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."

37 of 225 comments (clear)

  1. They Cannot Get Something of any Value? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    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?

    1. Re:They Cannot Get Something of any Value? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Can they violate GPL for American written software?

    2. Re:They Cannot Get Something of any Value? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      For products falling fully under US copyright like VirtualBox: sure. Same for GNU projects.
      For a lot of other GPL software a large to a majority of the contributors are from Europe and retain their copyright, and those could sue.
      I guess we have a wholly new reason to be against mandatory copyright assignment...

    3. Re:They Cannot Get Something of any Value? by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 3, Informative

      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?

      It's not a case of asking. They're taking what they are owed because the US is refusing to compensate them.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    4. Re:They Cannot Get Something of any Value? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They had an opportunity to ask for something valuable and instead asked for all the crap put out by Hollywood?

      It is actually quite smart. Their goal is to apply pressure on American politicians to abide by trade rules. Hollywood is very politically connected. The studios are big political donors, and they already have lots of lobbyists on K Street. If Hollywood squeals, Washington listens.

    5. Re:They Cannot Get Something of any Value? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The trouble here is that the U.S. is refusing to compensate them for money lost on gambling, but the money is lost because Americans can't really gamble online anymore: to the extent that they are able, the U.S. government has effectively banned internet gambling. While this is an incredibly stupid bit of policy -- taking loose money from websites run by American companies you can control and tax and shunting it all to websites run by people you can't tax who don't care about U.S. law -- it's basically an internal U.S. matter.

      Of course, it's not like the trade organizations haven't been used to destroy perfectly legitimate laws before... just try getting a carcinogenic gasoline additive banned in North America these days. But that doesn't make it reasonable. It just points out how questionable the underpinnings of the entire enterprise are.

      Also, I'm a little curious whether the $21 Million will be metered according to the "iTunes price" ($1 per song, or 21 million songs) or the "Jammie Thomas price" ($2,250 per song, or 9333 songs), or some token amount lie a penny a file (2.1 billion movies, songs, and texts sold). If the Antigua government just decides to give stock away, rather than seeking full compensation, does it ever have to stop? How do you set a price on something that is "temporarily free... until the total number of temporarily free things totals $21 million"? I'm sure there's a tighter definition in the legalese somewhere, but it's not immediately clear from the articles what it is.

      Then there's the real-world political implications of poking a very large bear. The U.S. tends to be very "hands off" when it comes to helping other countries with their trade problems (cigarette smuggling into Canada comes to mind). At the same time, the RIAA and MPAA are not known for their temperance. When some "rogue hacker" in no way associated with the U.S. government or one of these groups (no, really, we swear) manages to get some version of Flame on the Antigua servers, it's going to get very messy very quickly.

      This is kind of like the judge in a libel trial saying it's okay to resolve the matter with a duel to the death. It will end badly for pretty much everyone involved.

  2. RIAA maths by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    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!

    1. Re:RIAA maths by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This could be potentially very exciting in terms of orphaned works and works that are in danger of vanishing. That little nation could become the centre of the world's first truly global data archive.

  3. How does this affect copyleft? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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?

    1. Re:How does this affect copyleft? by Richard_at_work · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The ruling doesn't suspend everyone's obligations with regard to the copyrights involved, just Antigua's - while the copy sent to you may be unencmbered by a license, that doesn't mean you gain any rights to redistribution.

    2. Re:How does this affect copyleft? by Gaygirlie · · Score: 5, Interesting

      But alas, what does happen if you give an Antiguan a copy of something, then the person removes original copyright notices and replaces them with his/her own and distributes that copy to you? It's not anymore the original one, the copyright was stripped from it, you are not in the legal position to determine who the copyright really belongs to, and it could even be considered a derivative work -- does the suspension of copyright allow for a loophole that basically strips copyrights from an existing item and assigns a new one?

    3. Re:How does this affect copyleft? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 3, Informative

      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?

