French ISPs Pushing Back Against Hadopi; Threaten To Ignore Requests
from the like-you-didn't-see-this-coming dept
This should hardly come as a surprise, but as the French “three strikes” agency Hadopi tries to push forward, it’s facing some serious resistance from French ISPs, who might out-and-out ignore the law’s requirements in a boycott against the plan. The main issue, of course, is that they feel that the law puts too big an expense on them, without adequate compensation for the work. Basically, the government is asking them to be under-paid police for the entertainment industry. The ISPs are asking for greater compensation to play that role, and if they don’t get it, are apparently willing to fight the overall law in court. It seems that, after years of fighting to get the law passed, the French government still might not be over the final hurdle to kicking people off the internet for file sharing.
Comments on “French ISPs Pushing Back Against Hadopi; Threaten To Ignore Requests”
I don’t see how this is an got passed into law, it violates all sorts of EU laws.
This has always been the weakness of the EU. Unlike what we’ve got with the States, the EU consists of several completely sovereign nations. Power in the EU is held only at the existence of several international treaties between member states. More over, the principle of subsidiarity is key to the EU member agreements (basically stating that the EU should only be allowed to take action when individual member states cannot accomplish a goal).
It’s not like the USA, where the tasks of the Federal and State governments are specifically laid out in our constitution. Instead, EU members can, so long as not abused, ignore EU law and claim sovereignty if they don’t agree with a specific EU law/ruling.
Re: Re: Re:
sorry forgot the
@1 the law is already happened
its them saying screw this bad law and all hte people are on our side let the king eat cake
Re: @1 the law is already happened
I don’t think you know what “Let them eat cake” means. I also don’t think you know what that shift key thingy is…
Re: Re: @1 the law is already happened
I think that let the king eat cake is euphemism for something else.
Re: Re: Re: @1 the law is already happened
“I think that let the king eat cake is euphemism for something else.”
No, that’d be pie….
Re: Re: Re:2 @1 the law is already happened
the pie is a fake!
the cake is a lie!
Re: Re: Re:3 @1 the law is already happened
“IF you read what i wrote”
No, no. The pie is real. It’s the female orgasm, THAT’S the myth….
(100 Dark Helmet points for 1st person to name the movie reference….)
“the French government still might not be over the final hurdle to kicking people off the internet for file sharing.“
Actually, the final final hurdle will be the hardest. Getting people who were kicked off the net to magically start buying plastic discs again.
@ 3 and 4
Back in the French revolution the king said jokingly about poor people “let them eat cake”
Of course they had no cake to eat….and he didn’t care and lost his head over the deal.
This lesson in French history brought to you by the letter L and the words, Louis XXIV.
So basically you guys agree with what i said just had issues with grammar again , ok be the editors edit and fix it up publish and take credit see copying is fun. Iif it makes the world better SO BE IT. ( emphasis mine ).
Re: @ 3 and 4
Umm. I’m pretty sure the saying is attributed to Marie Antoinette, not a French king.
Re: Re: @ 3 and 4
And I thought nameless one was supposed to be Canadian.
Re: Re: @ 3 and 4
And the French never quite made it through to Louis XXIV, they only ever got to XVIII (and that was after skipping XVII)
Re: @ 3 and 4
“Cake” in the referenced quasi-historical phrase is a single-word description of the stone chips, wheat husks and flour which accumulates upon a millstone. Only the poorest of the poorest of the poor would voluntarily eat “cake.” Thus, such a phrase is quite an insult.
Re: Re: @ 3 and 4
Finally someone had enough time to surf for the definitive definition of this quasi-historical phrase.
Re: Re: Re: @ 3 and 4
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_them_eat_cake :
“Let them eat cake” is the traditional translation of the French phrase “Qu’ils mangent de la brioche”, supposedly said by a French princess upon learning that the peasants had no bread. As brioche is a luxury bread enriched with eggs and butter, it would reflect the princess’s obliviousness to the nature of a famine.
Although commonly attributed to Queen Marie Antoinette, there is no record of these words ever having been uttered by her; they first appear in Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Confessions, his putative autobiographical work (completed in 1769, when Marie Antoinette was 13).
(And yes, it’s wikipedia. And yes, it also cites references).
So yeah, it’s all a big fat lie. Like cake.
Re: @ 3 and 4
try Marie Antoinette
no it was attributed to Marie Antoinette, but was unsubstantiated and widely debunked.
and it was in response to “there is is no bread” – so is used to refer to the obliviousness of the leadership.
quit worrying aobut it and declare the war on users over.
IT might take a few years ….
see what i mean in that thread about what you do.
People with money like to buy things to show off too.
DO you want a hundred discs with no name on them to impress everyone or 50 with labels and covers and other stuff you can give them. The poor are lost to you give up and move on. QUIT wasting humanities resources on this when as i said like the fbi being removed form missing kids cases to protect IP, its now quickly showing its evil head.
and you can give away one or two free songs on all the trackers and p2p freely, and you might just see a few added sales
as one person once said wisely
p2p is not about piracy, its about marketing. if you can’t give something away free , how are you going to sell it?
La Resistance vs. la greve
For a moment I thought the French ISPs would actually stand up against bad government and refuse to betray their clients. Then I got to the part about their just wanting to be paid more for betraying their clients.
@3 and @4
might be plausible had the original not been “brioche” –
still think the phrase is about the royals obliviousness that you need the same products + some to make brioche.
The funniest part, is that the HADOPI system would make the ISP pay out of their pocket the whole system (while it’s meant to be refunded afterward, but french administration sucks at doing things, let’s face it), AND the government wants to increase taxes on the ISPs because it seems the french internet is among the cheapest ones comparatively for a TV + Phone + Internet system (30~40 euros for up to 100MB line + internet phone to several countries + quite a bunch of tv channels).
That is to say, the ISPs were already quite opposed to HADOPI because of the risk of increasing prices, but add to that taxes, and the HADOPI system is pretty moot.
J&SB Strike Back.
and im the pie president.
I award you 100 Dark Helmet points. They are redeamable (sp?) in the Mega Maid gift shop….
Let me give a bit of background. In France, the Legislative branch is Constitutionally prohibited from passing regulatory rules as those fall under the purview of the Executive. So, instead, they basically create a framework and the Executive the passes a decree (some sort of executive order) that sets up the rules. So in this case, if I recall correctly, the HADOPI law said: we will reimburse the ISPs, let the executive use a decree to setup a reimbursement process. The executive decided that if they never setup the process for reimbursement, they would never have to pay a dime. (a common ploy actually) So that’s what the administration did which does endanger the whole law until that decree comes out.
Don’t claim victory too soon though. A case was decided I believe last month on a similar issue of censoring an unlicensed offshore gambling website. (I believe you posted on it) The government was playing the same trick of just not having setup the reimbursement process. The ISPs tried to claim that since the reimbursement was not in place, the whole law was void. That reasoning was struck down in court. The case is being appealed, but what will happen is anyone’s guess.
More generally, it is a common thing in France to pass laws and then just never come out with the executive order that would make the law effective. And I’m not speaking of signing the law the way the US President does it. It’s more like if Congress was to create a position of power/influence and the President just never nominated anyone to it.
how long till someone hacks into every single one the wifi`s of the people who passed the law a download copyrighted stuff?