RSS
Twitter
French Constitutional Council Guts 'Three Strikes' As Unconstitutional
from the sorry-Sarkozy dept
Well, that didn't last long at all... After some back and forth (and tremendous pressure from French President -- and known copyright infringer -- Nicolas Sarkozy), France passed a three strikes law that would kick people off the internet for three accusations of unauthorized file sharing. However, it looks like the law may be going nowhere fast. France's Constitutional Council has gutted the law, after finding significant constitutional problems with it. The Council specifically barred the heart of the law: the cutting people off the internet part, noting:
communication and liberty of expression are fundamental rights that only a judge can rule on.Indeed. The council said that it could be okay to cut off internet users... but only with a judge's permission. It's expected that the law may be adjusted to push these issues in front of a judge -- but that's a much better (though still not perfect) situation, since a judge should at least require evidence rather than simple accusations. Either way, it's yet another defeat for an industry that continues to insist that somehow kicking people offline is going to "save" the industry.
Reader Comments
(Flattened / Threaded)
"(and tremendous pressure from French President -- and known copyright infringer -- Nicolas Sarkozy, France passed a three strikes law that would kick people off the internet"
Punctuation doesn't usually bother me all that much, but I just spent some two minutes desperately searching for a second parenthases to no avail. I demand you give me either exactly two minutes of life back to me, or else a second parenthases...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Here ya go: )
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re:
Gasp...Gasp...Thank God.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re:
Seriously man, you should give up LISP programming before it's too late :P
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re: Re:
coding in LISP to long will drive a person mad
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
"it's yet another defeat for an industry that continues to insist that somehow kicking people offline is going to "save" the industry."
Do you have a quote somewhere (not on techdirt) to back up this claim? Has "the industry" ever said that in as many words anywhere?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
do you have some sort of other logical conclusion to the whole premise of the 3 strikes rule?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
Well, if that isnt the case then why bother kicking people of the internet? Its not like they would ask for this kind of non-judicial right if they didnt think it would help their industry.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re:
"Do you have a quote somewhere (not on techdirt) to back up this claim? Has "the industry" ever said that in as many words anywhere?"
Well, there you go : http://www.sacem.fr/portailSacem/jsp/ep/contentView.do?contentTypeId=2&contentId=536899202&p rogramId=536899201&pageTypeId=8585
10000 signatures of self-proclaimed members of the French music industry who called for an adoption of the law.
And you don't want to hear about the constant whining from Pacal Negre, head of Universal Music France et of serveral RIAA-like structures, claiming what an emergency it was to pass the law to save the artists.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re:
Without the benefit of direct context, I believe Anonymous Coward was confused by the lack of mention of any other industry than simply "the internet".
Unless you're a frequent tech-dirter, that ambiguity is a little tricky at first. It may not have been clear to a new reader that Mike was referring to the music industry rather than ISPs, which would have seemed pretty weird and would make AC's comments make more sense.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
"Indeed. The council said that it could be okay to cut off internet users... but only with a judge's permission."
Take two steps forward, one step back, two steps forward, one step back. That's often how it works. They took two steps forward (knowing that people won't accept it) and when people didn't like it one step back was taken (but their goal was only to get one step forward at this time).
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Sure!
"Punctuation doesn't usually bother me all that much, but I
just spent some two minutes desperately searching for a second parenthases to no avail. I demand you give me either exactly two minutes of life back to me, or else a second parenthases..."
Certainly. Bend over and you'll have your second parentheses.
:P
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Sure!
Okay, don't make that smiley when you tell someone that. Just, no.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
smackdown?
it wasn't a total smackdown for the government, as the constitutional court did affirm that after three warnings, a plaintiff could file a motion with a local court:
newspaper article in french
as well, the law's supporters have signaled their desire to go down this road and start sending out warning letters this autumn:
another newspaper article in french
which begs the question, are the french divisions of the labels dumb enough to also sue their fans? you wouldn't think so, but there are quite a few luddite author's guilds among the bill's supporters, so.................
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Shouldn't they have called it the 'Three Pitches' law anyway? I mean, strike kinda means you didn't bat the ball, dunnit?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment