[pp.int.general] Telecoms package, ACTA and other monsters

[Nicolas Sahlqvist]

2009/11/6 Félix Robles <redeadlink at gmail.com>

> Would have been illegal to add that they would need a court ourder
> (authorization of a judge) to cut off internet?
>

Good question, I doubt we are experts in EU law, it is very complex they
say..

>
> If the answer is no, why didn't they add that?
>

EU politics? Seams more complex then EU law..

>
> And if the answer is yes, why didn't they change the law so it's illegal to
> cut off internet whatsoever?
>
> The official explanation is that they are not allowed to interfere with
member state law in such detail.


- Nicolas
  PPI / PPSE member



> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Nicolas Sahlqvist <nicco77 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> The main problem with the telecom package was that it was too specific so
>> could not be approved so I guess the official explanation is true, but only
>> time will tell.
>>
>> You can read more about it on Christian's blog in English, in particular
>> look at point 4:
>>
>> "Although the word ”court” is not used, the wording very strongly
>> suggests that some sort of court should be involved."
>>
>> http://christianengstrom.wordpress.com/2009/11/06/landmarks-in-the-telecoms-text/
>>
>>
>> - Nicolas
>>
>>
>> 2009/11/6 Félix Robles <redeadlink at gmail.com>
>>
>>> And is that explanation true?
>>>
>>>
>>> And, anyway, if that explanation was true, why would they support a law
>>> that allows the administration (A) the power to cut off internet without (B)
>>> the authorization of a judge anyway? How is possible to determine to cut off
>>> or not a internet connection without spying the communications? Have they
>>> thought about that?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Christian Hufgard <
>>> pp at christian-hufgard.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Félix Robles wrote:
>>>> > Well, I'm a simple member of the Spanish Pirate Party and we have
>>>> already
>>>> > stated that we are against on the Swedish Piratepartiet's stand on
>>>> > theTelecoms Package. I'm not representing my whole party now (perhaps,
>>>> > maybe, another person will be designated for that later) but *I
>>>> personally
>>>> > ask*:
>>>> >
>>>> > Why? *Why did the swedish Piratepartiet agree* with the Telecoms
>>>> Package
>>>> > when it allows* to cut off internet without the previous authorization
>>>> of
>>>> > a judge*? Can any swedish member of the Piratpartiet explain it??
>>>>
>>>> The official explanation is, that the EU has not the right to order the
>>>> authorization of a judge...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Christian
>>>>
>>>> ____________________________________________________
>>>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>>>> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
>>>> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________
>>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>>> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
>>> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________
>> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
>> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
>> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>>
>>
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20091106/60a17c9a/attachment.htm>