'Son of ACTA' Worse Than Original

An anonymous reader writes "TechDirt has the latest on the leaked US proposals for the 'Son of ACTA' treaty and it looks worse than the original. It's practically a checklist for how to kill innovation while making lawyers rich. In particular, they call for expanding what's patentable, blocking people from buying copyrighted goods in other countries and taking them home, expanding liability for ISPs whose users commit acts of infringement, forcing ISPs to identify their users to anyone on demand, and getting rid of third-party patent review while expanding the presumption that they're valid. The only way it could get any worse would be if it were enacted in law."

Comments

good

[Anonymous Coward]

This is where capitalism takes you. By definition, a philosophy based on the rule of the most supremely selfishly rational is going to end up with these people trying to change the law to increase their wealth.

Re:good

[suomynonAyletamitlU]

"This is where it takes you" is an apt way to put it. I don't think capitalism was ever meant to be a final solution; it was meant to be a steppingstone, and it was far in advance of pre-capitalist systems in terms of the social change it's allowed.

Capitalist means the capital--means of production--are privately held and can be used for private profit. The alternative is capital being held by the state, which is amazingly good at keeping the status quo or responding to clear challenges (invasions, keeping up with the Jones, space race, energy race, etc) but is not nearly nimble enough to drive innovation by random, untested entrepreneurs. There's frankly no way that such people could have driven innovation unless they could could convince The Authority Figure with The Money to give it to them. Now, at worst, they have to convince An Authority figure with Money, but it could be one of hundreds (or maybe thousands or millions, depending on the startup costs).

But it ain't right, because in the end, what do you do when you've beaten the game (to put it in such terms)? If you've ever played a game like Civilization or even one more directly about Just Making Money, you know that eventually you've achieved every achievement and the game just ends. But if that game were your life, what do you do when you no longer have profit to make? Game over don't happen 'til you die.

If you ask me, the people who are doing this shit are (to extend the metaphor unduly) people who've completed the game and are going after every last achievement, even the ones the designers put in there just to be dicks. "Become the leading producers of entertainment worldwide--check. Pass legislation worldwide so that every poor sod worldwide is under your thumb--working on it. Wait... become a tyrant that's destroying the happiness of billions... why do I have this achievement?"

Seriously, they've lost their focus and their minds, and they ought to either be shot or stripped of all money and forbidden from ever engaging in capitalist endeavors again.

Beware the simplified summary

[jcrb]

While I hate all this ACTA and related types of laws (DMCA, etc) the summary for this article is not accurate, for example it says it would forbid third party opposition to patents, which it doesn't say, what it actually says is that it prohibits them prior to the grant of a patent. And as someone with a bunch of patents from little startups, thats a good thing actually, as it would be way to easy for big corporations to make small inventors and startups waste money by filling all sorts of third party opposition during the patent prosecution.

In any case, don't believe the summary article, if you care about a particular point follow the links to the full text and read it in the original.

Re:Beware the simplified summary

[h4rr4r]

Holy shit! That was a fucking mess. English translation follows;

No, it will mean that when a big company gets a patent on basically the same damn thing as you, you will be forced to fight about it after the fact in court. This is something most small businesses cannot afford.

Re:Kill'em all

[Roger Wilcox]

I say we take it one step further and kill all humans. Cleaner and simpler.

Everything can be copyrighted!

[vrmlguy]

blocking people from buying copyrighted goods in other countries and taking them home

Things that can be copyrighted: Books, nicknacks, travel brochures, the pattern on my boxers... Not only will you have to strip naked for the TSA, you'll have to remain naked while crossing national borders.

Re:Everything can be copyrighted!

[Culture20]

Things that can be copyrighted: Books, nicknacks, travel brochures, the pattern on my boxers...

"Sir, this skidmark is clearly derivative."
"Um, Parody?"

Re:Everything can be copyrighted!

[MoonBuggy]

I'm expecting to see selective enforcement - those running the show won't piss off too many members of the public because it risks backlash (and they're not on such firm 'scare tactic' footing as the TSA are, so they have more to fear from public disapproval), but they'll pull out the clause any time arbitrageurs look to take advantage of an absurd regional price difference in copyrighted goods. End result, of course, is that while the employers take advantage of cheap global labour, any disparity in goods prices can't be taken advantage of by the consumer because the identical, but lower priced foreign goods can't be imported without the permission of the copyright holder. Even without this law, we're seeing exactly that behaviour in Omega v. Costco.

Re:Everything can be copyrighted!

[Anthony Mouse]

Things that can be copyrighted: Books, nicknacks, travel brochures, the pattern on my boxers... Not only will you have to strip naked for the TSA, you'll have to remain naked while crossing national borders.

