted for years, right under the nose of the supervision authorities?
  Because that money was interest free.
Portugal.... by wbr1 · 2012-09-27 04:37 · Score: 4, Funny

Enabling pirates since ~1577. Thanks!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Fernandez

--
Silence is a state of mime.
1. Re:Portugal.... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 04:45 · Score: 1
  
  Enabling pirates since ~1577. Thanks!
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Fernandez
  
  Awesome :D
  Although you should read your own quotes:
  "Fernandez severed his loyalty to the Spanish crown and in the 1570s he took up a career in piracy"
  Portugal had virtually no pirates, but their fleets were attacked by British pirates, Spanish pirates and Dutch pirates...
2. Re:Portugal.... by Erikderzweite · 2012-09-27 05:25 · Score: 1
  
  So the Portuguese have enabled all those pirates to thrive on their serve... eh... fleets.
3. Re:Portugal.... by Kergan · 2012-09-27 18:03 · Score: 1
  
  Oddly, the pirate nation in chief, if history should remember any, no longer tolerates piracy today...
  http://ageofpirates.com/article.php?English_Privateers
LOL @ ACAPOR by blind+biker · 2012-09-27 04:41 · Score: 3, Insightful

âoeWe are doing anything we can to alert the government to the very serious situation in the entertainment industryâ
I can't quite put my finger on it exactly, but for some reason that sentence made me LOL bigtime. Luckily no coffee was in my mouth at that moment, or I'd have ejected it explosively through several facial orifices.

--
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
1. Re:LOL @ ACAPOR by blind+biker · 2012-09-27 04:42 · Score: 1
  
  Why did quotes become "Ãoe"? Slashbug?
  
  --
  "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
2. Re:LOL @ ACAPOR by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · 2012-09-27 04:47 · Score: 2
  
  Because Unicode is for hippies and tree-huggers.
3. Re:LOL @ ACAPOR by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 05:36 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  And foreigners.
4. Re:LOL @ ACAPOR by mcgrew · 2012-09-27 08:14 · Score: 1
  
  Why did quotes become "Ãfoe"? Slashbug?
  Yes. Ciopy from almost anywhere, including slashdot, and paste it into a comment and half the punctuation (especially quotes and apostrophes) change into garbage. There's no unicode support in comments.
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
5. Re:LOL @ ACAPOR by icebraining · 2012-09-27 12:22 · Score: 1
  
  It's relevant to mention that ACAPOR is the association of video clubs (like Blockbuster), and they're mostly butthurt that people have moved on much like everywhere else (exacerbated by the fact that our salaries are low and the internet speeds are reasonable).
  
  --
  Dilbert RSS feed
You just wait for craziness to ensue... by tibit · 2012-09-27 04:54 · Score: 3, Insightful

You just wait until various acronymous industry groups start blaming Portugal's "lax" IP laws on their financial problems. With entertainment revenue's bottom dropping out, as it does to an extent when people have little or no disposable income, we're bound to hear industry groups blaming it all on legalized file sharing. Sigh.

--
A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
1. Re:You just wait for craziness to ensue... by daem0n1x · 2012-09-27 05:44 · Score: 1
  
  I'm pretty sure the IMF will say something about that. And our puppet government will immediately create a law that forces every Portuguese to buy a certain monthly quantity of overpriced CDs containing shitty French and German music.
Drive it home by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 05:04 · Score: 5, Insightful

The result has been a decrease in drug use and all associated problems
I don't think you really drove the point home. What this literally means is that decriminalization of drugs results in:
- LESS crime
- LESS violence
- LESS injustice
- LESS corruption in government
In other words, decriminalization has the exact opposite result of what the government propaganda teaches us. That should immediately raise a red flag and cause a citizen to lose trust in government. The fact that drug use itself also goes down, rather than up, is just the icing on the cake. The reason drugs need to be decriminalized is not simply to lower drug use; it is for the much more critical reasons stated above.
1. Re:Drive it home by ZeroSumHappiness · 2012-09-27 05:27 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Hold on, one second.
  First, I'm assuming that "LESS crime" means less crime once you account for the fact that you're not prosecuting drug crimes. It would take a willfully ignorant misreading to screw that up.
  However, how do you measure "LESS injustice" and "LESS corruption" as a result of decriminalizing drug laws? Not that I don't believe you, just that I think those would be hard to measure as effects.
2. Re:Drive it home by Sarten-X · 2012-09-27 05:46 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, come on... Even without that whole "causation" thing, or that "significance" bullshit, just calculating statistics is hard enough.
  Especially while high.
  
