Contrary to what some publications and articles on social networks claim, the Hadopi still exists. The Sages only restricted her access to certain data.
“Hadopi, it’s over”,“Hadopi is defeated”,“End clap for Hadopi”. In recent hours, dozens of messages have hastily welcomed a decision of the Constitutional Council made Wednesday, May 20 and supposed to remove this body responsible for fighting against illegal downloading.
Even La Quadrature du Net, which is one of the associations behind the decision of the Constitutional Council, went a little quickly: “Censorship by the Constitutional Council led us to think in the heat of the moment of a decisive victory that we hoped for.“
But what does the Constitutional Council really say about Hadopi? The True False cell explains to you.
To track internet users who download illegally, the High Authority receives information from access providers in order to identify fraudsters and warn them before possibly sending their file to justice in the event of a repeat offense.
But the Constitutional Council judges that the Hadopi agents have access to information that is too broad and not all justified. It is paragraphs 3 and 4 of article L 331-21 of the intellectual property code, which defines the powers of Hadopi, which are the problem. In fact, this part specifies that Hadopi has the right to obtain from operators communication and a copy of “all documents regardless of the medium, including data stored and processed by operators”. For the Wise, “such data provide numerous and precise information which is particularly harmful to their privacy.”
Furthermore, for the Constitutional Council, “the right to obtain communication and copy of all documents”Without specifying“the people with whom it is likely to train”Is unbalanced compared to“the objective of safeguarding intellectual property.“The personal data to which Hadopi has access is therefore now more limited, but this in no way signals the end of its mission.
Apart from the censored article, most of the text has been validated by the Constitutional Council. Hadopi can always ask operators to give it information about the identity of a user. More specifically, the agents of the High Authority will continue to be able to recover “mailing address, email address and telephone number”, Once a user has downloaded protected works without the authorization of the rights holders.
For the Constitutional Council this information is “required”To Hadopi to remind internet users concerned of their obligations. “They therefore have a direct link with the subject of the procedure implemented by the rights protection commission.”, It is specified in the decision. Finally, for the Wise, this part of the text is not problematic because it reconciles in a “clearly balanced“Respect for privacy and the objective of safeguarding intellectual property.
The abrogation of these points considered not to be in conformity with the Constitution will not take effect until December 31, 2020. The Sages consider that “in this case, the immediate repeal (…) would have manifestly excessive consequences”.
The government now has six months to present a new text, knowing that the audiovisual bill debated for a few months in Parliament plans to create a new authority that would merge the powers of Hadopi and the CSA.