The issue, which pits citizens' civil liberties against the rights of content owners such as record and movie companies to protect creative works on the Internet, has blocked the passage of a wide range of laws collectively dubbed the telecoms package.

Although the compromise reached by representatives of the European Parliament, the 27 national governments and the European Commission has still to be confirmed, it is seen as a watershed moment for the proposed laws, which aim to enhance competition among telecoms providers and to adapt users' rights to better suit the Internet age.

The text of the telecoms package now contains a new Internet freedom provision that states that access to the Internet is a human right of every E.U. citizen, and that if authorities take away that right people must have the opportunity to defend themselves; citizens also have an automatic right to mount a legal challenge.

However, the text does not demand that authorities in the 27 countries of the E.U. obtain a court order before cutting off someone's Internet connection, as the European Parliament demanded when it last voted on the issue in early summer.

The issue is very sensitive, and not just in Europe, where a number of countries including France and U.K. are passing laws threatening to sever users' Internet connections if they are found to have breached the copyright on music or movies.

The subject is under discussion at a gathering in South Korea this week. The U.S. is trying to garner support from other countries for a treaty that would force Internet service providers to take action against subscribers to their networks involved in illegal file sharing.

The so-called Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) has attracted condemnation from many law experts and civil liberties activists because of the secretive way it is being drafted, and for the dramatic changes it would impose on the way people engage with the Internet.

The European Parliament has been criticized for caving in on the issue of prior judicial review. It was forced to back down because its call for a court order to be issued before someone is cut off from the Internet was legally uncertain, it said in a statement Thursday.

"There were serious doubts as to the legal validity of the amendment, as it would seem to go beyond the European Community's competences in this field," the Parliament said.