Forget about the logistics. That's just the collateral damage. The real issue is that it enables price discrimination. Which makes the US and other countries with a high standard of living even more uncompetitive by compounding the cost advantage of foreign countries: Foreign students will get our textbooks for 5% of the US price, which means they have even lower costs and can more easily undercut our wages. Corporations license software in foreign countries for 5% of the US price, making it more cost effective to set up shop Anywhere But Here. On and on.

Re:I know I'll get marked troll again...

[0123456]

Yes, if they flip flop, like they did in the 1800s, switch sides. But RIGHT NOW Republican == BAD.

And there I was thinking that Democrats had run the US government for the last two years.

Re:I know I'll get marked troll again...

[trollertron3000]

Do you know much about how DC works? Seriously I lived there my whole life and I'm tied to the US Federal government closely. I think it's hilarious that people like yourself think there's a huge difference between the two parties. Guess the bullshit machines are working.

Protectionism

[HermMunster]

No true free economy allows laws that protect certain markets and business models. Obama is up to his ears in jobs loss. As a consequence these MPAA/RIAA lobbyists go to him claiming that they are loosing billions and millions of jobs in an industry that "can't" be off-shored--nothing like American movies and music.

What's wrong is that he thinks that these efforts will result in recovery of lost jobs and income. In reality, when the economy recovers, if it ever does, these industries (with their protected and outdated business models) will be in control beyond what was intended, and it will have set a precedent for other industries to try the same thing, thus leaving America, and the world, with massive abusive businesses controlling ever more of Congress.

This is *NOT* capitalism

[mangu]

Having the government make laws to give privileges to a selected few is absolutely not what capitalism is about.

This is FEUDALISM.

Re:This is *NOT* capitalism

[istartedi]

Ron Paul has no new ideas. He just wants to take us on a trip down memory lane, back to the preconditions that got us here in the first place.

We need a Theodore Roosevelt (trust buster) not a Ron Paul. And as I put my hand to my face, shield it from the blinding Sun and scan the horizon of the Fruited Plain, I see no Rough Rider coming to save us.

We will have to do it ourselves, somehow.

Re:This is *NOT* capitalism

[hairyfeet]

Actually capitalism is nearing its end, whether the 1%ers like it or not, simply because technology kills capitalism dead in the long run, there is simply no escaping that fact. I'm sure some will say "capitalism and tech go great together!" but this ignores a simple truth: The entire premise of capitalism is trading labor for capital but what happens when that labor is no longer valuable?

I'd say probably half the USA population isn't qualified and will never be for anything that can't be done better by a machine, and each year the musical chairs that is "jobs not able to be done better by machine" will shrink smaller and smaller. So we either come up with "make work" to give an excuse to cut these people a check, have massive unemployment and underemployment which will eventually lead to a tipping point and massive civil unrest, or we find a new way (perhaps resource based) to do things.

After all who thinks it would be hard to automate a McDonald's? The service industry will be the next to go and for many that is all that is left. So the 1%ers better enjoy their time in the sun, because those peasants won't just go quietly starve to death. Technology makes the worker pointless, and by sticking with capitalism you just make sure that now unemployed worker won't have any way to take care of themselves. Like delivering mail on horseback the capitalist way of trading labor for money is simply a dead end.

As for TFA it is a perfect example, an attempt for the old money buggy whip manufacturers to hang onto their business model in the face of technology. Whatever idiot thought the USA could survive as an "IP based economy" really should be shot, as you are trying to force scarcity into a medium where none exists. They spend ever more money on ever more draconian laws to prop up a dying business model. Countries like China aren't gonna give a shit about your "IP based economy" when they can keep their money and just make copies, so you get a "giant sucking sound" where all the money goes out and never comes back.

So until they wake up and smell the fail and start working on new business strategies that take the abundance and ease of propagation into effect they are just wasting their money. More and more of the population simply doesn't play your reindeer games anymore, so what are you gonna do? unplug the planet?

Re:This is *NOT* capitalism

[Anthony Mouse]

those peasants won't just go quietly starve to death.

No, but bread is cheap and so are circuses.

Negative income tax pretty much solves all of capitalism's problems. You set the lowest (negative) tax bracket such that no matter how little money you make, you can afford to eat and pay rent on a very small apartment. Then nobody needs to work to not starve, but you still need to work if you want a car or a house or to send your kids to a decent school.

And people want those things enough to work for them, but not enough to riot over not having them. So if you can find a job, good for you. And if you can't, enjoy your government cheese.

