Central Europe Countries Continue to Oppose ACTA

tykev writes "The Czech government suspended the ratification process of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, ACTA, said Prime Minister Petr Necas today. The government wants to further analyze the issue. There were a number of public demonstrations against ACTA in several Czech towns, and some Czech Euro MP's oppose ACTA as being 'completely wide of the mark'. Earlier, Poland announced its intention to suspend the ratification process as well. In the meantime, the website of the ruling Czech Civic Democratic Party was attacked and defaced by Anonymous who also publicly released personal data of the party's members."

Comments

Futile

[busyqth]

"Further analyzing the issue" is irrelevant. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.

Re:Futile

[TallDarkMan]

That's political speak for "re-evaluating the impact on future popularity/votes" and "assessing lobbyist monetary income levels"

Re:Futile

[Anonymous Coward]

One nice thing about Europe is that representatives of independent countries often vote independently. Unlike in the U.S.A., where members of congress are supposed to vote for their district or state's interests, but instead just go with whatever corporation or national lobby promises the most money. (This reminds me that I need to order fresh flowers for the 10th amendment's grave.)

Re:Futile

[K. S. Kyosuke]

One nice thing about Europe is that representatives of independent countries often vote independently. Unlike in the U.S.A., where members of congress are supposed to vote for their district or state's interests, but instead just go with whatever corporation or national lobby promises the most money. (This reminds me that I need to order fresh flowers for the 10th amendment's grave.)

Actually, I'm deeply suspicious that it is yet another "more bribes, please" situation for our politicians. :/

Re:Futile

[stanlyb]

You really think this is good? You know, when someone is independent, he is actually independent of you, and free to take money from anyone.........

Re:Futile

[Leolo]

They say that the best defence is an offence. Why not go on the a counter-attack. Let's make Internet access, or simply access to adequate telecommunication, a fundamental human right. This would protect net-neutrality and work against arbitrary disconnection laws.

Re:Futile

[Darkness404]

That is a really, really stupid idea. When it comes to real rights such as freedom of expression or freedom of religion there is nothing that I am not forced to promote that, only not to trample the rights of others. In no way am I forced to agree with them, to pay money to help them put up billboards or go with them on protest marches. With a "right" to internet I'm forced to pay for the lifestyle of someone else. If someone wants to choose to live far away from others in a remote location, why should I be forced to help lay fiber or cable for them to have the "right" to internet?

A better solution would be net neutrality is required if you use public land or public owned cables to run your ISP. Because it allows for the most amount of net neutrality (nearly all ISPs use public owned cables to do business with customers) but allows the greatest amount of freedom (if the ISP doesn't want to implement net neutrality don't use public land or cables).

Re:Futile

[tobiah]

If you remove the politicians who are selling out, they'll just be replaced by other sellouts. It's not enough to defeat bad laws as they come up, new laws affirming the freedom of data need to be fought for and won. The best defense is a good offense, and that is something sorely lacking in the IP wars. And the great difficulty with mounting that offense, is deciding what the objectives should be.

Re:Futile

[msobkow]

Remember the telephone? Electricity?

Government mandates and sponsorship are what got the province of Saskatchewan serviced with those facilities, and in the '70s, my grandparents finally got electricity and a phone while I was a kid. It's well within MOST people's lifetimes to remember that infrastructure has to be supported, not boondoggled with cries of "why should I pay" by selfish yokels in the cities.

Re:Futile

[msobkow]

You DON'T pay for it. The people of Saskatchewan did.

But why should the Saskatchewan city dwellers pay?

So the farmers can produce food.
So the farmers can live like human beings.
So the small towns can be home to small businesses instead of congesting everything in the cities.
So the farmers can run the equipment they need to do the job.

But you don't really care about that, do you? Well, good luck surviving in the cities without food if the farmers all go belly up because they can't use the internet to sell their crops, find parts, locate equipment, review new equipment, etc.

THAT's why you shouldn't be a selfish, navel-gazing jerk about subsidizing rural development.

