ACTA, SOPA's big brother

[BoredByLife]

Source: https://www.accessnow.org/policy-act...as-big-brother

Last week, online activists took to the streets in New York and San Francisco to protest SOPA and PIPA, convincing the US Congress to shelve the bills in the face of overwhelming opposition. This week, protesters are filling the streets of Warsaw and other cities across Poland to speak out against another, even more dangerous threat to the open Internet and human rights—the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). Negotiated in secret by a handful of countries, ACTA seeks to establish new international standards on the enforcement of intellectual property.

ACTA goes far beyond the US bills in its scope and reach. If you were worried about the ramifications SOPA and PIPA would have on free speech in the United States and the subsequent chilling effect around the world, pay attention—ACTA promises to inflict far more damage on a global scale. ACTA has managed to sneak by virtually unnoticed by the international community, where the treaty has already been signed by many of the 39 partner countries, including the United States, Canada, Australia, Japan and South Korea. Tomorrow, the 27 member states of the European Union, led by Poland, will sign.

ACTA seeks to curtail online copyright infringement by putting the interests of rightsholders ahead of free speech, privacy and other human rights. While we support the rights of creators, these draconian approaches to the enforcement of copyright in the online environment will not only reap collateral damage on the open internet and human rights, but are ineffective in confronting the issue at hand. As the international human rights community argued in a letter opposing PIPA, “[E]nforcement should not come at the expense of free speech or due process.”

ACTA, however, extends far beyond copyright, and includes everything under the umbrella of “intellectual property,” including patents, trademarks and the like. This means the scope is much wider, and will have serious repercussions, particularly for European signatories, from a variety of perspectives. These include, but are not limited to, fundamental rights, access to medicines and innovation.

[Aberration]

Your rights should not infringe upon anothers rights. That is a pretty basic and fundamental concept shared pretty much by all developed countries.

You have the right to free speech, unless it infringes on someone elses rights... copyright. You have the right to privacy, unless it infringes on someone elses rights... copyright. A basic and fundamental right is to that of your property and the right to protect it.

[BoredByLife]

Your rights should not infringe upon anothers rights. That is a pretty basic and fundamental concept shared pretty much by all developed countries.

You have the right to free speech, unless it infringes on someone elses rights... copyright. You have the right to privacy, unless it infringes on someone elses rights... copyright. A basic and fundamental right is to that of your property and the right to protect it.

Maybe this will clarify it for you...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8Xg_C2YmG0

[OldChap]

The needs of the many disregarded by governments to satisfy the greed of the few.

...and all done in secret

We voted these people in to work for US

[3lfk1ng]

All this crap just makes the future of the internet look grim.

[Linchpin]

Might sound extreme but maybe it's time to get all these tools the hell out of government by any means necessary? After all they are supposed to represent the people not themselves.

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. "
Thomas Jefferson

Time to make them scared I say

[BoredByLife]

The problem is, this is about people who weren't even elected...

[BrowncoatGR]

Useful links
http://www.stopacta.info/
https://www.eff.org/
http://www.edri.org/
http://www.ffii.org/

[OldChap]

https://www.accessnow.org/campaigns for world wide petition

[Aberration]

Maybe this will clarify it for you...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8Xg_C2YmG0

I stopped when they started with a copy being the same as an original.

Copyright.

[BoredByLife]

I stopped when they started with a copy being the same as an original.

Copyright.

Than it says a lot about you, if you would have watched the complete video you would have known what it is about. But maybe you just prefer to have no knowledge about the subject. That choice is up to you.
ACTA where C stands for Counterfeiting, not Copying.

[01Lude]

I can't see governments enforcing this on a practical level. I don't think they would arrest their own citizens for copying the ideas of people in other countries because it would only hurt their own competitiveness in a global marketplace. Unless they plan to adopt a policy of "selective enforcement" where they only go after small fish?

If you think about it, people borrow ideas from each other all the time. That's how we learn and grow. Children in schools "infringe" on the ideas of their teachers. When we get older we take ideas from other businesses and adapt them to fit our own companies. Artists "sample" from each others works all the time. If we weren't allowed to borrow ideas from each other then society would be completely stagnant.

