IP = Internet Protocol

IP = Intellectual Property

Integrity = a quality we would like to see in politics



 Iptegrity.com is released under a Creative Commons licence. Please attribute the author when quoting or using it as a reference source. 

 

Don't miss iptegrity

Use Live Bookmarks in your browser to keep up to date with iptegrity.com (RSS feed)

Login / Comment

You will need to log in to make a comment on any of the Policy Matters articles.
Username

Password

Remember me
Password Reminder
No account yet? Create one
It is free to create an account. When you have created it, you will get an email, telling you how to activate it.

 Support IPTEGRITY

Iptegrity.com provides comment and news on EU Internet policy that is independent of all commercial and political interests. 


Your donation will help to keep it that way.

 

Home arrow Policy Matters arrow France  arrow Hadopi law: waging war on France’s youth
Hadopi law: waging war on France’s youth
Written by Monica Horten   
Mar 12, 2009 at 12:33 PM

French opposition politicians accused the Sarkozy regime of waging war on France's youth, in the  first day of debate on the Creation and Internet law in the French Parliament .  In a polarised debate - ‘Internet users versus ‘la creation' -   415 amendments were tabled.

 

***There is a  live webcast of the French Parliament debate on the Creation and Internet law. ***

 

Will Madame Albanel, the French culture minister,  get her way?  The French  Creation and Internet law (also known as the Hadopi or 3-strikes law) is creating a deep divide  the French Parliament (Assemblée Nationale), including a riftt within President Sarkozy's own UMP party.

 

The law is an 'anti-piracy' measure, and seeks to put in place a graduated response or 3-strikes regime of penalties for French Internet users who download. It is particularly targetting peer-to-peer file-sharers. The polarisation of views was  evident in watching the first day of the debate, which was yesterday (11 March). Opposition politicians accused Mme Albanel and the Sarkozy government  of  ‘liberticide' and waging war on France's youth. They attacked the law for its proposals to police the ‘Net, creating ‘Orwellian

surveillance' in order to preserve the creative industries.

 

Jean-Pierre Brard, of the Republican Left Party, called the law ‘innopportune, inutile, perverse et liberticide'. He spoke of ‘le risque de punir la majorité des innocents' instead of going after the real criminals. Corinne Erhel said it was an attack on liberty, "inadapté" to the digital society.

 

Didier Mathus (Socialist) said that very few artists would see any financial benefit, and that this law which was being put in place to protect ‘la creation' would in fact have the opposite effect. . He said that the law would result in widespread surveillance of the Internet,  and he attacked the social costs of ‘la société Orwellian que vous créez". And he accused Mme Albanel of declaring war on the young people of France : ‘c'est un bataille citoyen' which would result in ‘un mort sociale éléctronique'.

 

Government representatives outlined  the rights-holder perspective that ‘piracy is theft' and is destroying France's creative industries which need to be protected.

 

The  split in the French Parliament was  also reported in Liberation, which said that the Socialists will vote against the Creation and Internet law, and that a number of UMP members have also  come out in opposition to it.   Liberation names three UMP (government) politicans who oppose the law, and who have tabled amendments to reintroduce the role of the judiciary in the process - one of the key points that is attacked by the law's opponents in general is that it works outside the judicial process.

 

According to the Liberation report,  415 amendments have been tabled to date, and there may be more, due to a rule which permits amendments to be tabled even after the debate has begun.

 

Of particular interest, Liberation highlights amendment 324, tabled by the centrist politician Jean Dionis du Séjour, which would ban all methods of filtering.  In his speech to the Parliament, M. Dionis du Séjour said he supported the aims of the law, but unhappy about its implementation. He  called for ‘un Hadopi moderne'.  He was unhappy about cutting off Internet access, and called for a fine instead. And he attacked the government for failing to put in place legal  alternatives, where users could download without being accused of copyright infringement.

 

From the amendments of government supporters, Liberation also highlights amendment 200, tabled by UMP's Patrice Martin-Lalande, which seeks to limit or restrict users rights to just a selection of government websites - could this be the ‘whitelist' referred to prior to the debate by Mme Albanel?

 

La Quadrature du Net have analysed the amendments - available here .

 

 

If you use the information in this article, please credit iptegrity.com! 


User Comments
Please login or register to add comments

Last Updated ( Mar 12, 2009 at 12:51 PM )
<Previous   Next>

 "We who love the Internet

say that user rights are

defined by what we use our

Internet subscriptions for.

We do not want to be

reduced to consumers so

that our rights are only 

what is in the subscription

agreement. "

Eva-Britt Svensson, MEP


Your Freedom to

 repeal the DE Act

 


La Quadrature du Net

La Quadrature du Net

Don't disconnect us!  

European Commission Creative Content Online consultation

AK Zensur

AK Vorrat

Open Rights Group

open rights group

Exgae

  Code

GetUp Action for Australia

 Campaign against Internet filtering in Australia

...AK Vorrat - against data retention

  AK vorrat