Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New EU law prescribes website blocking in the name of consumer protection

juliareda.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 125 posts

Re: New EU law prescribes website blocking in the name of consumer protection

#31

Post by snowpanda »

sassenach wrote: post #9

I think this is the relevant paragraph in the document (page 27 in http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/commissions/imco/inag/... ) linked from the article: "3. Competent authorities shall have at least the following enforcement powers: (e) where no other effective means are available to bring about the cessation or the prohibition of the infringement including by requesting a third party or other public authority t…

>and allow the competent authority concerned to register it

It's actually worse than 'blocking', they get control of the domain.

Re: New EU law prescribes website blocking in the name of consumer protection

#32

Post by ucarion »

I don't see the relevance of Ms Reda's example of Catalonian domains being taken down. Using such an example seems more like a scare tactic than anything else.

The EU law she discusses seems clearly focused on (e-)commerce, and it instructs the government to have websites taken down only when that's the only way to protect consumers from being harmed (e.g. defrauded) by those websites.

News websites, even those encouraging people to show up to illegal referenda, don't appear to be affected by this law?

Re: New EU law prescribes website blocking in the name of consumer protection

#33

Post by pilsetnieks »

1_2__4 wrote: post #25
shmerl wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is no going back. Why not. Bad laws should be repealed.

What should happen is irrelevant to the conversation. We’re talking about what WOULD happen.

This is the EU, bad laws do get repealed, for example, the data retention directive was annulled for violating fundamental rights of privacy. It's not completely eradicated from national laws yet in every country but it's on its way.

Re: New EU law prescribes website blocking in the name of consumer protection

#35

Post by mattmanser »

sassenach wrote: post #9

I think this is the relevant paragraph in the document (page 27 in http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/commissions/imco/inag/... ) linked from the article: "3. Competent authorities shall have at least the following enforcement powers: (e) where no other effective means are available to bring about the cessation or the prohibition of the infringement including by requesting a third party or other public authority t…

"risk of serious harm to the collective interests of consumers"

What a weaselly term. Bet they spent months trying to come up with something that didn't sound ridiculously biased/anti-consumer and that's the best they came up with. So obviously corrupt.

Re: New EU law prescribes website blocking in the name of consumer protection

#36

Post by leggomylibro »

mattmanser wrote: post #35
sassenach wrote: post #9

I think this is the relevant paragraph in the document (page 27 in http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/commissions/imco/inag/... ) linked from the article: "3. Competent authorities shall have at least the following enforcement powers: (e) where no other effective means are available to bring about the cessation or the prohibition of the infringement including by requesting a third party or other public authority t…

"risk of serious harm to the collective interests of consumers" What a weaselly term. Bet they spent months trying to come up with something that didn't sound ridiculously biased/anti-consumer and that's the best they came up with. So obviously corrupt.

Let me translate:

"business which we want to cultivate a protected local equivalent of"

China figured it out; the EU is just playing catch-up.

Re: New EU law prescribes website blocking in the name of consumer protection

#37

Post by StanislavPetrov »

pilsetnieks wrote: post #17
dalbasal wrote: post #10

This feels like a fight we're going to lose eventually. Proposals come up.. most fail. I admire those responsible for putting up resistance. But.. some succeed. Others partially succeed. Limited to stopping pedophilia, piracy, nazis... Those are bridgeheads. The direction is monodirectional. Eighty six proposals can fail, but if the eighty seventh succeeds that's just as good. There is no going back. Win, good. Lose,…

> The direction is monodirectional The obvious tautology aside, I wouldn't agree with this in case of the EU (the US, probably.) To me, the EU feels more like two steps forward, one step back - this being the step back but, for example, the GDPR being the two steps (or leaps) forward. In any case, this regulation seems more misguided rather than malicious. It's targeting real problems that have to be tackled but it d…

>In any case, this regulation seems more misguided rather than malicious.

Intent isn't relevant at all - only result.

Re: New EU law prescribes website blocking in the name of consumer protection

#38

Post by porfirium »

sverige wrote: post #16
porfirium wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should abolish prisons then? It's a ridiculous argument. Abuses can happen with full backing of the courts, but I expect them to not happen. In all the years that this system has been in place in Spain I have never seen it used for anything other than blocking websites that were in breach of the law.

Wait, what? How do you get abolishing prisons out of that? Back to the subject, what if a law is bad, but the mere act of saying publicly that the law is bad is, in itself, breaking the law? That's where this is all heading. It starts with prohibiting the utterance of specific words because they hurt someone's feelings, but hidden under "consumer safety" or "public order." No one speaks against it because "of course…

So what? We have hate speech laws in Europe. Try saying "the holocaust never happened" or "homosexuals are vile creatures" and you will see what can happen to you. There's no free speech in Europe anyway.

Re: New EU law prescribes website blocking in the name of consumer protection

#39

Post by gsich »

tankenmate wrote: post #19
sassenach wrote: post #9

I think this is the relevant paragraph in the document (page 27 in http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/commissions/imco/inag/... ) linked from the article: "3. Competent authorities shall have at least the following enforcement powers: (e) where no other effective means are available to bring about the cessation or the prohibition of the infringement including by requesting a third party or other public authority t…

As if the ICANN compliance department don't already have enough on their plate squaring the circle over the WHOIS / GDPR / RA / RAA imbroglio. 'in with the good' 'out with the bad'

The EU is right on this matter however. (ICANN)

Re: New EU law prescribes website blocking in the name of consumer protection

#40

Post by untog »

StanislavPetrov wrote: post #37
pilsetnieks wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The direction is monodirectional The obvious tautology aside, I wouldn't agree with this in case of the EU (the US, probably.) To me, the EU feels more like two steps forward, one step back - this being the step back but, for example, the GDPR being the two steps (or leaps) forward. In any case, this regulation seems more misguided rather than malicious. It's targeting real problems that have to be tackled but it d…

>In any case, this regulation seems more misguided rather than malicious. Intent isn't relevant at all - only result.

It's relevant if you're considering proposing an alternative. If you can achieve the same desired end result without hideous side effects, people might be receptive.
Post reply on HN