  --
  You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
3. Re:Drive it home by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 05:59 · Score: 1
  
  Less corruption: Prohibition is profit to government. That is why it exists, and that is why they are so vehemently against abolishing prohibition, even decriminalization which is merely a step in the right direction. Prohibition rakes billions of dollars per year through the business of government, and they are aware of this not simply at the top of the pyramid, but right down to the grunts who do the actual work. It is well known that prohibition presents the perfect opportunity for corruption, from the top of the pyramid right down to the grunts, and if you look hard enough through the smokescreen you will find plenty of evidence of actual corruption.
  Less injustice: I consider this self-evident, but for those who accept the dominant theme of authoritarianism in today's world of superpower governments, it is 100% wrong and immoral to lock a peaceful man in a cage like an animal -- for committing a crime not against any actual human being, but merely against the business of government. Furthermore you can't ignore the incidental victims of prohibition: those who are falsely accused, emprisoned, or even killed (again, no shortage of evidence if you look hard enough).
  Less crime: Again, I consider this obvious. Drug prohibition doesn't stop the drug business at all -- it simply puts it in the hands of criminals. Criminals who don't follow the law by definition.
4. Re:Drive it home by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 08:07 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  If you only decriminalise posession of small amounts it won't make any difference.
  There is two types of crime that are caused by the "war on drugs"
  1. Organised crime in supply.
  2. Petty Crime used by addicts to get the stuff they need.
  First could be solved by government selling anything you want (Taxed at a level that means large amounts of profit for the government but still far cheaper than organised crime can supply it for and at a regulated quality). You can wipe organised crime out really easily (People still sell smuggled cigs and booze especially in low income areas but those people don't have money / guns / power).
  Second could be solved by giving addicts access to pure and affordable stuff. (Perhaps for less than sold on the open market so as to reduce crime for the rest of the population).
  Taking in extra taxes by getting rid of the black market would be a good way to solve the current financial crisis. (At least in the UK).
  I don't quite understand why governments are so against this sort of logic but would rather make things harder for the sort of people who are votiing for them (and probably don't do drugs and wouldn't anyway) by cutting spending on essential services. People who take drugs will take them no matter what a responsible government would stear people towards the safer ones as well.
5. Re:Drive it home by Anarchduke · 2012-09-27 16:45 · Score: 1
  
  It also means less prisoners, which would put thousands of corporate detention officers out of work. You obviously just hate honest hardworking Americans and want them to become unemployed government moochers. What are all those prison guards supposed to do if you have your way? Not to mention the thousands of hard working criminal attorneys and police officers. Why there's a whole industry of jobs you are threatening with your radical talk.
  
  You must be a marxist, socialist, muslim, athiest, commie, fascist liberal.
  
  --
  who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
6. Re:Drive it home by Anarchduke · 2012-09-27 16:46 · Score: 1
  
  or worse, a Ron Paul supporter.
  
  --
  who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
Exactly by ThatsNotPudding · 2012-09-27 05:33 · Score: 4, Insightful

Also, possession of personal quantities of just about every drug has been decriminalized in Portugal, for about 10 years now. The result has been a decrease in drug use and all associated problems.

This is a closely-guarded secret held under wraps by the US government, corporate-owned media, Big Pharma, and most especially the sickening for-profit prison corporations. You as a US citizen will NEVER hear about this on the news. Bill Maher should open every show talking about Portugal and compare it US prison statistics.
1. Re:Exactly by jotaass · 2012-09-27 12:14 · Score: 1
  
  Also, possession of personal quantities of just about every drug has been decriminalized in Portugal, for about 10 years now. The result has been a decrease in drug use and all associated problems.
  This is a closely-guarded secret held under wraps by the US government, corporate-owned media, Big Pharma, and most especially the sickening for-profit prison corporations. You as a US citizen will NEVER hear about this on the news. Bill Maher should open every show talking about Portugal and compare it US prison statistics.
  Indeed. I must admit that I'm a quite well-educated libertarian-ish American who has been online since the early 90s and find my way to all kinds of alternative media outlets, and yet this is actually the first I've heard of Portugal's drug policy.
  Hell, I'm Portuguese and this is the first time I've heard of Portugal's drug policy.
2. Re:Exactly by imnotanumber · 2012-09-27 14:23 · Score: 1
  
  If you just google "portuguese drug policy" there are a lot of interesting links.
  I find interesting how a subject can be just overlooked by being discreetly "forgotten"...
Downloading = Legal, "making available" not so by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 05:54 · Score: 5, Informative

Portuguese with some legal background:
It has always been legal to own or acquire (download) unauthorized copies of most content. *
It's legal to make how many copies you want for your own use and to share with other people
within your "personal" sphere.
What is illegal is "making such content available to the public", emphasis on "public" as in
"general public".
What the A.G. clarified is that, in the particular case of BT and similar P2P protocols,
the act of seeding a file you are downloading, or did just download, enjoys the same treatment
as if you were downloading using a traditional protocol, i.e., benefits from the "personal use"
exception.
This does not mean you can happily run a public W4R3Z FTP server with impunity, but it does clarify
an important issue re: the law vs P2P downloads that had had no previous legal interpretation.
It has also brought about an interesting IP != person argument which will be interesting to follow up on,
in case of more serious offenses.
AC
* thanks to the lobbying efforts of the BSA-equivalent in the 90s, computer programs are dealt with differently
and enjoy no "personal use" rights.
Portuguese here... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 05:56 · Score: 1

