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!

Submit Your Comments About ACTA

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the piece-of-your-mind dept.

Government 124

alex_guy_CA Notes that the US Trade Representative — who has been negotiating the secret Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement without input from the American people or Congress — is seeking public submissions on how to conduct US foreign copyright policy. This means that Americans can file comments with the USTR asking for ACTA to be made public. Public Knowledge explains the process: "Under the Special 301 process the USTR seeks input from US copyright, trademark, and patent owners about whether policies and practices in foreign countries deny them adequate IP protection. The process has generally been used by IP holders to complain not only about lax enforcement in other countries, but also about limitations and exceptions in their laws that are beneficial to libraries, to education, to innovation, and to the public interest generally. The ability to comment in the Special 301 process is not limited to IP owners only. Any member of the public is free to file comments. If you believe in the importance of balanced copyright policies, file comments with the USTR and make your voice heard. Comments can be filed electronically via http://www.regulations.gov/ docket number USTR-2010-0003. You have to include the term '2010 Special 301 Review' in the 'Type Comment and Upload File' field. ... Deadline for filing is February 16 by 5 pm."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered


Hmmm... (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080042)

Geist is going to have a field day with this one. What's the real motive?

Re:Hmmm... (4, Insightful)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080144)

What's the real motive?

Pretending to care.

After careful consideration and review, they'll finally decide to do whatever the hell the oligarchy thinks is most profitable, as planned.

Re:Hmmm... (4, Insightful)

UnderCoverPenguin (1001627) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082066)

What's the real motive?

Pretending to care.

They are not even pretending to care. If you read the notice, it is a solicitation for complaints against foreign countries who are failing to provide adequate protection to US intellectual property owners.

Re:Hmmm... (4, Interesting)

gnieboer (1272482) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080532)

IMHO (and near-total guess), I don't think this is an RIAA-type copyright nazi push. It seems in the last 2 months or so that there's been a quiet directive from the current US administration to be more protectionist. It's a stand the president can't make publicly because then everyone else will follow suit, but it seems that in the quest for jobs, they want to try to encourage domestic consumption.

I mean first off you've got the DOT secretary going nuts about Toyota [cars.com] . Deserved? Maybe. Did the Secretary help the situation by saying "don't drive your cars"? Definitely not. Then there's NSA's involvement with the China/Google issue. More government involvement that seems out of place. The "Buy American" clause, changes in tax breaks announced at the State of the Union address, blah blah blah.

So if that's the case, then I focused in on the part of the summary about "policies and practices in foreign countries". Reading the actual docket, the request for info is strictly about what countries should be placed on a watch list, not what policies etc (searching iPods at the border) should be (or not be) in place. It's JUST about what countries out there are making fake CDs and handbags etc. and need to be placed on the "watch list".

I'll bet a fake Rolex that China ends up on the watch list.

Re:Hmmm... (1)

FooAtWFU (699187) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080820)

the quest for jobs, they want to try to encourage domestic consumption.

Yeah, Obama is pretty protectionist. Myself, I'm just still amazed that otherwise-intelligent people seem to believe that forcing 90% of the country to pay 10% of the country twice as much for cheap plastic gizmos and electronics is the way to make us all more prosperous. To borrow a charge leveled at the previous administration, "prosperity theater" is more like it...

Re:Hmmm... (2, Insightful)

mOdQuArK! (87332) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081142)

I'm amazed that some people seem to think being able to import cheap crap from overseas is somehow meaningful when a huge (and growing) percentage of the working population is having a problem finding a job. As long as you have a job, then you can cope with rising prices. Without jobs, then the fact that imported goods are cheap merely means that you are spending your reserves a little slower than you would otherwise - and the money is STILL going out of the country, to a place with a lower standard of living, which means you probably won't be seeing again anytime soon (except maybe as a loan).

I'm skeptical about the specific forms of protectionism being proposed nowadays, but the idea that allowing all our money to flow unimpeded out of our country (without having any dependable mechanism to bring back equal or more value) will somehow be net beneficial for the country is just laughable.

Re:Hmmm... (1)

Thinboy00 (1190815) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082152)

Trade is always mutually beneficial [wikipedia.org] in the long run (otherwise the individuals involved in the trade wouldn't participate), unless abusive monopolies are involved, in which case the free market could become slanted towards them. Since most abusive monopolies are American, I don't understand what you're concerned about.

Re:Hmmm... (2, Insightful)

pwizard2 (920421) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082852)

When is the last time that China has bought anything of significance from us except for our debt? I think it's high time that America woke up and understood that foreign countries are not necessarily our friends or have our best interests in mind just because they're willing to trade with us. Free trade is going to be the ruin of this country.

Re:Hmmm... (1)

QuantumRiff (120817) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081192)

I think if I loaned someone dozens of billions of dollars, I would probably diss their competition as much as possible too.. ;) I would want to make sure I got paid..

