Dear Ladies and Gentlemen, Dear TL Community, Dear Admins,
It is of my concern that I have to shift attention to the european-wide demonstrations against ACTA at the 11th of February. ACTA is worse than SOPA ever was. The "Anti-Counterfeighting Trade Agreement" is a back room product of disgusting proportions. In Europe even the only democratic institition, the parliament, is not allowed to see the transscripts of that agreement. No major television studios in europe are reporting about it even though it will have a deep impact in our daily lifes. All informations about acta (at least what has leaked so far) is available at the following sites:
Tell it your friends, your family and try to convince them to set a sign together with you. Worst case is that even pages like teamliquid.net might not even survive when ACTA would hit legislation.
Short ACTA overview and what it does: tl;dr:
Let us try to make a big statement on saturday so the politicians will think twice about signing it. Even the slovenian minister which signed it apologized to the public afterwards when she became aware of what she actually signed there:
Because the farming and fishery delegation is obviously what decides on world wide trade agreements.
Purge the EU by fire and blood, its filled with elitist maggots that serve noone but themselves, least of all the people of Europa. Rebuild it right. Currently its more likely the people of europe will unite to overthrow the EU then it is they'll come togheter under it.
And on a more sane note: That image needs to be ~33% bigger font to be readable by people not favoured by fighterpilot eyesight.
LOL, love how it's the fault of EU. If any major government or most most small countries were against ACTA it would be dead. But they aren't. They're just happy to let the EU take the blame for it.
So the world is getting controlled by governments more and more... actually it is going fast. They want to control everything now... Well its the people that can change it, but NO ONE will stand up. Occupy is doing okay, but people that don't understand politics, will not give a fuck and let the government control them. Just sad. Canada is a copy country and they will do whatever USA will do (C - 11).
This is sad, i had a feeling this would happen for some time. No such thing as Rights or Freedom. Never was and never going to be, if no one will help to change. "They don't care about us! "
It has been discussed to death with some people being for it and most people being againts. The truth seems to be on the halfway: If ACTA is implemented it does not have to change that many laws though some (mostly non internet-related and concerning bordersearches) will most likely get stricter. As such ACTA will not be able to change much and most likely the poster is not true in a strictly legal sense,
The truely sad thing about ACTA, however, is that judges have to start using ACTA as part of the rational behind verdicts. It will make "damages" in copyright-cases significantly larger than today and the even more scary part is that the doom and gloom parts in ACTA is impossible to understand for anyone since the real problems arise from the initial statements of how ACTA is meant to be read and those have not been published, not even for EP who have to ratify the deal! They are therefore not in a position to see the consequenses of their choice.
Another and much scarier truth is that ACTA is 100% one-sided in favor of protecting IPR. If a government just copy-pastes ACTA to their laws without a huge chunk of exceptions it will essentially give roots to far more fascist opresion of free speech than what is in effect in China. Nobody can stop Hungary from implementing that with slightly hidden suppression of the opposition!
ACTA is not bad in itself. The problems start when the connotations kick in!
Pointless to fight against it. SOPA didn't pass, a lot of good it did for all the file hosters. Government want to do what they want, it would be nice if it was legal and legitimate, but it sure as hell doesn't need to be.
On February 08 2012 07:01 ddrddrddrddr wrote: Pointless to fight against it. SOPA didn't pass, a lot of good it did for all the file hosters. Government want to do what they want, it would be nice if it was legal and legitimate, but it sure as hell doesn't need to be.
Totally unrelated to SOPA and ACTA. If they want to spend money on bringing down illegal websites then that is fine, the owner of mega upload did allot of bad things and wasn't exactly a saint.
On February 08 2012 07:01 ddrddrddrddr wrote: Pointless to fight against it. SOPA didn't pass, a lot of good it did for all the file hosters. Government want to do what they want, it would be nice if it was legal and legitimate, but it sure as hell doesn't need to be.
Well, since we should be in a democracy we still have some influence on what they do and whatnot. plus we have the obligation to stand up against wrong directions like ACTA.
The EP still has to vote on this...and they will probably vote it off.
The EP doesnt have to vote if all countries ratify it. And that's the big problem about it. With all the twists and turns and back room agreements the treatment stinks to heaven.
Sweden signed it, i dont anyone expected Sweden to sign it. It was a huge surprise to me and i am disgusted with my own government, they bend the truth on so many levels on the government webpage where they explain ACTA and answer some criticism. Other then that like 0 media coverage, no debate, nobody is putting the government up to stand for this action. They are just being silent hoping if they dont talk about it they can pass it behind our backs.
