The press review catalogues press articles related to la Quadrature's issues, compiled by its volunteers.
See also our French press review.
The body responsible for administering France's "three strikes" anti-piracy law has summoned a group of web users to explain their file sharing habits.
But Jeremie Zimmermann from French citizen advocacy group La Quadrature du Net [...] thinks that it is unlikely that anyone will ever be charged.
"For Hadopi it's now about this strategy of intimidation - they're sending out warnings to make people believe that file-sharing is bad, but that's as much as they can do "
"Hadopi is hoping that people will come and confess, that they will say that they have indeed downloaded copyrighted material," he told BBC News.
The Florida-based file-hosting service Hotfile intends to file a lawsuit against Warner Bros. for abusing its anti-piracy tool. Hotfile claims that Warner Bros. deleted files from the file-hosting service to which it didn’t hold the copyrights.[...]
Earlier this year five major Hollywood movie studios sued file-hosting service Hotfile for several copyright-related offenses.
“Hotfile has evidence that Warner used an antipiracy tool provided by Hotfile at Warner’s request to improperly remove material for which Warner did not own a copyright, and that Warner removed some material without ever verifying the contents of what it was deleting. [...]
Three of Europe's biggest telecoms firms are keen to start charging online content providers for delivering material to consumers.
[...] the organisations want national regulators to allow them to charge the biggest online content providers - such as Google and YouTube - for delivering their services to home and business broadband customers.
One critic of this system, citizen advocacy group La Quadrature du Net, argued that allowing the telecoms industry to control content in this manner would be at the expense of "fundamental freedoms".
Today the European Commission published the responses to a public consultation on Europe’s anti-piracy directive IPRED. As expected, there is a huge divide between the copyright holders on the one hand, and Internet providers, academics and citizens on the other. The latter fiercely oppose the draconian measures that IPRED introduces, claiming it threatens basic human rights while stifling innovation.
[...] the majority of the respondents argue that the entertainment industry itself is one of the causes of piracy, due to the lacking availability of legal content.
Most citizens go even further and call for legalizing file-sharing entirely, as it helps the free exchange of information.
As the United Nations has said, access to the Internet is a human right. A report by the U.N.’s special rapporteur presented last month to the Human Rights Council in Geneva warns that this right is being threatened by governments around the world — democracies included.
The French and British parliaments have passed draconian laws that would ban users from the Internet for illegally downloading copyrighted material. [...]
The U.N. has proposed sound guidelines to defend free expression: censorship of content online must be transparent and enforced only through the courts. Governments should not rely on private entities like service providers to censor content and should not hold them liable for user content. Counterterrorism should not be an excuse to bar expression, unless it is to prevent imminent threats.
A major Internet conference ended today in Paris with the publication of an official "Communiqué on Principles for Internet Policy-Making" (PDF). A key piece of these principles involves deputizing Internet providers to become Internet cops—cops that would act on the basis of "voluntary agreements" with content owners and other groups, not on national laws.
The resulting document has plenty of noncontroversial material about freedom of speech on the Internet and letting users run applications of their choice, but a key theme is that ISPs need to saddle up and slap on a badge; they're part of the posse now.
French group La Quadrature du Net went even further, saying that "the text's good opening principles are deeply undermined by copyright-related provisions calling for Internet actors to participate in an endless 'war on sharing' and granting them private police and justice missions."
"Sound Internet policy should encompass norms of responsibility that enable private sector voluntary co-operation for the protection of intellectual property. Appropriate measures include lawful steps to address and deter infringement. All parties have a role to play, including intermediaries," the communication said.
"This approach could create incentives for Internet intermediaries to delete or block contested content and lead to network filtering, which would harm online expression. In addition Internet intermediaries could voluntarily adopt a "graduated response" [...]" said CSISAC, a coalition of more than 80 civil liberties groups from across the globe, including La Quadrature du Net, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and EDRi.
This appears to favor a move towards more filtering and control, something that troubles CSISAC members. "Internet intermediaries must not be called upon to make determinations about the legality of content passing through their networks and platforms because they are neither competent nor appropriate parties to do so.[...]
Groups including La Quadrature du Net and the Electronic Frontier Foundation said they could not endorse the plan because it calls for private policing of the internet and would lead to censorship in the name of copyright protection.
“Under the pressure of the entertainment industries, the OECD is undermining the good principles laid in its framework for Internet policy-making,” said Jérémie Zimmermann, co-founder of the La Quadrature du Net.
The OECD draft Communiqué on Principles for Internet Policy-Making would make search engines and internet service providers play a more active role in monitoring copyright abuse, potentially becoming responsible for filtering and blocking access to websites that house copyright-infringing material.
For a long time, the dominant conversation around internet censorship has focused on two of the practice's giants: Iran and China.
Arguably owners of the most sophisticated filtering methods, the criticism levied against these two countries has been deserved. And yet, the focus on them has largely been at the exclusion of other countries that also censor the web to varying degrees - including an increasing number of democracies.
Filtering at the government or ISP level is costly, yet can be easily circumvented with minimal tech savvy, using widely available proxy tools.
Most problematically, setting a precedent of blocking websites simply makes it that much easier for a government or ISP to extend filtering as they wish.
A draft executive order would give various French government agencies the power to take down or block Internet content they deem harmful. Critics see a vast censorship scheme that would allow for “arbitrary” take-downs.
As PC Inpact (in French), which broke the story, has pointed out, however, the definition of “electronic commerce” provided in the LCEN is “misleading.” [...] PC Inpact and digital rights organization La Quadrature du Net have therefore argued that the bill puts “the entire Internet” under government censorship.
Based on the aforementioned provisions of the 2004 law [...], the draft executive order that spurred the current controversy defines possible measures as well as the government agencies that would be able to impose them.