Re:Hmmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081816)

"...but it seems that in the quest for jobs..."

    This is the new propaganda catch-phrase, correct? It replaces "do it for the children". My guess is that the followup will be something like "maintain vigilance".

Re:Hmmm... (1)

siddesu (698447) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082576)

that is quite true, but in the case of toy yoda (and the other japanese cars) there is the additional motive of pressuring the new japanese government into political obedience - part of the platform they were elected included revision of certain aspects of US-Japan military "cooperation" etc. so, it is a bit more complicated than pure protectionist drive, but the protectionism is definitely there -- and was even before the elections.

Re:Hmmm... (2, Insightful)

ae1294 (1547521) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082308)

Written comments should include a description of the problems experienced by the submitter {with country X} and the effect of the acts, policies, and practices {of said country} on U.S. industry. Comments should be as detailed as possible and should provide all necessary information for assessing the effect of the acts, policies, and practices. Any comments that include quantitative loss claims should be accompanied by the methodology used in calculating such estimated losses.

They aren't asking for our input on anything, just big media's and then they are only asking which countries they should go after with a rather large axe for being bad for business...

Feel free to write something just know that it will be filtered out before anyone important reads it. Honestly it should be clear to everyone that if they cared about what the public thought they would not be holding these meetings in secret.

But... If you wanna cause some trouble (for the Lulz) then I'd suggest picking a random country, lets say... china.. and then complaining about loosing millions because of IP theft. That at least should get past the filter and maybe even read before being deleted because it just wasn't valuable for their secret negotiations. Now if you want to help them out than might I suggest complaining about Canada or Spain. Pretty sure file swapping was ruled legal in Spain a while back.

No bias here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31080050)

Wow. A loaded question and a short deadline.

We won't track you (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082686)

Regulations.gov does not use persistent tracking technology (also referred to as 'cookies') to place software files or other information on your computer.

File a request? Request corruption enquiry (3, Interesting)

syousef (465911) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080054)

How under any circumstances is this legal? It's not national security you're talking about, it's a trade agreement. I'd be thankful I'm not American but unfortunately I'm Australian so with a government that's so I don't feel like I have any right to brag, nor reason to celebrate. What happened to the Western ideals of freedom and democrasy. Seem to have thrown the baby out with the bath water sometime around the start of the war on Terra.

Re:File a request? Request corruption enquiry (2, Insightful)

Shadow of Eternity (795165) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080080)

Our LEFT wing political part is a good 2x more right-wing than most other right-wing parties in the world is what happened.

That and gerrymandering combined with a lack of term limits and now no limits on corporate campaign contributions.

Re:File a request? Request corruption enquiry (1)

aronschatz (570456) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080622)

You don't need term limits if our citizens would stop voting in the same bad people. It is as simple as that. I live in NJ and we finally elected a new governor that wasn't the incumbent. Term limits aren't the answer. Getting more people involved and respecting how and why our system works is the answer. And no, there should never be a "career politician."

Re:File a request? Request corruption enquiry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31080956)

I live in NJ and we finally elected a new governor that wasn't the incumbent.

But unfortunately, you elected another tool to replace the previous one.

Wait and see.

Too many people game trade agreements. (2, Insightful)

tjstork (137384) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080726)

It's not national security you're talking about, it's a trade agreement.

As an American protectionist, I would think that the issue is really about how Asia approaches trade. They are all mercantile nations, not genuinely free trading ones, and, after waiting for 30 years for trade to somehow balance, I'm done with waiting and am ready to pull the plug on trade with at least Asia.

Australia, and Europe, I am not so worried about. Those nations come from the same cultural background, have been long allies, and at least play by similar rules. Like, I have no problem buying a Pontiac GTO, which was made in Australia, because Australians have similar wages, legal and cultural underpinnings, and hey, the first two Men at Work albums were pretty good stuff to listen to. Plus, 400hp RWD is always nice to have.

Re:File a request? Request corruption enquiry (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082864)


Not treason? Punishable like murder, with 10 years minimum? Or beheading, in earlier days?

That’s the problem when the king is put on drugs by his royal household. No matter if the king is close to 300 million people. He’s just a dummy figure, sitting in his fancy throne (constitution & co) solely for decoration.

Re:File a request? Request corruption enquiry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082956)

"What happened to the Western ideals of freedom and democrasy"

Bought and paid for.

My message (5, Informative)

glasserc (1510291) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080494)

[Also see the EFF's page about this [eff.org] if you're having a hard time coming up with a letter.]

This is my comment about the '2010 Special 301 Review' for the United States Trade Representatives. I would like to complain about the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, also known as ACTA. As a firm believer in transparency of government and democracy, I would like to strongly object to the outright secrecy displayed around these negotiations. In a modern age, this simply isn't an appropriate forum for creation of new law.

