But Of Course: Ridiculous ACTA Provisions Magically Appear In CETA
from the try,-try-again dept
There were plenty of rumors (and leaks) earlier this year about how, even after European protests effectively killed ACTA in the EU, it was clear that some of the worst, most outrageous parts of ACTA had been written into CETA, a similar agreement between Canada and Europe. EU officials claimed they were removing the most controversial provisions — but now it’s been confirmed that the ridiculously misguided criminal sanctions… had magically found their way into CETA. Given the public’s response to ACTA, EU Commission officials either think the public is stupid… or just not paying attention.
The current attitude of the EU negotiators on CETA is an alarming repetition of the blatant denial of democracy of the ACTA negotiations. Despite calls from citizens and representatives, CETA remains confidential, both in the EU and in Canada. In this context of non-transparency, Philipp Dupuis, the European Commission negotiator, confirmed at a workshop held on October 10th 2012 that ACTA-like criminal sanctions were still in the CETA draft.
As Jeremie Zimmermann points out in the link above, this whole process of sneaking through protectionist IP policies in supposed “free trade” agreements needs to stop:
“The only hard evidence on which we can base our analysis suggests the worst: once again, the European Commission and the EU Member States governments are trying to impose repressive measures against cultural practices online. Broad criminal sanctions do not belong in a trade agreement. If they appear in the final CETA text, the agreement will lose all legitimacy and will have to be frontally opposed, like ACTA. This trend of sneaking repressive measures through negotiated trade agreements must stop.”
It needs to stop, but people don’t realize how entrenched that process is, which is a big part of the problem.
Filed Under: acta, canada, ceta, criminal sanctions, europe
Comments on “But Of Course: Ridiculous ACTA Provisions Magically Appear In CETA”
Why is Western Democracy such a sham?
Why do politicians treat the will of the public with such contempt?
At this point, the only thing that will bring any change in politics is to tear the whole damn system down and start again.
Re: Re:
I want to see some Mass Discontent going on in Response to CETA.Hope we see a large Protest Movement against the new version of ACTA now called CETA.
Kiss My Ass MAFIAA & Your Corrupt Officials.The people are going to bring you Rich A-Holes down.
I totally agree that at this point we need to tear down the whole system and try to Rebuild it Right.WE won’t be able to change the system unless we have a huge Movement of Mass Discontent, Protest, and even the Destruction of those who stand in the way of Progress.
Hey A-Hole Corporations………………Your day is coming soon.
FTA's
Australia’s free trade agreement with the US in 2004 resulted in our copyright5 terms for sound recordings, etc, being extended from 50 to 70 years. So, thanks, US, now I can’t enjoy cheap but good quality rock and roll CD’s.
Re: FTA's
Copyright aside; what’s worse is that, this FTA was supposed to make American goods cheaper for Australians, but manufacturers of electronic goods, along with other entrenched sectors such as software and games, never lowered their prices.
Besides the fact Aussie gamers are still being ripped a new one on digital downloads through portals such as Steam, PlayStation Network and iTunes, where prices can be as much as double what they are in the U.S., one recent example in the electronics sector was a set of Logitech surround sound PC speakers I purchased.
One the U.S. website the speakers were listed with a RRP of $399 where the Aus site listed the RRP as $799. I’m not the best mathematician, but that’s double, and at a time when the AU dollar was trading higher than the Greenback.
Pissed off, I contacted Logitech about this and they laid the blame on “localisation costs” such as C-tick approval and other bullshit (probably adding the letter “u” to all the words in the product manual that US English seems to leave out). Sorry, Logitech, not buying it. I appreciate we run 240v power here compared to the 110v in the states, but I can buy a 240v/110v converter for $20 and import from the US.
This brings me to the next rort. USPS international shipping costs. It seems that all the money being “saved” on goods due to a FTA is being recouped by ridiculous shipping rates, where the cost of shipping a small package can exceed it’s retail price. Some Ebay retailers charge as much as $50 to ship something the size of a book. I bought a box of mobile phone accessories from Honk Kong a while back for $20 and they shipped it for free.
Basically, what I’m saying is that the FTA doesn’t seem worth the paper it’s printed on.
/rant.
Re: Re: FTA's
” but I can buy a 240v/110v converter for $20 and import from the US”
Usually there is no need.
Nearly all power supplies these days are switchmode supplies and work on both 110 and 240.
Re: Re: FTA's
“Basically, what I’m saying is that the FTA doesn’t seem worth the paper it’s printed on.”
