Three Strikes Rule May Sneak Into EU Law, Despite Earlier Rejection

from the never-let-your-guard-down dept

We’ve talked in the past about how the entertainment industry never gives up trying to push through its legislative agenda — even after it is dealt setbacks. You may recall that the EU Parliament rejected a proposal to institute a “three strikes” law favored by the entertainment industry, that would kick people off the internet if they’re accused (not found guilty, just accused) of unauthorized file sharing three times. The EU Parliament correctly noted that such a law would interfere with individuals privacy and civil rights. However, some academics have noted that another set of laws focusing on telco reform may backdoor in nearly identical three strikes language, requiring telcos to adopt such policies. The fear, obviously, is that this issue, buried in a big telco bill may not get very much attention and may be put into law without much debate, despite the EU Parliament’s earlier rejection of such an idea.

Filed Under: , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Three Strikes Rule May Sneak Into EU Law, Despite Earlier Rejection”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:


Every country has the same stupid legislative system. Bills get a lot of items thrown in and its all or nothing. It’s damn stupid. In the US the Senate and Represenatives are supposed to be able to debate over it all and revise and so on. Stuff like this happens far too often.

Earmarking and so on does need to stop. They need to be required to, flat out, vote on things on a per item basis. You don’t make a Bill of Cyberlaw, you pass one item (such as unathorized access to a remote system is “hacking” and illegal) as a part of the “Cyberlaw Section”.

None of this BS where stuff can “sneak in” to other bills. It will take longer, but face it. People are legislating TOO mcuh.

JB says:

Legislative Process

This and the Federal Bailout are just a couple of examples why I hate the Legislative Process. The system is broke when legislators can tack on unrelated restrictions and provisions, still pass it all as one bill, and are never required to later review those laws. In the above bill, a previously rejected provision has been tied in and could simply be overlooked. These politicians are being paid large sums of money to find ways to abuse the system just so they can stay in office.

These are simply my opinions and I just felt like ranting.

JB says:


I prefer the Legislative Two Strike rule. It lacks the extreme effectiveness of the Legislative One Strike rule, but capitalizes on its weakness, namely the lack of innovative legislation. Adding a third strike to the rule only allows the legislator to make the same mistake again while doubling the odds of a poorly formed bill arriving at the President’s desk to be signed into Law.

Mark Regan (user link) says:

That's the American system already

The police can arrest you for three or more crimes (you’re only ACCUSED, NOT CONVICTED.)

But the DA and your attorney will CONVINCE you that the system doesn’t care if you are guilty or innocent. The American system is set up that you are forced to plead guilty to at least one of the charges in exchange for dismissal of the others, even if you are innocent, because if you go to court on all three charges even if you are not guilty, the fact is that rarely does an American jury ever acquit a defendant who is, in fact, innocent. If the police arrested him, he MUST be guilty.

This is the same situation discussed above. If the RIAA has accused a person of illegal downloads, they MUST have done so. They never accept that sometimes teenagers use grandma’s computer, or their boss’s computer, or your computer or mine. Proof? All that is necessary is the ISP number appearing on some log, or proof of who the computer software is registered to.

Allegations are all that the Bush administration needs to detain and torture alleged terrorists for seven years, and continue doing so even after a federal judge orders their release. Why should the RIAA be held to any stricter standards than George Bush, who set the precedence that allegations are just as good as convictions?

Stefano Quintarelli (user link) says:

it will not. the decision is against france' ruling

EU culture ministers yesterday (20 November) rejected French proposals to curb online piracy through compulsory measures against free downloading, instead agreeing to promote legal offers of music or films on the Internet.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...