Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Announces Global Intellectual Property Plan
Angry_Admin writes "ZDNet is running a story about how the U.S. has announced new plans to expand its crackdown on intellectual-property infringement overseas. From the article:'One program would place intellectual property experts on the ground in regions where infringement is considered a concern. There they would work with overseas U.S. businesses and native government officials to advocate improved intellectual-property rights protection, according to a department fact sheet. Another program, called the Global Intellectual Property Rights Academy, would train foreign judges, enforcement officials and other stakeholders in international intellectual property obligations and best practices.'"
The problem is, other countries have other laws. You can't enforce US law in china. They'll tell us just where we can stick our initiative. I hope that ALL the countries do the same....
0xB315AA8D852DCD3F3DCA578FD2E0BF88
As if we (the U.S.) didn't have a PR problem already. Now we're going to be viewed as the Microsoft of the world.
would train foreign judges
Yeah, all those years of school and working as lawyers in the field couldn't prepare them enough.
Trolling is a art,
I'm speechless. I don't think I really want to live in this country (USA) any more.
That's the worst possible solution -- being speechless I mean.
That's backwards. The US government now proves itself a wholly owned subsidiary of entertainment cartels. Future historians will have a field day with our era, endlessly arguing, picking apart and tracing precisely where and how it was decided to relinquish fundamental rights for the benefit of a tiny minority of business interests specializing in trivialities.
It may not help in the end, but at least you'll feel like you did something while Homeland Security is dragging you away to have a NeuroDongle(tm) installed in your parietal lobe to keep your brain from processing non-DRM equipped media.
...that the US wants foreign judges to consider US law as it judges things in its own jurisdiction, yet doesn't want US judges to consider foreign law as it judges matters here in the US?
E2ST
It doesn't... look at the world trade center...
It is exactly these kind of arrogant things that form a magnet for negativity...
At this rate American's won't be welcome anywhere.
I'll repeat it again;
Way to legislate special interest!
What fuck-asses. I cant wait to see the nepharious two-fisted bullshit these content-holder hitmen are going to try to pull on the rest of the world. Once you get past the sickening reality, it should be downright fucking hilarious. They wont exactly have all that much leverage, they're just some random joe show shows up claiming to be defending some other nations interests. Surreee, we'll listen to you.
The US remains the only place in the world where law enforcement considers 100% enforcement their duty. Less barberic civilization seems to have realized that the purpose of laws is for the general goodwill and fortune of the populous, and laws should be enforced or not enforced as such. Its called humanity you nincompoops.
Its kind of scary to think nations might willingly forfeit the sovereignty of letting someone else come in and demand that they start enforcing their laws better. There's cases of defunct government where such aid is needed, but its pathetic that hte only place the US is going to start leveraging such direct extra-national influence is to the cock-sucking lobbyists that've completely monopolized the entertainment sector. Its even more terrifying to think that any self respecting international body would let agents of a single nation impose this policy.
Little more ire than usual, but whatever. "Sometimes you know, I get so pissed off,"
Myren
Myren
[sarcasm]
Well, now that we've captured Bin Laden, resolved all of the problems from hurricanes Katrina and Rita, finally got out of Iraq and solved our crime and unemployment problems locally, I'm glad to see that our country is putting our over abundance of tax dollars to good use!
[sarcasm]
Homer no function beer well without.
I guess that's one way to stop other countries with lighter IP restrictions from out innovating us...take away their advantage!
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
Since you think this is such a marvellous plan, how about this... Dutch / European IP law works quite well and hasn't as of yet created the mess that the USPTO has for you. I think we should send some Dutch advisors over and tell the American companies exactly how they should apply *our* IP laws as universal guidelines. This will be very beneficial, especially for European companies who have a head start. I'm sure that will be very well recived over there, right?!? No?!? What a surprise...
To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
Western civilization is the worst thing that have happened to the earth during the last million years. The human species wiped out all the big mammals in all parts of the world except Africa when we spread across the globe 10.000 years ago. Then, when the industrial revolution came about a mere 300 years ago we started wiping out entire habitats and broad ranges of species more effectively and now, today, species are going extinct a thousand times faster than they did before humanity came along. And we are felling trees ten times faster than they are being reproduced. Sorry, but in my humble opinion western civilization was a extremely bad idea and I am, sadly, sure I will be proved right in a mere generation or two. I know this has nothing to do with the US imposing their ridiculous software laws on the free world, but so sorry, it had to be said.
9/11: Never forget it was a false-flag operation
Since the USPTO is playing the honest, I'll be frank too.
I don't observe anyone's intellectual property (the shortening of my constitutional rights (I'm Non-USA before someone cites the USA's constitution for me)), period. I would like to encourage others to protect their own rights too.
The best thing that could have been done to the patent system is to scrap the whole thing. Those who created it didn't go past modern economy 101, because, well, it was created 200-300 years ago (in a much more applicable form than it is in today, if i may add).
It's one thing that the intellectual property system reduces my right for freedom of speech (why can't i "say" data sequences on the net?), but it is also bad for the economy. It is a forced, artificial restriction much like prohibition was. Society can be interpreted as a continuation of evolution on some level. This means, that societies which made murder a "crime", survived better, for example. As a general rule of thumb, while respecting a few basic things, the less restrictive a society is, the better. Creating artificial restrictions is making a society function less optimal. Applying restrictions on computers, which eventually boil down to mathematics are:
a.) Not precise. (I demand to know the sequence of those base two numbers which you hold the copyright/patent on. If you can't reproduce those numbers, your copyright doesn't stand.)
b.) Because of a.), defining a copyrighted work is ambigous. Since what we define those copyrights on are very precise, creating a relation between the two sets are almost impossible. (Could you point me to the database where i can look up a copyrighted set of base two numbers, please, so that i can verify that i can make sure i don't infringe upon someone's copyright?)
