Slashdot Mirror
Unpacking the Secrets of ACTA
An anonymous reader writes "As negotiations in the 7th round of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade
Agreement talks continue this week in Mexico, Michael Geist has been
posting a comprehensive guide to the secret copyright treaty. He
started with a review of the substance of
the treaty, then posted links to all the leaked
documentation, and has now unpacked the
secrecy associated with the talks, including why governments have
made it secret, the public concern, and why this isn't business as
usual."
Same old story, you have a two party system where both parties are being funded by corporations, and God forbid you should suggest some kind of government regulation because that is "socialism" and as every patriotic American knows Socialism = Evil.
Same old story, you have a two party system where both parties are being funded by corporations, and God forbid you should suggest some kind of government regulation because that is "socialism" and as every patriotic American knows Socialism = Evil.
One of my problems with regulation is that big business actually welcomes it. Why do you suppose that is? Because they know that it's easier to shut out small businesses that might challenge their business model when you put regulatory hurdles in the marketplace. A large company will have no problem complying with whatever regulations are imposed on it. They have legions of lawyers working on compliance and lobbyists in DC working to ensure that the regulations protect their existing business while shutting out competitors. The small start up has neither of those advantages.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
This is far more of a threat to freedom and democracy than terrorism ever could hope to be.
Governments negotiating secret treaties with corporations concerning the dispersion of information? That's a stake right through the heart of liberty, far more damaging than suicide bombers or terrorist attacks.
The "make it harder to steal" part is less important to you.
You, however, are not rich. Therefore, you do not matter.
The "make it harder to steal" part is very important to a small group of rich people who usually get their way.
Same old story, you have a two party system where both parties are being funded by corporations, and God forbid you should suggest some kind of government regulation because that is "socialism" and as every patriotic American knows Socialism = Evil.
And what is social security? A mild form of socialism. What are taxes (especially those that go to public owned parks, libraries and schools)?
I believe that we've slowly warmed up to the idea that the best economic system lies somewhere between pure capitalism and pure socialism. And even on a state by state basis you will find a wide array of where each state sits. Take Minnesota versus Texas, in Texas it might be well known to all the patriotic 'wing-nut conservatives' that Socialism is Evil but in Minnesota I can tell you that the patriotic 'bleeding heart liberals' that Socialist programs are necessary to protect the poor and sick. I know that the political winds of politics are different because I grew up in Minnesota under the poverty line on Minnesota Care and received college grants based on need. Everyone around me loved it. I now live in Northern Virginia where I leave that out of conversations after listening to a few folks rail on "Communist Minnesota." Fine.
Decentralization of power back to the states is good. And shows that many models can work for many different people. I speculate that socialism is evil locally to you. Please don't extrapolate it to a national scale.
My work here is dung.
Also, being a small business isn't an excuse to ignore regulations. "Hi, I'm a start up nuclear waste disposal company so I'll need all these regulations waived so I can compete."
That's a nice strawman, but where did I say it was an excuse to ignore regulation? All I suggested was that some regulations are put into place with the implied intent of codifying the business model of the big boys and locking smaller players out of the market. Do you disagree with that notion?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Forget filesharing for a second. Anybody have the latest stats off how many have died as a direct result of us refusing developing countries generic antiretroviral drugs since they are covered by patents?
If you think the main issue here is about file-sharing and the MPAA, think again. The ACTA negotiations involve representatives from the Pharmaceutical industry but notably absent is the WHO , Amnesty, Doctors without Frontiers , and a number of other human rights organizations.
Basically if this treaty is allowed to go through it is likely millions will continue to die a morbid death needlessly. Focusing on file-sharing and the RIAA is only going to result in the Pharma industry getting to screw over the citizens of developing countries.
Same old story, you have a two party system where both parties are being funded by corporations...
Some of the other parties are also funded by corporations, for instance Lieberman is probably going to get a lot of money from his masters in the health insurance industry, and I guess he's technically not a democrat? Anyway, just wanted to point out that what's keeping corporate funding for the other parties low isn't a magic number greater than 2 or any ideological differences, it's that they haven't been winning and are therefore poor investments. If that were likely to change, corporate interests would invest in 3rd, 4th, or 9th party candidates faster than flies land on poop.
This is bad becuase it will make it harder for me to steal things off the internet.
This is bad because it violates my right to free speech (due to anti-circumvention clauses).
This doesn't make it harder to steal, it makes it easier to steal -- from us. We are being robbed of our cultural heritage. Copyright is supposed to be so new works will go into te pubic domain. WE own the art; the "content creators" only own a monopoly on its distribution.
The theift isn't copyright infringement, it's the copyright holders themselves who have stolen from us. Disney should NOT have a monopoly on Steamboat Willie, JRR Tolkien's heirs should not have a monopoly on LOTR. In a sane world all images, music, movies, books produced before 1989 should be in the public domain. They belong to US, and have been stolen from us by the corporatti.
Nothing produced in your lifetime will reach the public domain. That is the REAL theievery, and it's an abomination.
Free Martian Whores!
When you deprive the general public of the ability to make fair use of a copyrighted work, that would be stealing. If you prevent the copyrighted work from ever entering the Public Domain, that would be stealing. If you use copyright and the hammer of the DMCA to prevent people from watching movies they purchased on the hardware - or in the geographical location - of their choosing, that would be stealing.
Hey, this is starting to sound like one of those "you may be a redneck" rants ...
I don't care why you're posting AC
We can kill this fucker in it's crib.
Just like we killed the DMCA and Patriot Act...
Random Thoughts From A Diseased Mind (Not For Dummies)