On February 08 2012 05:14 radiatoren wrote: If a government just copy-pastes ACTA to their laws without a huge chunk of exceptions it will essentially give roots to far more fascist opresion of free speech than what is in effect in China. Nobody can stop Hungary from implementing that with slightly hidden suppression of the opposition!
There is absolutely no way that this would happen. What has stopping illegal filesharing go to do with free speech? I just don't understand you people's line of argument. There is no way Chinese repression would be allowed under EU law, which is a much stronger system of treaties than one trade agreement.
Although you can't deny that these protests and all the opposition are having an effect to change the policy of governments involved in this agreement. In my opinion if governments want to push through anti-copyright legislation they should make it a lot more well restricted and avoid the scope being too broad, make it very specifically entirely about torrent websites or whatever. This way they will be able to categorically all this free speech talk which I still think is a smokescreen to be able to keep downloading things for free.
On February 08 2012 05:14 radiatoren wrote: If a government just copy-pastes ACTA to their laws without a huge chunk of exceptions it will essentially give roots to far more fascist opresion of free speech than what is in effect in China. Nobody can stop Hungary from implementing that with slightly hidden suppression of the opposition!
There is absolutely no way that this would happen. What has stopping illegal filesharing go to do with free speech? I just don't understand you people's line of argument. There is no way Chinese repression would be allowed under EU law, which is a much stronger system of treaties than one trade agreement.
Although you can't deny that these protests and all the opposition are having an effect to change the policy of governments involved in this agreement. In my opinion if governments want to push through anti-copyright legislation they should make it a lot more well restricted and avoid the scope being too broad, make it very specifically entirely about torrent websites or whatever. This way they will be able to categorically all this free speech talk which I still think is a smokescreen to be able to keep downloading things for free.
What I wrote has absolutely nothing to do with illegal filesharing. What I am commenting on is the empowerment of companies to appear as police and judge at the same time. Thanks for strawmanning me...
One example that I would bring forth is the Sony-case, where a man found the illegal rootkit installed by Sony. If you do not have an exception towards reverse engineering, the man would have been in jail and Sony would still have installed rootkits at random since the govermentcontrol is almost none-existent. That is censorship of free speach and has nothing at all to do with the piratebay-junkies and their illegitmate claims for breech of free speach.
The DNS-blocking that was in the previous version would be extremely controversial since DNS-blocking is completely meaningless for anyone with even the slightest clue about the internet, since it is extremely easy to get past, even unintentionally unless all countries in the world would ratify it! You are restricting me from using the internet freely based on geography. That is exactly what is happening in China. If you read the existing text it has the possibility to use such a measure.
You are correct that if they want to stop anything on the internet it should be a lot less wishywashy. It would be a million times better than creation your own little team, make a "trade-agreement" in total darkness and get it passed as if it was nothing without sufficient involvement from outside your own special interests.
The buttomline is that DNS-blocking is not the way to solve the problem! Pushing it as such is totally dishonest or ignorant...
On February 08 2012 05:14 radiatoren wrote: If a government just copy-pastes ACTA to their laws without a huge chunk of exceptions it will essentially give roots to far more fascist opresion of free speech than what is in effect in China. Nobody can stop Hungary from implementing that with slightly hidden suppression of the opposition!
There is absolutely no way that this would happen. What has stopping illegal filesharing go to do with free speech? I just don't understand you people's line of argument. There is no way Chinese repression would be allowed under EU law, which is a much stronger system of treaties than one trade agreement.
Although you can't deny that these protests and all the opposition are having an effect to change the policy of governments involved in this agreement. In my opinion if governments want to push through anti-copyright legislation they should make it a lot more well restricted and avoid the scope being too broad, make it very specifically entirely about torrent websites or whatever. This way they will be able to categorically all this free speech talk which I still think is a smokescreen to be able to keep downloading things for free.
What I wrote has absolutely nothing to do with illegal filesharing. What I am commenting on is the empowerment of companies to appear as police and judge at the same time. Thanks for strawmanning me...
One example that I would bring forth is the Sony-case, where a man found the illegal rootkit installed by Sony. If you do not have an exception towards reverse engineering, the man would have been in jail and Sony would still have installed rootkits at random since the govermentcontrol is almost none-existent. That is censorship of free speach and has nothing at all to do with the piratebay-junkies and their illegitmate claims for breech of free speach.
