Cherche relecteurs FR -> EN - Hadopi - vers un endoctrinement des enfants

[Marc Chauvet <marc.chauvet AT gmail.com>]

Bonsoir à tous,

Je viens de terminer la traduction du communiqué de presse que voici http://www.april.org/fr/hadopi-vers-un-endoctrinement-des-enfants-des-ecoles.

Vous trouverez les versions FR & EN ci-jointes. Je suis preneur de toute suggestion d'amélioration.

Bonne soirée à tous :)
Marc

In a recent press release entitled HADOPI - proprietary propaganda at school? April showed its concern regarding an article suggesting setbacks in the educational and commercial neutrality of school.

Such fears were relevant since the Parliament rejected on Thursday the 2nd of April 2009 an amendment of shere common sense proposed by the SRC Member of Parliament Martine Billard who wanted to balance the article by presenting also the legal distribution of contents and works under open or free licenses.

The Member of Parliament Mrs Martine Billard (SRC) had indeed presented two sub-amendments aiming at correcting article 9 bis. These were the sub-amendement 527 and the sub-amendment 528.

They were discussed Thursday but were rejected following the unfavorable opinion of both the bearer of the bill Franck Riester (UMP) and the Secretary of State Christine Albanel. Here are the details:

---

Mr the President: I'm being presented with amendment n°95, which is itself the object of amendment n°527. The floor is yielded to Mr Franck Riester, in order to defend amendment n° 95.

Mr Franck Riester, bearer [of the bill]: This is a re-wording amendement.

Mr the President: The floor is yielded to Mrs Martine Billard, to defend sub-amendment n°527.

Mrs Martine Billard: As long as we don't try, we're sure to fail! This is why I'm presenting this sub-amendment. Maybe Mrs Marland-Militello will support me again.

Mr Philippe Gosselin: You are right: nothing is inevitable, there is only renounciation!

Mrs Martine Billard: Article 9 bis provides that students will receive information on the dangers of downloading on cultural creation, as part of the computing and internet diploma for middle school students. So be it, but since we still haven't the report that was expected from the DADVSI law, the debate remains whole as to ascertain its result.

This is why this sub-amendment aims at underlining that this information shall be "neutral and pural" - which is not yet the case today - and that it will present "also the legal distribution of contents and works under open or free licenses". If I insist on such licenses as Art Libre or Creative Commons, it is because there constitute an excellent way to legally distribute culture and to share culture between individuals.

It is important to explain that these licenses exist. Moreover, Mrs the bearer of the bill recognized it, by telling us she had used a work under a Creative Commons license while omitting to mention its author. This is a relatively recent license, which therefore need to be better known in order to avoid that internet users use unvolutarily works that use such a license without mentioning its author's name, when it is the main requirement of that license. This sub-amendment is therefore essential to ensure the respect of copyright law in the case of distribution of works for which the authors ask for the respect of their moral rights without demanding financial compensation. It is also essential because I maintain that the opening up of the cultural practices of our youth requires the use of such licenses. Didn't today's major artists start in a more modest way?

It is true that Internet constitutes for new artists a fantastic distribution tool. It is therefore were important to explain to the younger ones that they must respect copyright by not downloading illegally pieces of work but that they can very well use open and free licenses.

Mr the President: What is the opinion of the commission on this sub-amendment?

Mr Franck Riester, bearer [of the bill]: Ms Billard expressed longly her point of view but the elements she proposes aren't in the puview of the law (Ms exclaims), but rather in an application decree. Ms the Secretary of State, maybe could you highlight to Mr the Secretary of State of Education these concerns, but I insist, Ms Billard: This proposal of yours shouldn't be dealt with by law. The commission therefore expresses a defavourable opinion.

Mr Patrick Bloche: Does Ms Billard's proposal disturb you?

Mr the President: What is the opinion of the government?

Ms Christine Albanel, Secretary of State for Culture: Same opinion.

Sub-amendment n°527 is rejected.

Amendement n°95 is adopted.

---

You can find it interesting to read Alexis Kauffman's reaction "Civil disobedience coming to school?".

Lors d'un r??cent communiqu?? intitul?? HADOPI - propagande anti-libre ?? l'??cole ? l'April s'??tait inqui??t??e d'un article remettant en cause la neutralit?? scolaire et commerciale de l'??cole.

Inqui??tudes bien fond??es puisque l???Assembl??e a rejet?? jeudi 2 avril 2009 un amendement de pur bon sens de la d??put?? Martine Billard (SRC) qui souhaitait ??quilibrer l'article en pr??sentant ??galement la diffusion l??gale des contenus et ??uvres sous licences ouvertes ou libres.

