Comments on: Strike Two for EU Three Strikes Law

By: EU Reopens Backdoor to Graduated Response in Telecoms Package -

EU Reopens Backdoor to Graduated Response in Telecoms Package - — Sat, 02 May 2009 21:58:05 +0000

[...] response’ into Europe’s telecoms package. Previously last month, that attempt failed with an amendment that said that European’s cannot be disconnected from the internet. It [...]

By: EU Reopens Backdoor to Graduated Response in Telecoms Package

EU Reopens Backdoor to Graduated Response in Telecoms Package — Sat, 02 May 2009 21:02:09 +0000

[...] response’ into Europe’s telecoms package. Previously last month, that attempt failed with an amendment that said that European’s cannot be disconnected from the internet. It [...]

By: British IP Minister Shoots Down Three Strikes Law Proposal

British IP Minister Shoots Down Three Strikes Law Proposal — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 23:04:15 +0000

[...] very recently, return to the French parliament. Still, the Europe-wide three strike proposal was effectively neutered through an amendment that would prevent people from getting disconnected from the internet in the [...]

By: Info/Law » Norm-Shifting Litigation

Info/Law » Norm-Shifting Litigation — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 17:55:40 +0000

[...] systems (a plan that seems to have met with, at best, lukewarm support from U.S. ISPs and outright hostility abroad). Lawsuits that were still pending as of the date of the industry’s announcement, [...]

By: Prediction: UK TV and Movie Industry Insignificant in 5 Years

Prediction: UK TV and Movie Industry Insignificant in 5 Years — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 06:24:27 +0000

[...] now, the industry had their long sought after “Three Strikes” law proposal in the EU rejected by lawmakers. Since this represents a perceived threat toward taking more control away from the end [...]

By: flynn

flynn — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 01:59:33 +0000

The ITRE vote was 40:4, the amendment is numbered 138/46. Research first, writing later ftw.

By: 1cooldude

1cooldude — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 18:43:29 +0000

Major payola behind this fucken law..how else could anyone vote for such a corrupt decision? Whatever happened in allowing the individual to present his/her case before the court and in front of the judge?