France Disconnects First File-Sharer From the Internet

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
If you ask me, the $800 fine is more of a deterrent to me than getting booted off the internet for two weeks.

France is seen as the pioneer of so-called “three strikes” anti-piracy legislation, in which repeated file-sharing offenders are disconnected from the Internet. This week, following the issuing of millions of warning notices, the law has finally resulted in the first disconnection. The news comes as somewhat of a surprise since the Hadopi regime is set to be scrapped after doing little to stop online piracy.
 
IMO, that's more than fair compared to what happens in the US. You are NOT punished by any government agency, instead the industry have lobbied such that "fines" that are levied in CIVIL court can get upwards of $22,000 per song that is downloaded (I'm not sure what the movie or software rules are).

$800 for getting caught downloading 3 pieces of software, 3 movies, or 3 songs is a steep price to pay sure... but no where near as outrageous as 1.5 million for two dozen songs
 
While $22,000 or whatever is absurd, I would say that $800 is still pretty ridiculous. Trying to fine people is not going to "fix" the problem.
 
While $22,000 or whatever is absurd, I would say that $800 is still pretty ridiculous. Trying to fine people is not going to "fix" the problem.

What stops you from going into Best Buy and stealing anything? Is it the fear of being caught or going downtown for booking? Paying the fine? Community service?

If they are able to catch a lot of people and it's known that there's a good chance of being caught and forced to pay $800 that should keep a lot of people from downloading illegally.
 
Crime still happens today with all the laws in place. It won't change anything.
 
They are likely treating as theft both legally and philosophically....Which I'm all for.

Here in the US they treat it like Theft philosophically but copyright infringement legally.

Stealing a CD from a store could likely carry an 800 dollar fine.
Playing a CD on TV without having permission carries a muli-million dollar fine.


..MAJOR difference between theft and copyright infringement legally....sooner they acknowledge this in the US the better.
 
and here I thought the French were not going to use that "disconnect" provision due to various legalities of it (for one, the EU is moving to declare Internet access a human right)
 
They are likely treating as theft both legally and philosophically....Which I'm all for.

Here in the US they treat it like Theft philosophically but copyright infringement legally.

Stealing a CD from a store could likely carry an 800 dollar fine.
Playing a CD on TV without having permission carries a muli-million dollar fine.


..MAJOR difference between theft and copyright infringement legally....sooner they acknowledge this in the US the better.

Except copyright infringement is not theft.

<insert pages-long discussion on this topic that inevitably happens>
 
Except copyright infringement is not theft.

<insert pages-long discussion on this topic that inevitably happens>

No except needed I specifically said theft and CI are not the same.......For now.


laws change and corporations change them.
 
No except needed I specifically said theft and CI are not the same.......For now.


laws change and corporations change them.

My point was that they shouldn't be equal, and CI certainly shouldn't hold a larger penalty than actual theft.
 
No except needed I specifically said theft and CI are not the same.......For now.


laws change and corporations change them.

Eh, even if laws change. Copying should never mean Stealing. Though, the dictionary does change.
 
Copying is not equal to stealing. No one can own an idea or concept. Today it is more profitable to stop others from innovating than to innovate yourself. Pure madness. When will humans regain the power over the corporate beast they have unleashed?
 
Trying to fine people is not going to "fix" the problem.
If you assume the problem is copyright infringement, then "trying" to fine people won't get you too far, successfully fining people might get you somewhere. I don't think it'd eliminate piracy, but I think it would definitely reduce it if people were worried it was going to cost them large amounts of money. It's why I don't speed, why I stop for stop signs and why I wait at traffic lights even when there's no traffic.
 
Copying is not equal to stealing. No one can own an idea or concept. Today it is more profitable to stop others from innovating than to innovate yourself. Pure madness. When will humans regain the power over the corporate beast they have unleashed?

