Christian Engström, Pirate MEP

5 november 2009

Telecom package: Final agreed text

Postat i: English,informationspolitik,Telecoms Package — Christian Engström @ 1:45
IMG_2283

Philippe Lamberts (Green) and Christian Engström (Pirate)

The European Parliament and the Council of Ministers reached agreement on a text tonight. The conciliation process is now over. The acceptance of the text was unanimous by the parliament’s delegation, i.e.: including us Pirates and Greens.
This is the final text (compared to the parliament’s last proposal):

3a. Measures taken by Member States regarding end-users’ access to or use of services and applications through electronic communications networks shall respect the fundamental rights and freedoms of natural persons, as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and general principles of Community law.

Any of these measures regarding end-user’s access to or use of services and applications through electronic communications networks liable to restrict those fundamental rights or freedoms may only be imposed if they are appropriate, proportionate and necessary within a democratic society, and their implementation shall be subject to adequate procedural safeguards in conformity with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and with general principles of Community law, including effective judicial protection and due process. Accordingly, these measures may only be taken with due respect for the principle of presumption of innocence and the right to privacy. and shall guarantee a A prior fair and impartial procedure shall be guaranteed, including the right to be heard of the person or persons concerned, subject to the need for appropriate conditions and procedural arrangements in duly substantiated cases of urgency in conformity with European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. and tThe right to an effective and timely judicial review shall be guaranteed.

To be honest, I never thought this would happen. It is not everything that we would have wanted in the best of worlds, and this is not the end of the fight for a free and open internet. But it is a much bigger step in the right direction than I would have dared to hope for.

We would never have been able to achieve this without all the work that the community of net activists has put in. We have shown that ordinary citizens working together can make a difference. And this is only the beginning.

The internet community has begun to flex its muscles.

…………

Update: Further analysis of the text: Landmarks in the Telecoms text

Press release from the Pirate Party in English and in Swedish

Andra bloggar om: , , , ,

168 kommentarer

  1. Thank you Christian, you have made a difference! :-)

    Kommentar av Daniel Wijk — 5 november 2009 @ 1:49

  2. Grattis.
    Cred till dem cred ska givas.

    Kommentar av scaber nestor — 5 november 2009 @ 1:57

  3. Yay! Bra jobbat! Fast om steget verkligen är i rätt riktning, eller om det bara är ett oväntat kort steg åt fel håll går ju att diskutera. Man hade hur som helst förväntat sig värre. Gå och lägg er nu, det är ni värda.

    Kommentar av Brynolf — 5 november 2009 @ 2:02

  4. AWESOME!!!!!!!11 jag blir riktigt glad :D :D Nu är typ hälften klart. Om också nätneutralitet kan back-portas in i nya lagen så är det ultimat :D

    men framför allt: Det här är verkligen trevligt! Det visar att det vi arbetade för när vi kampanjade för att få in dig i parlamentet inför EU-valet ger reella resultat. Det är asbra för min, och förmodligen andras, motivation. Piratpartiet FTW!!

    Kommentar av Kalle Vedin — 5 november 2009 @ 2:09

  5. The text states that ”A prior fair and impartial procedure shall be guaranteed”.

    Who decides what is a prior fair and impartial ”procedure”? There is now no mentioning of ”court” or ”tribunal”…

    Anyhow, we now may see at least hope för the future…

    The best of all is that now all forces may be concentrated on the ACTA.

    Thank you for everything, Christian et al!

    Kommentar av Hans J — 5 november 2009 @ 2:10

  6. Bra jobbat, Christian!

    Jag hade nästan förväntat mig att förhandlingarna inatt skulle sluta i en katastrof för allt vad rättssäkerheten på Internet heter, men det verkar som att ni nått en överenskommelse som vi alla kanske kan leva med. Frågan är vad som händer när ACTA kommer…

    Kommentar av Sandra — 5 november 2009 @ 2:12

  7. AT LAST! :D :D :D :D

    Kommentar av Manen — 5 november 2009 @ 2:15

  8. :D

    Kommentar av apisms — 5 november 2009 @ 2:18

  9. Re: comment 5
    It is clear that prior means that the procedure must take place before anyone is banned.
    Fair and impartial means that you get to defend yourself in a proper manner. The only way
    to accomplish that is to have proper court proceedings, with proper requirements for evidence
    and a proper procedure for appeals.

    Kommentar av Gurra — 5 november 2009 @ 2:20

  10. @Gurra:

    I do understand what the words means. I just wondered WHO DECIDES what is such a ”procedure”

    Kommentar av Hans J — 5 november 2009 @ 2:30

  11. @Hans J:

    It’s works like all other EU legislation; the member states implement directives as they see fit and if someone thinks that they aren’t in conformance with EU law they can take it to the EC court.

    Kommentar av Lars — 5 november 2009 @ 2:48

  12. It is better than I thought this would end, so I suppose it is a victory. But I’m not convinced it even stands the Hadopi test. ”Prior procedure” seems intentionally vague, and could just mean a letter that states that your connection is to be terminated in the near future with information about how to send in your complaints (i.e., exercising that ”right to be heard”).

    Kommentar av Tino — 5 november 2009 @ 2:52

  13. @Lars:

    LOL.. Well then it doesn’t stand the HADOPI test. Also the time to get anything through EC court usually takes six to eight years! In the meantime the respective national interpretation is valid.

    Kommentar av Hans J — 5 november 2009 @ 2:58

  14. @Hans J:

    That is the only thing that you could ever get from EU legislation. It’s the court that decides whether national law is in conformance, that’s the way it has always worked.

    Kommentar av Lars — 5 november 2009 @ 3:03

  15. …except that countries that have constitutional courts could possibly try national laws against EU law themselves, before the EC court does it.

    Kommentar av Lars — 5 november 2009 @ 3:04

  16. [...] kunnat nere i Bryssel, utan framförallt alla EUs medborgare.Fler: Piraterna, Europaportalen, DN, Christian Engström (PP), SvD & Henrik Alexandersson Published by Christian Valtersson kl. 03:00 [...]

    Pingback av Christian Valtersson: Det omöjliga har hänt... — 5 november 2009 @ 3:07

  17. I am afraid that the logical step after this will be new legislations in the member states that tries to introduce the penalty of denied access to or use of services through electronic communications networks, and i think you are aware of the measures needed to make a court ruling like that effective.

    Everyone of us has the right to freedom of expression. This right include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority regardless of frontiers.

    A state penalty consisting of a denied access to or use of services through electronic communications networks, is a denial of the above right. But here comes the danger, states are allowed to do that already for protecting moral or for protecting the reputation or rights of others (like copyright for example..).

    Look at the issue in a perspective of snail mail: Measures taken by Member States regarding citizens access to or use of postal services shall.. (be completely OK after a trial) Very sick indeed, but with a directive worded like the 3a regarding postal services, that would be OK too.

    Congratulation Christian, you have just participated in introducing this new penalty of denying citizens access to the Internet, EU-wide. You have just made the coming ACTA treaty a big favor, paved the way for all EU-states to comply in restricting peoples access to or use of services through electronic communications networks. Congratulations!

    Kommentar av William T. — 5 november 2009 @ 3:10

  18. I am very satisfied with having voted for the pirate party. All Europe should be proud of the representatives in the parliament.

    I really hope that those heroes in Brussels will do equally well with ACTA.

    Kommentar av Hans J — 5 november 2009 @ 3:18

  19. This gave me some hope back. Thank you all for your hard work!
    I will show my gratitude by adding some cash to the PP fund.

    Kommentar av Anders — 5 november 2009 @ 6:11

  20. [...] Telecom package: Final agreed text « Christian Engström, Pirate MEP [...]

    Pingback av The Ultimate Reiki Package. | Pharmacy Info 4 You — 5 november 2009 @ 6:15

  21. This is à good deal. It does not violate the member states right to set up their justice system the way they want. So it is within the scope of article 95 EC.

