Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Secret Copyright Treaty Timeline Shows Global DMCA

CmdrTaco posted more than 4 years ago | from the only-a-matter-of-time dept.

Privacy 184

An anonymous reader writes "Michael Geist, a leading critic of the ACTA secret copyright treaty, has produced a new interactive timeline that traces its development. The timeline includes links to leaked documents, videos, and public interest group letters that should generate increasing concern with a deal that could lead to a global three-strikes and you're out policy."

cancel ×

184 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Wow. (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30431892)

Insta-dupe.

Yeah? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432114)

Well, fuck you.

Re:Wow. (5, Insightful)

StreetStealth (980200) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432332)

Normally I'm against captain-obvious troll-feeding, but this is one case where I think a response is merited.

ACTA awareness needs to reach as far as it possibly can. We are, quite literally, talking about the future of the world here: A global treaty that promises to have a profound effect upon the freedom of all of us is being negotiated in secret.

The maximum must be brought to light before the widest audience. If that means dupe stories, then I'm all for dupes.

Re:Wow. (4, Insightful)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432780)

I agree, problem is most of us here in the USA are already used to the oppressive laws against consumers so we already do our DMCA violations in secret.

I have to live as if the SS will come smashing down my door in search of contraband. All because I'm a wierdo that wants to have his own Video on demand system with a server full of my DVD's, HDDVD's and Blu Rays, ready to play in any room.

I'm evil, destroying all that is American by not being patriotic and switching discs and cluttering up my living room with cabinets full of discs (Destroying the economy by not buying furniture to hold them! OMG!)

Honestly I took the stand that I don't give a rats-ass what laws are passed and what they say. The laws are un-just so I not only ignore them, I am in contempt of them. I'll do what I want, if I have to design in a system to automatically destroy "evidence" when they storm the house, then so be it. It's the price I pay for living in a country where we gave up being by the people and for the people.

The USA is for the Corporations and by the Corporations....Anyone saying otherwise is either blind or watches Fox News too much.

Re:Wow. (4, Insightful)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432864)

My view is, that the Internet by its very definition does not make it possible for such a treaty to be any more that a pipe dream.

We already have darknets, wich are way beyond the grasp of any legislation. They would have to literally shut down the internet, to even stop it for more than a month. After that everyone would just have a personal net with all the wlan nodes around, completely and literally routing around the net. Everyone who knows how to do it, will do it. And everybody else will ask those, to do it for them. Even if that becomes illegal, it will become like selling weed. (A war long lost.) But it won’t ever stop.
Because inside, everybody knows what is right and wrong. And that ACTA is not right. Even the hypocrites who say the opposite, secretly use Bittorrent.

Until there is nothing else left for them, than to give up.

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.

Emailgate (4, Insightful)

plopez (54068) | more than 4 years ago | (#30431938)

If any organization needed an emailgate, this is one of them. We need to see who is manipulating and bribing who. Just like the open docs. fiasco.

Re:Emailgate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432006)

I won't name the manipulators and bribers, but I'll give you a hint: their initials are RIAA and MPAA.

Re:Emailgate (4, Funny)

Spazztastic (814296) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432164)

I won't name the manipulators and bribers, but I'll give you a hint: their initials are RIAA and MPAA.

I demand to know why myself, Richard Ingus Alfonzo-Almada and my wife Maria Perez Alfonzo-Almada, are being targeted by this smear campaign! We have done nothing!

Re:Emailgate (3, Funny)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432402)

Just a note: I don't have six fingers and I didn't kill your father. Please don't hurt me.

Re:Emailgate (3, Insightful)

angelwolf71885 (1181671) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432438)

12 trillion on red it gets tucked into the climate bill that will pass in the US very shortly after Copenhagen is over

Re:Emailgate (2, Insightful)

Sylver Dragon (445237) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433872)

I'd take that bet, I'm figuring that it'll get attached to the defense spending bill which is still waiting to be passed for this year (or next year's, if it takes that long). The Republicans are going to fight anything which comes out of Copenhagen which isn't an obvious hand-out to the oil companies. On the other hand, they won't fight a defense spending bill even if it had a "we're going to kill babies and stick them on spikes" rider in it.

Not Enough (-1, Troll)

Das Auge (597142) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432594)

When is it okay for me to start killing them?

Re:Emailgate (1)

Pete Venkman (1659965) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433526)

If someone did leak more documents, do you think the news would cover it?

Doubleplusnotgood! (4, Insightful)

filesiteguy (695431) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432032)

I get a very bad feeling about international DCMA. It is bad enough the US citizens bent over and allowed the DCMA to be delivered, but now?

