They might have been congratulated for their "green" efforts in an area of heavy air pollution.
Instead a group of French cleaning ladies who organised a car-sharing scheme to get to work are being taken to court by a coach company which accuses them of "an act of unfair and parasitical competition".
The women, who live in Moselle and work five days a week at EU offices in Luxembourg, are being taken to court by Transports Schiocchet Excursions, which runs a service along the route. It wants the women to be fined and their cars confiscated.
French-style socialism does nothing but give French people and French companies a false and delusional sense of entitlement. And if this doesn't qualify as evidence for this statement, I don't know what does.
Boy oh boy, I thought I had heard it all.
Hat Tips to:
eu-serf
hubsandspokes
13 comments:
You know, just when I thought there was some hope from France..... good lord. What a huge bunch of hooey.
Socialism means never having to say please or thank you.
Man, this is over the top, even for the French...on second thought, given their history over the last hundred years or so, it should be shifted to the hardly surprising catagory.
All three of you have said it well.
Using expensive legal action, no matter how frivolous, to crush a small competitor is not a phenomena confined to France.
Anonymous is right. But the nature of the complaint is what makes this unique. The U.S. has the scam known as eminent domain, but to target people because they find an alternative to your company's product or service, makes no sense.
It is comparable to a mafia tactic, like intimidation used when a good customer of one mob switches loyalties to another mob. Only this French bus company is using the courts in France to do their dirty work, instead of the big goons that break thumbs.
RIAA? Sugar - Splenda?
RIAA vs. Filesharing and Sugar vs. Splenda are different, in that, the survival of a whole industry, is at stake.
The recording industry spends billions to sign artists and record them. Filesharing cuts into the record companies' abilities to recuperate that money.
The French case is one company suing individuals that chose to find an alternative, that is otherwise legal. I doubt that the whole French bus industry will collapse because a few people car pool instead.
To sum it up, the suits you mention are suppliers vs. suppliers. Not suppliers vs. consumers, which is what the French suit is.
RIAA suing teenagers downloading songs is supplier vs consumer.
If the recording industry has paid billions to sign and record and distribute artists and cannot make any money out of it, then they paid too much. Is it the function of the courts to enforce the RIAAs profit margins anymore than it is the function of the courts to enforce the profitability of bus companies?
The courts say unlicenced free distribution of music is illegal, now a bus company wants to know if the unlicenced free provision of mass transport is illegal.
1. The RIAA is made up of a collection of companies that together are an industry. The French case is one company, suing some blue-collar, working class ladies, that chose to find a less expensive and more comfortable way to get to work.
2. An industry has a right to protect their right to be compensated for products, that THEY produce. They have the right to protect their livelihood from people that want to get something for free. A company does not have the right sue someone just because that person found a less expensive and better product.
3. In the French case, these ladies are not trying to take anything that the bus company produces, without cost. They merely shifted a part of their operating budget from one supplier to another. And did so for a lower price. Nobody was defrauding anyone. They were paying something for something, not getting something for nothing.
They chose a different industry to provide it, they chose the automobile industry. Instead of picking on the carmakers, the bus company picks on little ladies trying to make ends meet.
4. The RIAA is threatening to sue teenagers but how many have they sued? How many will they have to sue? Too many.
I perosnally know of no one that has been sued. I have not read anything about massive lawsuits being filed against millions of teenagers that swap music, online. (If you know of any credible stories of this happening, provide a link and I will check it out.)
But in the French case, the bus company HAS filed a suit, it was tossed out of a business tribunal, and now they have taken it to a higher court. And they have asked they be awarded damages, to include having the ladies' cars, taken away from them, by force.
The RIAA just wants the practice to stop. So they can sell music. Which is why they are in business.
5. The RIAA went after Napster first. Again, this was a case of supplier vs supplier. It was shut down. They are threatening to go after the consumers ONLY, as a last resort. (But again, as far as I know, that hasn't happened yet.)
6. Transportation is a NECESSITY. CDs are entertainment, recreation, and fun. It is not needed. People can do without it, if necessary.
People that want to feed their families need a way to get to work. (It's hard enough to get a toddler to eats his/her veggies, they wont eat a CD, and they sure as hell won't get their vitamins and minerals listening to Pink Floyd or Jimi Hendrix.)
To sum it up, they may seem to be similar on the surface but they are quite different, in a lot of ways.
Justice and law are much deeper disciplines than a superficial similarity. Comparing apples to apples is much harder to do, when the intricate details are examined much more intensely. No two cases are ever alike.
I still stand by my original statement. But thank you for visiting my blog and know that you are welcome back, anytime.
5. Now you do - http://p2pnet.net/story/302
I have to make the point that I am biased, because you see I am a criminal. I have provided at no charge copies of some music to a friend. I understand that most law abiding citizens such as yourself would never do this. Also I have carpooled in the past.
angus, NZ
Angus,
The link you provided says nothing about what the outcomes were. Whatever it was, it wasn't much, because it still goes on. There is no way that the RIAA can possibly enforce the ruling by suing millions of people.
But the topic was originally about the French suit, which you likened to the RIAA suit. And I still don't see it that way, because of the vast amount of differences, I pointed out earlier.
According to Groklaw, "it is the stupidest lawsuit since the world began". What about the outcome ?
Cathy
French Course Angel
Post a Comment