Futile

[Anonymous Coward]

If all we do is oppose, then some battles we'll win, others we'll lose, but the front line is only going to tighten around us until we are nothing but obedient corporate servants. What we need to do is strike back at the politicians and remind them that they are serving the interests of all the population, and not the interest of special groups who would like the free market to bend down for them and give them money just because they feel they're entitled to it.

There's still some hope.

[sadness203]

Maybe one day, we'll look back and laugh at all these garbage laws that some odd fellow were trying to pass to "protect" some intellectual property. Maybe one day a good law will be passed, one made not for corporation, but for the people and innovation.

I doubt I'll see that. Yet, I can still hope.

Re:There's still some hope.

[kheldan]

I have it on the authority of someone older and much more experienced than I, that all this sort of bullshit is cyclic: it's happened before, it's happening again now, and it's likely to happen again in the future. We who live in these turbulent times must just endure it, and continue to raise our voices against that which is unjust, and eventually the bastards of the world will be shouted down and things will be quiet again. We might even come out ahead of the game. ;-)

Re:There's still some hope.

[V!NCENT]

It's neither. A population can take a lot, but only so much. It's when the last straw snaps that people are willing to die to overthrow their government in protest.

It's only a matter of time before terrorism will be practised by western people against the west and not just by some random extremist nutcase-organisations.

There maybe enough laws, technology, police and military personel, but they are all outnumbered once an entire population sais "Fsck it! I'm not taking this shit any longer!" and then the shit hits the fan, at 100.000 miles/hour.

Re:There's still some hope.

[SuricouRaven]

The past is no guide - the modern world is like nothing that has been seen before.

Re:There's still some hope.

[flirno]

People haven't changed. When soldiers have to make the decision to shoot relatives (brothers, sisters, grandma, mom) many will reside with the population. That is when governments fall.

Re:There's still some hope.

[Jedi Alec]

One of the reasons the US grew so powerful was its blatant disregard for intellectual property in the old world. And now, many years later, as the US is in decline, guess which other growing nation doesn't give a flying fuck about what the US thinks about intellectual property.

I guess 50 years from now the US and Europe will be on the same side trying to fight off Intellectual Property laws being crammed down our throats by the Chinese. Assuming, of course, they need to resort to such silly things as laws to make their point and don't just call in their loans.

Hope yet for the human race?

[kheldan]

This is an encouraging thing to read on a Monday morning. SOPA/PIPA gets shelved here in the U.S., and now the EU is showing some backbone. Should we dare hope?

Re:Hope yet for the human race?

[jdgeorge]

Should we dare hope?

No. But vote. And it would be a good idea to plan ahead for what to do after something similar gets passed.

What's the point?

[Saintwolf]

Even if this gets vetoed to hell... some corrupt douchbag politician will most likely end up slipping it into a "Save the children" bill or similar...

Re:What's the point?

[am 2k]

Yeah, like the software patent stuff, which was trying to slip by in the Agricultural and Fisheries Commission. Luckily, it didn't work out.

Re:What's the point?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep, and since this is the EU, they actually take the time to read the bills being proposed, unlike in the US where they just say Yes to the bill with the most financial backing. As a result of this, any unpopular law that somehow finds it's way into a completely unrelated bill, get's vetoed and removed before the bill can continue it's path, again unlike the US.

Re:What's the point?

[qbast]

Interesting that ACTA also passed on Agriculture and Fisheries meeting. There is something really fishy with those guys...

Hey editors, thank you...

[SlovakWakko]

...for at least keeping the original title of my submission, when you removed the part where it says that Slovakia also suspended ACTA ratification today. I think that this situation, where former soviet satellite states oppose ACTA nicely reflects the fact that we still remember how it is NOT to be free...

Prague Spring comes to mind or not.