Next thing, I'll be sitting in jail for trying to solve a Rubik's Cube by taking it apart.

Not jail, the wilderness (3, Interesting)

Wrexs0ul (515885) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432228)

This isn't a jail policy, they can't imprison you on allegations yet.

Unfortunately they can kick you off the internet for a period of time by allegation alone. You know, that little novelty some of us run hobbies off of, or maybe send the occasional "electronic" letter to our hip friends in other cities through Prodigy.

Let's get real about this. Internet for many people is an integrated part of daily life, you wouldn't cut power or phones from people who allegedly do bad things with it without proving guilt first (or in the rare case preventing immediate harm to someone else). This isn't any different; sure I can survive just fine without internet or power (for a while), but the consequences to my life and livelihood would be apparent pretty quickly.

Worse yet, the authority for removing essential services has an established track record for casting really big nets. The American cousin of the CRIA uses big lawsuits to make up for inadequacies like a city-bound guy with a Hummer... We already have enough issues in this country with a self-governed federal police force, thank-you. Let's sort those bumps out before putting law in the hands of the private sector.

-Matt

Re:Not jail, the wilderness (1)

tuxgeek (872962) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432396)

You'd be surprised just how simple your life would become without internet or power ...

For one, you would probably read more books
And you would certainly expose yourself to a lot less red slime from Fox news corp

Re:Not jail, the wilderness (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432586)

And you'd have a hell of a time finding employment if you want to do more than local burger flipping and dish washing.

Re:Not jail, the wilderness (1)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432588)

But now many of us are held up to the expectations of having internet connection. Sure, we managed to survive without phones, but living in the modern life partially means that you are accessible by phone (for most of us, anyways). Internet, email, etc has now gone that route too.

Re:Not jail, the wilderness (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432494)

Unfortunately they can kick you off the internet for a period of time by allegation alone. You know, that little novelty some of us run hobbies off of, or maybe send the occasional "electronic" letter to our hip friends in other cities through Prodigy.

That also means anyone could remove any other IP address simply by accusing them of copyright infringement.

By simply sending 3 letters I could remove the computer running RIAA.COM or WHITEHOUSE.GOV
Sure they can move it to another IP address but the time and effort to do so makes printing a few cut & pasted letters seem
worth it. What would happen if a group of individuals got together and started a letter writing campaign claiming copyright
infringement by a whole block of addresses. I cant wait to see how these laws will be abused.

If they add something allowing the person disconnected to sue the accuser (effectively requiring you to pay to prove your innocence)
then set up a limited company and fold it right before any lawsuits start.

Re:Not jail, the wilderness (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30433230)

A proper US-DMCA letter makes claims "under penalty of perjury..."

Perjure myself for a prank? I don't think so.

Re:Not jail, the wilderness (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30433410)

The RIAA and MPAA minions have no problem with perjury, so I don't think this is being enforced very carefully. Still, its probably best to use tor to send the messages using some actual ones as a model. I don't think many places are checking the digital signatures currently, so that shouldn't be a problem.
The target should also be changed. You need people to get IP addresses and time stamps for people who will get listened to (politicians, judges, celebrities) and use them for the takedown notices in order to get them cut off.

Re:Not jail, the wilderness (1)

number11 (129686) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433844)

A proper US-DMCA letter makes claims "under penalty of perjury..."

The only part of the letter that the penalty of perjury applies to is a statement that the sender is an authorized representative of the copyright owner. Which is no problem if you're claiming that it's something you hold copyright to. (The copyright does not need to have been filed with the Copyright Office.)

And if you've ever sent them an email, when you wrote that email you automatically got copyright to it. I expect they could argue "fair use" if they made (or still have) a copy, but the DMCA makes no provision for fair use. Besides, it would be amusing to hear the MPAA/RIAA make arguments about why fair use is permitted.

Re:Not jail, the wilderness (1)

Theaetetus (590071) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433956)

A proper US-DMCA letter makes claims "under penalty of perjury..."

The only part of the letter that the penalty of perjury applies to is a statement that the sender is an authorized representative of the copyright owner.

You also have to warrant "that the information is accurate" and, under penalty of perjury, that the copyright has been infringed. Additionally, perjury aside, making false statements could be considered an obstruction of justice that could get you a contempt of court charge.

Re:Not jail, the wilderness (4, Insightful)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433378)

Simply put

1: Your letters will be ignored if they're accusing someone important.
If you accuse a senator there's no way in hell they're getting disconnected.

