Slashdot Mirror


US Threatens Spain For Not Implementing SOPA-Like Law

SharkLaser writes "In a leaked letter sent to Spain's outgoing President, the US ambassador warned that if Spain didn't pass SOPA-like file-sharing site blocking law, Spain would risk being put into United States trade blocklist. United States government interference in Spain's intellectual property laws have been suspected for a long time, and now the recent leaks of diplomatic cables confirm this. Apart from the cables leaked earlier, now another cable dated December 12th says U.S. expresses 'deep concern' over the failure to implement SOPA-style censorship law in the country. 'The government has unfortunately failed to finish the job for political reasons, to the detriment of the reputation and economy of Spain,' read the letter. Racing against the clock in the final days of the government, Solomont had one last push. 'I encourage the Government of Spain to implement the Sinde Law immediately to safeguard the reputation of Spain as an innovative country that does what it says it will, and as a country that breeds confidence,' he wrote."

32 of 508 comments (clear)

  1. correct response: "OK, put me on the list." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All it needs is one domino to fall.

    1. Re:correct response: "OK, put me on the list." by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Spain is bankrupt. Putting them on an international trade blacklist is like refusing to serve homeless people in Harrod's.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    2. Re:correct response: "OK, put me on the list." by Nadaka · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not really, the US represents a huge buyer of inexpensive cheap plastic crap from china and would devastate their economy if we stopped trading with them. The US would suffer because we would have to buy locally produced expensive cheap plastic crap, at least until we have had time to ramp up the cheap plastic crap industry at home and solve the unemployment problem.

    3. Re:correct response: "OK, put me on the list." by Asic+Eng · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I really don't get this - is SOPA so important to US interests that it would risk a trade war with an EU country? I get that it's in the interests of some media companies, but they are puny in comparison with other US industries. Don't these industries have lobbies, too?

    4. Re:correct response: "OK, put me on the list." by rickb928 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      1. SOPA is so important to U.S. corporate interests that they are exerting enormous pressure on our Legislature.

      2. Our Legislature, being so dependent on corporate insider trading, is willing to do their will.

      3. Our Executive branch, being utterly bereft of ethical standards, is willing to threaten Spain with actual economic damages for no more reason than to support U.S. corporate interests, which uktimately serve to enrich the Legislature (and other insiders) to the disadvantage of the general population.

      4. There are virtually NO U.S. corporations that would not benefit from the enactment of SOPA, in some way. Virtually none would suffer any damages from enactment of SOPA. Even Internet-based corporations would benefit from having clear rules to follow. Ambiguity is not always profitable.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    5. Re:correct response: "OK, put me on the list." by poetmatt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      what makes you think this doesn't apply to any trade blacklist globally?

      The market is no longer "us centric", so any trade blacklist just makes it worse for us. Who would do business by choice with a country that is blacklisting (and blackmailing) countries into being the same kind of failure they are becoming?

    6. Re:correct response: "OK, put me on the list." by Anthony+Mouse · · Score: 5, Insightful

      4. There are virtually NO U.S. corporations that would not benefit from the enactment of SOPA, in some way. Virtually none would suffer any damages from enactment of SOPA. Even Internet-based corporations would benefit from having clear rules to follow. Ambiguity is not always profitable.

      This is just ridiculous. First of all, what about the existing law is supposed to be so ambiguous? New laws almost always produce more ambiguity because there has to be a period of years before the courts have a chance to write decisions interpreting them where any number of the new provisions remain uncertain. This is especially true of SOPA because parts of it are so obviously subject to a constitutional challenge, which means companies won't know whether they have to follow them until it goes to court -- which is the worst kind of uncertainty; the kind that leads to expensive protracted litigation.

      In addition to that, if SOPA will have no negative effects on them, why have they all come out against it? Why are they running full page ads in the New York Times?

      I think you'll find that the US Trade Representative's positions are set not based on what US companies want, but rather based on what US companies that do the most lobbying want. The RIAA and MPAA have long been prolific in their employment of lobbyists; tech companies less so until very recently and even there they lack the sort of experience necessary to be as effective as would be expected from their size and economic importance. One can hope that they get it right before it's too late, but I prefer to hope that Americans come to their senses and make it a defense to murder that the victim was an entertainment/fossil fuel/defense/telecommunications industry lobbyist.

    7. Re:correct response: "OK, put me on the list." by thisnamestoolong · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My friend, you are sorely mistaken if you think that money is the only card on the table in the SOPA debate. If it was only about money, Google and Facebook would lobby the **AA's into oblivion, as their pockets are so much deeper that it wouldn't even be a contest. SOPA is not even about copyright; it's about control. By writing such an overly broad rule, the government assures that all sites on the web are in violation of the law at all times. While the vast majority of sites would be assumed to be acting in good faith to prevent infringement, anyone who steps out of line can immediately be wiped out with no due process. Wikileaks and the Occupy movement have showed the Congress critters that an unregulated Internet will eventually bring all of their greed and corruption into the light of day, and that people will only tolerate it for so long. They NEED something like SOPA to reign it back and, so that they can continue fucking the people without worry of being taken to task for it.

