Slashdot Mirror


Bye ACTA, Hello CETA

New submitter xSander writes "Is anyone really surprised by this? ACTA may have been rejected by the European Parliment, but it is far from dead yet. Apparently, the EU is trying to revive ACTA through the Canada-EU Trade Agreement (CETA)." The article contains a handy side-by-side comparison of the CETA clauses that are nearly identical to ones found in ACTA.

12 of 225 comments (clear)

  1. Let them talk forever, it's what the EU is for by captainpanic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How long will this continue to go on?

    Hopefully forever. European counties founded the EU because it's better to keep the politicians talking about money than to have them threaten each other and start a war. First it was a union for coal and steel, now it's apparently music and entertainment. Same thing though: it keeps them occupied, and the results are generally a bit less awful than a world war.

    The more they talk, the less harm is done.

  2. This is war by Pecisk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If someone didn't understand, this is war. We have billions industry fighting this who has lot of money to waste on politicians and lobbying, and they won't give up their rights to get easy money without any economical logic. This ain't first, and won't be our last battle, and we should accept this as that. What's good that this also creates generation of new politicians who are very informed about moral/economical/legal issues of IPR regimes. More they pushing this, more people see what's their real aims are.

    --
    user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
  3. Amateur protestors vs professional lobbyists by Rogerborg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is the lobbyists 9-5 (well, 11-3 including a 2 hour expenses lunch) job. It's just going to go on and on and on, and they will never stop, ever, regardless of either setback or success. There won't be enough profit or laws or mandatory nagware or State enforcement to satisfy them, because this is what they do. This is all that they do.

    While we won the battle on the barricades, they continued the war by creeping in through the sewers. They're in this for the duration, and so we have to be too.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    1. Re:Amateur protestors vs professional lobbyists by Andtalath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As long as they are on the offense, we are on the defence.

      Meaning, even if they don't win, we don't either.

      That's why the actual goal is to attack them.

  4. Re:Not a surprise by ifiwereasculptor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't really decide if that's extremely funny or incredibly scary. Did she actually say that people should have nothing to do with laws? That she'd keep pushing it covertly until it passed, making no compromises? Whoever votes for that woman is a very special kind of idiot.

  5. Re:Not a surprise by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We don't really vote for MEPs. We vote for European political parties, almost all of which are made up of groups of national political parties. So people end up voting for the same party they vote for in their own country, and it's often not the best and brightest who advance to European politics, quite the contrary in fact. It seems that the only "good" politicians who get into europarliament are the onces who need a bit of a break from the busy life of national politics.

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
  6. I'm reminded of the EU referendum in Ireland by Fixer40000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You will vote on this referendum again and again until we get the result we want.

    At which point you will be stuck with it forever.

    Democracy in action.

  7. It never will by oztiks · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Name your reason, kiddy porn, hacking, illegal downloads, so on and so fourth.

    Polticans will think they are doing the world/country justice trying to eliminate one of the above problems, they put forward a policy until its very many faults are examined and it's abandoned.

    Another policitican comes along, thinks they are doing the world/country a justice trying to eliminate one of the above problems, except for the last one cause that's still in the news, they put forward a policy until its very many faults are examined and it's abandoned.

    Another politician comes along ........

  8. Re:Great by siddesu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You can blame anyone you choose, but your reasoning is faulty.

    In general, the leverage that the European citizens have over the EC is significantly smaller than the leverage the Americans have over their federal government. This is so because of the way EC commissars .... ops, commissioners are appointed to serve, and because of the complex patron-client relationships that exist between the various national political elites that make the appointments, the European Council, the key commissars and the major European "parties".

    In this specific instance, the only body of the EU that represents the "little guys" directly, the European Parliament, rejected ACTA very clearly (and under massive grassroots pressure), so you cannot really blame the EU electorate.

    What you are witnessing here is a small clique of euro bureaucrats gaming the rules of the EU, trying to subvert the will of this elected body. They are the ones who should bear all the blame.

  9. Then it will be revived again by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Eventually, protesters run out of steam. High-paid lobbyists don't stop. This sort of thing will be revived over and over until the industry gets what it wants. That's how democracy works, right? Keep demanding things until people lose the energy to vote against you.

    --
    Palm trees and 8
  10. Re:Great by gorzek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You can thank Ronald Reagan for much of that sentiment: the idea that the government is incompetent at best, evil at worst. The federal income tax burden on someone making around minimum wage is not just non-existent, it's negative: the Earned Income Tax Credit is a refundable credit available to the poor, meaning they can get back more than they paid (and they often pay next to nothing.)

    If they want to whine about something, maybe they should look at the regressive taxes that disproportionately hurt the poor: gasoline taxes, sales taxes, and the like.

    Americans benefit in a lot of ways from the various social programs we have. Food stamps, unemployment, Medicaid, Medicare, TANF, Social Security, etc. etc. The individual who never draws on any of these is a rare creature, indeed, perhaps even mythical. They are there in case you need them. Claims of fraud are generally exaggerated, except in Medicare, which has massive levels of fraud that somehow don't get talked about.

    I've noticed that a lot of the "low tax, small government" conservatives are "pre-rich." They think they will be wealthy one day, and the thought of Uncle Sam taking a good chunk of it is horrifying to them. Never mind that if you are pulling down over a quarter million a year, you aren't going to miss a few tens of thousands. Well, maybe you'll have to settle for one Lexus instead of two?

    Oddly enough, I make more money than the vast majority of people who spout such rubbish, and I never complain about paying my taxes, even though they are in the five figures per year. I value the services that the government provides to people less fortunate than me, because I value having a functional society and a government that respects and upholds the social contract. What disgusts me is our runaway defense spending--as if killing foreigners is more important than looking after our own people. It's curious how the same people who are against spending money on the poor and sick are nevertheless fine with dropping billions on boondoggle weapons systems and wars in the Middle East. Talk about fucked up priorities.

  11. Re:Great by gorzek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The idea that hard work == material success is very Calvinist in origin--not a surprise that so many Americans buy into it unthinkingly. Calvinist doctrine and the Protestant work ethic are deeply-ingrained traits of our culture. It's a circular bit of logic born out of a belief in double predestination: God has elected who will go to heaven and who will go to hell; he blesses those who will go to heaven with material success; those people are successful because they worked hard and God rewarded them; therefore, they will go to heaven. This allows its adherents an airtight logic loop: people who are poor are being punished for not working hard enough, and God knew they wouldn't work hard enough to be successful, that's why they aren't among the Elect. The wealthy are so because God ordained them to be, because he knew they would work hard for it.

    In this way, both the rich and poor divinely deserve their fates, which are simultaneously determined in advance and the result of free will (in your hard work/lack thereof.)

    Most Americans never stop to think about it beyond the level of "hard work == success," but the theological beliefs underpinning it are pervasive.

    Naturally, societies not poisoned by this Calvinist bullshit recognize that success and failure are a product of the circumstances of one's birth, upbringing, work habits, education (and access to it), healthcare (and access to it), and just plain dumb luck. How hard you work certainly plays into it, but it is not the sole factor, and often not even the most important factor. That's not an excuse to be a lazy ass, of course, but it's an acknowledgment that reality is not a black-and-white place where the good people are Christians who worked hard and got rich and the bad people are heathens who never did anything with their lives and remained poor.