ACTA

So... what's everyone's views on ACTA?

Essentially... a global treaty. Designed to stop piracy; it will also prevent freeware, blogging (or uploading of any original content), allow devices to be checked for breaches of copyright without evidence - they could confiscate your iPod in the streets just in case it has pirate music...

"Free" would not exist. More over, since ISPs will be liable... they will just block you uploading, rather than sit and check everything people upload.

Calm talking lady, describing it nicely;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhCs0vPmjVA&feature=related

A news report;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrRuuSlCCOc

Anonymous' response, if you can stand Microsoft Michelle's voice;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roMf2RmRzFc

Very blunt, but full of swearing version;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38mQnRfDuwg

BreakTheMatrix wrote:Now, the President is using an executive order to keep the negotiations secret due to "National Security Concerns". I guess telling the world about the US' torture techniques in the name of transparency was no big deal but talking about stopping someone downloading New Moon is a critical national secret.

LOL XD

The loss of the freedom to upload original content is most definitely the one notion that will reach highest controversy. Simply limiting the majority of the people of the world for the sake of the few is simply unjust.

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" Sadly this notion can become the reverse in some political opinions, mainly 'cause the people asked are those who are stronged biased (or bribed).

We'll all be guilty. And it's not a case of "until proven innocent" because the three strikes and your out is based on accusations - not convictions, nor is evidence required.

The way I see it...

This will be a waste of time and money so the best case scenario is just to abandon it all together.

... it's suppose to be happening in three days. It's been in planning for years. It's a bit late to say it's a waste of time and money... that's like saying the Eiffel Tower is a waste of time and money just as you go to put the last bolt in.

It's highly unlikely it'll happen. Obviously because it breaches so many human rights. And if companies weren't so demanding about release dates, registering on films, music and games, this entire mess could be avoided.

WWIII?

Human rights are subjective -- they can be changed. But obviously, the right to privacy is something that will cause controversy. There's not really anything we can do though... it's a treaty, countries sign it. It doesn't need to be passed by the courts, only those signing it.

It'll probably be a global civil war.

Essentially, it's the turn the internet into a broadcasting medium.

Ah so you say! However, we must recall this:

1) US signs it
2) Someone gets taken off the internet/something fishy happens
3) Suit
4) Supreme courts smashes it into the depths of hell

(I do realize this is international, but if the United States is unable by it's constitution and the ruling of its highest court to comply, the whole treaty is royally screwed since we are damn huge)

The EU refuses to sign unless significant changes are made. Although, that was in response to a leak last year... it could have changed since then. I hope not.

the final draft is finallized. there's no changes. Also on your comment about the Eiffel Tower, that actually happened. People thought it was as ugly as **** and a waste of time when it was first displayed to the public. XD

Also Congress has to ratify treaties. The President can't just sign world influencing documents whenever s/he pleases. If that were, Bush would probably have already decimated and leveled the Middle East- not just in Iraq.

Actually, the President does have that power.

Guess what. This violates the constitution of the United States. If we sign, it gets declared illegal. If it's not declared illegal, we may actually impeach our first president. I have this to say to whatever asshole signs this "treaty": DIE.

3mptylord wrote:Actually, the President does have that power.

Not without the approval of the Senate.

They want to breed a cattle race. People strut around acting like no-one is like them, like they are individual, but it's all a lie. Cattling has begun, we already submit to their advertising campaigns and believe every little lie, because some people can't think for themselves.

All the significance we serve, to them, is to vote for them.

Dark Avorian wrote:Not without the approval of the Senate.

Oh, I thought the President had the power to do anything. As in... could act outside the government. Umm... like the Queen! She has the power to do pretty much whatever she wants... it's just in her best interests not to and only be needed when the government needs her to do things.

MorbiusMonster wrote:They want to breed a cattle race. People strut around acting like no-one is like them, like they are individual, but it's all a lie. Cattling has begun, we already submit to their advertising campaigns and believe every little lie, because some people can't think for themselves.

All the significance we serve, to them, is to vote for them.

I don't think most of the politicians (who are obviously the ones discussing this) truly know the implications. Obviously, those who are disgusted by it leaked it in the first place - but the rest of them are probably just being bought over by "Stop piracy", without truly thinking of the consequences. Although, there's probably a few fully aware of the consequences and they're looking forward to it.

They're going to go home after they've signed it to all there teenaged kids hating them, and saying stuff like "Well, arrest me then... iPod, Phone, Computer... three things filled with pirate music."

Specifically the music thing, in an anonymous survey, people who download music are more likely to spend more money on the industry in the long run. They might not buy the albums, but they regularly go to gigs, buy merchandise, maybe even buy a copy of the album to get it signed, etc.


Now, people have pointed out that it's not just online -- they'll be targeting medicine and counterfeit items. Somehow, I don't see confiscating clothing in the streets because it's counterfeit is going to work if you ask me... and since the countries that made it aren't signing the treaty, I hardly see it as helping the slave-children-workers.

They aren't getting my wolf shirts, those are genuine!

Why haven't I heard of this? Why am I uninformed? Why can't I find out, what the effects of it is?

^
Yes, I thought I'd have been hearing about this for quite some time. It's hardly something that can be put in place discreetly, and the uproar that'd innevitably follow would be in the riot-levels, escpecially if people were arrested or charged for things this movement suddenly "raised the consequences" for.

Danes can't even spell ACTA

You can't?

If this is signed, I'm looking forward to Election day.

I'm not a member of Anonymous, but this is correct.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNKZTVvgTjY

The agreement is heavily flawed.

1. Not all pirated software, music or films is distributed for free, so you're effectively going to have a problem finding ALL illegal sites amongst sites that are legal and have a license to distribute products for a fee. Most pirated goods are sold, not given away.

2. Some sites that do offer freebies ask for a registration fee, so people are paying on a contract to download as many tracks in that time. The "free music" message is an ad campaign, not a truthful statement.

3. A lot of sites that offer free content are legitimately given rights to give away certain music, most of the time as a means of promoting new albums or artists.

4. The basis of accusation without evidence is effectively a witch hunt and will be challenged heavily.

5. The internet is heavily dependant on user input. Without user input, entire businesses could go bankrupt (some websites charge fees for uploading), certain sites would be forced to be shut down and the global recession will be made even worse by the boycotting of the world's most powerful industry.

Some politicians may have the sense to see this and may refuse to sign it. And besides, it is up to the publishing industries to prevent piracy of their products, the government shouldn't get involved.

1) So long as we're only talking about software, must and films; it's ALL FREE! I don't know a single pay-piracy website and if they exist... well, why use them when you can get it for free pretty much everywhere else?

... *reads the whole thing*

What are you pointing out with all that?

They aren't stopping downloading/uploading - and all your points seem to be based on that.

Downloading will likely be unaffected - however, the penalties for illegal downloading will likely be greater. That, and how they check for illegal products will seemingly be improved - such as random spot checks.

ISPs will be liable for what their customers upload, thus, it'll be UPLOADING that's affected by ACTA. They'll likely block all uploads to untrusted websites, or put monitors in place to see what you're uploading. These precautions won't affect your ability to download - but P2P-filesharing only works because people are uploading, if people stop uploading then you won't be able to download.

Things like Tor and other proxy servers will likely still work, the same way they mask you now. However, if your ISP sees you uploading via an encrypted network they might think something's going on.