      --
      To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
    8. Re:correct response: "OK, put me on the list." by arkane1234 · · Score: 5, Funny

      You know, big boys were having big boy conversation until you came in saying that.

      --
      -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
    9. Re:correct response: "OK, put me on the list." by ricklow · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What he was doing (rightly or wrongly) was paraphrasing the old saying "When you owe the bank a thousand dollars, you have a problem, but when you owe the bank a million dollars, the bank has a problem."

      --
      "Oh God help us. We're in the hands of engineers."
    10. Re:correct response: "OK, put me on the list." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, China is one of the (non-american) biggest USA debt buyer,

      That is like saying that a 4 ft tall person is the tallest person in a room full of midgets. The amount of US debt owned by China is only 8% of all US public debt. Their interest in the US economy is solely as a potential market to sell goods. And soon they won't even be worried about that as their middle class keeps growing. But right now the US is the larget market out there, with no real replacement.

    11. Re:correct response: "OK, put me on the list." by dbet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is what I'm hoping for. The rest of the world finally says "enough" and puts the U.S. on a trade blacklist. We face the possibility of 100 million deaths because we don't produce any food anymore. We go to war to secure stations in food-producing countries. Both the EU and China join forces to stop us. The U.S. military is completely destroyed. The U.S. signs treaties. We go back to a "normal" country again and start putting money into infrastructure and education instead of bombing the shit out of the backwoods tiny nation du jour.

  2. Freedom by alphatel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Blackmail: you're doing it right.

    --
    When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
    1. Re:Freedom by SniperJoe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, this is more along the lines of extortion. "Nice country you've got here. It would be a shame if someone blacklisted it from trading with other countries..."

    2. Re:Freedom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In fact, SOPA will make work for the police a lot harder.

      As of now, it is easy to sit back and monitor connections, because people will do their business directly from their IP addresses.

      Come SOPA, there will be a distributed, encrypted name system, and more people will move to offshore proxies. This will completely lock out passive spying, forcing LEOs to have to take an active role, either by blocking proxies by IP address, demanding endpoints have monitoring on them, or passing harsh, unenforceable laws, and then vacuuming up a script kiddy to throw a life sentence at as an example.

      SOPA will just get P2P people to have to download an updated client. Law enforcement will be stuck out in the cold when all connections go dark as people start using VPNs as a matter of routine.

  3. Dear US of A by Krneki · · Score: 5, Funny

    Fuck off!

    --
    Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    1. Re:Dear US of A by toetagger · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The questions is: Will the people living int he US finally elect a competent set of leaders, or will this worsening problem require an external solution? I guess another alternative would be a revolution? How many more years like this?

    2. Re:Dear US of A by jimmerz28 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We can't elect anyone who is competent until we somehow fix the lobby-centric corporate buyout principal the political environment is built on here.

      People (like Obama) seem competent to voters and then turn around and act just like (or worse than) the previous administration due to their corporate entrenchment.

    3. Re:Dear US of A by thisnamestoolong · · Score: 5, Interesting

      With the amount of money that it takes to be a viable candidate for the office of the president of the United States, you can be sure that anyone you see on the ballot was bought and payed for long before you had any say in the matter. Couple this with the corporate collusion in media ownership to take care of 'outliers' (not that I agree with everything he says, but look at the time Ron Paul was given in debates in relation to his poll numbers), and you have a system where we really don't get a choice at all.

      --
      To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
  4. Now do you understand by OzPeter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why a large part of the world considers the USA to be a big bully?

    And yes .. mod me to hell for that.

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    1. Re:Now do you understand by SniperJoe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Being a big bully is one thing. It's one thing if we're a big bully on things like human rights. What's more distressing to me is that we're basically allowing the media companies to push the US into being a big bully for things that even our own citizens think is ridiculous.

    2. Re:Now do you understand by OzPeter · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Being a big bully is one thing. It's one thing if we're a big bully on things like human rights. What's more distressing to me is that we're basically allowing the media companies to push the US into being a big bully for things that even our own citizens think is ridiculous.

      Before the media companies there were other commercial interests that pushed the US government to do their bidding. Go back to 1893 and you'll find that sugar interests were responsible for Hawaii being taken over by the US. And that is just one example.

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    3. Re:Now do you understand by inviolet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Being a big bully is one thing. It's one thing if we're a big bully on things like human rights. What's more distressing to me is that we're basically allowing the media companies to push the US into being a big bully for things that even our own citizens think is ridiculous.