    At the same time it recognises that a prior procedure must take place. This does not exclude HADOPI but it severely restricts how such an agency should operate, and it gives us the right to appeal to the courts.

    Sarkozy may have his high authority, but it is going to look like a tribunal, but possibly without the opportunity to have oral proceedings.

    An exception for national emergencies is actually not so bad. Not even the European convention stands in the way for à nation to defend itself. Cyber warfare is real.

    In the end it shows that if you stand up to principle it will pay off. It is an enormuous victory for the parliament. And it very much shows a necessity to have the pirate movement present in all parlaments in the world.

    Regarding net neutrality, let us not forget that with the telecoms package now becoming law, operators will be required to declare which services they are blocking or restricting. Also it means stricter cometition laws and that a new european agency for monitoring the telecoms market now can be setup.

    The only ”bad” thing here, Christian, is that the expectations on you is now sky high for the four and a half years left of your term. But you are soon to get company so I’m confident we will see more of this before 2014.

    Kommentar av Johan Tjäder — 5 november 2009 @ 7:02

  22. Tack!

    Kommentar av Ragnar E — 5 november 2009 @ 7:13

  23. Bra jobbat! :-)

    Kommentar av David — 5 november 2009 @ 7:23

  24. Just saw this @ SvD and could not believe my eyes. You look really happy with yourself in that pic and you should be. I personally cannot remember when any politician in any country has given the constituency so much ‘bang for buck’. I see you as a contender for Politician Championship of the World, the ‘Tussle in Brussels’ being right up there with the ‘Rumble in the Jungle’.

    Kommentar av Rick — 5 november 2009 @ 7:25

  25. Thank you all for your fight against the political colonization of the net!

    Unfortunaley, I think that we lost this battle with the wording in 3a, if the leaked parts from the korean ACTA negotiations are true.

    Simply put, if the ISPs have liability for the content that their users transmit, then no measures have to be taken by any member state and ”ECHR” is not applicable.
    (Any person who feels his or her rights have been violated under the Convention by a state party can take a case to the Court.)

    Iow. the ISPs will be forced to have some kind of 3-strike procedure in their general terms in order not to risk to be taken to court.

    Another question arise, will any ISP dare to let encrypted traffic thru their networks,especially if the origin of the packets are unknown?
    (ie.The anonymization services used during the Iran election, etc.)

    Kommentar av Sjöholm — 5 november 2009 @ 7:34

  26. [...] kom både Parlamentet och Rådet överens om följande: 3a. Measures taken by Member States regarding end-users’ access to or use of services and [...]

    Pingback av Framsteg med telekompaketet « Aspera — 5 november 2009 @ 7:36

  27. Thanks a lot. Great Job!

    Kommentar av Bogomil Shopov — 5 november 2009 @ 7:36

  28. Bravo Christian med vänner! Ett första steg åt rätt håll.

    Kommentar av Peter F — 5 november 2009 @ 7:40

  29. @Sjöholm

    Well, we have to take this fight also. But consider this. The parliament have today succeeded to establish end users’ rights against state action. What makes you believe it will pass an ACTA-agreement effectively nullifying this milestone. I hope that all MEPs now have realized that you don’t have to buy anything. And that the commission does also take notice to this strong stance of the parliament.

    The best outcome of this would be that the Commission never want to go through this again, and therefore includes safeguards in its initial proposals.

    Kommentar av Johan Tjäder — 5 november 2009 @ 7:52

  30. Det är så eu-byråkratin ska hackas, kul att det lönar sig att arbeta för (pp). Bra jobbat.

    Kommentar av nipe — 5 november 2009 @ 7:56

  31. [...] är telekompaketet avklarat och huvuddelen av tillägg 138 blev kvar i telekompaketet – även om det skrevs om på ett annat sätt och gav bort möjligheterna [...]

    Pingback av Anders S Lindbäck om kunskapssamhället · Telekompaketet rättat! Dags för nätneutralitet ? — 5 november 2009 @ 8:00

  32. @Christian – Was there any position (or declaration) expressed on behalf of Bulgaria?

    Kommentar av Bogomil Shopov — 5 november 2009 @ 8:10

  33. Lysande arbete, Christian!! Du är mer än värdig ditt mandat! Vi är, typ, stolta över dig… ;)

    Kommentar av Anaïs — 5 november 2009 @ 8:29

  34. [...] Christian Engström rapporterade inatt om vad slutresultatet av förhandlingarna för Telekompaketet blev. Vårt mål hade varit att olagligförklara dumheter som att stänga av folk från Internet för bagateller som fildelning,  vilket Frankrike håller på att införa, och som Storbritannien har aviserat. [...]

    Pingback av Rick Falkvinge (PP) » Seger i Bryssel om Telekompaketet — 5 november 2009 @ 8:32

  35. [...] Telecom package: Final agreed text « Christian Engström, Pirate MEP [...]

    Pingback av jardenberg kommenterar – 2009-11-05 — jardenberg unedited — 5 november 2009 @ 8:44

  36. [...] Engström, Pirate MEP announced today: The European Parliament and the Council of Ministers reached agreement on a text tonight. [...]

    Pingback av Veni | Вени » Blog Archive » Good News for the Internet Users in Europe — 5 november 2009 @ 8:51

  37. Thank you Christian for fighting for our civil rights!

    Kommentar av Niklas — 5 november 2009 @ 8:57

  38. [...] är inte perfekt, skriver Christian Engström (PP), men det är mer än han och flera av oss andra vågat hoppas på. [...]

    Pingback av opassande » Blog Archive » Ömsom vin, ömsom vatten — 5 november 2009 @ 9:12

  39. @Johan Tjäder

    I agree that it’s a milestone, and provides some safeguards against actions of the member states.

    But it’s only half the battle on this issue, if we don’t stop the present draft of ACTA, the result will not be what we want.

    Kommentar av Sjöholm — 5 november 2009 @ 9:20

  40. I am a bit worried that they use the word ”procedure” instead of trial/court or similar.

    Kommentar av Simon — 5 november 2009 @ 9:24

  41. [...] kommer nu från Lena EK när det gäller Telekompaketet och avstängning från Internet som precis slutflörhandlats i EU. Läs även Lake, Christian Engström, Henrik Alexandersson, Scaber Nestor, [...]

    Pingback av Vi behöver lättläst information om FRA m.m. | Oscar Fredriksson (C) — 5 november 2009 @ 9:29

  42. Yarr! in the name of human rights!

    Kommentar av calandrella — 5 november 2009 @ 9:45

  43. [...] stor och bred i denna fråga och många har agerat för att få till stånd en ändring. Hur mycket Piratpartiet påverkat i detta är svårt att säga. Kanske hade ändringarna kommit till stånd i alla fall. [...]

    Pingback av Den goda kraften ser ut att vinna « Kent Persson (m) blogg — 5 november 2009 @ 9:56

  44. ”I den text som antogs finns vissa undantag då en ”rättvis process” inte behöver gälla. Det handlar om brottslighet kopplad till exempelvis terrorism, eller andra typer av brott som finns angivna i Europakonventionen.”, http://www.europaportalen.se/index.php?newsID=46106&page=301&more=1&1stpage=1
    Så… det är okej att skippa rättssäkerhet för misstänkta terrorister? *host*Guantanamo*host* Det låter… oroväckande.

    Kommentar av calandrella — 5 november 2009 @ 9:59

  45. Congratulations!

    I just hope that we haven’t lost the battle about whether disconnecting users – a kind of virtual improsonement – can be a valid punishment at all in the process. But I’m feeling positive today after reading these news. Not only because this is good for basic democratic rights (not to speak of the respect for politicians), but also because it strengthens the Pirate Party. You now already have one important achievement that you can point to when someone asks you what you have accomplished.

    Btw. I think it’s an excellent decision you made to write more in English. It’s an international movement so it’s important that everyone can take part of it.