Oh, it’s worth millions, possibly billions, to the companies that wrote it…
Nix all *TA until further notice
All *** Trade Agreements should all be considered guilty of piggy-backing IP protectionism until their negociation is made public by law. We must beable to trust our governments again to not fuck us up on repeat.
ACTA into CETA = GOOD
This is the kind of progress we need and the sooner that people realize it the better.
Re: ACTA into CETA = GOOD
People are so stupid and don’t know how good it feels to get it up their ass…
Re: Whut?
are you on something?
If so, why aren’t you sharing?
I’m sure that the FBI will LOVE to get their hands on it.
Re: ACTA into CETA = GOOD
“the kind of progress we need“
Who’s we ?
Clearly they understand that people are not stupid and that those same people are indeed paying attention. Therefore it is also abundantly clear that they simply do not care what people think. This is a blatant slap in the face with a declaration they think anything goes and there is nothing people can do about it. With all the uprisings occurring across the globe one would think … oh wait, that is what they want???
when corporations or governments want a new law introduced or an old law amended, it is re-introduced time after time after time, regardless of how many times it is rejected and for whatever reasons, until it gets voted in. if the people want a new law introduced or an old law updated, it only has to be rejected once. it is never allowed to be re-introduced because those that objected to it, rejected it the first time, kick up such a shit storm that no one in politics dares to. funny how what’s good for one is never good for the other, isn’t it?
The only hard evidence on which we can base our analysis suggests the worst: once again, the European Commission and the EU Member States governments are trying to impose repressive measures against cultural practices online
Funny, there were other cultural pratices people used to do, slavery was one, till people put repressive measures on something they felt was wrong and illegal….
Re: Re:
“…till people put repressive measures on something they felt was wrong and illegal….”
Emphasis on the important part.
Here, we don’t have THE people trying to put up repressive measures to control something that is universally considered bad. We have bone-headed politicians who think that they know better than anyone else trying to push through legislation without any sort of public consultation. Heck, without any disclosure, even.
They are trying to push trough something that will likely impact millions of people and they don’t even bother to tell us what that is.
It’s madness and completely anti-democratic.
Re: Re: Re:
no, it isn’t madness nor anti-democratic
true democracy is a fallacy, always was always will be
they are elected to do a job, they are doing it
you don’t get to change everythign they do, just because you don’t like it
otherwise there would be no taxes, or speed limits or any other “law” people didn’t like
Re: Re: Re: Re:
They are doing a job for sure, but not the one they were elected to do. They’re doing a job for the ones who are bribing them.
Re: Re:
You’ve just conflated piracy and slavery. Just. Wow.
Aside from that obviously horrific analogy (you sir. You. Wow.), the government ended slavery because it was a terrible, horrible thing that treated people as property.
The copyleft, interestingly, wants to prevent ideas as being treated as property.
If anything, not only is your analogy offensive, but it may actually work to serve the copyleft agenda far better than the copyright agenda.
Re: Re:
Yes, anti-slavery laws were repressive. Repressive – Inhibiting or restraining the freedom of a person or group of people. Yes, that’s a perfectly apt description of anti-slavery laws, laws that guaranteed the freedom of groups of people.
Re: Re: Re:
Troll or sarcasm?
In part the problem is the negotiations are being done by bureau-rats who are not answerable to the public. They are only overridden by the politicians when they fear for their jobs. The bureaucracy does not change, and so try again as their jobs are not under threat. Similarly the power behind the lobbyists are largely safe.
Re: Re:
No, the problem is that these things are ebing done by people.
Proposed solution: kill all humans! YEAH!
/s
Re: Re: Re:
Is that you Red Robot ?
Re: Re: Re:
Proposed solution: VOTE
There, fixed that for you.
impose repressive measures against cultural practices
LOL
Translation: they want to punish those that take other people’s property without permission.
What a crazy concept!
Re: Re:
“Translation: they want to punish those that take other people’s property without permission.
What a crazy concept!”
It *IS* a crazy concept! I mean, if they were going to punish those who took other people’s property, we’d see bankers and billionaires in prison for sending the US and Europe into a massive recession.
Oh, wait! You’re talking about IMAGINARY Property… The stuff that gets copied (original is still there), and shared (original is still there) with others all the time.
Didn’t your parents ever teach you to share your toys?
Did you ever loan a book to someone?
Did you ever let people watch a movie or TV series that they didn’t pay for?
