Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Internet Pirates In France To Lose Broadband

timothy posted more than 6 years ago | from the don't-kick-against-libe-goad dept.

Government 388

slyjackhammer writes "France is purporting to take a hard line on copyrighted media (movies and music). According to timesonline.co.uk, a new measure approved yesterday by the French Cabinet would kill the Internet connection to those caught downloading illegally. 'There is no reason that the internet should be a lawless zone," President Sarkozy told his Cabinet yesterday as it endorsed the "three-strikes-and-you're-out" scheme that from next January will hit illegal downloaders where it hurts. Under a cross-industry agreement, internet service providers (ISPs) must cut off access for up to a year for third-time offenders.' Google and video site Dailymotion have refused to sign up as consenting participants, and the state data protection agency, consumer and civil liberties groups and the European Parliament are all kicking against the goad as well. France may be pioneer in this kind of legislation, but they sure have their work cut out for them."

cancel ×

388 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Democracy (5, Informative)

tomalpha (746163) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869845)

France may be pioneer in this kind of legislation

At least they're debating it in parliament. In the UK Virgin Media's behind-closed-doors deal [slashdot.org] with the media industry has already been covered here.

Note to self - I need to switch away from an ISP that is itself a content provider with vested interests in censoring my internet connection. Soon.

Re:Democracy (5, Insightful)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869867)

While I understand your point. Democracy does not inherently mean that the best result will be the outcome. What percentage of parliament is ever near objective, and full aware of the what is as stake on both sides?

Re:Democracy; and the easy solution (5, Funny)

cloricus (691063) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869885)

Download movies at work. Report your worksite. Rinse and repeat three times.

Do it on a country wide scale (say every /. reader in France) and bingo, law will either be thrown out or the economy will collapse.

Re:Democracy; and the easy solution (5, Insightful)

guile*fr (515485) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869971)

do it once and be fired for breaching the IT usage policy that you signed while joining the company.

beside, it's not as if a governemental agency is blocking uniterally your internet access.

I suppose that in that case, your company is considered as an ISP.

Re:Democracy; and the easy solution (2, Insightful)

Corporate Troll (537873) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870209)

Not hard... Make sure to plant the downloading software on machines that are not linked to you. (Coworker you don't like, a badly secured server, etc, etc..) Many places don't do MAC-address checks and connect any laptop to the network and they will access the whole network. A few Gumstix Linux machines [gumstix.com] that download Britney Spears continually to /dev/null, well hidden around the office under the raised floor.

It's easy, really...

Not that I would do such a thing, but you just have to think a bit out of the box.

Re:Democracy; and the easy solution (5, Informative)

macbutch (827717) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870255)

Haha... you clearly don't work in France. Fired for misuse of the companies internet connection?

That's really not as easy as you seem to think. It's not even legal for the company to monitor your internet usage!

Re:Democracy; and the easy solution (5, Interesting)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870057)

Do it on a country wide scale (say every /. reader in France) and bingo, law will either be thrown out or the economy will collapse.
Or rather it will just be selectively enforced and used to persecute people the authorities don't like, similar to what's happened with so many other laws.

Re:Democracy; and the easy solution (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870261)

There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. When there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.
- Ayn Rand's head in a jar

Re:Democracy; and the easy solution (5, Funny)

Dan541 (1032000) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870277)

Just more reasons to use your neigbours WiFi

Re:Democracy; and the easy solution (1)

WK2 (1072560) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870343)

Silly cloricus. Large companies don't have to follow the same rules people do.

Re:Democracy (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870001)

If democracy actually worked, copying software, audio, video and other things would be 100% legal. Because lets be honest here, more than half of all people on the world are currently thieves (me included).
And it should be legal. Because if product/album/movie is actually GOOD, people will pay premium to support the author and/or receive support from author (in case of software). Crappy products will die, which is good.

Re:Democracy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870095)

Lose me interweb? Yarrrr

Lost my interweb? Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrg

Re:Democracy (5, Funny)

kdemetter (965669) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870129)

In other news , French telco's are going broke , as apparently , most of their high bandwidth users where pirates .

Re:Democracy (1)

Jerome H (990344) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870289)

Because we have the bandwidth and no throttling ! A shame really...

France ? The country with taxes on blank media ? (5, Interesting)

DrYak (748999) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870429)

France, on the other hand is one of those countries that have a tax on blank media.

A suit had been mentioned on /. a couple of years ago were a French "pirate" was acquitted on the ground that the financial damage due to copying of the movies (for private use) was already paid by the tax on blank media.

