Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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 Assembly Rejects Three Strikes Bill

CmdrTaco posted more than 5 years ago | from the they-don't-even-play-baseball-there dept.

Censorship 129

An anonymous reader writes "The French Assembly has rejected the Three Strikes bill (in French!) which would allow ISPs to cut off users found to have been downloading protected content after two warnings. Summary: the Sarkozy administration can go back with a new draft for approval by both chambers or try to get upper house approval of a softer version without the cutoff passed by the lower house."

cancel ×

129 comments

Hooray (5, Funny)

jaggeh (1485669) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517163)

Thats strike 1

Re:Hooray (4, Funny)

nicolas.kassis (875270) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517225)

No no no, the French government does not obey by it's own rules. They get unlimited attempts.

Re:Hooray (4, Informative)

H4rold (1375287) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517325)

They actually will get another attempt that needs to go through Senate and the assembly. (not unlimited though)

Re:Hooray (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27519437)

I know the French army tanks have 6 speeds (in reverse) and 1 in forward...

This begs the question-- can the French surrender to their own repeat criminals?

Re:Hooray (1)

equinx (993214) | more than 5 years ago | (#27520761)

Actually, it is unlimited. The only limit being the next election if they loose it. If you understand written French it's explained here [maitre-eolas.fr] .

Re:Hooray (4, Informative)

spagiola (234461) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517445)

Before you get too excited, be aware that the rejection was primarily due to the absence of several government-party members of parliament. The government intends to re-present the bill after the easter recess, and presumably will make sure that all its members of parliament show up. At that point, the law will presumably be approved.

The government cannot re-present the exact same bill, however, so they'll have to make at least a few changes.

Re:Hooray (4, Funny)

PMuse (320639) | more than 5 years ago | (#27518145)

Dear god, please make it stop before I have to learn French legislative procedure just to read /.

Re:Hooray (1)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 5 years ago | (#27519913)

The law was rejected in a vote. 21 no, 15 yes, about 10 no-votes. In an assembly of 577. I am ashamed of my own country. 90% of abstentees on this crucial law. It may be a victory for IT people, it is a defeat of our republican system.

Re:Hooray (3, Insightful)

JohnBailey (1092697) | more than 5 years ago | (#27518427)

Before you get too excited, be aware that the rejection was primarily due to the absence of several government-party members of parliament. The government intends to re-present the bill after the easter recess, and presumably will make sure that all its members of parliament show up. At that point, the law will presumably be approved.

If that was the case, then why try to sneak it through, which is what got it rejected in the first place. If it was a formality that it would pass, then they would have followed the usual procedure and it would have already been passed.

Re:Hooray (3, Interesting)

English French Man (1220122) | more than 5 years ago | (#27519411)

Keep in mind that there were 36 members of parliament who voted, where the assembly is made of 577... Being French myself, I watched the live stream. The president of the assembly was dumbstruck.

Members of parliament also have other things to do than discussing and voting every law that goes through.

That said, members of the assembly were a lot fewer than usual this morning. This could be because some members didn't want to vote this law (votes are public, and they don't want to face public opinion), so stayed the ones who intended to vote against this law, and too few of the ones whose party line was to vote for the law.

Re:Hooray (1)

dstar (34869) | more than 5 years ago | (#27520373)

Members of parliament also have other things to do than discussing and voting every law that goes through.

If you actually believe this, and it's typical of your country, I fear for the future of democracy in France.

No. They do _not_ have better things to do than 'discussing and voting on every law that goes through'. That is, in fact, their first duty, and it is a duty that transcends everything except family crises -- and it transcends any family crises that is not literally life and death.

As a side note, does the French parliament not have rules regarding the need for a quorum, to avoid just this sort of problem? Or did they find some way around that?

Re:Hooray (1)

blackchiney (556583) | more than 5 years ago | (#27519373)

The reason it got this far was because they passed it with only a few members (~12) of the assemblee present. By trying to rush it through at 9pm on a friday night they wanted to avoid debating the bill.

The next time the bill is presented it will be under more a scrutiny and even less popular since everyone has learned what the Sarkozy gov't has tried to do.

in French! (1)

nmrtian (984245) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517265)

Mmmm... Is it any surprise that it would be rejected "in French!"?

Re:in French! (4, Funny)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517357)

"Those French, they have a different word for everything" - Steve Martin

Re:in French! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27517545)

No but rejection "in French!" is especially brutal and possibly inhumane.