2: If the RIAA accuse everyone in a network block of copyright infringement with no proof then so what?
In theory there are penalties for sending fraudulent DMCA notices but you have to have deep pockets to make it stick and there's probably some crap whereby they only have to prove that they *believed* you were violating copyright because the magic 8 ball said so and hence were acting in good faith.

3: the penalties if you do make it stick are probably a drop in the bucket for the RIAA/MPAA etc

4: If you try to turn it against them and serve notices to them then they will have deep pockets to make it stick to you and will make an example out of you.

5: the penalties which would be a drop in the bucket for the RIAA/MPAA etc will make you bleed out your ears.

Re:Doubleplusnotgood! (4, Insightful)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432292)

Well, any other route to global domination would be a bit too obvious, dontcha think? I mean, why make blatantly obvious laws that everyone notices immediately? Instead, you can make opaque, confusing, and outright obscure laws to sneak in and swipe individual liberty, one piece at a time, just like seawater eroding a sand castle on the beach. After all, it's far easier to point at a pile of obfuscation and say "don't worry - only those nasty artist-raping copyright pirates will have to worry about it - you're fine". Next, you can impose laws in the name of, oh, "the environment", then "safety", then "health", of course "the children", and then... well, you get the idea. Give it a pretty name, gloss over the ugly parts, and market it, one small piece at a time. As long as the proletariat is comfortable, they won't mind the ride until it's too late to actually do anything about it.

Besides, fascism-by-bureaucracy is far less messy to accomplish than staging an armed coup. Certainly a bit slower to do, but far more certain (as a bonus, you can condition the masses to actually be comfortable in the new environment. All you have to do is keep them distracted with neat little toys, lots of sexual entertainment, and the occasional celebrity gossip, just like they did it in the old days of Rome...)

Re:Doubleplusnotgood! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432474)

That's silly! Just peel the stickers off the outside and move them to the correct side.

Worse than terrorism. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432052)

These global organizations, as well as global governance, are a far bigger threat to freedom and democracy than terrorism ever could be.

We need politicians who are running on a platform that will directly challenge this sort of behavior. We need politicians who will withdraw our nations from these organizations and treaties.

NAFTA and treaties with various third-world countries have destroyed the American manufacturing base. The American economy will not recover until those treaties are abandoned and manufacturing comes back to America. We need politicians who will make this so.

Re:Worse than terrorism. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432102)

Protectionism is freedom?

Re:Worse than terrorism. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30433140)

Why yes, yes it is. If you think the soverignty of a nation has any purpose, and that the main job of a government is look out for the concerns and welfare of it's own citizens.

But if you're the type that wants to help the rest of the world while the very community you live in goes down the shitter, you're free to do that too.

Re:Worse than terrorism. (1)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432278)

The American economy will not recover until those treaties are abandoned and manufacturing comes back to America.

There are at least two ways of interpreting this sentence: the way you meant it, and the cynical one.

Re:Worse than terrorism. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30433396)

These global organizations, as well as global governance, are a far bigger threat to freedom and democracy than terrorism ever could be.

You sure got that right. WTO, IMF and the world bank == the NWO, nothing democratic or free about them.

I would propose the public hold secret talks. (4, Funny)

Bottles (1672000) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432092)

Secret talks to discuss, develop policy for and enact positive action to counter the erosion of our rights as we step into a new global digital age. Only, that's terrorism these days isn't it? Ok. Non-secret talks. Who's in? I'll buy beer.

Re:I would propose the public hold secret talks. (2, Funny)

Malevolyn (776946) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432218)

You had me at "beer."

Bring it on (5, Insightful)

frenchbedroom (936100) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432130)

The harder they push in this direction, the more people will realize there is another way [creativecommons.org]

Re:Bring it on (5, Informative)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432336)

Question is, will they care? Most folks consume content, not create it. Also, as we've seen in the whole Microsoft vs. FOSS wars, the closed-source guys seem to have better, slicker marketing.

Re:Bring it on (3, Insightful)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432932)

Of course they will care. Because what is the point of ACTA? More money.
From people who do not have more money.

So it creates financial pressure. And as humans always seek the easiest (most efficient!) way, they will naturally be pressed towards CC and more secretive file sharing (which will become way easier to set up).

ACTA is the classic “tighten your grip, until you are left with nothing”.

There is no way to win this, for the content industry. They can only lose.
They get to choose the way it ends. Nothing more.
If they want to choose the faster dead (ACTA), let them. :)

Re:Bring it on (3, Insightful)

aynoknman (1071612) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433448)

There is no way to win this, for the content industry. They can only lose. They get to choose the way it ends. Nothing more. If they want to choose the faster dead (ACTA), let them. :)

The problem with letting them is the collateral damage. I'm reminded of the cartoon of the criminal holding a child's head next to his with a huge pistol pointing at the two of them. "Stand back or the kid gets it!"

