> But what if rather than cutting someone of completely, you just limited their bandwidth [...] Certainly a nuissance and displeasurable to the perpetrator, but

> But what if rather than cutting someone of completely, you just limited their bandwidth [...] Certainly a nuissance and displeasurable to the perpetrator, but it seems to me a proportionate and fair response Most 3-strikes proposals, including the HADOPI one, say that someone should be punished on being accused of filesharing by the entertainment industry, not on being found guilty of anything. Is it fair to punish someone if they've not been given due process and been found guilty by a court of law? I say it isn't, but 3-strikes proposals, including the HADOPI one, say that someone should be punished on being accused of filesharing by the entertainment industry, not on being found guilty of anything. Is it fair to punish someone if they've not done anything wrong, but if amember of their family or a flatmate has? I say it isn't, but 3-strikes proposals say that everyone using an Internet connection should be punished, for what one of them does. This is collective punishment, it's repugnant to the English Common Law legal tradition, and if you do it in wartime, you're a war criminal.