Purported ACTA Wishlist Would Put DMCA To Shame

ulash writes "Ars Technica has an article about the (alleged) leaked 'wishlist' that RIAA submitted to the US government back in March of this year listing what they wish to see as a part of ACTA. The list includes such gems as forced filtering of materials by the ISPs, gutting the parts of the DMCA that provides safe harbor to the ISPs, and even restricting supplies of 'optical grade polycarbonate' in countries 'with high rates of production of pirated optical discs.' While the effectiveness of such a 'wishlist' on the law is not by any means objectively measurable, if one takes into account how *AA was instrumentative in the passing of DMCA, I think it is more than likely that they will get at least some of their wishes."

Comments

the printing press

[circletimessquare]

had some unintended consequences

it made books cheap, leading to better educated commoners, leading to the creation of a middle class, leading to the idea of democracy and equality

i'm obviously broadly glossing over the historical details, but the lesson is that the printing press allowed for the realization of a number of previously impossible and unforseen societal changes

whatever the internet is going to do society in the realm of unintended consequences, one is sizing up pretty obvious:

the invalidation of the concept of intellectual property

intellectual property works when only a small number of players distribute data. it takes a lot to run a vinyl pressing plant, and easy to find and shut one down that doesn't play by the rules. but when every single person is a one man effortless data distribution factory, then getting everyone to play by the rules of the game becomes impossible to enforce

such that there is no more game. the idea of intellectual property simply ceases to be a valid concept. if it gets out on the web, it stays there. and anything not on the web is given a strong incentive to get on there. witness the imbroglio over guns n roses chinese democracy album recently. once its out there, you can't take it back, and it is extremely easy and anonymous to get out there

what can you enforce in such an environment? say the *AAssholes actually get their way and get all of their draconian laws passed. who cares?

do they honestly believe anything will change? the technology will simply treat their laws like damage, and route around them. this is what the internet was made to do

go for it *AAssholes, give the laws your best shot. why do you believe any legal structure will work to contain the internet? or, i guess the next step is: break the internet. destroy what makes the internet compelling and useful in order to preserve a dying business model

heh, had to open my big mouth

There are lots of gems in that wishlist

[Hoplite3]

Here's a good one:
"3. Provide that the presumption of ownership may be rebutted only if the defendant is able to provide concrete evidence to the contrary."

Yeah, that's right. Claimants own whatever they claim unless the defendant proves otherwise. Oh, and don't put up a fight if they sue you for having copyrighted material because:

"4. As a deterrent to groundless defenses, award plaintiffs full costs and fees for overcoming frivolous challenges to titles."

I propose a modest fifth bullet point. Anyone with a copyright may punch those damned ordinaries not in the "creative class" in the stomach at any time, without fear of reprisal. Genius!

Re:At what point

[rtb61]

No, it has nothing to do with profitability of corporations. The underlying basis is power and lust. The RIAA/MPAA works for organisations that target most of their works at children. Their desire is for unlimited power and control. They want to be the only source of information, the only point of access for self 'sic' expression, they want to totally define public thought and they wish to force adoration for them from the general public.

This is clearly demonstrated by their willingness to punish children, to control their lives, sending them to jail for copying music whilst simultaneously promoting the self destructive practices within that age group via that same content, in affect priming them for intimate contact with publishing executives.

The only constraints that will limit the corruptive practises of these organisations are the ones forced upon by the general public, those that appreciate that the quality of an industry is not defined by the profit it makes but by the nature of the products it produces and whether that product supports a healthy society or as is clearly apparent the product in fact attacks society, tears down family values and, even promotes criminal behaviour.

Re:Presumption of guilt

[Smidge204]

I guess this will come down to who has the stronger lobbyists: The *AA or the telecoms.

That is really goddamn scary.
=Smidge=

Important article

[Reziac]

If you haven't read TFA at http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/print/3673 , kindly do so. It makes some pungent observations, frex this one, which pretty much says it all:

"Copyright is being turned from a limited-term incentive designed to encourage creative artists to a broadly scoped transfer of wealth from the public to the private realm. As the industries that generate copyrighted materials seek control over not only their works but also the devices on which we watch, listen to, and remix them, copyright law is turning into technology regulation."

Re:What about when the **AA's are out of business?

[IndustrialComplex]

You know what, I don't buy their stuff, but then I might want to buy something that is completely unrelated to the RIAA.

You know, cable television service.

Except that due to the proddings of these organizations my cable-box is a piece of shit. If I switch input sources on my television, it loses its HDCP connection and must reconnect (this results in a few seconds of black-screen that aren't necessary).

The nice company, Scientific-Atlanta, decided to be very safe in their design. When their smart cable box determined that an evil pirate like me decided to include the input source from my cablebox->HDMI->TV with my Cablebox->Composite out->TIVO->Composite->TV (you know, the low res stuff). The cable box freaks out and blocks ALL output on all video sources.

The result is that whenever my Cablebox detects a HDMI connection, it shuts down all other outputs and displays a large "OMG DON'T USE ANYTHING BUT HDMI" message with an 'ok' dialog.

So what happens? My Tivo records nothing but a large dialog box instead of the television show that I am completely within my rights to record.

Of course, this doesn't happen if I use the component connections on the cable box, which kind of makes this entire attempt to block piracy COMPLETELY FUCKING POINTLESS. It simply causes me to not be able to use all of the functions of the equipment that I already own.

So I had to ditch the HDMI connection, or manually operate my TIVO....

Or I could just spend 10 seconds and download an unencumbered pirated version that works better.