    Kommentar av Tor — 5 november 2009 @ 10:04

  46. Stort tack för ett fantastiskt arbete! Jag är idag mycket stolt över min röst på PP och en repris i september är nu självklar! Detta ska firas med att en donation är på väg till partiet!

    Kommentar av V — 5 november 2009 @ 10:05

  47. Tack för ett väl utfört arbete!

    Kommentar av Matte — 5 november 2009 @ 10:48

  48. Vad glad jag blir. Tack för allt arbete du/ni lagt ner på denna fråga.
    Nu är det bara fortsätta – På dom bara!

    Kommentar av Ivan — 5 november 2009 @ 10:55

  49. [...] mer ingående om detta hos Christian Engström som ska ha ett STORT tack för sin [...]

    Pingback av Kudos PP « Equiliberal — 5 november 2009 @ 10:57

  50. Tackar och bockar för att någon lever upp till sina väljares förtroende. Nu är det dags att bekämpa ACTA med näbbar och klor!

    Kommentar av Johan — 5 november 2009 @ 10:58

  51. Fantastic work Mr E. But are we missing something? How could the UK and France agree upon this?

    Kommentar av stroll — 5 november 2009 @ 11:17

  52. [...] Engström skriver lite tyngre om själva formuleringarna på engelska. Rick Falkvinge gav summeringen ovan. Hax har förstås [...]

    Pingback av Seger i telekompaketet! « projO's/gothbarbie's blog — 5 november 2009 @ 11:36

  53. Sjöholm wrote (#25):

    Simply put, if the ISPs have liability for the content that their users transmit, then no measures have to be taken by any member state and ”ECHR” is not applicable.

    This point was discussed a lot by the EP delegation, and it is a perfectly valic concern.

    This is the reason why it says ”…and their implementation shall be subject to adequate procedural safeguards…”. If a member state chooses to implement things by letting the ISPs do the dirty work, that is still covered through this wording.

    Kommentar av Christian Engström — 5 november 2009 @ 11:46

  54. Calandrella skrev (#44):

    ”I den text som antogs finns vissa undantag då en ”rättvis process” inte behöver gälla. Det handlar om brottslighet kopplad till exempelvis terrorism, eller andra typer av brott som finns angivna i Europakonventionen.”,
    Så… det är okej att skippa rättssäkerhet för misstänkta terrorister?

    Nej, det räcker faktiskt inte ens med terrorism eller grov brottslighet, eftersom texten refererar till undantaget i Europakonventionen om mänskliga rättigheter.

    Slår man upp konventionen ser man att det enda undantaget är artikel 15, som pratar om att

    15. Under krig eller i annat allmänt nödläge som hotar nationens existens
    får en hög fördragsslutande part vidta åtgärder som innebär avvikelser
    från dess skyldigheter enligt denna konvention i den utsträckning som
    det är oundgängligen nödvändigt med hänsyn till situationens krav,
    under förutsättning att dessa åtgärder inte strider mot dess övriga
    förpliktelser enligt den internationella rätten.

    Så just det undantaget tycker jag känns helt vattentätt.

    Kommentar av Christian Engström — 5 november 2009 @ 11:56

  55. Great job! Thanks in the name of a lot of people which needs freedom and people like you in this rats nest called european union.

    Kommentar av López — 5 november 2009 @ 11:56

  56. Gôtt jobbat!

    Kommentar av AM — 5 november 2009 @ 12:01

  57. Tack! Grattis!

    Det känns underbart att röstat på dig och PP.

    Jag kommer rösta piratpartiet valet 2010!

    Kommentar av sebastian johansson — 5 november 2009 @ 12:04

  58. @canderella:

    Jag instämmer i Christians svar (#54) med tillägget att den stat som utnyttjar sin rättighet enligt Artikel 15 också ska anmäla detta till Europarådets generalsekreterare med angivande av skäl.

    Detta är en starkt avkylande bestämmelse. Väldigt få länder skulle nog i fredstid vilja skicka det där brevet som säger ”Nu upphör vi att garantera de mänskliga rättigheterna…” En sådan not skulle skärskådas bokstav för bokstav – det kan jag lova.

    Men om man hänvisar till Europeiska konventionen i normalfallet, så får man även acceptera undantagen. Jag ser inte det som en stor fråga.

    Dessutom om en stat anser att du är en misstänkt terrorist så är nog din internetanslutning inte ditt stora bekymmer, utan snarare att du inte blir ansluten till världen överhuvudtaget från häktescellen.

    Kommentar av Johan Tjäder — 5 november 2009 @ 12:18

  59. Sorry, but how could you ever give your vote for such a foul compromise?
    IMHO no compromise is better than such a foul one.

    Me and a lot of other German Piretes are deeply disappointed that you *agreed* to this compromise, as is EFF and other NGOs.

    What you just did was giving in. The lobby of the entertainement-industry might want to put you on their payroll soon – hope it’s worth it…

    Kommentar av Gregor — 5 november 2009 @ 12:42

  60. Two thumbs up.

    If this has any negative effect in the ACTA negotiations for the pro-copyright zealots, then it’s probably pretty solid. Just to sad the proceedings are behind locked doors, ’cause it’d be real interesting to see ‘em hop around.

    Kommentar av ST — 5 november 2009 @ 12:44

  61. [...] sollte auf jeden Fall das Blog von Christian lesen und nein er hat nicht den Verstand verloren: Christians Blogeintrag zum Telecom Package KategorienAllgemein, Datensch(m)utz, News, Politik, zensur Tags: christian, egstroem, [...]

    Pingback av Achtung beim Heiseartikel “Halbgarer Kompromiss zu Internetsperren” | ghcif — 5 november 2009 @ 13:07

  62. [...] när vi vunnit en seger mot konspirerande krafter på just den femte november (som @berinder) framför mig i bussen [...]

    Pingback av Rick Falkvinge (PP) » Remember, remember — 5 november 2009 @ 13:08

  63. [...] Apesar disso, deputados importantes no processo, como Christian Engström, eleito pelo Partido Pirata sueco, mostraram-se agradados com o texto final (ler Telecom package: Final agreed text). [...]

    Pingback av UE decide corte do acesso à Internet sem ordem judicial ← Diário2 — 5 november 2009 @ 13:42

  64. The copyright lobbyists are celebrating with champagne. The parliament has agreed that a ”prior procedure” is all it takes to get someone of the net. I am deeply disappointed with the result.

    I don’t understand why everyone is happy, there is nothing to be happy about as I see it. Have the people in this thread read the text, or are they just celebrating because the Pirate party says the compromise is good?

    Kommentar av Dissapointed — 5 november 2009 @ 13:43

  65. Tack för att du ger oss pirater valuta för hårt valarbete. 40 personer i en källare i gamla stan känns länge sen :)

    Kommentar av Jakoe — 5 november 2009 @ 13:49

  66. [...] El Partido PIRATA sueco, a favor de la nueva reforma del paquete Telecom [...]

    Pingback av El Partido PIRATA sueco, a favor de la nueva reforma del paquete Telecom — 5 november 2009 @ 13:57

  67. Noch nicht mal an der Macht und schon gleicht sich die Piratenpartei immer mehr den anderen Parteien an. Schade #fail

    Kommentar av Oh mein Gott — 5 november 2009 @ 13:58

  68. i dont like this at all… I mean, in Germany, i voted for the pirates to fight against those laws. Ok, youre not a german political person, but you´re a pirate! This should mean you are against this sh***…

    Ok, it is a littel bit better then the original law. But it is never the less unacceptable! A group of people who could not get a new concept to sell their stuff on the internet / in eth 21th century enforces a law to punish people, who don’t like the strict terms of use?

