India Attempts To Derail ACTA

Admiral Justin writes "Ars Technica is reporting that India is attempting to gather support from other large countries that have been intentionally left out of the ACTA process to actively protest it. India fears that ACTA will eventually be used against it and other countries that were given no chance to be a part of the process of drafting it. Among the primary concerns are the possibility of medical shipments being seized if they use a port in transit that is controlled by a country with a patent on the pharmaceuticals."

Comments

software patents and DRM

[ciaran_o_riordan]

They focus on medicine, which is indeed a subject of massive importance, but I hope they'll also fix the DRM and software patent problems. Of these two, DRM is actually the most worrying problem, IMO, but I don't have info on that :-/ I do have info on ACTA and software patents:

• ACTA official text, re: software patents
• ACTA and software patents
• Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement overview

FWIW

Re:software patents and DRM

[unix1]

Don't demean the word "rights." Everyone is free to write the software (DRM or otherwise) as they see fit - that is a right.

The real problem is when governments come in and single-handedly criminalize certain speech when such speech doesn't agree with corporate interests that got them elected in public office.

Re:software patents and DRM

[unix1]

DRM is a problem.

(See, you did not say why. So I also don’t, to refute your statement. But I can add arguments on top anyway, to make it an actual argument. Like:)

It's not a problem because it's your right to write whatever software (DRM or otherwise) you please - that is your right. Outlawing DRM would take away your freedom to write such software.

DRMed information is lost, when the server or decoding system is gone.

Writing with disappearing ink also causes information to be lost. Let's outlaw disappearing ink.

Encrypting information and throwing away decryption keys would also cause information to be lost - let's outlaw deleting encryption keys and passwords.

Criminalized circumventing DRM also is why it is a problem.

Then you didn't read my (oh, so short and to the point) post. Because that is what I said was the problem.

Re:software patents and DRM

[AK Marc]

It's not a problem because it's your right to write whatever software (DRM or otherwise) you please - that is your right. Outlawing DRM would take away your freedom to write such software.

That's a strawman argument. No one has ever said it should be illegal to write DRM. However, it would be reasonable to not allow copyright protections to content under DRM. Something "protected" by DRM is not released to the public as is required for copyright. It's purposefully crippled and often laden with a time bomb. That would prevent free use once the limited time for copyright has passed. As such, and since it is under license and not "sold" I would argue it's a trade secret, and should be protected as such, and without and regular copyright protections at all.

So, you can write all the DRM you like. That's your right. But I'd assert that it should be illegal for you to then try to enforce copyright law against someone for it because it wasn't released as required for copyright.

Writing with disappearing ink also causes information to be lost. Let's outlaw disappearing ink.

If you write something with disappearing ink, then it too should not be under copyright. After all, if there's only the one disappearing copy, once it's gone, how would you prove it was infringed upon? And again, assuming you made ink that lasted one day less than the length of copyright, then you'd be abusing copyright and directly violating the "law" (being the Constitutional requirements for protections, not necessarily the implementation as currently written by Congress).

Then you didn't read my (oh, so short and to the point) post. Because that is what I said was the problem.

Circumventing and talking about are two different issues. It's like the difference between talking about robbing a bank and actually robbing one (and, incidentally, both of those are illegal as well - assuming you have the means and intention to actually carry out the robbery).

Re:Profits are more important than lives.

[Anonymous Coward]

The drug companies could drop their costs by, oh, more than half if they'd stop advertising their newest placebo all everyone's TV. They could probably recoup more costs if they stopped bribing doctors to stick every single patient on hypertension, cholesterol, and mood-altering drugs that likely have worse side-effects than they have benefits. I have zero sympathy for the leeches.

Re:India in. Now we only need china, and russia.

[future assassin]

Well the way its going in Canada, Hollywood is already entrenched in out gov pockets even though the majority of Canadian voters don't want the new DMCA. http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/5079/125/ http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/5017/125/ and many more http://www.michaelgeist.ca/index.php

Re:Yep. Yer boned.

[Jaysyn]

Yeah, they are. I'm not sure about other countries, but in the US treaties are even higher than the constitution. Which I don't quite get, seeing as the power to participate in treaties comes from the constitution, at least for us.

No they aren't. This is the lie they want you to keep repeating until it becomes the truth.

The Constitution is supreme over laws and treaties; it expressly states (Article VI, Section 2) that: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land . . ." This means that any such Law (Act of Congress) which violates the Constitution is automatically made null and void to start with--nullified by the Constitution itself--and therefore cannot be a part of the "supreme Law of the Land." This is also true as to treaties.

http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/AmericanIdeal/aspects/limited_gov_treaty.htm

http://www.uhuh.com/control/contrump.htm

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=354&page=1

Re:i'd like to see them try

[oiron]

Flouts is too strong a word. Indian law allows the government to license other manufacturers to produce any drugs deemed to be "life saving"...

EFF

[Misch]

EFF is looking for people to contact their representatives in the US, especially if you are in a state with a senator on the Finance committee, or the House Ways and Means / Trade subcommittee.

Re:I can relate

[mcgrew]

I think he was referring to the insanely high cost we Americans pay for drugs compared to other countries. For example, after an eye surgery I was prescribed some eyedrops (Vigimox IIRC) that ranged in price from $65 to $85 depending on the pharmacy. My co-pay, what I pay after insurance, was $26.

The same drug retails for $24 in Canada.