      Before the media companies there were other commercial interests that pushed the US government to do their bidding. Go back to 1893 and you'll find that sugar interests were responsible for Hawaii being taken over by the US. And that is just one example.

      Yep. Not to mention all of the banana republics in South America, who had their approximately-democratic governments violently toppled by the CIA acting on behalf of American produce companies.

      America has never been The Good Guy, it has just been a typical state out to get ahead at any cost... any cost, that is, short of allowing its citizens to discover that it is not The Good Guy.

      That's why the diplomatic cable leaks are such a Big Deal, and the reason why Bradley Manning will get no popular sympathy. His revelations cause American citizens to feel cognitive dissonance ("We aren't the Good Guy? Really?")... and people deeply hate those who cause them cognitive dissonance.

      I'm an American citizen and I feel ashamed about the degree to which my country has fallen to regulatory capture.

      --
      FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
    4. Re:Now do you understand by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm really hoping that Google, Facebook, etc. pursue the "nuclear option" that has been discussed. It will kill SOPA almost instantly, making SOPA politically untouchable. It will also serve as a wakeup call to politicians that they were meant to serve the people, not lobbyists.

      At this point, we'll have serious egg on our face for implying that another country is a "bad country" because their politicians didn't want to commit political suicide.

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  5. I think its time by future+assassin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    to overthrow the US gov and burn down Hollywood. The two greatest threats to freedom since Hitler. Fuck em.....

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  6. Fuck America ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am so fucking tired of hearing how America is bullying the world into being forced into implementing legislation that is utterly flawed and is only there to serve the interests of the *AAs.

    America can go fuck themselves if this is the best they've got.

    Things like fair use are legal rights in other countries, but the USA is working to be sure that we all have the same lowest common denominator -- them.

    I think someone should start passing laws holding the US accountable for the financial melt-down they caused, and for charging them for the implementation of the laws they've been ramming down everyone else's throats.

    America has become a bunch of pathetic, whining cowards who are only worried about copyright, and making sure they can buy cheap oil.

    1. Re:Fuck America ... by spire3661 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We, the People, DO NOT WANT THIS. Politicians and businessmen do. We are as powerless as you concerning these matters.

      --
      Good-bye
    2. Re:Fuck America ... by aintnostranger · · Score: 5, Informative

      Powerless? You are not. Come back and tell me that after you get a big chunk of population marching on the streets and getting shot for it. In Syria people are powerless. So the government officials you guys elected don't act like they should?? Mass protest / strike till they are out of office. Until you try such things and fail you ARE NOT POWERLESS.

  7. I'm absolutely sick of it... by g0bshiTe · · Score: 5, Informative

    First I'm an American, I live in the US always have. I'm am just fed up with my government. How in the hell can they be so disconnected, and how in the hell do they expect to impose their will on other nations. Fucking hell isn't that what the initial settlers came over here to get away from?

    --
    I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
  8. The sad irony in this matter.. by Superken7 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Actually, thanks to Wikileaks we now know that the head of PROMUSICAE (the RIAA-equivalent in Spain), Guisasola, secretly pushed for having Spain included in the infamous 301 List. http://cablesearch.org/cable/view.php?id=10MADRID179
    After Spain was finally included in that list, he claimed that being included in that list was "a national dishonor", and used this argument in order to push for Ley Sinde, the aforementioned SOPA-like law.

    Only a few days ago, this law was finally passed. Most Internet users are against this law because it does not change which sites become illegal - it merely changes the *referee*. As a result, judges have been replaced by a commission whose members are privately selected by private lobbying parties (aka spain's RIAA). This might sound like something outrageous, but sadly this is exactly what has happened.
    If this was not bad enough, keep in mind that this occurs right after *years* of judges ruling *in favor* of those websites that they want to take down (no hosting sites, just linking sites)

  9. Great news for the conspiracy theorists! by pla · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For everyone normally making fun of the tinfoil hat crowd, we have here nothing short of concrete proof of a vast (global?) intergovernmental conspiracy by the oligarchy to fuck... us... all.

    We've discussed the technical merits (or lack thereof) of SOPA here on Slashdot numerous times, and always, the inescapable conclusion came out that we simply had Luddites and idiots for leaders. Now, we have a better, more accurate answer. Our leaders may still count as idiots, but they fully realize just how deliberately-bad a law they've crafted in SOPA.

    Can you hear the drums in the distance, getting ever closer, Washington?

  10. Re:Republitarians no better by SeNtM · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am far from being a republican, but I would likely vote for Ron Paul. He may be a loon, but he has been consistent and has shown a degree of moral aptitude, while other politicians pander to corporate interest. The Republican party has toted the line of less government influence for 100-years, yet, where are we? There have been as many Republican controlled justices, congressmen, and presidents, if not more, than Democratic ones.

    Its time to put your money where your mouth is right-wingers...

    --
    "There ought to be limits to freedom." -George W. Bush