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?
I wouldn't relax yet. A controlled leak to discredit critics is quite likely.
That's the problem with conspiracy theories - there is no real way to tell about these until more evidence surfaces or the entire thing is revealed.
I mean, I agree, it would make a lot of sense for them to 'leak' this kind of info, to help qualm all the clammer about it.
However, the only evidence to support them doing so is just that it would be a good idea for them to do so.
So you can never really tell. I'm not betting on one or the other just yet.
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
Um... Those are all words (although they are verbing one of them).
They are obviously trying to make every part of the person who harvests clams have apprehensions.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
Or just stop correcting people. all you trolls really should find something better to do with your time. Find a life, meet a girl, go out and do something like see the sunlight. Shitheads.
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."
Really? What exactly does "ACTA" stand for again? Oh right - "Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement". Which means that they should be talking about counterfeiting, right?
So tell me - in a trade agreement that is supposed to deal with counterfeiting, why are they talking about penalties for file sharing?
Now, if it was dealing with mass for-profit media duplication with the intent of passing off the product as the original, that would make sense.. but they're not. The discussions are about "three strikes" and other bullshit to combat file sharing.
What exactly does file sharing have to do with counterfeiting?
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.
They equate it all under the umbrella of IP enforcement. They're talking about counterfeit goods (trademark violation), not counterfeit currency.
In my opinion, if you consider getting digital material from a non-official source, its still the same material. Its copyright infringement, not counterfeiting.
They want to label it all counterfeiting because it is much harder to take a reasonable stance against counterfeiting. Its victory by redefinition.
-molo
Using your sig line to advertise for friends is lame.
Really? What exactly does "ACTA" stand for again?
Anti-Consumer Trade Agreement
And ACTA is fundamentally about protecting monopolists from competition. Does that make ACTA a counterfeit trade agreement? As IP can certainly be considered a kind of fraud it certainly would be somewhat fitting.
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.
'qualm the clamor'
"Quell the clamor"
A cat can't teach a dog to bark.
The biggest problem with 'one world order': Where does one go when they don't agree to the policies set forth by the one world order? What if I want to smoke a joint but it'll mean the death sentence if I do? What if they start basing their laws on Christian teachings, but I'm not Christian? What if I want to start a business somewhere the won't require me to hire equal numbers of all different races? I can't, because if the one world order decides it should be, then the world will be just that.
I don't mind countries forming defensive pacts or trade agreements. What I do mind is letting the people that can profit from those laws decide what should go in them.
Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
They don't make that many guns.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
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