backtop


Print 60 comment(s) - last by JediJeb.. on Jun 25 at 10:03 AM

Controversial plan finally sees legislative approval

France's presidential cabinet endorsed the controversial “three-strikes” plan late last week, which will disconnect French pirates from their broadband connections if caught downloading illegal material three times.

Set to take effect this January, French web surfers on their third strike will be kicked off their internet connection for a period of one year. For strikes one and two, surfers will receive written warnings via e-mail and registered mail.

A similar plan in the European Union was voted down last April, with many EU member countries citing concerns over civil liberties and human rights. France's plans continues unaffected however – The New York Times called the EU vote “symbolic” -- as member nations are generally permitted to govern themselves as they see fit.

The French content industry “hailed” the three-strikes law as a model for the European Union as a whole.

“This is the most important initiative to help win the war on online piracy that we have seen,” said IFPI executive John Kennedy.

“There is no reason that the internet should be a lawless zone,” said French president Nicolas Sarkozy.

A number of European news sources noted that Sarkozy seems to have taken a personal interest piracy after marrying Italian model and folk singer Carla Bruni.

“We run the risk of witnessing a genuine destruction of culture,” said Sarkozy at the proposal's introduction in November 2007, who called it a "decisive moment for the future of a civilized Internet."

Speaking last April, Kennedy said that governments generally decided that there is “no easy solution,” and that banning pirates from the internet serves to be the “most attractive” option available.

Enforcement will be handled by a newly-created administrative copyright-enforcement agency called “Hadopi,” which stands for the French version of “High authority for copyright protection and dissemination of works on the internet.” The firm will receive complaints from copyright owners and hand out punishments when necessary.

France's Culture Minister, Christine Albanel, said the law's purpose was to replace criminal sanctions with “dissuasion,” and notes that banning people from the Internet takes a “preventative and educational approach.”

The law faces stiff resistance from a wide variety of government and public interest groups, including France's own data protection agency. French newspaper Libération noted that families could lose their internet connection if their children – or neighbors' children – downloaded music via an unprotected wireless router.

The Times Online notes that the French entertainment industry will drop “existing copyright protection” -- presumably meaning that they will strip DRM – from media purchased in France, in order to facilitate its playback on a wide variety of devices.





Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

destroy culture, or destroy online privacy ??
By Silver2k7 on 6/24/2008 8:48:32 AM , Rating: 5
“We run the risk of witnessing a genuine destruction of culture,”

If say PirateX has a archive of culture on his/her computer, how does this destroy culture ?

If free files on the net, helps an unknown band reach lots of listeners who would have never came to know this band, does this destroy culture ?

If rare material such as demos, rehearsals, out of print records and live recordings gets spread to a broader audience, does this destroy culture ?

Creating laws to prevent corporations from changing with the times from a disc based media to an online sales model.. isnt this a bit strange of the lawmakers to agree to this ?




By arbitriter on 6/24/2008 9:00:53 AM , Rating: 1
Big "who cares?"

At what point do people decide that we dont care what the french say? Between them and the EU they are a part of, at what point do people get tired of it and just say who cares?

For a while now the EU in general, and France in particular have been acting as if they alone are fit to make decisions about things like file sharing, piracy, and monopolies/competative buissiness practice.

While there is no way I could hold companies like microsoft or Intel blameless, at what point do they simply decide that the EU and the French are just annoying, and cut them out? stop shipping products and things like security updates for windows and let them deal with outdated software and hardware. And when do ISP's just cut out any traffic from French nodes?


RE: destroy culture, or destroy online privacy ??
By Aloonatic on 6/24/08, Rating: 0
By arbitriter on 6/24/2008 10:03:01 AM , Rating: 1
While it is a good point that the US has launched investigations into MS and Intel, i think the difference is twofold:
1)Nobody else has levied such huge fines for the accusations they have maed against these companies, and
2)There are actualy US companies that could be hurt, like AMD and Sun, where there arent any in the EU.

Yes, it would be interesting to see a well developed continent try and compete, but first you have to find a well developed continent capable of it.

And i certainly think it would be interesting to see what happens if Intel and MS decided to pull all their products from the EU. No updates, no new chips, no computers sold with windows or intel chips, and no shipping them into the EU...

but i think this all diverges from the point, that being the fopishness of France and the EU. On the whole, i think the issue of digital rights and piracy has been sadly mishandled by everyone... EU, US, consumers, and record companies. But with all the inherent flaws everyone else is pointing out in this new plan, as well as the likelyhood of it actualy lasting, when do people the world over simply start ignoreing France and the EU?


