News French government to disconnect 60 file sharers

And what will happen to public wifi access in places like Starbucks or McDonalds?

The thing that bother's me the most here is that this is in France, a country well known for a quite liberal and relaxed attitude towards large areas of the law.
I dread to think whats going to happen with the usual clumsy and heavy handed attitude of the UK.

 

Are you crazy?

Do you even know what kind of laws there are in France? The UK is one of the most easy-going nations in the EU and are the most liberal. You can do more here than anywhere in the EU.

The UK implements its laws differently and may be clumsy, but is no where near as heavy-handed as France.

If the UK was to implement such a scheme here, I have confidence it would be done better than elsewhere.

 

You don't know the UK very well do you? Europe might have a lot of laws, but it's in the UK that small minded public administrators justify their existence, and our tax/council tax money, by zealously interpreting them in petty, silly ways. Not especially pragmatic, open minded or full of common sense these public workers.

 

Not sure why it is morally wrong. If the individual has no problems with it, it is not morally wrong. If these boxes had been around since the very first car, no one would bat an eyelid. I wouldn't have a problem with it, as I wouldn't be breaking the law. If I did, and I was caught, well, I shouldn't do the crime if I can't do the time.

All these people who knowingly break the law by stealing a product/code that someone else worked for, without paying for it, and who then get all worked up when the Governments are pressured to do something about it, should just man up and stop bitching. Whether you like it or not, it's against the law - if you're caught, you can't plead ignorance. You don't like a law - do something to change the law. Don't p*ss and moan about how unfair it is 'cos you're breaking a law and then got caught and are being threatened with punishment.

That's what I think anyway. I'm sure many disagree, and that's fine - we all have our own opinions.



However, I absolutely aggree that a stricter burden of proof should rest on those who claim their copyright is infringed, and that punishments need to be more thought out.

 

The moment I can copy/paste a Nissan GTR I agree with you.

 

Ha ha ha... Now that'd be quite a cool trick...

 

Yeah... People should sell the software cheaper and not have the audacity to ask 50 euros for something with a lot of bugs and then complain that it gets pirated. In my opinion this is another corporate move through the government to try and squeeze more out of regular folks. Intellectual theft is not the same as physical theft because you are not preventing somebody else from making use of it.

 

To continue the off topicness. If they did do this pretty much everyone who owns a car would be banned from driving.

Back on topic: piracy is not stealing. It's piracy.

 

Exactly the same in Germany

Well, we have "free" Wifi at Mcdonalds in Germany...meaning you access the McD Wifi, it asks you for a mobilephone number, then texts you the access-code.
As all mobile phones are registered (you can't buy a Sim-card without proof-of-identity), McD can always ID you.

 

The issue of "theft vs copyright infringement" has been discussed in some detail before. It's a little depressing to see some posters still swallowing the tripe put out by the media industries, though at least the alleged links with drugs and terrorism didn't get a mention also.

Another point to consider is that disabling Internet access can have a severe effect on people's livelihoods given the number that bank, manage utilities, shop and work online. Inflicting financial distress on a family because of something a child is "alleged" to have done is rather low.

 

Seems to me there are three debates:

What is piracy and is it wrong.

What punishment should be meted out and is it appropriate.

Who is to police this 'crime' and how should it be proved.

For me, the answer to the first is apprehending a copy of software or other that you have not paid for the license to use, or been given permission to use without paying, and that it is completely wrong to do so.

The second is slightly more difficult, but I don't think that disconnection from the internet is a workable solution.

The third is potentially even more tricky. I think that the ISPs should certainly be involved, but I don't think all onus should be placed on them. The IP holders should certainly also pull their weight if they want to see things tightened up. I also would NOT like to see solicitors and legal firms in the same mould as ambulance-chasers getting involved, as there has been in the past.

 

correct...for you, this may apply

may I bring this into remembrance?

Which was solved by paying a fee on every recordable medium "for home use".
We still pay this fee (in France and Germany anyway), but "for home use" recording is outlawed indirectly. (circumventing the DRM to enable this is outlawed, not the "for home use" copying itself)