France, a country where the Internet access is cheap with a very good quality of bandwith, but ... France is now one of the sole countries which adopt a anti-freedom law against internet users ... against civil liberties and human rights ... and against European rules ...

France voted yesterday a law (Hadopi) that threat internet neutrality by removing liberties from french internet users and give that liberties for industrial interests. Hadopi means "High Authority for the distribution of works and the protection of rights with respect to the Internet".

The law intend to cut the Internet accesses that are detected as being used to download data protected by copyright. Christine Albanel, France’s Minister of Culture and Communication, wants to cut off Internet access for people who are suspected of illegal filesharing. Those guilty of illegal downloads will receive an online warning, then a letter, and finally have their internet access cut off for up to a year if they persist. A newly created independent authority, called HADOPI, is to be in charge of issuing warnings and potentially cutting infringers’ Internet subscription – though it remains unclear exactly how the offenders will be caught. On the upside, the entertainment industry will reportedly also drop existing copyright protection on French material so that music or videos bought legally online can be played on any sort of device. Blocking Internet access as a sanction might breach constitutional protections guaranteed by the French Constitutional Council (Conseil Constitutionnel). Despite massive lobbying efforts by the French, a 44-member EU commission on civil liberties just unanimously voted for securing Internet access as a basic human right ...

In 2008, The French government has given the green light to the controversial "three strikes" (graduated response) plan, which will disconnect pirates in the country from their broadband connections if caught downloading illegal material three times. The scheme was endorsed by the cabinet of President Nicolas Sarkozy, who said that "there is no reason that the internet should be a lawless zone".

Any amendment proposed in the direction of a global license, such as the "creative contribution" proposed by the socialist Patrick Bloche was rejected. The proposed mechanism would have implied a fee paid by the Internet subscribers to their ISP for legal downloading of copyrighted material. The fees collected could be used to remunerate artists for their work. "With a universal licence, the money recuperated will not uniquely go into the pockets of the producers, which is definitely the case now. Today, artists' royalty payments are significantly less, while the (media companies') royalty payments are considerably more," said Bloche.

On 24th September 2008, by voting the amendment 138 proposed by Daniel Cohn Bendit, European Parliament strongly hit the French initiative HADOPI for flexible response. in a letter (http:// www.ecrans.fr/IMG/pdf/Lettre_Barroso.pdf), French president, Nicolas Sarkozy asked Jose Manuel Barosso (President of the European Commission) to drop this amendment. Jose Manuel Barroso rejected the possibility for the Commission to reject it. It is not the role of EC to censorship a decision voted by 90% of the European deputies, unless democracy is at stake (http:// www.iptegrity.com/pdf/Rapid%20-%20Press%20Releases%20-% 20EUROPA.web.page.MEMO-08.607.pdf). It will be up the European Council of Ministers to promulgate or drop amendment 138.

The purpose of Hadopi is to alleviate the courts. Before, there were very few prosecutions for downloading copyrighted files, because the courts were overburdened. Hadopi was created at the request of the majors. The European Parliament is against this law because it does not allow people to defend themselves (or with their lawyer), and because the sanctions must be imposed by the courts. (This is not the case for Hadopi: sanctions will be imposed by the government and majors.)

The french law goes further than any other country in Europe nowadays regarding anti-piracy. You can be held guilty for something you didn't do (neighbor hacked in WLAN). That's like being held guilty for the damage someone makes that stole your car. That would negate the base assumption: everyone is innocent as long as his/her guilt has not been proven. This is not "held guilty" in the legal sense. They are just disconnect you before bring to court. This is a proactive measurement to prevent further "harm".

The French government (Christine Albanel, French Ministry for Culture & Communication) votes for the "graduated response," i.e., the possibility that the public authorities will be able to deprive "pirate" Internet users of their Internet access. the "Hadopi" law, a.k.a the "Olivennes" or "Creation and Internet" (!!!!!) proposal, is a disproportionate response to the objective of developing creative content online.

The graduated response and the Hadopi proposal are retrograde. They tend to confirm the widespread concern that the creative industry and its representatives have not yet adapted their activity and economic models to the new situation created by the digital environment.

Cutting people off from the Internet prevents them from accessing many services, both public and private, such as filing taxes, online banking, and even education. It should be recalled that, according to European law, a member State cannot interfere unlaterally in the trans-border supply of electronic services.

The Hadopi proposal and, more generally, the principle of the graduated response requires the collection and keeping of phenomenal quantities of personal data within the framework of investigations into Internet users suspected of piracy. The exact legal scope of this surveillance is not yet clear. In addition, in France, the data concerning alleged pirates may not necessarily correspond to the true offenders. Inadequate protection, a loss or the misuse of such data could be particularly damaging to the families or individuals involved.

The graduated response is harmful from both an economic and a social standpoint.

The proposed measures and sanctions show a lack of understanding of what the Internet actually is.

The blocking is arbitrary, upon request of the majors. Majors give IP addresses to a high authority, and high authority blocks the Internet connection, without legal proceedings. People can not defend themselves. It is even impossible to denounce a neighbor who uses our wireless connection: the French state provides software to protect connections, and it consider that the owner of the connection is protected and responsibly. The European Parliament is against French law, but no European law has been passed yet (http://eric-diehl.com/ blog/?x=entry:entry090331-182629). The French minister of culture want several hundred million of sanctions per year without legal proceedings.

The french community, and specially art community, is afraid by this law.

alternative ? Certainly there are some breaks in the sanctions of french law Hadopi. Hadopi allow censured users to use television, telephone and maybe anothers payables services. So, victims will have a lot of censured ports, but not all. Some ports will continue to run. Can we found a method to override this censorship (with freenet)? e.g. encapsulate traffic into VoIP ? To install a filtering software on your computer to escape the sanctions of the Hadopi law ?

a reminder : Read http://freenetproject.org/philosophy.html item 5: " The only way to ensure that a democracy will remain effective is to ensure that the government cannot control its population's ability to share information, to communicate. So long as everything we see and hear is filtered, we are not truly free. Freenet's aim is to allow two or more people who wish to share information, to do so.

reactions : http://tuxfamily.org/en/news/200904 http://en.hadopi.infobrulante.com/ http://www.nnsquad.org/archives/nnsquad/pdfuGxV0bmwjf.pdf http://internetmonamour.wordpress.com/

articles : http://french-law.net/french-culture-minister-to-present-graduated- response-bill-on-11th-june.html http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/03/french-anti-p2p-law- toughest-in-the-world.ars

The manifesto "Téléchargez-moi" (Download me), September 2008 (in french)

“téléchargez-moi”

Le projet de loi «Création et Internet» nous préoccupe. Il est en total décalage avec notre réalité, bien loin de la «Création» et encore plus de cet «Internet» dont il prétend réguler les pratiques. Cela dit, il semble très naturel qu’une communauté de cinéastes «défendent cette loi sans réserve» et se fendent d’une tribune intitulée «Culture ne rime pas avec gratuité» dans le Monde du 8 juillet. Comme il semble naturel que l’enjeu industriel soit au cœur de cette loi.

Sauf que. Depuis les débuts du World Wide Web, nous nous sommes pris au jeu de cette mutation et existons 1.0, 2.0, et demain 3.0. Nous sommes les créateurs de demain, sans prétention aucune. Très sérieusement et depuis longtemps, nous nous posons la question du droit d’auteur, celle de la diffusion des œuvres sur les réseaux et de leur réception. Tout comme nous nous posons la question de l’économie de la création, sur l’Internet et ailleurs.

Ce projet de loi est contraire à nos pratiques, tout comme il est extrêmement méprisant des usages et totalement ignorant d’un monde simplement contemporain.

-Nous souhaitons qu’un projet de loi intitulé «Création et Internet» prenne en compte nos processus de création. C’est un droit. -Nous désirons partager et être téléchargés, sans filtrage aucun. C’est une nécessité. -Nous espérons que le principe démocratique selon lequel l’œuvre existe ou n’existe pas au travers du regard de l’autre s’applique à cette multiplicité que d’autres nomment «piratage». C’est une revendication.

L’auteur, le créateur, le spectateur, a muté. L’œuvre est regardée, écoutée, partagée, comme jamais auparavant. Et c’est pourquoi créateurs et regardeurs ne peuvent être filtrés par une loi obsolète et crétine. Une loi qui asphyxie la «Création» et «l’Internet».

LES PREMIERS ARTISTES SIGNATAIRES SONT : Adrien Mondot, Agnès de Cayeux, Alain Escalle, Albertine Meunier, Alexandre Perigot, Anne Laforet, Annie Abrahams, Bérénice Belpaire, Caroline Hazard, Cécile Babiole, Chloé Delaume, Christian Vialard, Christophe Bruno, Christophe Fiat, Christophe Jacquet dit Toffe, Claude Closky, David Guez, Dinah Bird, Electronic Shadow (Yacine Ait Kaci et Naziha Mestaoui), Emmanuel Maa Berriet, Emmanuelle Gibelo, Eryck Abecassis, Etienne Cliquet, Etienne Mineur, France Cadet, Franck Ancel, Gilbert Quélennec, Grégoire Courtois aka Troudair, Grégory Chatonsky, Invader, Jacques Perconte, Jan Kopp, Jean-Noël Montagné, Jean-Philippe Roux, Jérôme Joy, Joachim Montessuis, Julien Lassort, Karine Lebrun, Karen O’Rourke, La Boîte Blanche, Louis Bec, Luc Dall’Armellina, Luc Martinez, Lucille Calmel, Lydwine van der Hulst, Lynn Pook, Martin Le Chevallier, Mathieu Briand, Michaël Borras aka Systaime, M. Chat (Thomas Vuille du Collectif Chat), Nicolas Boone, Nicolas Clauss, Nicolas Frespech, Olga Kisseleva, Olivier Auber, Olivier Le Gal (collectif MU), Pascal Lièvre, Pascale Gustin, Paul-Armand Gette, Pavel Smetana, Pierre Beloüin (Optical Sound), Philippe De Jonckheere, Philippe Castellin (Akenaton/Doc(k) s), Philippe Quesne, Pierre Bongiovanni, Pierre Giner, Ramona Ponearu, Roland Cahen, Shu Lea Cheang, Stéphane Sautour, Sylvie Marchand (Gigacircus), Thierry Théolier aka THTH, Triny Prada, Valéry Grancher, Vincent Elka aka Lokiss, Vincent Epplay, Wolf Ka (Compagnie Respublica), Xavier Cahen.