By Aloonatic on 6/24/2008 10:32:26 AM , Rating: 5
As an Englishman, you'll find no argument from me about ignoring the French :D

I guess the fines and such would be large because the EU is a large place maybe? There's 500 Million of us over here apparently and the EU is a monster that is hell bent on getting larger :-s

I think many of the fines are about protecting consumers too, not industry. As you point out, there are no European chip makers and Software houses in competition. I guess they want to keep as much EU money in the EU as possible as well?

I can't say I'm a big fan of the EU myself, though the 20 day minimum holiday plus bank holidays is a good thing, so it's not all bad and if the corrupt EU members of parliament can line their pockets (the European parliament is amazingly corrupt place and an utter disgrace) with Intel and MS fines rather than my taxes then that's got to be good for me? :-s :)

If you were to cut out the EU, MS will be cutting out a lot of it's customers who actually pay for their products though, and be left with India, China, and Russia where piracy is rife :-s

AMD seem to have a lot of support over here though, I think they would be happy to keep on supplying?

At the end of the day, it's never going to happen.


RE: destroy culture, or destroy online privacy ??
By nosfe on 6/24/2008 11:18:10 AM , Rating: 2
right, who cares? because you're not french, right?
quote:
In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up.


By Reclaimer77 on 6/24/2008 7:08:58 PM , Rating: 2
Nobody does care.

Pffft the French. They rolled over for Nazi Germany, but hey, when it comes to the uber culture destroying ability of file sharing, they draw the line !

Nice quote. Except for the fact that France has one of the most apathetic cultures on the planet.


By fic2 on 6/24/2008 6:07:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
For a while now the EU in general, and France in particular have been acting as if they alone are fit to make decisions about things like file sharing, piracy, and monopolies/competative buissiness practice.


I think it is the U.S. through the MPAA/RIAA that has been bullying all the other countries to stop file sharing, etc.


By Indianapolis on 6/24/2008 9:22:41 AM , Rating: 6
The French president is correct when he says “We run the risk of witnessing a genuine destruction of culture." Those of us who have studied history will recall that the fall of the Roman Empire was prompted primarily by piracy and copyright infringement.


RE: destroy culture, or destroy online privacy ??
By DASQ on 6/24/2008 10:25:04 AM , Rating: 5
The French Revolution did not start until after the first takedown notice.


By Ringold on 6/24/2008 4:43:21 PM , Rating: 2
To which Marie Antoinette, the biggest pirate of them all, said "Yarr! Let them eat cake!"

Then it was off with her head.


By xphile on 6/25/2008 12:11:16 AM , Rating: 2
Yes I remember the lessons well...

"Et tu Brute?" (So you copied my bloody CD collection as well? ... You bastard!)


RE: destroy culture, or destroy online privacy ??
By excelsium on 6/24/2008 9:49:09 AM , Rating: 2
Obviously the law makers in question are out of touch or are sleeping with the evil corporations.


By DM0407 on 6/24/2008 11:19:01 AM , Rating: 3
Keep smoking unfiltered Marlboro's at the age of 14 Frenchy!

Piracy is by far your biggest problem at the moment... By the way, 3 European tourist were just captured by ACTUAL pirates.


By killerroach on 6/24/2008 10:47:01 AM , Rating: 5
It's destroying their culture because they are, through piracy, getting easy access to American films and music rather than the Francophone stuff that the government subsidizes in the hopes of "promoting culture".


By JustTom on 6/24/2008 12:26:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Creating laws to prevent corporations from changing with the times from a disc based media to an online sales model.. isnt this a bit strange of the lawmakers to agree to this ?


Which law would that be? And does your online sales model include the corporations giving their product away for free?


The Human Rights Act...
By Aloonatic on 6/24/2008 8:45:03 AM , Rating: 5
What are the chances that the first person to be disconnected will take this to the European Court and prove that it is their human right to have a broadband, always on connection?

It is a silly plan anyway.

Firstly (if you equate piracy to shoplifting) then this is virtual house arrest surely? And something of an over reaction?

