"
if illegal downloading of files containing copyrighted works, the subscriber will receive two recommendations of Hadopi (email and letter), before a possible fine and / or interruption of the Internet access for a maximum of one month, all decided by the judge. "
"The offense of
" gross negligence "
will consist on two conditions: if, on the one hand, the subscriber, after receiving
"two recommendations"
of Hadopi, abstained, "two recommendations"
"without cause"
, to secure its access to the Internet or arrange for it to work properly. And if new illegal acts were carried out from its Internet access in the year following receipt of the letter. First confession:
"Hackers are not our target: they are stronger than us. Our target is people negligent or who did not fully conscious of having committed an offense "
, said Mireille Imbert-Quaretta."
http://www.lemonde.fr/culture/article/2010/06/29/le-piratage-sur-internet-sera-verbalise_1380492_3246.html
: /
Me I think it says little about the means used for the chopper peers had heard of Shareaza software change that would be used. The problem is that in the case of the torrent and edonkey etc (p2p) are recovered file fragments around a bit. So how do they define "piracy" works? (Because one simple piece of mp3's just not usable).
Or is the thought that counts? From the moment you log on Shareaza police anywhere there is the ip file?
In that case "proof of concept" seedfuck (home Packetstorm) can be used by anyone to piss someone; with the ip Mireille Imbert-Quaretta seedfuck ip in the list, a connection on Shareaza and it will take a letter warning hadopi? For
thing "contrary to negligence" then it is even more unclear to me ...
So she talks about "Secure
its access to the Internet, "but I see that it changes not technically [
its access to the Internet, "but I see that it changes not technically [
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/report-48-of-22-million-scanned-computers-infected- with-malware/5365
-> 48% on 22 million computers are infected].
an infected PC may very well serve as a gateway for illegal downloads, so without the traffickers from entering the machine and Outgoing recorded and analyzed, how can we define who is guilty of what?
How can we define something as muche will receive an email warning without seizure of equipment and analysis? 
"Pirates are not our target: they are stronger than us. Our target is people who are negligent or not fully conscious of having committed an offense " , said Mireille Imbert-Quaretta." I find remarks like this quite? I dunno ... (you know you are there so you'll eat, that's what it means nan?) is like the trade you need to target the type of consumer here is the victim but it's the same type.
This AC is good in France we have people working on legislation in an area where they know little. ('Cause for virtually everything government sports minister who is not sports ... etc.)
Until I secure my internet access and my pc (in case) I will put the firewall open office (there are more now, this is no joke ca cf rstack squeeze that has made a note above)
Long live Universal
where you saved the debian 