Some consumer interests group should remind that to Mr. Napole-rkozy.

But don't be afraid : after all, manifesting in the streets is a national sport in France and the subject is bound to be brought up.

what about my wife and children? (5, Insightful)

bmcage (785177) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869851)

So if I do a crime, my wife and children must be punished too?

Isn't that like in the Middle Ages?

Re:what about my wife and children? (1)

CrashNBrn (1143981) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869869)

The "middle ages" and perhaps even into the Renaissance - depending on which country you refer to
Was more apt to chop your hand off for stealing, than punish your family.

Re:what about my wife and children? (1)

Thiez (1281866) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870123)

Which is quite a retarded pusishment. How are you going to work and make money with only 1 hand? Guess what, you'll end up stealing again (this time because the alternative is starving) and lose you other hand (or your head, if you're lucky).

Anyway if the Medieval you can't work on your farm, your kids are going to be hungry, so getting your hand chopped of == punishing your family.

Re:what about my wife and children? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870213)

Actually, in that time period, you'd be considered an actor for copying a play, or a musician for copying a song.

Re:what about my wife and children? (5, Insightful)

TornCityVenz (1123185) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869879)

What about the public...What happens when public access points become the route of choice for these downloaders? I can see it now when the library has no broadband.. Or the local coffee shop? Or the next door neighbor who had little knowledge about secureing his wireless router...

All of these points are good and ignored (5, Informative)

Nicolas MONNET (4727) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870223)

As a member of April [april.org] , the French free software association, I have been following this nonsense since it started. We have raised those issues already. W have been in touch with government officials, and this much is clear: they don't get it, because they don't care. The Sarkozy government is about as corrupt and authoritarian as the Bush administration, and similarly incompetent.
(Even Chirac, who didn't have the most spotless of records to say the least, had at least surrounded himself with competent and well meaning people.)
To illustrate this point, there's no better story than that of former member of parliament Cazenave. He was a member of Sarkozy's (and Chirac's) party, UMP, and one of free software's best advocate in the legislative branch. But before the last election, Sarkozy decided to give the party's nomination for that district instead to convicted felon Carignon. I shit you not. Carignon lost to the socialist candidate, in a district that had never voted left in decades.
Anyway, we have been in touch with members of several parliaments (assembly, senate, european), and have found strong allies. Former Prime Minister and current MEP Rocard for example was instrumental in defeating software patents in the European Parliament, and he voiced strong opposition to this current nonsense.
But we know how Sarkozy operates, he's learned from the worst, and, like Tom DeLay, he's going to strongarm his party's members in the legislative to toe the party line, even if they have reservations.

Re:All of these points are good and ignored (2, Informative)

jez9999 (618189) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870371)

The Sarkozy government is about as corrupt and authoritarian as the Bush administration, and similarly incompetent.
(Even Chirac, who didn't have the most spotless of records to say the least, had at least surrounded himself with competent and well meaning people.)

This starts to make sense when you realise they were/are comparing Sarkozy to Blair.

Re:what about my wife and children? (1)

K9black (620592) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870225)

u know if that actually became a problem they would ban by MAC address. lol

I love Linux (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870441)

ifconfig eth0 hw ether 00:16:3E:72:42:c2

New MAC address!

Re:what about my wife and children? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23869915)

Oh okay then. Three warnings for each one in your family.
And three for each of your neighbors using your deliberately-open wifi.
Open proxies on your machine don't count.

After that no excuses.

Re:what about my wife and children? (5, Interesting)

Brain Damaged Bogan (1006835) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870011)

why not just register a new internet account with your wife's name, then with your kids name.... by then the year suspension should be over on your first account, rinse and repeat

Re:what about my wife and children? (1)

Dan541 (1032000) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870303)

While their at might as well shut off your electricity, gas and water

Re:what about my wife and children? (1)

jez9999 (618189) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870361)

You don't have a wife and children; you are a pirate [apirate.info] .

Re:what about my wife and children? (1)

gsslay (807818) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870401)

Nope, not like the Middle Ages, just blatantly obvious. Name any punishment for any crime that doesn't also in some way adversely affect the criminal's family.

Cos I can't think of one.

Re:what about my wife and children? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870473)

Yea because of shared connections this will be selectively enforced on SINGLE person households if its enforced at all, either that or they do something retarded like cut off entire families and organizations.

Re:what about my wife and children? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870477)

Dickhead. If you go to *jail* your wife and kids are punished. They are affected by whatever you do, you just may not realize this yet.

Bonjour! (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23869857)

Arrrrrrrrrrgh!