Secondly, all the people living at that address which is banned/black listed will be being punished too, which cannot be right and just either?

Thirdly, what happens when people move? Assuming that French ISPs are as useless and poorly run as UK ISPs, then there is going to be a lot of innocent people being caught in the cross fire.

Simple solution, blame your internet coffee maker and register a different e-mail address with the authorities or never check it, assuming the same rules apply for e-mail warnings as serving court papers?

All seems a little half baked to me.

If a crime is being committed (back to the shoplifting analogy) then there are already laws in place to deal with that sort of thing, so why aren't they being used?




RE: The Human Rights Act...
By afkrotch on 6/24/2008 9:02:37 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
If a crime is being committed (back to the shoplifting analogy) then there are already laws in place to deal with that sort of thing, so why aren't they being used?


Those laws are in place and are being used. The only thing that has changed is the punishment that is being placed onto the law breaker.


RE: The Human Rights Act...
By Martimus on 6/24/2008 10:10:57 AM , Rating: 2
I guess you are right. They should go to jail on the third strike to avoid punishing the other people in the house.


RE: The Human Rights Act...
By DASQ on 6/24/2008 10:23:40 AM , Rating: 2
Uhh... I assume this was a joke.


RE: The Human Rights Act...
By hellokeith on 6/24/08, Rating: 0
RE: The Human Rights Act...
By Aloonatic on 6/24/2008 12:15:59 PM , Rating: 2
No, no I don't think it would be unfair. It would affect the person who broke the law, and them alone.

Maybe people who depended on them for a lift would be affected indirectly, but hey could get around it easily.

But I do not think that it is fair that, if a father/husband is banned from driving, than his wife, children and anyone else in the home should be banned also, as you seem to?


RE: The Human Rights Act...
By Brian23 on 6/24/2008 12:45:43 PM , Rating: 2
This reminds me of that time that Homer Simpson got his liscense revoked. Lisa (I think) kept trying to explain to him that the car would still work even though he didn't have a liscense. He didn't seem to understand. :-)

Seriously though, if you're going to steal a car, getting your liscense taken away after you're caught won't stop you from driving again. It only means you're in bigger trouble if you're caught again.


RE: The Human Rights Act...
By hellokeith on 6/24/2008 1:23:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Maybe people who depended on them for a lift would be affected indirectly, but hey could get around it easily.


So the children of the car thief can easily get another ride to and from school every day? The pregnant housewife can just walk to and from the store?

We punish people all the time, and the punishment almost always affects those around the person being punished. It's just a reality. Second-guessing punishment because of how it affects those around the criminal is a fruitless exercise.

Do the crime, do the time, take the punishment. Stop making excuses for criminals.


RE: The Human Rights Act...
By Aloonatic on 6/24/2008 1:43:22 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not saying that we live in a perfect world?!

People loose their license for driving offences everyday and they get by and most people can drive, the pregnant mum probably can, the kids mite be old enough to also, it's not really the issue though is it?

To follow on your argument however. Perhaps, when they steal a car again and run someone over the whole family should be sent to prison on manslaughter charges too?

quote:
Do the crime, do the time, take the punishment. Stop making excuses for criminals.


I'm not making excuses for anyone? Please tell me where I am?

And the point is, the other people have not committed a crime, so why should they do any time???


RE: The Human Rights Act...
By JustTom on 6/24/2008 12:21:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Firstly (if you equate piracy to shoplifting) then this is virtual house arrest surely? And something of an over reaction?


I think a better analogy, accepting your original anaology of piracy with shoplifting which I think is clever, is the pirate not being allowed into the store where he was caught shoplifting.

This is hardly a draconian punishment, whether you agree on it or not. Since you are warned both by e-mail and registered letter after the first two infractions the accussed has plenty of warning to either stop his activities or contest the fact that he is pirating.


RE: The Human Rights Act...
By fic2 on 6/24/2008 6:12:46 PM , Rating: 2
Actually it is more like being banned from all stores if you are caught shoplifting. The ISP doesn't just ban that one site you "shoplifted" from they take away your internet connection.

BTW, I wonder how they take away your ability to use wireless connections or an internet cafe.


RE: The Human Rights Act...
By Icelight on 6/24/2008 12:25:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Secondly, all the people living at that address which is banned/black listed will be being punished too, which cannot be right and just either?