Re:Bring it on (3, Interesting)

macbeth66 (204889) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433022)

the closed-source guys seem to have better, slicker marketing.

Perhaps.

But when Grandma asks me about this 'new' Linux thing and will it get rid of all these virus things, I know there is hope.

Re:Bring it on (1)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432368)

Where's the link on that site to download movies and music? Because as tempting as it is to believe people want to build a brighter, DMCA-free future and live in a shiny happy world, for most people the overriding concern is "how can I get hold of the latest music/movie/game?"

cc.org, cool and noble though it may be, doesn't address that need and therefore will not resonate with 95% of the people out there. Find a way to make cc.org (or something similar) legitimately compete with the **IA, and you'll be on to something.

Re:Bring it on (3, Interesting)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432536)

There is yet another way. It is called massive civil disobedience.

They can't cut us all off. And I dare them to try.

Re:Bring it on (5, Informative)

schon (31600) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433294)

Sorry, no.

As admirable as you believe the goal is (and I agree with you on that), the means is just *wrong*.

You're talking about organizations that think nothing of sending infringement notices for things that are in the public domian, or copyrighted by the people who post them. "Artist's" groups that send DMCA notices against the wishes of the authors they represent for material that is published by the authors themselves under a CC license.

These are people who send infringement notices based on nothing more than the author's name being similar to one they represent.

They are people who send infringement notices to the wrong place, or "link" infringement to IP addresses that are assigned to printers.

You get three of these? You're off the net. Period. Doesn't matter if the stuff is CC'ed or not. Doesn't matter that the notices are invalid. You're guilty until proven innocent. You have to prove you're innocent, and do it without access to the tools necessary to do so.

THIS IS WRONG

"Bring it on" is entirely the wrong way to approach this - we need to stop it before it happens, not try to fix it after.

Yes, help creative commons, open source etc. (2, Interesting)

matt007 (80854) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432142)

If this is going live, i can foresee open source apps and creative commons goods surge in popularity.

Aren't they shooting themselves in the long term ?

Re:Yes, help creative commons, open source etc. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432194)

Human beings are very good at making positive short term actions that lead to long term detriments.

Re:Yes, help creative commons, open source etc. (1)

sajuuk (1371145) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432198)

Nope, the next international treaty will outlaw open source and creative commons. At which point I shall secede from the human race.

Re:Yes, help creative commons, open source etc. (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432258)

I can also foresee alot of Open source apps unable to foster because of global copyright laws.

Re:Yes, help creative commons, open source etc. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432518)

You've got to clarify this. The license under which they are produced allows collaboration and distribution in spite of craziness in other copyright laws.

Re:Yes, help creative commons, open source etc. (3, Interesting)

schon (31600) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433348)

The license under which they are produced allows collaboration and distribution in spite of craziness in other copyright laws.

It doesn't matter - all it takes is someone who is willing to say "hey, that code infringes our copyright". The "offending" code gets removed, and (after the third time) the person who posted it gets kicked off the net.

Good luck trying to clear your name when you don't get to use the internet, and you can't sue to get reconnected because the company that made the claim is in another country.

And if you *do* manage to get it cleared up, the company just says "whoops, I guess I was wrong", and it starts all over again.

Re:Yes, help creative commons, open source etc. (5, Informative)

filesiteguy (695431) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432350)

Currently, OSS distributions cannot send out - for example - CSS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_Scramble_System) code in many countries due to things like the DCMA. However, it can easily be downloaded from other countries, where the DCMA is not in effect. This allows one to play DVD's using MPlayer or VLC without worrying about the local authorities knocking on one's door.

Given this bastard law, one wouldn't be able to download code regardless.

Pro-ACTA arguments are disingenuous (5, Informative)

TechForensics (944258) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432190)

If one follows the link in TFA to Michael Geist's interactive timeline, there's an element that leads to a short video of a debate in the Canadian Houses of Parliament-- one member says ACTA is a tool of US corporate interests and will lock millions of users out of the net; the government minister who responds says anything in ACTA is "subservient to the acts of this Parliament". What he DOESN'T say, and what the member is not sharp enough to pick up in the swift give-and-take of debate, is that *once the treaty is in place*, there is NO more subservience to *anything* (short of something on the order of a US Constitutional Amendment". This is the point: the people and even those of their representatives who want to derail this blindsiding juggernaut *will be able to do nothing* once the treaty is signed, and *saying the treaty is subject to US or Canadian law* is a pure, cynical smokescreen. An ounce of prevention here can accomplish what no amount of cure can fix. ACTA negotiations must be transparent. If we don't fight for that the corporate interests will do an end run around our rights.