I guess.. (1)

negRo_slim (636783) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869863)

It's not necessarily a bad idea, if we had a copyright system for the people by the people. Instead it's just the media mafia and false positives ensuring this is going to be a grand ol' cluster fuck.

one funny side-effect (1)

Freaky Spook (811861) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869899)

But it will be funny when we see an ISP deliver a disconnection notice to a homeless person. "I'm sorry sir, we are going to have to disconnect your dumpster from the interwebs because you apparently downloaded Britney Spears last album"

Re:one funny side-effect (4, Funny)

fluch (126140) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869979)

If you download Britney Spears ... you are already punished enough by what you get! No need to disconnect here...

Re:one funny side-effect (2, Funny)

aceofspades1217 (1267996) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870071)

They should have a zero tolerance policy for downloading Britney Spears....one strike and your out.

After all it is for your own good. If your downloading Britney spears than you just don't deserve to have the privilege of using a internet connection.

Now that would be an anti net neutrality law I could stand behind!

Re:one funny side-effect (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870117)

They should have a zero tolerance policy for downloading Britney Spears....one strike and your out.

The same goes for people who use the wrong form of your.

(Feel free to correct the grammar in this post.)

Re:one funny side-effect (1)

aceofspades1217 (1267996) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870313)

<quote><p><blockquote><div>They should have a zero tolerance policy for downloading Britney Spears....one strike and your out.</div></blockquote><p>The same goes for people who use the wrong form of your.</p><p>(Feel free to correct the grammar in this post.)</p></quote>

Oh and grammar nazis should also get their internet taken away >.<

Re:one funny side-effect (1)

fluch (126140) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870125)

Hey! Why does the word "guillotine" jump into my head?

Re:one funny side-effect (1)

aceofspades1217 (1267996) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870319)

<quote><p>Hey! Why does the word "guillotine" jump into my head?</p></quote>

that might also work. It has worked for the french in the past.....

Re:I guess.. (4, Insightful)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869945)

Well if you RTFA you'll see that they are trying to get it right:

As a sweetener to the deal, material produced in France will be available free of copyright protection devices, which means music and video files will be able to be more easily transferred between different computers and portable media players.

Seems like a fair deal to me. Instead of pro-actively punishing everybody on the assumption that they're going to steal, only actually punish the ones that do.

The points about coffee shop wireless etc are all valid - presumably either the law won't apply to communal wireless (gaping loophole) or cafes/airports/etc will simply bite the IPv4 bullet and buy more addresses so they can associate a C&D notice with an actual (cc verified) customer.

Anyway. I think Sarkozy is talking sense here. Do law enforcement the old fashioned way - by finding and punishing the people actually breaking the law.

Re:I guess.. (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870089)

Except what exactly does "material produced in france" actually mean? Are we talking french productions or any content sold in France? Like satellite television? Or BLU-RAY discs? Eh?

I'm thinking its the former, and when the lobbyists are done with it, it will probably be even less useful, like applying only to educational and academic content, or even better just content that is in the public domain.

Re:I guess.. (1)

badfish99 (826052) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870155)

I doubt whether many CDs are produced in Frace, and I bet that those which are do not currently have copyright protection devices attached to them. So it's not much of a sweetener: one side is punished without due legal process, and the other side carries on doing what they have always done.

It's bullshit (1)

Nicolas MONNET (4727) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870231)

What you quote is what the government claims in its press briefings, not what's in the damn law. They lie through their teeth, on top of being completely incompetent.

Re:I guess.. (1)

medoc (90780) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870393)

> Sarkozy is talking sense here. Do law enforcement the old fashioned way -
  > by finding ^^^ and punishing
^^^ Fixed for you and missing from the law: "judging"
  > the people actually breaking the law.
Yeah.

at least they don't extort you (1, Insightful)

crazybit (918023) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869871)

they just want their law to be respected, not your money.

three warnings? (4, Insightful)

thermian (1267986) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869881)

At risk of being modded down with a baseball bat, this sounds fair.

Three warnings should be more than enough. If you are unaware of the infringing use when you get your first warning, you should try to find out who's doing it. If you don't bother, then well that's your own fault.

It's a whole lot better then being sued for thousands of dollars, at least you get a chance to find out what's happening, or if you are the downloader, to stop with no consequences.

Re:three warnings? (4, Insightful)

cliffski (65094) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869997)

agreed 100%, and I am fully expecting the whole of slashdot to agree with you, as (from what i read here), the vast majority of people using p2p are doing it to download creative commons and open source programs and linux distributions. All that traffic to the piratebay is just people sharing their holiday photos etc.