Re:This is *NOT* capitalism

[Ltap]

I second this. I am reminded of the Edison quote, "I will make electricity so cheap, only the rich will burn candles." The cheap excuse

Re:This is *NOT* capitalism

[roman_mir]

Capitalism is not 'trading capital for labor', this is so silly.

Capitalism is saving and (re)investing. Exactly what is the money (re)invested into is irrelevant, as long as it's actual savings, and not some government subsidy.

Capitalism is of-course about organizing tools/labor/possibly land in order to make profit, but those things (tools/labor/land) can be used interchangeably, it doesn't really have to be labor, it doesn't have to be manual labor, it doesn't have to be human labor either.

As to 'what people will be doing' - I bet there were questions just like this one 200 years ago when first capitalists were organizing tools (steam engines, machines), land (factory floors) and labor (workers, engineers, management, etc.) in a way that allowed producing more machines, which eventually removed the need for 95% of human farmers, and only 5% of farmers were needed to feed 100% of population.

What would those 95% of people do?

Re:I know I'll get marked troll again...

[Archangel Michael]

No, they forget that the Trial Lawyers (wing of the D party) are also involved. This is not a (D) or (R) issue, this is a DC corrupt issue. Both (D) and (R) have the proverbial blood on their hands.

Stop trying to spread your s*t

[spyfrog]

Could you Americans please stop trying to force us other in the world to accept your fascist corporations wishes?
Please continue to live in your corporate govern country that you believe is the worlds greatest democracy but STOP trying to force us other to obey your corporate overlords.

Thanks.

Re:Stop trying to spread your s*t

[misexistentialist]

Haven't you bought most of our corporations by now?

Re:Stop trying to spread your s*t

[Bob9113]

> Could you Americans please stop trying to force us other in the world to accept your fascist corporations wishes?

With every fiber of my being I wish that what you are saying was rational. Unfortunately, we Americans are no longer represented by our government.

We decried the Bush / Neo-Con oligopoly, and forced its heir-apparent, John McCain, to try a crazy stunt called Sarah Palin as a mad grasp for electability.

We have used the soap box.

We voted for Obama, the one who promised change. Who promised net neutrality, the end of Gitmo, withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, public participation in the construction of the health care law, and a shift away from secret government in general.

We have used the ballot box.

We have brought lawsuits that have been quashed by secret national security objections. We have brandished the forces of the EFF and Groklaw to fight the courtroom battles, attempting to hold the line, in vain.

We have used the jury box.

I have deeply considered what the above statements imply. I have contemplated the LA, the Fruitvale riots, and the current events in Wisconsin. I have lay awake at night stunned at the implication of these things.

The path forward is a scary one. For me, I cannot accept it as it seems to be. I have chosen to believe that it is a failure to use the first three boxes sufficiently. Given that I cannot see how ballot or jury can overcome their state of decay, I am left with the soap box.

This post is an example. I have a lot to learn. The barriers ahead look insurmountable. And the only sure way to fail is not to try.

Re:Stop trying to spread your s*t

[houghi]

Look at your constitution. It has a way out. The question is if you are willing to die for your ideals, like the people in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and other countries are willing to do.

I think not. You have bread and games. (To be fair, the same is true for most of Europe.)

Ok

[Sycraft-fu]

Then let's hear your better system. I don't think anyone except for maybe crazy libertarians claim capitalism is perfect, or the be-all, end-all of economic systems. However so far nobody has come up with anything better. Communism sounds nice on paper but doesn't work in the real world.

You'll notice that capitalism underlies the economy of all successful, well off, countries in the world. Now that doesn't mean it can or should be implemented without any checks, clearly all capitalist nations have counterbalances to it but the fundamentals of capitalism are what underlie their systems because it works.

So, let's hear it then. You clearly think capitalism ought to go away right now which implies you have something better. Let's hear what that as, as we'd all be interested in a genuinely better economic system. Do your homework first though, because a lot of them have been tried and failed.

However I'm going to guess you do not in fact have a good answer since you clearly don't know what you are talking about. The reason is that these things being proposed are actually ANTI-capitalist. In a true free market, there are no artificial restrictions of any kinds. So buying goods over seas and selling them for a profit at home is 100% kosher (it's called arbitrage and is common). As such if you think these are bad, then really you are being pro-capitalist as it stands.

Re:Ok

[Anonymous Coward]

The reason is that these things being proposed are actually ANTI-capitalist.

You're thinking too idealistically. The capitalist philosophy inevitably leads to crony capitalism. You need a philosophy centred around something other than rational selfishness and regulated accordingly.

Social democracy is an obvious answer, and has worked quite well in Europe in the sense that it gives people a good quality of life rather than in the sense of economic summary statistics suggesting that a country is doing well.