The internet connection is likely paid for/under the name of a single person. That person likely agreed to a contract regarding usage of the connection.

A better example would have been: Is it right for a car owner to be punished if a criminal steals his/her car and proceeds to use it for a crime?


RE: The Human Rights Act...
By JustTom on 6/24/2008 12:30:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Secondly, all the people living at that address which is banned/black listed will be being punished too, which cannot be right and just either?


This is a specious argument, since the person under whom the account is registered will be receiving two warning prior to revoking internet access that allows plenty of opportunity for Dad or Mom to straighten Junior out.


RE: The Human Rights Act...
By Aloonatic on 6/24/2008 1:38:25 PM , Rating: 2
Junior aka "Blue Beard" is probably the most tech literate member of the household and the one who sets up the broadband account and knows the most about the family PC so could perhaps make it so that they get the e-mails from the ISP, leaving mum and dad blissfully unaware of what is going on?

Directly punishing numerous innocent people for one person's crime is not fair any way you look at it though. I fail to see how it is specious?


RE: The Human Rights Act...
By hellokeith on 6/24/2008 3:29:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Directly punishing numerous innocent people for one person's crime is not fair any way you look at it though.


Abuse land line telephone, telephone service gets disconnected = affects whole household

Abuse electricity / tamper with electric meter, electric service gets disconnected = affects whole household

Abuse gas, water, cable, satellite, etc etc, that service gets disconnected = affects whole household

Make lots of noise at night / disturb the peace, family gets kicked out of apartment = affects whole household

Perhaps you should rethink your "punishing numerous innocent people" argument. Punishment affects more than just the criminal, this is a fact and a reality. One more good reason not to be a criminal.


RE: The Human Rights Act...
By Aloonatic on 6/24/2008 4:02:03 PM , Rating: 2
There's nothing wrong with my argument, there's no reason whey people who have done nothing should be punished.

If they knowingly gained benefit from said abuses of services and utilities, then they are not innocent.

If they didn't, then it is wrong.

The fact that big corps and utility companies can ride all over us all in an imperfect world, with governments nearly always coming down on their side doesn't make carrying on this abuse further any more acceptable.


RE: The Human Rights Act...
By JustTom on 6/24/2008 9:53:32 PM , Rating: 2
While my son does not know more about the computers than I do, I realize this is not uncommon. However, there is a simple solution: Junior does not get on the computer.


RE: The Human Rights Act...
By Aloonatic on 6/25/2008 1:31:26 AM , Rating: 2
Seriously?

NO children allowed to use the family PC at all?

Whether they have done anything or not?

No wonder your kid doesn't know anything.

Are you one of those dads who beats their kids at games and humiliates them, playing basket ball then taunt them, laughing in their face as they are left crying on the floor a la competitive dad?

Ignore the above paragraph if you have never seen "The Fast Show"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkhpnrGBTRc&feature...


Stupid.
By excelsium on 6/24/2008 8:42:41 AM , Rating: 2
And what about shared internet connections?




RE: Stupid.
By Clauzii on 6/24/2008 10:25:40 AM , Rating: 2
They'd probably ban the lawfully written owner of the connection. If it were to work right (ie. not getting innocent users banned), they would have to be able to lock down the netcard itself.


RE: Stupid.
By DASQ on 6/24/2008 10:33:51 AM , Rating: 2
Are they going to start requiring wireless security licenses to certify who can properly own and operate a wireless network? (Like a driver's license)

Otherwise you can't just EXPECT people to know how.


RE: Stupid.
By vapore0n on 6/24/2008 10:48:25 AM , Rating: 2
or worse, register MAC addresses to the gov or ISP

shhh, dont want them to get any ideas


RE: Stupid.
By Polynikes on 6/24/2008 10:58:04 AM , Rating: 2
But then what, people can't buy a new computer (integrated LAN on the mobo) or a new NIC without government approval?


RE: Stupid.
By Clauzii on 6/24/2008 12:43:17 PM , Rating: 2
It would be something like that unfortunately :(

Here in DK, if one searches for child-porn (WHO WOULD DO THAT?!!), a filterpage comes up and tells You that You are entering illegal ground. I think the same would be possible with other files/sites as well..


Instead of internet pirates....
By marvdmartian on 6/24/2008 11:59:41 AM , Rating: 2
...why don't they go down off the coast of Somalia, and take care of getting rid of some real pirates??