Furthermore, what I have seen in leaked versions of the ACTA is deeply upsetting, on many levels:

- The "Border Measures" provisions are unconstitutional, as well as extremely alarming -- search and seizure without probable cause, on no grounds more severe than suspicion.

- The ISP regulation is also extremely alarming, unduly allowing enforcement agents to remove the privacy and anonymity of citizens without a warrant.

- "Graduated response" programs, such as those required by the ACTA, threaten to deprive citizens of Internet access without probable cause. As Internet access becomes more and more central to civic and daily life, this becomes increasingly threatening.

- In general, the criminalization of copyright infringement, which has always been a civil crime, is a huge provision for what is presumably a "trade agreement" and is frankly arbitrary and despotic.

The creation of ACTA is wholly inappropriate given the existence of another intellectual property organization, WIPO. As a citizen of the United States, I demand that my government cease participation in this mockery of democracy at once.

Thank you for your time.


Re:My message (2, Interesting)

tobiah (308208) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082388)


My comments regard the ACTA agreement currently under secret negotiation. It's not that secret, and as something that has a hugely prohibitive affect on my personal and professional life, and that of my children, I am very offended by both its content and the method in which it is being developed.

Respect for the law requires respect for the governed; the ACTA treaty in no way represents my interests, and has not been carried out in a democratic or representative manner. Furthermore, it is grossly out of sync with common practice of the public and the direction in which history and technology is headed.

I don't know specifically what the result would be if ACTA is realized, but history tells us that unjust and oppressive laws tend to elicit a strong backlash. One that turns out poorly for those who enacted those laws.

One-sided negotiations conducted in secret may be a convenient way to get what you want in a law. It is also a good way to permamently lose the public's good will. It is not too late to involve representatives of the public's interest into these negotiations, and save your treaty.

Re:direct link (2, Informative)

slashqwerty (1099091) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082124)

I'm not 100% certain that is the correct link. It could just as easily be this one:

http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#submitComment?R=0900006480a7bbba [regulations.gov]

If you follow the directions in the PDF [regulations.gov] it will give you both links.

By the way, that PDF indicates they prefer comments be uploaded as a file. In particular they prefer MS Word and Adobe Acrobat format.

On a side note that has got to be the worst web site I have seen in years. Parts of it render incorrectly in Internet Explorer leaving you unable to read text in the document details page. The site is completely unusable with Konqueror on Linux and I was unable to successfully submit a comment with FireFox on Linux.

I would be willing to bet the site does not even come close to being section 508 compliant. While they do thoughtfully include alt attributes, someone who wants to submit a comment about books in Braille is not going to be able to.

My comments on ACTA (5, Interesting)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080164)

You can take your unconstitutional further criminalization of what is ultimately a civil issue -- copyright infringement -- and shove it up your ass. Rights holders already have all the recourse they need -- the public court system. Taking away my constitutional rights to satisfy the profit needs of some rights holders is simply unacceptable. What do we have to do? Toss CDs and DVDs into Boston Harbor?

Re:My comments on ACTA (3, Funny)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080338)

That might not be a bad idea... /me calls for a Boston CD Party!

Re:My comments on ACTA (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31080656)

I have a better idea.

Pirate. Don't hide. Don't pretend we aren't doing it. Be PROUD of pirating. PUBLICIZE your piracy. Take a copy of Steamboat Willie down to your local courthouse and hand them out to the people there. Better yet, hand them out at the building that houses the Disney Corporation. When or IF you get arrested/sued, make a BIG stink. Explain EXACTLY why you are doing what you are doing, explain EXACTLY why it should be legal, and fight this travesty in the light of day.

Re:My comments on ACTA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31080866)

Alternately, take every CD and DVD you already own, rip a copy of it, then take the original, scrawl "Fair use, bitches" on it, and ship it to someone who will collect hundreds of thousands of them and use them to block the entrance to an RIAA/MPAA office building some time in the middle of the night.

Re:My comments on ACTA (1)

Arthur Grumbine (1086397) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082874)

Pirate. Don't hide. Don't pretend we aren't doing it. Be PROUD of pirating. PUBLICIZE your piracy.

Says the brave AC...

Dont worry (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081110)

there is already a law to discourage this...
Take your pick: "dumping is prohibited" or some other environmental protection law that will be used against any Bostom CD partier.

*sad sigh*

No DRM without representation?!?!? (2, Funny)

TiggertheMad (556308) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081176)

That might not be a bad idea... /me calls for a Boston CD Party!

Sweet jeebus, man, don't do it! Dolphins are having hard enough of a time of it as is without you dumping cases of crappy Brittney Spears music on them...

Re:My comments on ACTA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081078)

Here was my exact comment about the proposed trade agreement:

2010 Special 301 Review

The handling of this negotiation has not been in the interests of the general public, nor has it been conducted in such a fashion as to provide sufficient public oversight. Negotiations have been conducted in secret, without any kind of legislative or public oversight, and any concessions made under such conditions constitute a terrible breach of trust which is necessary for our type of government to function efficiently.

According to information that was made available on Wikileaks, the introduction of measures that would amount to "Guilty until proven innocent", such as "3 strikes" provisions, et al, have been a major staple of this trade agreement. Due process laws exist to prevent circumstances of exactly this kind: Where a powerful organisation or group of organisations levels an accusation, and enacts a powerfully crippling punishment without first proving guilt before a jury of the defendent's peers. As the propositions of the leaked draft currently stood as of the last update of that document on Wikileaks, these "Guilty until proven innocent" due process violations are a primary staple of this agreement.

Due to this fact, and the fact that the agreement in general has not been widely publicised, that this public review has been called for despite legitimate release of the document a priori, and the overall tone of secrecy involved in the deliberations of this trade agreement, it is my position as a citizen who's rights to public domain properties and rights to fair use through the codified fair use doctrine are in jeaparody, I strongly discourage, and DO NOT SUPPORT any ratification of this trade agreement until these issues have been totally eliminated, regardless of what my elected representatives claim on the matter.

I recommend a full disclosure of the ACTA document to the public so that a proper public review with up to date materials can be performed, and that the deadline of February 16 be postponed until then.

Don't toss that CD... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081228)

For you will certainly be arrested for littering. Watch it, man, the TASER is unholstered.

'input' -> justification (1)

Animaether (411575) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080186)

With the probably predictable type of 'input' they'll get for the most part, does anybody think it will be used for anything -other than- justification for the stipulations in ACTA and keeping the 'negotiations' secret?

Re:'input' - justification (2, Insightful)

Attila Dimedici (1036002) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081210)

It will turn out just like the place where they asked for public comment on off-shore drilling. When the overwhelming majority is not in favor of what they want to do, it will just disappear into a black hole and get ignored.

Lol (3, Interesting)

santax (1541065) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080236)

How about the USA keeps there dictatorial policy on their own continent? Foreign policy... Don't make me laugh, next thing they want to bring democracy to Europe. Yeah sure, please mod this down... but the truth won't go away by modding this down.

Re:Lol (1, Insightful)

dargon (105684) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080292)

screw keeping it on their own continent, i say keep it in their own borders, i'm 100% positive that Mexico and Canada would prefer the US kept its nose out of our business. I'm from Canada, so i know i'm at least 50% accurate there :)

Re:Lol (3, Insightful)

santax (1541065) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080352)

Yeah unfortunate you will be modded down as a troll to i think... I know that most people from the US are great people, nice, friendly, smart. But the people with the right to voice often aren't. I feel your pain mate.

Re:Lol (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081632)

The reason you were modded troll is probably because your post is idiotic.

You suggest that Americans keep this crap within the continent, as if it's wanted there either. Then you pretend as if you're onto something and throw in the old "mod me down but i'm right" crap after two insignificant sentences.

Also, you spelled their incorrectly.

Re:Lol (1)

santax (1541065) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080472)

told you so ;) They just don't want to understand and everybody who disagrees gets silenced.

Re:Lol (1)

Rewind (138843) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081436)

NOTE: Don't take this as super condescending. If it comes across that way it is my failure to correctly convey my message, not any intent to be a jerk. I am half joking here. I included a liberal amount of ':P' to help!

Well you got modded up actually! So now you have to apologize :P Just kidding of course. That said, I have the hard time seeing the "truth" about America's "dictatorial" policy and since you didn't really provide any backing for that claim I am going to file it as crazy gibberish. A claim you did support by arguing with the mods in a reply to your own post :P

I am an American who dislikes a good bit of our foreign policy, so I didn't mean to say you have no reason to be irked by it. Far from it. If I don't like it I can certainly see why you wouldn't! I was simply saying that going about posting "dictatorial policy!" and "the truth won't go away!" sounds more like the crazed fear mongering employed by some of my fellow Americans to steer our foreign policy in the directions you don't like than presenting an opposing view.

Oh and a closing :P for good measure!

Re:Lol (1)

kent_eh (543303) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081406)

How about the USA keeps there dictatorial policy on their own continent?

Hey, what do you have against us Canadians?
The Americans can keep their own rules and unilateralism within their own borders, thank you very much.

Re:Lol (1)

Max Littlemore (1001285) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081994)

Oh that's right. Don't forget the Canadians., They're the polite, intelligent Americans.

ok, ok, i know, blatant trolling, but I just couldn't resist....

Re:Lol (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082558)

It would help if the Canadian government would tell the US government to fuck off a lot more than they do now.

