Slashdot Mirror
European Court Finds Copyright Doesn't Automatically Trump Freedom Of Expression
First time accepted submitter admiral snackbar writes "The European Court of Human Rights has declared that the copyright monopoly stands in direct conflict with fundamental Human Rights, as defined in the European Union and elsewhere. 'For the first time in a judgment on the merits, the European Court of Human Rights has clarified that a conviction based on copyright law for illegally reproducing or publicly communicating copyright protected material can be regarded as an interference with the right of freedom of expression and information under Article 10 of the European Convention [on Human Rights]. Such interference must be in accordance with the three conditions enshrined in the second paragraph of Article 10 of the Convention. This means that a conviction or any other judicial decision based on copyright law, restricting a person's or an organization's freedom of expression, must be pertinently motivated as being necessary in a democratic society, apart from being prescribed by law and pursuing a legitimate aim.'"
I, for one, welcome our new european overlords!
What?
An organisation has freedom of expression?
That's not good. It's members maybe, but an abstract legal entity?
SJW n. One who posts facts.
While the EU has had a lot of criticism (some of it justified) for it's costs, it's impenetrable bureaucracy, and it's tendency to focus on the minutia rather than bigger problems, I think that it would be impossible to practically enact vital laws and opinions such as this on an international scale without it. Big government may be out of fashion on the other side of the pond, but it certainly has it's merits over here (where our governmental needs are different) and this kind of check against the increasing pressure and influence of fanatical commercial interests on the interpretation and drafting of legislation is exactly what we need right now to restore a little sanity to the situation.
There's something you owe the french.
Your freedom.
And most of your constitution.
TFA is crap, but links to a post with more details.
the applicants were Robert Ashby Donald, Marcio Madeira Moraes and Olivier Claisse, respectively an American, a Brazilian and a French national living in New-York, Paris and Le Perreux-sur-Marne. All three are fashion photographers. The case concerned their conviction in France for copyright infringement following the publication of pictures on the Internet site Viewfinder of a fashion company run by Mr. Donald and Mr. Moraes. The photos were taken by Mr. Claisse at fashion shows in Paris in 2003 and published without the permission of the fashion houses. The three fashion photographers were ordered by the Court of Appeal of Paris to pay fines between 3.000 and 8.000 euro and an award of damages to the French design clothing Federation and five fashion houses, all together amounting to 255.000 euro
Notably,
In the case of Ashby Donald and others v. France the European Court of Human Rights did not need to undertake itself such a balancing exercise, as it found that the French judicial authorities have done this exercise in a proper way. As the Court stated, it saw no reason to disagree with the findings by the French courts
I.e., the ruling didn't do squat to help the defendants in this case.
Might go some way towards explaining the massive right-wing hate for the European Court of Human Rights and petty tabloid hate of 'European human rights' in general.
Human rights and (rightwing politics, elite interests) of all colours generally don't get along.
(mutatis mutandis of course).
It's long been common practice that copyright couldn't be enforced if it was violated in order to provide information in the interest of the public.
I don't see this ruling going any further...
That's interesting. Could you provide links to more information? I think that's the way it should be.
Don't like the 2nd Amendment? Ignore it, or make up self-serving crap about a simple explanatory clause somehow being related to the fundamental right being guaranteed!
Don't like due process? Ignore it. Use them drones to whack US citizens!
Hate to tell you this, but only a minority of Europeans actually live in France, there are a few other countries in the EU...
Thanks for your attention, I hope you enjoyed your geography lesson.
A good example of the Human Rights Court anarchist and far, far left trend. You do not have to be a right-winger to see the issues here. If they can undermine the 'capitalistic' underpinnings of copyrights, then much of our information/technology/innovation sharing and growth will grind to a halt. We will innovate like the Russians and Chinese do - not.
These 2.3 terrabytes of bit torrent downloads are not piracy.
They are performance art.
Some express themselves through defecating paint on canvas, or inserting nostalgic objects into their vaginas, or even collecting garbage in a room and calling it art.
My art is poetry formed of the sequence of downloads I am undertaking.
Now please stop troubling me with your talk about "piracy" and "illegality" because it's simply not true.
Also because I'm in the EU, can I get welfare benefits for heavy metal addiction?
That's what I'm downloading. Help me!
Futurist Traditionalism
Hate to tell you but the European Court of Human Rights is not an EU court but a COE (council of europe) court.
