Wikileaks Releases ACTA Negotiations As "0-Day"

An anonymous reader writes "Wikileaks has released a new document about the ACTA negotiations occurring in Washington over the next three days. This might be the shortest time between authorship of a document and its publication on Wikileaks so far. The brief 3-page memo, dated today, could add quite a bit of oil to the fire of the ACTA debate. It is titled Business Perspectives on Border Measures and Civil Enforcement and it contains a set of proposals to the 'ACTA negotiators' issued by 'Concerned business groups operating in ACTA nations.' Among many highly invasive methods and approaches proposed in this memorandum, the reader can find detailed demands for: full disclosure of relevant information by Customs to trademark holders so that they can mount private investigations; disclosure of identities and other information about copyright infringers; and increased inspection of goods. This document is especially important to raise public awareness on these negotiations and their implications for the future." We've been watching ACTA develop for a few months now.

Comments

ACTA?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it really that hard to say what the initials stand for just once in the summary?

Re:ACTA?

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean you don't know? Time to move out from under that rock!

I mean, geez... talk about ignorant. EVERYBODY knows about ACTA.

('cept me...)

Re:ACTA?

[simmee]

I might point out that not EVERYBODY that visits /. is an American. As a non-American, I for one would like to know what this thing is about (and being too lazy, at the moment, to google it), because anything that happens in the USA sure as hell ends up happening in other anglo-saxon western democracies,whether we vote for / like it or not.

wikileaks

[olddotter]

Part of me thinks that had the technology been around in the mid 1700's the rights of something like Wikileaks would have been enshrined in the constitution by the founding fathers as the ultimate check and balance.

Re:wikileaks

[DragonWriter]

Part of me thinks that had the technology been around in the mid 1700's the rights of something like Wikileaks would have been enshrined in the constitution by the founding fathers as the ultimate check and balance.

Despite the fact that the technology was far more primitive in the 1700s, the rights of "something like Wikileaks" were enshrined in the Constitution -- that is, in the Bill of Rights:

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Re:wikileaks

[B3ryllium]

I was under the impression that ACTA was, in essence, an end-run around the constitution (or, in my case, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms) ...

wtf

[mattsqz]

so now a collection of 1's and 0's with a filename ending with .mp3 will be searched for as if it were a kilo of coke? this makes me happy to be a gun owner... when the sh1t goes down, you better be ready..

Re:wtf

[megaditto]

Since you are a gun owner, you should realize that they will first come for YOU (since they know where you live).

And the rest of us will cheer ("make streets safe for our children" or whatever) them on until it's too late.

Re:wtf

[fotbr]

4473 isn't required for all purchases, though individual states may require something similar.

Re:wtf

[mattsqz]

getting OT here, but.. not all firearms are purchased from storefronts, many are bought/sold by individuals. and not all firearms are purchased at all...many AK's, for example, here in the US are built at home with a press and a blowtorch, using deactivated parts kits and do not need paperwork of any sort - or even a serial number - to be legal.

Re:wtf

[krelian]

What's wrong with a kilo of coke? It's just a collection of atoms.

Re:wtf

[hey!]

All those protections against government data snooping that were passed after Watergate are now nil, because those restrictions left a loophole for private entities to do this and for the government to buy it from them (thank you Cap Weinberger).

All the things the government is banned to do for itself, it can buy from the private sector. If you use a frequent shopper card or a credit card, they know you are buying pseudoephed at the pharmacy. They don't need a form to know that you're buying a gun. They can buy that information. They probably can figure out how much ammo you buy too.

All in all, the background check form is the least dangerous intrusion because it is (a) accurate, (b) transparent, (c) and regulated by law. Every bad thing you imagine them doing with the form they can do with data bought from the private sector, only it won't be accurate, you won't know you are being profiled, and there are no legal restrictions on how they use that data.

Of course, in a world without criminal background checks for firearms purchases, you could avoid detection by conscientiously buying your firearms, shooting supplies, books and magazines (off the rack, no subscriptions!) with anonymous cash transactions. But most people won't, and they've got you after you've bought your first box of bullets on your credit card.

The most important place to protect the right to bear arms isn't in firearms regulation. It's in protecting consumer privacy. In the US, there is no legally recognized right to privacy. Change that, and the ability of the government to target any group by what it purchases is severely restricted. Including people who purchase firearms. Criminal background regulations are actually less dangerous to gun owners, because of post-Watergate laws restricting the government's ability to mine its own data.

end?

[Anonymous Coward]

I used to wonder what the end of our free societies would look like.
Now I know it looks like ACTA

The Days of Internet Freedom

[Anonymous Coward]

The days of Internet freedom are quite sadly coming to an end with these international movements toward information totalitarianism, unless the geeks of the world are able to effectively unite and push back.

Re:The Days of Internet Freedom

[Wiseblood1]

Yes, it is sad that attacks on our freedom such as this are happening everyday. The people woh have the power to change things do not, and will not for the foreseeable future. So long as corporate funded PACs and special interst groups such as these have the influence that they do now, our days as something remotely resembling a democracy are numbered.

Re:The Days of Internet Freedom

[snl2587]

I guess it's time for all of us to retreat to the FreeNet/DarkNet...which would consequently improve it greatly.

Re:The Days of Internet Freedom

[ShieldW0lf]

The days of Internet freedom are quite sadly coming to an end with these international movements toward information totalitarianism, unless the geeks of the world are able to effectively unite and push back.

Local renewable energy, Wireless mesh networks and RepRaps are a good place to start. It is really more about walking away than it is about pushing back. If all you do is protest and make demands based on the rights you feel entitled to, they own your soul. If you render these centralized industries irrelevant, they die of neglect.

Re:The Days of Internet Freedom

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, next time the pirate party is running for election, fucking vote for them then.

Seriously, things will only get worse if you keep voting republicrat/demopublican.

Mod parent down

[Shandalar]

Come on now, this is banal. There were then, and are now, laws about defamation, and there was never any intent to make defamation Constitutionally protected; and Wikileaks-posted material is subject to those laws the same as any other speech.

Re:Mod parent down

[Actually, I do RTFA]

defamation was Constitutionally protected

Defamation IS constitutionally protected. Slander and libel are not, which are cases of untrue defamation with malicious intent (or reckless disregard or some other standard that makes it very difficult, but not impossible to sue over.) Also, those are torts, not civil matters. So, while you don't have a constitutional right to prevent me from obtaining compensation for you unfairly and (something akin to deliberately) maligning my reputation, you cannot go be sent to jail.

Thats why I buy guns illegally.

[johnny cashed]

Screw the forms. Not really illegally, but in my state, personal sales don't involve any forms. Unless you consider a federal reserve note a "form".

Re:IANAL so if one can answer me this...

[pjt33]

Why do I fear the answer will be "It's true it is against the 4th Amendment. However the U.S. Constitution is pretty much a piece of ass wipe your elected officials use daily anymore."

Because you're not Rip van Winkle, and thus haven't been asleep for the past n years?

Re:IANAL so if one can answer me this...

[TheFlamingoKing]

Oh, no. The amendments to the FISA bill passed earlier this month. We don't have a Fourth amendment anymore.

I can see where you may have been confused, since a Google search will still turn up some text about "search and seizures" or something. But, if you're looking it up, you're probably a terrorist anyway. America *needs* to be able to go through your files, your hard drives, your iPods and your phone calls, or else more people will die!

9/11 Changed Everything! Did you forget?

Re:ATCA

[phoomp]

I would think nerds would like to know about a treaty which proposes to search your mp3 player for unauthorized copyright material at international borders.

Pretty good with two additions

[fermion]

Recommendations for Border measures 6. Establish clear procedures for those accused of infringement by the right holder to dispute claims and enforce due process including (a)disputing the standing of the alleged right holder to make a claim, (b) disputing the right of the border authority to impede fair trade, (c) require documentation supporting the claim of infringement within 24 hours of the claim (c) allow immediate access to the good accused of infringement by the owner or an authorized agent, and (d) require a hearing within five(5) business days of the claim of infringment to assess the validity of such claims.

Recommended ACTA Provisions for Civil Enforcement (5) In the case where a right holder claiming infringement does not provide documentation within 24 hours of the claim, does not attend the hearing or does not have suitable evidence to support the claim of infringement, or in the case where it is shown that right holder has made a frivilous claim, the victim of the right holder is entitled to recover costs associated with the defense and direct and indirect loss of business resulting from the claim. These include but are not limited to attorney fees, storage fees, the value of the detained product, the values of any lost business of the victim, that value of any lost business of clients related to the detained products, and any costs necessary for the victim to recover from any defamation related to unsupported detention of the products.

I know it sounds unreasonable, but if my shipment of bag can be halted just on the word of LVMH, and they can force me into the poor house because I have no recourse to get and sell my merchandise for 30 days, then there better be a balance so I can tap their massive corporate assets when they do wrong, including making them pay for the months worth of lost sales.

Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement

[story645]

wiki + firefox searchbar

Really though, yeah, should have been in the summary as a matter of style, but what do you expect?

Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement

[Anonymous Coward]

ACTA stands for 'Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement', but that's not particularly informative, because the worrisome part has nothing to do with counterfeit goods and everything to do with Copyright Cops who fight the RIAA's War on Sharing via thousands of lawsuits.

Shhhh.

[johnny cashed]

Be QUIET, or the yanks will move down here.

We don't have paved roads, and we still use outhouses. This state is full of rednecks.

Re:ATCA

[MrNaz]

40 years ago they thought that they'd never be able to waste time searching the bags of every person that traveled.

All it took was a generation to be force fed apathy inducing, mind-numbing pop culture and now they are free to use your tax dollars to make your life a living security nightmare.

To the guy who posted earlier about only wanting to hear about the latest greatest motherboards and ignore anything remotely political, I'm looking at you. Only caring about the latest hardware is no different, effectively, to the teenage girl who reads Cosmo cover to cover to stay up to date on the latest adventures of Paris Hilton.