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

Dutch parliament rejects ACTA, prohibits government to sign or ratify.

bof.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 52 posts

Re: Dutch parliament rejects ACTA, prohibits government to sign or ratify.

#41

Post by dlitz »

jkn wrote: post #15
maurits wrote: post #10

Two critical notes to the general "holland is fantastic" fuzzy feelings. The Netherlands are European leaders when it comes to wiretapping communications. Its laws gives the intelligence communities extensive powers to tap, filter and store. This was already the case well before 9/11. Secondly, privacy is usually not a political or social issue of any real significance.

The Netherlands recently passed a law on Net neutrality stating that a warrant is required for internet wiretapping: https://www.bof.nl/2012/05/08/netherlands-first-country-in-e... I don't see anything wrong with wiretapping with a warrant. Do people who argue against them also argue against home search warrants?

I see something wrong with it if everyone is required to keep logs and to "know their customers", just in case someone comes along with a warrant. Such requirements destroy the ability to offer free public wi-fi.

Re: Dutch parliament rejects ACTA, prohibits government to sign or ratify.

#42

Post by jvdongen »

gglanzani wrote: post #17

And on the other and now the majority of ISP are blocking access to the PirateBay. As much as I like the Netherlands (living here from 2006, I'm Italian), these inconsistencies in their systems are really annoying[^1]. Net neutrality, ACTA rejection on one side, blocking web sites on the other. [^1]: I won't mention the other kind of inconsistencies, but if you really curious about some health care system madness, I…

The decision to require ISP's to block the Pirate bay is currently being appealed by the way. It's a judicial issue based on existing laws, not a political one such as the net neutrality one. And as long as the appeal is going on nothing is definitive.

Re: Dutch parliament rejects ACTA, prohibits government to sign or ratify.

#44

Post by scoot »

bgentry wrote: post #43

Wow, is this really what bills in the Netherlands look like? 500 words, half a page? How do we get our govt to stop churning out multi-thousand page piles of pork-barreling instead of simple, straightforward resolutions like this?

Charge politicians by the word for submitted bills?

Re: Dutch parliament rejects ACTA, prohibits government to sign or ratify.

#45

Post by speleding »

bgentry wrote: post #43

Wow, is this really what bills in the Netherlands look like? 500 words, half a page? How do we get our govt to stop churning out multi-thousand page piles of pork-barreling instead of simple, straightforward resolutions like this?

Actually, it's a "motion", a (strong though non-binding) suggestion from the house to the cabinet that they should change the regulations to accommodate the motion.

The actual law or laws that will be changed or created are not nearly as pretty. (Although judges here are allowed to pass judgement in the "spirit of the law" rather than taking the text literally, so there is less of an incentive to get every little detail nailed down on paper)

Re: Dutch parliament rejects ACTA, prohibits government to sign or ratify.

#46

Post by eru »

bgentry wrote: post #43

Wow, is this really what bills in the Netherlands look like? 500 words, half a page? How do we get our govt to stop churning out multi-thousand page piles of pork-barreling instead of simple, straightforward resolutions like this?

The US constitution isn't too verbose, either. (But you can still see the murky compromises, if you look carefully.)

Re: Dutch parliament rejects ACTA, prohibits government to sign or ratify.

#47

Post by ktizo »

ajuc wrote: post #33
ktizo wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is a marginally better excuse than the standard 4 year old's "someone else did it and ran away", but only just.

For the record - Polish PM backed off after few weeks of mass protests in Poland, and said he was wrong, and Poland won't ratificate ACTA. I still don't like him for his other decisions, and the lies he told about ACTA before he changed his mind, but at least he can say he was wrong.

Fair point, however I admit I am a bit of a cynical bastard and so suspect that most politicians would swear the earth was flat, if they thought for one second it would extend their time in power.

Re: Dutch parliament rejects ACTA, prohibits government to sign or ratify.

#48

Post by gpvos »

gpvos wrote: post #34
adavies42 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is that in theory where the queen steps in?

Not sure; it has never happened yet and it would certainly get ugly, so she might. She does usually step in at a few other places, though. We're getting off-topic here; for a very nice but not yet complete overview, see http://www.quirksmode.org/politics/ .

Hmm, I may have misunderstood adavies42 slightly here; I thought (s)he meant what would happen if a motion of no confidence were ignored, which has never happened and would be quite a shock. When a motion of no confidence is passed by parliament, either against the entire government or against one or more of its members, which has happened several times, usually the target of the motion goes to the queen to resign; the governmental parties then seek a replacement who has to be officially appointed by the queen. If the entire government resigns, the queen usually asks for advice from all political leaders, and then there are several options, all of which involve her, since she officially appoints the members of the government. In practice, power is in the hands of the political parties; she does have some possibilities to influence the process, but not very much.

Re: Dutch parliament rejects ACTA, prohibits government to sign or ratify.

#49

Post by derfniw »

gglanzani wrote: post #17

And on the other and now the majority of ISP are blocking access to the PirateBay. As much as I like the Netherlands (living here from 2006, I'm Italian), these inconsistencies in their systems are really annoying[^1]. Net neutrality, ACTA rejection on one side, blocking web sites on the other. [^1]: I won't mention the other kind of inconsistencies, but if you really curious about some health care system madness, I…

the blocking of TPB is not an inconistency. The net neutrality law has explicit exceptions for allowing blocking IPs / hostnames / sites via court order.

In this case the judge has decided that TPB mostly facilitates illegal downloading and that therefore a block is allowed.

This is a, technically, correct decision because the net neutrality law gives judges enough room to block websites.

Re: Dutch parliament rejects ACTA, prohibits government to sign or ratify.

#50

Post by adavies42 »

gpvos wrote: post #48
gpvos wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure; it has never happened yet and it would certainly get ugly, so she might. She does usually step in at a few other places, though. We're getting off-topic here; for a very nice but not yet complete overview, see http://www.quirksmode.org/politics/ .

Hmm, I may have misunderstood adavies42 slightly here; I thought (s)he meant what would happen if a motion of no confidence were ignored, which has never happened and would be quite a shock. When a motion of no confidence is passed by parliament, either against the entire government or against one or more of its members, which has happened several times, usually the target of the motion goes to the queen to resign; t…

> I thought (s)he meant what would happen if a motion of no confidence were ignored

yes, that's what i meant. thanks for the info!

Post reply on HN