The decision of the Constitutional Council on the law Loppsi 2 has just been released and while many important articles were censored, the measure for filtering pornography sites without the approval of the judge was upheld. The Sages have maintained article 4 of the Act which provides that the need to fight against pedophilia on the Internet can cause blocking of websites, but necessary move before a judge.
The law also says that the government responsibility to compensate ISPs for the additional costs generated by this measure. The Constitutional Council has held two interesting points as a motivation, but that does not always seem relevant. The decision is interesting because on several occasions, it clearly limits the spectrum of the law which should censor the dissemination of images to print pedophiles.
This limit repeated several times in the Decision (recitals 6, 7 and 8) oversees the law. A website can be censored if it distributes graphic content (film, pictures, drawings, etc.). Child pornography. A page containing only text, even questionable in the eyes of the public morals, should not in principle be censored, limiting the damage to freedom of expression.
The Council also considers it possible to enter the administrative law judge to challenge the censorship decision taken by a government body. There is therefore no need to be validated by the judiciary before its execution as it can be entered retrospectively and may cancel it. Unfortunately, French law does not take into account the constraints and realities of the Internet.
Referral to the competent French court will be extremely difficult for a small site foreigner residing on another continent. Language barriers, cultural and financial means that it will be much more difficult to challenge this decision will have very serious damage. Unjust censorship can easily plunge a company into a chaotic situation sufficiently to force it to file for bankruptcy.
The time to seize the judge to overturn the decision and could have tragic consequences. It's two points leads us to believe that a referral to the judge before the implementation of such a decision would have been wiser. The decision of the Constitutional Council is also interesting because it represents one of the heaviest censures of the history of the Fifth Republic.
Many articles have been rejected or almonds. Minimum sentences for juveniles are contrary to the fundamental principles of juvenile justice and constitutional requirements in criminal justice. The Sages also said contrary to the Constitution section allowing prefects to carry out the forced evacuation of premises occupied illegally "when the formal notice to leave within forty-eight hour minimum set by the latter provision has not been implemented and has not been the subject of suspensive appeal.
" They believe that this article gives too much power and the prefects do not guarantee a duty to balance preservation of public order and rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. Similarly, Article extending the persons authorized to carry out an identity check and that allowing a private company to undertake the tasks of surveillance of the highway were also rejected. 
The law also says that the government responsibility to compensate ISPs for the additional costs generated by this measure. The Constitutional Council has held two interesting points as a motivation, but that does not always seem relevant. The decision is interesting because on several occasions, it clearly limits the spectrum of the law which should censor the dissemination of images to print pedophiles.
This limit repeated several times in the Decision (recitals 6, 7 and 8) oversees the law. A website can be censored if it distributes graphic content (film, pictures, drawings, etc.). Child pornography. A page containing only text, even questionable in the eyes of the public morals, should not in principle be censored, limiting the damage to freedom of expression.
The Council also considers it possible to enter the administrative law judge to challenge the censorship decision taken by a government body. There is therefore no need to be validated by the judiciary before its execution as it can be entered retrospectively and may cancel it. Unfortunately, French law does not take into account the constraints and realities of the Internet.
Referral to the competent French court will be extremely difficult for a small site foreigner residing on another continent. Language barriers, cultural and financial means that it will be much more difficult to challenge this decision will have very serious damage. Unjust censorship can easily plunge a company into a chaotic situation sufficiently to force it to file for bankruptcy.
The time to seize the judge to overturn the decision and could have tragic consequences. It's two points leads us to believe that a referral to the judge before the implementation of such a decision would have been wiser. The decision of the Constitutional Council is also interesting because it represents one of the heaviest censures of the history of the Fifth Republic.
Many articles have been rejected or almonds. Minimum sentences for juveniles are contrary to the fundamental principles of juvenile justice and constitutional requirements in criminal justice. The Sages also said contrary to the Constitution section allowing prefects to carry out the forced evacuation of premises occupied illegally "when the formal notice to leave within forty-eight hour minimum set by the latter provision has not been implemented and has not been the subject of suspensive appeal.
" They believe that this article gives too much power and the prefects do not guarantee a duty to balance preservation of public order and rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. Similarly, Article extending the persons authorized to carry out an identity check and that allowing a private company to undertake the tasks of surveillance of the highway were also rejected.
- France Away Shirt 2011 - The Marinière (09/03/2011)
- Finding an apartment in Paris... impossible?? (09/03/2011)
- Madvillain - "Avalance" + "Victory Lap" (05/01/2011)
- The busiest week ever at Teapot Towers...now it's off to mideast France at first light! (25/02/2011)
- We explore Niort - Niort, France (06/03/2011)
No comments:
Post a Comment