[pp.int.general] About TELECOM statement.

[Rackham]

Le 26 nov. 09 à 02:26, Ryan Martin a écrit :

> We.. since some of YOU all have reps now..

Well, as some of us are fighting over the only deputy the PP has on  
the European level, I try to forget the fights and look ahead the  
facts that:

- We have ONE deputy in Strasbourg/Bruxelles, it means a lot of work  
for him and I'm sure he's doing is best at keeping us informed of the  
things that are important at the EU level.
- We are going to have a brand new SECOND ONE, it'll only make things  
better. I don't think we all understand/value exactly the amount of  
work involved for deputies to follow effectively the bills on the go.
- I don't forget that EU "laws", are not plain marble set clear as  
roman law, but setting the spirit of things so each country has then  
to adapt its own corpus of laws to comply. You have to set at EU level  
the main rules of what can be done and what cannot. You just can't  
make in the current system of EU government a way to have strictly set  
rules, just boundaries of acceptability. And in this regard the actual  
telecom bill "fits" the bill. (this doesn't mean I'm that happy at all  
this way of doing things)
- In fact PPsw has EU deputies… We are just drooling at the  
perspective like US engineers at the metric system. ;)

> I think it'll be a long time for
> us.  We're so backwards I considered making the pro-metric fight a  
> pirate
> concern, and I came up with a few valid talking points.  ;p

Off topic: Maybe the NASA should loose a few more $$$$ due to miles/km  
mix ups… ;) I'm sure it'd help. :o)

Our very own Valentin wrote in a moment of supreme English mastery: :o)
> Er, let's say it's still leading to heated arguments here in France  
> as well.

note: this is an understatement… both inside and outside the PPfr

> Some of us like don't hesitate to criticize Christian for "not having
> the balls" to oppose the revamped amendment.

Even put in more polite words, it's about the level of thinking behind  
the criticisms. iMHO
(sorry for the french PP members around)

> Others believe he's been pragmatic and he had to compromize to
> preserve some fundamental values in the amendment.

\:D/ (<= me frantically thanking the European parliament for doing  
their job as best as they can)

> Others (like me) do not feel competent/psychich

I knew you were psychic Valentin… ;)

> enough to judge so
> early, and are eagerly waiting for an European Court to give its
> vision of #138, and establish a clear case law. As it is now, I feel
> it is not enforceable in a single, distinct way, so I'm not sure what
> the various national governments will do with it (though I do expect
> them to try and restrict civil liberties as much as they'll be allowed
> to).

+1 It all depends on the Commission position on one hand, on local  
"traditions", and if the laws are pre-existing (or not) too.

On the case of France, given our actual nasty record at being bad to  
the respect due to EU bills and the hadopi law, I think the  
proceedings will be as follow:
- The culture and communication minister will tell publicly nothing  
hinders the Hadopi law in the EU statement.
- The Hadopi authority will starts its job and make use of the 158  
square meters each of its 7 members has in their offices…
- The private companies in charge of the filtering/investigation will  
show they do their job too…
- Letters will "pour out", connections will be cut.
- ONE bloke will say no.
- He will be prosecuted in the limits of the french law and it will be  
loooooooooooong and eventually get fined, burned, sent to Hell. (I  
make it short) Until all possible procedures are used and abused (it's  
years away)
- Then he will have to go in front of the ECJ to enforce the rights  
contained in the EU bill…

As Christian told so, as other french deputies did so (one green, one  
ALDE) all on the same wavelength, it's a convoluted system the  
Commission wanted to enforce in the bill, that a clear ("à la 138")  
wording would have avoided and the deputies are looking forward at the  
forthcoming plaints before the european courts.

After all is it OUR fault if the Commission and the Council are fond  
of convoluted wordings? One day maybe they will understand it's  
staving off European citizens from the EU institutions… (rant rant)

> I agree with Nicolas: perhaps we can trust Christian to be much more
> aware of the issues at stake and their complexity than we are. There
> may also have been some hairy discussions between him and others MP
> (inside and outside his group), which we aren't aware of.

Given the same wavelength shown by the aforementioned, it's more than  
plausible.

Plus, I may add, that the resistance against the Commission/european  
Council over the "138" may have compromised other parts of the bill  
deputies would not have like to be screwed either, but only Christian  
can enlighten us on this. As a vulgum pecus commenting on one of the  
webzines over the statements in France and from deputies wrote: it's  
the difference between people who are being a pression group and the  
others who have decided to walk the political way. The latter have to  
make compromises, if not on principles, on the timeline for things to  
come OUR way. "it's only the first round of many others" as Corinne  
Lepage (alde) said.

> But it would certainly be nice for some of us to get a chance to  
> discuss
> this with him directly, whenever/if he's able to.


+1

Denis, still with his f… b… broken laptop keyboard (copy/paste is my  
friend)
partipirate.org board of directors - Île-de-France coordinator
NO DADVSI - NO HADOPI - NO LOPPSI (more to come)