EU Apparently Agrees That ACTA Should Be More Transparent
from the ok,-so-open-up dept
Via Jamie Love we learn that at an EU trade policy meeting, EU member states have agreed to push for more transparency with ACTA, including releasing the draft negotiation documents as soon as possible. Apparently, this position was driven by Sweden, who we already noted was unhappy with where ACTA was heading. Since this apparently includes all EU member states, does this mean that Denmark has backed down from its hardline position against transparency? And if this is the case, who is left arguing that the documents need to be kept secret? As far as I can tell from the earlier list, we’re now down to Singapore, South Korea and the US. That’s odd, because Singapore, South Korea and the US already have trade agreements of this nature. In fact, much of ACTA is actually based on the agreement between the US and South Korea — which is already proving problematic for those in South Korea.
Filed Under: acta, eu, transparency
Comments on “EU Apparently Agrees That ACTA Should Be More Transparent”
“Via Jamie Love we learn that at an EU trade policy meeting, EU member states have agreed to push for more transparency with ACTA”
Good news, however it’s amazing how these authorities are suddenly in favor of greater ACTA transparency only AFTER most of the documents they want to keep secret the most have already leaked. Where was this transparency sentiment before these documents leaked?
Re: Re:
This way the politicians can take credit for encouraging transparency when, in reality, they don’t really encourage transparency, it’s just that the documents have already leaked so it is now pointless not to encourage transparency.
“As far as I can tell from the earlier list, we’re now down to Singapore, South Korea and the US.”
Wrong, according to the U.S. they ARE being transparent.
Re: Re:
Which we know to be a bullshit claim.
Re: Re: Re:
Might have been sarcasm, though you never know sometimes.
Re: Re:
of course they are.. after all, some stuff still got out despite their best efforts to suppress everything.. Thats being transparent isn’t it?
Re: Re: Re:
LOL. Unfortunately running for a few steps in an attempt cover up tripping over a rock DOESN’T constitute excercise.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
“Unfortunately running for a few steps in an attempt cover up tripping over a rock DOESN’T constitute excercise.”
The backpedaling the politicians and media executives have to do for the months following ACTA’s transparency might constitute exercise.
definition : backpedal – modify one’s opinion, make it less strong … rinse lather repeat.
apparently murder is bad
and apparently so is hitting someone with a hammer but we dont have a law stating hammer makers are responsible do we?
Maybe we should….
Re: apparently murder is bad
A) No. We shouldn’t.
B) WTF does that have to with this topic?
Re: Re: apparently murder is bad
“but we dont have a law stating hammer makers are responsible”
“B) WTF does that have to with this topic?”
It has to do with secondary liablity.
Your kid kills someone, you are held responsible and charged with murder … secondary liability. (iffy)
Someone uploads a file to your site that infringes, you are fined … secondary liability.
Someone uses your WiFi to download a file, you get your internet access shut off … secondary liability.
ACTA has secondary liability built into it. It also has guilt based on accusations not proof, and your need to prove you didnt do what you are accused of (proving a negative in most cases is impossible).
Re: Re: Re: apparently murder is bad
Apparently they think we should change our law to “everyone is guilty until proven innocent” %@&$!
Re: apparently murder is bad
That hasn’t stopped the anti gun groups from trying to sue gun manufacturers when children are shot.
Re: apparently murder is bad
Re: apparently murder is bad
Left field called, they want that comment back
its about the sudden shift to wanting transpancy
Boy you guys didn’t get it too bad, and how rediculous they ( EU ) are now sounding.
out the deal completely NOW. or don’t and suffer …..regime change.