Re:Pro-ACTA arguments are disingenuous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432274)

That is not totally true. For example a few years ago the US backed out of a treaty. Russia was not too happy about it. That treaty no longer is 'above the law'.

Re:Pro-ACTA arguments are disingenuous (1)

TechForensics (944258) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432316)

And what amount of public pressure will ever move the government to repudiate a treaty that serves the interests of the principal government campaign contributors?

Re:Pro-ACTA arguments are disingenuous (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432466)

Maybe somebody should harness public pressure to create an alternative political party which harnesses xenophobia and a protectionist ideology in order to garner popular support for treaty withdrawal as one of it's policy points. Perhaps that party could refuse funding from the campaign contributors which would seek to oppose that view - at the same time, it could publicize it's refusal and demonize those contributors.

Re:Pro-ACTA arguments are disingenuous (1)

Vanderhoth (1582661) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432706)

I'm sure you're being sarcastic, but this is one of the best ideas I've heard yet.

Re:Pro-ACTA arguments are disingenuous (1)

orgelspieler (865795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433654)

So you're saying we should hijack the teabaggers?

Re:Pro-ACTA arguments are disingenuous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432314)

Actually, Canada is still dragging their heals ratifying many portions of the WIPO treaties, the government ignored the Kyoto protocol, free trade agreements signed with countries in South America may or may not still need to be implemented by an act of parliament, but essentially the Member of Parliament is correct when he says that treaty agreements are subservient to the acts of parliament. As such it is entirely possibly for future parliaments to pull out of treaty agreements by implementing their own acts. However, of course, there are the potential backlashes internationally of violating the agreements that have to be weighed... at the same time, the Conservative party is very likely going to attempt to implement legislation to conform to ACTA. If Canada is lucky, then there will be an election before then causing any proposed amendment to the copyright act to be dropped until it can be reintroduced in a new session. Which has thankfully happened I think at least twice that I can remember?

Re:Pro-ACTA arguments are disingenuous (2, Informative)

gedw99 (1597337) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432334)

Yes, fully agree here. Once the treaty is in place, the nations will be not allowed to trade unless they support and hence legislate the principles of the treaty into their laws. This is exactly how its worked in the past. Countries sign up, and then realize that the US and others cant or wont trade with them unless they too legislate the treaty. No country can afford to be out of the world trade economy and so is forced to act on the treaty and put it in effect as legislation. Its very sneaky and effective and have been used for decades. The world bank also uses this to their advantage as a rule. "You must implement this treaty in order to qualify for this loan". The pattern of how they get this ratified and legislated is all around us. History teaches us. I want countries and people to learn from these patterns that history has shown us again and again.

Re:Pro-ACTA arguments are disingenuous (1)

Vanderhoth (1582661) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432388)

So what do you propose to do about it? Are you going to lead the revolution that brings down the corrupt government and forces them to be accountable to the people that voted them in and not to the corporations that line their pockets?

The problem with politicians is they have the police and military on their side. The problem with people is we have the freedom to speak out, but won't. I'd join a group so my voice could be heard anonymously, but I'm not going to jail because the government knows I disagreed with them.

Get Mad, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNxoLJy3m3s [youtube.com]

Re:Pro-ACTA arguments are disingenuous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432516)

So what do you propose to do about it? Are you going to lead the revolution that brings down the corrupt government and forces them to be accountable to the people that voted them in and not to the corporations that line their pockets?

Join al-qaeda. Seriously it's the lesser of two evils.

Re:Pro-ACTA arguments are disingenuous (3, Interesting)

Abcd1234 (188840) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432902)

If one follows the link in TFA to Michael Geist's interactive timeline, there's an element that leads to a short video of a debate in the Canadian Houses of Parliament-- one member says ACTA is a tool of US corporate interests and will lock millions of users out of the net; the government minister who responds says anything in ACTA is "subservient to the acts of this Parliament". What he DOESN'T say, and what the member is not sharp enough to pick up in the swift give-and-take of debate, is that *once the treaty is in place*, there is NO more subservience to *anything*

Clearly you have no understanding of the role of treaties in Canadian law.

Unlike our American neighbours to the south, treaties have *no legal force on their own*. That's right, they do *not* become the law of the land. Rather, once a treaty is ratified, it's up to the government to then pass laws which harmonize Canadian law with the treaty provisions. But that's *not legally required*. ie, there's nothing stopping the house from simply refusing to pass laws to harmonize Canadian law with our treaty obligations.

