Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 4th Jun 2011 19:52 UTC
Internet & Networking Since it's weekend, let's start with some good news we can all be happy about. The United Nations has declared internet access a human right, and has called upon all nations to not instate any laws that have the power to cut people off the internet, with France and the UK being singled out because they passed three strikes laws.
Thread beginning with comment 476080
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: France law
by Neolander on Sun 5th Jun 2011 07:52 UTC in reply to "RE: France law"
Neolander
Member since:
2010-03-08

Great right... but if you break the law by murdering someone, your right to liberty is taken away and you are sent to jail.

This contradiction can by avoided by stating that the right to life has a greater value than the right to liberty. Keeping a criminal unpunished puts the life of people in danger, maybe that's not worth the liberty of the criminal.

Similarly, if you break the P2P law, you can have your internet right taken away.

This, on the other hand, is pure hypocrisy, doing so basically says that the media industry's pleasure is worth more than the people's freedom of speech.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: France law
by silix on Sun 5th Jun 2011 09:17 in reply to "RE[2]: France law"
silix Member since:
2006-03-01

"Similarly, if you break the P2P law, you can have your internet right taken away.

This, on the other hand, is pure hypocrisy, doing so basically says that the media industry's pleasure is worth more than the people's freedom of speech.
"

but P2P is not "speech", it's sharing coprighted material, denying the creator of that material his right to monetize it at his discretion (now, hate majors as much as you want, dont ever buy from them, but if one -whoever- wants to produce something AND sell it, that principle must hold)
those who do p2p cant invoke freedom of speech at their defense, because they abuse their freedom of speech rights, in order to deliberately go against the law - and it would be hypocritical of them to say they do it "to spread culture" (games, sw, britney spears music and blockbuster movies are hardly "culture"..)
OTOH, one could say that depriving one of internet access forever is an excessive measure, when the copright law already prescribes fees and penalties, and that would be agreeable...

Edited 2011-06-05 09:23 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: France law
by Neolander on Sun 5th Jun 2011 09:38 in reply to "RE[3]: France law"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

I don't say that people shouldn't be punished for breaking copyright law, I say that removing internet access is an excessive punishment that should be anti-constitutional if it's not already.

Nowadays the internet is used for much more than sharing files. It is one of the main communication medium of our age, so it is certainly something that should be protected by freedom of speech and freedom of press.

Removing someone's right to access the internet because he has published illegal material on it is IMO just as disproportionate as removing someone's freedom of press because he has published hateful racist or homophobic content in his journal. The person should certainly pay a fine, maybe go to jail, but certainly not lose his/her ability to publish something because he/she has publicly expressed questionable opinions.

Edited 2011-06-05 09:43 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

revenge, punishment, the law, ethics
by frajo on Mon 6th Jun 2011 06:44 in reply to "RE[2]: France law"
frajo Member since:
2007-06-29

Keeping a criminal unpunished puts the life of people in danger, maybe that's not worth the liberty of the criminal.


We should acknowledge the differences between revenge, punishment, and corrective measures.
While corrective measures are a social necessity, punishment can be and often is counterproductive.

Furthermore, the definition of "criminality" is depending on the actual societal environment. (Think of the Nazi German race laws .) Thus, law alone is no replacement for ethical decisions.
In certain circumstances you have to act illegally if you want to stay humane. The responsibility is yours. It's your chosen path.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

"Furthermore, the definition of 'criminality' is depending on the actual societal environment. (Think of the Nazi German race laws .) Thus, law alone is no replacement for ethical decisions."


Being lawful does not imply being ethical or visa versa.

Ah philosophy.

Reply Parent Score: 2