EU Parliament Won't Wait For EU Court Of Justice To Vote On ACTA

from the and-why-that-could-be-good dept

With the clear momentum in the EU moving against ACTA, the supporters of the treaty in the EU Commission (who negotiated the deal) began to worry that the EU Parliament might move to reject ACTA completely at the vote planned for June. So they cooked up this delay tactic of taking ACTA to the EU Court of Justice to get a ruling on the legality of the document. However, some realized that a big part of the strategy behind this move was to try to push off the EU's vote, and hope that it could be brought at another time when the issue wasn't seen as such a political hot potato. It looks like that's not happening, and the EU Parliament has agreed (strongly) to move forward with the planned vote around June, and will not wait for the EU Court of Justice's opinion on the matter. So, for folks looking to stop ACTA in its tracks, the focus has to be on convincing MEPs to vote against it in June.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: acta, eu, eu commission, eu court of justice, eu parliament, vote

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    Ed C., 29 Mar 2012 @ 3:21pm

    At least try to get it straight

    I mean, look today - he highlights an op-ed piece talking about how piracy isn't theft, but NEVER wants to address the end results (someone has something they don't have the rights to). He (and the law professor) are looking very narrowly at one part of the transaction, and not the results. Why? Because looking at the results would require him to admit that the material was obtained without permission, either through fraudulent means or, well... theft.

    No, the point of the article was that infringement is not theft. Only a simpleton can't tell the difference. Just as a simpleton would confuse piracy with infringement. For instance, making copies of my entire movie and music collection is infringement. Not piracy, not theft, infringement. Downloading a copy of a song or a movie I already own is also infringement. Not piracy, not theft, infringement.

    Now, if I downloaded a song I didn't own, it's still infringement. Yet, you call it theft. I could have just as well copied it off the radio, which would actually have been legal, but I'm sure you'll just call it theft all the same. Well, if I "stole" it, what did anyone else lose? Sure, someone's copyright was infringed upon, but nothing was lost. If something of real value was stolen, then that person would have noticed. I would notice if a movie or song was taken from my collection, as I would no longer have it. A store would notice if a disk was taken when they do inventory. It's something of value that would cost money to replace. Yet, that person wouldn't notice if I merely copied a song. Everything that he or she possessed before is just the same as after. You might argue that person didn't get any money either, but the person wouldn't have gotten money if I didn't copy the song. Again, the situation for that person is completely the same one way or the other.

    Well, if I "stole" it, what did I gain? You could argue that I'm somehow enriched by the copy. Sure, I could listen to the song when or where ever I chose. Yet, what is the value of it? It's not something I could pawn or sell if I grow tried of it or needed the cash. It has no real value at all.

    Again, supposing I copied a song I didn't buy and told my friends and coworkers about it. Even played it for them. Later, five of them, by my urging, bought something from the artist. That's five sales that wouldn't have happened otherwise. Yet, I'm still a pirate and thief because I got something out of it? Fine, next time I promote someone's work, I'm demanding a cut of the sales. Do you think I should just give away my talent and time for nothing? You know, no free lunch and all of that...

    And in case if you're wondering, I do create art too. And no, I don't throw an infantile fit when someone copies it. It's not as though I'd even notice. It's not as if someone broke into my house in the dark of night and stole one of my kittens. Besides, I put my name on my work. When someone likes it, they can probably find me.

    Now, if someone took my computer and all of my backups, that would be theft because I would lose my time, effort, ability to use my own work.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.