DMCA induced Economic collapse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432196)

As far as I'm concerned the more they tighted and restrict what I can do with something I bought, the less I'm inclined to even buy anything (and no, not pirating).

If enough people feel this way, watch the sales tank . . . .

Re:DMCA induced Economic collapse (1)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432416)

... which the corporate lobby will then blame on piracy.

Re:DMCA induced Economic collapse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432468)

Turnabout is fair play, considering there is no evidence to support either OP's position or the corporate lobby's.

and this changes what? (4, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432226)

Intellectual property is an invention of the rich countries to force the poor countries into an economic model that benefits them. Knowledge has always been power, and the developed countries of the world realize that by locking up their books and restricting the free trade of information and knowledge, they can effectively keep those countries enslaved -- producing real, material goods, in exchange for imaginary ones.

That, people, is the true objective of intellectual property. You people think they care about you making pirate copies of CDs and DVDs? How pathetically self-centered! The truth is much bigger than your hard drive contents.

digital sharecropping (1)

SgtChaireBourne (457691) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432256)

Intellectual property is an invention of the rich countries to force the poor countries into an economic model that benefits them. Knowledge has always been power, and the developed countries of the world realize that by locking up their books and restricting the free trade of information and knowledge, they can effectively keep those countries enslaved -- producing real, material goods, in exchange for imaginary ones.

digital sharecropping. nuff sed.

Re:digital sharecropping (2, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432748)

digital sharecropping. nuff sed.

How interesting that you mention farming. The way copyright and patent law works now, it would be illegal for me to use irrigation and farming techniques any more modern than at least 1880 (150 years plus the life of the author). Think about that when people talk about the war on "piracy". It's not -- we're on the right side (by distributing this stuff for free and attacking their business model) but we're here for all the wrong reasons.

Hackers need to return to their roots: Deep down inside, we know that free access to technology is a liberating and empowering experience. We've become complacent -- certain that we'll crack whatever protection scheme they invent, and comfortable with the labeling of criminal and pirate. We think we're too hard to find, too decentralized, and it would be too expensive to take us out. That arrogance will kill this community and everything it stands for.

We need to give the disadvantaged access to the collective's knowledge. That's always been our purpose. It's the guiding principle behind open source -- and piracy and breaking copy protection is just the cheap way to avoid having to reinvent the wheel. But we have to... Because otherwise we'll have to wait through three generations of humanity growing up to have access to what we do today. We need the old school hacker mindset more now than ever before -- and we need to understand the golden age is at its end. We're about to go toe to toe with Goliath -- a worldwide cooperative of corporations, governments, and private interests with trillions of dollars at their disposal, secret treaties, courts, and increasing levels of control over the media.

This is not a conspiracy theory. This is not someone crying wolf. This is out there, it's real, and it's happening now -- and we are acting like The Pirate Bay and torrents are a blow against these faceless powers. We still have people like Richard Stallman and his precious GPL, and we argue over and over again about the merits of a change in language. Typical geeks -- we focus on the details and fail to see the big picture. There are over five billion people living in complete poverty, and intellectual property is one of the barriers keeping them there.

Re:and this changes what? (2, Interesting)

gedw99 (1597337) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432422)

Patents and intellectual property are one things.

But this treaty and others go further than that.

Dont be so simplistic.

they already enforce that all countries that trade with the US, must respect international treaties. Copyright and intellectual property was one of the first many many years ago.

the stuff they are pushing through now is much more focused on addressing open information leakage. They want to gain some level of control over information spread.

Its not just the US. Its the EU. The EU tends to be more socialist in their agenda, and able to also interpret these treaties for what they are.

But again, the pressure to sign up to these treaties is on the EU parliament too, because they need to trade with the US.

Now that the EU has a more solid power base, and the US economy has started to falter it does allow the EU much more wriggle room and negotiation room.

The danger of course is of the EU simply embraces whole heartedly what the US is trying to achieve with these treaties. In essence the EU then becomes just as draconian as the US.

Re:and this changes what? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432528)

>Intellectual property is an invention of the rich countries

Or, you know, people just wanted to make money off their creations.

You sound like Fox Mulder... (1)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432638)

That, people, is the true objective of intellectual property. You people think they care about you making pirate copies of CDs and DVDs? How pathetically self-centered! The truth is much bigger than your hard drive contents.

As a matter of fact, I think they do because there is no other reason why the RIAA and MPAA would go after so many students if they were really just secret imperialistic stooges hoping to maintain our global hegemony. The truth is that the developing world would benefit from greater IP protection, as IP currently has functionally **no** protection in most of it. India in particular would greatly benefit from the sale of a lot more legitimate copies versus illegitimate copies of IP goods.