The DNS-blocking that was in the previous version would be extremely controversial since DNS-blocking is completely meaningless for anyone with even the slightest clue about the internet, since it is extremely easy to get past, even unintentionally unless all countries in the world would ratify it! You are restricting me from using the internet freely based on geography. That is exactly what is happening in China. If you read the existing text it has the possibility to use such a measure.
You are correct that if they want to stop anything on the internet it should be a lot less wishywashy. It would be a million times better than creation your own little team, make a "trade-agreement" in total darkness and get it passed as if it was nothing without sufficient involvement from outside your own special interests.
Could you point that out in the current text? I thought it was taken out in the last revision and cannot find such a provision at the moment.
On February 08 2012 05:14 radiatoren wrote: If a government just copy-pastes ACTA to their laws without a huge chunk of exceptions it will essentially give roots to far more fascist opresion of free speech than what is in effect in China. Nobody can stop Hungary from implementing that with slightly hidden suppression of the opposition!
There is absolutely no way that this would happen. What has stopping illegal filesharing go to do with free speech? I just don't understand you people's line of argument. There is no way Chinese repression would be allowed under EU law, which is a much stronger system of treaties than one trade agreement.
Although you can't deny that these protests and all the opposition are having an effect to change the policy of governments involved in this agreement. In my opinion if governments want to push through anti-copyright legislation they should make it a lot more well restricted and avoid the scope being too broad, make it very specifically entirely about torrent websites or whatever. This way they will be able to categorically all this free speech talk which I still think is a smokescreen to be able to keep downloading things for free.
What I wrote has absolutely nothing to do with illegal filesharing. What I am commenting on is the empowerment of companies to appear as police and judge at the same time. Thanks for strawmanning me...
One example that I would bring forth is the Sony-case, where a man found the illegal rootkit installed by Sony. If you do not have an exception towards reverse engineering, the man would have been in jail and Sony would still have installed rootkits at random since the govermentcontrol is almost none-existent. That is censorship of free speach and has nothing at all to do with the piratebay-junkies and their illegitmate claims for breech of free speach.
The DNS-blocking that was in the previous version would be extremely controversial since DNS-blocking is completely meaningless for anyone with even the slightest clue about the internet, since it is extremely easy to get past, even unintentionally unless all countries in the world would ratify it! You are restricting me from using the internet freely based on geography. That is exactly what is happening in China. If you read the existing text it has the possibility to use such a measure.
You are correct that if they want to stop anything on the internet it should be a lot less wishywashy. It would be a million times better than creation your own little team, make a "trade-agreement" in total darkness and get it passed as if it was nothing without sufficient involvement from outside your own special interests.
Could you point that out in the current text? I thought it was taken out in the last revision and cannot find such a provision at the moment.
We are discussing a "what if" scenario. If you look at section 5.6 it can be done by DNS-blocking as a possible measure. Besides: If DNS-blocking wasn't possible in ACTA, Denmark would have to change laws to get in line and that is something that will not happen according to the government.
On February 08 2012 05:14 radiatoren wrote: If a government just copy-pastes ACTA to their laws without a huge chunk of exceptions it will essentially give roots to far more fascist opresion of free speech than what is in effect in China. Nobody can stop Hungary from implementing that with slightly hidden suppression of the opposition!
There is absolutely no way that this would happen. What has stopping illegal filesharing go to do with free speech? I just don't understand you people's line of argument. There is no way Chinese repression would be allowed under EU law, which is a much stronger system of treaties than one trade agreement.
Although you can't deny that these protests and all the opposition are having an effect to change the policy of governments involved in this agreement. In my opinion if governments want to push through anti-copyright legislation they should make it a lot more well restricted and avoid the scope being too broad, make it very specifically entirely about torrent websites or whatever. This way they will be able to categorically all this free speech talk which I still think is a smokescreen to be able to keep downloading things for free.
What I wrote has absolutely nothing to do with illegal filesharing. What I am commenting on is the empowerment of companies to appear as police and judge at the same time. Thanks for strawmanning me...
One example that I would bring forth is the Sony-case, where a man found the illegal rootkit installed by Sony. If you do not have an exception towards reverse engineering, the man would have been in jail and Sony would still have installed rootkits at random since the govermentcontrol is almost none-existent. That is censorship of free speach and has nothing at all to do with the piratebay-junkies and their illegitmate claims for breech of free speach.