    I mean, 15 years bevore this, when we just had MC and CD, it was legal(and normaly still is) to copy music etc. for your personal interest, as a backup, and even to give these copies to your friends / famalies (in a small range). Now, these companys have enforced a law that it is not legal to copy this stuff, yet to give it to your friends. Seeing that most people don’t hold this stupid law, doing what was legal before (just using another medium instead of MCs), this companys can’t allocate to the new medium and want a new law.

    This reminds me so much of dark-future RPGs liek shadowrun. Companys making laws, company lawq goes over national law… strict ”justice” against everyone..

    I hoped fromj the pirates to help us against this. But seeing you agreeing in this ”Ok, shut down the internet of everyone who seems to download something illegal” is not acceptable!

    The big problem is: The only clue in these cases are Ip-Adresses. And the fact (at least for germany) is this:
    - There ARE errors in this. Cycling-errors in the IP-Adress for instance.
    - But the courts normaly don’t favour the defenders but the other party, jou have to prove that you didn’t do something! Which is practically not possible.
    - Also this whole thing costs money. Lots of money. No problem for a big-a** company or interest-group, but for a simple person who is not guilty (unitl proven (!!) otherwise), it’s not possible. And this Prove is mostly just a log of the form ”IP XYZ has Down / uploaded file ABC at this date and this time”… Well, i dont like this one bit.

    For me, i’m dissapointed by this. I would have liked to heaer ”Pirates are against the hole company-driven law”. Thas would be the right way, and maybe the only way to prove you are better than those other political monkeys.

    Kommentar av Freestila — 5 november 2009 @ 14:02

  69. [...] goed nieuws dankzij de man van de piratenpartij. Frankrijk had enige maanden geleden een wet in hun land ingevoerd met betrekking tot illegaal [...]

    Pingback av Niet zomaar afgesloten worden. » Two spoons of Garlic — 5 november 2009 @ 14:24

  70. [...] Christian Engström Mitglied der schwedischen Piratenpartei mit Sitz im Europäischen Parlament [...]

    Pingback av Verspätetes Halloween: Die Horrorliste « Marcel-André Casasola Merkle — 5 november 2009 @ 14:25

  71. Freestile: So you’d prefer him to not achieve anything but at least go down with guns blazing? That’s the wrong attitude for somebody in parliament. Christian and his collegues achieved a lot, don’t play it down.

    Kommentar av b.pwned — 5 november 2009 @ 14:36

  72. To 68: copyright infringement under this current text does NOT classify as an urgency and therefore cannot be exempted from the prior procedure where culpability of the accused has to be demonstrated. Urgency refers to issues of national security or public safety issues. This is huge!!

    The text only allows for the prior procedure to exist and not a ”paralel” one. The exemption granted under the duly justified urgency only allows for a derogation to take preventive measures, but Governments will not be able to create in their laws two separate procedures to include what offences they see fit in each of them.

    I am very happy with this text that will require several existing laws to change, such as Hadopi. Now a judge signs the order without a need to guarantee a procedure or prove someone guilty. The law will need to be revised to include this!

    Kommentar av Maria — 5 november 2009 @ 14:39

  73. Congratulations to your successful work, Christian and congratulations to the Council for understanding their duty and obligations.

    If we would see Internet cutoffs any time soon based on allegations of copyright breaches or similar, let’s all work together to move the case to the EC Court of Justice. When it has ruled such cutoffs to be illegal, we will have a good precedent to keep shouting lobbyists quiet.

    Mankind beats greed.

    Kommentar av Jakob — 5 november 2009 @ 14:40

  74. Thanks Christian and fellow believers, when can we vote for you (from the Netherlands)!-)

    Kommentar av Huub Knops — 5 november 2009 @ 15:02

  75. [...] Der Rat forderte nun eine Art Schnellverfahren ohne Richter gegen Tauschbörsenbenutzer. Das Parlament bestand hingegen auf einem ordentlichen Gerichtsverfahren. Nach einigem hin und her im Vermittlungsverfahren kam es am 4. November zu einer Einigung über einen gemeinsamen Entwurf. [...]

    Pingback av RaheBlog » Blog Archive » Bewertung: telecoms-package-deal — 5 november 2009 @ 15:09

  76. [...] paso adelante” en la defensa de los derechos de los internautas europeos incluso por el Partido Pirata, Los Verdes o los Socialistas Europeos, la prensa española, lejos de informarse con rigor de lo [...]

    Pingback av Cuando la prensa toca de oido | NetoRatón 3.0 — 5 november 2009 @ 15:33

  77. [...] agreement means that member countries will not be allowed to do this. A great success, according to Christian Engström, Swedish Pirate Party MEP: “To be honest, I never thought this would happen. It is not [...]

    Pingback av eatanicecream.com » Pirates-Mafia, 1-0 — 5 november 2009 @ 15:34

  78. [...] Christian Engström, el eurodiputado del Partido Pirata, no es del todo pesimista. Cree que algunas de las peores cuestiones del Paquete de Telecomunicaciones han sido resueltas: “No es lo que nos hubiese gustado en el mejor de los mundos posibles pero es un paso en la dirección…“. [...]

    Pingback av Libertad vigilada para internet : Blogografia — 5 november 2009 @ 15:40

  79. @Freestila: It’s now up to you to make sure Germany does not use this option, or imposes very high standards for shutting down end-users.

    I think it’s too bad that there was not enough support for a pirate party in the Bundestag elections, because the fight for Internet users rights cannot take place in Brussels only. It needs to take place in Berlin, Stockholm, Paris, London, Madrid, Rome and all other capitals of Europe and of the world.

    Kommentar av Johan Tjäder — 5 november 2009 @ 16:01

  80. [...] var det många som var oroliga för vad slutresultatet skulle bli. Men resultatet visade sig bli bättre än vad man vågat hoppas på – och det gäller ärligt talat även mig.  Formellt sett är det dock inte klart än eftersom [...]

    Pingback av (C)eger i Bryssel – Telekompaketet klart! | Riksdagskansliet — 5 november 2009 @ 16:03

  81. [...] reported by Engström, the exact text reads: 3a. Measures taken by Member States regarding end-users’ [...]

    Pingback av File-Sharers Protected Under Proposed EU Legislation - P2P Talk? — 5 november 2009 @ 16:04

  82. What a deep disappointment. Congratulations to you for giving up ideals and choosing EU propaganda speech so fast after your election.

    Kommentar av Klaus — 5 november 2009 @ 16:49

  83. [...] TorrentFreak şi Blogul lui Christian Engström (conţine forma finalǎ a textului) Comments [...]

    Pingback av Victorie Partiala a PP in cazul Pachetului Telecom | Partidul Piratilor — 5 november 2009 @ 16:50

  84. [...] paso adelante” en la defensa de los derechos de los internautas europeos incluso por el Partido Pirata, Los Verdes o los Socialistas Europeos, la prensa española, lejos de informarse con rigor de lo [...]

    Pingback av Cuando la prensa toca de oido : Blogografia — 5 november 2009 @ 17:01

  85. ”in conformity with European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms”

    Is this really an achievement or is it just this a matter of course?

    I’m disappointed

    Kommentar av Karamic — 5 november 2009 @ 17:07

  86. Underbart! :D

    Kommentar av Malabi — 5 november 2009 @ 17:18

  87. Good work, thanks! :-)
    This is something we can push back under the rock it crept from.

    Kommentar av LifeScientology — 5 november 2009 @ 17:21

  88. To Karamic: it is an achievement as these rights in the convention traditionally only applied to criminal law. (pressumption of innocence, due process, right to be heard, etc). Now they will also apply to administrative procedures which will seriously limit any possible arbitrary decisions by them.

    Kommentar av Maria — 5 november 2009 @ 17:29

  89. [...] i EU-parlamentet har lyckats tvinga fram en hygglig kompromiss om telekompaketet. Till och med Christian Engström verkar nöjd för dagen. Karl Sigfrid sätter dock in uppgörelsen in ett större sammanhang, och [...]