I think it's pretty fair, if I get caught speeding i get fined instantly, I don't get given 2 warnings first.

And anyone who expects mass public campaigns against this needs to get out and speak to ordinary people. Most voters care about taxes, education, health and the economy, not whether or not their kids can keep maxxing out their bit-torrent speeds.

Re:three warnings? (5, Insightful)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870003)

If by "strike" you mean "being found guilty of some crime by a jury of your peers" then sure. But I don't think that's what the media companies have in mind.. considering that there are no laws which criminalize downloading of copyright restricted works - not even in France.

Re:three warnings? (5, Insightful)

Halo1 (136547) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870051)

If by "strike" you mean "being found guilty of some crime by a jury of your peers" then sure. But I don't think that's what the media companies have in mind..

Indeed. One of the big problems is that you can only appeal the final warning. I.e., if the first warnings were completely baseless (e.g., because you download a file with a name similar to some RIAA/MPAA blockbusters but with completely different content) and the final one turns out to be factual, then you're out too.

Re:three warnings? (1)

Propaganda13 (312548) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870173)

Other problems in theory

1. ISP or other group monitors your internet usage. Would people agree to have all telephone conversations wiretapped in case they do something wrong?

2. Media company downloads from you(person A) to prove it was their IP. If it's a false positive but it's person B's IP. Shouldn't person B be able to sue/disconnect the media company?

Re:three warnings? (2, Informative)

QuantumG (50515) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870339)

Blah, there's is simply no law against downloading. It isn't a crime. It isn't even copyright infringement. If you want to introduce some bullshit "3 strikes and you're out" law, you have to actually introduce laws to make downloading a crime (or even copyright infringement) first, then you can try your extra stupid 3 strikes law.

Re:three warnings? (2, Interesting)

teh kurisu (701097) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870193)

I'm wondering whether the courts are involved in this, and whether a conviction is necessary for disconnection.

It's fair enough to say that internet connectivity can be revoked for offenders, just as a driving licence can be revoked. But revoking a driving licence always involved a conviction in court, to my knowledge.

That's aside from the problems with making this law workable - burden of proof, enforcing, etc.

Re:three warnings? (1)

freedumb2000 (966222) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870175)

Nowhere does it say that you won't still get sued if caught. This is a seperate, government mandated, measure and has no impact on the possibility of media companies sueing the infringer.

Re:three warnings? (1)

pjeremyh (903859) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870233)

The real problem is the process. Look when we get 12 people together, a judge, a prosecutor and a defense lawyer we still make mistakes in prosecuting people.

This seems to be fast justice, whatever system is in place is going to screw up much more that a jury trial, it's unworkable - we (and France) have laws and a justice system .... use them.

This sounds more like privatised fast-justice, who the hell will decide who "Hadopi" will ban, what will the legal process be?

What about when I lose my internet access for accessing wikileaks, or because I downloaded a Tom Cruise Scientology video? What happens when Geller causes thousands to lose their access cos they downloaded a James Randi debunking video?

And anyway, it's all fucking pointless, if you're prepared to "waste" half you bandwidth then the whole illegal peer-to-peer scene can just move to a system like tor where downloaders don't know who the uploaders are and vice-verca. Sure it wastes (at least) half the networks bandwidth but if authorities force p2p there, then there it will go.

what happened to the land of liberty? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23869883)

Liberté, Ãgalité, Fraternité???

~AC

Re:what happened to the land of liberty? (2, Interesting)

Random Guru 42 (687672) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869937)

Same thing that happens every time some liberal idea raises its head in France. Crypto-fascists come along, pass it off propaganda-style, and then proceed to make things even worse for the peasants. It's a pattern dating back to the beginning of the Capetian dynasty, check your French history.

Re:what happened to the land of liberty? (5, Funny)

lloydchristmas759 (1105487) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869965)

what happened to the land of liberty?

Possibly the same thing that happened to UTF-8 encoder of your web browser?

Thank god for that (0)

Centurix (249778) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869891)

Jerry Lewis must be smiling from ear to ear...

Re:Thank god for that (1)

guile*fr (515485) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869953)

this joke is really getting old

YOU INSENSITIVE CELOD! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23869901)

History Repeats Itself (0, Flamebait)

kramer2718 (598033) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869911)

Recording Industry: *Knock* *Knock* Open up it's the RIAA!
France: Don't shoot! We surrender!
Recording Industry: Ummm. We're just some lawyers. We don't have guns.
France: That's okay. We surrender. We're comfortable with that. You can have anything you want. Just ask.
Recording Industry: Well...