Apart from these natural necessities, even if i were to accept the unfair artificial restriction placed upon me by society, i flatly refuse to accept to believe in the pack of _lies_ copyright and patent holders spread in order to protect their own selfish interests against society as a whole.
The dreaded day when someone copyrighted a mathematical expression happened decades ago, when someone decided that people should pay someone for copying specific binary bits apart from the ISP. There is a huge difference between paying for someone to create the knowledge about a sequence of specific bits (writing source code, translating that into binary executable) and for paying someone for the reversal of the artificial restriction of being denied the right to copy already known binary bits from one storage to another.
The paying for copying part is gravely vague too. What constitutes as copying? Installing an operating system is surely copying? Am i not allowed to copy then or not?
Modern communications require freedom of information. On communications i mean digital communication which is starting to gain strength lately, and will hopefully cleanse the world of this medieval copyright nonsense.
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
It's funny, I often think the same thing. I don't want to live in this country anymore. Sure, a lot of the things that get to me are little things, but when you put them all together they make something big. The other thing that gets me is that it often seems that the priorities in the US are all fucked up. We're worried about the rights of an industry built around entertainment. Yes, it's a lot of money, yes, it's a huge export, but it's fucking entertainment. There are places in the world, in the US even right now, where people's lives are at stake. Maybe we should worry more about helping poor nations develop their businesses so that they can enjoy the luxury of entertainment and actually have enough money to pay for things, money they didn't make selling pre-release or pirated versions of movies or OSes on the street corner.
I don't know that it would be necessarily better living in another country, but man, I think it all the same... It reminds me of that Far Side comic where the two guys are fishing and there's a mushroom cloud in the distance. One of them says to the other "I'll tell you what this means, Norm, no size restrictions and screw the limit!"
Isn't it ironic...that the US wants foreign judges to consider US law as it judges things in its own jurisdiction, yet doesn't want US judges to consider foreign law as it judges matters here in the US?
That's an issue with the Supremes - and the appointment and confirmation process - right now.
Some of the "Consititution is a Living Document" crowd - who want to bend the protections into any convenient shape so they can be conveniently ignored - DO want the Supremes to "consider foreign law" when they make their decisions.
The problem is: that's ILLEGAL. The US government has ONLY the power granted it by the Constitution, and the whole POINT of the Supreme Court (in the current operation of the country) is to hold it to those limits. All US law derives from the Constitution. Giving foreign law ANY input into the decision-making at the judicial level risks breaking the single defense of citizens' rights (short of violent anti-government action.) Then you get to knuckle under or fight a war, probably lose, and end up broke and exhausted even if you DO win.
Foreign law properly gets incorporated through legislation to fulfill treaty obligations. Then the judiciary determines whether the chosen implementation is within the government's limits and sends it back for a rehack if not. Citizens and lawyers only have to deal with the law of the US.
In the absense of adherence to that set of limits the President can do anything he pleases and the Congress can pass any law they can get the President to enforce. Tyranny with a capital-T.
The Supreme Court puts the brakes on that by knocking down laws, regulations, and executive excesses when they exceed the constitutional bounds. (It keeps working over a significant time because the main source of their power is knocking down improper laws - and being seen as reasonably consistent and true to the meaning of the constitution when doing so.)
But recently a supreme court justice mentioned foreign law in a decision - in a way that makes it appear that it influenced that decision. Now whether new appointees are going to stick to the constitution or "legislate from the bench" by ad-libbing and/or giving foreign law some standing above portions of the Constitution itself is a big issue.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Well, the current administration really formalised their plans to build a world-wide empire in 1997, when they founded the Project for a New American Century. Here's their policy statement:
Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:
we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global
responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;
we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;
we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;
we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.
If it sounds like a bunch of nutbars running the organisation, take a look at their founders and board of directors. I'm sure you'll find some familiar names.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
This is bigger than frivolous entertainment products like teen pop music and Hollywood movies. The strict enforcement of drug company patents will mean that people in developing nations who need inexpensive generic drugs, not outrageously priced name brand ones, are going to die so that rich bloodsucking businessmen can drink their fill. The body count could easily be in the millions.
The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
I'd like to point out that it would probably take less than a minute for the US to refuse an initiative from another country (the first 59 seconds of the minute being spent laughing). Isn't it great how the US is happy to impose itself on everyone else, but baulks at it's sovereignty being infringed upon.
I agree with all your specific observations, western civilization (itself a loaded term) has made a lot of mistakes. If, however, we'd seen the rise of Eastern Civilization (or some other nonsense term) instead, it would have made its fair share of mistakes also.
Importantly, most - actually probably all - civilizations have borrowed from each other, improved on culture, knowledge, etc etc and at some stage passed it back.
Anyway, as a first generation Westerner (there's another weird concept for ya), I prefer what I'm comfortable with. I'd prefer to improve Western society, with all its ills, than swap it for a cultural framework that in offers liberties where we have strictures and strictures where we have liberties, etc.
Pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will! - Antonio Gramsci.
I hate to nitpick, because I totally agree with the gist of what you're saying, but the GPL is only possible BECAUSE of copyright law. Copyright law is the only thing compelling companies to release the source code for their improvements. Now the BSD license on the other hand...