    Pingback av Max Andersson: En halv seger om telekompaketet — 5 november 2009 @ 17:33

  90. Tack Christian Engström och Henrik Alexandersson för att ni sett till att vi ‘vanliga medborgare’ fått insyn i processen!

    Kommentar av none — 5 november 2009 @ 17:49

  91. [...] reported by Engström, the exact text reads: 3a. Measures taken by Member States regarding end-users’ [...]

    Pingback av File-Sharers Protected Under Proposed EU Legislation | We R Pirates — 5 november 2009 @ 18:00

  92. [...] of this text, we’ll quote the most important passage, as reported by Pirate Party’s Christian Engström, who was also involved in the creation of the document. “Measures taken by Member States [...]

    Pingback av New EU Legislation Protects File Sharers…To a Certain Extent : BeginnerPC — 5 november 2009 @ 18:01

  93. I am really disappointed, the agreement opens up the possibilities for shutting down Internet users without a prior judgment in court. Torstensson has fooled you all. I don’t understand how you could accept this compromise, it’s not a compromise it is still an insult to the parliament. Christian, I know you have the best intentions, but this time it went totally wrong.

    Kommentar av Jens — 5 november 2009 @ 18:26

  94. Now the telecoms package just needs to be changed to make disconnections completely impossible. There are appropriate ways for dealing with civil offenses, notably fines, the mere idea of disconnection should be scrapped once and for all.

    Kommentar av Bartek — 5 november 2009 @ 18:27

  95. Kanonbra jobbat! Visst hade vi hoppats på mer men detta visar ändå vad några engagerade personer kan åstadkomma. Heder åt dig Christian och dina medkämpar.

    Kommentar av Anders — 5 november 2009 @ 18:39

  96. [...] Engström har postat den berörda skrivningen angående internetanvändarnas rättssäkerhet här. Här är den i sin helhet: 3a. Measures taken by Member States regarding end-users’ access to [...]

    Pingback av Telekompaketet slutförhandlat efter tveksam kompromiss « DOOM4 — 5 november 2009 @ 18:47

  97. @Jens

    Are you interested in real legislation or some lofty wording that the Court would strike down immediately – leaving no protection what so ever?

    The Parliament is restricted to act within the EC treaty. I wouldn’t have it any other way.

    Kommentar av Johan Tjäder — 5 november 2009 @ 18:59

  98. Well, congratulations: you just made me rethink my decision to join up with the pirate party in June 09.

    With this new bill, there still is the need of an accused violator to prove his innocence- and not the other way round as it usually is in a court of law.

    Kommentar av ALex — 5 november 2009 @ 19:20

  99. @Johan Tjäder

    I would like real legislation, but not legislation saying that it is not necessary with a real trial, in a real court, not: ”A prior fair and impartial procedure”. I am afraid that the compromise is contra-productive and that we would be better off without it. I hope you can convince me that i am wrong ;-)

    Kommentar av Jens — 5 november 2009 @ 19:57

  100. Voting – it works, bitches!

    And to the *AA lobby: this is what happen’s when you push it (i.e. wordings of lawful content) too far!

    Ha!

    /Werner

    Kommentar av Werner — 5 november 2009 @ 20:10

  101. To jens a ”prior judicial ruling” does not necessarily imply a trial. Look at Hadopi 2, the judge is only there to sign. I think that the EP has been smart in addressing the issue of the prior procedure.

    This text does not force Member States that have in their constitution that it should be a judicial decision to change it (and the same is true the other way around). but under both circumstances both systems will need to hold the prior procedure where the burden of proof falls in the hands of the acuser and not the way around (principle of pressumption of innocence), unlike what another commenter has said.

    Kommentar av Maria — 5 november 2009 @ 20:23

  102. [...] om jag tycker det gick bättre än jag först trodde så är jag som många andra pirater inte riktigt nöjd med [...]

    Pingback av Telekompaketet igen « Jan "PiratJanne" Lindgren — 5 november 2009 @ 20:50

  103. can you comment on this please?

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/05/telecoms_package/

    Kommentar av Blake — 5 november 2009 @ 20:57

  104. A reflection: the phrasing is ”Measures taken by Member States regarding end-users’ access”. But what happens if a member state takes measure A that forces ISPs to take measure B that implies disconnecting certain users without a fair trial? Would measure B then be a measure taken by a member state or would it be a measure taken by an ISP?

    Kommentar av Tor — 5 november 2009 @ 21:02

  105. Freestila, ”i dont like this at all… I mean, in Germany, i voted for the pirates to fight against those laws. Ok, youre not a german political person, but you´re a pirate! This should mean you are against this sh***…”

    What exactly do you mean with ”those laws”? You do know the whole point of the telecom package is to regulate the telecom business for your benefit? To get cheaper bills to pay? To get more options? To not get locked-in by an operator by unusually weird and cruel operator defined rules? Et cetera.

    That the copyright outfits hijacked the whole thing and managed to fool some politicians with their bull crap is bad, but as long as it is within the rules of the democratic process, everything is as it’s supposed to be, and everyone else has to act accordingly, which in this case meant compromising to get the package through the hoops sinking the package would mean several more years of tax payers money, again, to get the consumers rights to get get what they ought to have had all along in a free market, choices less expenses.

    We can be all the idealists we want to, but remember that the pirate party consists of idealists from left to right, so we all have to be somewhat realistic. We have to converge on the basic of what the pirate party stands for and that’s it! No more no less, lest you want to create every kind of internal problem.

    So what does the pirate party stand for in this specific case? No case at all? Does the copyright outfits have much of a problem acting in the current, less regulated, market? Are the consumers happy with the current state of not really knowing what’s what? The copyright outfits have forced them self upon several ISPs this year alone within EU borders with the help of the current legislation. Imagine the current legislation coupled with a ratification of the ACTA agreement, and see how that pans out.

    Kommentar av ST — 5 november 2009 @ 21:29

  106. [...] de forma agridulce. Así el eurodiputado del Partido Pirata, Christian Engström, asegura en su blog que no es el mejor de los textos posibles pero que es un paso en la dirección [...]

    Pingback av Internet agridulce « El mundo desencajado — 5 november 2009 @ 21:38

  107. thanks christian! We believe in your work in the EU Parlament!

    From Spain

    Kommentar av javi — 5 november 2009 @ 21:40

  108. [...] of this text, we’ll quote the most important passage, as reported by Pirate Party’s Christian Engström, who was also involved in the creation of the document. “Measures taken by Member States [...]

    Pingback av New EU Legislation Protects File Sharers…To a Certain Extent | GoSocial.dk - Social Media Marketing — 5 november 2009 @ 22:01

  109. Thanks a lot for this, Christian.

    I think this is our best political victory ever.

    Please also pass my thanks to Erik Josefsson, Henrik Alexandersson and all the other good people who have helped us win this victory.

    Kommentar av Ole Husgaard — 5 november 2009 @ 22:26

  110. Tor, Precisely the EP insisted and succeeded in introducing the words ”and their implementation” to make sure that any other actor that is not the Government but is mandated by a law to deal with the implementation of the measures will be subject to exactly the same conditions as the Member States. This includes ISPs and/or administrative bodies.
    Hope it helps!

    Kommentar av Maria — 5 november 2009 @ 22:27

  111. [...] of this text, we’ll quote the most important passage, as reported by Pirate Party’s Christian Engström, who was also involved in the creation of the document. “Measures taken by Member States [...]

    Pingback av New EU Legislation Protects File Sharers…To a Certain Extent | World News — 5 november 2009 @ 22:37

  112. god work christian. relly god work ;)

    Kommentar av nezzi — 5 november 2009 @ 22:42

  113. Blake, about the article, it is a shame that it understands the amendment as only directed to address copyrights issues when that is not correct! it is there to defend fundamental rights of users and put limits to what governments and others can do to restrict them. However, the quote in the article expresses the same opinion I have of the agreed text. That there are heavy requirements to be fulfilled before cutting internet off (principle of innocence, right to privacy, etc) which will require changing many of the 3-strike laws. It does not necessarily forbids them, but it will force these laws to include the prior process to the cutting, will need to prove you’re guilty, and will not be merely sending 3 letters of warning.

