|
Piracy/LEGAL/Hackers/SPIES/AI /CRYPTO/Scams & Internet News Anything Related to Piracy, Warez, Legal Matters, Hackers, Internet News & Scams and How it Affects Sites/Members Can Be Read Here. Please do NOT post links to other Sites, but you May Name Them if They are Scam Sites |
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT |
Hallo to All Members. As you can see we regularly Upgrade our Servers, (Sorry for any Downtime during this). We also have added more Forums to help you with many things and for you to enjoy. We now need you to help us to keep this site up and running. This site works at a loss every month and we appeal to you to donate what you can. If you would like to help us, then please just send a message to any Member of Staff for info on how to do this,,,, & Thank You for Being Members of this site. |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
07-02-13, 19:41 | #1 | |
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 47,372
Thanks: 27,594
Thanked 14,456 Times in 10,262 Posts
|
Court Rules:File-Sharing Convictions Violate Human Rights
Court Of Human Rights: Convictions For File-Sharing Violate Human Rights
Rick Falkvinge, Founder of The Pirate Party, 07 Feb 2013 Civil Liberties: The European Court of Human Rights has declared that the copyright monopoly stands in direct conflict with fundamental Human Rights, as defined in the European Union and elsewhere. This means that as of today, nobody sharing culture in the EU may be convicted just for breaking the copyright monopoly law; the bar for convicting was raised considerably. This can be expected to have far-reaching implications, not just judicially, but in confirming that the copyright monopoly stands at odds with human rights. The European Court of Human Rights in Luxembourg is no dismissible small player. It is the court that oversees the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which is part of the Constitution of the European Union and of most (if not all) European states. When this court makes a decision, that decision gets constitutional status in all of Europe (except for Belarus, which is not a signatory). Therefore, the copyright monopoly as such – which is ordinary law in European states – was just defined as taking a back seat to the constitutional right to share and seek culture and knowledge, as defined in the European Convention on Human Rights, article 10: “Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.” (ECHR 10) We have long claimed that the copyright monopoly stands in direct conflict with civil liberties (one of my most well-known keynotes, Copyright regime vs. civil liberties, even highlights this in the title). While the judiciary is slow to react to new phenomena, and issues like this percolate very slowly to the top courts where verdicts make a reak difference, I’m very happy to see that the issue did indeed get to the relevant court at last, and that the Court made the only reasonable decision. However, this verdict doesn’t mean that people sharing culture can never be convicted. Exceptions can be made to Human Rights according to a well-defined three-step test: the verdict must be necessary in a democratic society, prescribed by law (the copyright monopoly already is), and pursuing a legitimate aim (this can be discussed at length). This means that people can no longer get convicted for violating the copyright monopoly alone. The court just declared it illegal for any court in Europe to convict somebody for breaking the copyright monopoly law when sharing culture, only on the merits of breaking the law. A court that tries somebody for violating the copyright monopoly must now also show that a conviction is necessary to defend democracy itself in order to convict. This is a considerably higher bar to meet. I am happy to see that people persecuted for sharing culture and knowledge all over Europe got this quite strong judicial decision in their back. I’d love to try to see the lobby make a case why it is necessary to defend democracy to convict a single mother of three who shared pop songs. The summary in English of the French verdict is well worth reading (with my highlights): Quote:
Neither is it sufficient to consider that the unauthorised use, reproduction or public communication of a work cannot rely on one of the narrowly interpreted exceptions in the copyright law itself, including the application of the so-called three-step test END For a more detailed report on the Court Ruling, Click Here -Glyn Moody. .
__________________
PUTIN TRUMP & Netanyahu Will Meet in HELL TRUMP WARNS; 'There'll Be a Bloodbath If I Don't Get Elected' PLEASE HELP THIS SITE..Click DONATE & Thanks to ALL Members of ... 1.. THIS SITE IS MORE THAN JUST WAREZ...& TO STOP SPAM-IF YOU WANT TO POST, YOUR FIRST POST MUST BE IN WELCOMES |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|