Slashdot Mirror
WTO Approves Suspension of US Copyright in Antigua
hydrofix writes "On Thursday TorrentFreak broke the story (verified by BBC) that the government of Antigua and Barbuda, a tiny island nation on the Caribbean, was planning to launch a legal 'pirate' website selling movies, music and software without paying a penny to U.S. copyright holders. Now, the World Trade Organization has given its final approval for the Antigua government to launch the website. The decision follows from long-running trade dispute between the countries, related to online gambling, which was ruled in Antigua's favor in 2005. After the United States refused to compensate, the WTO granted Antigua the right to 'suspend' U.S. copyrights for up to $21 million annually."
From the article: "The Antiguan government further reiterated today that the term 'piracy' doesn’t apply in this situation, as they are fully authorized to suspend U.S. copyrights. It is a legal remedy that was approved by all WTO members, including the United States."
What the hell? They had an opportunity to ask for something valuable and instead asked for all the crap put out by Hollywood? Why not just ask for a few beads on a string?
A limit of $21 million per year? What's that 3, 3 1/2 songs? Best get in there quick if you want to buy this year!
The GPL and friends rely on copyright to function correctly. Can I get someone in Antigua to send me a copy of Linux (or whatever) unencumbered by the GPL for me to start a proprietary fork?
This is what happens when you try to strong arm countries and, then, when the ruling goes against you, you ignore it.
B&A is going to make $21 million really fast. The question is who sets the prices....
As a US Citizen I'm glad to see them stand up to our government's bully tactics. I hope they follow through and set an example for other countries currently getting strong armed. I think it's pretty funny they knew where to hit the politicians where it hurts, a gut shot to the copyright lobby. I really hate the way this fuels international perception of Americans, our government may feel this way but I'd say it has more to do with campaign money than actually representing the collective public interest.
Btw I don't like copywright but this is just wrong
Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
Lets see if they use a domain registrar that has US roots/ties and then the DHS will seize the domain name of the site(s).
Whilst it may be legal for them to sell $21million worth of copyright content, is it legal to import that content, be it via download or otherwise?
This is the whole grey market import thing ...
As to "what makes up $21million", that depends on their sticker prices, not court payments.
They're allowed to sell $21million worth of material, so at $20/movie (for example), that's 1,000,000 movies.
Or at $2/song, that's ~10,000,000 iTunes tracks.
Presumably the MPAA/RIAA could garner up a few people and spend $21million "overnight", sacrificing 1 day of sales to mean that the other 364 days of the year would not be free of copyright. But that's tin foil hat stuff and requires that the long term gain be more than the short term loss and for the *AA to recognise that.
You're missing the point, if gambling were illegal in the US then the Antiguan casinos wouldn't have been able to petition the WTO for remedy. A country is allowed to dictate whether an activity is legal within its borders, but it is not allowed to make it legal for its own businesses while excluding a foreign competitor.
If I recall correctly, this was something to do with horse racing in Kentucky (or was that another case?) where the Kentucky state government was attempting to protect gambling revenue by barring online casinos. There was a bit about suspending their domain names as well, a lot of judicial overreach on that one.
But seizing money would chase away future business. This way they can get their money from people that they don't care if they offend.
Except those casino operators are the very things they want to operate in their country. So seizing assets from them would likely cause more long term harm (by causing casino operators to move somewhere that doesn't have a history for seizing casino assets).
I think its also a cautionary tale about these world governing bodies and making treaties. Our earliest founders warned us about getting into international entanglements. This is clear example of how these things don't always come out as planned. We might be strong arming China one week, but might have some rulings like these go against our interests another, and it makes us look like real ass hats when we try and argue these international bodies should be abide by one moment and than ignore them the next.
Yeah, it sucks when you must follow rules you agreed to, especially hwne you intended to use thoe rules to strong-arm others.
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
What everyones real question is, can I download Hollywood stuff legally from Antigua servers. I don't bittorrent any shows or movies but if it was cheap enough I'd do this (if it was legal).
