Free P2P In France?

cyberbian writes to tell us that earlier in the week the French Parliament voted to allow free sharing of music and movies on the Internet. This ruling puts them in direct conflict with both the Media companies and the rest of the French government. From the article: " If the amendment survives, France would be the first country to legalize so called peer-to-peer downloading, said Jean-Baptiste Soufron, legal counsel to the Association of Audionautes, a French group that defends people accused of improperly sharing music files. The law would be a blow to media companies that increasingly use the courts worldwide to sue people for downloading or sharing music and movie files. Entertainment companies such as Walt Disney Co., Viacom Inc. and News Corp.'s Fox say free downloading of unauthorized copies of TV shows and movies before they are released on DVD will cost them $5 billion in revenue this year."

Duplicate article

[Antony-Kyre (807195)]

It's a duplicate, same URL as before. I know because I saved the page from a few days ago.

Re:Duplicate article

[DrHanser (845654)]

The funny thing is that the ruling is largely symbolic anyway, and still has to pass the French Senate. From this article [arstechnica.com]:

But despite reports, this does not mean that P2P is legal in France. The vote would still need to pass in the French Senate, and even before then, it will probably need a second reading in the lower house, because the first one was a sham. To put it bluntly, this is a publicity stunt. The bill, which passed last night by a vote of 30 to 28, saw the remaining 519 deputies absent from the vote. They weren't there.

How very ironic!

[by Anonymous Coward]

This was the DADVSI bill that was supposed to turn free software into crime.

You have to admire an independent parliament!

Viva la resistance!

[thealsir (927362)]

...er, I mean, curse those French Fries!

What about Canada?

[eMartin (210973)]

"If the amendment survives, France would be the first country to legalize so called peer-to-peer downloading"

I was under the impression that it's already legal in Canada [slashdot.org].

Or does Canada not count?

Re:What about Canada?

[eMartin (210973)]

Sorry pasted the wrong bit into the link.

http://news.com.com/2100-1027_3-5182641.html [com.com]

Re:What about Canada?

[JonN (895435)]

Oeer-to-peer is only partially legal in Canada. The government has deemed that downloading music in Canada is perfectly legal, as it is for personal use. However the issue lies in uploading music, which is illegal. More information in this article [com.com]

Re:What about Canada?

[k00110 (932544)]

In the initial ruling they say "But the judge denied that request. In a far-ranging decision, the court further found that both downloading music and putting it in a shared folder available to other people online appeared to be legal in Canada. "

Makes it available to other people imply uploading so it must be legal. I think some recording associations are trying to mess with the judgement.

Re:What about Canada?

[wfberg (24378)]

The distinction made between uploading and merely making it available for download is who's pushing the buttons. So, sending music to your mate on msn messenger would be Bad, since you're pushing the upload button. Having an FTP server would be legal. Etc.

Why this is WRONG

[kentrel (526003)]

People will freely distribute Celine Dion songs without any fear of retribution.

Re:Why this is WRONG

[Guppy06 (410832)]

1. Distributing Celine Dion is a violation of the Geneva Conventions.
2. Blame where blame is due: Celine Dion is CANADIAN!

Please !

[yogikoudou (806237)]

Please please stop saying that P2P is illegal. P2P is legal everywhere, downloading/uploading copyrighted material is illegal.

By the way, stop using IP as an acronym for Intellectual Property, IP is Internet Protocol.

Re:Please !

[nomadic (141991)]

By the way, stop using IP as an acronym for Intellectual Property, IP is Internet Protocol.

No, stop using IP as an acronym for Internet Protocol. Intellectual Property came first.

Re:Please !

[AgentScummy (927127)]

So Voice over IP (VoIP) is someone talking during a movie?

Of course not ...

[straybullets (646076)]

What the representants that rejected the government bill to ban P2P really want is to impose a new monthly tax that will be given back to the artists, kind of like what is done already with radio broadcasted music. Gee ... what a not so great idea !

It is also important to note that among those so called pro P2P stand some of the most right winged politicians, namely Christine Boutin, known for her brain washed positions against abortion, homosexuality et al ... You would think of some better advocatee to defend freedom .

IMO this pro P2P stand is taken by a bunch of know nothings politician that just want the free exposure and a chance to look modern and up to date, as the majority of the population here is pro P2P. All this noise is a real shame too as you would think that after 2 weeks of urban riots these people would have some more important things to care about.

One good thing tho is that the actual "ministre de la culture" who is a total dick is in a real bad position now, being defeated by the left and right of the parliament.

Rest assure that the right wing government will promptly deal with this situation and burry the problem fast.

A tax is worse than a ban...

[mangu (126918)]

What the representants that rejected the government bill to ban P2P really want is to impose a new monthly tax that will be given back to the artists

Seems bad, really bad... You can always break the law, as Heinlein once said: "But I will accept any rules that you feel necessary to your freedom. I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; If I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am responsible for everything I do." ("The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress", 1966). It's much harder to avoid paying a tax that's built into the price you pay for access to the web.

As I mentioned this morning on another story [slashdot.org], the problem with illegal copying is that products are priced much higher than their true value. I was in France a couple of weeks ago and saw some fruit stands in Paris that worked based on customers' honesty. The fruit were in cardboard boxes on the sidewalk, you picked whatever you wanted and stepped into the store to pay. Are French people so honest that they will always pay the price? I don't think so. Although I wouldn't mind picking a few 500 euro bills from a box on the sidewalk and then step inside to write a check, no bank in France works the same way grocers do.

Each business must work according to the product being sold. What's so wrong about this bill in France is that they seem to be transfering the duties of the merchant to others. Jewelers in France must provide their own safes and break-proof glass showcases. Fruitstand vendors must keep an eye for people who walk away without paying. Yet the media industry want to transfer to the ISPs the chore of making sure that no one copies a song without paying...