Re:in French! (2, Funny)

Shark (78448) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517785)

Non

Re:in French! (2, Funny)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 5 years ago | (#27518745)

Rejecting it in French is like wiping your ass with silk.

Mon amore ... (4, Funny)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517293)

"The French Assembly has rejected the Three Strikes bill (in French!)"

I hate being rejected in French. The woman is always trying to say something like "get away you impudent fool", but it always sounds like they are saying they are dying to make love to me, and cannot wait to get to a hotel room.

Actually, she is asking you to go to a hotel (5, Funny)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517371)

It is just that being french she has to talk dismissily to americans, it is in the EU constitution. Brits suck up, Italians rob you blind, we dutch sell you drugs and the french talk down to you. Oh and the germans start wars you arrive to late.

Sorry, but you have been missing out on a lot of free and high quality foreign babe sex.

Re:Actually, she is asking you to go to a hotel (1)

Dishevel (1105119) | more than 5 years ago | (#27518317)

Oh and the germans start wars you arrive to late.

Maybe next time we will take European advise and let the Germans have at you all.

Re:Actually, she is asking you to go to a hotel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27518599)

Maybe we'll do the same and next time you invade some piss ant country the friendly fire will land on American heads.

Re:Actually, she is asking you to go to a hotel (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 5 years ago | (#27519737)

Maybe next time we will take European advise and let the Germans have at you all.

Yeah cus that would have ended so well for us.

But I guess that's the American way -- being stupidly self-defeating in the name of pride.

Re:Actually, she is asking you to go to a hotel (4, Funny)

damburger (981828) | more than 5 years ago | (#27518337)

We do NOT suck up to Americans. Our politicians do. We get drunk and verbally abuse Americans.

Re:Actually, she is asking you to go to a hotel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27518651)

Then we Americans get drunk and make fun of the surrendering French and the police-state-loving Brits. We also kindly ask the Germans to send us their wimmins in exchange for the purchase of their shitty cars (besides Porsche).

Re:Actually, she is asking you to go to a hotel (1)

Rulian (1125325) | more than 5 years ago | (#27518619)

..and we f*ckin don't talk down to you, you dirty b#stard !
You're not the center of the universe, we talk down to every-motherf$cking-one on this planet, comprende ?

Re:Actually, she is asking you to go to a hotel (1)

khallow (566160) | more than 5 years ago | (#27519333)

You're such a kidder.

Re:Actually, she is asking you to go to a hotel (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27519033)

"it is in the EU constitution"

They're is no such "EU Constitution": France and the Netherland both made the attempt to have one failed by voting against in 2005.

European Union is only ruled by treaties signed by the various members' government and sometimes approved by the people.

Re:Actually, she is asking you to go to a hotel (1)

GNUbuntu (1528599) | more than 5 years ago | (#27520423)

He wasn't being serious. It's what the rest of the world calls "joking".

Re:Actually, she is asking you to go to a hotel (2, Funny)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 5 years ago | (#27519607)

Oh and the germans start wars you arrive to late.

Ah, that explains that classified ad that said "Woman seeks man for romance, invasion of Poland"

Re:Mon amore ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27519159)

"Mon amour" is French, "Amore mio" is Italian; "Mon amore" is neither...

Re:Mon amore ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27519405)

Since the coronation (no relation to any "corones", in spanish, or even spanglish - having to resort to a reknown and very expensive italian courtesan he may have been the last to have layed, essentially to counterbalance his inferiority complex - 5 feet tall, at most - is no sign of proeminent "corones" indeed) of Nicolas Sarkozy de Nagy Bocsa, first of the name, the french emperor since 2007, the official expression would rather be "back off, poor morron", or, excuse my french, "casse-toi, pauvre con" (though "con" would more litteraly mean "cunt", I guess it is a bit better to non-litteraly translate in that case - the, vastly used "con" to shout at someone, almost being punctuation in, especially southern, France, probably comes from the fact it is designed to be fucked; and it is well known fact that us French like to fuck people up; well, I guess one could also translate it "asshole" in this context, but it is litteraly something a tad more aggressively used, ie "trou du cul", as an interjection, this latter nowadays being far more often replaced by "va te faire enculer", ie "go get fucked up your ass", which is clearly less warm-hearted than the, almost cordial, warcry our emperor doesn't hesitate to resort to in public).

