MPAA Wants To Know If ACTA Can Be Used To Block Wikileaks?
from the huh? dept
The folks over at Open Acta Mexico sent over their report on an open information meeting at the Ministry of the Economy in Mexico about ACTA last week. There were two oddities that they called attention to. The first is that there was an MPAA representative at the meeting, who apparently asked whether or not ACTA could be used to block access to “damaging” sites like Wikileaks. As the Open Acta Mexico people asked, what does Wikileaks have to do with movies? It seems like an interesting question, though, and I’m assuming that the MPAA is using Wikileaks as an example of a site they deem “dangerous” to get the idea across, so that later when they designate other sites (say… The Pirate Bay….) as dangerous, they can use this to make the case it should be blocked. Nice to see the MPAA is so blatant about using copyright for censorship…
The other oddity in the meeting was that apparently the ACTA negotiator who was there leading the meeting, Gilda Gonzalez Camarena, claimed that the negotiators met every day with the relevant Senate commission to keep them updated on ACTA negotiations. Yet, Open Acta Mexico notes that the Senate recently requested a full debrief on ACTA negotiators later this month. If they’re getting briefings every day, why do they need a debrief?
Comments on “MPAA Wants To Know If ACTA Can Be Used To Block Wikileaks?”
Fig leaf
Translation: “I’m giving you an out to go against these people who are threatening my business model by conflating them with people who are going against your political shenanigans.”
wow!
Mabe we can use ACTA to sue the MPAA for infringing on our right to chose what medium we want to view and listen to things.
To quote the linked tweet
WTF!
intersting what other sites do the MPAA consider damaging. the list is tiooooo long, ohhh do i see Techdirt in there.
I want to know what they will do when if ever they get piracy to stop and their revenues don’t grow what they will do about it LoL
Re: Re:
They will continue lying.
Re: Re: Re:
Indeed, they’ll always point and scream ZOMGPiracy, because of course it has got to be that, what else could it be?
On Censorship
Wasn’t that actually the original purpose of copyright laws in England? To legally justify government censorship of certain authors and publishers? Here, of course, the Framers wanted to make sure that copyright was used (if at all) only to the extent of “promoting the progress”, so it looks like the MPAA wants to get back to the “good old days” i.e. the status quo in England.
Re: On Censorship
Wasn’t that actually the original purpose of copyright laws in England? To legally justify government censorship of certain authors and publishers?
This is a bit of a myth actually. The evidence suggests that, although the stationers company was officially supposed to implement censorship, in practice the government didn’t rely on them for that function.
The reality is that the orignal stationers charter gave them a monopoly on all printing (as was the norm for the various guilds at the time). Copyright originally operated within that monopoly as a private “non-compete” arrangement amongst the staioners themselves
RE: Anonymous Coward #5
Quote:
“I want to know what they will do when if ever they get piracy to stop and their revenues don’t grow what they will do about it LoL”
They’ll label every man, woman, and child as pirates and sue the entire country for not buying their inferior media products. ;P I reeeeeally hate those copyright mafia guyz.
Re: RE: Anonymous Coward #5
Yep. And every government around the world can misuse ACTA to arrest innocent people and/or families who don’t have computers, laptops, iPods, cell phones, or any other devices that infringes copyright. ACTA is not about copyright, it’s about the creation of the New World Order. We are living in the End Times. Make Jesus your Savior right now.
Re: Re: RE: Anonymous Coward #5
My Buddha versus your Jesus – in the car park at dawn – make it a fair fight!
Re: Re: Re: RE: Anonymous Coward #5
Thor gets the winner
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlFyoEKV0dE
Lobbying Potential?
A thought: US politicians with DoD, NSA, CIA, etc. interests aren’t necessarily
involved with these talks, but I could imagine the
MPAA lobbyists in a scratch-my-back-I’ll-scratch-yours situation.
Eg. “Get assurance it can be used to block stuff we don’t like and we’ll help to see you get the ACTA you (MPAA/RIAA) want.”
Re: Lobbying Potential?
You just about nailed it. Who really wants to block Wikileaks – the U.S. Government. Here is how they are scratching each other’s backs…
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/04/obama-taps-fift/
http://www.osnews.com/story/23002/Obama_Sides_with_RIAA_MPAA_Backs_ACTA
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10133425-38.html
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/11/mpaa-already-lo/
http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2008/12/what-the-mpaa-wants-from-obama-3-strikes-canada-crackdown.ars
We replaced one president who was owned by the oil industry with one who is owned by the entertainment industry. Let’s not screw this up again in 2012.
all about content
This request by the MPAA is all about content and what is and what is not accpetable/damaging content. Wikileaks has shown time and time again that is is not shy about posting content that offends some segments of societies all over the globe. At times I have agree that much of what Wiklileaks puts out is very dangerous and/or offensive. This said however, using ACTA in such a generic manner also has inhearent dangers to freedom of expression and liberty.
Kill(er) Bill
The proposal is now a Bill presented to the U.S. Congress called Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA). See more here:
http://www.technollama.co.uk/u-s-proposed-bill-against-piracy
We already knew that they were drafting this in order to control the internet. You will now be unable to tell your friends just how bad [Insert shitty movie title here] sucked. Your ISP will get a C&D order, a DMCA order, and you’ll get a ban from using the internet. They want your friends to see this shitty movie, so that they can make nonrefundable profits. You can’t use the copywritten title in your blog/website, nor can you disclose any part of the plot. And now with their discussion of wikileaks, they probably plan to sell their insider power to anyone who wants any content of any kind removed at the victim’s (Ours)expenses. because it will be up to us to launch a $2 million lawsuit to defend our rights. This sort of corruption is worthy of their deaths IMO.