I think you meant no one "should" own an idea or concept since modern law currently allows owning an idea or concept in all major markets ... I still disagree with you though :) ... patents work more often than they fail ... the system needs reform to work more effectively but eliminating all protection of intellectual property would create more problems than it would solve ;)

On topic I like the idea of reasonable fines (a ban gets a little more problematic though) ... I also think a smaller fine and some incredibly obnoxious community service would be more effective ... cleaning toilets in a drug rehabilitation facility or cleaning public toilets would be a great deterrent :cool:
 
What stops you from going into Best Buy and stealing anything? Is it the fear of being caught or going downtown for booking? Paying the fine? Community service?
My moral compass stops me from stealing things when I'm browsing through stores--not threats of punishment.

I get angry at people sometimes but I don't have a desire to assault them or murder them with the only thing stopping me being the threat of prison.

Punishment may have been a primary motivator when I was a child, but not as an adult.
 
My moral compass stops me from stealing things when I'm browsing through stores--not threats of punishment.

I get angry at people sometimes but I don't have a desire to assault them or murder them with the only thing stopping me being the threat of prison.

Punishment may have been a primary motivator when I was a child, but not as an adult.
So what exactly is your point or suggestion? The public should only rely on each other's moral compass and not bother with having laws?
 
Copying is not equal to stealing. No one can own an idea or concept. Today it is more profitable to stop others from innovating than to innovate yourself. Pure madness. When will humans regain the power over the corporate beast they have unleashed?

Wait until you come up with an idea and try and market it but get pushed out by a large corporation that prices you out of the market, makes you go bankrupt, you lose your family, house, and livelyhood and see if you still preach the no one owns ideas or concepts.

Wait whats that? Why didn't you patent it? Because owning an idea or concept can't be done.

Downloading movies, music, software, without the intent to purchase isn't copyright infringement, it is theft, just like copying articles from the internet in college papers is plagiarism.

Governments and corporations trying to block you from free access to the internet is a different scenario.
 
So lets so nothing, let crime be legal! :rolleyes:

What he may be getting at is that society only exists because of an unspoken pact the majority of us keep. The laws do not inherently keep society stable. It is our free will not to randomly go around raping, killin & steallin that makes society.
 
Wait until you come up with an idea and try and market it but get pushed out by a large corporation that prices you out of the market, makes you go bankrupt, you lose your family, house, and livelyhood and see if you still preach the no one owns ideas or concepts.

Wait whats that? Why didn't you patent it? Because owning an idea or concept can't be done.

Downloading movies, music, software, without the intent to purchase isn't copyright infringement, it is theft, just like copying articles from the internet in college papers is plagiarism.
.

Artists primarily create for the enjoyment of creation and the fulfillment of enriching others lives through art. It is those that control and profit from the artists' work that stand to lose, and they're a societal drain that contributes nothing.
 
Artists primarily create for the enjoyment of creation and the fulfillment of enriching others lives through art. It is those that control and profit from the artists' work that stand to lose, and they're a societal drain that contributes nothing.

Lol bullshit.

Sounds good though doesn't it all altruistic and flowery. I just went to Denver Comic Con and artists there were selling 8x10 pencil sketches for thousands of dollars. Artists are in it like everyone else to get a buck and make it into the 1%
 
Artists primarily create for the enjoyment of creation and the fulfillment of enriching others lives through art. It is those that control and profit from the artists' work that stand to lose, and they're a societal drain that contributes nothing.

BUAHAHAHAHAHA. Oh wait, you're serious? Artists are the ones who sign themselves up to publishers. If they weren't willing to accept the terms and conditions and would rather just create "for the enjoyment of creation", they wouldn't sign on the dotted line.

That's just from the artists perspective, from the consumer perspective, we wouldn't have big budget games or movies or music. I'm sure a lot of people would cry out "and it'd be for the better!", but I'm guessing there's plenty of music people listen to, TV series they watch, games they play and movies they watch that would not exist without publishers to both pay for the production and distribution and also pay for the advertising so you actually know it exists in the first place.

Granted, I don't agree with all publishers do and won't defend a lot of their actions. But the "artists create to create" and "publishers are nothing but a drain on society" is just BS. Publishers wouldn't exist if artists didn't want to sign up with them and consumers didn't want to enjoy entertainment that only exists because of publishers.
 
Back
Top