Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 00:10 UTC, submitted by SReilly
Permalink for comment 454582
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2010-03-30
Yes. True. I should have been more articulate and made my thoughts clearer: when writing that sentence you quoted, I was thinking of their decisions, with respect to pressures from companies (and specifically "big content providers" as Thom calls them) and with respect to what is the best in this digital age for consumers.
Putting things differently, I am astonished as to how ineffective the recent "digital laws" seem to me.
From a link (on www.linformaticien.com) after googling the keywords I gave earlier:
Mais la loi divise même dans les rangs de la majorité, même si « Il n'y a pas de clivage droite-gauche sur ce sujet », explique Laure de La Raudière, députée UMP d'Eure-et-Loir. Si elle est fermement opposée au filtrage du web, qu’elle juge « inefficace », elle a néanmoins voté pour l’article en question.
Do these people have some reasoning capacity? Why vote for a law if you are opposed to its contents and deem it ineffective?