Sometimes it isn't so clear who should "own" the copyright in the first place. For example calculus was developed simultaneously by both Newton and Leibniz in two completely different countries. On top of that we don't pay a royalty to these people every time we solve a math problem in school or in the workplace. That would be just ridiculous.

Those who believe that society will simply stop innovating because of online piracy are dead wrong. One might even argue the idea market will become MORE competitive for several reasons.

1. The time window to make one's profits will be significantly diminished, so there is added pressure to release good ideas sooner and more often, rather than sitting on a good idea for a period of time or relying on the income for years and years because you own the copyright.

2. Copyrights and patents cost big money. Without the need for huge amounts of cash to protect copyrights, the market opens up for the average person to make a name for himself/herself. The way things are now, if you have a good idea you basically have to sell it to a large patent company who has the money to buy good lawyers. Without this layer of red tape, ideas could come directly from individuals, and perhaps even allow for opportunities for creative people in third world and developing nations to make names for themselves.

This is just off the top of my head, I'm sure others can think of more but my brain is tired now.

[01Lude]

Than it says a lot about you, if you would have watched the complete video you would have known what it is about. But maybe you just prefer to have no knowledge about the subject. That choice is up to you.
ACTA where C stands for Counterfeiting, not Copying.

I think that is more semantics than anything else. It's a legal argument, not an ethical one. It would be quite easy for lawyers to correct such a minor oversight by changing the language itself, or even simpler by changing the interpretation of the current language. So technically you are correct that counterfeiting is not copying, but I'm pretty sure they (industry lawyers) can fix that pretty easily.

[Aberration]

Than it says a lot about you, if you would have watched the complete video you would have known what it is about. But maybe you just prefer to have no knowledge about the subject. That choice is up to you.
ACTA where C stands for Counterfeiting, not Copying.

Why would I watch the entire video when they are dishonest within a few minutes? Says a lot about you that you are willing to accept dishonesty.

Yes C is for counterfeiting. And in SOPA, P was for Piracy. What was your excuse then?

[01Lude]

Your rights should not infringe upon anothers rights. That is a pretty basic and fundamental concept shared pretty much by all developed countries.

You have the right to free speech, unless it infringes on someone elses rights... copyright. You have the right to privacy, unless it infringes on someone elses rights... copyright. A basic and fundamental right is to that of your property and the right to protect it.

1) You don't have the right to either free speech or to privacy, internationally speaking. Other countries are not beholden to each others laws unless they agree to of their own free will. Try going to China and telling them to respect your *cough* "right" to free speech.

2) How do you justify "ownership" of this property you speak of, especially on an international scale? Historically, ownership of property has been about having the POWER to enforce one's own interpretation of "ownership" over others' interpretations. For example in the U.S. (old west) there was no such thing as "private property" until barbed wire was invented.

[Aberration]

I think that is more semantics than anything else. It's a legal argument, not an ethical one. It would be quite easy for lawyers to correct such a minor oversight by changing the language itself, or even simpler by changing the interpretation of the current language. So technically you are correct that counterfeiting is not copying, but I'm pretty sure they (industry lawyers) can fix that pretty easily.

The title has little bearing on the legal contents, and does not need to be completely accurate to the language of the bill.

[BoredByLife]

Well, another thing to think about...

http://dudelol.com/img/whenever-you-...ese-people.jpg

[Otis11]

For the record, I don't support piracy, but these measures are way to extreme. I am not willing to give up my civil liberties, nor my privacy so that companies have an easier time duking it out in court... or anything else for that matter.

The copyright system needs to be revamped from the bottom up to encourage innovation, not tweaked and skewed as all current legislation is doing.

And while I know there really are real people hurt by piracy, they really are few compared to the number that would be hurt by this type of legislation, and it's hard to support actions like SOPA and PIPA when the MPAA and RIAA act the way they do.