If you answered yes to any of these questions, yooooooou might be guilty of copyright violations.
Re: Re: Re:
Cool! Then you won’t mind if I take your money without asking first- it’s a copy (the original stamping plates are probably somewhere in Washington DC).
Thanks!
Re: Re: Re: Re:
“Taking” implies a subtraction.
Copying implies an addition (or a multiplication).
Your analogy fails…
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
No, “taking” implies ‘to take’; ‘to take possession of.’
btw, it’s so obvious that you freetards love to believe weasel words will somehow absolve you of your illegal, slimy behavior…
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
“No, “taking” implies ‘to take’; ‘to take possession of.'”
Taking possession of something is taking it AWAY from someone else. Copying something isn’t, and can’t be, taking.
If I take your car, do you still have your car? No?
If I scan a page from a book at the library, does the library still have the book, and I now have a copy of that page? Yes?
How is the library missing a car then? (gak – it hurts my brain to try to come up with analogies for people too stupid to think for themselves.)
Re: Re: Re: Re:
except bills are serialized and therefore unique and not a copy. well, they are if you’ve got counterfeit bills.
the logic pretty much fails all around.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
So? They’re still copies.
When you’re ripping off music and movies there is metadata that is unique.
You fail pretty much all around.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
“When you’re ripping off music and movies there is metadata that is unique.”
… Uh, so if I make my own cover of a song, then I’m… I’m sorry, but I don’t get what you’re saying. Metadata? What? Huh? Do you have any idea what you’re talking about? Ripping off movies and songs isn’t that hard to do, if you know what definition you’re using. Ever heard of a parody? If you’re talking about stealing, then… ow, my head…
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
making a copy of a file also copies the metadata.
i’m not failing at this nearly as much as you are.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
“You fail pretty much all around.”
yeah, you do. You analogy fails so hard that I’m having a hard time trying to figure out why the sky suddenly turned purple and everything tastes red.
“So? They’re still copies.”
When you talk about money, each bill is unique, not a copy and is worth something.
When you talk about movies, music, games, ETC, each copy is that, a copy. With no difference between them. At all.
Having 500 copies of Star Wars: The Phantom Menace just means you have 500 copies of that movie.
Having 500 copies of the same 20 dollar bill will get you some serious prison time.
See the difference?
Re: Re: Re:4 Re:
Having 500 copies of the same 20 dollar bill will get you some serious prison time.
See the difference?
Wait, I thought stealing I mean pirating I mean raping, er copying a movie 500 times could get you serious prison time too. Like federal pound me in the ass prison. That’s what the FBI tells me anyway.
Re: Re: Re:5 Re:
I never said HOW you get those 500 copies.
I was talking about buying 500 copies of the movie.
Still, all 500 are exactly the same.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
Actually if we could copy money like crazy it would lose value just like the digital files made the song itself lose the value and uncreased the value of the scarce parts of music (contact with the artist, shows, physical merchandise etc). That’s why it’s forbidden and strictly enforced to copy money bills. And the “virtual” money generated by the stock market bubble and the irresponsible credit actually contributed to the current recession and the devaluation of many currencies around the world.
So your analogy fails.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Keep on tying AC, maybe, just maybe, one day you’ll find a suitable non-moronic analogy supporting your sacred imaginary “Property” obsessive belief.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You TOOK my money.
You didn’t copy my money.
I now have less money because you TOOK it.
If you copied it, I’d still have my original money, and you’d be in prison for counterfeiting.
See how your analogy fails?
Re: Re:
“LOL
Translation: they want to punish those that take other people’s property without permission.
What a crazy concept!”
No, they just want to go after the easiest targets they can find. They’re already trying to be the thought police by cracking down on “undesirable” speech. The internet was working just fine and dandy without the government’s omnipresence. The way they continuously go on and on about IP, you’d think that stuff was akin to digitized narcotics or something. If they wanted to put a stop to crime, they’d go after the banks, extortionists like those music collection societies, corporate CEOs who outsource jobs and then hand themselves fat bonuses, lobbyists who bribe politicians and government officials, etc. etc.
Re: Re:
Copying is NOT taking. How hard is that for idiots to understand?
When you copy, you do not get the original as it is left behind in all it’s glory. You get a copy of the original and you do NOT deprive anyone of their property.
When you take something, you take the original and leave nothing behind so the person is deprived of their property.
Do you understand now? Or do you need a diagram?