Oh yeah, that's right. It's because internet pirates don't shoot back!! [/sarcasm]




RE: Instead of internet pirates....
By DASQ on 6/24/2008 12:34:11 PM , Rating: 3
Actually, because those pirates aren't actually costing the megacorporations any real monetary damage.

Plus why fish two oceans away when you have fish in a barrel right at home.


RE: Instead of internet pirates....
By Ringold on 6/24/2008 5:05:04 PM , Rating: 2
Heh, actually, they cost "megacorporations" a ton of monetary costs. They regularly attack ships off Somalia, in the Indian Ocean, through the Straits of Malacca, and up towards China. Groups of a dozen, some times several dozen, men armed with assault rifles pull up to ships, from fishing boats up to oil super-tankers and cargo container ships, board, and then..

a) Steal anything thats not tied down, then leave
b) The above, plus take some of the crew for ransom, which the company dutifully pays
c) All of the above, plus they sail off with the entire bloody ship, give it a paint job or just sell it to scrap yards.

A few violent cases exist where whole crews were executed.

Ships don't always call for help; captains report calling the local nation in and the police that show up the next morning were in fact the pirates that had boarded them the day prior. Corporations don't like to make it a big public news event, because, well, its bad PR. It's also hard to fight back; they've got AK-47s after all, and outnumber the crew, so whats the point?

They do some times seal the ship pretty solid while moving through hot-spots, but I read where a fire broke out on a cargo ship and the crew was incinerated because they couldn't open sealed hatches fast enough. Win some, lose some.

This has been rising, I've been told, ever since the US and USSR terminated a lot of their Cold War era naval patrols. The wikipedia entry estimates up to 16 billion in average annual costs; that is sizable sum for any single industry to shoulder. The trend becomes obvious simply by googling; the closer the news story gets to the present, the larger the number and more audacious the attacks become.

The Economist also noted it briefly a week or two ago as a possible reason why China, India, South Korea and others in the region are beefing up their blue-water navies.


By jbartabas on 6/24/2008 4:03:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
why don't they go down off the coast of Somalia, and take care of getting rid of some real pirates??


Actually they do both :-P

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7355598.stm


RE: Instead of internet pirates....
By Ringold on 6/24/2008 5:09:49 PM , Rating: 2
They'd have to stabilize all of Somalia first.. At least Iraq and Vietnam knew what a government looks like, how to form one, how to obey one, etc. Somalia knows no such thing. Think nation building is expensive? Somalia would be civilization building.

Easier, I think, to let Ethiopia & the AU worry about it and simply shoot at any funny looking ship that sails out from the Somali coast.


And now...
By jamdunc on 6/24/2008 8:45:39 AM , Rating: 2
....the riots will start. Or they will soon. The French love their riots and right now I hate their government. Thank god I live in the UK although knowing us we'll be next :p




RE: And now...
By Aloonatic on 6/24/2008 8:57:39 AM , Rating: 5
With the price of petrol as high as it is, there probably wont be so many cars on fire as there was last time things kicked off over there :)

Hopefully any rioters will take into account the carbon released from a petrol bombed vehicle and that it is irresponsible to waste such precious resources too :-s


RE: And now...
By afkrotch on 6/24/2008 9:11:39 AM , Rating: 2
I can't imagine this would last too long when 1/2 the French population gets the ban.


In other news...
By Some1ne on 6/24/2008 1:41:54 PM , Rating: 5
95% of French Internet users have been kicked off the Internet within the first week after this law's passing. With Internet Service Providers declaring bankruptcy left and right due to the sudden loss of revenue, the remaining 5% are left with only 56K dialup Internet access. And even that now costs several hundred Euros a month, a figure the few remaining ISP's say is necessary in order to stave off further financial ruin for their companies.

It's not all sour grapes, however. A French Recording Industry spokesman went on record earlier today stating that he is "very happy" with the recent developments. "Hey, at least they aren't pirating our music anymore, and with the competitive pressure provided by online piracy removed, we've been able to increase the average price of an album by 50%", he said. When asked about the lost jobs and productivity associated with the collapse of nearly the entire French telecommunications industry, he replied "Fuck them. Their only 'job' is to give me money. As long as they do that, I don't give a shit." Clearly it is a good day to be a French Recording Industry executive.

