Hadopi law rejected, fight not over!

[Arthur_64]

Incitement to suicide and pedophilia being already punishable by law, I do not see what more can be done.

Regarding Internet and children, it is not a question of regulation but of surveillance.

There is no need for Internet specific regulation on these topics.

[C moa]

Incitement to suicide and pedophilia being already punishable by law, I do not see what more can be done.

Regarding Internet and children, it is not a question of regulation but of surveillance.

There is no need for Internet specific regulation on these topics.

This is your point of view but you know like me that pedophiles also have (good ??) lawyers so confuse one of his bastards posing as a minor, if you do not predict the text that goes well, the l The bastard in question is quickly released because you have made an impersonation fraudulent collection of evidence.

In addition, I think we must fight "on equal terms". Pedophiles have networks, the sites are numerous, "means of protection" .... So we need means and tools to locate them, verify the facts, the contacts, before taking action (we have saw with Outreau what it looked like when it was not done correctly).

[gegyx]

For the ideas of suicide, there were books (forbidden), there are the friends, his intellect (more or less lucid, because not followed by the attentive parents),
and the daily government television news ...

For the perverts, you must be as uncompromising for the ban in kindergartens, and in a perimeter of 100 m around each school, gentlemen who have candy in their pockets?

If children are abused, it is serious, especially if it causes a market. But it is the responsibility of the police and the justice of these countries.

Firearms have killed millions of times, is it forbidden?
The automobile, the money, the work, the forks ...

[Christophe]

@Petrus
Personally I am not against a minimum of security of the Internet network because what would our roads and highways without a minimum of rules ?? It would probably be an anarchy limit Madmax ....

Uh what do you mean by "security"? Technological security or, as I think you think, mental or moral security? So what is good morality? Yours? Mine? That of the neighbor? Who is good? Who is bad? Example: in a war, there are never good or bad, there are good against another good ... Or bad against another bad if you prefer ...

Another example: the morality of Sarko and his stuffed UMPiste (rhyme with ...) is the dough and the infinite growth the stronger possible ... but it's not really those members of this forum... Am I wrong? Are we dangerous and outlawed? According to the morals of some, it could be that yes ...

Obviously the sites which are amoral (racial hatred, Xphilie ... I put X because I find that we focus a little too much on pedo and that there are many other sexual deviations on the net ... start with the zoo ...) must be "fought" ...

But the problem is that with stupid laws like hadopi or ... "Loppsi 2" (which I have just discovered ...) the "outlaw" sites will be more and more numerous .. .and after?

Is 1984 running? Think hard about the little frog that gets boiled if the temperature rises slowly enough ...

[elephant]

This is the problem of the knife: you can use it to cook delicious dishes, as well as to kill your stepmother.
Now, what prevents you from bleeding the aforesaid beldoche? : nothing in the design of the object: only the sitting yard if you skip the step, which can eventually mitigate your responsibility or fulfill you in certain circumstances.

In Belgium, on the other hand, we have had a dangerous precedent: the blocking of

code: Select all

www.stopchildrenporno.com

, a Dutch site which had published a list of (Belgian) pedophiles "to protect the population". But we could just as easily have committed this act of denunciation otherwise, at a higher cost, of course.

[C moa]

If children are abused, it is serious, especially if it causes a market. But it is the responsibility of the police and the justice of these countries.

What annoys me with this kind of reasoning is that finally the consumer is released from all responsibilities by deliberately forgetting that these are systematically corrupt countries without a real judicial system. While it is not the consumer who has raped the kid 5 years but if he was not there to watch, the site would not have had an audience, would not have had money and so he There would have been no point in violating the boy.

Firearms have killed millions of times, is it forbidden?
The automobile, the money, the work, the forks ...

This is a bad way to pose the problem because very quickly we will drift between either I forbid everything or I authorize everything. In both cases it is very dangerous.