[unity100]

It certainly does. if you dont know what it is, google it.

what's futile is this :

[unity100]

What we need to do is strike back at the politicians and remind them that they are serving the interests of all the population

they know very well who they should be serving. they are NOT choosing to serve who they should be serving. instead, they choose whomever pays them.

the difference of the central european countries is that, there is still a lot of generations currently at the age of running government, corporations etc, who has grown up during the communist era with at least some ideals. you wont find those in anglo-american countries. hence, the opposition from central europe.

Re:what's futile is this :

[Opportunist]

the difference of the central european countries is that, there is still a lot of generations currently at the age of running government, corporations etc, who has grown up during the communist era with at least some ideals. you wont find those in anglo-american countries. hence, the opposition from central europe.

Actually, the main difference is that we bribe our politicians, not some lobbyists.

Well, actually, considering how deep our conservatives are in the bribery swamp, I guess that's not correct. Let's say it's optional, not mandatory like in the US. Here, you get your campaigning expenses reimbursed from tax money if you happen to get more than x% (with x being somewhere between 0.5 and 3 in most countries that have this system) of the votes. That's doable for most halfway serious political parties.

The point is that we're not as used to seeing politicians get cozy with business tycoons as the US people are. For us, it's still reeking of some shady deals, of lobbying (don't say that word aloud here, it's often used synonymously with corruption), of, well, corruption. We have a party that's more or less known to be the political arm of the industry, and even THEY don't dare to be seen shaking hands (or worse) with business leaders.

And, frankly, I prefer it that way. Politicians will be bought. One way or another. Campaigning costs money, and someone has to foot the bill, a bill that no ordinary person (hell, even a well off person) cannot foot. He will be bought.

So it's better that OUR pockets buy him.

EU Parliament is pretty cool

[F69631]

I don't know... While it's common (especially in USA) to claim that all politicians are scum, let's look at the European Parliament's stance on ACTA, as supported by something like 98% of the members in 2010. European Parliament resolution of 10 March 2010 on the transparency and state of play of the ACTA negotiations. The relevant parts:

1. Points out that since 1 December 2009 the Commission has had a legal obligation to inform Parliament immediately and fully at all stages of international negotiations;

2. Expresses its concern over the lack of a transparent process in the conduct of the ACTA negotiations, a state of affairs at odds with the letter and spirit of the TFEU; is deeply concerned that no legal base was established before the start of the ACTA negotiations and that parliamentary approval for the negotiating mandate was not sought;

3. Calls on the Commission and the Council to grant public and parliamentary access to ACTA negotiation texts and summaries, in accordance with the Treaty and with Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents;

4. Calls on the Commission and the Council to engage proactively with ACTA negotiation partners to rule out any further negotiations which are confidential as a matter of course and to inform Parliament fully and in a timely manner about its initiatives in this regard; expects the Commission to make proposals prior to the next negotiation round in New Zealand in April 2010, to demand that the issue of transparency is put on the agenda of that meeting and to refer the outcome of the negotiation round to Parliament immediately following its conclusion;

5. Stresses that, unless Parliament is immediately and fully informed at all stages of the negotiations, it reserves its right to take suitable action, including bringing a case before the Court of Justice in order to safeguard its prerogatives;

6. Deplores the calculated choice of the parties not to negotiate through well-established international bodies, such as WIPO and WTO, which have established frameworks for public information and consultation;

7. Calls on the Commission to conduct an impact assessment of the implementation of ACTA with regard to fundamental rights and data protection, ongoing EU efforts to harmonise IPR enforcement measures, and e-commerce, prior to any EU agreement on a consolidated ACTA treaty text, and to consult with Parliament in a timely manner about the results of the assessment;

8. Welcomes affirmations by the Commission that any ACTA agreement will be limited to the enforcement of existing IPRs, with no prejudice for the development of substantive IP law in the European Union;

9. Calls on the Commission to continue the negotiations on ACTA and limit them to the existing European IPR enforcement system against counterfeiting; considers that further ACTA negotiations should include a larger number of developing and emerging countries, with a view to reaching a possible multilateral level of negotiation;