Up next, the Frech Recording Industry is reportedly launching a new political party, with the stated goal of "better manipulating French law and policy to the advantage of the Recording Industry". It is expected that the new party will easily attain a majority presence in the government within the next two elections.




RE: In other news...
By rs1 on 6/24/2008 2:03:27 PM , Rating: 2
lol. +6!


Ok Mr. Government
By Regs on 6/24/2008 3:06:30 PM , Rating: 2
How about banning those mother f'ckers who cheat on CSS and COD4 (or hack) first? How about those a** holes on ebay who stole my credit card info or keep sending me subscriptions to porn?

It seems like the government is deregulating everything that they should not and regulating everything that should never be touched.




RE: Ok Mr. Government
By DASQ on 6/24/2008 5:56:52 PM , Rating: 2
Did you just honestly compare cheating in online games to credit card fraud/identity theft?


RE: Ok Mr. Government
By Regs on 6/25/2008 9:37:56 AM , Rating: 2
Not comparing anything. Simply stating examples of when people don't care unless it's only big corporations money being lost.


Here's an idea.
By NicePants42 on 6/24/2008 10:44:52 AM , Rating: 2
If a printer can be framed for copyright infringement, so can the French.

http://www.dailytech.com/UW+Study+Frames+Network+P...

How's that for a "decisive moment for the future of a civilized Internet" ? Hopefully the taxpayers won't be saddled with the litigation costs of this farce.




what constitutes...
By Screwballl on 6/24/2008 12:13:18 PM , Rating: 2
...if caught downloading illegal material....

Where do they get the rules that state what is and is not illegal content? What about linux distro downloads from bit torrent, which as RIAA explains is only used for piracy? What about independent labels that release their music and movies over popular sharing methods? At what point do they start implementing a type of Chinese firewall at the ISP level?

I think the real key term here is not "downloading illegal material" but is "if caught"... less than 10% of illegal downloaders are actually caught because much of their downloading is a combination of both legal and illegal downloads.




By falacy on 6/24/2008 12:47:14 PM , Rating: 2
I sure as hell would smash my wireless router to and mail the bill for it to my MP if such a law were passed in Canada!

Hacking a wireless access point is dead simple, even for an idoit, so all this law does is encourage people to hack others until the innocent person they are hacking gets diconnected. I can't believe they were too stupid not to see this as the single most important reason they're great "3 strikes" idea is a complete load of crap.

Glad I'm not French!

"Let them eat cake!"




Find another source of internet.
By Cerin218 on 6/24/2008 1:14:49 PM , Rating: 2
There are a million hot spots, schools, libraries, unsecured networks in your neighborhood/apartment building, airports, etc. Do you seriously think that cutting off internet access is going to stop people who truly want to pirate? Yeah there is an acceptable use policy in all of those places, but if you are going to break the law by pirating, then you will probably be pretty comfortable breaking the acceptable use policy. Who determines if the third strike is from a vaild pirating source? There are three unsecured networks in my apartment building alone. Which means I get 3 x 3 opportunities to pirate without getting caught. Wireless cards can be changed to register different macs. As usual this is a law about keeping the honest people honest. I read an article on DT that brought up a good point, you need to catch the source of the content, not the end user. If there is no source, there is no pirating. And yes, the industries creating the content need to evolve and figure out how to harness the content. iTunes did, and look at their revenue. In the end, the war on pirating is a lot like the war on drugs, you will never stop it. Period.




By Reclaimer77 on 6/24/2008 7:05:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
“This is the most important initiative to help win the war on online piracy that we have seen,” said IFPI executive John Kennedy .


So we're not the only ones with Kennedy's wasting everyones time with useless liberal junk law-passing ?




Zero proof now required
By Ke on 6/24/2008 7:13:17 PM , Rating: 2
Previously with criminal prosecutions it was required to prove that you had commited the act - now multiple accusations is all that it takes to be disconnected. That is a major difference.

Secondly in order to monitor they will have to monitor all traffic through your connection - huge invasion of privacy. This will most definitely make it to the EU human rights court.




Won't it be funny when...
By JediJeb on 6/25/2008 10:03:35 AM , Rating: 2
Won't it be funny when someone in the French government gets caught downloading illegal files and the whole government has their broadband connection disabled :)




"Folks that want porn can buy an Android phone." -- Steve Jobs
Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki