×

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!

French President Busted For Copyright Violation

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the do-as-i-say dept.

Music 317

An anonymous reader writes "ZeroPaid has an interesting take on the story of Nicolas Sarkozy being accused of copyright infringement. The irony, of course, is Sarkozy's pushing of a 3-strikes law — disconnecting from the Internet those accused of file sharing — in France and across the EU. The French president had apparently offered to settle the copyright infringement accusation for one Euro, but the band rejected the offer, calling it an insult. The article notes that each year since 2006, a high-profile anti-piracy entity has been on the wrong end of a copyright infringement notice. In 2008, Sony BMG was sued for software piracy. In 2007, anti-piracy outfit BASCAP received a cease and desist order related to pirated software. And in 2006, the MPAA was accused of pirating 'This Film is Not Yet Rated'."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

317 comments

Do. (5, Insightful)

neoform (551705) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028037)

Do as I say.

Not as I do.

FUCK ARTISTS (0, Flamebait)

bonch (38532) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028409)

FUCK artists, and FUCK their rights. I join Slashdot in mocking this hypocrisy, and I look forward to even more pro-piracy articles this week. I live for these stories--every day, I get to make myself feel less guilty for pirating the shit out of everything. After all, it's because of their "obsolete business model!" It's just "free advertising!" Somebody else will pay those artists, through concert tickets or t-shirts or something. I don't really think about it.

The big corporations and the lawmakers are the bad guys here, not me! Artists are my slaves, and they don't deserve shit for their work. As I said, FUCK artists, and FUCK their rights. I'm not doing anything wrong.

Re:FUCK ARTISTS (3, Insightful)

Shark (78448) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028459)

Is this what they call sarcasm?

It is a very good way to put a point across, but overdone it just makes one look like an extremely frustrated lunatic.

I'm sure there are valid points on your side of the debate, but you're preaching to a highly biased and relatively intelligent crowd. There ought to be a less self-destructive way of making your case.

Re:FUCK ARTISTS (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028535)

relatively intelligent crowd

Is it a truth universally acknowledged that any group will always consider itself comprised of people relatively intelligent compared to some "average"?

Do any of you guys reading or posting on Slashdot ever think to yourselves that you might be, in broad intellectual terms, at or below average? Like me, you enjoy tinkering with computer hardware or software, and like me, you may have one or more good academic qualifications. Like me, you probably can quote some self-aggrandizing metric which claims to prove your intelligence. But do you actually think, in the scheme of things, that you're all that great? Do you stop and think about all the things that you cannot do, or has your skill at bullshitting your way out of your weaknesses become so honed that you even manage to fool yourself?

I judge myself as fairly stupid, and, frankly, I judge much of the output of Slashdot posters as hot air. Almost every (+5, Insightful) is a "we agree with what you said" rather than some sharp demonstration of thought. There's also the standard toadying deference to classes of people rather than ideas: whether it's someone who mentions they studied at MIT (omg MIT!!! because turning one's nose up at a well-rounded education is never likely to create an inhuman technocracy). or worked at Google (and why do you think MS is so popular on the desktop? clue: try to overcome your "abusive monopoly" whine), or.. ugh.. NewYorkCountryIPLawyerWhenHe'sNotPretendingToBe"OneOfUs".

During the dotcom boom I cofounded a pregnancy+parenting site, long since sold, and the best way to get hits was to have articles/sections about abortion and all sorts of other controversial topics. Similarly, much of Slashdot is erected as one big flamebait - the editors know that you're going to achieve nothing productive by coming here, but they're appealing to the basic human urge to show everyone else your asshole. You think your shit smells so good, doesn't it, so much more worthy of inhaling than everyone else's?

No, failure. You're going to die in 100 years like the rest of us. Think less of yourself. Hate yourself more for your failures, and show some humility. Realise that what you have to say is probably obvious or bullshit - either way, it's already been thought about by a million people before you, who didn't think themselves so important to speak it out loud. Love yourself and you will become lazy and derive a sense of entitlement based on your abilities and chance; loathe more your very existence and you will strive to be more productive and useful.

The only message worth spreading is this one.

Re:FUCK ARTISTS (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028737)

Cheer up, emo kid. I guarantee that you think very highly of yourself or you wouldn't have typed out that long, holier than thou, rant. You really should, as you tell others, hate yourself more, because you're a pretentious cunt and your message isn't worth the hard drive space it's saved on.

Re:FUCK ARTISTS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028757)

While some might hate me for this, but i actually agree, for the most part.

Seriously, think about it for 1 second, just 1 second.
Most of those damn singers / musicians / sound / video etc are richer than a good bunch of us here, and for what? "oh hey maw i can makes a music on the PEECEE"
It sickens me.
Look at Lilly Allen, think i'd ever pay her for music, regardless of how good it was? Screw that, she is richer than i'll probably ever hope to be.
Oh well, that's life, you say.

Just no, screw that, most of them hoard all the money and never do a damn thing but buy the next big thing, or some crappy dress, or a stupid car, or some big-ass stupid statue for their mansion that they only use 40% of.
Or even better, they spend it on drugs / drink or some crappy party with a bunch of other walking cancers.
Not to mention the fact that the industry pretty much eats up a good chunk of the profit anyway!

The only music i'll ever* buy is Independant music.
* unless said musician / singer was under a company now and i still liked them. But even that will come under investigation before i do.

Go on, hit that troll or flamebait now, enjoy the guilt, you know i am right. (unless you love them copyrights, gotta love them copyrights)

Re:FUCK ARTISTS (4, Interesting)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028745)

It's all about capitalism... Pirates are making available a cheaper and often superior (no drm) product. It is our duty as good capitalists to get best value for ourselves.

Smart move (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028043)

Smart move, idiots. Alienate the guy who's pushing your agenda. What can possibly go wrong?

Are these guys smoking something or are they just retarded?

Re:Smart move (5, Insightful)

neoform (551705) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028057)

Maybe they don't like his agenda?

Re:Smart move (4, Insightful)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028067)

Maybe they don't like his agenda?

Seriously, artists are not all automatically on the side of big media. And you're right: they probably saw this as a way to make a point, that they don't like where he's trying to take copyright.

Of course, offering a single Euro as compensation was kinda ridiculous.

Re:Smart move (1)

icebike (68054) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028121)

Yes, ridiculous. Way beyond what one song would be worth.

By the time you buy a song from iTunes, do you seriously believe
the artist got anywhere near a Euro?

Re:Smart move (5, Informative)

Translation Error (1176675) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028247)

The song was used multiple times for his party's political campaign when the license purchased didn't allow that. From the much more informative article [www.cbc.ca] linked in the article, it sounds like they were permitted to use it once but then went on to use it multiple times and, additionally, put it on the internet. Then, rather than paying the difference for such use, the party offered €1. I can't imagine why the band wasn't amused...

In short, this wasn't a case of Joe User downloading a song; it was unauthorized commercial use.

Re:Smart move (-1)

mgblst (80109) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028613)

Yes, but if Obama had done it, I am sure the band wouldn't have minded. I think sarkozy looks to himself as the french version of obama, other people don't.

Re:Smart move (1, Flamebait)

Czernobog (588687) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028839)

Awwwww poor band, they gained nothing by having their music repeatedly exposed to millions of people... â1 was more than they deserved.

Re:Smart move (5, Insightful)

Handlarn (911194) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028943)

Sigh.

They were hardly protesting against having their music spread to the big masses. They obviously intented to point out that the most influential politician/pro-copyright spokesman of France is a hypocritical asshole.

It's incredible how anyone could miss the point.

Re:Smart move (2, Informative)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028789)

You're comparing an independent group with the average dummy who signs a contract with a major label. Unlike those who sign on the dotted line, independents OWN their music. They can charge as much or as little as they like, because they haven't sold their souls to the devil.

Re:Smart move (4, Interesting)

theheadlessrabbit (1022587) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028283)

Seriously, artists are not all automatically on the side of big media.

you have no idea how right you are.

I have noticed that the 'artists' who produce schlock and hope someone will hand them a paycheck haven't even looked into copyright.

Serious artists who are making a serious effort to comment on contemporary culture are usually very much against copyright. my next show requires a camera to view the images (photographing a painting is a violation, technically).
I know a few bands who encourage people to film their shows, post them to youtube, then they make copyright claims and post ads on that video page. ( no idea how that works out).
they no longer want to be 'picked up my a major'
now, they talk about 'making it somehow without signing...by using teh internets or something...'

i have yet to find a serious artist who supports strict copyright laws. (and I know a lot of artists; being one myself, and associating mainly with other artists, and I work with musicians fairly often.)

Re:Smart move (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028515)

Nice paintings, especially some of the "Urban Landscapes".

Re:Smart move (3, Informative)

Skuldo (849919) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028489)

Something similar that made me laugh:

For most of its history, the band chose to stay away from the political realm. However, in 2004, upon learning that George W. Bush's presidential campaign was using "Times Like These" at rallies, Grohl decided to lend his public support to John Kerry's campaign. Grohl attended several Kerry rallies and occasionally performed solo acoustic sets. The entire band eventually joined Grohl for a performance in Arizona coinciding with one of the presidential debates.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foo_Fighters#One_by_One_.282001-2004.29 [wikipedia.org]

Ronnie 'Python' Reagan (1)

fnord_uk (842775) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028869)

I remember seeing him come onto the stage at a Republican convention in the 1980's, to the sounds of the Monty python theme tune. I loved it!

I was waiting for the big foot to come out of the sky and squash him, but it didn't.

Re:Smart move (3, Insightful)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028311)

lol. Are you trying to be funny? The agenda that the French president and the recording industry try to push hardly benefits artists. What do you think, that the RIAA is fighting tooth and nail just so your favourite electrohouse artist can get a bigger pay cheque? What Sarkozy does doesn't benefit them, and they know that. That means they're not as stupid as you rushed to claim, how shocking!

ARRGGG, MATEY! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028045)

I be piratin' dis post!

Oh wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028061)

The irony. The ever so delicious irony.

It's like the RIAA got sued for copyright infringement for downloading their own music or something. Except TOTALLY DIFFERENT.

The band in question (5, Interesting)

bedonnant (958404) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028073)

is MGMT, for what it's worth. When the band decided to sue, Sarkozy's party offered a "symbolic euro" for compensation.

Re:The band in question (5, Informative)

bedonnant (958404) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028125)

Also, for information, the 3-strikes law will be discussed next week, and implies juicy stuff like "guilty until proven innocent" and "you can only prove innocent if you have installed official government trojan horses on your computer" and "these malware have no requirement of interoperability, which hurts the choice of costumers (!)". Citizens and bloggers (such as myself) following the Quadrature du Net association are calling for a "blackout" (link in French, sorry) [laquadrature.net] of the French side of the internet in protest.

Re:The band in question (2, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028135)

Oh, yes, a black out will work... That scares the hell out of them.

Re:The band in question (1)

bedonnant (958404) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028177)

apparently it worked in australia, or new-zeland, i don't remember.

Re:The band in question (1)

NitsujTPU (19263) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028187)

It must have been a terrifying experience to have left such an impression on you ;-)

Re:The band in question (5, Informative)

thoughtfulbloke (1091595) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028219)

New Zealand, the government has put the law on hold pending agreement between rights holders groups and internet groups on the law's implementation. If no agreement the law will be suspended (whatever that means). NZ Herald news link [nzherald.co.nz]

Re:The band in question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028157)

I definitely want to be able to choose my costume supplier.

Re:The band in question (-1, Flamebait)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028199)

"guilty until proven innocent"

Well, as I understand it, that is one of the guiding principles of French law. The burden of proof is on the accused.

Re:The band in question (1, Insightful)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028261)

How can such an insulting bullshit be moderated informative??

This proves a major prejudice about Americans: Most of you don't know shit about the world (outside of your borders).

But I still hope, that there are some here who will fix that. After all, I thought Slashdot users had an above average intelligence.

Re:The band in question (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028281)

And this proves a major prejudice about non-Americans: Most of you immediately assume that anyone on the internet who makes an idiotic or misinformed comment is American.

Re:The band in question (4, Insightful)

ta bu shi da yu (687699) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028341)

I know, it's awful and unfair. But after only 8 short years of Bush being in power, it looks like its going to take a while for these prejudices to subside.

Re:The band in question (4, Funny)

Quothz (683368) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028389)

And this proves a major prejudice about non-Americans: Most of you immediately assume that anyone on the internet who makes an idiotic or misinformed comment is American.

In fairness, the guy's handle is "ScrewMaster", so he prolly is American.

Re:The band in question (1)

CodeBuster (516420) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028299)

After all, I thought Slashdot users had an above average intelligence.

There is always someone more intelligent than us; the wiser ones among us know this implicitly but the fools know only that which they permit themselves to see, hear, and think.

Re:The band in question (1, Insightful)

bonch (38532) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028423)

Non-Americans love to throw out stereotypes like that. And yet when I ask them something like "What is the capital of Florida?"--they don't know. They know as little about our country as we do about theirs. They might even be worse, because they form almost all their opinions about America through portrayals in TV shows, which is really, really stupid.

Re:The band in question (1)

Starayo (989319) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028475)

Florida has a capital?! I thought it was just some magical place where old people go eventually. Kind of like neverland, but wrinklier.

Re:The band in question (5, Insightful)

endymion.nz (1093595) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028523)

For a fair comparison, ask a non-American what the American capital is. America has fifty states, with fifty capitals. I don't expect an American to know what the capital of a random province in my country is. The reason we think you are stupid is because we are outside of the happy fun curtain. We get to see the effects that American imperialism has on the world, our news agencies actually report on the wars and insurgencies that America funds and / or fights by proxy. We see statistics coming out of America like 92% of Americans believe in a God [washingtonpost.com] . This speaks volumes. Do you even know what piracy is? Ask the victims of the boats attacked and hijacked off the coast of Somalia. Copyright infringement isn't stealing, it isn't piracy and it isn't theft. When our (mostly Americas, because the rest of the world is forced into following suit by the WHO and WIPO and UN) antiquated notions of property finally catch up to the reality of digital storage and the internet, we might have a chance at getting it right.

Re:The band in question (3, Insightful)

Just because I'm an (847583) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028729)

How many US citizens know what the capital of Florida is?

Also really.. just national capitals would be nice, capitals of states is a much longer bow to draw since the corollary question would be to ask what the capitals of places like Hunan, Alsace, Free State and Tasmania would be.

I think most people would probably assume the answer is Miami because it's the most known of Floridian cities, I knew it wasn't but had to look up the answer. I'm not from the US and do not live there.

I think in broader terms you're right about ignorance not being uniquely a US trait and that entertainment TV shows are a poor educational tool (because they're not meant to be) but if you're trying to change the preconceptions of people then I would say your post isn't doing it.

Presumed innocent? (5, Informative)

dna_(c)(tm)(r) (618003) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028491)

Well, as I understand it, that is one of the guiding principles of French law. The burden of proof is on the accused.

Well, you got that wrong then. It were the French that introduced the concept of presumption of innocence in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen [wikipedia.org] and later structured the way laws are written down in the Napoleonic Code [wikipedia.org]

Of course, The Enlightenment was the source for these ideals as well as the inspiration for the the US Declaration of Independence and the constitution...

This had a major influence on European law making since Napoleon occupied most of it...

Re:The band in question (1)

johannesg (664142) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028953)

Well, obtaining a french phonebook shouldn't be too hard. Beyond that point it is just a question of setting up a distributed system for sending out infringement notices (they should not come from one source or look too identical, since that makes them too easy to filter). This will clog up the courts, and will knock the entire nation of France of the internet in short order.

lol (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028087)

Jai in ur offiÃe, coupyin ur warez

(PS.don't special chars like compose-comma-c work here on /.???)

Re:lol (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028101)

Jai in ur offiÃe, coupyin ur warez

(PS.don't special chars like compose-comma-c work here on /.???)

Nein.

3 strikes (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028107)

Okay, so the UMP is getting booted off the internet now, right?

Er...right?

Hypocrisy as the norm... (5, Insightful)

StrategicIrony (1183007) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028131)

It's amazing that most people simply accept that Hypocrisy is the norm. That's sad.

The copyright organizations call for "zero tolerance" and are then caught themselves.

The congressmen who rail against finding teenagers attractive are caught lusting after them.

Preachers who rail on homosexuals are caught fucking gay prostitutes.

Vigilantes who claim to catch online predators are found to be employing young teens in their exploits and having child pornography on their computers.

Educators who rail against drugs and demand for instant lockup of drug offenders... are found to be drug users themselves...

These are all real stories.

Instead of stepping back and recognizing that their viewpoints may be of questionable value and that they may have made errors in judgment... they just ignore their mistakes and continue in their hypocritical ways.

And the world is a worse place for it.

Re:Hypocrisy as the norm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028171)

Amen. How about a hypocrisy 3 strikes law.. Disconnect the offenders from the planet.

Re:Hypocrisy as the norm... (1)

someone1234 (830754) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028529)

Our planet would be very empty suddenly.

Re:Hypocrisy as the norm... (3, Insightful)

eiapoce (1049910) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028577)

but still a better place. Remove them from power at the first offence would be better, sarkosy wouldn't have made past student rapresentative...

Re:Hypocrisy as the norm... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028231)

People often hate most of others what they hate most of themselves. They're angry with themselves that they can't control their own behavior, so they lash out at others and attempt to control theirs. It's a compensation mechanism. Either that, or it's plain old game theory--an attempt to persuade others to cooperate while one defects, thus maximizing personal gain.

I once had a lengthy discussion with a mother who was bat-shit loco against people looking at kiddie porn. She thought anyone who looked at kiddie porn should be sterilized, and that producers should be locked away forever. Deeper into the conversation, she admitted to having looked at kiddie porn, and further admitted to having posted pictures of her nude son on her blog (bathtub pictures). She conceded that she was a hypocrite, but defiantly refused to change her opinion about what should happen to OTHER people who did what she did.

Re:Hypocrisy as the norm... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028237)

People are somewhat accepting of hypocrisy as the norm in politics because it's the norm in real life.

Story time: I live with two other people, one of whom was gone for months and just returned. After a week she cleaned all the floors and wrote us a passive-aggressive email about how the cleaning schedule obviously wasn't working. She wrote that she hoped we'd clean up the other things she called "obvious", but which are not so obvious to me. The thing is, sending out the week's cleaning schedule is her job and she didn't do it. This girl has gotten increasingly picky about the cleaning while still doing things like leaving used lemons on the kitchen counter while we had a fly infestation, and the compost sack is in the freezer just a few feet away, and going on a four day trip. She'll complain about the hair on the bathroom floor and then not clean out the drain in the tub. Hell, I don't even have a contrast for this (other than her desire to see things clean): I've seen her menstrual fluid in more unexpected places than I'd previously seen in my life.

You see, our messes are different from other people's messes; our illegal actions are different from other people's actions. We have a reason for it, or we know that we didn't mean anything by it, or we know that we're good people and shouldn't be punished too badly for it - if anything we could probably use some help or education, right?

