Slashdot Mirror
WSJ Says Pro-ACTA Forces Helped Drive Anti-ACTA Reactions
pbahra writes with commentary from the Wall Street Journal: "Europeans will take to the streets this weekend in protest at the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, an international agreement that has given birth to an ocean full of red herrings. That so many have spawned is, say critics, in no small part down to the way in which this most controversial of international agreements was drawn up. If the negotiating parties had set out to stoke the flames of Internet paranoia they could not have done a better job. Accepted there are two things that should never be seen being made in public—laws and sausages—the ACTA process could be a case study of how not to do it. Conducted in secret, with little information shared except a few leaked documents, the ACTA talks were even decried by those who were involved in them."
FYI, the TFA is the Wall Street Journal, which is (now) owned by News Corp. You remember: Rupert Murdock's gang of yellow journalists, criminals and corrupt police officers.
The article basically bashes anything anti-ACTA while trying to sound neutral. For example, it quotes 2 scholars who say that ACTA is a good thing, while admitting that their some paranoia out their about ACTA.
The whole article basically starts off with the premise that "copyright" is real property and that copying real property is "theft":
If you say copying other people's copyright is an OK thing to do, then you are saying that theft is OK. Everyone is very keen on sharing until it is their stuff that is being shared.
It's a VERY one sided article that sounds like it was sponsored and supervised by Rupert Murdock himself.
Of course copyright is not necessarily a bad thing, but demonizing the opposition to copyright and to ACTA in particular just demonstrates how useless Rupert Murdock's brand of journalism is.