Re:A tax is worse than a ban...

[Suhas (232056)]

> I was in France a couple of weeks ago and saw some fruit stands in Paris that worked based on customers' honesty. The fruit were in cardboard boxes on the sidewalk, you picked whatever you wanted and stepped into the store to pay. Are French people so honest that they will always pay the price? I don't think so.

You must be an american. I find it extremely funny that this is surprising for you. I don't know about france but this is the de-facto way of selling for all types of stores in Japan. Not just fruits and vegetables, but cosmetics, toys, books, CD's etc. as well. Yes, people ARE that honest in other parts of the world. Why, in a Tokyo suburb called kokobunji, I have first hand seen unmanned fruit stalls on hiking trails where you pick what you want and drop the money in a cardboard box.

As far as I know...

[Kjella (173770)]

If the amendment survives, France would be the first country to legalize so called peer-to-peer downloading, said Jean-Baptiste Soufron, legal counsel to the Association of Audionautes

...no civilized country hae outlawed peer-to-peer downloading, that is the technology itself. For a specific exchange to be legal though, you must have the necessary rights to that specific content such as being in the public domain or with permission from the copyright holder.

What we're talking about here is extending the concept of "private copying" to include peer-to-peer downloads. This is allowed by many copyright laws, almost all passed when you had generational loss and copies would be inferior. In short, it is a legal way to copy the works of others without the copyright holder's permission.

Since digital copies are perfect clones, and there's no borders on the Internet, it would pretty much obliterate all copyright in the private sector world-wide. What do you think the odds are of that passing? Not until you see the Devil wearing a pink tutu doing a triple axel on ice skates in Hell.

Already Legal in Canada

[Oniros (53181)]

No, it would not be the first country to make P2P downloading legal. P2P downloading for personal usage is perfectly legal in Canada; which is just an extension of the right to private copy which let you borrow a CD from a friend and make a copy for your own private usage. What is not legal is uploading / distributing unauthorized copies of copyrighted material; likewise it's an extension of the existing laws, you can't make copies and give/sell them to others.

It's more about global licence

[Pierre Carrey (806548)]

Just to be precise : the 2 amendments voted are first steps towards the introduction of a global licence for download of video and musical content. People will be able to download content legally if they pay somehow for it. The next step should be to introduce a tax in the internet access fees in order to make the download fully legal.
BUT, that is if the amendements are really fully accepted. The government is trying to reverse the movement and cancel the amendments (the bill intended at first was supposed to forbid P2P and be a real pain in the a**). The debates should start over in mid january.
(Sorry, no english links to provide, everything I wrote is from french sites (ratiatum.com, liberation.fr))

So stop withholding the product

[mikeswi (658619)]

"...free downloading of unauthorized copies of TV shows and movies before they are released on DVD will cost them $5 billion in revenue this year."

Poor babies. If they don't want me downloading movies before they are released to DVD (officially), then they need to release the damn things sooner.

I buy a lot of DVDs. I have a small shelf, four levels, full of DVDs, with a box filled with more DVDs right next to it. I despise movie theaters. I'm not going to one, except in very rare cases. But I will see the movie, regardless.

I can't wait for that company Morgan Freeman has founded to start operating. Downloads of movies released at the same time they are released to the theaters.

The MPAA and RIAA needs to accept the fact that they cannot ignore the internet or the consumer. They don't want to work with the internet, because they fear piracy. So either they won't release anything on the internet or they wrap it in obnoxious DRM and at low quality. And in doing that, they are directly responsible for most of the file trading. If the INDUCE Act ever becomes law, they will be its biggest offenders.

Re:So stop withholding the product

[Microlith (54737)]

They don't want to work with the internet, because they fear piracy.
Well considering the way the general populace of the internet has behaved, I don't blame them.

And in doing that, they are directly responsible for most of the file trading.
False. Movies are traded on P2P because people like getting shit for free. There's really no philosophy, unless it's mentioned and people hide behind one "Uh yeah, cause I can't buy it. Right." It's only a question of whether it's J-Random-Warezd00d or the studio releasing it unprotected first. The feeding frenzy that is p2p trading would be just as vigorous.

This is going down

[Lewisham (239493)]

For those that can't be bothered to RTFA, down the bottom you'll see:

"The amendment was approved 30 to 28, with 22 members of the UMP voting in favor. While there are 577 members of the lower house, few were present for last night's vote."

And if you look back up the article (obviously the author was trying to sensationalise this):

"The government can overturn the amendment, either by re- opening debate or if the Senate votes it down when the bill moves to the upper house. French Culture Minister Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres has asked that parliament re-open debate on the amendment today, Agence France Presse reported."

So only one-tenth of the house were present for the amendment. It seems like everyone else had gone home. 22 of the votes in favour were by a (what appears to be) minority party. As soon as parliament reconvenes, this will be gone. It's way too crazy/stupid/radical, I very much doubt the majority party want this, and you'd need a serious rebellion from that party in order to push this through.

It's not news so much as a political machination that happens all the time ("Quick! They're asleep! Slip in that amendment!")

Please let change happen

[grumpygrodyguy (603716)]

The free sharing of resources and pooling of indexed harddisks, what a tragedy.

The grandest vision of the early ftp/http devs has come to pass, and now everyone wants to put the ship back in the bottle. Screw all of you naysayers, this is what the internet was for...the free sharing of information.

I'm sorry so many of you think abundance is such a threat to your livelyhood.

Maybe you should back politcal change in the form of progressive solutions instead of trying to cram decades of legacy materialistic thinking down the proverbial throats of your children's future.

Re:Actual Cost?

[Spy Handler (822350)]

Same place BSA pulls its figure from. Out of its ass.