      Unlikely. Linux has contributions from around the world, and the copyright on those certainly has not been suspended.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  4. Karma is a.... by Sprouticus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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....

    1. Re:Karma is a.... by SJHillman · · Score: 4, Informative

      Note that the summary even mentions the US, as part of the WTO, approved the ruling.

    2. Re:Karma is a.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Note that the summary even mentions the US, as part of the WTO, approved the ruling.

      Wrong. The summary says that the US approved an agreement that allows rulings like this under certain circumstances.

      The US no more approved this ruling than the Senator from Arizona approved immigration reform -- which they just did contingent on securing the southern border. In neither case will they ever agree that the agreed-to condition has ever been satisfied.

    3. Re:Karma is a.... by Lazere · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I doubt it. This is a move fully backed by the WTO, of which the U.S. is a member. Any retaliation on the part of the U.S. for exercising the right the WTO has given them will not be looked on fondly. Odds are, if they do retaliate, they'll get an even bigger slap down.

  5. Bully tactics by sorensenbill · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Bully tactics by DarkOx · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    2. Re:Bully tactics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      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

      And that's kind of the problem, the US wants to have their cake and eat it too.

      They insist on free trade, but then they want to be sure to have an advantage. They want keep their own farm subsidies, but penalize anybody else who does it. They want other countries to open up their markets to US products, but not always the reverse.

      So America has a moral objection to gambling, big deal. That doesn't mean that another country should, or that it should be their job to police America citizens.

      America has always been inconsistent in how they do things, and mostly to their own advantage.

      Want to stop international entanglements? Fine. Stop trying to export your copyright laws, stop trying to be sure your own industries have access everywhere with no reciprocation. Stop doing stupid things like tying aid to promises to not teach contraception. Stop sending Monsato seed as food aid which carries an EULA that you won't save any seeds for next year to grow another crop.

      America sticks her nose into everybody else's business, pushes for 'free' trade ... and then tries to be sure that the agreement only goes one way and that they can dictate terms to the countries they sign agreements with.

      By all means, don't get entangled -- but don't act like it isn't the US who initiated these in the first place and then refuses to play by their own rules. Just stop being a bunch of self entitled bastards who think the world owes you something.

  6. Domain seizures ahead? by BSAtHome · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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).

    1. Re:Domain seizures ahead? by DarkOx · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't know that is tough one. Nobody can really force us to give up control of the root zones and the last time it was tried it was pretty unpopular.

      I really doubt our government would be inclined to yield control over an incident like this. For lots of technical reasons you could not very will mix root servers in your hints; if those root servers have a different idea of truth. You would get instability and chaos.

      If some international group or other country stand up its own root servers you will have chaos as well. Which DNS do you use? What domain registrations are valid where. What happens when I try to mail someone in another country does it go to the person I am expecting or someone else who happens to have the same domain on my DNS?

      We'd have to go back to bang paths.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
  7. Re:WTO is Full of.... by Splab · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No, it's absolutely how it should be.

    The U.S wont respect the agreements, then Antigua doesn't have to either. Just like any other trade sanction being used around the world - you go for where it hurts to make the big guy play ball.

  8. Is it legal to buy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

    1. Re:Is it legal to buy? by Sarten-X · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Import legality won't really be a big issue, because Antigua would be able to determine the import laws. The United States could limit exports, but the United States has already agreed to this plan on the WTO side, and the US has enough enemies that may be willing to act as intermediaries. For the paltry sum of $21 million/year, I doubt anyone will really be able to effectively stop this.

