Slashdot Mirror
ACTA Document Leaks With Details On Mexico Talks
An anonymous reader writes "A brief
report
from the European Commission authored by Pedro Velasco Martins (an EU
negotiator) on the most recent round of ACTA negotiations in
Guadalajara, Mexico has leaked, providing new
information on the
substance of the talks, how countries are addressing the transparency
concerns, and plans for future negotiations. The document notes
that governments are planning a counter-offensive to rebut claims of
iPod-searching border guards and mandatory three-strikes policies."
Man, that buzzword just keeps coming up. Can you imagine if baseball was based around 4 strikes instead of 3?
Uniformity of procedures.
Guess we were all worried for nothing.
Until they show me what's on the table, I will not consider anything rebutted. The politicians can say all they want that xyz is not in the proposed treaty, but until they show me what is actually in the treaty, I won't believe them. Politicians often say that something is not in a bill or treaty or other document imposing government regulation and when you read the document, sure enough it isn't there. However, when you analyze what is there you discover that, while what they told you wasn't there isn't, the stuff that is there allows for them to just implement it at any time in the future that they choose without any further public notice.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
A good counteroffensive to rebut these claims would be to remove all the secrecy and let us see what's going on
So its still a one sided document being written up by those in the big industries and no input from anybody this document will most likely effect, the people. They are trying to control and impact technologies they don't understand in the least. I mean if they actually had real knowledge of the technology they were trying to control they would realize that they should be using this to their advantage instead of trying to stop it.
Make a backup. We don't want another case like Wikileaks, where a leaked draft goes online and then the site comes down for planning and doesn't come back up.
Whatever's in there about patents, please make notes here:
* http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting_Trade_Agreement
Thanks.
Please help publicise swpat.org - the software patents wiki
The document is very sparse on details. They seem to be negotiating four topics:
1. civil enforcements
2. customs
3. internet
4. transparency (wtf??)
But the most interesting quote is: "Parties remain committed to conclude ACTA in 2010."
If my own government is anything to go by (Netherlands) then the counteroffensive will be "you just don't understand it". The time politicians felt accountable to the public has long gone.
Mind you, the public keeps voting for the same guys over and over.
The biggest scammers are the media, in Holland you got something called to "kiez wijzer", a site that records the various parties (yes America, you can have more then 2) election PROMISES and ask you how you feel about various issues and then gives a recommendation. It is actually fairly fair, except that the attentive reader will have noticed I said PROMISES. It does NOT base its advice on YOUR preferences and a parties PAST behavior. So the advice in on what parties say they will do, not what they have done. And almost every falls for it.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I'm a big supporter for copyright in principle, but I have no sympathy for the big content companies losing money left and right to pirates because most of them are by anti-property rights leftists and are constantly harping on "Capitalism is bad, mmmmkay?" If things were philosophically balanced where the little guy's property rights were as rigidly secure as big corps' IP, and those same big corps didn't spew out an anti-property rights, anti-"rich" mentality, I might have some mercy for them getting more aggressive in protecting their rights.
... I'll start investing in MicroSD chips... lets see border guards search me for those!
Bastards...
This message was brought to you by Sarcasm and Troll Feeders United (STFU)
Every time a politician lies, I buy another gun.
"The document notes that governments are planning a counter-offensive to rebut claims of iPod searching border guards and mandatory three strikes policies."
A) so, are the claims true or not?
B) if they released the fricking document in the first place, they wouldn't have to "rebut" (supposedly) false claims. They could just refer people to the document.
C) until I see the actual document I won't believe whatever "rebuttal" they are cooking up anyway.
Here you find a video of Valasco-Martins as he explains the agenda behind the ACTA agreement to lobbyists.
Like an analysis as to whether ACTA will block evidence discovery in support of foreign trials.
Have gnu, will travel.
just hurry up and die already. if the same fervent effort were applied to research, development, and innovation of pirated products as was applied to relentlessly combing the globe with jackboots and bayonets in a systematic attempt to pre-exterminate all general interest yet inability to consume monetarily, im certain i would have a music player that did what i wanted and needed it to do, a video medium that didnt treat me like a car thief, and software that didnt have to send half my computer to its corporate headquarters before i got to use it.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Insightful analysis of the use of the word counterfeiting.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
As already pointed out: wrong. Though he DID misspell (though this could be a localisation of the spelling).
Qualm. A nervous thought or worry. "I have no qualms with your investigation of me. I shall be exonerated".
Clamour: Great and random noise. "The entire tray fell down the stairs with a clamour that awoke the house".
Just because you don't know the words doesn't mean they don't exist.
And pointing out a wrong "no such word" rather redounds (there's another new word for you) upon you.
It isn't counterfeit goods either. It isn't pretending to be "Hit me baby one more time" but turn out to be a monologue on how piracy is killing music (this is counterfeit and is done by the labels).
Neither is it being pronounced as the property of the sharer. Unlike several claims against websites hosting their own content that merely shares a name with a pop song. That too has been done several times by the labels.
So if this is what ACTA is about, then the labels are in trouble.
Counterfeiting is fundamentally about trademarks and copyrights.
That sentence is complete and utter bullshit.
If it were true, then why do we have counterfeiting laws? Why not just prosecute under trademark and copyright?
If it were true, why do we talk about counterfeit money, when money is neither trademarked or copyrighted?
If it were true, why is passing off a fake DaVinci counterfeiting?
As Entropius said - counterfeiting is primarily about fraud. It can deal with trademark infringement if the product is marked, and it can deal with copyright if (as I said) the copyright infringement is large-scale for-profit copying with the intent to pass it off as the original. But it's fraud that makes it counterfeiting, not the trademark or copyright status.
Secret laws are a slippery slope that eventually encourage lawlessness and act against the interests of the citizenry. Why should any citizen obey the laws they do know, if they can always be punished severely for breaking laws they aren't permitted to know about? It's unconstitutional in most places, and especially the US that is founded on rule "by the people for the people". Anyone enacting these laws should be brought up on charges of treason, as should anyone attempting to enforce them. Quite ironically, there are probably anti-terror laws that apply too.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
New Zealand recently proposed our own version of the anti file-sharing law. It had a 3-strikes and you're out provision, but it was so convoluted that it would never actually get to disconnecting someone as it is currently written. I figured that it was just included to appease our American overlords, and it seems as if I was right.
I wrote this letter
Dear [New Zealand Prime Minister]
I notice that our country has joined the latest international fad and is implementing our own version of the three strikes policy to deter potential file-sharers.
However, as I'm sure you're aware, no one in New Zealand plays baseball. So, I propose the following changes:
The word "strike" is replaced with the word "wicket".
You only have one "wicket". So if you are accused of file-sharing once, you are 'out'.
You don't actually go to jail until 9 of your good friends have also been accused of file sharing.
There is a neutral party which can review any decisions. (I think this may have been called a 'judge' at some point, but I would rename it to 'third umpire').
These changes satisfy the intention of writing laws based on popular sports rules, but they add a nice "kiwi" touch.
Yours Sincerely, ...
I never got a reply :(
Insanity: voting in the same two parties over and over again and expecting different results
My New Bumper Sticker...Every time a politician lies, I buy another gun.
This says the same thing more concisely:
"I'm a fucking nutcase."
Non-military secrets have no place in representative governments.
Every committee chamber needs a C-SPAN camera broadcasting and the ability to share the documents being discussed so we can keep our eyes on these .... "representatives."