Slashdot Mirror
Another ACTA Leak Discloses Individual Country Data
An anonymous reader writes "On the heels of the earlier leak of various country positions on ACTA transparency, today an even bigger leak
has hit the Internet. A new European Union document [PDF] prepared several weeks ago canvasses the Internet and Civil Enforcement chapters, disclosing in complete detail the proposals from the US, and the counter-proposals from the EU, Japan, and other ACTA
participants. The 44-page document also highlights specific concerns of individual countries on a wide range of issues including ISP liability, anti-circumvention rules, and the scope of the treaty. This is probably the most significant leak to date since it goes beyond the transparency debate to include specific country positions and proposals."
Start prepping your wireless mesh network.
Neighborhood wireless BBS? Somebody put up a tower and let people in the neighborhood connect to it with subscriber units?
Group of people rent the fire hall for the weekend and throw down some gigabit switches?
I doubt strongly people will just accept dropping file sharing. Do we start wasting actual police resources in raiding swapping parties and neighborhood wifi meshes?
Anti-circumvention is a necessity because unbreakable DRM is an impossible dream
So why does that make anti-circumvention a necessity?
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." - H.L. Mencken
Not illegal if I can figure out how to set my WiFi to accept any password with WEP.
Because without it they couldn't stop you from breaking the DRM and disseminating the How-To to a wider audience, who would then be very hard to catch actually infringing. With Anti-Circumvention laws you can both discourage people from breaking the DRM (or at least telling people about it) and take legal action against anyone who does, whether they've actually done anything "illegal" beyond circumventing the DRM or not.
Anti-Circumvention laws are "Attempted Copyright Infringement".
That these documents have been purposefully leaked and there is indication of opposition to it's content is proof of the exact opposite. It is pretty much certain that in most modern democratic countries that most of the conditions of ACTA would be opposed by the general public and result in disruptive public opposition.
The reality is, it is too late to try a force this through, to force the will of the corrupt minority against the will of the democratic majority. Not that this effort should be ignored or the the perpetrators of it should be publicly exposed and called to account for their corrupt activities, their intent to purposefully subvert the growing public expression of democracy.
A full public investigation should be made of who was involved, who sponsored and supported that involvement, who actually wrote up those bits of proposed corrupt legislation, what private interests were involved whilst 99.99etc percent of the electorate were specifically excluded and, of course what criminal prosecutions need to be considered.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Agreed, but unfortunately that won't stop them from financially (and/or by incarceration) ruining the lives of anyone they can catch doing it. Things like justice and sound policy are the least of their concerns.
It's like the way the Inquisitors obviously did not believe in the power of their religious message, but that didn't stop them from threatening and torturing (and worse) anyone whom they found inconvenient.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
We (the global collective population of the globe) have more guns.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
It doesn't make sense to grant a monopoly to market, if the monopoly holder isn't going to sell to that market. If they're going to abstain from doing business (either by refraining from selling DRM-free media, or by making it illegal to use DRMed media), then they have no stake in the market to lose (they'll lose $0 per year due to piracy); granting them copyright is not only pointless, but it will be violated.
And that's the whole crux of the argument against the huge fines imposed - they aren't losing money because they are not even providing a product in the market that the pirates are serving. Hence, the damage supposedly caused is actually non-existent.
I've been following the whole ACTA fiasco for a while, and was getting increasingly nervous about the whole "behind closed doors" thing. Of course, many of the proposals, particularly from the US, are obviously big-corp-funded crazy talk, and the secrecy of the whole process is abhorrent. However, now that I've seen an official document for the first time, I'm actually pleasantly surprised, in that it's not as bad as I expected.
I find it reassuring that there are quite a few notes where the EU has explicitly disagreed, apparently even indicating that this is not a point on which they will give way in some cases, e.g., on restricting any damages for infringement to actual damages and rejecting any notion of punitive damages entirely, or where they want to insert wording with the anticircumvention provisions to provide for safeguarding the benefits of certain limits on IPR (which would presumably leave open the door to excluding otherwise fair use from the anticircumvention protection).
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Infringing upon copyrights is not harmful. It is the current state of copyright law that is harmful in reality. Violating copyrights by file sharing pretty much always helps small artists and may or may not lower revenue for large artists. Diminishing an entitlement granted to some is not harmful.
I know it's nitpicky but its' hard to have honest discussions on this topic and it's one of my pet peeves. Nothing against you, I am just having a digital outburst.