Not really, no. The old article was from the 24th, stating that this was probably going to happen, and the new one is from the 28th, stating that yes, this is actually going to happen as the WTO has approved it. There's a big difference between a small country saying they will take US copyrights at whim and the WTO saying they are allowed to.
I live in constant fear of the Coming of the Red Spiders.
Could they sell copies of "Song of the South" or other items that copyright holders in the U.S. refuse to sell?
The point is, that the US has a de facto monopoly on international money transfers, since almost all sites need VISA and MasterCard as payment processors. The US has abused its power by going after e.g. Russian sites trading with European customers, by simply shutting them down at VISA and MasterCard. That's what's wrong with the system: the US has a stranglehold on the international money flow, even between countries that are not doing business with the US.
cpghost at Cordula's Web.
You have a long history of "piracy". Embrace it...
Except gambling is illegal in the US.
Or rather, the US is not some sort of Soviet style hegemony.
Saying that gambling is legal in the US is much like saying it's legal in Europe or Africa. People tend to forget that the "States" part of "The United States" actually are distinct political entities.
In some regards they are even more independent than the members of the EU (ironically enough).
If the feds tried to impose upon the States what Bonn wants to impose upon Spain or Greece, there would be another civil war.
That's not even getting into the whole VICE aspect of the situation.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Affected US companies just need to create foreign subsidiaries and then assign their copyrights over to those subsidiaries. Problem solved. Heck, some of these companies probably already hold their IP offshore.
Mark Dayton (Governor of MN) and Democrats in the State House are talking about extending State Sales Tax to i8nclude Digital Downloads.
I don't think they are going to get much revenue if people in MN just download the digital content from Antigua
Like pretty much all of international law (except the fairly narrow domain of international criminal law regarding war crimes and crimes against humanity as embodied in various ad hoc war crimes tribunals and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court), the entities at issue in the WTO are nation-states, not individuals or "businesses".
So, it is not "one business is being unfairly discriminated against" and retaliation against a "completely separate business". It is one nation-state discriminating against imports from another nation-state, and the victim nation-state being allowed to retaliate against the offending nation-state.
We don't have a world government that deals with disputes between businesses, we have treaty organizations that deal with disputes between nation-states. That's a consequence of an international regime driven first and foremost, almost without exception, by the idea that nations are completely sovereign within their jurisdiction, with international organizations governing only the relations between those nation-states.
Under Hollywood Accounting rules, Antigua would need to set up a store that sells Imaginary Property (IP). Then they would need to set up several other organizations that bill the store various "fees".
Under Hollywood Accounting rules, this is perfectly acceptable. The US should not complain.
Until the store eventually turns a profit, that $21 Million that Antigua is owed cannot be repaid.
I hope those "fees" won't get too high. I mean, it could take Billions and Billions of dollars in sales in order to eventually turn $21 Million in profit.
Heck, the Star Wars movies from the 1970's still are not profitable!. So poor Antigua may never get the $21 Million that the WTO says it is owed.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
the U.S. government has effectively banned internet gambling...[snip]... it's basically an internal U.S. matter.
No, if the US banned online gambling outright there would not be a problem. The problem is they allow US companies to run gambling sites but will not allow companies from other nations to compete under the same laws (such as paying tax). The other member countries are also obliged to allow US companies to offer gambling in their country under the same regulatory regime as their local companies.
Disadvantaging overseas competition is called "protectionism", it gives domestic companies an "unfair" advantage. One of the reasons the WTO was set up was to discourage protectionism, that's why the WTO has punished the US.
It will end badly for pretty much everyone involved.
No, the US will simply ignore it, it's a very cheap alternative to a trade war.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Eh?
You are quite wrong in what you state.
First, Bonn hasn't been the seat of German federal government for over a decade. Second, Germany imposes nothing upon Spain or Greece, they just enumerate conditions for credits way below the market price. Both Spain and Greece are free to declare bankruptcy and leave the union. They most certainly don't want that.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap