Spanish Congress Rejects Internet Censorship Law 229
TuringTest writes "A commission of the Spanish Congress has rejected a law that allowed the closure of web sites that provide unauthorized downloads. The government couldn't reach enough support from its allies, not because they opposed the law in principle, but because of the way it was redacted and the lack of negotiation. Recently the Spanish Senate rejected a law on net neutrality. Also the Wikileaks cables disclosed pressure from the USA on the Spanish government to pass a law to reduce Internet sharing of music and media, which is legal in Spain."
packing my bags ... (Score:3, Informative)
and moving to spain
Re:redacted law (Score:5, Informative)
I believe that's a mistranslation or a mistake by a Spanish speaker. In Spanish, "redactar" means "to write" (as in a book, an essay, a law, ...).
Re:I smiled for a moment... (Score:4, Informative)
That raised protest, a DDoS attack to the web pages of ALL politic groups, a flood of emails and calls to the politics, and so on. That incidents produced some notices in national media that raised more the awareness of the public opinion.
At last, the politic groups was intimidated. The situation in Spain is critical, with a 20% of unemployment and a brutal credit crunch. So a high unpopular law as that could 'spark' some unrest.
Re:packing my bags ... (Score:2, Informative)
Hope you don't carry, 'cause in Spain you can only do it to and from a range. Freedoms can be funny things like that - you get one, you lose one.
Re:redacted law (Score:2, Informative)
Redact [google.es]. Note in particular the definitions from Wordnet.
Re:Don't give them an inch, or all you have to do. (Score:5, Informative)
What has particularly pissed off [eff.org] Spanish internet community is that the copyright laws the US is blackmailing through in Spain (via 301/trade sanctions) go way beyond what has ever been proposed here in the US - i.e. 3 strikes.
In a move that has only thrown more fuel on the fire, the US ambassador to Spain took an active role in discouraging democratic debate [google.com] about the new laws - agreeing by Spanish request to "influence" elected representatives so that they did not to meet or discuss the new laws with their constituents:
"[Sebastian] I was particularly concerned that the regional government of Madrid had been organizing meetings with Internet users. (...) He said that would be helpful if the ambassador could encourage regional president [Esperanza Aguirre] to stop.'s Ambassador agreed to raise the issue when meeting with the regional president."
"Spreading Democracy" in action, anyone.
Legal is not the right word (Score:3, Informative)
I'll copy+paste myself from Osnews:
File sharing is not "legal" in Spain. It is something called, in the law world, "alegal" which means something is not regulated nor prohibited. To give a weird example: it is legal to say something because you have the right of free speech but... would it be legal to kill an e.t.? Right now, with the law in hands, that would be "alegal".
Re:I smiled for a moment... (Score:4, Informative)
You're not spanish, or if you are, you're in denial. Spain had our laws and constitution stomped a week ago and nobody gave a damn. Had our worker rights ripped apart and nobody gave a damn. Our politics are a wealthy elite and the crisis don't touch them, but nobody-give-a-damn!
BUT, if you touch a local soccer team or closes music or video downloads, hell breaks loose.
This is Spain, and that's the reality in Spain.
Re:Spain beats with a fascist heart (Score:4, Informative)
Communism: A political/economic theory with the proletariat (the people) at the centre, who wield power. In a communist society, there *is* no state - it has "withered away", to quote some old dead guy named Marx, who was also the only Marx in history without a sense of humour.
Fascism: A political/economic theory with corporations at the centre, with the government wielding power on their behalf.
Spain under Franco was Fascist, no argument.
Soviet Union under Stalin was *not* communist, in any way shape or form. It espoused communism, but there is a difference between using communism as a rationalization for your actions, and actually *being* communist.
The Soviet Union was, depending on the time, either a dictatorship, or an oligarchy (think dictatorship, but instead of having a single ruler, it is run by a group of individuals. That would be the Politburo). It could accurately be described as an oligarchy, a dictatorship, or a police state.
Spain under Franco could also be described as a dictatorship, a police state, *or* a fascist state. All are accurate.
But there is no possible way to describe the Soviet Union as fascist. It's just plain wrong.