1
Political Opinions / Net Neutrality? Screw That!
« on: January 22, 2009, 08:33:36 AM »
You guys live in US so you will likely don't care but anyway.
In Sweden two new laws have been formed the FRA and Ipred, both handles internet traffic. the most intressting of those are Ipred.
Crash course in IPRED:
* Film and recording industry may be entitled to receive out who subscribed to a particular IP address on the network at a given time, if they show a court "reasonable evidence" to file the claim from the IP address. A screenshot (which is super easy to fabricate) will most probably be more than enough. This means only that they have greater powers to violate personal privacy than the Swedish police (who can not find out any information without a break can give at least imprisonment, and often more years imprisonment).
* With these data in hand are they a dunning to the subscriber for internet subscription (which need not be the same person as the hunt pirates). It says it is essentially "pay a monthly salary, otherwise we match up to four months. We have evidence and you can not win. Are you taking it to court, you also pay the costs." Most pay in pure horror to get the problem to disappear. That is how the copyright lobby has done in every other country where they had this right and there is no reason to believe that they would do differently in Sweden. This is nothing but state-sanctioned extortion. Legal security is nonexistent.
* Amount of damages in Sweden has since 1920 had a very strict principle: damages may only be imposed for actual, documented economic damage. This Act amends for it, so that the film and the record industry may sue individuals imagination amounts only to highlight its position of power, without having to show that they lost a penny.
* The hunt pirates convicted in court should be required to pay a newspaper or the equivalent, which states that he or she has been convicted, and for what. This is also something that never occurred before.
* The politicians argue that it all comes from an EU directive, "Sanctions Directive" or IPRED1. It is a pure lie straight up and down. In the first, it requires the EU directive only subscriber data may be generated in connection with a trial, not to private interests is to get them just because they say something. On the other, the Court has expressly down part of the Directive, it no longer applies.
So, this basicly sucks to live in sweden from now on.
In Sweden two new laws have been formed the FRA and Ipred, both handles internet traffic. the most intressting of those are Ipred.
Crash course in IPRED:
* Film and recording industry may be entitled to receive out who subscribed to a particular IP address on the network at a given time, if they show a court "reasonable evidence" to file the claim from the IP address. A screenshot (which is super easy to fabricate) will most probably be more than enough. This means only that they have greater powers to violate personal privacy than the Swedish police (who can not find out any information without a break can give at least imprisonment, and often more years imprisonment).
* With these data in hand are they a dunning to the subscriber for internet subscription (which need not be the same person as the hunt pirates). It says it is essentially "pay a monthly salary, otherwise we match up to four months. We have evidence and you can not win. Are you taking it to court, you also pay the costs." Most pay in pure horror to get the problem to disappear. That is how the copyright lobby has done in every other country where they had this right and there is no reason to believe that they would do differently in Sweden. This is nothing but state-sanctioned extortion. Legal security is nonexistent.
* Amount of damages in Sweden has since 1920 had a very strict principle: damages may only be imposed for actual, documented economic damage. This Act amends for it, so that the film and the record industry may sue individuals imagination amounts only to highlight its position of power, without having to show that they lost a penny.
* The hunt pirates convicted in court should be required to pay a newspaper or the equivalent, which states that he or she has been convicted, and for what. This is also something that never occurred before.
* The politicians argue that it all comes from an EU directive, "Sanctions Directive" or IPRED1. It is a pure lie straight up and down. In the first, it requires the EU directive only subscriber data may be generated in connection with a trial, not to private interests is to get them just because they say something. On the other, the Court has expressly down part of the Directive, it no longer applies.
So, this basicly sucks to live in sweden from now on.