The DNS-blocking that was in the previous version would be extremely controversial since DNS-blocking is completely meaningless for anyone with even the slightest clue about the internet, since it is extremely easy to get past, even unintentionally unless all countries in the world would ratify it! You are restricting me from using the internet freely based on geography. That is exactly what is happening in China. If you read the existing text it has the possibility to use such a measure.
You are correct that if they want to stop anything on the internet it should be a lot less wishywashy. It would be a million times better than creation your own little team, make a "trade-agreement" in total darkness and get it passed as if it was nothing without sufficient involvement from outside your own special interests.
Could you point that out in the current text? I thought it was taken out in the last revision and cannot find such a provision at the moment.
We are discussing a "what if" scenario. If you look at section 5.6 it can be done by DNS-blocking as a possible measure. Besides: If DNS-blocking wasn't possible in ACTA, Denmark would have to change laws to get in line and that is something that will not happen according to the government.
Do you mean that the ACTA committee may, according to 36.2 (c) "consider any proposed amendments to this Agreement in accordance with Article 42 (Amendments);" which reads "A Party may propose amendments to this Agreement to the Committee. The Committee shall decide whether to present a proposed amendment to the Parties for ratification, acceptance, or approval. "
From which follows article 36.6 "The Committee may amend the rules and procedures. " that you referred to.
But all this says is that there's a committee that discusses amendments and does the paperwork, the amendments do not go through without "the parties" ie. countries ratifying, accepting or approving it. So the committee itself cannot make DNS-blocking possible, it's the individual countries that need to do it.
On February 08 2012 05:14 radiatoren wrote: If a government just copy-pastes ACTA to their laws without a huge chunk of exceptions it will essentially give roots to far more fascist opresion of free speech than what is in effect in China. Nobody can stop Hungary from implementing that with slightly hidden suppression of the opposition!
There is absolutely no way that this would happen. What has stopping illegal filesharing go to do with free speech? I just don't understand you people's line of argument. There is no way Chinese repression would be allowed under EU law, which is a much stronger system of treaties than one trade agreement.
Although you can't deny that these protests and all the opposition are having an effect to change the policy of governments involved in this agreement. In my opinion if governments want to push through anti-copyright legislation they should make it a lot more well restricted and avoid the scope being too broad, make it very specifically entirely about torrent websites or whatever. This way they will be able to categorically all this free speech talk which I still think is a smokescreen to be able to keep downloading things for free.
What I wrote has absolutely nothing to do with illegal filesharing. What I am commenting on is the empowerment of companies to appear as police and judge at the same time. Thanks for strawmanning me...
One example that I would bring forth is the Sony-case, where a man found the illegal rootkit installed by Sony. If you do not have an exception towards reverse engineering, the man would have been in jail and Sony would still have installed rootkits at random since the govermentcontrol is almost none-existent. That is censorship of free speach and has nothing at all to do with the piratebay-junkies and their illegitmate claims for breech of free speach.
The DNS-blocking that was in the previous version would be extremely controversial since DNS-blocking is completely meaningless for anyone with even the slightest clue about the internet, since it is extremely easy to get past, even unintentionally unless all countries in the world would ratify it! You are restricting me from using the internet freely based on geography. That is exactly what is happening in China. If you read the existing text it has the possibility to use such a measure.
You are correct that if they want to stop anything on the internet it should be a lot less wishywashy. It would be a million times better than creation your own little team, make a "trade-agreement" in total darkness and get it passed as if it was nothing without sufficient involvement from outside your own special interests.
Could you point that out in the current text? I thought it was taken out in the last revision and cannot find such a provision at the moment.
We are discussing a "what if" scenario. If you look at section 5.6 it can be done by DNS-blocking as a possible measure. Besides: If DNS-blocking wasn't possible in ACTA, Denmark would have to change laws to get in line and that is something that will not happen according to the government.
Do you mean that the ACTA committee may, according to 36.2 (c) "consider any proposed amendments to this Agreement in accordance with Article 42 (Amendments);" which reads "A Party may propose amendments to this Agreement to the Committee. The Committee shall decide whether to present a proposed amendment to the Parties for ratification, acceptance, or approval. "
From which follows article 36.6 "The Committee may amend the rules and procedures. " that you referred to.