They eat horses you know.
You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
What have the politicians been up to this time?
Their corporate handlers are going to be *so* cross.
It just goes to show: You can never really rely on them being housebroken.
At least they know they are eating horses.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21377601
as long as it's
2.3 terrabytes
of whatever; as soon as we're talking terrorbytes, thing might go ugly...
Holy crap, I'm feeling like my wildest dreams have come true! Finally acknowledging, that copyright must be in balance with society and is no absolute right, whereas freedom of expression is an absolute right.
I DO in general despise the EU (they do regulate a lot of our daily lives, which is kind of strange for all those little things) but the high courts seem to have a deep insight into humanity and society as of late.
I was hoping someone would pick up on this. I live in the UK, but I'm vegetarian, so I get to laugh and point at all my friends who delight in eating mystery meat. Personally, I don't see much difference between horse and cow; why eat one and not the other?
You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
The ECHR has nothing to do with the EU. The ECHR was established as part of the Council of Europe. With 47 member states (including, for example, Russia) the Council is significantly bigger than Europe.
This is important for a few reasons:
- This decision, while not necessarily binding in domestic law for many countries, offers relatively strong guidance as to how domestic law should treat these cases
- Discussions about the EU are irrelevant here
- Unlike EU law, ECHR decisions do not automatically become domestic law in many cases/countries.
I've never understood the aversion to eating horse. It's basically just a tall skinny cow, so what's the problem?
I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...
....time to cut the EU off from the rest of the world. Let them fall back into their own cesspool.
Stealing money from big companies to bolster their crappy economies....then saying that people who share stuff is "freedom of expression" - how retarded....
Mankind sort-of made a pact with horses. They let you ride on their back and agree to be used for labor, but in return you promise not to kill them for food.
Similar deals have been made with for instance donkeys, dogs, cats and falcons. They hunt for us, guard us or carry our loads.
Cows appear much less intelligent and you won't be able to make such a deal. They are basically a meat-milk-excrement factory, barely intelligent enough
to stay awake. All they do all day is stand around and eat. Therefore we are allowed to eat them.
On a sidenote, this is the reason I don't eat pig. They are way too intelligent to be brought to the slaughterhouse.
Well. apparently the Findus Spaghetti Bologneighs is fine if you put some mascarpone on top. It's not bad for you, although it is somewhat high in Shergar and has been known to give some people the trots.
You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
Because, traditionally, horses work on the farm, cows don't. Killing and eating an animal that has worked for you for multiple years as final payment for his services is betrayal.
This ruling is generally in accordance with the US constitution. People have rights inherently; they are not granted. governments do not. They have powers over those rights, granted by he people for specific purposes, carefully designed, and revocable.
One such was the creation of copyright for the purpose of protecting the economic interest of authors, to promote same. Go read the lines yourself.
Now if this European decision is treating copyright as some power aggrandizement or usurpation, that is an incorrect view. There is no unconstitutionality of properly-formed government-granted (granted to government, by the people) powers.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
"Studies show money follows positions a lot more than the other way around."
This shows that the old boys network ensures only "the right people" get power.
It used to be the aristocracy, but now it is the plutocracy.
One reason why there are so many buried there is the Merkin Mindset. the US commanders "didn't need" help from the Royal Navy and so requested they not support the landing.
Not being heavily shelled meant that the german forces could reconfigure themselves to cover the landings where they were going to get a beachhead.
And, as the other poster points out, there are a lot of other soldiers under those dunes.
Not to mention that (proportionate to the number of people) there are a lot of french soldiers buried on US soil freeing YOU from British Rule.
But do you hear the french cry off "Fat american cheeseypoof-eating idiots"? No.
Why?
Because, despite not being British, they're more adult than many of the noisier Merkins.
I was hoping someone would pick up on this. I live in the UK, but I'm vegetarian, so I get to laugh and point at all my friends who delight in eating mystery meat. Personally, I don't see much difference between horse and cow; why eat one and not the other?
I don't see a problem with eating horse... To my mind, the problem seems to be that the suppliers obviously aren't capable of keeping track of what goes into the products, so it could have been *anything*... we just got lucky it was horse.
