USTR Statement On ACTA Makes No Mention Of Releasing Latest Draft

from the one-time-deal? dept

Well, the latest round of ACTA negotiations have concluded and the USTR has released one of its patented content-free statements about what happened. Most notable, of course, is what is absent: there is no indication that negotiators plan on releasing the latest draft. Remember, that it was in the USTR's statement following the last round that it announced plans to release the draft. This was what many folks had feared. Negotiators released the one draft so that they could claim they were being transparent, and then went right back to secrecy. On top of that, the USTR seems to imply that it was "transparent" this time around because it met with some civil societies who have concerns about ACTA. Of course, it leaves out how negotiators dodged most of the questions. That's not transparency. It's just sad.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 1st, 2010 @ 4:48pm

    "it leaves out how negotiators dodged most of the questions. That's not transparency. It's just sad." - no, it is just proof that even as a guru, you still do not wag the dog.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    FUTUER ACTA ENFORCER, Jul 1st, 2010 @ 4:53pm

    Re:

    You'll all pay.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Keven Sutton, Jul 1st, 2010 @ 5:05pm

    And Thus....

    ...France becomes a totalitarian state, a Dictatorship.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    gooberly, Jul 1st, 2010 @ 5:47pm

    This all seems so outlandish, it's surreal actually. The economy is headed to the toilet once again, and the Obama administration seems hell bent on pushing this agenda, on top of the other agendas he inherited. It's not that I care so much about the facade that they put up in an effort to make this look like something for the people.. it's absolutely 100% against the people. It's something that NO NATION could pass without corruption. We really are in uncharted waters here, unlike the hyperbole of what the mainstream news reports.

    The seizure of our liberties at the behest of one industry is exactly what the founders of nations fear. It's not that different really, than what other nations, throughout history have suffered just prior to their darkest hour.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 1st, 2010 @ 5:51pm

    Re:

    "The seizure of our liberties at the behest of one industry is exactly what the founders of nations fear." - the founders would not support the widespread piracy of privately created goods.

    you have fallen for it hook line and sinker. you have no rights to anyone elses materials. it is a priviledge they can grant you, under the terms of the laws of the land. there is no liberty being seized, only liberties taken on the rights of content producers and copyright holders.

    sorry, but you so fail.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    NAMELESS.ONE, Jul 1st, 2010 @ 6:37pm

    heres what you do

    bomb the boats and feed the fucking flesh to the fish

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    NAMELESS.ONE, Jul 1st, 2010 @ 6:38pm

    @2

    i see your payment and fart twice in your momma's face

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    gooberly, Jul 1st, 2010 @ 6:42pm

    Re: Re:

    Are you high?

    Look, this is really simple.. I know you don't want to (or are paid not to) believe that, but it is. You keep pointing to piracy and everyone says yeah it's a bad thing, lets do something about it. Then you and your ilk say: "great lets draw and quarter everyone that we suspect of infringement. While were at it, lets just make every website liable for infringement if they dont do the hoke-pokey on command and to cover the international contingency, we'll force other governments to comply with those standards. If they cant comply we impose sanctions...

    The room falls silent... we uhhh we didn't mean all that. Then you have the grapes to claim that the men who were VERY aware of the tyranny that overbearing IP caused in England, would have overridden the democracy that they established for some elitist with entitlement issues, who thinks the world owes him money every time anyone accidentally hears a song that he secured the rights to by screwing some kids with fine print! AND WORST OF ALL he uses the word "fail" at the age of 46???

    You, sir, are a creep...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 1st, 2010 @ 6:47pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    the only thing creepy is how many strawmen you made in a single post. get the hook and sinker out of your mouth and try again.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 1st, 2010 @ 6:53pm

    Re: Re:

    Content producers and copyright holders have rights? On the internet? Since when?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    icon
    Modplan (profile), Jul 1st, 2010 @ 7:36pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Says the one who has explicitly stated that Google should be held responsible for infringing content that even Viacom can't tell whether it's from themselves, tried to justify making it possible to force sites to not link to TPB, and railed against Spain on the basis that it doesn't have US style copyright laws.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 1st, 2010 @ 8:05pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    you just got strawman served

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 1st, 2010 @ 8:07pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I think he should be liable to everyone including AT&T and other backbone carriers for putting that content out there and inducing the illegal usage of their networks!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 1st, 2010 @ 8:13pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    STRAWMANIA!!!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    icon
    btrussell (profile), Jul 1st, 2010 @ 8:15pm

    Re: Re:

    If you don't want people copying/borrowing your ideas, then keep them private.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    icon
    btrussell (profile), Jul 1st, 2010 @ 8:16pm

    Re: Re:

    You'll pay if you try to enter my house!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 1st, 2010 @ 8:55pm

    Re: Re:

    "the founders would not support the widespread piracy of privately created goods."

    The founding fathers were considering specifically forbidding copyright and patents to begin with. They eventually settled on allowing it to exist provided its use was very very limited, for a limited time. They would have never dreamed of allowing retroactive copyright extensions. You already knew that but honesty is not something IP maximists really care about.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 1st, 2010 @ 8:56pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Exactly, no one is owed a monopoly on anything and if you don't like it you can better contribute to the economy by finding another job and not getting in the way of others.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 1st, 2010 @ 10:01pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    google should be responsible, sorry you dont agree. they have a business model on you tube that does not jive with being responsible. it is really too bad, and likely more draconian laws will be written to address this massive black hole in the copyright law.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    icon
    Mike Masnick (profile), Jul 1st, 2010 @ 10:40pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    The founding fathers were considering specifically forbidding copyright and patents to begin with. They eventually settled on allowing it to exist provided its use was very very limited, for a limited time. They would have never dreamed of allowing retroactive copyright extensions. You already knew that but honesty is not something IP maximists really care about.

    It's also worth pointing out that the founders actually *supported* "piracy" in that they specifically chose not to honor foreign copyrights, so that Americans could copy those works. The founders clearly recognized the "benefits" that could be associated with ignoring copyright law for the sake of spreading content.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 1st, 2010 @ 11:25pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    You're right thick, you are?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 2nd, 2010 @ 12:16am

    Re: Re:

    "the founders would not support the widespread piracy of privately created goods."

    The founders believed that copyright was an evil monopoly that should only be allowed for the public good. the founders would never have approved of it taking priority over the right to privacy or free speech.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    icon
    Modplan (profile), Jul 2nd, 2010 @ 12:29am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I forgot, you have no sense of context, reasoning nor any ability to deal with the facts of a situation. You merely repeat something you want to be true, or a meme that allows you to not have to deal with the truth.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    identicon
    IronM@sk, Jul 2nd, 2010 @ 5:29am

    Re: Re:

    As a psychic and self confessed anal retentive I can only see what happens in the future if it is spelled correctly.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25.  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Jul 2nd, 2010 @ 7:39am

    Re: Re:

    "the founders would not support the widespread piracy of privately created goods."

    You really have no concept of history at all do you. The founders basically ignored patents and copyrights from other countries. They refused to patent things they thought were important to society. They believed that copyrights and patents were a feeder for the public domain. They never would have allowed retroactively extending copyright.

    Here is the important one ...

    They believed in the rights of the individual over the rights of the government or any organization.

    To use your own words, copyright " is a priviledge they can grant you" its not a right.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This