Furthermore, your argument falls apart in that if we were really so paranoid about them, we wouldn't be training their students in our universities to the level we are.

Re:You sound like Fox Mulder... (3, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433838)

The truth is that the developing world would benefit from greater IP protection, as IP currently has functionally **no** protection in most of it.

The developing world would benefit more from spending all of their money developing infrastructure instead of licensing and importing it in exchange for their natural and human resources. Their economy is not like ours: The multiplication effect is such that for every dollar they invest in infrastructure, the return on investment would be three, even as much as five times. The multiplication effect is lower in developed countries because we are operating close to or at the production possibilities curve. Although it seems like only pennies on the dollar to license these technologies, for them it represents a major investment rather than part of the aggregate cost.

It's not just RIAA/MPAA (4, Insightful)

microbox (704317) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433914)

Our economic system is predicated on perpetual growth -- and business interests have talked about IP as the new "gold" for decades. It is not an evil conspiracy, but rather, politicians and business leaders believe that they need to enact these laws for our system to continue to grow. It's not just the RIAA and MPAA, it's also the big phama and agricultural firms.

Personally, I think it is bullocks dreamed up by people who never created art in their entire lives. Nobody is going to pay for "IP" when they need food on the table. Furthermore, these laws will be used to silence the critics of political interests.

It is precisely the free exchange of ideas that creates intellectual wealth, which is why these laws are fundamentally counter-productive in their goals.

Re:and this changes what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432822)

In the US Constitution, as originally written, the purpose of Copyright and Patents was to ENSURE that the items, or knowledge, in question was released to the public, for public use and improvement, in a short period of time. The purpose was NOT to ensure a perpetual ownership by the inventor or rights-holder, but to get it out of his or her hands and into the public's. Somehow our courts (and many parts of the world have followed) have twisted it 180 degrees around.

I say we bring back the original intent, as well as the original 14 year maximum period.

Re:and this changes what? (1)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433588)

No, 14 years was set way back when people were expected to only live until 40.

Since both patents and copyrights in the US were originally 14 years, and patents are now 20, 20 years must be the correct amount for copyrights, too!

read your history books, corporate goons (5, Insightful)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432234)

technology tames the law

the law never tames technology

not for want of trying of course

Re:read your history books, corporate goons (2, Funny)

boxxertrumps (1124859) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432284)

I can do this too,

Making haikus about stuff.

It is very fun.

Re:read your history books, corporate goons (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432384)

twas 5-7-5

mine was 7-9-8, yes?

troll has haiku win

Re:read your history books, corporate goons (1)

boxxertrumps (1124859) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432554)

It's monday morning...

I haven't had caffeine yet,

I'm tired, sorry.

Re:read your history books, corporate goons (1)

gedw99 (1597337) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432458)

agree here.

check out the world bank and how it uses treaties as qualification and compliance requirements in order to get loans from them.

this is another way of forcing treaties onto countries.

technology tames the law (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432666)

Technology can't even finish that fucking movie of yours.

sneaky... (3, Insightful)

gedw99 (1597337) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432264)

Lets face it. The "authorities" have now realised that the internet allows people to collaborate and learn openly whats really going on in the world, and how the puzzle fits togther. this to them is danderous. the cat is out of the bag, and now they are trying to gain control over it so they can manage the leaks as it were. Its crucial that the internet remain fully open !!!! Its thats simple. More groups that support open information should be targettting these groups hard. This is the type of thing that the authorities will try to slide in to legislation as part of trade agreements like they do with all the other things. Dont support treaty x, y and z - Sorry you cant trade with us. Its really insidious and smart tactic they use.

Re:sneaky... (1)

idontgno (624372) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432614)

The "authorities" have now realised that the internet allows people to collaborate and learn openly whats really going on in the world, and how the puzzle fits togther. this to them is danderous

:) As in, "makes their scalps itch and shed flakes?"

I know, that's just a typo, but it's a good one. Almost Freudian: this kind of freedom of information makes their skin crawl.

Anyway, this comment (without typo) brought to mind a Monty Python sketch [orangecow.org] most apropos:

He's that most dangerous of creatures, a clever sheep. 'e's realized that a sheep's life consists of standin' around for a few months and then bein' eaten. And that's a depressing prospect for an ambitious sheep.

Let's hear it for dangerous sheep!

Re:sneaky... (3, Insightful)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433012)

Its crucial that the internet remain fully open !!!! Its thats simple.