On the other hand, vegitarians need to be careful - uniquorn has been found in some veggy meals :)
http://blog.nexusuk.org
Huh? People eat all of the animals you listed (except perhaps falcons). Horse meat is taboo in the US, but commonly eaten in France and Italy. Donkey meat is not as common, but still consumed in Europe. Dogs and cats are eaten in Asia. Animals don't really care what you do with them when you die - you are anthropomorphizing.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
They also say it is beef fit for human consumption. they say it is not from sick animals and not rotten.
But if it isn't beef, how do we know it's fit for human consumption? After all, we've only their word for it. And they've lied about it being beef already...
Whoa there!
Falcons stay with their owner for protection, shelter and free food. The life the falconer gives them is better than the life they would get in the wild. It's why they choose to stay and not fly off to fend for themselves.
This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
To be honest, I think it's not so much not being capable of keeping track, but more outright fraud.
You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
I disagree. Horses are stupid as well, but their meat tastes much better than beef. It is just that cows waste less food.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
"Similar deals have been made with for instance donkeys, dogs, cats and falcons."
Eating your fellow carnivores is in general a bad idea, and that goes for zombies and cannibals. The concentration of poisons go up the higher the food chain you go. A falcon can suffer from eating rats not harmed by eating insecticide-laced insects.
It's not about what the animals care about. It's about not being a backstabber and a betrayer to the animals that worked for you for years.
Actually, traditionally, most farm work was done by neutered male cattle (oxen), not by horses. Horses were too expensive. And oxen did get slaughtered and eaten when they were no longer able to work.
The taboo about eating horses comes not from their being working animals - it comes from the fact that they were expensive, and therefore kept by the upper classes, who had plenty of other food, and thus, could afford to be sentimental. The fact that the upper classes mainly kept them also led to horses being considered a 'noble animal', which led to further cultural restrictions against eating them.
I wake up every morning
hold my hands and pray for rain
I've got a head full of ideas
driving me insane
It's a shame the way she makes me scrub the floor
well, I ain't gonna work on Maggie's farm no more
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
It's not about what the animals care about. It's about not being a backstabber and a betrayer to the animals that worked for you for years.
This is nonsense; you cannot betray an entity that doesn't understand betrayal. You might have well said we shouldn't betray rocks by breaking them for gravel because they provide solid footing.
Cows work just fine (well, at least quite ok) for heavy work. In the past a lot of people couldn't afford workhorses and used cows.
Btw. cows in open fields do quite a bit of running around etc. particularly when they are in fields that is crossed by a hiking trail.
They also have a good bit of curiosity, which can be a bit scary when you don't know if they might get agressive.
They also have no problem remembering the way home and know when it's time to get milked etc.
Agree with anything the self-important 'ECHR' says, and it's like agreeing to burn witches. Well, in ECHR terms, soaking their feet gently in nice warm water and giving them a pension-for-life as an 'excluded community'. Don't join the nonsense train, use the Comfy Cushions.
Like I said, anthropomorphizing.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
I think this is the core of the issue.
On one hand, sharing information is a great thing.
On the other hand, that information will not get developed if it doesn't pay off handsomely.
My concern is making sure we can continue to fund quality books, movies, etc. We can find people to do it for free, but people who get paid to do it can do it full time and may do a better job.
Futurist Traditionalism
Proof by analogy is fraud. If it weren't you wouldn't need an analogy to make your point.
Anthropomorphising is attributing human feelings to animals. The GP attributed human feelings to humans. Don't feel bad about having problems with reading comprehension. That's nothing to be ashamed of. You can definitely improve them if you work hard enough.
Alright, smart guy, how can you be a "backstabber" or "betrayer" to an animal unless you imagine the animal capable of understanding - let alone having an opinion about - these very human concepts? The very concept of "betraying" a horse only makes sense if the horse can feel betrayed.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Anthropomorphising is attributing human attributes to animals.
Try looking up definitions before making up your own.
"Similar deals have been made with for instance donkeys, dogs, cats and falcons."
Eating your fellow carnivores is in general a bad idea, and that goes for zombies and cannibals. The concentration of poisons go up the higher the food chain you go. A falcon can suffer from eating rats not harmed by eating insecticide-laced insects.
Ummmm, what?
"To thine own self be true". If, for example only, you were to say nasty things about a friend of yours to someone else, and that friend never found out, wouldn't you still be a bad person for doing so? The logic is identical, except that the "friend" is a horse. Or a rock, I suppose. I'd give you a pass on gossiping about a rock. Plus, horses are shiny.