Uh what do you mean by "security"? Technological security or, as I think you think, mental or moral security? So what is good morality? Yours? Mine? That of the neighbor? Who is good? Who is bad? Example: in a war, there are never good or bad, there are good against another good ... Or bad against another bad if you prefer ...

My way of seeing things is as follows: between letting everything do as in the USA and controlling everything as in China, there is enormous leeway for, on the one hand, letting the population live, communicate and finally "wander" on the canvas without constraint and on the other hand to protect the most vulnerable (which are not the majors).

As for morals and all the rest, you know, I'm a pretty straightforward person and I apply the good old adage: "the freedom of some stops when the freedom of others begins". And then I have a minimum of confidence in common sense and the laws of my country and of Europe.
Take the example of the HADOPI law. Personally I am not fundamentally against the idea that we should protect the intellectual property, I would rather be for but where I do not agree with the law HADOPI and his spirit is that:
- It is probably not a priority to protect the majors with considerable investments (Between 10 and 15 million € per provider) while "the coffers are empty".
- It's not true to say that downloading a movie on the Internet is like stealing a DVD from a store. When I download a movie, I do not have the quality of the DVD both in terms of image and sound. I do not have the packaging either, I do not have the bonuses, I do not have several languages ​​at my disposal.
- The majors are already compensated through the media tax.
- It's wrong to think that a person who owns 300 movies at home would have bought them if he did not have access to the download. Even if tomorrow we cut Internet access to all French, the income of the majors would probably not increase. When we have trouble finishing the month, we do not buy DVD 30 €.
- The majors have not developed any alternative system to piracy. Today we talk every day about globalization but most of the series / films that are produced in the world are not available in France or even many years after their release. So to see them, you have no choice but to hack them. The few solutions offered are either unreliable or still very expensive. At € 1 per title, most virtual albums have almost the same price as "paper" albums. For example, Patricia Kaas sells on the last album on the web at 6 €, suddenly, I would be tempted to buy it because I find the price fairer.
- The law does not respect the republican spirit that justice must be rendered by the judiciary.
- It does not respect the principle of double punishment.
- Technically, it will be easily bypassed so it's a law for nothing.
- This money could have been invested in the fight against the Xphiles or Xphobes.
- And many other things ...

Another example: the morality of Sarko and his stuffed UMPiste (rhyme with ...) is the dough and the infinite growth the stronger possible ... but it's not really those members of this forum... Am I wrong? Are we dangerous and outlawed? According to the morals of some, it could be that yes ...

You are right but I still have confidence in the deputies and the laws of my country but for how long? It is certain that if the second part "Loppsi 2" were voted without discussion, like HADOPI, this confidence would be greatly shaken and for a while.
I hope that there will be a Republican burst from UMP and they will not accept that intelligence services can do anything and everything without control or prosecution. Such a device of the time of Mitterand and the illegal listening would have been ... legal.

[Petrus]

Interestingly, the first criterion in awarding the HADOPI market is not the price, but the speed of commissioning:
http://www.numerama.com/magazine/12960- ... tiels.html
"There is no minimum or maximum amount for this contract."

Well yes, the crisis is not over and with the new graduates who will be without income and the licensees of the crisis who will be in the end right in less than 2 years, it is necessary that everything is ready to kill in the egg any rebeleon organization.
At the beginning, there will certainly be a few lines cut by "mistake" while the system is running smoothly.

I may be paranoid, but for what other reasons are they so in a hurry?

[Arthur_64]

I may be paranoid, but for what other reasons are they so in a hurry?

Ben because the sooner it will be put in place, the earlier the artists will be paid, it seems obvious.

[gegyx]

And the marmots ...

[Petrus]

I may be paranoid, but for what other reasons are they so in a hurry?

Ben because the sooner it will be put in place, the earlier the artists will be paid, it seems obvious.

Rénumerés? How? 'Or' What ?
The global license would have allowed to re-register the artists, but hadopi is only repressive.