    Kommentar av Maria — 5 november 2009 @ 22:54

  114. [...] Detta är mest bara för att generera länkkärlek egentligen! Telecom package: Final agreed text « Christian Engström, Pirate MEP. [...]

    Pingback av Telecom package: Final agreed text « Christian Engström, Pirate MEP « Min röst i cyberrymden — 6 november 2009 @ 0:15

  115. [...] zeigt sich Christian Engström, der EU-Abgeordnete der schwedischen Piratenpartei, er schreibt: To be honest, I never thought this would happen. It is not everything that we would have wanted in [...]

    Pingback av EU: Internetsperren ohne Richtervorbehalt? | internetsperren.at — 6 november 2009 @ 0:40

  116. [...] Telecom package: Final agreed text The European Parliament and the Council of Ministers reached agreement on a text tonight. The conciliation process is [...] [...]

    Pingback av Top Posts « WordPress.com — 6 november 2009 @ 1:17

  117. Yea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thank you Cristian!!!!!!!!!!! Thank you Pirat Partiet! You save all us!!!!!!!!!

    Kommentar av Kenneth — 6 november 2009 @ 1:41

  118. Eres un auténtico cínico. Yo firmé en tu apoyo, y estás contento por una mierda de resolución. Eres un farsante manipulador.

    Vete a la mierda.

    Alvarez

    Kommentar av Alvarez — 6 november 2009 @ 2:08

  119. You’re a real cynic. I signed on your support, and you’re happy with a crappy resolution. You’re a phony manipulator.

    Fuck.

    Alvarez

    Kommentar av Alvarez — 6 november 2009 @ 2:10

  120. [...] reported by Engström, the exact text reads: 3a. Measures taken by Member States regarding end-users’ [...]

    Pingback av File-Sharers Protected Under Proposed EU Legislation | InstantIdiocy — 6 november 2009 @ 2:45

  121. Sorry, but this is rediculous. Are you a worm set up by the music industry! You are a traitor – shame on you! I will not vote for the pirate party again!

    Kommentar av Angry former Pirateparty voter — 6 november 2009 @ 2:48

  122. [...] effectively removing the mechanism for free speech. The text of the amendment is available on Christian Engström’s site . The wording of a “fair and impartial procedure” stops short of guaranteeing a trial, [...]

    Pingback av Family Holloway » Blog Archive » EU Rejects ‘Guilt Upon Accusation’ (sort of).. — 6 november 2009 @ 3:20

  123. [...] of this text, we’ll quote the most important passage, as reported by Pirate Party’s Christian Engström, who was also involved in the creation of the document. “Measures taken by Member States [...]

    Pingback av New EU Legislation Protects File Sharers…To a Certain Extent | Brain Box — 6 november 2009 @ 4:20

  124. [...] reported by Engström, the exact text reads: 3a. Measures taken by Member States regarding end-users’ [...]

    Pingback av File-Sharers Protected Under Proposed EU Legislation – FUCK THE RIAA — 6 november 2009 @ 4:52

  125. We will (all) see. After I spoke with some lawyers and after all I think it ist not without problems for the PP´s in Europe.

    The ”judicial authorities” (even that there may be low effect) is out of the text and the copyright also.

    We will(?!) face a case in wich someone got a legal (after an administrasion decision) ”three strike” in Europe. And then someone will(!) ask (”us”) who votet for this law. I am not sure if it we (as the Pirate Party) should really claim this as a victory.

    Perhaps(!) it was the best wich could be made in Straßbourg. Perhaps it was the best actually and for a long, long time for the people in Europe.
    But the parliament (remember: the place where laws are made; also: we) lost.

    Compromises are necessary. I see that Christian votet sometimes with the Greens. He was not in danger to be considered to be an ”extremist” or something like a fundamental outs.

    So: it (the law) could have been worse and I thank a lot Christian for the work…. but anyway I am *not sure* if the decision to vote for it was the best idea.

    Best regards from Germany
    ALOA

    Kommentar av aloa5 — 6 november 2009 @ 8:13

  126. [...] Christian Engström (Kalózpárt) írása [...]

    Pingback av Kalózpárt » három dobás helyett az ártatlanság vélelme — 6 november 2009 @ 8:43

  127. @Maria
    Good point about the implementation also being covered by the safe-guards. Thanks for the answer.

    Kommentar av Tor — 6 november 2009 @ 8:45

  128. Just a preview of what is called ”a fair and impartial procedure”:

    GROUPAMA, a French insurer, was caught in a $200 million software PIRACY case.

    GROUPAMA argued that bank secrecy entitled it to limit the scope of Police investigations to a building that was not the place of the infraction… and the General Prosecutor of PARIS (illegally by any standard) ruled that they were right:

    http://remoteanything.com/archives/groupama.pdf

    Kommentar av Pierre — 6 november 2009 @ 9:34

  129. [...] anche applicare la legge dei tre avvisi e la disconnessione ma entro opportuni parametri che rispettino i diritti umani [...]

    Pingback av UE: i file-sharer verranno protetti — 6 november 2009 @ 9:51

  130. [...] paso adelante” en la defensa de los derechos de los internautas europeos incluso por el Partido Pirata, Los Verdes o el Partido Socialista , la prensa española, lejos de informarse con rigor de lo que [...]

    Pingback av Cuando la prensa toca de oído : Blogografia — 6 november 2009 @ 11:00

  131. [...] paso adelante” en la defensa de los derechos de los internautas europeos incluso por el Partido Pirata, Los Verdes o el Partido Socialista , la prensa española, lejos de informarse con rigor de lo que [...]

    Pingback av Cuando la prensa toca de oído : Blogografia — 6 november 2009 @ 11:00

  132. Köszönöm! Thanks your work in EU Prliament!

    Laci from Hungary

    Kommentar av Laci — 6 november 2009 @ 12:43

  133. @aloa5: It’s important to remember that laws in the EU are made not only in the Parliament but by the Parliament and the Council of ministers together. If the rumours are correct, the german minister responsible did a very good job of moving the Council closer to the Parliament’s position.

    All countries need a pirate presence in their parliaments to ensure that not only domestic legislation is good enough, but also to keep an eye on their ministers’ actions in the EU.

    Kommentar av Johan Tjäder — 6 november 2009 @ 12:44

  134. [...] långa förhandlingar så blev det till slut en kompromisslösning. Jag satt den kvällen beredd att skriva en jämförelse mellan den dåliga dag jag skrev om förra [...]

    Pingback av Allt under en grå himmel · Fingertoppskänsla av Torstensson? — 6 november 2009 @ 13:04

  135. The way laws are made is a (great) problem in the EU, that ist correct (before and even after Lissabon). But that ist not the point here.

    I am not sure in details about (the new) HADOPI. It seems to me that the difference is that after the third letter there only have to be sent an additional formular like in Germany when someone drove faster then the speed limit (you are guility yes/no?). If this is the whole difference there wopuld be no really difference for French users…. AND then(!) French Pirates would be asked within day´s or weeks what the hell the Pirates in parliament did agree with.

    Maybe that this is not true because I don´t know enough about HADOPI but I think that (in this case) we in Germany were asked too. But what shall we answer? ”It was the best we could do” seems to be a very defensive answer. The same answer the second Party (SPD) gave after agreeing to the EU data retention.

    So – I do not say that Christian could do better as such (perhaps no chance for another law). The problem for us could (not must) be a result anyway.

    Regards
    ALOA

    Kommentar av aloa5 — 6 november 2009 @ 13:45

  136. @ALOA, are you asking about what changes to HADOPI the EU text will bring?

    The Hadopi 2 allows for a fast track judicial decision (that does not involve the accused nor the necessity to prove you committed a crime/felony), this will need to be changed if/when this directive is implemented as Hadopi doesn’t have a prior procedure as included in the EU text.

    The EU text makes sure that fast track procedures such as in Hadopi 2 can only happen, as an exception to the rule, in situations of subtatiated urgencies and that, as Christian explains, file sharing cannot fall into that category.

    Kommentar av Maria — 6 november 2009 @ 15:42

  137. @aloa5

    Well actually, when you are not in the majority you cannot have all that you want. The pirate movement is seeking to be the tip of the scale so that it can build a majority for these issues. But we are not there yet.

    Anyway the HADOPI 2 system will not last. It’s going to have to be reformed.

    Nothing in this text prevents the member states for having a simple procedure if you are prepared to admit to crime.

    Kommentar av Johan Tjäder — 6 november 2009 @ 16:03

  138. Alvarez, ”You’re a real cynic. I signed on your support, and you’re happy with a crappy resolution. You’re a phony manipulator.”

    Before jumping ship, and this might be a weird notion to some, but try reading the final draft and interpret it to your own advantage, (instead of only interpreting it to the opposition’ supposed advantage.)

    Kommentar av ST — 6 november 2009 @ 22:16

  139. [...] reported by Engström, the exact text reads: 3a. Measures taken by Member States regarding end-users’ [...]

    Pingback av File-Sharers Protected Under Proposed EU Legislation @ blog.idtorrent.org — 7 november 2009 @ 0:01

  140. [...] reported by Engström, the exact text reads: 3a. Measures taken by Member States regarding end-users’ [...]

    Pingback av File-Sharers Protected Under Proposed EU Legislation | Thriller Blog — 7 november 2009 @ 8:12

  141. @Maria #136
    I read different article and spoke to lawyers. As far as I can see arstechnika(1) seems to be right:

    quote
    A new Internet freedom provision means that(!) European countries can still adopt ”three-strikes” rules targeting P2P users, but they must presume innocence, guard privacy, and allow(!) for judicial appeal….Note what’s different here from the original amendment 138; the right to judicial review is guaranteed on appeal, but the original sanction can be issued by a non-judicial authority like HADOPI.
    /quote

    So it seems to me making no really difference in the end – facing the pirates the question. Have in addition a look on my next posting – the answer to #137 Johan Tjäder.

    Regards
    ALOA

    (1)http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/11/eu-adopts-internet-freedom-provision-on-net-cut-offs.ars

    Kommentar av aloa5 — 7 november 2009 @ 9:49

  142. @ Johan Tjäder #137

    You can see my answer to #135 about HADOPI. Nevertheless one word to ”cannot have all that you want”. This is correct (sure) but that is also very complex.

    I try to explain why this is very difficult (only for me?). You speak about compromises. The question is what about we must and what about we can and when we should never allow compromises. When someone comes to you speaking about death penalty or about minimum wages about 20Euro/hour. Compromise or not?

    It is a sort of defining principles and under wich level of *rights* you never want to go. We have (minimum) three lines here:
    1) Internet (or a telephone) is a right wich can only be cut of from judges in serious cases because/and this is a step like beeing convicted to jail (only prisoners can not telephone/interact with others)
    2) Internet can be cut of from judges because of ”serious” copyright-infrightment.
    3) Internet is like a driving license wich can be forbidden by a township when you drove to fast (three times). You have a right to let a judge look over the case.
    4) There are no rights for a use of the internet at all.

    The first two lines cracked down yet – and others see this also(1).
    Quote:
    A sweeping telecom reform package finally cleared the European Parliament, but members abandoned a bid to declare Internet access a fundamental right
    /quote

    So it´s the (only) question for me if it was necessary – this compromise. Maybe. But if, it was not put over from Engström. He said that ”puts up a strong line of defence against the ‘three strike’ Hadopi law in France….”

    We will see but I just think that this is not right. I don´t know the english idiom for this (my dictionary says that someone ”hornswoggled” him … sounds funny whatever it means in detail :-D ).

    To come to the end – after reading some news/blogs/lawyers – I think it would perhaps(!) have been no luxus to say ”no” to this compromise and decide to take line one or two in this case. Maybe the cost were to high – perhaps – when Engström would have lost his seat in ”his” commitee.
    (It was a luxus to say ”yes”.)

    But to relativise – I don´t want to make a drama out of it. But nevertheless this is my point of view.

    Best regards
    ALOA

    (1)http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/nov2009/gb2009116_710422.htm

    Kommentar av aloa5 — 7 november 2009 @ 10:31

  143. @ALOA: #142
    Actually this clause will protect the voice service also, where there were no protection before.

    Well, the EU acting under Article 95 of the EC treaty cannot stop member states for enacting criminal laws. So if there is a ”three strikes” criminal law in France, then it can be abolished only by the French. It is actually a good thing that we decide our criminal laws in our own countries respectively.

    However, this clause forbids the ”strikes”, at least the last one, from being unilateral warnings. The charges must be contestable both before HADOPI and in french courts. They cannot presume you’re guilty. They may not track your traffic or let their ISPs track your traffic.

    And it is important to remember that if file sharing is regarded as a crime, the government has the right to put you in jail. They don’t have to disconnect you. They don’t even have to prove you are guilty. It is sufficient to have cause to believe that you are guilty and then they may lock you up pending further investigation. Let’s keep in mind that The Pirate Bay operators were sentenced to one year imprisonment for *aiding* copyright violations. I would say it was a serious fault on the part of the prosecutor, given that outcome, not to have them locked up pending the final verdict, as the claimed violation of law is still continuing. That would have been absolutely legal and in accordance with human rights conventions.

    Don’t get me wrong here. My view is that the Stockholm district court had it wrong in its conclusions of law regarding The Pirate Bay, but my point is that will now be easier for the state to put you in jail, then to disconnect you from the internet.

    Kommentar av Johan Tjäder — 7 november 2009 @ 12:16

  144. @#143 Johan Tjäder

    It´s true that there were no protection before. But maybe the best (only?) argument. The rest of your posting is more or less a weak defense.

    Remember Christian (one day before):
    quote
    ”A key issue is if we will be able to stop French Hadopi-laws and British Mandelson-measures. If the text negotiated do not do this, we cannot accept it.”

    ”I am worried that other MEP:s in the delegation might be willing to compromise.
    /quote

    I don´t think that the target is reached.

    Regards

    Kommentar av aloa5 — 7 november 2009 @ 16:17

  145. @aloa

    Hadopi has been changed by the constitutional french court to have a judge signing. This is a matter of national law. However, like Johan said, if in your country something is a crime, then you might get caught and be sent to jail. The problem with 3 strike laws as they exist today is that you are suspected of illegal downloading because your bandwith use is too high, for example, and that is enough to get the judge (in case of Hadopi 2) to sign the cutting off. Might be that you have downloaded something legal so, with the new text, by involving the accused in the ”prior process” they will have to be proved guilty of actually downloading something illegal BEFORE being able to cut anyone off.

    A judicial review is a universal right in EU law and that is why there is no problem including it for the Council. The problem was the PRIOR judicial ruling since in some countries this power lies also in the hands of police, regulators, prosecutors, etc. So the EU Parliament could not enforce with this directive that these countries harmonise their national crimial systems/constitutions. And I didn’t think about it but after reading johan, I really do think it would have created a bad precendent. We were all supportive of 138 because we agreed with what was written on it but what happens next time there is an amendment that would also require to change your country’s criminal law in a way you fundamentally disagree (take the UK system of invasion of privacy). Who is to say that wouldn’t happen next?

    I think people get confused with the reach a EU directive has. ISPs, etc will have no more rights or less than now to intercept communications, nor will have governments. This issue is NOT dealt with here because the EP is not competent to do so. It will not affect that it is a judge or not that takes the prior decision for the same reason. However, what this article in the directive does, is that it provides with minimum limits Governments and implementing actors will have to respect when they decide they want to cut someone off.