"Three Strikes?" Nevaire! (3, Informative)

LaminatorX (410794) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517321)

As if the National Assembly would adopt a policy rooted in the Diversion Nationale de les Etats Unis.

Well Nevers' MP rejected it (2, Funny)

Nicolas MONNET (4727) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517427)

Christian Paul [christianpaul.fr] represents the Nevers' district, and he was one of the major opponents :)

Re:"Three Strikes?" Nevaire! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27517625)

What the hell does that even mean? Can't you proof read your french so that it makes even little sense?
I mean :
the Diversion Nationale de les Etats Unis.

^^^ THIS can't be understandable by someone who's french, heck I can't make it out even retranslating it in english

Re:"Three Strikes?" Nevaire! (1)

Taevin (850923) | more than 5 years ago | (#27518487)

I imagine he meant something along the lines of "the national pastime of the United States." He probably should have used "le divertissement" or "le passe-temps," but then again, he probably wasn't attempting perfect French but rather was attempting "French that is understandable by any English speaker with half a brain" (i.e. the readers of this site).

Re:"Three Strikes?" Nevaire! (1)

Miseph (979059) | more than 5 years ago | (#27519101)

""French that is understandable by any English speaker with half a brain" (i.e. the readers of this site)"

Whoa, slow down there cowboy. We don't want to offend people with only half a brain: they've got it tough enough without people implying they aren't smarter than /. readers.

we we (0, Offtopic)

JackSpratts (660957) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517335)

say bone!

It seems that the French are taking this seriously (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27517345)

They have not been swayed by the blackmail of the nefarious Italians who exercise covert control over the "mainstream" media. If only our Nation were so bold and noble.

!commonsenseprevails (0, Troll)

Richard.g.k (1215362) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517347)

I fail to see how this is common sense

The internet community defends file sharing as a way to transfer things legally, this bill only addresses if you *break the law* and download copyrighted material

Just because you don't believe book/song/game/software/etc is good enough to pay fore, that doesn't give you the right to take it for free, period.

Common sense would dictate that when you steal something, you get punished

Re:!commonsenseprevails (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27517447)

Common sense is *NOT* being punished when you get *ACCUSED* of doing something.

I don't speak french, I haven't read the legislation, I am not a lawyer... but the talk on this site is that the problem with what they are trying to pass is that three strikes = three accusations. Court of law? Innocent until proven guilty (if that applies in France)? Proof that IP = Identity (and not some kind of spoof, tampered logs, etc)? All of that is gone by accusations.

If your guilty of something, fine... but 3 accusations and your out? Fuck that noise. And you can say that in any language (not just french)

Re:!commonsenseprevails (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27517897)

Indeed, many people said there were a lot of issues with that law : it's technically ridiculous, the law would anyway be unconstitutional, there are huge problems with privacy. But the government hoped that people would be scared of that law and stop using p2p. It's definitely not a good reason for such a law, but as usually Sarkozy's (beware the spellingâ¦) government is out of touch with reality.

Re:!commonsenseprevails (3, Interesting)

andymadigan (792996) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517497)

Because it is easy enough to make it look like someone downloaded something illegally, when they really didn't. Also, if I remember correctly this law does not give the cut-off customer legal recourse (if you say they did something illegal, prove it in court or GTFO).

Re:!commonsenseprevails (4, Informative)

Eunuchswear (210685) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517535)

this bill only addresses if you *break the law* and download copyrighted material

No, this bill only affects you if you are accused by a private company of having broken the law - no attempt will be made of finding out whether you actual did download something, and you will not be informed of what you are accused of having downloaded, so you will be unable to defend yourself.

Also it's not "three strikes and you're out" it's "one strike and you're out" - you may receive two warnings by e-mail if the HADOPI feel like it, but being e-mail nobody can be sure it'll get through.

Re:!commonsenseprevails (2, Informative)

Eunuchswear (210685) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517597)

you may receive two warnings by e-mail if the HADOPI feel like it, but being e-mail nobody can be sure it'll get through.

Sorry, that's one warning by e-mail and one recommended letter. So "two strikes".

Re:!commonsenseprevails (5, Funny)

emocomputerjock (1099941) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517557)

So you're perfectly ok with being kicked off the Internet for being accused of theft, regardless of whether or not you actually committed the act? I'm perfectly ok with you being kicked off the Internet for supporting that idea.

