French Data Protection Agency Says Three Strikes Is Allowed
from the and-we're-off... dept
France’s “three strikes” Hadopi program was originally supposed to go into effect in January (technically, it did…), but concerns about how this conflicted with European and French data privacy laws resulted in holding off on actually enforcing the law. However, it looks like the French data protection agency has reviewed the law and is now allowing three strikes enforcement to proceed. Apparently, now Hadopi is going to start sending out notices by the end of the month. We had already noted that since the law went into effect (even if enforcement hadn’t started), file sharing had increased in France (much of it through channels not covered by Hadopi), so we’ll see what happens now that enforcement begins. And, we’re still wondering will anyone actually buy more music?
Filed Under: france, hadopi, three strikes
Comments on “French Data Protection Agency Says Three Strikes Is Allowed”
“And, we’re still wondering will anyone actually buy more music?”
This is already a historical event if you look at sweden. If there is an increase in music and movie advertising at the same time or before this is actually implemented then yes for a short period people will buy more content. If there is no increase in advertising then there will be no increase.
Re: It depends
submitted instead of previewed …
From a purely financial perspective, the amount they need to spend on advertising, to sell the same amount of product, has been increasing. I havent looked at the advertising cost -vs- profit curve for music recently but it wouldnt surprise me if it cost more to advertise than they will make back in the profit off of sales.
Re: Re: It depends
And the question remains…
Is this increase due to the law enforcement, or because of the increase in advertising?
Because…you know, that’s what advertising is for. Increasing customers.
Re: Re: Re: It depends
“Because…you know, that’s what advertising is for. Increasing customers.”
What I was pointing out was that, it is getting to or has passed the point where the record labels can make money by advertising. It costs more to advertise than they make back. That is country dependant, spain, and south korea, china, have already passed the point, most others are going to be there in a staggered pattern over the next couple years.
Re: Re: Re:2 It depends
Well, that’s because record labels think “advertising” means TV commercials and billboards.
No matter who you are, you can always benefit from more (effective) exposure. It’s up to the record labels to actual use the options that are cost efficient.
So here’s a question:
When will the big government listen to the economists that tell them about bad ideas?
Oh, oh, I know this one.
It’s when those economists start giving bigger kickbacks than corporate lobbyists.
Did I get it right?
According to what i remember, the system works as follow :
First, a mail is sent to you as a warning
Second, a real mail is sent
Last, you’re summoned for trial.
However, here’s the trick : there is a database system, lasting 6 months. After 6 months, the database is cleared. Also, it’s set up to find at most 600 000 different persons within those 6 months.
If I’m not wrong, there are about 48M internet users. In other words, slim chance of being warned thrice.
It sounds like the French are learning how to use good old “selective enforcement”. In this case, it looks like the agency responsible for enforcing the data protection laws has decided not to do so. I’m sure they decided that it “just didn’t make sense” to enforce the laws as written. I seem to remember Mike being a supporter of selective law enforcement, too. Well, here you go.
everyone should turn off there net for a few months
in protest …turn off the net. THEN when they lose billions in taxes there economy can be even better
P.S. WHAT ever you paid to ISP DO NOT SPEND IT ANYWHERE
just save it. THATS HOW YOU GET EVEN WITH MORONS IN GOVT.
“we’re still wondering will anyone actually buy more music?” – i dont think that is the question. it isnt about selling anything. it is about getting online users to respect the same laws they would have to respect in the real world. you couldnt walk into a music store and randomly rip cds onto your laptop in the middle of the store, why should you be allowed to do that online?
Wow, points for NOT talking about physically stealing a disc!.
Still, if you could manage it quickly and relatively anonymously, then you might find a few people doing it. Depends how likely you are to be caught, and how much effort it is.
The model breaks down in that you can only be physically present in one shop, but can download from many sources at once
Re: Re: Re:
“The model breaks down in that you can only be physically present in one shop, but can download from many sources at once”
But you can still only download at XMb/s, whether it be one file or one hundred.
Re: Re: Re:
i am trying to come up with a way to better explain the situation. if you sat ripping stuff in the middle of the store, they would likely throw you out, and potentially call the police (as there is a sort of theft going on). the internet basically removes the shop keeper and every other watching eye, and allows you to rip with impunity. all three strikes laws attempt to do is put a sort of balance back into the situation, making people understand that their actions arent any more acceptable online than they would be in the middle of a busy store.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well with the way sharing works it is more like someone bought it then is offering a ripped version of it. So a better example would be you go to the store and bought CD/DVD then go home make copies of it and offer it free to who ever stops by. Still wrong but I think that is closer to what happens to most files.
And, if upon being accused (not proven to be) doing that 3 times you were banned from all retail stores forever, you might have a point.
Of course, as usual, you don’t.
Douchy Mac Strawman strikes again.
This is bad news for all those internet connected printers. I imagine that they will getting a bunch of letters – woohoo !
How can you defend yourself ?
Aside from having a clear defense if the IP was that of a printer, it is somewhat problematic that you cannot defend yourself against a random attack. Suppose they just take 600’000 random internet IPs and send a notice without even having any proof. How can you defend against that ?
Re: How can you defend yourself ?
Threaten to actually go to court ?
Re: Re: How can you defend yourself ?
And then ? What do you do in court ? They have no solid proof and you should not prove your innocence. How would you do that anyway ?
Actually the Rennes University report showed that file-sharing as such went down after HADOPI, even though the law had not come into full force. Similarly in Sweden the IPRED law and conviction of the Piratebay thieves coincided with a massive fall in infringement. Then legitimate sales took off. Freetards and the ISPs will continue to call black white, however.