Our empathy for others rarely ever measures up to our empathy for ourselves. If anything, being lax on hypocrisy is being truthful about our nature. I still wouldn't mind giving a punch in the kidneys to the fucks at the RIAA, but that's how it goes.

Re:Hypocrisy as the norm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028429)

Woohoo! Catfight!

Re:Hypocrisy as the norm... (5, Interesting)

Maxo-Texas (864189) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028265)

These things have *always* happened.

The only difference is that cameras, record-keeping databases, and surveillance have all gotten much better over the last thirty years.

Hell some of the early popes had mistresses.

Power corrupts.

The only real solution is shrinking the amount of power and wealthy any one person can have. And that boat has sailed.

Re:Hypocrisy as the norm... (1)

vigour (846429) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028545)

Hell some of the early popes had mistresses.

Hell, if you believe some of the now discredited early histories, there was even a woman pope, Pope Joan [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Hypocrisy as the norm... (1)

rohan972 (880586) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028637)

Hell some of the early popes had mistresses.

According to the bible apostles, including Peter (Cephas) who the Catholics count as the first pope, were married. I Corinthians 9:5 Have we no right to take along a wife who is a believer, even as the rest of the apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?

Re:Hypocrisy as the norm... (1)

trenien (974611) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028687)

Well, in Sarkozy's case, he was already waaay beyond simple corruption before he was even elected president. Now he just gets to fulfill most of his fantasies.

Re:Hypocrisy as the norm... (1, Offtopic)

EGenius007 (1125395) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028295)

There are collapsing paradox waves at work here.

What if someone else opposed to hypocrisy is found to be a hypocrite?

Would you continue to advance your anti-hypocritical agenda, or abandon it on principle?

Great, now I've even confused myself.

Re:Hypocrisy as the norm... (1)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028461)

If someone who is opposed to hypocrisy is found to be a hypocrite, they should simply be treated by you as you treat any other hypocrite, since they are clearly not in the same camp as non hypocritical opponents of hypocrisy, and assuming of course that you treat non hypocritical opponents of hypocrisy differently from hypocrites, otherwise the question is moot to begin with.

Re:Hypocrisy as the norm... (1)

mqduck (232646) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028641)

It's amazing that most people simply accept that Hypocrisy is the norm. That's sad.

You're telling me that hypocrisy isn't the norm?

Re:Hypocrisy as the norm... (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028815)

...and yet you'd be the first to claim "seperation of public and private life" for any hypocrite whose opinions you agreed with. A civil servant may represent the people officially, as part of his job, and have entirely different viewpoints personally. But if it's one of the GOOD PEOPLE, then it's totally OK, it's not hypocrisy, it's all part of the rich intellectual landscape of life, where people can perform duties in public and then retire outside view and conduct his own business as he sees fit.

See, you're not railing against hypocrisy, you're against it if you disagree with the viewpoints of the person in question. Seen it a million times since Bush was elected.

Re:Hypocrisy as the norm... (1)

bloodninja (1291306) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028889)

It's amazing that most people simply accept that Hypocrisy is the norm. That's sad.

The copyright organizations call for "zero tolerance" and are then caught themselves.

The congressmen who rail against finding teenagers attractive are caught lusting after them.

Preachers who rail on homosexuals are caught fucking gay prostitutes.

Vigilantes who claim to catch online predators are found to be employing young teens in their exploits and having child pornography on their computers.

Educators who rail against drugs and demand for instant lockup of drug offenders... are found to be drug users themselves...

I don't find that so unusual. If a person is doing something wrong and knows that he is hurting someone, that does not mean that he has the power to stop himself. That could be just the reason that politician X is against action Y. He knows how bad Y is because he cannot help from doing it himself.

In fact, this is the situation in my own home. I spend way too much time on the intercords, but I don't let the kids online for more than a few minutes at a time. Mostly because I am aware of my own addiction.

