EU Parliament Member Asks EU Commission What It Will Do If Italy Approves One Strike Copyright Law

from the good-for-her dept

We recently wrote about a ridiculous copyright law being proposed in Italy, that could ban people from using the internet based on a single accusation of infringement. As we noted, the law did not appear to agree with overall EU law. Some in the EU Parliament are taking notice. MEP Marietje Schaake has now officially posed a Parliamentary question to the EU Commission questioning how it would respond to such a law:
Via the press it has come to my attention that the Italian Parliament is currently considering a draft law by which internet users can be disconnected and blacklisted if they have been accused on an intellectual property infringement. The accusation does not necessarily need to originate from the rights holder of the work in question.

The draft law as it is proposed, violates several EU laws and principles, including:

- Article 1(3a) of the telecoms package, amending the Framework Directive 2002/21/EC,
- Article 6 ECHR concerning a fair trail
- Article 10 ECHR concerning the freedom to seek, receive and impart information,
- The principles of necessity and proportionality, and,
- Depending on implementation, the exemptions of intermediary liability in E-Commerce Directive 2000/31/EC,

Does the Commission agree the Italian proposal is in violation with EU laws and principles? If not, why not? What concrete action will the Commission undertake to put a halt to measures being implemented by Member States by which citizens may be disconnected from the internet?
While it will be interesting to see how the EU Commission responds, just the fact that such questions are being asked should hopefully generate some attention to this awful proposal.

Filed Under: eu, eu commission, eu parliament, italy, marietje schaake

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. icon
    PaulT (profile), 21 Sep 2011 @ 2:57am


    "It isn't clear that an internet ban would be considered a "trial""

    The trial part would be referring to the fact that a mere accusation would be enough to remove internet access under this proposal. This is counter to every principle of free speech, due process and liberty.

    "I also don't think that an EU article, such as article 10, can be construed to suggest that the transmission of pirated material is encouraged or supported."

    That wouldn't be what it would be used to defend, it's to defend the access to perfectly legal speech that would be removed under this proposal.

    "I would also have to say that this politician, while a member of another party, seems to agree with the pirate party people a lot"

    You are aware, of course, that the "pirate parties" have a lot more policies than the one you might assume from their name? There's nothing wrong with agreeing with them, and you can agree with them on a lot of things that don't involve piracy.

    "So perhaps her "call" isn't anything more than grandstanding."

    Perhaps, but since you seem to have misunderstood every proposal here, perhaps not.

Add Your Comment

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

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.