![]() |
#166 | ||
Dry fruit
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 1,157
Karma: 1047086
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Paris, France
Device: Bookeen Opus + HTC Desire HD
|
Quote:
Quote:
Last edited by YGG-; 04-07-2009 at 11:26 AM. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#167 | |
Connoisseur
![]() ![]() Posts: 82
Karma: 184
Join Date: Jun 2008
Device: Sony PRS-505
|
Quote:
There may be some confusion with how people are using "automatic" in this discussion. So, instead, I will clarify and say that I am fully aware that people will not be immediately disconnected. However, I am not sure if there is anything to stop this Haute Autorite from disconnecting someone simply because the Haute Autorite receive information that the person's IP address is suspected of infringing on copyright, and the required warnings are sent to said person. (Or another example, after sending the required warnings, the Haute Autorite could decide to disconnect a single person, but may decide not to disconnect a company.) Does anyone know how this Haute Autorite would work? HarryT says "judicial powers", which as a US citizen means to me that there would be due process, and a chance for the accused to prove they are innocent. However, I can see nothing in the article which states that this body would have to follow due process, or would indeed be given "judicial" powers. I know nothing of French government, so this Haute Autorite could have some precedent of which I am unaware. Edit: If by judicial powers, you simply mean they are given the power to decide if someone is guilty or innocent on their own, without requiring due process, then I would think the problem(s) with that possibility would be obvious. Last edited by kad032000; 04-07-2009 at 11:57 AM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#168 |
Connoisseur
![]() ![]() Posts: 82
Karma: 184
Join Date: Jun 2008
Device: Sony PRS-505
|
There are of course, other problems with the law as well. Notably:
1) The controversial way in which it was passed. 2) It conflicts with a European law. 3) It allows for the blocking of p2p sites. For elaboration on (3), there are plenty of legitimate uses of p2p. In the TPB trial, the defense (TPB) stated that based on random sampling, 80% of torrents were legal. Now, this could be biased or incorrect information, but AFAIK, there is no evidence contrary to this. In addition, could this law be used to block sites that are in an even more grey area legally, such as isohunt, which if I am correct, acts simply like a search engine and doesn't even have it's own tracker? Isohunt also complies with DMCA takedown requests. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#169 | ||
"Assume a can opener..."
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 755
Karma: 1942109
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Local Cluster
Device: iLiad v2, DR1000
|
Quote:
Quote:
The last paragraph seems to be saying something about checking for legal sales avenues, but I can't really say what that is exactly. Anyway, rest assured that due process will be violated. That said, there are some people here who don't care about that sort of thing, which is why a debate could arise over the legality of this bit of legislation at all. Last edited by zerospinboson; 04-07-2009 at 01:01 PM. |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#170 | |
Grand Sorcerer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 5,187
Karma: 25133758
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: SF Bay Area, California, USA
Device: Pocketbook Touch HD3 (Past: Kobo Mini, PEZ, PRS-505, Clié)
|
Quote:
They are handing off their responsibility to stop crime, to the managers of the locations in which crime takes place. It's like they told individual store-owners that they were supposed to take away the wallets and ID cards of suspected shoplifters. Shoplifting is indeed a problem. However, the solution isn't to strip-search every customer before they leave the building. And illegal filesharing is a problem. (I note that you & I probably have different ideas about what filesharing is illegal.) But the solution is not to give government--or worse, corporate--access to everyone's computers so they can search for evidence of crimes. And in the US, the government does not mete out punishments to "suspected" criminals. We are required to convict. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#171 | |
"Assume a can opener..."
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 755
Karma: 1942109
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Local Cluster
Device: iLiad v2, DR1000
|
Quote:
Last edited by zerospinboson; 04-07-2009 at 05:34 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#172 |
Guru
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 988
Karma: 12653
Join Date: Apr 2008
Device: None of your business
|
This makes me think of a town-watch reporting that they see a certain car has a habit of going into 'that' part of town. After being informed of this, law enforcement immediately revokes the owner's driving privileges pending a review as to whether or not the driver has 'legimate' reasons to be traveling there. It is of course for the greater good, and doesn't matter that the driver has family, friends, or WHATEVER reason he might have.
The above was just a test, had this been real fascism local revolutionaries would have informed you which people to stand in front of the wall... I can't wait for all the cases of reporters that were critical of certain politicians, bloggers that write about kopyright/copyleft topics and ISP technicians' ex-g/f's who will be losing their internet access. -MJ |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#173 | |
Banned
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 5,100
Karma: 72193
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: South of the Border
Device: Coffin
|
Quote:
The next couple of years are going to be very interesting indeed ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#174 |
Connoisseur
![]() Posts: 99
Karma: 14
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Brisbane Australia
Device: iPod Touch, Ipad, Kindle 2
|
Who decides what sites are illegal, will this be a pathway to enable governments shutting you down for visiting oposition governent websites, if you view a blog that is anti something, will you be banned. Yep just wait, shit like this is not far away. Trials are running in Australia that block web sites in Australia. They said only bad sites would be censored from the public, but already a honest dentist has had his site blocked, due to so e hacker hitting the dentists site over a year ago. So don't tell me we can trust our somehow elected leaders. I'm not that niece.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#175 |
Connoisseur
![]() Posts: 63
Karma: 80
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Device: Sony PRS505 (given away), Sony 650 Touch, LG Nexus 4, Kobo Arc
|
Article from Teleread today.
A link from Teleread saying what happened and would/would not happen in the States
http://www.teleread.org/2009/04/07/i...iracy-control/ ~Jen |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#176 |
Connoisseur
![]() ![]() Posts: 82
Karma: 184
Join Date: Jun 2008
Device: Sony PRS-505
|
I would think that most people who have nothing illegal in their homes wouldn't want people monitoring their personal activities in their house. Is it ok for someone to spy on you in your home to make sure you're doing nothing illegal? What about in your bedroom? What about files on your computer? What about files being transferred by your computer? Where do you draw the line, and why do you draw it there?
And there is plenty to fear from being spied upon. What about people who do morally questionable things that are perfectly legal? What about people whose public persona would be harmed should their personal beliefs or actions be made known to the public? What about those whose career would be in jeopardy? Now obviously, this would be a highly unlikely result of this particular law, but as I asked, where do you draw the line? This law would give a non-governmental entity the right to spy on your activities. Even if the "High Authority" works completely fairly and justly (which I haven't seen any evidence supporting), there is no guarantee that the third party company acting in its own interest to make profit off of the recording/movie/whatever industries that hire it will act fairly and justly. They are not directly concerned with protecting society, or even copyright. They are only directly concerned with making a profit. They will be taking on the role of the police. Last edited by kad032000; 04-08-2009 at 10:17 AM. Reason: grammar |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#177 | |
zeldinha zippy zeldissima
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 27,827
Karma: 921169
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Paris, France
Device: eb1150 & is that a nook in her pocket, or she just happy to see you?
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#178 |
a pthread?? where? where?
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 1,763
Karma: 30462
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Somewhere in EU
Device: Newton MessagePad 2100, and only this
|
I don't agree about this, if you remember some site like The Pirate Bay push valid IP for some of their "active client" on their torrents, and if you are really innocent, but not using the HADOPI's Spying System ThatSayYouMayAreNotAThief©, you are, even if really didn't download ANYTHING you are considered as a nasty pirate...
What I fear the most about this set of laws is that they were nearly all written by lobbyist, majors and other company like this (FNAC, Vivendi/Universal, ...) |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#179 |
Dry fruit
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 1,157
Karma: 1047086
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Paris, France
Device: Bookeen Opus + HTC Desire HD
|
The plain & simple fact about this is: PEOPLE MAKES MISTAKES!
A stupid comparison: how many people convicted for murder & (fairly,) trialed (may I say this?) & condemned to death, have enventually been found innocent?-- |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#180 |
Guru
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posts: 820
Karma: 11012
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Device: Bookeen Cybook
|
I believe that laws should be made with society's benefit in mind. Internet is a new medium , and no one has proven yet which is better for the majority of the population - maintaining copyright law, or not maintaining it - because there's been no way to get hard data. Personally I believe copyright law stifles creativity, and currently the world would be better off with no copyright law at all (with advent of Internet and huge increase in the numbers of educated and intelligent people who want to create). I don't believe that artificially manipulating present situation with law, so a writer can get more money off his work, or that some business model is generating more income than it otherwise would is worth thwarting the ability of many other people to use the works in their own creations.
I write software for money myself, and I'm aware that in the world without copyright law the way I work would change considerably, but I have no doubts I'd get by somehow. Assumptions that it will be better if copyright law continues to exist are unwarranted, and letting non-government agency spy on people in the name of those assumptions is a big mistake. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Seriously thoughtful They all passed ..... | GeoffC | Lounge | 5 | 05-23-2010 12:57 PM |
French Copyright Law Question | ahi | News | 8 | 01-14-2010 03:25 PM |
Filesharing and ebooks | mastakilla | Deals and Resources (No Self-Promotion or Affiliate Links) | 109 | 10-08-2009 10:04 PM |
France passes La Hadopi AGAIN | Nate the great | News | 31 | 09-23-2009 05:12 PM |
Second attempt to pass French anti file-sharing law | HarryT | News | 5 | 05-13-2009 03:03 AM |