Just like Democrats & Taxes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028159)

If you are a "little person" the Democrats say "it is patrictic to pay taxes" (-Biden)
But if you are a Democrat big shot, you have no need to pay taxes until you get nominated for a Cabinet post.

Will the 3 strikes policy affect him? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028165)

The worst thing about this is the much touted "3 strikes policy". Even if the president gets busted infringing on copyright 3 times, do you really think his internet access will be terminated?

"Oh sorry, that law wasn't intended for Important People, such as The President, who need the internet for REAL purposes."

One law for them, one law for everybody else.

Our entire civilization is being screwed up the ass SO BADLY by these people, and there's nothing we can do.

Fuck you frenchy, I hope you and your fat wife drown in a vat of wine.

Re:Will the 3 strikes policy affect him? (5, Funny)

Dionysus (12737) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028207)

Fuck you frenchy, I hope you and your fat wife drown in a vat of wine.

Fat wife [courant.com] ?

Re:Will the 3 strikes policy affect him? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028251)

Find something newer that ain't so obviously shopped.

Re:Will the 3 strikes policy affect him? (0, Offtopic)

ta bu shi da yu (687699) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028353)

All right [thebosh.com] .

Re:Will the 3 strikes policy affect him? (1)

eiapoce (1049910) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028609)

I understand that most people will be in a rush for carla bruni pictures. But don't forget she's also an artist whose music is strangely not selling well.

Of course this is because of piracy!!! She's obviously too nice to sing poorly and now that she's the wife of the president she's also too famous to hold a concert in a stadium to raise some money by actual work.

I hope that the french three strikes policy will correct this unfair stealing of her precious music from those filthy bastards that got her husband elected.

This of course has nothing to do with sarkosy including anti-piracy discussion in every meeting with EU PMs like last week with italian media mogul berlusconi.
[/sarcasm]

Retroactive exemption for political purposes in (2, Funny)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028181)

Cinq... quatre... trois... deux...

Re:Retroactive exemption for political purposes in (1)

bloodninja (1291306) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028897)

This is the case with Israeli anti-spam laws. In December, spamming from Israel became illegal. Except for political spam, which was very common in the elections last month. WTF?!?

We have our Sarkozy in Chile, too (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028191)

Here in Chile, the president of the SCD (Society of Author Rights) was caught with pirated software, in a powerpoint lecture about... you guessed it... PIRACY! (they are triying to copy the spanish law, taxing the internet connection for the "lost of revenues")

http://www.elnortero.cl/admin/render/noticia/18164

An our congress try to pass a 3-strikes law for ISPs... with a word document created by a SCD lawyer with a pirated copy of windows ("UE, The Houze"). There are even commemorative t-shirts!

http://url.ie/10xd

http://www.elfrancotirador.cl/2009/01/15/ponte-la-camiseta-con-el-acceso-a-cultura/

There are RIAAs scammers in every country.

Not the first time for this stuff (3, Insightful)

rastilin (752802) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028197)

Not like this is the first time something like this happened. Wasn't there one story where the family of an executive officer of the RIAA was accused of this and he pushed the company to let them off with a warning?

He's not directly involved (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028215)

The french president Nicolas Sarkozy is not directly sued for this copyright infringement. His own party (UMP) used the song during a meeting, and didn't reported it to the french RIAA (SACEM) for artist compensation, wich generally is pretty low.

The UMP party is sued for this, but not the french president, who was not in charge for the organization of this meeting, and has presidential immunity.

But's that's pretty funny anyway.

Excellent-- and not just for schadenfreude (1)

Maxo-Texas (864189) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028259)

We need to enforce these laws against the children of music/movie executives and politicians and the wealthy.

Then the laws will be changed quickly.

But most of those groups think they are immune to the same treatment as the rest of humanity.

Re:Excellent-- and not just for schadenfreude (2, Insightful)

bloodninja (1291306) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028915)

We need to enforce these laws against the children of music/movie executives and politicians and the wealthy.

Then the laws will be changed quickly.

But most of those groups think they are immune to the same treatment as the rest of humanity.

They are _not_ enforced. There was an incident about a year or so ago in which some music exec's kids were caught downloading illegal music. What did they get? A stern warning from dad.

kdawson (1)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028329)

the title says he's been "busted" the summary says he's only been "accused". do they pay you to be an editor? i certainly hope not.

The title is inappropriate (5, Informative)

French31 (1311051) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028413)

I know Nicolas Sarkozy being an omnipresent president and all, but it's not like he personally chose the song, right? It's actually some people among his political party (the UMP) that decided to play the song in two meetings.

Otherwise, the result is the same: the political party from which Nicolas Sarkozy is has been busted for copyright infringement. It's a further proof that copyright laws are being way too tentacular. Can't they just see it?

Re:The title is inappropriate (3, Informative)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028621)

It wasn't just played in 2 meetings.

"The party has admitted to using the popular track, Kids, at its national congress in January, in two online videos and in political advertisements. " - From the link inside TFA. (TFA is more of a blog post than an article.)

But the ire at Sarkozy isn't from the playing of the song and violating the agreement, it's at him trying to offer 1 euro to buy his way out of breaking the law he wrote.

Re:The title is inappropriate (1)

trenien (974611) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028723)

I know Nicolas Sarkozy being an omnipresident and all

It's a further proof that copyright laws are being way too tentacular. Can't they just see it?

They know. They just don't care. The only important thing is to make sure that their cronies get as much as they can and as they can get away with.

That law hasn't be discussed by MPs, it's been written down by the majors and the SACEM (local equivalent to the RIAA) who don't even understand its unredeemable defects. Some MPs from Sarkozy's party may even be against it, but most don't care and they'll all vote yes since they want endorsement for the next elections.

The worst of it is that it goes against French Constitution, and the viewpoint of the EU Parliament on it to boot. Sarkozy and his buddies are just trying to force the issue. Seeing as how things have gone in the last year in France, they may even get away with it.

an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028445)

true dat

Liberté, Egalité et Fraternité (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028455)

That's French for Liberty, Equality and Fraternity.
We can clearly see he firmly understands the importance of free and equal access to culture and opinions. We can also see in what direction he's going to go. By demonstrating his unwillingness to comply with this copyright bullshit, he's standing up for the rights of the everyday citizen against the NOTORIOUSLY POWERFUL COPYRIGHT-UP-THE-YINGYANG CORPORATIONS. Hats off to "Monsieur le Président".

May he get the worst possible treatment (5, Insightful)

jonaskoelker (922170) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028485)

May Sarkozy get the worst possible treatment allowable under law. I hope he gets all his computer (and other electronic devices) seized and thoroughly examined.

Not out of any hate of Sarkozy, or any need for vengeance for the wrongs committed by the RIAA against innocent people.

The purpose is this: I believe that those in power should be feel the impact of their decisions.

You want greater surveillance? Fine, we'll start around your house. You want to wage a war? Fine, any of your eligible children get "volunteered" for army service. You want to give the police power to search people without a warrant? Fine, you'll get searched daily both near your home and near your workplace.

Then, maybe, just maybe, people would think twice. They tend to when there's something at stake for them.

This is really an extensions of Schneier's idea about security: the one in charge will make the decision that matches their own agenda. We the people have to make it a part of the agenda of the people in power to make sure their decisions are sane. I've proposed a way.

May this makes Sarkozy's life really shitty for a while.

Steeeee (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27028511)

eerriiike one!

All people are equal... (1)

fluch (126140) | more than 5 years ago | (#27028829)

All people are equal, just some are more equal than others. Somehow this story reminds me of this statement again and how true it is. :-/

Now infringing on copyright in the fair use realm is one thing, infringing on copyright to gain financial or professional benefits is something I object! Trying to settle for 1 Euro is indeed rediculous! :-

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...