Nah. Not even. If only one single stream of communication remains open, that’s enough to pipe the whole internet trough. If we have, we pipe every tcp/ip packet trough twitter. If we have, we form direct wlan-to-wlan nets. We do not even need providers in any city of reasonable size. Soon with mobile phones, this will even become bigger. In theory, you can use any mobile phone as a gateway.

The can/box, and it won’t ever close again. It’s that simple.

Re:sneaky... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30433612)

truth.

Re:sneaky... (1)

pilgrim23 (716938) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433552)

What does it matter? I can hear all I need to of Tiger Woods on all the major networks. They also broadcast the latest Hollywood scandals and who is sleeping with whom. All the Internet does is talk about oppressed people Whatchamacalitstan and other places like France (which I think is near Iowa).

DDOS on the law? (1)

dshk (838175) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432324)

There seems to be a way to screw the three-strike scheme:
At least a third of the adult internet subscribers of a country starts to illegally download a song, then they report themself to the police. The author of that song guarantees that he will not seek any damages. Neither the police is able to handle so many cases, nor it is acceptable for the government to disconnect millions of Internet subscribers.

Re:DDOS on the law? (1)

orgelspieler (865795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433772)

Interesting idea, but you'll never get enough people to agree to report themselves. It would make for an interesting short story, though. I wonder if the same would work for speed limit laws. Millions of people break them every day. Will a cop even give you a ticket if you just pull up beside him, roll down your window and confess? "Hey I just ran a stop sign back there, and I'm feeling guilty about it."

If you're not doing anything wrong (2)

The Altruist (1448701) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432354)

you have nothing to worry about. Unless, of course, a disgruntled employee / competitor / girlscout-you-didn't-buy-cookies-from gives your name to the Business Software Alliance. Then it's the Spanish Inquistion / Salem Witch Trials / Mc Carthy Trials all over again.

New World Order (1)

kurt555gs (309278) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432360)

Ever wonder what that phrase meant?

It means a few elite rich folks controlling, well, everyone else regardless of silly little local laws or constitutions.

Re:New World Order (1)

idontgno (624372) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432690)

Welcome to the 21st Century revival of Feudalism.

I for one welcome my media overlord, as a good serf should. I hope I don't pressed into his peasant militia in his campaign against his neighboring Baron.

Re:New World Order (1)

hitmark (640295) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432862)

oh, modern feudalism have been here for a while now.

i would claim it got started ones USA made corporations citizens...

All I can say is... (1)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432446)

...if you're not participating in FreeNet [freenetproject.org] by now, you'd damned well better start. It's likely to be the last place left (assuming it isn't outlawed).

Easy solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432448)

Let's take on politics then: http://www.piratpartiet.se/international/

The Results of Being Off The Net (1)

pky666 (1675924) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432532)

You may recall the funny little article from "The Onion" [theonion.com] that discussed Google's new opt out feature that allowed paranoid users to remove any traces of their online presence. The three strikes law for DMCA violations would simply add you to this list without going to all the troubles of signing up.

Timeline? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30432814)

So can we get to a different timeline where the DMCA didn't happen? Anybody got a time machine (or combination of stargates and solar flares)

Democracy no? (5, Insightful)

patrickthbold (1351131) | more than 4 years ago | (#30432990)

A lot of us live in "Democracies." Maybe some of us who don't suck should run for office. And maybe some others could help them out. I don't thing voting for change is enough in this day of age. We need people who are different that we can vote for first. Any takers?

Who cares? (1)

mweather (1089505) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433432)

Negotiate in secret all you like, we'll see the finished product when Congress attempts to ratify it.

Re:Who cares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30433674)

Fixed a few typos... "we'll see the finished product after Congress ratifies it."

If you haven't already (1)

T Murphy (1054674) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433576)

Be sure to contact those representing you. Just one country has to push for openness to get this out for the whole world to see. I'm as cynical as the next person about my government, but I can't complain about the system if I don't try to use it.

Where's the "skeptics"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30433686)

Where's the "skeptics"? Where are they when you need someone to throw great vitriol at the idea of One World Government?

We had plenty of them on anything that turned to global warming, so where are they now???

Good luck with that. (1)

crhylove (205956) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433714)

Nobody is going to follow the increasingly ridiculous IP laws. Nobody. Information should be available to all, free of charge. That was the recommendation of Ben Franklin, and he is certainly smarter than any of the corporate tools they've assembled to put together this inhuman legislation.

Brilliant. (2, Insightful)

Dirtside (91468) | more than 4 years ago | (#30433774)

Yeah, because perpetual copyright wasn't enough for these greedy fucktards.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>