      However, note that the $21 million isn't necessarily sales, but rather copyright license fees (or at least that's what I suspect, because none of TFAs are clear on the matter). If the normal fee to the MPAA/RIAA were ten cents per item, Antigua could sell 210 million copies annually. That's a pretty reasonable amount, and does exactly what it's supposed to do: boost Antigua's economy at the United States' expense.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
  9. Re:WTO is Full of.... by DarkOx · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The WTO is not looking at is a one business though they are looking at as economies. Its not like they have an army to go pacify a nation state that is not following the rules it agreed to abide by. This type of action is the only way they have to apply pressure. It make perfect sense to me; piss off an industry with a powerful domestic lobby and hope they lean on their government to fix the situation and yesterday.

    Personally I hope the outcome is that our government does a re-think on being part of the WTO in the first place; that would be the best outcome for us citizens. That naturally is a pipe dream. We should negotiate trade agreements individually on a nation by nation basis (there is only about 400 after all our government is already BIG enough to read everyone e-mail so that should not be an issue). As to places like Antigua doing things like this or China for that matter well we either consider infringement on what we feel is our property a serious enough matter that its an act of war or we don't. I would seriously hope the answer to that is we don't but its a democracy let the people decided not some international body.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
  10. Re:WTO is Full of.... by Sique · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We should negotiate trade agreements individually on a nation by nation basis (there is only about 400 after all our government is already BIG enough to read everyone e-mail so that should not be an issue).

    You know what then will happen? All the other nations will form a common body for the sake of negotiations with the U.S., and the U.S. will be forced to sign the same treaty with everyone. You get the WTO again, but without the leverage of being a member.

    --
    .sig: Sique *sigh*
  11. Re:WTO is Full of.... by dkf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I hope the outcome is that our government does a re-think on being part of the WTO in the first place

    Careful for what you wish for; the outcomes might not be what you expect. For example, it would also mean that the rest of the world would feel no need at all to enforce copyrights held under US law, including on a lot of Free Software, or at least not until the negotiation of a whole new set of bipartite treaties.

    I wonder whether it would be legal now (if not necessarily moral) for an Antiguan citizen to do derivative works of software where the copyright holder is the FSF and change the license to a different one (e.g., a BSD variant)...

    --
    "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
  12. Re:Wait, What? by guises · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

  13. Re:WTO is Full of.... by nedlohs · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's how it always works. Restricting it to the same business won't work because usually there isn't a significant "same business".

    You put a tariff on importing their televisions, so they put a tariff on importing your wheat.

    The WTO was supposed to put a stop to that, but of course the only real enforcement mechanism it has is that very thing. "Hey the rules say you can't do that. Since you won't stop we'll let the other guy do this other thing that is also supposed to be against the rules".

  14. Re:Exactly by TFAFalcon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  15. Re:Exactly by nedlohs · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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).

  16. Bully tactic blowback sucks by hduff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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
  17. Re:WTO is Full of.... by Clsid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well, nobody forces you to sign those agreements. But if you want to get into the game, better play by the rules. So much for all the talk of free trade in the US.

  18. Re:WTO is Full of.... by JDG1980 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So basically one business is being unfairly discriminated against by a government being protectionist. So the WTO says ok in that case you can rip off this completely separate business. WTF are they smoking?

    This is nothing new. Google "chicken tax" – back in 1963, there was a trade war between the US and various European nations over tariffs they put on imported chicken. In retaliation, the US put a 25% tariff on several unrelated goods – including, most importantly, light trucks. Even though the original issues were resolved long ago, the 25% tariff on fully-assembled light trucks remains, which means that foreign manufacturers usually either build their truck plants inside the US or import the trucks in "complete knock down" form and assemble them in the US.

    Anyway, remember that copyright is purely a legal construct – it's not part of customary international law, it's just a deal that the governments agreed to. If there were no treaties in the first place, Antigua would be perfectly within their rights to say that they would not have any copyright or patent laws at all.

  19. Out of print by GreyWanderingRogue · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Could they sell copies of "Song of the South" or other items that copyright holders in the U.S. refuse to sell?

  20. Easy work-around by cfulmer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  21. Re:RIAA maths == Hollywood Accounting by DickBreath · · Score: 3, Funny

    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.