Re:Lol (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31083476)

I believe a more appropriate response would be :
Canada respectfully declines inclusion in ACTA, in much the same way we declined attendance at the invasion of Iraq. We feel confident that the same group of countries which participated in that battle will be happy to obey. An uncertain consequence to Canada, of non-compliance with ACTA, will likely be stronger ties with China, but at the moment, they, at least, seem willing to respect our democracy.
Have a great term Monsieur Obama!

4chan (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31080284)

Quick! Get this over to 4chan.

Re:4chan (1)

ae1294 (1547521) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082160)

Quick! Get this over to 4chan.

Sorry but I can't seem to get it to load... Something seems to be wrong with my Verizon wireless internet..

Where can I read the leaked copy? (3, Interesting)

H4x0r Jim Duggan (757476) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080286)

    A leaked copy was posted on wikileaks, but they took everything offline due to their financial problems. Does anyone have a copy of the leaked document? Please post it here, or add it to this public wiki:

    The URLs for the relevant wikileaks docs were:

  • http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Classified_US%2C_Japan_and_EU_ACTA_trade_agreement_drafts%2C_2009 - where you'd find scans of the document
  • http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Talk:Classified_US%2C_Japan_and_EU_ACTA_trade_agreement_drafts%2C_2009 - where people had started to type it up

I haven't found it in archive.org or Google cache. Help sought, thanks.

Why? (2, Insightful)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080436)

Submit Your Comments About ACTA

Seriously: Why?

It's not like they really care what us little people think. The fact is, what gets put into law will be what the big copyright holders want. Think **AA.

Re:Why? (2, Insightful)

glasserc (1510291) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080530)

My hope is that the lawyers and representatives involved simply don't realize the magnitude of the number of people who think ACTA and unbalanced copyright in general is a bad idea, and that if a few thousand people write anything at all, they'll take notice. Wishful thinking? Probably..


Re:Why? (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080752)

My hope is that the lawyers and representatives involved simply don't realize the magnitude of the number of people who think ACTA and unbalanced copyright in general is a bad idea, and that if a few thousand people write anything at all, they'll take notice.

Ethan, relatively few people care about copyrights, let alone know about ACTA. Yes, wishful thinking.

Re:Why? (1)

biryokumaru (822262) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081020)

On the scale of American democracy, a few thousand ought to be considered relatively few. But, in reality, the vocal component of any group is always the extreme minority of those affected. To wit:

The sheer drama of this election has driven voter turnout to its highest level in centuries: 6%!

- Linda, A Head in the Polls, Futurama

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31080566)

To put on a show for the public that makes them seem like they actually give a damn what people think.

We lost control of our government years ago. It's no longer about the people, it's all about the money and big corporations.

It's time for a revolution.

Re:Why? (1)

Vanderhoth (1582661) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080648)

My Grandfather always said, "There's a slim chance you'll ever win the lottery, but if you don't at least buy a ticket you won't even get that."

Re:Why? (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081940)

Huh. I didn't have a doting family member to give me advice about the lottery, so, I guess I'll have to substute what I've always said.

"There's a slim chance you'll ever win the lottery, but if you buy when the payout ratio is less than unity, you're playing a losing game."

Which I usually follow up with "And the grand prize is split amongst the winners in the event of multiples, making the payout ratio per ticket difficult to determine."

Anyway, the point is this: It's true that you can't win if you don't play (in gambling), but you also can't lose if you don't play. Unfortunately, in the case of copyright treaties (and pretty much anything else where law is made...) you can't win if you do play, and not playing isn't even an option.

What ACTA needs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31080524)

Here's the key thing the treaty will need, as it addresses a problem that already went haywire with the U.S.' flawed DMCA.

DMCA needs to exempt bypassing technological measures which limit access, if the purpose is to not infringe copyright (the librarian of congress part of DMCA sort of does this, but very poorly and with a lot of weird arbitrary limits that have chosen with seeming ignorance of traditional fair uses). And it needs to exempt trafficking in devices that bypass technological measures, if the primary purpose is to access the work for noninfringing uses (DMCA totally fails on this, and so far the U.S. government hasn't even tried to fix it yet).

(i.e. it should be legal to create, sell, ship, and use a BluRay player that plays the disc by cracking the protection instead of purchasing/licensing a player key. (Remember it's the movie's copyright holder that the law ostensibly is intended to protect, not Sony's hardware division or media spec consortiums.) And it should be legal to reverse engineer players in order to get player keys for use in such players. Do that, and BluRay discs become legally playable (if with some difficulty) and people can start buying them instead of pirating them. Then if the studious have a lick of sense, they'll publish all the keys to tide customers over, while they scramble to create Yet Another format that doesn't include any DRM.)

Ergo, ACTA should contain a provision that all signatories enact such exemptions if those signatories have any laws which prohibit access or otherwise interfere with non-infringing uses. If a signatory outlaws playing lawfully obtained media, they should be held in violation of ACTA since their government (as is currently the case with U.S.) has taken a pro-piracy stance.

The treaty can then correct the violator by abstaining from recognizing any international copyright for that signatory's works. i.e. if US outlaws accessing BluRay discs (thereby interfering with Germans who want to sell BluRay movies in US; potential US customers have to torrent German highdef movies instead) then US copyrighted works should be public domain in Germany. Tit for tat unless the violator decides to allow the market to exist in their country.

Of course, that's a very weak proposal, that still pays a lot of lip service to licensing bodies and large hardware manufacturers. An even more sensible policy would be for ACTA signatories to deny copyright protection to works that have any technological measure which limit access. Do that and then everyone wins, both users and creators. But one step at a time.

Enforcing copyright (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31080536)

I'm sure that America will use it's usual ways of enforcing copyright, buy the bomb, bullet or economic sabotage if a country does not comply to the "American way." See how long it takes a serious point to be moderated as Troll.

Is there a point? (2, Interesting)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080554)

I don't mean this at all in a snarky way, but...

Does anyone have a sense of whether or not us submitting comments would actually change the outcome?

Re:Is there a point? (1)

Gorkamecha (948294) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080612)

Does an individual vote really change the outcome of an election? Not most of the the time, but that doesn't mean that people shouldn't bother to vote. It's about supporting the process.

Re:Is there a point? (3, Insightful)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080664)

Does an individual vote really change the outcome of an election? Not most of the the time, but that doesn't mean that people shouldn't bother to vote.

I'd say that's a bad example, because (if you ignore Gerrymandering), enough votes force the decision of who gets into office. With ACTA, we could have 200 million citizens protest, and the Congress and the President could still enact it.

It's about supporting the process.

But is there a point in supporting this process, if it's bought and paid for my special interests? (I'm not assuming it is; this is what my question was about.)

Re:Is there a point? (1)

biryokumaru (822262) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081180)

Leela: That's not true; the first robot president won by exactly one vote.

Bender: Ah, yes, John Quincy Adding Machine. He struck a cord with the voters when he pledged not to go on a killing spree.

Farnsworth: But, like most politicians, he promised more than he could deliver.

- A Head in the Polls, Futurama

Oh look, I'm getting flashbacks... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31080694)

...to my old software release post-mortems. The ones I was always so happy to be able to vent my frustrations at. The meetings that let me know management cared (snicker).

Not requesting public comment on ACTA per se (2, Interesting)

diversiform (1085477) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080706)

Am I missing something? I read the Federal Notice rather quickly, but I don't see anything about ACTA. They're looking for comments specifically for "Identification of Countries Under Section 182 of the Trade Act of 1974." Wouldn't they just disregard any comments that don't address what they've asked for? (To "identify those countries that deny adequate and effective protection for intellectual property rights or deny fair and equitable market access to U.S. persons who rely on intellectual property protection.") I suppose one could submit a comment saying that the parties negotiating ACTA are denying adequate and effective protection (etc.) under Section 182 of the Trade Act of 1974, but I don't know that this would have any effect on the ACTA negotiations.

Re:Not requesting public comment on ACTA per se (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081986)

so straight turn the process and comment that the USA should be considered as one of these countries.

More draconian is better.. prison time++ (3, Insightful)

xtal (49134) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080720)

Nothing will get any better until things get loony. I hope to see house confiscations, children removed from families, people put in jail.

We're already _almost_ there.

This will foster the development of better anonymous networks and the adoption of proper encryption techniques to defend against these crazy laws.

Just like consuming illegal drugs, nobody is going to stop copying things that don't exist.

Insanity does not help (1)

Geof (153857) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081254)

More draconian is better.. prison time++ . . . Nothing will get any better until things get loony. I hope to see house confiscations, children removed from families, people put in jail. . . . Just like consuming illegal drugs, nobody is going to stop copying things that don't exist.

You are arguing that the means (house confiscations, the removal of children, jail) justifies the ends (revising copyright). I don't think that ends justifies this means.

Besides which, what makes you think insanity will lead to positive change? You have already had all these measures for illegal drugs for decades.

The point is moot (1)

plopez (54068) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080766)

Now that corporations can funnel as much unconstrained money as they want, look to them to dominate the debate on ACTS, DRM, copyrights, patents etc.

Turn off the lights, the party's over.

Kill Yourselves... (1)

Foobar of Borg (690622) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080872)

If you are working on ACTA or trying to internationalize intellectual property ... Kill yourself!

Re:Kill Yourselves... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31083230)

Pff, better Idea, how about we go about euthanizing these jerkwads, and saving them the trouble? Since these are the same idiots who allowed abominations such as the Patriot Act, I think it could be argued we'd be conducting a public service.

Very little to say, except perhaps this (1)

istartedi (132515) | more than 4 years ago | (#31080884)

Since you haven't conducted the ENTIRE preceedings with input from the Public, we don't consider them valid.

Until such time as the ENTIRE AGREEMENT is reviewed PUBLICLY, with input only from individuals and not fictitious persons, and with equal weight for the views of all said persons, we will disobey any and all parts of it which we see fit to disobey, as an act of civil disobediance.

Copy, paste, send.

Re:Very little to say, except perhaps this (1)

myspace-cn (1094627) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081134)

Heh, I was going to go at it from the counterfeit dollar printing angle. Boy did I miss the boat.

If I Did (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081346)

If I expressed my opinion concerning ACTA they would lock me away.

please comment! (3, Informative)

ffflala (793437) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081354)

I'm sure a lot of people will cynically disregard the opportunity to comment as pointless; ignore this urge! While this comment period touches a fairly narrow area, if you care about this issue PLEASE COMMENT. Bring yourself up to speed on the proposed regulation (summary: http://www.regulations.gov/search/Regs/home.html#documentDetail?R=0900006480a7dc9b [regulations.gov] ), and make your comment as efficient, relevant, and precise as possible.

Commenting on regs is NOT like writing your congressperson! Public comments to proposed regs are reviewed, and are considered; these public comment periods are not just for show. Industries with vested interests in an agency's regulations are aware of this, and are certain to have their say in the matter. Have yours!

There's more context in the linked summary, but here's basically what they're asking for input on:

USTR requests that interested persons identify those countries that deny adequate and effective protection for intellectual property rights or deny fair and equitable market access to U.S. persons who rely on intellectual property protection. USTR requests that, where relevant, submissions mention particular regions, provinces, states, or other subdivisions of a country in which an act, policy, or practice is believed to warrant special attention. Submissions may report positive or negative developments with respect to these sub-national entities.

The law it's referring to: (1)

diversiform (1085477) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081626)

19 U.S.C. 2242 : US Code - Section 2242: Identification of countries that deny adequate protection, or market access, for intellectual property rights. [findlaw.com]

Both the Request for Comment and the underlying law specifically refer to the identification of foreign countries with bad IP policies. So I still don't see how this opens the door for complaints about the U.S. Trade Representative's secrecy regarding ACTA. I don't want to discourage anyone from complaining -- certainly the Trade Representative should know that people are concerned about this -- but as I understand it, they have the right to disregard any comments not responsive to the request.

How can anyone comment (1)

MeNeXT (200840) | more than 4 years ago | (#31081966)

when we don't know what the discussion is all about! My biggest worry is how the USA is trying to create conflict for the sake of profits. It seems that in my lifetime the USA has done more to curtail my freedoms and not protect my interests than any previous generation. This is a comedy.....

Rational Discussion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31081974)

As much as I'd like to discuss this rationally, my ultimate message is best expressed by Dethklok

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_sioHsT7GQ at 1:24

"secret Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement"... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082048)

...doesn't work with "Government Of, By, and For the People."

In other words, "No Legislation Without Representation." Really, people, we should do our best to identify the U.S. lawmakers behind this garbage and VOTE THEIR ASSES OUT OF OFFICE! Passing laws without the people's oversight is what COMMUNISTS do!

Re:"secret Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement"... (1)

myspace-cn (1094627) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082556)

I noticed you volunteered to be part of the unbroken human "chain of custody" to count paper ballots instead of allowing "electronic vote tabulation devices" break the "chain of custody."

Thanks for your SERVICE to your COUNTRY!

Suggested text (2, Insightful)

thomst (1640045) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082120)

2010 Special 301 Review

I ask you to make a part of the United States' position the following:

1. ACTA negotiations must be open and transparent and conducted in such a way as to permit the American public ongoing input into the negotiation process as it occurs, rather than conducted behind closed doors, with only the end result visible, after an agreement has been concluded.

2. The preservation of fair use must be a critical and integral part of the United States' position in the negotiations, and the fair use rights of its citizens must not be compromised in the final agreement.

3. Copyright terms must not be extended any further than U.S. law currently provides, and should, if anything, be reduced in order to provide the artistic compost necessary for the creative process to thrive. The U.S. must take the position that excessive copyright term lengths stifle innovation in the arts, rather than preserve it, and that its citizens and humanity as a whole are ill-served by the progressive march towards infinite copyright extension.

4. Penalties for copyright violation should and must fit the actual economic damage incurred by copyright holders, with Draconian punishment reserved exclusively for those who profit financially from infringement. The U.S. position should and must be that damages for infringement by individuals who do not seek to profit financially from their actions must neither be excessive nor unduly harsh.

5. Artists should be given the right to sue copyright infringers for monetary damages, regardless of when or whether those artists have formally registered their works, if and only if the infringing use was for the financial gain of the infringer.

Re:Suggested text (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082536)

6. Death by firing squad for oath breaking officials who sign any of these trojan horse UN treaties (a shitload of them lately) which usurps the Constitution of the United States

Th1s FP for GNAA (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31082184)

not so bad. To the Save Linux from a you can. No, and personal and easy - only Be a cock-sucking moronic, dilettante Of various BSD n3tworking test. are a few good is perhaps enjoy the loud problem; a few backward and said declined in market reasons why anyone SHITHEADS. *BSD windows, SUN or Fastest-growing GAY perform keeping something cool tangle of fatal the public eye: provide sodas, another folder. 20 FreeBSD project, users. This is by the politickers it will be among members all over sadness And it was

This is for complaints about specific countries. (3, Insightful)

Animats (122034) | more than 4 years ago | (#31082598)

This is about "special 301" reviews [ustr.gov] , which are a scheme for applying diplomatic pressure on countries that do trade things that US companies don't like. Anything submitted that doesn't relate to a specific issue with a specific country is irrelevant.

If you want to bitch about ACTA, write your congressional representative.

Okay, I'll Write Them: Sunlight for ACTA (1)

myspace-cn (1094627) | more than 4 years ago | (#31083102)

Sunlight for ACTA

Sadly, I am a constituent and I'm sick of oath breakers

Today the topic is (ACTA) that is currently being negotiated by retards in the Office of the United States Trade Representative. Who I might add don't represent a damn thing about me.

more Unconstitutional garbage?
I wonder if it came from Biden's desk?

Meanwhile the FED is legal counterfeit. Clickty Clickty Clic

You should be ashamed. Public Comments are worthless admit it publicly you chicken oath breakers

You Waste Our Time With Your Fake Leadership And Lies


Re:Okay, I'll Write Them: Sunlight for ACTA (1)

myspace-cn (1094627) | more than 4 years ago | (#31083136)

Oh yeah I forgot the part about regulations.gov filling in all the fields and hitting submit and it FAILS! hahahahaha! AHAHAHAHAHAA! Plausible deniability bitches!

I'd hand this joke over the the pro comedians but I keep getting a fsckin 404 eRRoR at change.gov

(Ba da booM)

Re:Okay, I'll Write Them: Sunlight for ACTA (1)

myspace-cn (1094627) | more than 4 years ago | (#31083186)

Or how about M$ Feinstein? jah hahaha
Today's Topic: Cap And Trade

Dear Senat0r Diane Feinstein,

    dear dear. oh dear oh dear
Um, okay what was I saying?
Oh yeah!

Do Not Sign No Cap And Trade Treaty with the IMF or the UN if it usurps the United States Of America's Original Constitution or even our current laws under peacetime since you have not declared any wars yet. Since it is like you would basically become a domestic terrorist (for lack of better terminology basically)

From the Office of Diane the GODDESS
Reply to X
Thanks for the opportunity to reply.
Since the CRU emails were HACKED from their SERVER, we think the shite is great for ya, ya lil fsckin child, how dare you even write me back, now you and your little dog will suffer too! Muahahahahahahahahaa!

So yeah we're fscked..

WTF (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31083582)

Go ask Lawrence Lessig.
STFU with this "ask the "PUBLIC" junk".

The public is so sorely misinformed (on oh so very many varied issues) please understand why I think this is dumb.
Thank you sirs.

I can just see it now. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31083636)

They'll probably just database all the responses, creating lists of anyone who doesn't support it, and using their other Orwellian surveillance that they illegally inflict through the private sector, the government can then list, track and persecute anyone who doesn't agree with them.

The problem is more than just this specific treaty. The problem is a President who is all too happy to cede the sovereignty of the nation he was elected to represent to unelected global corporate treaty organizations. We've seen this attempt in every facet possible, at the Climate Change Snake-oil Salesman Convention, and beyond.

How about this? Don't sign secretive treaties that are unrepresentative of the will of the people or in respect of governing documents in each country. Perhapse, instead of giving trillions of taxpayer dollars to wall street bankers in backroom deals, and passing pet projects using the disguise of a "stimulus package". How about realizing that this is and never has been about money. It's about the control of information. major media are losing money, mostly because of their lack of market control, due to alternative markets. Government are losing face also, due to alternative venues to corporate talking heads in the media disseminating real analysis sans the usual spin.

In a free market system, the people determine what business models will succeed or fail. Those who adapt to new trends, and deliver a desirable good or service succeed. Those who ignore their customers and/or try to dominate them fail (as long as monopoly/anti-competition laws are actually *ahem* enforced)

In a fascist market system, government bureaucrats, and abusive monopolies make back room deals with each other in order to enforce their stranglehold on the market, kicking competition to the curb, and resisting free market changes to their business model.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account