Re:!commonsenseprevails (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27517605)

There are already existing punishments for copyright infringment en France, obviously. But this law would have :
-completly bypassed due process and the judicial system
- put all the burden and the cost on the internet providers for the technical, who then would have been legitimized when asking to drop net neutrality
- imposed a government spyware on all computers, for proving that you didn't do anything wrong on your computer
- kept pushing for the big content way of selling music (they wanted to ask google to put the officially approved online music store on the top results when searching for music downloads !), while doing nothing to promote inovation in the sector.

Re:!commonsenseprevails (1)

Richard.g.k (1215362) | more than 5 years ago | (#27518679)

um...troll?

I'm not trolling anything, the article states that the bill specifies those who 'have been found to download' to me that implies a burden of proof that an illegal act was committed.

Assuming that there is a burden of proof, than I absolutely agree that there should be a series of punishments for committing a crime.

You will not beat the RIAA/MPAA/etc by stealing their content, the only way to really affect the market is to support artists who welcome new technology. Claiming something isnt worth paying for and then downloading and listening/watching/wtfever to it simply gives them the impression that there IS a demand for their product and that they SHOULD keep fighting for its protection.

Re:!commonsenseprevails (1)

Pentium100 (1240090) | more than 5 years ago | (#27519263)

You are accused of murder. this is your strike #1. I do not need any evidence.

If you get accused of murder two more times, you WILL be sentenced to death (or will spend the rest of your life in prison if your local laws do not allow executions). You DO NOT have the right to a trial. You DO NOT have the right to a lawyer. You DO NOT have a right to an appeal.

(I'm now calling two of my friends, you will be in prison in no time)

Tres Bien (5, Funny)

Ukab the Great (87152) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517359)

In keeping with French tradition, the disgruntled music industry executives must now start a riot in the suburbs.

Re:Tres Bien (1)

MadKeithV (102058) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517723)

Or call a national strike blockading all the highways.

Re:Tres Bien (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27521087)

Or stop bathing and eat cheese in protest. Oh, wait...

Here's what happened (5, Informative)

Nicolas MONNET (4727) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517401)

The opposition took advantage of the very low attendance by the majority party: a dozen opposition MPs showed up at the last minute (apparently coordinated by my deputy, Mr Bloche), preventing the majority from gathering its troops. The vote failed 15 to 21 (there are 577 members in the lower chamber).
The law is not rejected for good, because the government can (and probably will) push for a second reading in both chambers, and it has a large enough majority to get it through. But this event is going to push the issue into the spotlight, and may also allow the European Parliament to once again vote its opposition to the principle (amendment 46 to the Telecom Package), while the opposition gains team.
Indeed, just a few days ago, a few prominent actors and directors such as Catherine Deneuve or Victoria Abril signed an open letter opposing the law, thereby disproving the main talking point of the proponents: not all artists are united behind Sarkozy-Universal.

Oh my God, Ponies! Viva La France... (0)

tjstork (137384) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517467)

Way to go Frenchies! Nicely done.

Re:Oh my God, Ponies! Viva La France... (3, Funny)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517657)

Mon Dieu! petite chevals!

There, fixed that for you.

Re:Oh my God, Ponies! Viva La France... (1)

MadKeithV (102058) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517771)

Mon dieu, petits Deux Cheveaux! [wikipedia.org] (i.e. a pony car in France is not what you'd expect ;-) )

Pony is "Poney" in French (3, Insightful)

bebemochi (772144) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517933)

Sorry to break it to y'all: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poney [wikipedia.org] ("Pony" comes from the old French "poulenet", which meant "small colt".)

Re:Pony is "Poney" in French (1)

MadKeithV (102058) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517975)

Yeah but it's not nearly as *funny* like that.

Re:Oh my God, Ponies! Viva La France... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27518055)

Didn't Danny Devito drive one of those in Romancing the Stone in South America?

"Chevaux," not "Cheveaux" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27519369)

"cheval" (singular) becomes "chevaux" in plural.

LEARN FRENCH BEFORE TRYING TO CORRECT SOMEONE (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27517781)

Oh mon Dieu, des poneys!

petite chevals?
First the she-form of horse is JUMENT,
then the plural of male horse is CHEVAUX.
And lastly if you've got an adjective complementing a noun that is in its plural form, the adjective is then in its plural form => PETITS

so even your flawed traduction would be :
PETITS CHEVAUX ou PETITES JUMENTS.

