Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 00:10 UTC, submitted by SReilly
In the News "Spain last night killed a controversial anti-P2P bill that would have made it easier to shut down websites that link to infringing content. The move was a blow to the ruling Socialist government, but it may be of even bigger concern to the US, which pushed, threatened, and cajoled Spain to clamp down on downloading. And Wikileaks can take a share of the credit for the defeat."
Thread beginning with comment 454553
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Not just anti-P2P
by Netwalker on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 09:03 UTC
Netwalker
Member since:
2010-12-23

I'm spaniard and I've been following this issue with great fear. Do you remember this Simpsons gag when they use a paper clip to join a law to another to get it passed? This is what happened here. They joined the law to a kind of economy adjustment law. Who can be against tweaking the government expending in this crisis times?

Besides, P2P is legal here. They taxed CDR, CD recorders, CD players, HDD, computers, MP3 players, anything that can be used to play, record or copy any multimedia content. With the law in the hand, you have to get rich AND provide the content to be doing something illegal. A torrent site? Perfectly legal. Using torrent, emule, amule, whatever? Perfectly legal also. So each time they get a torrent site admin to the judges, they found them not guilty and let them go.

Well, guess what... they tried doing a bypass. And a big one, too: the "antiP2P law" was so lax, so unexpecific, even a common blog on politics could get closed with it and they could do it withought asking a judge. This goes against constitution, against law, against common sense, and would put it at the same level of Iran in terms of censorship and citizen rights.

Big THANK YOU to Madding and Wikileaks for blowing the wistle and helping us against this madness.

Reply Score: 11

RE: Not just anti-P2P
by Nth_Man on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 09:39 in reply to "Not just anti-P2P"
Nth_Man Member since:
2010-05-16

So each time they get a torrent site admin to the judges, they found them not guilty and let them go.

[...] Well, guess what... [government] tried doing a bypass


Yes, that's true! ( for more details see http://www.filmica.com/david_bravo/ ) The new law was to allow the government to act without trials! To avoid that people have legal defenses!

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Not just anti-P2P
by vodoomoth on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 11:03 in reply to "RE: Not just anti-P2P"
vodoomoth Member since:
2010-03-30

The new law was to allow the government to act without trials! To avoid that people have legal defenses!

The weird thing is that just the day before yesterday, a security-oriented law has been voted in France. That law covers of bunch of security-related things but it also proposed setting up an administrative body that will mandate (I hesitated in using "foist") that ISPs block certain websites. In the name of what? you ask and I answer "in the name of child protection". No legal system involved, no judges involved, no discussions or warnings sent to the website, they would just decide that a site should be banned and, which is brilliant of them, additions to the list remain undisclosed for years (yes, years!). For those who read French, google "loi loppsi filtrage".

Essentially, the law is about filtering the web... Some MPs with a brain contended that despite them being with the current ruling party. When I heard about this on the radio, I wondered how the same government that wants to impose a "taxe Google" upon bandwith-heavy sites can even consider monitoring the web traffic for child porn. I mean, they're wailing because of the cost overhead of sites such as Youtube and now they want to filter/monitor/whatever-other-stupid-action the web traffic in France based on child protection? What is the probable proportion of child porn in the total web traffic? I wouldn't be surprised if it was below 0.0001%, which makes it obvious to me that there's a hidden agenda.

I'm dismayed by politicians. Are they ever going to do something good for the people?

Anyway, kudos to Wikileaks. As long as they don't mess with admitted-as-confidential things and don't jeopardize people's lives, I'll be fine with what they do.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE: Not just anti-P2P
by Damnshock on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 10:59 in reply to "Not just anti-P2P"
Damnshock Member since:
2006-09-15

I'm spaniard and I've been following this issue with great fear. Do you remember this Simpsons gag when they use a paper clip to join a law to another to get it passed? This is what happened here. They joined the law to a kind of economy adjustment law. Who can be against tweaking the government expending in this crisis times?

Besides, P2P is legal here. They taxed CDR, CD recorders, CD players, HDD, computers, MP3 players, anything that can be used to play, record or copy any multimedia content. With the law in the hand, you have to get rich AND provide the content to be doing something illegal. A torrent site? Perfectly legal. Using torrent, emule, amule, whatever? Perfectly legal also. So each time they get a torrent site admin to the judges, they found them not guilty and let them go.

Well, guess what... they tried doing a bypass. And a big one, too: the "antiP2P law" was so lax, so unexpecific, even a common blog on politics could get closed with it and they could do it withought asking a judge. This goes against constitution, against law, against common sense, and would put it at the same level of Iran in terms of censorship and citizen rights.

Big THANK YOU to Madding and Wikileaks for blowing the wistle and helping us against this madness.


I live in Spain too(I don't consider myself spanish, that's another story though ;) ) and I would like to comment some things:

P2P is legal almost everywhere. What is not legal in many places is the sharing of copyrighted material without consent.

Next: file sharing is not "perfectly 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 to free speech but... would it be legal to kill an e.t.? Right now, with the law in hands, that would be "alegal".

Now, the tax thing. This is what troubles me more. What is know here as "canon" IS NOT A TAX!!! it is not for the government nor for the cities or any public organization you may think of: it's for a private organization known as SGAE(kind of RIAA in Spain)!!! This is the key to the whole problem: the cannon is applied everywhere and to everyone and it is all in benefit of a private organization and not us as people/country.

Wanna know a funny thing? 80% of the money the canon gets comes from *the Spanish legal system*. Yes, you read it right. The court recordings, the backups... everything which is obviously not copyrighted material is what gives SGAE almost all it's money and we are paying it all with our real taxes!!!

What has worried me the most is that the political parties that brought this bill down changed their mind because it was exposed by wikileaks (I know, strictly speaking I'm guessing) and not because it was *WRONG*. As wrong as when they got the canon in the first time (although I must admit the canon is something that comes from the cassette times...).

I want politicians that have *integrity*. Politicians that are capable of standing up against external pressures (be it the USA or whoever) and do what is right.

I know I'm dreaming, still, a good dream ;)

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Not just anti-P2P
by Netwalker on Thu 23rd Dec 2010 12:03 in reply to "RE: Not just anti-P2P"
Netwalker Member since:
2010-12-23

P2P is legal almost everywhere. What is not legal in many places is the sharing of copyrighted material without consent.

Next: file sharing is not "perfectly legal" in Spain. It is something called, in the law world, "alegal" which means something is not regulated nor prohibited.


Walking on the street isn't regulated nor prohibited, and doesn't make it alegal either. Besides, there IS a law that regulates sharing of copyright material, by the way. It's NOT legal UNLESS the material is copied from a legal source, there's no "animo de lucro" (intention of getting rich), and it's for personal use. This is clear as water for the judges, that have been issuing not guilty to every file sharing case here in Spain.

Now, the tax thing. This is what troubles me more. What is know here as "canon" IS NOT A TAX!!! it is not for the government nor for the cities or any public organization you may think of: it's for a private organization known as SGAE(kind of RIAA in Spain)!!!


Yes, I forgot to mention this detail. This is totally true. It's kind of a private company tax. Think of it as if Disney would get money from the TV set builders, just in case you use their TV sets to watch one of their movies. Guess who is paying it at the end...

Reply Parent Score: 2