Actually, there isn't any news here, only confusion, and file-sharing in Portugal is still illegal. This means you cannot share something that is copyrighted and of which you have no right to copy. But receiving the result of the copy is not illegal. This basically means that it's illegal to upload, but downloading is legal. Using BitTorrent for downloading copyrighted material of which you have no right to copy is also illegal because you're uploading when you're downloading.
1. Re:Portuguese here... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-09-27 06:19 · Score: 1
  
  Also Portuguese here, Read the article with care
  O DIAP considera "lícita" a reprodução para uso privado, "ainda que colocando-se neste tipo de redes a questão de o utilizador agir simultaneamente no ambiente digital em sede de upload e download dos ficheiros a partilhar". in publico.pt
2. Re:Portuguese here... by karmac0ma · 2012-09-27 10:39 · Score: 2
  
  Portuguese here too, and this quote ought to be translated:
  
  O DIAP considera "lícita" a reprodução para uso privado, "ainda que colocando-se neste tipo de redes a questão de o utilizador agir simultaneamente no ambiente digital em sede de upload e download dos ficheiros a partilhar". in publico.pt
  Rushed translation from that original article in portuguese:
  
  DIAP considers reproduction for private use "legal", adding "even though there is the issue of a user acting simultaneously as uploader and downloader of the shared files."
  This is a great example of media spinning towards the opposite side, look at the full quote from another source:
  
  [...] even though there is the issue of a user acting simultaneously as uploader and downloader of the shared files, we understand as legitimate the use of P2P networks by their users for private use -- articles 75-2a and 81-b of the Code of Author's Rights and Associated Rights -- even though one can gather that once the copy is done the user does not stop being part of the sharing process.
  So what sounded like a warning to change the law was actually them specifying that the download vs. upload issue is irrelevant for this particular case. A really strong point, and the rightsholder associations are fuming like mad (especially since they were the ones that caused this following a silly charge of 2000 IP addresses.) Considering the conservative tendency of the current government and the current political shitstorm here, it wouldn't be shocking to see a change to the law try to slip through Parliament. Also, if the EU someday decides for a copyright directive that outlaws private copying (lobbies are powerful, remember), it's bye bye for our downloader's paradise here.
Piracy vs. FileSharing by scarboni888 · 2012-09-27 06:32 · Score: 3

Piracy = making money off of other people's works = bad
File sharing != Piracy
Thank goodness the portugese legal system understands that as most of the rest of the world (Including Slashdot) seems to think those things are one and the same.
Sure can.. by xtal · 2012-09-27 07:10 · Score: 1

I'd say the next Pirate Bay VPN located there will sure meet your description of a globally distributing film/music/software company based in Portugal. :)

--
..don't panic
Do some research, eh? by Mathinker · 2012-09-27 10:16 · Score: 2

From Wikipedia:

2010s
In 2010 Portugal produced 22 feature films.[2][1]
In 2011, there were a total of 19 feature films produced.[3][1] The most commercially successful Portuguese film of the year was Blood of My Blood by João Canijo with 20,953 admissions and grossing €97,784.72.[4] The share of Portuguese cinema in the Portuguese box office was 0.7%.[5] On the artistic side, one of the most successful films was Joaquim Sapinho's This Side of Resurrection, premiered at the Visions programme at the Toronto International Film Festival with a United States premiere at the Harvard Film Archive.
At the 62nd Berlin International Film Festival, in 2012, Tabu, directed by Miguel Gomes, was in competition for the Golden Bear and Rafa, directed by João Salaviza, won the Golden Bear for Best Short Film.
As of 9 September 2012, the highest grossing Portuguese film of the year is Morangos com Açúcar – O Filme with €869,102,19.[6] The Lines of Wellington will be in competition for the Golden Lion at the 69th Venice International Film Festival. [7]
Just because Americans don't hear about foreign films doesn't mean they don't exist, or even thrive (like all other film industries, including the American one).
1. Re:Do some research, eh? by icebraining · 2012-09-27 11:44 · Score: 2
  
  Not really. Our film industry is divided between the commercial producers, which only makes crap for the least common denominator (like the Morangos, which is one of those teenage soaps/dramas played by unknown "actors"), and the artistic producers, which live off government subsidies and make stuff nobody but the critics watch.
  We had a streak of great movies in the 40s and 50s, but the rest barely registers.
  
  --
  Dilbert RSS feed
2. Re:Do some research, eh? by Mathinker · 2012-09-29 04:33 · Score: 1
  
  > which only makes crap for the least common denominator
  Kind of like Hollywood, then? The point wasn't that Portuguese movies are earth-shattering masterpieces, it's that (especially when correct for population differences), the Portuguese film industry is far from "non-existent".
Next year, no Portuguese language content because by raymorris · 2012-09-28 12:33 · Score: 1

It will be interesting to check back a year from now and see if virtually no-one produces Portuguese language content at that time since you won't be able to sell enough to recoup the costs of making and marketing it. Maybe look at how many NY Times bestsellers are translated Portuguese today and how many are avaible a year or two from now. I know I wouldn't spend my time translating, only to sell one copy and have everyone else pirate it. Maybe it'll work out well, maybe not. Let's check back next year and see, shall we.