10. Urges the Commission to ensure that the enforcement of ACTA provisions – especially those on copyright enforcement procedures in the digital environment – are fully in line with the acquis communautaire ; demands that no personal searches will be conducted at EU borders and requests full clarification of any clauses that would allow for warrantless searches and confiscation of information storage devices such as laptops, cell phones and MP3 players by border and customs authorities;

11. Considers that in order to respect fundamental rights, such as the right to freedom of expression and the right to privacy, while fully observing the principle of subsidiarity, the proposed agreement should not make it possible for any so-called ‘three-strikes’

Re:EU Parliament is pretty cool

[Joce640k]

+1 informative, thanks for posting that.

But...if all that's true then how come we're still voting on it nearly two years later?

Re:EU Parliament is pretty cool

[Spad]

Because the EU Commission can continue to draft and negotiate ACTA for as long as they like, but ultimately they have to put it to the EU Parliament to vote on before it can become law. There are a couple of things they can try if the Parliament rejects it, but those can still be vetoed by a 2/3rds majority of the Parliament and history has shown that they generally don't like it when the Commission tries to do an end-run around them.

Protests in many, many European cities

[DerCed]

What is also quite impressive are the protests planned by Pirate Parties and others in numerous cities all over Europe (+ some other continents). Many events are to be held this Saturday, February 11st. The map looks absolutely breath-taking:
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=212120558776447282985.0004b7b33e16f13c710c7&msa=0

Not a group

[Darkness404]

The difference between Anonymous and most other groups is that Anonymous isn't really a group. Rather, it is more of a banner that individuals rally around for a common cause. There is no real agenda that Anonymous has because Anonymous really has no leader or real members. Anonymous is simply a rallying cry.

Really, who knows what they intend to accomplish with this. But undoubtedly there are some "members" of Anonymous who agree with it and undoubtedly there are some that disagree.

They just don't know how Democracy works!

[erroneus]

In a democracy, what is supposed to happen is the government doesn't listen to the people and makes desicions based on the amount of money business contributes to their re-election campaigns. It is dangerous to listen to the people because, as the great and wonderful Steve Jobs said, the people don't know what they want and it's not their job to know what they want. And if the people organize to make themselves heard, they are actually forming a threat against the government which is terrorism and you should never give in to terrorists.

Well of course not, they're not IP dependant

[poity]

Western Europe is the major source of intellectual property. Look at WIPO's top applicant nations - Germany, France, UK, Netherlands. Look at IMDB's top film making countries - France, UK. Look at the fashion world where you're nobody unless your're based in London, Paris, or Milan. In addition, Central and Eastern Europe are the conduits (if not the source) for many counterfeits. With ACTA, those governments would bear a share of the burden in protecting someone else's economy while their own not-quite-so IP-reliant economies see no benefit. So they'd go from not spending money enforcing someone else's IP while getting economic benefit from those citizen who profit from counterfeit, to spending money enforcing someone else's IP while killing off a pretty nice influx of money. Western EU countries are going to have to offer much more trade incentives to get what they want, but then by increasing trade incentives to get IP enforcement, they will just be switching from one hose siphoning money from them to another hose siphoning money from them.

Can you Vote in Europe? Take action NOW!

[SD NFN STM]

SOPA and PIPA are dead... meet their cousin, ACTA. Please contact your MEP (Members of the European Parliament) using this link and register your protest:

UK:
http://www.writetothem.com/

Rest of Europe:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/members/public/geoSearch.do;jsessionid=EAF5D554A71EBE16A5E8A71092CD2DB9.node2 [europa.eu]

A brief analysis of the issue, but obviously presenting a one-sided view... so weigh the info as you see fit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ihere3PEPg&feature=g-all-u&context=G20f3a72FAAAAAAAABAA

Central Europe Knows Tyranny

[hemo_jr]

Having been subjugated by tyrannical Communist regimes during the lifetimes of most of their populations, Central European countries are the best equipped to spot the tools of tyranny like ACTA.