Personal tools
 
Views

Debate: French HADOPI antipiracy law

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search
[Digg]
[reddit]
[Delicious]
[Facebook]

Is the HADOPI law in France a good idea?

Background and context

[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]

Graduated response: Is graduated response (three strikes) good policy?

[Add New]

Pro

See Debate: Graduated response antipiracy laws


[Add New]

Con

See Debate: Graduated response antipiracy laws


[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]
[Move subquestion section up]

Cutting off Internet: Is this an appropriate "proportional" punishment?

[Add New]

Pro

  • Graudated response is the least draconian option. Barry Sookman and Dan Glover. "Graduated response and copyright: an idea that is right for the times." Lawyers Weekly. January 20th, 2010: "Graduated responses systems are not intended to be anti-consumer or heavy handed. To the contrary, user interests and their privacy and procedural rights are respected. Instead of being hauled into court for copyright infringements, users receive multiple notices before any action is taken by rights holders. These notices provide ample opportunities to change consumer behaviour from unauthorized file sharing to purchasing content legally. When proceedings are taken, there are procedural safeguards to ensure that sanctions are only imposed on the real offenders, and that they are proportionate."
  • Graduated response would only temporarily cut-off Internet. Graduated response would cut off Internet access, for those ignoring the first two warning, only temporarily from between 3 months to a year, and possibly less for people that promise to never again pirate musive and other files illegally. This means that cutting off Internet access can be measured proportionately to the severity of the infringement that took place.
[Add New]

Con

  • Suspending Internet access for file-sharing is draconian.
  • Small fee for piracy more proportional than disconnection. Many have proposed fees of different sizes for illegal downloading music or video files. In New Zealand, for example, many have proposed fees approximately three times the value of the dowloaded materials. Some proposed fees of $100 for any illegal download of CDS or DVDs with a cap on fines at $1000 for a single month. This ensures that the penalty can be quite stiff, and an effective deterrent, while not going too far in fully cutting-off an Internet user's access to the Web. And, this policy could be implemented as a three strikes policy, in which two warning are provided to the offending user, then followed by a fine instead of fully cutting Internet users off.
  • HADOPI violates human right to Internet access. United Nations' Universal Declaration of Human Rights includes the right to education and the right to work, which may hinge on Internet access.
  • Cutting off access does not mean individual can't get online. Being cut-off from Internet access at one IP address at home (for a limited period) does not usually mean that an individual cannot get online, for example at wifi spots or public libraries. It simply inconveniences the individual a little bit, making it a little harder to get online, and so acting as a punishment and deterrent for further pirating.
[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section down]
[Move subquestion section up]

Judicial review: Is judicial review appropriate in HADOPI?

[Add New]

Pro

[Add New]

Con

[Edit]
[Delete Subquestion section]
[Add new subquestion section]
[Move subquestion section up]

Pro/con sources

[Add New]

Pro

Click "edit" and write arguments here





[Add New]

Con




See also

External links and resources

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.