Seriously it's like you would have written :
Zar, phix'd zat 4 u

Re:LEARN FRENCH BEFORE TRYING TO CORRECT SOMEONE (2, Funny)

$RANDOMLUSER (804576) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517853)

I surrender!

Re:LEARN FRENCH BEFORE TRYING TO CORRECT SOMEONE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27518001)

What?
You don't shoot first then blame the world for your problems?

Re:Oh my God, Ponies! Viva La France... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27517797)

Des petites chevals.

Fixed that for you too.

Re:Oh my God, Ponies! Viva La France... (1)

Inda (580031) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517909)

Mange tout. Mange tout.

Re:Oh my God, Ponies! Viva La France... (1)

jaggeh (1485669) | more than 5 years ago | (#27519361)

Mange tout. Mange tout.

Oh Fromage Frais rodney

Re:Oh my God, Ponies! Viva La France... (1)

BlackPignouf (1017012) | more than 5 years ago | (#27519903)

Oh mon Dieu, des poneys!
or
Oh mon Dieu, des petits chevaux!

There, fixed that for you.

Don't be too happy... (5, Informative)

Lcf34 (715209) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517475)

(disclaimer: written by a native "is baseball a kind of dutch cheese?" country). The Assembly is now entering some holidays so press will enjoy the news for the next days, but be sure the law will pass in less than two months (as Mr. Sarkozy has personally expressed a deep interest into it). Even if a very unlikely situation would happen & the text is then supported by a minority and would never been voted as it is, the government has a magic kind of "execute order 66" to bypass assembly and will not be afraid to use it (they already done it). This is the kind of democracy we get in France since Mr. S has arrived where he wanted to!

Re:Don't be too happy... (1)

Rulian (1125325) | more than 5 years ago | (#27518733)

mod parent +10 insightful.
Sadly, that's exactly the way things gonna happen.

Spelling, Bad French, please (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27517517)

As much as I don't like him, it's "Sarkozy" with a "k", not a "c". And please trolls, stop the French sentences with a mistake in every one of them.

Re:Spelling, Bad French, please (1)

stinerman (812158) | more than 5 years ago | (#27520171)

Pourquoi?

Nicolas who...? (4, Insightful)

tygerstripes (832644) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517523)

the Sarcozy administration can go back with a new draft for approval by both chambers...

Okay, but how would the Sarkozy administration react?

Pedantic? Well okay, but is it too much to ask that they get the President's name right? Sheesh...

Re:Nicolas who...? (1)

Canazza (1428553) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517697)

it's not like anyone spells Barrak Obama wrong...

Re:Nicolas who...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27519157)

Here in the UK, his name is routinely pronounced "Barrack" (rhymes with Garrick) on the TV news, even the BBC whom you'd think would know better.

Re:Nicolas who...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27517827)

Really? Me and my friends spell it "The French Tony Blair" or "The CIA's man in Paris". De Gaulle must be turing in his grave and it wasn't us brits that opened the door to US economic imperialism after all.

Re:Nicolas who...? (1)

tygerstripes (832644) | more than 5 years ago | (#27518737)

"turing in his grave"?

Was that deliberate?

Re:Nicolas who...? (1)

Rulian (1125325) | more than 5 years ago | (#27519119)

He means "De Gaulle must be with Turing in his grave"
We all know wht Alan Turing commited suicide right ?
Aahh love is in the air...

Re:Nicolas who...? (1)

redcaboodle (622288) | more than 5 years ago | (#27520869)

The french spell it Iznogoud.

mod 3own (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27517527)

out how to make the on 48 endeavour members' creative the problems

This will change nothing in the long run (2, Insightful)

Radium_ (150865) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517583)

Don't fool yourself, this (temporary) rejection was only possible because some of the left wing party sneaked at the last minute to vote AGAINST the proposal. There were not enough right wing (government) politicians in the assembly to vote for it and the text was rejected.

This, however, changes NOTHING in the long run: despite being a stupid, non-applicable, lobbied-by-the-SACEM*-to-maintain-the-outdated-cash-machine, this law *will* be accepted in the end, since the government has enough of its own members of the Assemblee Nationale to vote for it, regardless of what the other "deputes" do.

When this stupid law is effective everybody loses, except maybe for recoding companies which will be able to seat for 20 more years on their obsolete business plan.

It's very important tactically actually (1)

Nicolas MONNET (4727) | more than 5 years ago | (#27520891)

1. It makes the gov't look foolish, and it's attracted lots of media attention
2. This will push the final vote back to just before the European Parliament election; it will either cost Sarkozy's party quite a few votes, or make them want to give it up
3. It will give time to the EP to vote their anti-3 strike amendment once more.

In French??? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27517651)

"The French Assembly has rejected the Three Strikes bill (in French!)"

Well, I guess we must be thankful they rejected it in French. Just think how awkward it would have been if they had rejected it in English, say, or Russian, or God forbid, Chinese.

Hadopi (1)

French31 (1311051) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517661)

Everything you want to know about Hadopi can be found here [pcinpact.com] (Fr).

They-don't-even-play-baseball-there (2, Interesting)

Potor (658520) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517683)

False! I have played baseball in France, more than once.

Not just cutoff...but paying anyway! (1)

nodrogluap (165820) | more than 5 years ago | (#27517977)

Translating a section from the article:

The CMP party had essentially re-established "double damages", so-named by the bill's opponents. Internet users sanctioned under this bill for illegal downloads, after two warnings, would continue paying their subscription fees for between two months to a year while their access was suspended. [...] "Once again we are seeing the government's amateurism, as well as that of the Ministry of Culture and the UMP Party," commented Mr. Dupont-Aignan.

Oh, great... (1)

RabidMoose (746680) | more than 5 years ago | (#27518027)

Percentage of Slashdot readers who RTFA when it's in English: less than 10%
Percentage of Slashdot readers who RTFA when it's != English: less than 2%

(These numbers based on my own estimations, with zero research to back them up)

Re:Oh, great... (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27518095)

And somehow they all manage to get slashdotted.

Re:Oh, great... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27518243)

So you mean :
Percentage of Slashdot readers who makes up numbers : less than 4% ?

21 against, 13 for, 541 MIA (1)

nbuet (944469) | more than 5 years ago | (#27518365)

fun fact, out of roughly 570 deputes, only 34 were present during the vote. No question asked regarding what these guys do instead of working...

So, when it finally does pass... (1)

dwiget001 (1073738) | more than 5 years ago | (#27518385)

Does the French Administration all gather in a room, arms on shoulders with each other and sing(?):

So it's one, two, three strikes you're out
at the down load game!

It makes no sense .. (1)

haapi (16700) | more than 5 years ago | (#27519299)

.. that the industry (ISPs) that seems to not be able to detect 'bot traffic and spam emitters well enough to shut those hosts down should be expected to detect downloads of "protected content" and then take action.

LULZ (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27519473)

LOL it's "Sarkozy", not "Sarcozy" (not a french name btw)

Since when? (4, Funny)

SteveFoerster (136027) | more than 5 years ago | (#27519539)

Since when is anyone in France against strikes?

NOW FOR CANADA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27519553)

http://voice.liberal.ca/pages/on_probation

go here and vote the hell out of the seocnd one about infrastructure
it outshot every other topic for like a week and suddenly in last day 722 votes went to another topic.

LETS SHOW THEM WHO THE PEOPLE REALLY ARE
you get 3 votes total per person

so all we need are 300 out of all this to make a difference.

We have a minority government that these liberals COULD tip things in our balance for BOTH copyright and net neutrality.

Am I missing something? (2, Interesting)

mikfire (68619) | more than 5 years ago | (#27519991)

I don't understand why everybody is so happy when these bills fail to pass.

Let them pass.

And then accuse every member who voted for it of downloading copy righted material. Make sure you accuse some of the aides, secretaries, etc. too. Try your best to make sure every last governmental office is taken off line. Accuse several of the CEOs in the music and film industries too. I see all sorts of potential in this.

Re:Am I missing something? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27520649)

Yeah, good luck with that.

Re:Am I missing something? (1)

Youx (988716) | more than 5 years ago | (#27520985)

Riiight, as if laws applied equally between the people and politicians/companies/etc... :)

Typo. (1)

BisexualPuppy (914772) | more than 5 years ago | (#27520517)

Sarkozy. With a 'z'.

I need *you* to send an email! (1)

Nicolas MONNET (4727) | more than 5 years ago | (#27520739)

Frederic Lefebvre is the biggest douchebag and a major proponent of that law. That idiot had left the parliament for lunch and missed the vote.
I need you all to send him an email at: flefebvre@assemblee-nationale.fr, ask him if he enjoyed his lunch. You can do it in english.

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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...