February 6th, 2006
France Continues to Move Toward Legalized P2P
By Michael Santo
Contributing Writer, RealTechNews
As you may recall, in late December of last year we wrote about France voting to legalize P2P usage. Of course, it was by a vote of 30 - 28, with 519 deputies on vacation, and this would also have to pass the Senate as well. But it was still pretty interesting.
The legislation still continues to move forward however, though slowly. This week Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres, the French Minister of Culture, will address matters relating to the law in front of a special parliamentary session.
The proposed law would not make P2P both free and legal, although this popular misconception has persisted. Rather, P2P usage would be made legal in exchange for a monthly surcharge on Internet access, to the tune of circa €5 per month. Some users are jumping for joy at the idea of being indemnified against copyright infringement for a mere ~€60 a year, but not everyone. Like all taxes and surcharges, the fees would have to be paid by everyone, but not everyone thinks it’s a great idea (especially the entertainment industry). Source: Ars Technica
We Say: Initially this sounds like a great idea, but there are still problems. For example, the surcharge is for everyone, whether or not they actually download. And how will they handle content that for one reason or another is illegal in France but on the P2P network? There are more issues addressed in the full article linked above. Finally, you can bet other countries and plenty of media companies will oppose this law vehemently.
Thunderbee says:
Please note that in the original law, the tax was voluntary.
You would ask your provider to add the tax to your invoice (or the provider would ask you if you wanted this “option”). For once it would have been a fair tax
Do also note that the “French Minister of Culture” was totally opposed to this scheme, and sided with the music industry on this subject (illegal P2P, GPL licence made illegal for file trading software including FTP and http, …). He is the one who decided that the original vote was a “mistake” and that a new vote was to take place once the issue has been “explained” better.
Other laws were passed the same day, with the same number of deputies present, and there was no perceived need to re-vote on thoses issues.
February 6th, 2006 at 7:45 am
Michael Santo says:
Yes, I was confused about this because I recalled my original post seemed to indicate it was voluntary, but they seem to be changing tactics here.
February 6th, 2006 at 8:01 am