Degrees of socialism - in the sense of worker control of the means of production managed by a sympathetic state - helped much of Europe emerge from WW2 on both sides of the Curtain. Soviet Russia was throroughly successful for most of its life, being America's only equal for most of the last century. The response to resource allocation difficulties which had emerged by the early '80s was to dismantle the socialist framework and waste money on Reagan's arms race - this wasn't the only option. The West has just had a far greater hit to its economy and we didn't respond by entirely abandoning free market principles: we have just temporarily "socialised" elements of banking and industry.

As for communism in the sense defined by Marx, it's never been reached. There are lots of successful independent worker cooperatives - the John Lewis Partnership being one of the most famous in the UK - which give some idea of what worker control of the means of production without state management looks like.

The point being that there are lots of alternatives to a capitalist philosophy, many features of which are currently in use.

Kills right to resale?

[shutdown -p now]

Article 4, paragraph 3:

Each Party shall provide to authors, performers, and producers of phonograms the right to authorize or prohibit the making available to the public of the original and copies of their works, performances, and phonograms through sale or other transfer of ownership.

I'm not sure what this means, exactly, but it sounds like they don't want to let you resale things? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Tell that to the Arabs

[SmallFurryCreature]

Yeah, bread and circusses are cheap and the oil rich nations of the world can certainly afford to spend plenty. So why exactly are the oil rich Arab nations on fire? Lack of money? Really? Libya should be rolling in it.

Greed is all consuming. Why settle for a mere 10 billion if you can have a hundred by bleeding the people just a bit more? If Ghadaffi or whatever he is called had spend most of his fortune on buying bread and circusses and maybe an industry or two he would still be filthy rich and far more popular. But he didn't. Squeezed the country to the max until it broke. People are fighting tanks with what they can get hold off. That means bread and circusses completely failed.

And you are a fool if you think this can't happen in the west. Just see how easily Greece and Ireland fell. See the riots in London by students. Gosh, students rebel in Egypt, the english government applauds. Students rebel in London, shame!

Do you think that when Antionette said "let them eat cake" she saw the true problems in society? You can't see a revolution brewing until it boils over. If you could, people would do more to stop them.

There is no better system

[SmallFurryCreature]

Once you get a little bit older you might learn the secret of it all. It is that there is no perfect cure all system. The only thing that works long term, as in your life time, is to constantly find a balance while never actually achieving it.

This is not how people like to think, they want the hero to save the world at the end of the movie. Not spend infinity just avoiding total collapse.

In running a country, there is no end, no financial year, no last chapter. It is an ongoing concern that needs to readjust as the world changes.

Should high-tech firms receive a tax deduction to stimulate them? Yes... we need them to stimulate the economy.

Time passes...

Should high-tech firms receive a tax deduction to stimulate them? No... we got them, now their taxes can help to stimulate other sectors.

See what I did there? I changed a policy as the situation changed. How DARING of me!!! This is what most political parties with an ideology never do. Right - Left, it don't matter. Leave it to a republican and taxes for the rich would go to negative infinity. Leave it to Amnesty International and criminals would be out of jail before they commit the crime. Leave it to the green and humanity would be living on a very small isolated rock less it touch any piece of nature. Leave it to the Libertarians and we would have Somalia.

When you see Thatchet claim that the lady is not for turning, she shows just how bad a politician she was. Ruined the country.

Compromise? Yes, that is one word for it but really it is the realization that the needs of the country cannot be expressed by the needs of a singular group.

We need labour, we need high-tech, we need investors, we need rich people, we need poor people, we need unemployed...

Wait, what? We need unemployed? Yes, we do. Where else is a growing company going to get new people from? 0% unemployment is a nightmare for capitalists who know what they are talking about. Can you say salary inflation? Can you say stagnation?

So you might want to turn off the work stimulation projects BEFORE everyone actually got a job before you run out of people for the jobs. Immigration has proven to be less then an ideal method for solving this and once you got immigration going, it is hard to stop leading to masses of unemployed immigrants.

In politics you can never win because the game never ends. At best you can try to keep the ball somewhat under control. This means you got to shift back and forth on the same issue over and over. Do we build a nuclear plant? How about now? How about now? How about now? How about now? Yes, now it is a good idea.

ACTA seeks to create a cure all with no room for changes in the future. That is why it is bad. The patent system might need to be reformed now AND be reformed again in the future. And again. And again. The idea that you can draft a trade law NOW and be done with it forever and ever is just a silly idea that sadly seems ingrained in our conciousness. If only we did X all our problems would be solved forever. Nope.