But all this says is that there's a committee that discusses amendments and does the paperwork, the amendments do not go through without "the parties" ie. countries ratifying, accepting or approving it. So the committee itself cannot make DNS-blocking possible, it's the individual countries that need to do it.
The point was "if ACTA is implemented in the strictest fascion possible it would entail a huge reduction of freedom". You are arguing completely according to EU protocol, which does not influence the hypothetical situation.
On February 12 2012 00:04 radiatoren wrote: One example that I would bring forth is the Sony-case, where a man found the illegal rootkit installed by Sony. If you do not have an exception towards reverse engineering, the man would have been in jail and Sony would still have installed rootkits at random since the govermentcontrol is almost none-existent. That is censorship of free speach and has nothing at all to do with the piratebay-junkies and their illegitmate claims for breech of free speach.
I find it extremely hard to believe that a man who discovered an illegal rootkit from a company, albeit by an illegal method, would have been sentenced particularly harshly...unless he were in the business of regularly reverse engineering products so that he could pass their details on to copying companies...in which case it would be fair he faced punishment for that.
You see, whilst YOUR arguments may be fine, and make sense, and be valid...there are so many people jumping on this bandwagon just because they like the free ride that the internet gives them, and they are trying to pin the moral tail on the donkey by whatever twisted and convoluted language they can. If you actually pin half the people attacking ACTA down, I'd wager they have no specificity in their arguments.
Thanks to everyone for participating. We had 16k in munich alone. I guess 100k+ in germany and in EU between 500k-1mil. (depending on numbers). The demonstrations were a great success and even the gov of germany did decide beforehand to not sign it yet, it send the proper signal to the politicians for now!
Watch out for now. I bet other " harmless agreements" will come our way ^^
The european stop ACTA day has passed, and yesterday and today a lot of my friends were asking what that was all about - people are reading about it in the news (austria and germany had tv coverage) and I am pretty sure that there are going to be a lot more people at the next demonstration. The real danger is that people will forget about it in 2 months, and it will pass anyway. Stall tactic can be very efficient, and has been in the past. We just have to remind our and the EU`s parliament that is is not allowed to pass, and keep at it.
Lets do this
Edit : Oh I could chant "ACTA ! AD ACTA!" all day long. Damn you latin fools.
Here is the video I made for the Anti-ACTA Prostest in Saarbrücken. Saarbrücken is just a small city with only 180.000 ppl and still we had around 2000 ppl protesting (which is huge). The video is in german and in the beginning it says: "Dear members of the european parlament... around 2000 ppl in saarbrücken want to tell you something:"
On February 12 2012 00:31 iloveav wrote: Government: A way to legalize "what i want, as long as i have half a decent way to back up my moral choices".
And we have allowed this since like.... Ancient Egypt? And then we think we are "intelligent creatures".
We are dumb sheeps. People who has too much power always end up retarded, abusing children and such. I agree so much with you! LETS END IT RIGHT NOW WITH A REVOLOUTION
It's nice to see so many people oppose ACTA all of Europe. Australia has already signed it from what I've heard but I haven't noticed any differences to the internet. I think the reason was it wouldn't change the internet laws that Australia already had. How would this be different in Europe? I'm just curious and I don't want to spend a lot of time researching this so could someone explain?
5000 people (according to police) opposing ACTA in Stuttgart., Germany. The video can't do the demo justice. It was an overwhelming amount of people peacefully marching through the city at adverse wheather conditions. video compilation made by a youtube user (1 hour long)
On February 12 2012 22:39 SocialStigma wrote: It's nice to see so many people oppose ACTA all of Europe. Australia has already signed it from what I've heard but I haven't noticed any differences to the internet. I think the reason was it wouldn't change the internet laws that Australia already had. How would this be different in Europe? I'm just curious and I don't want to spend a lot of time researching this so could someone explain?
it isnt in effect yet, they just collect the sign-ins for now. it gives companies the right and DUTY to controll your personal internet usage directly, just like music companies have direct access to youtube and can block things there at will.
it is very dangerous and also the EU is build very undemocratic, it will pass there eventually.
On February 12 2012 23:32 Liff wrote: 5000 people (according to police) opposing ACTA in Stuttgart., Germany. The video can't do the demo justice. It was an overwhelming amount of people peacefully marching through the city at adverse wheather conditions. video compilation made by a youtube user (1 hour long)
There is an official E-Petition on the site of german federal parliament... I know this is for germans only, but I'll post it anyways. I hope my fellow germans will sign up in large numbers ;-)