Slashdot Log In
Positive Rights News From Europe
Posted by
kdawson
on Fri Sep 26, 2008 09:46 AM
from the not-all-doom-and-gloom dept.
from the not-all-doom-and-gloom dept.
Various readers are sending in good news from Europe on the rights front. First, at the EU level, Mark.J brings word that the European Parliament has canned a number of controversial amendments to its updated Telecoms Package, which could have resulted in ISPs being forced to disconnect customers for involvement in illegal file-sharing of copyrighted material. Next, SplatMan_DK writes from Denmark on a recent ruling by the Danish High Court that means that Danes are still innocent until proven guilty in copyright cases, even if their IP address has been confirmed as the origin of P2P traffic involving copyrighted music. Finally, from Sweden, an update on the draconian so-called Lex Orwell, which would have effectively resulted in the routine wiretapping of the entire nation. Eric Blair sends a link on an agreement reached between the Swedish parliament and the sitting government on a new form for the controversial signals intelligence law. Supposedly, the sting has been taken out of the law: only the department of defense and the cabinet may request data, and they'll have to get court approval for it.
Related Stories
[+]
Wiretapping Bill Passes Swedish Parliament, 143 to 138 326 comments
Assar Bruno Boveri writes "Swedish lawmakers came down in favour of a fiercely debated surveillance bill in a vote at the Riksdag on Wednesday evening. Despite some cosmetic changes, Sweden's proposed surveillance law is still a monster, writes Pär Ström from the independent New Welfare Foundation." The Swedish newspaper DN (in Swedish; translations welcome) compares the implications of the proposed law with activities carried out by East Germany's Ministerium für Staatssicherheit (STASI).
Submission: Europe Buries Three-Strikes Legislation by Anonymous Coward
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Encroachment upon rights held at bay (Score:4, Insightful)
So the gradual encroachment of governmental power over the rights of citizens is slowed yet again.
But doesn't the mere fact that the government has the power to limit itself signal that such limitations are arbitrary and subject only to the whims and needs of those in power? While "protecting the children" may not be as crucial as personal privacy to some European people, isn't it just a matter of time until the priorities become reversed and the erosion of rights will again begin in earnest?
How can a government be the arbiter of rights unless it has the power to take them away?
Re:Encroachment upon rights held at bay (Score:5, Insightful)
There's an old saying that speaks to your question and is profoundly true:
Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nothing human is eternal
Eternal vigilance is an illusion
Re: (Score:2)
that doesn't make any difference whatsoever. None of these things are possible for humans.
Re: (Score:2)
So maybe when Thomas Jefferson said, "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.", he was actually warning us that freedom costs too much and could never be had?
Re: (Score:2)
That may not be his intention but essentailly he says that the kind of freedom he invisioned is impossible to maintain in the long run. And that was a great mistake.
Re:Encroachment upon rights held at bay (Score:5, Insightful)
And now, I await my arrest by the U.S. [insert 3 letter organization here].
Parent
Re:Encroachment upon rights held at bay (Score:5, Insightful)
What you fail to realize is that you will not lose your rights due to complacency, but rather you will forfeit them enthusiastically to protect yourself and your loved ones.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Encroachment upon rights held at bay (Score:4, Insightful)
What YOU fail to realize is that not everyone in the U.S. has succumbed to the "bread and circuses" mentality
In a democracy, it doesn't take everyone to vote yea. It only takes enough.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Encroachment upon rights held at bay (Score:4, Insightful)
Please let the U.S. government in on your theory, because for the past 6 years the silent majority has been riding roughshod over the vocal minority.
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
History has proven time and time again that with freedom as a goal amazing achievements have been accomplished. Unfortunately it often takes the removal of those freedoms for the majority of sheeple to take note of whats actually going on.
Re: (Score:2)
Another part of the same effect is that someone with a complaint or advocating a change can be "louder" than a majority who either disagree with the complaint or advocate the status quo. With the latter only making their point after they have heard about the former. An obvious example is that lobbiests can effectivly write a bill, even going through several d
Re: (Score:2)
Were that the case it would be better than the current situation. The problem is too often most peoples rights are forfeit, regardless of their opinion. What would be far better is something a long the lines of "If you think that forfeiting your rights is a good thing. You and only you, plus anyone who agrees with you, lose those right
Re: (Score:2)
Being a Legal Nazi, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Being a Legal Nazi, but... (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Or it could be written positive rights-news to differentiate it from positive-rights news. As it reads it can be interpreted either way.
Re: (Score:2)
Uh?
When are people going to realize that there are shitty politicians on all sides of the spectrum, not just left or right leaning? Only moderates tend to be the non-shitty folks.
Re: (Score:2)
Uh? When are people going to realize that there are shitty politicians on all sides of the spectrum, not just left or right leaning?
There are, but in this case it was on the mark. Positive rights means the government must provide which means it must get funding which imply taxes in essence required by law. It goes against the liberitarian ideals that only the barest minimum should be provided by the state.
Re: (Score:2)
I get what you're saying, but we have seen democrats do things that go against democratic ideals/equates to hypocrisy, likewise with (insert any group or individual of any part of the political spectrum). Thus why say that it even matters if it's a group's ideal, I guess is what I question?
Re: (Score:2)
Only moderates tend to be the non-shitty folks.
Moderates are definitionally people who have no principles. I think you're confusing folks who aren't on one end of the artificial and absurd left-right scale with people who are always equivocating on policy.
