Slashdot Mirror
Backlash Builds Against US Copyright Blacklist
An anonymous reader writes "The release last week of the US copyright blacklist is beginning to generate a backlash in countries around the world. Reports from Canada, Europe, and Asia all note that the US claims are very suspect and that the report is little more than an attempt to bully dozens of countries into following the US DMCA model."
Nothing to see here, folks. Move right along.
Seriously, there's nothing here. Countries will always try to vilify other countries in order to satisfy their own interests. The Axis of Evil is a pretty good example.
Viable Slashdot alternatives: https://pipedot.org/ and http://soylentnews.org/
I do not think there is anything surprising about that conclusion that the entire thing is an attempt to force other countries into "compliance"
Hm, I wonder why other countries don't want a DMCA style law, could it be that the DMCA is effectively killing the US software/hardware market? Why do we see so many (innovative and clone) products from China? Because they don't have the stupidities of US patent and copyright laws. Imagine the marketplace being flooded with choices, of phones that can do as much as the iPhone, yet cost hundreds less (unlocked of course) and including features not currently found in most phones (open hardware*, dual-sim slots, etc). The USA could easily be first in the technology market, if our lawmakers weren't in the pocketbooks of the RIAA, MPAA and other backwards lobby groups.
*Well, perhaps open hardware is the wrong word, but basically hardware that if off-the-shelf, contains very little proprietary components and can be easily studied/modified.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
>>>The USA bully another country? Never..
New face in the highest office.
Same old shit.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
We seem to continue operating under the false assumption that we are still the biggest dog on the block.
After effectively skewering the financial system, starting a couple wars, and heaven knows what else we still expect to be taken so seriously.
I recognize we still have the most bombs, but when or country acts like a petulant child it's still tough to be serious about it. It isn't leading the world, it isn't change. It's thinly veiled fascism.
-
Obama is proving that there is equality by making sure people realise that politicians of all colours pull the same old shit.
One of the reasons these countries are developing a good IT infrastructure is due to software piracy. Any student with the slightest interest can pick up any software whatsoever, be it Tally, Photoshop or MS Excel, and learn by themselves. And businesses obviously have cost benefits in using something for free. Why would a developing economy hamper it's businesses by forcing them to use original software? It might help the bigger companies, the ones who make the software, but will affect the small and medium sized businesses negatively. And in the end, the software companies that do get the benefit are American, and not local businesses.
According to the original article, this is a routine annual report listing who we are happy with or unhappy with concerning copyright and such. There's also no mention of DMCA. Evidently, countries come and go off these lists all the time. It's just a way for the USA to communicate what it does and doesn't like about other countries behavior. It's called diplomacy. How does anyone get "blacklist" out of this?
By the way, it mentions that North Korea was taken off the bad-boy list. Does anyone really think North Korea instituted a DMCA-like law?
>>>The USA bully another country? Never..
New face in the highest office.
Same old shit.
Yes, because he has an innate knowledge of every single thing the government is doing at any given time... ... and there's no possible way this was in the pipe from the chucklehead that just left and just now finally hit the light of day...
Artists definitely deserve their dues when it comes to creative artwork... but when their work generates revenue for 70+ years after it's creation for a corporation and not the artist, there's something seriously wrong.
Imagine what happens if #1 in the 1st link defaults on its debts.
Ireland? Umm.. We stop celebrating St. Patrick's Day? I give up, what?
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
I think we all must be duped. When Obama said he was bringing change, he actually meant collecting spare change to help pay-off his burgeoning deficit, not that he was going to listen to the People.
The mistake of many people dissing Obama now is that, when he said "change", they automatically presumed that it is going to involve their pet issues first. On Slashdot, this tends to be FOSS and copyright issues. In practice, though, when speaking of "People" as a whole, those issues aren't even on most people's radar, so it was pretty silly to believe that Obama would do something specifically about them.
Off the top of my head, I'd say that the big changes would be:
1. Russia will get boisterous and attempt to take on some of its smaller satellites.
2. China will make a move for Taiwan, and might get more aggressive with Japan/Korea.
3. At some point, someone will attack Israel.
4. Um...
5. Nope, that's about it.
Number 1 has been happening on and off anyway. I just think that with no threat of U.S. intervention, Russia might throw caution to the wind and go a bit nuts on that front.
China taking Taiwan is kind of predictable, too. Japan and Korea might follow.
Israel is obvious. Someone will see a moment of what they think is weakness, and try to walk in and be an Islamic hero. I'd say that they'll have their arse handed to them on a plate, unless they're remarkably successful, in which case their arse will become a glowing cinder. No country in the world has the will to use its Nukes in self defence like Israel has...
But because it's a religious thing, someone will be dumb enough to try it at some point. Sad, but true.
The absence of the U.S. might just make them a little more eager about it though.
But here's the thing that most Americans don't seem to understand...
NOBODY CARES ABOUT THE U.S. ANYMORE. The U.S. HAS BECOME FAR LESS RELEVANT.
If the U.S. dismantled its military, it wouldn't affect much. The only countries it would really affect are Russia, China and Israel. By extension, it will affect the ex-USSR states, Taiwan, Japan, Korea and whoever's dumb enough to attack Israel.
However, I must ask why you think the U.S. should completely dismantle its military. It's just not necessary.
The U.S. could make huge savings just by admitting that the cold war ended years ago, and that state vs state war is going to be skirmish at best - especially if they keep their ICBMs.
The U.S. has carrier fleets that they're afraid to deploy against pirates, because they know that a speedboat loaded with explosives can take out one of their destroyers.
The U.S. has hordes of tanks that take forever to deploy, require huge supply lines, and yet can be taken out from a rooftop with an RPG.
The U.S. has aircraft that are truly fantastic, amazing bits of kit - but that are hugely expensive and not much more effective than their immediate (much cheaper) competition.
The U.S. military-industrial complex is throwing money away fighting a war that ended two decades ago. What's needed now is helicopter carrier fleets - smaller, faster, more agile. More Marines and more transport and support for them.
More unmanned aircraft and ground support aircraft (like the old A-10 and the AC-130).
Also badly needed is strong military field engineering, with a civilian eye. No U.S. field base should leave an area without giving every nearby village better water supplies, a prefabbed school building, and a courtesy lick of paint. Hearts and minds will secure the bases just as well, if not better, than barbed wire and watchtowers.
And the U.S. needs a "Missile Shield" to protect itself like I need a six-barrelled rotary cannon with laser sights to protect me from flies in the summer.
You could cut the U.S. military budget in half, embark on a major restructuring project, and within five years America would have a far more effective military force than it has right now.
Because right now, if the U.S. was attacked, it wouldn't be able to defend itself. That was proved on September 11th, 2001. The leader of the group that made that attack is still not captured. The senior leadership of that group is hardly dented. The group has made huge territorial gains in Pakistan because of the U.S.'s military ability to handle it. And that group is recruiting more people every day.
Dismantling the military isn't necessary. But realising that the USSR has been dead and buried for almost 20 years would be a nice first step to making it cost effective...
Well to be fair, he did change from bowing to Big Oil to bowing to Big Media, as many expected him to do anyway.