RIAA Wastes Little Time Trying To Extend Interpretation Of Usenet.com Victory

New French Three Strikes Law: Judges Will Get Five Minutes To Rule

from the speed-convicting dept

Mon, Jul 6th 2009 8:00am — Mike Masnick

You've heard of speed dating, right? The system whereby single people meet other singles of the appropriate sex for a grand total of five minutes before moving on to someone else? It appears that Nicolas' Sarkozy's path to getting a "three strikes and you're off the internet" law passed in France involves something similar. As you may recall, Sarkozy's original law to force ISPs to kick file sharers off the internet for three accusations (not convictions) of copyright infringement was gutted as unconstitutional. The big concern was that a judge needed to be included in the process. But, Sarkozy -- who is married to a pop singer (bias?) -- has insisted this is a matter that needs to be addressed.

Michael Scott alerts us to the news that a new proposal has been put forth in France, and to deal with the whole "judge must decide" issue, it creates a special "fast track" for such cases, whereby a judge would be given a grand total of five minutes to decide such cases. Yes, you see, free society (which Sarkozy insists he's defending) apparently doesn't involve giving a judge ample time to consider whether or not it makes sense to completely cut someone off from the internet because they may have wanted to listen to a certain song without properly clearing the rights. Oh, did we mention that Sarkozy himself was recently caught violating copyrights? Would he have let a judge decide that case in just five minutes?

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: five minutes, france, three strikes

22 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Steven (profile), 6 Jul 2009 @ 8:34am

If I were a Judge...
I'd have to say that five minutes isn't enough time to properly vet evidence. Therefore, with the presumption of innocence, I would have to rule in favor of the defendant.

Of course we don't live in a rational world, so who's to say how this would really go down.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 6 Jul 2009 @ 8:56am
  
  Re: If I were a Judge...
  I was just about to ask if France had that "beyond a shadow of a doubt" thing like the US douse. 5min is not enough to prove anything beyond a shadow of a doubt.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Valkor, 6 Jul 2009 @ 10:10am
    
    Re: Re: If I were a Judge...
    Even in America, prosecutors do not need to prove a case beyond a "shadow of a doubt". They *do* need to prove it beyond a REASONABLE doubt. The shadow of a doubt is the domain of the grandstanding defense attorney, and has nothing to do with criminal law.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Jul 2009 @ 8:36am

This isn't even good PR...
Being a hard-line politician against "piracy" might have been good for a few percentage points in the polls, but I can't imagine how "5 minute trials" could ever be viewed in a positive light.

What's more, I highly doubt that the defendants in the legal proceedings would even be required to appear, given how these policies tend to be executed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Jul 2009 @ 8:38am

Pointless political grandstanding. There's no way France's judiciary will allow their deliberative powers to be curtailed, rushed or otherwise limited. This provision will be struck down just like the last one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Brian (profile), 6 Jul 2009 @ 8:59am
  
  Re:
  Indeed. I don't know how closely France's system mirrors our executive/legislative/judicial branch system... but this would be a clear case of the executive branch overstepping its bounds here.
  
  Hopefully the judges have the power to strike this down.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
NullOp, 6 Jul 2009 @ 8:49am

Bias...
Being married to a pop singer injects so much bias as to rule Sarkozy's opinion inadmissible, totally! As I see it, in any case where one party stands to make a buck from the decision then bias exists. Therefore, that party can not, must not participate in the decision making process in any way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Jul 2009 @ 8:57am

fawk france!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Another AC, 6 Jul 2009 @ 8:59am

Like they really need 5 whole minutes
to use their rubber stamp that says "déconnecter"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
dennis parrott, 6 Jul 2009 @ 9:04am

sounds like someone who is also wed to "Big Euro"
While it seems clear that his wife may be biasing his judgement somewhat to the Big Content side of this argument, I would like to add that the whole 5 minutes to decide part of the process is in keeping with how the European Parliament is run. France, being a huge proponent of Big Government for Europe as part of the self-proclaimed UK-France-Germany axis around which the EU turns, would want nothing less than what their model for the EU Parliament uses: ram-rod legislation through with 5 minutes or less to debate and cast votes...

Why should a lousy judge get more time than a legislator?

(now if only I could pry my tongue out of my cheek...)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Matt, 6 Jul 2009 @ 9:06am

Depends how they plea
I think 5 minutes would be just about enough time for the judge to accept a plea of Guilty...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 6 Jul 2009 @ 9:31am

Hrmm
Would this be the 'moron in a hurry' test?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Jul 2009 @ 9:35am

I actually want to see this law passed and enforced. It would be fun to jump on open wi-fi connections at restaurants, businesses, and private residences to download infringing content. Have just one major politico get their internet access cutoff because someone 'borrowed' their wi-fi and you will see the politicians running for cover.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mechwarrior, 6 Jul 2009 @ 9:38am
  
  Re:
  From what I remember, its illegal to have an open wi-fi connection in France.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Hephaestus (profile), 7 Jul 2009 @ 7:56am
  
  Re:
  This might be the next, best act of civil disobedience in France. Hack a politicians WiFi and download 40,000+ songs and leave them out there.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rekrul, 6 Jul 2009 @ 9:49am

Oh, did we mention that Sarkozy himself was recently caught violating copyrights? Would he have let a judge decide that case in just five minutes?

Don't you know that the laws never apply to the politicians who pass them?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rob, 6 Jul 2009 @ 10:20am

IP Address Spoofing...
On a scale of 1 to Certain -- how likely is it that there is going to be massive IP spoofing in France directed towards all these politicians? That would be a fun little gesture of civil disobedience...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Jul 2009 @ 11:17am

five minutes is more than enough time for a judge to determine that an accusation is not a conviction. Sadly the question is still will they.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nelson Cruz (profile), 6 Jul 2009 @ 11:21am

I wonder what the constitutional council will say
France's contitutional council didn't just demand that a judge decide these cases, but also said that presumption of innocence and due process must be respected. So the accused must be proven guilty and given an opportunity to defend themselves.

How does having a judge decide in 5 minutes address that?? It's exactly like the previous system, only with a judge behind the desk instead of a bureaucrat!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2009 @ 5:21am
  
  Re: I wonder what the constitutional council will say
  well, it sounds like they can let it stand and provide a 100% acquittal rate, as required by presumption of innocence combined with insufficient time to review evidence.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Jul 2009 @ 3:43pm

making the judges run at internet speed - now that is a good idea!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bjc (profile), 7 Jul 2009 @ 8:29am

It's the "Idiot in a hurry" test enshrined in the courts!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]