Yeah, okay (5, Insightful)

Auckerman (223266) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869941)

Also, you know the reason someone like Google won't sign up to be willing participants is because it's signing away their common carrier status. That will have HUGE legal repercussions in the United States. They will be suddenly responsible for even the most minor violation and susceptible to law suit. No company in their right mind would do that. It's not going to be out of the kindness of their hearts. If they could help nail people who are violating copyright without carrying any legal responsibility at all, I'm sure they would.

I'm not seeing a problem with this. You don't have a right to "share" material that is copyrighted by someone other than you if they didn't give you consent. You may not like this, you can come up with all the (possibly valid) reasons things should not be that way. It's not for YOU to decide. The only real problem is how something like this is enforced. I'm willing to bet it will be done with a false positive rate that won't go over well with the French people, who from this side of the pond seem the kind of people who don't put up with their government doing stupid things (I seriously commend them for their idea of how to go on strike).

Re:Yeah, okay (2, Insightful)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869959)

uh, why would a law in france affect google in the USA, and is there even such a thing as common carrier status in france?

this law is pretty even handed. 3 strikes and you lose internet access for UP TO a year, so you know it's going to be less. this is much better than being sued and having the RIAA france eating up court time filing john doe suits.

Re:Yeah, okay (2, Interesting)

Auckerman (223266) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869993)

US citizens and companies are bound to US law when outside the country. When you agree to willingly give up your common carrier status in France, that can be used in court in the States to demonstrate you are no longer a common carrier. They may or may not win, something like that hasn't been brought up yet, but it's a foreseeable problem that is easily avoided. It is for that reason that no company that does business in the States would ever sign up for something like this, because to do otherwise just invites trouble.

Re:Yeah, okay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870033)

Same for UK citizens.

Re:Yeah, okay (4, Informative)

KiloByte (825081) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869981)

Repeat after me: ISPs are not common carriers. They have already bought other laws so the don't have to.

New malware opportunity (wonderful) (5, Interesting)

Fallen Andy (795676) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869947)

Make malware share files illegally. Sit back and watch as it causes mass shutdowns of internet connections.

Better still, tie it in to the mechanism used in the current rounds of SQL injection attacks.

Idiots. All they'll end up with is a DDOS attack on their legal system...

Andy

Re:New malware opportunity (wonderful) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870157)

They want to have their cake and eat it too? Send for Madame Guillotine to slice it for them.

We can apply this elsewhere... (3, Interesting)

arse maker (1058608) | more than 6 years ago | (#23869983)

Lets start a 3 strikes system for theifs. We can then cut off their hands when they commit the 3rd offence.

Sure, hands are fundemental a humans quality of life. The internet is heading towards that, and growing year by year.

Its nice to see we are going back to the days where it make sense to cut off someones hands for stealing some bread, hear hear!

If the people who didnt push these laws through didnt have money, means and power I would most likely support them. You could probably check their home computer 3 times in a year and 3 times they would be breaking some law, they can enjoy the fruit of their labour then.

three strikes politician out (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23869999)

The punishment doesn't fit the "crime". To the "knowledge worker" Europe wants to base it's future on, losing broadband is the digital equivalent of house arrest. Without access to radio, television, books and newspapers.

I like the three strike approach though. Should be applied to politicians. Sell out your voters to special interest groups three times and your out. Would really cleans out the European Commission and the European Council.

   

Some more precisions (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870009)

What is not said in TFA.

The three step mentionned are optionnal. You can be banned from internet at the first time.
And the decision is not up to judges, as we can think, but to a new and "independent" (read leaded by the majors) entity. So very little to no possibility to contest the punition, since it's not french court that rule over it. Meh...
Moreover, the law try to push forward filtering of content, in order to detect "illegal" file sharing. That could prove useful to control population, in the future, isn't it ?

And if the media would accept to talk about it, maybe people could try and fight against this project, but you hardly hear a word about it out of computer oriented websites.

We're in for a wild time...

Re:Some more precisions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870059)

Forgot one "fun" detail : since it's not justice that manage this, when you're banned for sharing, you can still be sued in court for it. According to the lawmakers : "that won't happen, we trust the copyright owners to be adult and not abuse this".
What could possibly go wrong ?

Re:Some more precisions (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870433)

As a frenchman I'd like to reply to that... we already have an independent entity that is overlooking computer use (it was set in place in the 70s with the "informatique et libertes" law). I haven't ever heard anybody say that it was "sold" to any interest (be it government or to any industry, for that matter). the only problem is the amount of money they get to do what they have to do.

I won't answer to the plot theory, because if you just look at french history, you will see that we're not that easy to control...

as for media coverage, it made the evening news on every major channel.

best regards.

The issue is standards of proof (5, Interesting)

Budenny (888916) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870021)

The issue is standards of proof. To be caught doing something illegal on the net three times may seem to justify disconnection. However, simply to be accused of it cannot. The fundamental problem here is economic. The rights owners cannot justify prosecution, because that demands a standard of proof of misconduct which is very expensive. You have to get the evidence, display it, allow it to be subject it to public questioning. Witnesses have to testify to how it was obtained.

This is an attempt to bypass all that. It is far cheaper to simply disconnect on three accusations. However, the problem is going to be EC human rights legislation and the first suit for false accusation. Human rights legislation is going to be a problem because the EC Charter explicitly guarantees access to information. You are only going to be able to ban someone from Internet access with the same sort of evidentiary justification that you would need to ban them from a public library or from reading the newspapers. The first suit for false denial of access to information is, for the same reason, going to be explosive. The ISPs will be acting as a cartel, so where one, acting alone, could throw anyone off for any reason, all acting together are in effect conspiring to deny the person access to information.

One supermarket may ban someone from shopping. If all start to subscribe to a common list, there's a human rights issue.

In the end this is not going to work because you cannot get around the requirement for high standards of proof before depriving people of what the EC, with a different hat on, has defined as their fundamental human rights. Hoist with their own petard, as they say in Brussels!

Wrong answer to the wrong problem (5, Informative)

guile*fr (515485) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870035)

The trend nowadays in France is to complain about purchase power.

But the goverment is unwilling to lower taxes and the reccord industry is unwilling to lower their profits margin.

for instance a NIN CD sells 8 UKP (10EUR) the same CD sells 22EUR in France.

go figure why people are pirating

Re:Wrong answer to the wrong problem (1)

fluch (126140) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870065)

One can always order it from amazon.co.uk for the cheaper price. Delivery within Europa is the same as to UK (if I remember it right)....

Re:Wrong answer to the wrong problem (2, Funny)

Meumeu (848638) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870395)

Delivery within Europa is the same as to UK (if I remember it right)....
You mean amazon delivers to the moons of the Jupiter [wikipedia.org] ??

Re:Wrong answer to the wrong problem (1)

Meumeu (848638) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870409)

Oops... I should have previewed, I meant the moons of Jupiter, of course...

Re:Wrong answer to the wrong problem (1)

jez9999 (618189) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870383)

If they're pirating NIN, I really am having a problem figuring it out.

This will probably teach people to use encryption (4, Interesting)

fluch (126140) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870053)

Sofar people didn't have any big preasure to do so. I know, there are a lot of lazy people around, who just think: I don't care what happens to my computer. But I know enough people who do download and who wouldn't want to miss it.

So, how long does it take untill people run their download software in a virtual machine, completely seperated from the rest of the operating system, on a hiden true crypt partition and store the music/movies in the same way. And communication only over encrypted channels. Of course it has performance issues, but the computers are fast enough (and get faster).

And then let them cut of the internet? I would always defend myself and claim: false positive! And go public of course!

Re:This will probably teach people to use encrypti (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870207)

Do have a big throw-switch to kill the power? Have you got flashing red lights warning of intruders? I imagine a place like Hackman had in Enemy of the State.

Consenting participants? (1)

houghi (78078) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870061)

If it is the law, they will automagicaly become either consenting participants or not do any business in France.

I just hope that this does not mean that the local **AA can decide who they want to report, but still go through the legal hassle.

That way they need to file three lawsuits, where the people can easily say 'sorry' or not even show up. That way the local **AA must put its money where its mouth is. If they think it is worth it, they will. I bet they won't bother.
Otherwise it would be several million lawsuits and then the legal system will put them on a big pile and let it rot, so they can be busy with things that ARE important.

Re:Consenting participants? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870153)

I just hope that this does not mean that the local **AA can decide who they want to report, but still go through the legal hassle.

Too bad that's more are less the case.

That way they need to file three lawsuits, where the people can easily say 'sorry' or not even show up. That way the local **AA must put its money where its mouth is. If they think it is worth it, they will. I bet they won't bother.
Otherwise it would be several million lawsuits and then the legal system will put them on a big pile and let it rot, so they can be busy with things that ARE important.

No law suit to fill, just a letter to send.
First time a e-mail on your FAI mailbox (is there anyone that use them ?). The second time a physical letter w/ acknowledgment. Then the ban. Or directly the ban, if they are in bad mood, since nothing force them to use the two first step.
Sending letters to presumed pirates, does that remind you anything ? Here, it will become the "official way" of doing things.

wrong summary (4, Insightful)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870081)

Dumb Internet Pirates In France To Lose Broadband

Internet Pirates In France With The Slightest Bit of Technical Acumen To Carry On As Usual

there, fixed that for you

Re:wrong summary (1)

taupin (1047372) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870247)

Well, that's just it, isn't it? If the ISPs can cut out _some_ of the people that use a lot of bandwidth, they've come out ahead already, even if they're missing some (or even most) of those users.

It's just France.. (4, Funny)

sTERNKERN (1290626) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870101)

And they had no revolutions in the last 40 years... something has to be done there.

Reality to media industry: Accept the truth (5, Insightful)

kju (327) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870133)

Dear media outlets: Please accept the fact that you are fighting a war that you cannot win. Even with custom-tailored laws at your will the internet won't change and piracy won't go away at large. It is also still doubtful that it is piracy what is causing your alledged losses and not a general loss of quality in and appreciation of music. For the latter part it's even you who is to blame: Music is nowadays everywhere - with your permission. Bad versions of your "hits" are sold as overly annoying cell phone ringtones - with your permission and appraisal.

Some parts of the media business already have learned that both giving away for free and piracy is actually increasing business, not hurting it. Eric Flint, a sci-fi writer has pointed this out: http://baens-universe.com/articles/salvos8 [baens-universe.com] and http://baens-universe.com/articles/The_Economics_of_Writing [baens-universe.com] Instead of treating your customers like shit, making a witch-hunt and introducing bull shit like DRM which only scares away your loyal customers towards piracy - pirated versions don't have silly limitations - you should finally realize that you need to do what every business in trouble need to do: Adapt. Or die. Whatever.

Sincerely
Reality

While the law may seem fair... (4, Informative)

loutr (626763) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870139)

The process to come up with it was not. This law is based on a report by Denis Olivennes, CEO of the FNAC (largest brick & mortar music seller in France), in collaboration with the majors, but not with the consumer defense groups. The minister of culture talked with the majors several times, while the consumer defense groups were left waiting on the sidewalk, although they had a petition signed by several thousands citizen (and RMS' support ;)).

As a french citizen, I don't really disagree with the principle of this law, but to see our government act like the RIAA's lap dog is very unnerving. And the fact that the ministry of culture seems completely out of touch with today's technology annoys me even more (Not long ago this ministry published a tender for translation of their websites. They specifically asked for automated translation. Let's just say the translators union was not very pleased, and sent them a letter, along with an man-made english translation of it, and a french translation of the english letter made by google translate. The original letter and the google one had not much in common...)

In related News: (3, Funny)

AlgorithMan (937244) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870165)

France is purporting to take a hard line on streets. According to timesonline.co.uk, a new measure approved yesterday by the French Cabinet would take away the cars of those, caught speeding. 'There is no reason that the streets should be a lawless zone," President Sarkozy told his Cabinet yesterday as it endorsed the "three-strikes-and-you're-out" scheme that from next January will hit illegal drivers where it hurts. Under a cross-industry agreement, car-manufacturers must cut off access for up to a year for third-time offenders.'

Re:In related News: (1)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870425)

Funny? That's exactly what happens ... speed too many times and you lose your license.

Re:In related News: (0, Redundant)

ChameleonDave (1041178) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870427)

That's an extremely crappy reductio ad absurdum.

Speeding cars kill. There definitely should be a three-strike policy for that. Plus, there should be a one one-strike policy over a certain speed, or for drunk speedsters.

Three false positives (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870227)

I'm still waiting for that new "three false positives and you are out for at least a year" policy.
But I'm afraid it won't be implemented before the year of desktop Linux and release of DN4Ever.

Losing Internet is akin to Losing Electricity (3, Insightful)

Ron Bennett (14590) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870257)

Such punishment may have made sense 10 years ago when the internet was a novelty / toy to most people. But today, many people rely on the internet for basic everyday needs, such as communication, employment, paying bills, filing taxes, etc.

Ron

I predict the future... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870379)

The Daily Newspaper. Date: Two weeks from today. Today, France shut down all internet access and disbanded all remaining ISPs. "There simply weren't enough customers about to use them. I mean, there was a pair of grandparents over in Lyon that managed to keep their access for six days, but then the grandfather went to the wrong kind of site, and, well, you know what happens from there.", explained France's Prime Minister, "It just wasn't feasible to keep these companies alive when all they were fighting over was the last remaining customer, a blind monkey in the Paris Zoo." In related news, emigration rates have hit an all-time high, and Swedish is more popular than ever as a second language.

Thats much better. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870391)

In soviet russia, the broadband loses the pirates!!

In companies (1)

CharmElCheikh (1140197) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870435)

I especially like their "solution" for illegal downloading from work:

What do company employees risk?
In the case of illegal downloading inside companies, an alternative measure to the ISP subscription cut will be proposed ; that is to say, the installation of digital protections like firewalls on employees workstations in order to block downloads. Although, public places where it's possible to connect to the Internet (public libraries...) will also be concerned and will have to put in place a protection system to prevent illegal downloading from their computers.
(quickly translated by me from http://www.zebulon.fr/actualites/2097-loi-antipiratage-mode-emploi.html [zebulon.fr] )

1- Put nice sentences together and try to reinvent the wheel
2- Mess up the implementation because you understand nothing to IT
3- ???
4- Blame someoneelse (next government?) for the complete failure!!!

Hit them were it hurts !! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870437)

i don't think the ruling elite .. are really thinking this through to the end ..

without access to content and a high-speed INTERNET connection i will have very little use for any but the most basic of portables .. EeePc or the equivalent with WiFi .. although i will probable wait a will for a nice VIA nano or similarly equipped device 12-13 inch .. which will still give me INTERNET access .. all be it with slightly great degree of effort on my part .. and maybe the price of a coffee ..

and it will be the last $500-600 i spend on tech or internet access that the general economy will ever get from me .. and you think $150-$200 a barrel oil is going to hit the western tech based .. oil Dependant economies hard .. just add that in to the mix on an even moderate level and let's see how long they lasts ..

i pay just a little over a $1000 a year including TAX for my 6-10MB cable connection .. been doing that for about 10 years now .. and spend about $1000-2500 a year on computer hardware .. not including the 5 to 10 systems a year that i build for Friends and acquaintances .. that will all end .. i will quit .. go ahead and cut me off and see who suffers more .. me or the general economy .. for my part i will give up on computers and tech .. and go outside and get some fresh air .. and catch up on my reading etc.

yea go ahead hit me were it hurts !!

it would probably be the best thing that could happen .. the end of my unhealthy information and stimulus ADDICTION !!!

bring it on baby ..

DEA, big pharma, and the federalmarijuana erection (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23870443)

search news.google.com for marijuana:

99% of it is about law enforcement TAKING peoples land because of grows. People say, Legalize marijuana and the state/country will make money from it but isnt more money made FOR government by busting growers and sellers and taking all of their property, cars, drugs, etc.? Read history and discover how a lot of law enforcement RESELL the dope and the history of CIA involvement in drugs. Private prisons are in business to get repeat customers.

Non-violent pot smokers are sent to prison to be anally raped and have diseased gangland semen injected into their rectum and may face a life ending disease just because they wanted to smoke a weed. Datura, Foxglove, and other plants which you could smoke could kill you quickly but they are legal, isnt that fun? Marijuana is illegal today because governments profit from it being illegal. Just like with alcohol prohibition. See LEAPs website, Law Enfocement Against Prohibition for some good information, and MPPs website. It doesnt matter whether people want to smoke pot for recreation or as medicine, it should be legal and they should have the right.

It is illegal now only in places where the people are too scared to stand up together and shout, NO MORE! so they grow in closets and pass their money to people on the street who may be buying who knows what with the money they receive. Anyone who condemns a marijuana user is either a member of law enforcement who profits from it being illegal, ignorant, or both. There are plenty of pretenders on-line who are members of law enforcement or collaborators/informants who participate in such discussions as this and try to spread F.U.D., dont listen to them. Marijuana can and will be legal when the people stand together and say, NO MORE! Big Pharma and their liver rotting pain killers and tons of meds with side effects are the real drug dealers, and guess which agency protects them? You guessed it, the same agency which raids marijuana growers and clinics.

Its all about money in the land of the free, where sharing and community is evil, and stepping on the back of your fellow man to make a buck is the law of the land.

Does this mean (2, Funny)

koinu (472851) | more than 6 years ago | (#23870487)

we need only one worm that starts "illegal" downloads on every PC and whole France as a country is offline? Where are the script kiddies when you need them?

You need to learn about your own stupidity by having PITA. That works best.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?