Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   Wait a second...

   

   Jay (profile), Aug 26th, 2011 @ 1:02pm

   
   

   You mean the Protect IP Act wasn't the ACTA in disguise? So we have to deal with more laws that are byzantine, unnecessarily bureaucratic, draconian, and against consumer wishes? All because a few industry's can't figure out how to make money on the internet, the rest of the world has to suffer?
   
   That sure is a great way to "Progress the Arts and Sciences" as based on the ideals of our forefathers...

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

2.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Aug 26th, 2011 @ 1:08pm

   
   

   To protect the children, duh.

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

3.  

   

   fogbugzd (profile), Aug 26th, 2011 @ 1:25pm

   
   

   I am sure many nations will be pressured to sign ACTA and then will proceed to ignore its requirements. This will give license to larger nations to ignore the requirements. Only the nations that are controlled by the industry lobbyists will actually attempt to enforce ACTA, and eventually even the IP-heavy countries will end up ignoring ACTA.
   
   ACTA attempts to fight basic economics in too many ways. Economics always beats regulations in the end.

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

4.  

   

   Anonymous Coward, Aug 26th, 2011 @ 1:49pm

   
   

   It's a head shaker. The green party in Europe commissions a study, and they have to go all the way to a law college in Washington to get a review. Why the heck would they do that? Perhaps the authors of the report are sympathetic to the cause?
   
   Why wouldn't the European Green Party ask a university in Europe to do it?
   
   This smells like "starting with the result and working backwards" again.

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

5.  

   Re:

   

   Anonymous Coward, Aug 26th, 2011 @ 1:57pm

   
   

   Isn't that how all these laws came about anyway?

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

6.  

   Re:

   

   Dark Helmet (profile), Aug 26th, 2011 @ 2:02pm

   
   

   "This smells like "starting with the result and working backwards" again."
   
   Irony....too thick....can't....breathe....

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

7.  

   Re:

   

   The eejit (profile), Aug 26th, 2011 @ 2:21pm

   
   

   Uhh, you mean like Hollywood's origin? Or the monopolisation of law in the US? Or the forced legal exploitation of consumers for bottom-line gain?
   
   My Hypo-sense is tingling!

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

8.  

   Re:

   

   jimbo, Aug 26th, 2011 @ 3:37pm

   
   

   just like the entertainment industries do then

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

9.  

   Re:

   

   Richard (profile), Aug 26th, 2011 @ 4:18pm

   
   

   This smells like "starting with the result and working backwards" again.
   
   Which doesn't necessarily make it wrong!
   
   I note you have no arguments other than ad hominem, as usual.

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

10.  

    Re:

    

    Anonymous Coward, Aug 26th, 2011 @ 6:34pm

    
    

    So, you started with the result of "this study must be wrong!" and worked backwards.
    
    Good job.

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

11.  

    Re: Re:

    

    Anonymous Coward, Aug 26th, 2011 @ 8:25pm

    
    

    No, I actually started with "what an interesting study", and then got really suspicious when it didn't add up. It makes absolutely no sense to hire a group outside of the EU to do the job, unless nobody in the EU wanted to give them the answer the desired.
    
    It smells. What is a good premise and a good place to start a discussion is ruined because it really does appear that the Green party went "researcher shopping" until they found someone that agreed with them. That is the ultimate way to get the results you want.

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

12.  

    Re:

    

    Hephaestus (profile), Aug 26th, 2011 @ 8:36pm

    
    

    To protect the profits, duh...
    
    FTFY

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

13.  

    Re: Re: Re:

    

    Hephaestus (profile), Aug 26th, 2011 @ 8:50pm

    
    

    Hmmm ... new high priced malaria drugs replacing quinine, current aids drugs costing 2 years salary a month in Africa, banning and confiscating cheap pharma being shipped through various ports in the EU, if you are poor in the U.S.A. you may "APPLY" *(but may not receive) a reduced rate on these drugs ...
    
    A minimum of 50 million dead because of the high price of pharma in 18 years.
    
    Tell me how is that promoting the progress, or good for humanity?

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

14.  

    Re: Re: Re:

    

    The eejit (profile), Aug 27th, 2011 @ 12:01am

    
    

    Actually, all the Universities in the EU are busy being eaten by variant conservative economic thinking. Kinda hard to research something when you have no money to teach.

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

15.  

    ACTA and Green Party

    

    dwh, Aug 27th, 2011 @ 4:23am

    
    

    For the record the report states on the first page that it was written by 2 UK academics: Douwe Korff, Professor of International law, London Metropolitan University and Ian Brown, Senior Research Fellow, Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford.

