member-states
World’s first ‘net freedom provision’
p2pnet news view P2P | Politics:- British and French plans to institute the Draconian Three strikes plan drawn up by Big Music and Hollywood to have net users disconnected purely on the say-so of the cartels have met a setback. European legislators have given the green light to new rules which decree users’ can still be cut off, but only after a “prior, fair and impartial procedure” which gives them “the opportunity to state their case and respects the principles of presumption of innocence and the right to privacy” has been completed. However, an EU statement outlining the decision doesn’t say what the ‘fair and impartial procedure’ will comprise, or who will decide user rights have indeed been upheld, or by what means,.
Continue reading »EU Parliament Gives OK to Disconnect File-Sharers
Drops “Amendment 138″ from Telcoms Package that would’ve prevented member countries from disconnecting file-sharers from the Internet, replacing it with much weaker provision that opens the door to “three-strikes.” In a huge blow to the freedoms of European Union citizens and as an apparent gift to the lobbying efforts of multinational entertainment corporations, the EU Parliament decided to drop a crucial amendment (#138) from its much anticipated Telcoms Package that would’ve prevented member countries from disconnecting file-sharers from the Internet. Amendment 138 read : Applying the principle that no restriction may be imposed on the fundamental rights and freedoms of end-users, without a prior ruling by the judicial authorities, notably in accordance with Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union on freedom of expression and information, save when public security is threatened in which case the ruling may be subsequent. The new amendment allows for disconnection so long as a judge’s order is obtained beforehand, much as was just the case in France recently , whereby that country’s top court ruled that anything less than a judge’s order to strip a person of such a vital communications tool is unconstitutional.
Continue reading »