Re: Re: Re:
Well, copying is taking….but then you make another one (for you) and give the original back.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Damn, that means I took my friend’s homework in 4th year Grammar school 😉
Re: Re: Re:
no, you took something you didn’t pay for, since you didn’t pay for it, you “took” money from the artist, since you are not going to buy it, you already “took” it…..
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Ugh, I’m getting sick of seeing money being an issue in this. If money that big of an issue to you idiots, then WORK FOR IT!! If I want to buy it, then I will buy it. If I can’t try it out if I like it, then maybe I won’t buy it. You cannot force or tell me to buy your product without knowing what it is or what it does. All your whining about “well you can’t take it because you can’t” is weak and is just a really bad model to follow. You can’t force people to buy your stuff, otherwise you’re going to lose that customer and have them go somewhere else. Trying to get people to buy your stuff is a desperate act for attention and it gives you a negative image to not yourself, but your model and your business. If you refuse to see that and continue to use your method of selling, then how are you still in business?
Hey, if you can find people that like you and buy your stuff, go ahead. There’s a whole world that are against your model. If you can’t get them on your side, then why bother trying to convert us?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
And of course, when people like me buy anyway after copying…what the hell are you going to say then? Do I now owe twice the purchase price?
Re: Re:
It’s so crazy you have to misrepresent it to try to make your idiot child point.
Re: Re:
I think they want a lot more than that, but just running with what you said… they want to punish violators regardless of the harmful impact their actions have on innocent third parties. That’s they whole problem right there.
Seriously they need to make a fucking law that prevents them from ever making a law like ACTA and shut the fucking book.
Re: Re:
But there might become a point (don’t laugh) where a law like ACTA (seriously, don’t laugh)is genuinely need-
Nope, can’t keep going.
Re: Re:
Of course if they do that all it will really mean is that when they pass a law with identical text to ACTA they need to add a clause that says ‘nothing in this law should be construed as it being a law like ACTA.’
waste
This is just a waste of time for those that have spent time and money coming to a trade agreement that could have passed, now it will be shot down and all that work by those involved will be destroyed. Well live and learn(not), I think politicians are going to have to stop anyone from discussing anything to do with Hollywood in any trade agreement.
This is why voting and protesting are pointless.
Nothing changes until politicians feel personal fear.
Re: Re:
Actually voting and protesting are very much not pointless, because if there’s one thing a politician fears more than anything it’s losing their cushy job, status, and power due to people not voting for them in the future.
Protesting in general, or against a particular law/bill/etc, a politician can just shrug off, but if it’s made clear enough that support for what’s being protested will mean no votes for them next election… then suddenly I guarantee they will very much start caring and paying attention to what’s going on.
Re: Re: Re:
Everybody chants to ‘send the bums home’ but then only a minority of people ever actually vote, the then a flock of those people simply vote for who has the most signs, nicest tie, yells the loudest, whatever. If more people would simply cast their laziness aside and cast an informed vote, you wouldn’t *believe* the number of problems that could be solved. .
Re:
They are elected to represent us. If they are not consulting us on how we want to be represented, then they are not doing their jobs. This is a pretty basic concept.
The interests that they have chosen to represent are those of the corporations funding their campaigns. This is the definition of corruption. People are finally starting to wake up to it as can be seen with what happened to PIPA/SOPA and what is happening with ACTA.
The bottom line is that people everywhere are getting fed up with this consistent cronyism. If people can keep their attention focused then we may actually keep seeing this positive change.
The unfortunate part, and the part with which the politicians and their corporate masters are betting on is that people have very short attention spans. This to me is the driving force behind much of the repressive legislation being introduced to lock down the internet. The internet is keeping it possible for people to keep focused on the issues, and if “they” can’t lock it down tighter, “they” are going to be in for a rude awakening as the people begin to reassert their proper control.
“When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.”
FTA's
Not to disagree with your overall point, but I would certainly expect shipping to Australia to be much cheaper from Hong Kong than the US.
Re:
So we’re going into potential money now, going by the usage of inverted commas?
I didn’t buy a CD from an artist the other day, instead opting to buy a CD from another artist I prefer. I’ve “taken” money from the previous artist, then?
ac post 36
you really suck at the whole trolling thing you know that?
your supposed to be SUBTLE.
“Informed” voting doesn’t make a difference, either. You pretty much have to vote for the lesser of evils every election, which means you’re voting for evil.
The best way to fix the problems we’re seeing is federalism – break government into smaller, more manageable pieces, instead of having a gigantic, one-size-fits-all, continent-spanning government.