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

16.  

    Re: ACTA and Green Party

    

    Anonymous Coward, Aug 27th, 2011 @ 8:20am

    
    

    Perhaps we are reading different reports. A word search of the linked document did not find either of the two names you mention.
    
    As for "Why Mr. Flynn?", it is surely because the large majority of his work involves advocating the removal of all perceived limitations on drug distribution worldwide.

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

17.  

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    

    That Anonymous Coward (profile), Aug 27th, 2011 @ 9:54am

    
    

    Because all of the pharma execs will have more money, and this will encourage them to stop hiding it outside the US. They will in turn employee hundreds of new workers in the US and everything will be fine.
    
    So what if every other time we've given them a break this never happens. This time will be different.

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

18.  

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    

    Anonymous Coward, Aug 27th, 2011 @ 11:28am

    
    

    All the more reason why the Green Party showing up at the door with money to finance a study would be welcome.
    
    No, I think someone else got it right, Flynn would appear to be leaning their way. Too bad Mike didn't take a few minutes to check things out before running with this stinky pile of poo.

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

19.  

    Re: Boring trolls

    

    justobvious (profile), Aug 27th, 2011 @ 12:18pm

    
    

    Their study on fundamental rights was done by European academics. What's your explanation for that - too parochial, too Europe-centred?

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

20.  

    Re: Re: Re:

    

    Anonymous Coward, Aug 27th, 2011 @ 1:09pm

    
    

    So again, you have no actual criticism of the study except "I don't like it!"
    
    Not surprising.

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

21.  

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    

    Anonymous Coward, Aug 27th, 2011 @ 2:19pm

    
    

    Umm, no, I didn't comment on the study itself at all. I didn't have to go that far. Once you figure out who is writing and who is paying the bills, it isn't hard to understand the the content here likely isn't any more supportable than an RIAA report.
    
    You guys are all fast to pee all over reports you don't like, saying they aren't credible. I am saying that it is easy to see that this report has certain credibility issues before you even start reading, so why bother going any further? It is an agenda driven piece of "resear-formation", nothing more.

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

22.  

    Re: Re: Re:

    

    Anonymous Coward, Aug 27th, 2011 @ 5:22pm

    
    

    Or you know they wanted an outside perspective.
    
    You mean like it doesn't make sense to hire a third party to audit a firm?
    
    Why can't firms do their own auditing?
    Why government should never be in a position where they are responsible for watching and doing something?
    
    Can you show they did what you said they did, it is possible but they are not the ones with a really big long tails of past shopping in their belts so there is the trust thing, they are more legitimate than the MAFIAA will ever be.

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

23.  

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    

    Anonymous Coward, Aug 27th, 2011 @ 5:39pm

    
    

    Trying to believe in the RIAA is like trying to be sympathetic to somebody with Münchausen syndrome that also do the Münchausen syndrome by proxy.
    
    Believing the RIAA studies is like believing a drunk late at night in a bar.
    
    After all that lying the trust is gone.
    Even scientific experiments show that trust is a factor in how things are perceived and clearly the RIAA has none otherwise there wouldn't be so much people trashing your employer dude.

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

24.  

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

    

    Anonymous Coward, Aug 28th, 2011 @ 6:58am

    
    

    Gee, another moron who thinks I work for the RIAA. What a freaking joke. I love the idea that you guys think that anyone who isn't a supporter of piracy, and who generally supports the idea of the law is somehow a paid shill.
    
    It proves only that you guys are dangerously clueless.

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

25.  

    Re: Re: ACTA and Green Party

    

    Anonymous Coward, Aug 28th, 2011 @ 7:00am

    
    

    http://infojustice.org/archives/3426
    
    More proof that this "study" is just another opinion piece framed to be a study.
    
    Congratulations Mike Masnick, you have either (a) been completely hoodwinked by the Green Party, or (b) have completely failed in trying to sneak an astroturf "study" past our noses.
    
    Either way, bad boy!

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

26.  

    Re: Re: Re:

    

    Anonymous Coward, Aug 29th, 2011 @ 5:02pm

    
    

    Walk into the middle of a busy 'office' and loudly ask if anyone wants to complain about the boss.... wait for the crickets...
    
    Announce that you will be available one on one for private sessions if anyone has any issues they would like to bring up about their boss confidentially and you will get a TOTALLY different response....
    
    I wonder why that is.... now 'think bigger' and you'll understand why they may have looked for an 'independent' review.

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

Add Your Comment