Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Here the lay out several amendments they think are critical.  The language used is bit over the top, but still it seams to me as if they have a point.

However, I   did not check the draft report on it, maybe it is also simply not in there.

by rz on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 at 07:16:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That wiki is a mess.

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 at 07:24:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Uh huh...
As today (July 1st 21:00), we know that some so-called compromise amendments (this is an usual term in European Parliament, although there is no compromise at all, these amendments are pushed by pro-three-strikes-approach lobbyists) are discussed behind closed doors and will be tabled for July 7th, although they are not published yet.


When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 at 07:25:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
They are reading it backwards. The amendment:
...  to ensure that the ability of users to access or distribute lawful content or to run lawful applications and services of their choice is not unreasonably restricted.
I.e., this asks for regulation to prevent restriction to the running of lawful applications.

The commentary:

Free Software is not compatible with standards used to try to restrict the run of a « lawful application »
but trying to restrict the running of a "lawful application" is what the amendment wants to prevent.

The amendment says nothing about preventing the use of unlawful software (including modified lawful software), it only mentions that the use of lawful software should not be restricted.

The amendment:

Member States shall ensure, subject to paragraphs 2 and 3, that no mandatory requirements for specific technical features, including, without limitation, for the purpose of detecting,intercepting or preventing infringement of intellectual property rights by users, are imposed on terminal or other electronic communication equipment
Aren't they asking that no such requirements are imposed?

But I don't know. TBG reacted to this particular text by saying it appeared to by hysterical. Not to speak of the fact that it hasn't been tabled for July 7.

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 at 10:22:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Alright. Thanks for all the information. You are obviously right that at the current stage there is no reason to get particularly excited.  
by rz on Thu Jul 3rd, 2008 at 10:59:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series