Edit: BoredByLife - while it's interesting and easy to say it's just stealing from the big guys when people pirate, it really isn't. They'll take just as much as they did before - it's the people at the bottom that feel the impact. Plus, no matter how much they make, it's still wrong to steal from them. With that said - I do think they're ridiculous and need to be smacked upside the head for all the crap they pull.

[Aberration]

1) You don't have the right to either free speech or to privacy, internationally speaking. Other countries are not beholden to each others laws unless they agree to of their own free will. Try going to China and telling them to respect your *cough* "right" to free speech.

I am specifically addressing the US. And no treaties we sign can violate our Constitutional rights. BTW, I am in China

2) How do you justify "ownership" of this property you speak of, especially on an international scale? Historically, ownership of property has been about having the POWER to enforce one's own interpretation of "ownership" over others' interpretations. For example in the U.S. (old west) there was no such thing as "private property" until barbed wire was invented.

I don't really care about how property rights were protected in the past. Live in the now. But even in the now, you are complaining about people using power to enforce their rights. And we are not talking about interpretation of ownership, as that is pretty basic. What we are talking about is what people think they should be able to do with another's property.

And sorry, the concept of private property existed long before the US Constitution, and long before barb wire. You are talking about the ability to assert and protect your rights.

[01Lude]

BTW, I am in China

cool then you already get the point.

I don't really care about how property rights were protected in the past. Live in the now. But even in the now, you are complaining about people using power to enforce their rights.

To understand the here and now we have to understand the historical precedent upon which our foundations are based. I'm not complaining; I'm telling it how it is. Even today it is all about having the power to impose your point of view upon others. Sure at first we try to persuade each other, but when we agree to disagree, then POWER comes into play; and this is unfortunately the point at which the average citizen loses to large corporations.

And we are not talking about interpretation of ownership, as that is pretty basic. What we are talking about is what people think they should be able to do with another's property.

It isn't basic at all. People in other countries have an entirely different conception of "private property." In fact I would say that this debate is the central issue of our time. Again I reiterate, how does anyone justify ownership of anything? You seem to assume that everyone shares your understanding of property rights. Don't tell me that even when living in China, an American citizen can still live in a bubble?

And sorry, the concept of private property existed long before the US Constitution, and long before barb wire. You are talking about the ability to assert and protect your rights.

Again we need to hit on the point about being able to JUSTIFY why this piece of land is yours. Is it because you got there first and planted your flag? What about the native peoples who roamed the land long before any of us? It isn't as simple as "I paid for it therefore it's mine."

Let's back up a bit. A "right" is something we feel we are naturally entitled to. In actuality there is nothing "natural" about it. "Rights" are fought over constantly. Workers' rights, women's rights, rights to anything are contested every day. You said you are in China right now, right now you do NOT have the right to free speech. Your passport protects you to a degree, but most people on the planet aren't lucky enough to "own" the "right" to travel possessed by U.S. citizens. This thread is about much more than just U.S. citizens.

[Andrew LB]

SOPA and PIPA are two of the most fraudulent and deceitful pieces of legislation I've seen proposed since the Obama "health care" law and Dodd/Frank financial "reform" bill. In fact, they all serve the exact same purpose as one another while utilizing identical disingenuous methods to gain public support. They sold the financial reform bill as the only way another economic meltdown can be avoided.... and the health care law as the only way to lower our insurance costs and help the poor... all while pointing fingers at the wealthy and blaming them for all our problems. Now they're trying to pass SOPA and PIPA under the guise of Piracy and Copyright infringement. I'm not sure if it's clear to you guys yet, but the pattern is crystal clear to me. All these bills have one sole purpose, and it's for government to grab as much control as possible. It started with TARP and the government takeover of General Motors. Quickly followed by taking control of Fanny & Freddy along with most home loans in America. Then they passed a 2,500 page bill that NOBODY in congress even read, giving the government control of 1/6 of the entire US economy while telling the public it's purpose was to improve health care. LoL. Hidden inside the "health care" law was legislation that gave the Government complete control of ALL educational loans. Now why was that in there? For my health?