Why be unfriendly?
In fact, I can find nothing that says fair use applies to issues "in the interest of the public", as the grandparent comment says. It seems unlikely that the result of a court case now would be like that of the case concerning the Pentagon Papers: "Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government."
Whistleblower laws are independent of fair use laws.
There is no problem with eating horse apart from
a) It was not the meat it was cliamed to be.
b) Some drugs are not allowed into the human food chain and are used on horses.
c) If they can't track it who knows wtf it contains.
Cows form significant social bonds, as a matter of fact all memeber species of the bos familiy have quite complex and large herds. They are far from the milk and shit factories you fancy to keep you from feeling guilt. chickens (and practically all birds) are geniuses compared to most mammals.
It's all nice and fine to be vegetarian, but don't be complacent. Going from "local butcher" type of shops where you could actually trace that steak back to cow to industrial scale food production of ready-made meals is what brings in most of problems with food today. If you buy steak, you will probably notice funny taste, texture or look. If you buy minced meats, sausagues, burgers, "chicken" nuggets and other heavily processed food, you won't really know what you will get on your plate unless you break out full chemistry lab and start doing tests.
I would say that it goes similar with foodstuffs. It would be really hard to sell you potatoes labeled as broccolli, but enter processed foods with plethora of "veggie" ready-made meals, sausagues and burgers.. I would say that if anything larger than mom & pop shop made them, you probably aren't much better off than others eathing differently labeled processed foods. Who knows what protein sources would you find in that soy pasta sauce if you would really start testing them all.
I see this as a food industry problem. You have the whole supply chain thing which is mostly great at producing non-harmful foods (it's highly unlikely that you would get poisoned or contract e.coli), but not so great at tracing each and every sourced item like you could count on local butcher or local farmers market.
So as long as you buy stuff that's somewhat identifiable and prepare your own meals, then you're safe either way. You probably won't be eating rat, pig or horse meat in your beef burger and similarily your veg sasuage and soy patty won't include random nuts (which would get some people rightfully worried) or other non-compliant and unlikable things.
There's a reason that meany things you can buy explicitly state that while food isn't made using nuts, it's made in a place that uses nuts. Read between the lines and you will pretty much identify what is one of main problems when you aren't the person preparing your own meal. Do it industrial scale, and the risks become just harder to manage.
Can you do a logo for promoting spam as legitimate advertising?
I noticed that last sentence of yours works just as well for "human" as it does for "horse".
Just because it's difficult to communicate with X, does not mandate that X is incapable of feeling betrayed.
And a thought exercise: if one were to consider it acceptable to butcher any work animal that is "incapable of feeling betrayed", would a human psychopath (since they are not capable of forming emotional attachments) qualify?
Cool word, schmorgluck! Had to look it up: ... "the lowest degree of desire or volition, with no effort to act"
.
velleity : the lowest degree of volition, a slight wish or tendency, inclination
.
There is definitely a teenager in my house with a lot of velleity!
Yes, but will we get the same quality of work?
Ernest Hemingway was able to devote his life to his writing because it not only paid the bills, but paid comparable to work as an attorney or doctor.
If writing pays nothing, he'll take those other jobs instead, and not have the time to write the masterpieces he would do otherwise.
Futurist Traditionalism
The betrayer is human. And humans can definitely feel guilty,
Yes, exactly, there's the agreement. The falcon stays with the human, who will not eat it, and will provide it with food and shelter. In exchange for hunting and giving up their prey. Same with dogs. And very similar to horses. I am convinced that both sides understand this agreement- these kind of deals are biologic and have nothing to do with reasoning, it is not uncommon for different species of animals working together for mutual benefit. Like that little bird which cleans a crocodiles teeth.
Dude, if that's how you treat the animals working for you, I'd rather not do business with you. And that's how it works out in the end.
I guess I consider horses closer to "rock" when it comes to the category of "capable of feeling betrayed". If anything, as herd animals they should appreciate a little display of dominance. Pack animals like dogs/wolves will eat their dead, so if anything they seem to consider it an honor to be eaten. Anthropomorphizing...
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
Germany. The one European country that exports more than the US... Nevermind the 27/49 other countries.
The EU is actually the largest economy in the world - larger than the US.
Who's economy is crappy and nearly bankrupt? The US!