Re: (Score:2)
What a load of crap. definition of moderate [answers.com] or another [merriam-webster.com] Moderates are "definitionally" people whose views and principles aren't extreme. That doesn't necessarily mean they have no principles. Now, some "moderate" politicians may fit your definition because they're trying to make the most people happy to get elected, but it's not at all impossible to be moderate and principled. Your argument is one promoted by the extremists who want to make themselv
Re: (Score:2)
That doesn't necessarily mean they have no principles.
OK, what principles do moderates hold?
Re: (Score:2)
For example:
"Positive Rights *pause* News" is interpreted as "News about Positive Rights."
"Positive *pause* Rights News" is interpreted as "Positive News about Rights."
Anyone else want to chime in here? Am I completely off-base?
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone else want to chime in here? Am I completely off-base?
of course not. The point is that when your article title may be ambiguous without the benefit of verbal stresses, then it's a bad article title.
Re: (Score:2)
No, you are correct "Positive Rights News" *is* ambiguous. To determine whether Rights is being used as an adjective or a noun one would use hyphenation.
Positive Rights-News = positive news about rights
Positive-Rights News = news about positive rights
Europe is not one country (Score:5, Insightful)
Although it is nice to see positive news, you must remember that Europe is not one country. It is many countries and what is legal in one can be very illegal in another.
As if you start comparing laws in Israel, China and Japan, just because it is all Asia.
Just so you are aware of it.
Europe is now a confederacy (Score:5, Insightful)
Thanks to the EU, it's now an alliance with internal tradiing advantages and collective leadership. In English, we call this a confederacy (no necessary relation to the Confederate States of America).
If Israel, Iran and Iraq started their own trade agreement, we might refer to the mid-East in the same way.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks to the EU, it's now an alliance with internal tradiing advantages and collective leadership. In English, we call this a confederacy (no necessary relation to the Confederate States of America).
More like the Articles of Confederation [wikipedia.org], yes? I wonder how long it'll take them to end up like us...
Re: (Score:2)
We're ahead of schedule in quite a few ways. World domination? Been there, done that, got the museum full of loot. Horrifically bloody civil war? Depending on how you count it, on and off from 1914 to 1990. And you should see how fast the frontier on the Wild East is being pushed back.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Switzerland is quite central within Europe, but dosn't show much interest in becoming part of the EU. Nor does the largest European country, Russia...
Re: (Score:2)
Switzerland is not embracing European values and European integration at its fullest, thought they have integrated their economy with EU via bilateral treaties. However as they don't embrace Europe and its values and thus they have distanced from the Europe and thus are not as European as countries in EU. Remember Europe is about culture, values and shared destiny.
Russia is an Euroasian country, it hasn't been European country for a while. After communist took power and moved the capital to Moscow Russia as
Re: (Score:2)
Moscow was the russian capital during most of its history. It was just the spleen of the csars after Peter I not to reside there but have their own town somewhere away, preferredly at a harbour (where the court talked french and most of the executives talked german). But even through the 200 years of St.Peterburg as residence, Moscow was still the town where the administration was.
Re:Europe is now a confederacy (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Good try, but I doubt you will be able to convince the americans.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Europe is not one country (Score:5, Insightful)
Not quite the same thing. Israel, China and Japan are not joint members of any supranational confederation. The European Union now includes 27 states, and more and more matters are dealt with cooperatively. Since network rights are inherently international, they're exactly the sort of thing that ends up coming to the attention of Brussels - and the decision they reach will be shaped by the consensus among the various states. Precedents established in a single country today may well affect the whole Union tomorrow.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Israel, China and Japan have not chosen to ally their governments into an overarching (although advisory) Asian Union in the manner that many European nations have chosen to do in the form of the European Union.
The European Union is in Europe (Score:4, Funny)
And members are bound by treaty to abide by its rules.
Also, water wet. Fire hot. Pain hurts.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
(a bit personal but hey this is Slashdot)
Are you family of the (should have been slightly more legendary) Jean Monnet?
I always thought the "secret plan" behind the EU was the following priority list:
1. No more war
2. No more famine
3. there is no point 3, we'll all have to make it up as we go along
but then, i'm an idealist.
Lex Orwell not defeated yet (Score:4, Informative)
The "critics" who are now stating that the law is now acceptable to all critics are mainly members and supporters of the current government who in many cases voted for the original law because they didn't want to go against the party line (of their party Folkpartiet).
Now they feel that they can "compromise" and seem like they're against the original law while still not going against the party. If you check the websites of Piratpartiet (The pirate party) and StoppaFRAlagen.nu then you'll see that they, the chief critics of the law, are still against the revised law.
/Mikael
Relieved -- for now (Score:2)
Oh boye !!! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do not attempt to adjust the picture.
Still a sting in FRA (Score:4, Informative)
When the referenced site says that even the staunchest critics are now happy with the law, it is just not true.
The problem is still that the Swedish authorities will not just get the permission from this new special court to investigate "issues".
The Swedish government require that all ISP's provide the Swedish state with a copy of every single packet that crosses the Swedish border. They will not need permission from the special court to collect our traffic.
Re:Mr. Orwell? (Score:5, Informative)
Just to save a few visits to Wikipedia, Eric Blair is George Orwell's real name.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Being considered innocent until proven guilty is not a positive right it is a negative right.
But it is positive (good) news, right?