    Kommentar av Maria — 7 november 2009 @ 19:33

  146. @Maria #145

    ”””prior process” they will have to be proved guilty of actually downloading something illegal””

    Means nothing else than they ask the involved before. So: sending me one letter, two letters and a third letter with a formular asking me if I did something illegal what e.G. members of the RIAA said that is true. HADOPI is not about bandwith as far as I know.

    I´m not an EU-lawyer. But aside reading some law-blogs I am not really a law-ignoramus (I think so).
    So I think about EU-law that they can not make criminal law´s. But this IS not a criminal law. If then it would be anyway. A prior ruling makes no difference. That would be unlogic and in addition I never read something like this.

    ”It will not affect that it is a judge or not that takes the prior decision for the same reason.”

    Of course it would make a difference. I don´t know how many judges there are in your country and how the procedure of tickets (e.G. for driving too fast) is. The difference between having a judge or not is really great. Not from the point something reaches the judge. The barrier before getting there and the resistance of the justice would make the difference.

    We will see Maria. When this text is through the EP we will look to France. Within day´s they will correct HADOPI – if necessary. And we will see us in this blog, O.K.? :-) If you smile I will too.

    Regards
    ALOA

    Kommentar av aloa5 — 8 november 2009 @ 8:39

  147. [...] is de Zweedse PiratenPartij erg tevreden over het onderhandelingsresultaat en schijnen ook de Groenen ermee in te stemmen. Wat in ieder [...]

    Pingback av Europees Parlement onderhandelt over afsluiten burgers van het Internet | Kletskous — 8 november 2009 @ 9:32

  148. [...] christianengstrom.wordpress.com, NY [...]

    Pingback av 3rd strike - good news | Pauza de Cafea Blog — 8 november 2009 @ 22:59

  149. Thanx alot for this post

    مدونة

    Kommentar av مدونة — 9 november 2009 @ 12:14

  150. [...] torstaina (5.11.) Piratpartietin MEP Christian Engström kertoi blogissaan Euroopan parlamentin ja ministerineuvoston päässeen sopuun ns. telecoms-paketin sanamuodoista. [...]

    Pingback av Joukkotiedotus murroksessa, netinkäyttäjän oikeudet ristitulessa « Musta purje — 11 november 2009 @ 18:11

  151. [...] vuotamisen salliva ns.  SWIFT-sopimus ei mennyt läpi EU:ssa. Sen sijaan Telecom-paketista saatiin kompromissi aikaiseksi, joka ei ole ainakaan sen selvempi kuin alkuperäinen muotoilu ja näin sopivan avoin erilaisille [...]

    Pingback av ACTA-sopimuksen isoin ongelma - Tietokone — 17 november 2009 @ 14:52

  152. [...] Der Rat forderte nun eine Art Schnellverfahren ohne Richter gegen Tauschbörsenbenutzer. Das Parlament bestand hingegen auf einem ordentlichen Gerichtsverfahren. Nach einigem hin und her im Vermittlungsverfahren kam es am 4. November zu einer Einigung über einen gemeinsamen Entwurf. [...]

    Pingback av Bewertung: telecoms-package-deal. « RaheBlog — 19 november 2009 @ 17:55

  153. Good for you!

    Kommentar av ival — 20 november 2009 @ 9:27

  154. We will NOW see.

    Kommentar av aloa5 — 24 november 2009 @ 13:39

  155. Thank you!! I think yours is probably the only party that represents my ideas (and legitimate interests) in Europe.
    (From Barcelona, Spain)

    Kommentar av Pau — 25 november 2009 @ 15:22

  156. OK, our politicians, with your approval, are getting rid of that useless bullshit called ”fair trial”.
    It will help save a lot of time and make things easier for both parties, like when the londoner police on 25/07/05 decided to get rid of a potential terrorist. They saved a lot of potential lives by overpassing the traditional methods.

    ”judicial review” is the worst eupemism ever. So no more ”fair trial” but a ”judicial review”

    what a shit of a Europe is being built on our citizens?

    Kommentar av qer — 18 december 2009 @ 23:19

  157. @156
    Have you any actual links about whats going on there?

    Kommentar av aloa5 — 23 december 2009 @ 13:59

  158. Have you voted in plenary for the notion of ”lawful content”? It seems to be in the final text of the TP.

    Kommentar av pipulate — 15 januari 2010 @ 16:37

  159. @pipulate,

    The concept of ”lawful content” was introduced in the Harbour report, which was another of the directives in the Telecoms Package. The conciliation was only about the Trautman report, and it was only the Trautmann report that was voted in plenary this time.

    The Harbour report was accepted by the Council in the form that it was voted in the second reading in the Parliament. This was done in the spring of 2009, i.e.: during the previous legislature when I was not a member. I (and the rest of the current Parliament) have not voted on the Harbour report at all.

    The purpose of the article that was introduced in the Trautmann report after the conciliation process was to protect users as much as possible against the damage done by the introduction of ”lawful content” in Harbour’s report.

    I don’t remember if the phrase appears somewhere in Trautmann as well, but even if it does, the damage was already done, unfortunately.

    I voted yes to Trautmann because it at least offers some protection for internet users, and it is better to have something than nothing, regardless of how small or big one may think that ”something” is.

    Kommentar av Christian Engström — 15 januari 2010 @ 17:23

  160. You(!) think that you would have won ”nothing”.

    I don´t think so. In fact you lost more than you got. On the long run you will loose any fight this way.

    Regards
    ALOA

    Kommentar av aloa5 — 18 januari 2010 @ 13:29

  161. [...] Engström (pp) skriver själv om det hela här, och Henrik Alexandersson (pp) skriver [...]

    Pingback av Framgångar för integriteten i EU och USA « Jakob Lundgren — 19 januari 2010 @ 22:30

  162. thank you Christian, you have public sharing interesting political articles,
    although I do not know exactly how politics but interesting for the study,
    I hope you always succeed and prosper??

    Kommentar av B-Drul — 1 februari 2010 @ 16:08

  163. if we do not break the rules only if so,
    we live in a country that clearly stunned state law.
    mau gimana again, let’s hope that the fear you are not going ok?

    Kommentar av Qomar — 1 februari 2010 @ 16:12

  164. Now we can see:
    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do?reference=E-2009-6094&language=EN

    Have a look at ACTA – and the terms used there. Anyone an idea about source…..

    Regards
    ALOA

    Kommentar av aloa5 — 9 februari 2010 @ 17:34

  165. [...] też lekturę bloga Eurodeputowanego Partii Piratów pana Christiana Engströma w tej [...]

    Pingback av » Jest wstępne porozumienie w sprawie Pakietu Telekomunikacyjnego Partia Piratów - Partia Piratów — 7 april 2010 @ 8:48

  166. [...] PARTIDO PIRATA: Telecom package: Final agreed text [...]

    Pingback av Paquete Telecom, con licencia para espiar (actualizado con enlaces a favor) « Informática escuela EDIB — 31 januari 2011 @ 17:21

  167. [...] reported by Engström, the exact text reads: 3a. Measures taken by Member States regarding end-users’ [...]

    Pingback av File-Sharers Protected Under Proposed EU Legislation | TorrentFreak — 8 februari 2011 @ 12:44

  168. [...] En sådan självklarhet krävde enorm kamp, opinion från omvärlden och in i det sista nattmangling, alltså att politikerna satt uppe ända in i natten för att förhandla [...]

    Pingback av Tal till Piratpartiet år 2050: Demokratins slutliga seger. Del 6 – ut i Europa « Calandrellas blogg — 23 juli 2012 @ 21:03


RSS-flöde för kommentarer till det här inlägget.

Rubric-temat Blogga med WordPress.com.

Följ

Få meddelanden om nya inlägg via e-post.

Gör sällskap med 1 871 andra följare

%d bloggers like this: