Furthermore, the company behind Skype is Swedish, and based in Stockholm. I just don't see any way for the FBI to exert pressure here and I think the article overstated the danger.
Of course the EP has real power. In many topics (though not all) a law HAS to be passed by the European Parliament to make it -- this is regulated in the treaties.
Thanks for your interest. There is a list of the MEPs here along with their party affiliation as well as country of origin. Most of them have e-mail addresses published on their pages, perhaps it's worth a shot even though you're not an EU citizen.
I haven't yet written my MEPs but I plan to (particularly the one I helped elect to office, by voting for him three years ago).
I plan on customizing my letters depending on the political party I'm addressing -- the leftists (PSE and GUE/NGL) need to hear that patents will give large corporations too much power, while the liberals (ELDR) and conservatives (EPP) may be more receptive to arguments about fair competition and freedom and liberties.
The treaties are full of the phrase "Ever Closer Union", and explicitly prevent seccession.
The new EU constitution, due for adoption next year if things go right, explicitly guarantees member states the freedom to leave the Union:
Article 59: Voluntary withdrawal from the Union
1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the European Union in accordance with its
own constitutional requirements.
2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention;
the European Council shall examine that notification. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that
State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council of Ministers, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.
The representative of the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in Council of Ministers or European Council discussions or decisions concerning it.
3. The Constitution shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned,
decides to extend this period.
4. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to re-join, its request shall be subject to
the procedure referred to in Article 57.
Does this Directive overprotect intellectual property by taking on board the most repressive legislation found in EU Member States?
It is not right to say that the proposal simply takes on board the most 'repressive' legislation of each EU country. The Directive takes on board the best measures already adopted in various EU countries. Those are not always the most draconian and there are a number of measures currently available in certain EU countries which have not been included.
Translation: Yes, this law is pretty damn repressive... but we could have made it even more repressive, so it's okay!
{insert mandatory Orwell reference}
You can vote your EU MEPs out, or the national governments... and they are the ones who have the final say over this legislation. The commision's proposal is just that -- a proposal. They alone don't have the power to pass this rubbish. The trick is getting our local and national politicians not to buy into what the commision is saying.
The EU commision doesn't have the final say -- the member state governments, and often the EU parliament, can veto these things. The problem is convincing them that the commision's proposal is bad.
The big problem, I think, is that most people don't know enough about technology to realize why these ideas are bad. The average citizen will swallow whatever the politicians say, believing these laws are necessary for competing with the US and for safeguarding European industry and jobs (very misguided thinking, of course). I'm sure the combined geeks of the EU would be a formidable force but maybe not big enough for politicians to pay much attention to.
The European Commision last year poured some money into studying whether government computers in member state could be migrated to open source. Although, I'll concede that this isn't quite the same thing as actually funding open source development.
You guys shouldn't be to quick to change your system. Yes, the jury system is more prone to ignorant and populistic judgements but the concept of "trial by your peers" is elegant, and I might prefer that over the professional and semi-professional judges used in the courts of many European states.
I really hate non-standard GUIs -- I want everything to look and feel like the host platform and this IDE definitely does not. Also, as others have noted, C/C++ is not yet supported. Otherwise it seems pretty impressive.
Actually, you're wrong there: every five years, there are EU wide elections for the European Parliament. Together with the Council, which is nothing other than the combined elected governments from each member state with a more fancy name, they are the ones with the power to pass legislation. The EU does have its problems, but it's not nearly as undemocratic as a lot of people (including people in Europe, particularly in Scandinavia and the UK) believe.
BTW, the previous poster was a little wrong on the population size -- the EU is nearly 380 million people now, and around 100 million more (if I'm not mistaken) next year following the accession of the new member states.
While this is a very good offer, it doesn't seem that extraordinary. Bredbandsbolaget in Sweden has offered 10 MBit/s ethernet for a long time with a present price of around $36 per month. That's more expensive than the offer this story mentions, but not all that much. I'm one of their many happy customers. (No, I'm not getting paid to say this.)
All of the EU institutions involved in legislation (Council, Parliament, Commision) are either directly or indirectly elected by the people. The council comprises the directly elected member state governments, the parliament is directly elected in EU wide elections every four or five years, and the commision is elected by the member state governments.
Actually only one commisioner was shady but the parliament has the power only to sack the entire commision at once, not individual commisoners. Therefore they all voluntarily left before that happened.
Well, if you didn't vote for any of them in the EU parliamentary election, why not just contact the ones from the UK? After all, they are supposed to represent your member state.
Slashdot Mirror
They have published some info on their encryption. Look here and here.
The company behind Skype is Swedish, as were the Kazaa people. Sharman which now controls Kazaa is Australian but entered the game late.
Furthermore, the company behind Skype is Swedish, and based in Stockholm. I just don't see any way for the FBI to exert pressure here and I think the article overstated the danger.
Of course the EP has real power. In many topics (though not all) a law HAS to be passed by the European Parliament to make it -- this is regulated in the treaties.
Thanks for your interest. There is a list of the MEPs here along with their party affiliation as well as country of origin. Most of them have e-mail addresses published on their pages, perhaps it's worth a shot even though you're not an EU citizen.
I haven't yet written my MEPs but I plan to (particularly the one I helped elect to office, by voting for him three years ago).
I plan on customizing my letters depending on the political party I'm addressing -- the leftists (PSE and GUE/NGL) need to hear that patents will give large corporations too much power, while the liberals (ELDR) and conservatives (EPP) may be more receptive to arguments about fair competition and freedom and liberties.
The EU parliamentarians are elected. If you didn't vote in the election don't blame it on anyone else. You'll have another chance next year.
The treaties are full of the phrase "Ever Closer Union", and explicitly prevent seccession.
The new EU constitution, due for adoption next year if things go right, explicitly guarantees member states the freedom to leave the Union:
Article 59: Voluntary withdrawal from the Union
1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the European Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.
2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention; the European Council shall examine that notification. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council of Ministers, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.
The representative of the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in Council of Ministers or European Council discussions or decisions concerning it.
3. The Constitution shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, decides to extend this period.
4. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to re-join, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 57.
Why? A No vote to the EMU won't make this go away. It won't make a difference.
From the EU IP FAQ (my underline):
Does this Directive overprotect intellectual property by taking on board the most repressive legislation found in EU Member States?
It is not right to say that the proposal simply takes on board the most 'repressive' legislation of each EU country. The Directive takes on board the best measures already adopted in various EU countries. Those are not always the most draconian and there are a number of measures currently available in certain EU countries which have not been included.
Translation: Yes, this law is pretty damn repressive... but we could have made it even more repressive, so it's okay! {insert mandatory Orwell reference}
You can vote your EU MEPs out, or the national governments... and they are the ones who have the final say over this legislation. The commision's proposal is just that -- a proposal. They alone don't have the power to pass this rubbish. The trick is getting our local and national politicians not to buy into what the commision is saying.
The EU commision doesn't have the final say -- the member state governments, and often the EU parliament, can veto these things. The problem is convincing them that the commision's proposal is bad.
That was a terrific point and one I hadn't thought of. This needs to be modded up!
The big problem, I think, is that most people don't know enough about technology to realize why these ideas are bad. The average citizen will swallow whatever the politicians say, believing these laws are necessary for competing with the US and for safeguarding European industry and jobs (very misguided thinking, of course). I'm sure the combined geeks of the EU would be a formidable force but maybe not big enough for politicians to pay much attention to.
The European Commision last year poured some money into studying whether government computers in member state could be migrated to open source. Although, I'll concede that this isn't quite the same thing as actually funding open source development.
You guys shouldn't be to quick to change your system. Yes, the jury system is more prone to ignorant and populistic judgements but the concept of "trial by your peers" is elegant, and I might prefer that over the professional and semi-professional judges used in the courts of many European states.
If EU laws are not followed by member states, they can be brought to court and if convicted given very heavy fines.
I really hate non-standard GUIs -- I want everything to look and feel like the host platform and this IDE definitely does not. Also, as others have noted, C/C++ is not yet supported. Otherwise it seems pretty impressive.
Europe does have elections -- to the common parliament every five years, and indirectly to the EU council via local parliamentary elections.
Actually, you're wrong there: every five years, there are EU wide elections for the European Parliament. Together with the Council, which is nothing other than the combined elected governments from each member state with a more fancy name, they are the ones with the power to pass legislation. The EU does have its problems, but it's not nearly as undemocratic as a lot of people (including people in Europe, particularly in Scandinavia and the UK) believe.
BTW, the previous poster was a little wrong on the population size -- the EU is nearly 380 million people now, and around 100 million more (if I'm not mistaken) next year following the accession of the new member states.
While this is a very good offer, it doesn't seem that extraordinary. Bredbandsbolaget in Sweden has offered 10 MBit/s ethernet for a long time with a present price of around $36 per month. That's more expensive than the offer this story mentions, but not all that much. I'm one of their many happy customers. (No, I'm not getting paid to say this.)
You can read more about this principle, which is actually part of the constitution since hundreds of years ago in both Sweden and Finland, here.
All of the EU institutions involved in legislation (Council, Parliament, Commision) are either directly or indirectly elected by the people. The council comprises the directly elected member state governments, the parliament is directly elected in EU wide elections every four or five years, and the commision is elected by the member state governments.
Actually only one commisioner was shady but the parliament has the power only to sack the entire commision at once, not individual commisoners. Therefore they all voluntarily left before that happened.
Err, what!? There are public elections held in every EU member country every four years for the European Parliament seats.
Well, if you didn't vote for any of them in the EU parliamentary election, why not just contact the ones from the UK? After all, they are supposed to represent your member state.