Mme la d??put?? Martine Billard (SRC) avait en effet d??pos?? deux sous-amendements visant ?? corriger l'article 9 bis. Ce sont le sous-amendement 527 et le sous-amendement 528.

Ceux-ci ont ??t?? discut??s jeudi mais a ??t?? rejet?? suite ?? l'avis d??favorable du rapporteur Franck Riester (UMP) et de la ministre Christine Albanel. Voici le d??tail :

---

M. le pr??sident : Je suis saisi d???un amendement n?? 95, qui fait l???objet d???un sous-amendement n?? 527. La parole est ?? M. Franck Riester, pour d??fendre l???amendement n?? 95.

M. Franck Riester, rapporteur : Amendement r??dactionnel.

M. le pr??sident : La parole est ?? Mme Martine Billard, pour soutenir le sous-amendement n?? 527.

Mme Martine Billard : Tant qu???on n???essaie pas, on est certain d?????chouer ! Telle est la raison pour laquelle je pr??sente ce sous-amendement. Peut-??tre Mme Marland-Militello me soutiendra-t-elle de nouveau.

M. Philippe Gosselin : Vous avez raison : il n???y a pas de fatalit??, il n???y a que des renoncements !

Mme Martine Billard : L???article 9 bis pr??voit que les ??l??ves recevront une information sur les dangers du t??l??chargement pour la cr??ation artistique dans le cadre du brevet informatique et Internet des coll??giens. Soit, mais comme nous ne disposons toujours pas du rapport pr??vu par la loi DADVSI, le d??bat reste ouvert sur le bilan de celle-ci.

C???est la raison pour laquelle ce sous-amendement vise ?? pr??voir que l???information sera ?? neutre et pluraliste ?? ??? ce n???est pas encore une r??alit?? ??? et qu???elle pr??sentera ?? ??galement la diffusion l??gale des contenus et ??uvres sous licences ouvertes ou libres ??. Si j???insiste sur les licences du type Art Libre ou Creative Commons, c???est qu???elles sont un excellent moyen de diffusion l??gale de la culture et de partage culturel entre particuliers.

Il est important d???expliquer que ces licences existent. Du reste, Mme la rapporteure pour avis l???a reconnu, en nous indiquant qu???elle a utilis?? une ??uvre sous licence Creative Commons tout en omettant de signaler son auteur. Il s???agit d???une licence encore assez r??cente et qui a donc besoin d?????tre davantage connue pour ??viter qu???involontairement des internautes n???utilisent des ??uvres qui sont sous cette licence sans pr??ciser l???auteur de l?????uvre, alors que c???est la condition d???utilisation de cette licence. Ce sous-amendement est donc tout d???abord essentiel pour assurer le respect du droit d???auteur dans le cas de la diffusion d?????uvres pour lesquelles les auteurs demandent le respect de leur droit moral sans exiger de r??mun??ration. Il l???est ensuite parce que, je le maintiens, la pratique culturelle des jeunes vers l???ext??rieur suppose l???utilisation de telles licences. Les grands artistes aujourd???hui connus n???ont-ils pas d??but?? de fa??on plus modeste ?

Il est vrai qu???Internet constitue pour les nouveaux artistes un outil fantastique de diffusion. Il est donc tr??s important d???expliquer aux jeunes qu???ils doivent respecter le droit d???auteur en ne t??l??chargeant pas ill??galement des ??uvres mais qu???ils peuvent tr??s bien utiliser les licences ouvertes et libres.

M. le pr??sident : Quel est l???avis de la commission sur le sous-amendement ?

M. Franck Riester, rapporteur : Mme Billard s???est longuement exprim??e mais la disposition qu???elle propose n???est vraiment pas du ressort de la loi (Mme Billard s???exclame), mais plut??t de la circulaire. Peut-??tre, madame la ministre, pourriez-vous rendre le ministre de l?????ducation nationale sensible ?? ces pr??occupations mais, j???insiste, madame Billard : votre proposition ne rel??ve pas du domaine de la loi. La commission ??met donc un avis d??favorable.

M. Patrick Bloche : La proposition de Mme Billard vous g??ne-t-elle ?

M. le pr??sident : Quel est l???avis du Gouvernement ?

Mme Christine Albanel, ministre de la culture : M??me avis.

Le sous-amendement n?? 527 n???est pas adopt??.

L'amendement n?? 95 est adopt??.

---

On lira avec int??r??t la r??action d'Alexis Kauffman D??sob??issance civile en vue ?? l'??cole ?.