And now that we are now beholden to our government for our college loans, health care, home mortgages, and more.... they went ahead and passed Dodd/Frank "financial reform" bill... which made all the banks, including companies traded on wall street subjected to draconian government regulations, intrusion, and intervention by Washington beaurocrats that are tasked with "making sure your company complies with 5,000 new laws" that are crippling entreprenuership, investment, and our economy. Even more, now that Obama has forced government into almost every aspect of our lives... Dodd/Frank was the icing on the cake because it's purpose was to lock down this socialist/progressive system that Obama put in place so it would be next to impossible for later presidents to undo the damage.

Now i'm sure you guys are wondering what all this has to do with SOPA and PIPA. Well... if you had noticed, the government is selling them as being "necessary to stop piracy and copyright infringement". Because if you think about it.... how many people out there are AGAINST better health care, preventing another financial disaster, or in this case in particular..... Stopping Piracy. From a political perspective, when your detractors are forced to be labeled as any of those things... you've already won the debate.

The internet is the only place left where true freedom still exists. And that beacon of freedom where the government has absolutely no power... no control. The only aspect of life left which doesn't involve you having to get permission from big brother to use. Obama keeps repeating the the phrase that internet access is a right... and HE wants to be there for us and protect this right. He tried two years ago with Net Neutrality and failed. Which is why SOPA and PIPA are far more bold and would give government unbridled power and control of the internet... and in effect... control of us.

Mark my words... All government needs is to get their foot in the door and they will instantly become that friend you let sleep on your couch for a couple days... that became a couple weeks. They've already made the largest power grab in American history through tarp, Dodd/Frank, and the health care bill... and NOT ONE single promise Obama made regarding those bills has come true. I spend 2x now on my health insurance as before, getting a business loan is next to impossible, and the the economy is terrible because of the massive burden of regulation.

If government touches the internet... they will destroy it. /speech

[Motiv]

you lost me when you criticised free health care. That sounds rather good to me.

[Andrew LB]

you lost me when you criticised free health care. That sounds rather good to me.

And that is exactly the problem.

Do you not understand that nothing is free? The national debt is currently $15,280,870,300,000 and rising at an incredible rate. In fact, Obama called Bush unpatriotic for his deficit spending of $4.5 trillion over 8 years even though we had two wars (one was absolutely necessary).... yet in only THREE YEARS Obama has spent an additional $6.2 trillion that we had to borrow from foreign countries.

This spending spree is wreckless... and even downright dangerous. Just to put that kind of money in perspective, if you were to divide the debt between every single man, woman, and child in the US... your "fair share" (to use an Obama term) of the debt would be $180,000.

A question for you. How wise would it be for you to take all your credit cards and completely max them. Not on something you can use mind you. Go spend that money on a bunch of people you want to impress and hopefully get them to like you. And perhaps maybe vote for you. But now you're stuck with massive debt that eventually has to be paid back.


The main point here is this president has made a massive power grab that now effects almost every aspect of our lives in some way and is causing more and more people to become dependent on big government. This country is becoming more and more like Greece every day. Government now owns car companies, banks, mortgage lenders, and continues to promise more social programs, pensions, benefits, etc... but the whole time was paying for all these things with the national credit card.... just like Greece did.

Now what do you guys think will happen in the next two or three years when other nations stop buying out debt??? What's going to happen when those comfortable medical benefits, retirement pensions, and social security checks stop coming???

And what then happens to all those government owned banks, car companies, mortgage companies, and health care system... when your government cannot get any more loans to pay their obligations?

What happens to your Government regulated and operated Internet??????????? (if these bills were to pass)

... and we all thought the riots in Greece were bad. They have 11 million people. We have 330 million people. We also have 300 million firearms to spice things up just a little.

[massman]

TED (ideas worth spreading) is going to have a problem, I guess.

[BrowncoatGR]

snip

You do realize that the financial services that were at the root of the recent global crisis were actually completely unregulated and that exactly that lack of regulation led to rampant abuse by executives who cashed in huge bonuses while driving their institutions to the ground. As for Greece you have no idea what you're talking about. We have terrible healthcare and miniscule pensions and the government privatized most of the public companies back in the early 2000s.