Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Privacy Government News

Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 390

SpaceAdmiral writes "The Canadian government is secretly negotiating to join the US and the EU in an Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement. The agreement would give border guards the power to search iPods and cellphones for illegal downloads, as well as to force ISPs to hand over customer information without a warrant. David Fewer, staff counsel at the University of Ottawa's Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic, characterizes ACTA this way: 'If Hollywood could order intellectual property laws for Christmas what would they look like? This is pretty close.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement

Comments Filter:
  • Economic Big Stick. (Score:5, Informative)

    by Odder ( 1288958 ) on Monday May 26, 2008 @11:08PM (#23551297)

    The third page of the article explains how the US is able to get away with such outrageous requests:

    In a situation similar to what happened in the Softwood Lumber trade dispute, Canadians could face hefty penalties if it does not comply with ACTA after the agreement has been completed.In a situation similar to what happened in the Softwood Lumber trade dispute, Canadians could face hefty penalties if it does not comply with ACTA after the agreement has been completed.

    So the proposal is, "surrender your citizens rights or we will make it cost you." The answer should be, "without rights, you will just take our money anyway, no thanks."

  • by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Monday May 26, 2008 @11:12PM (#23551331) Homepage Journal

    Amendment IV [cornell.edu]

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
  • A few links. (Score:5, Informative)

    Regarding the matter, some additional source material for consideration:


    A couple of these links are several months old; this has been brewing for awhile, and action needs to be taken now to stop it.
  • by willyhill ( 965620 ) <`moc.liamg' `ta' `kaw8rp'> on Monday May 26, 2008 @11:29PM (#23551507) Homepage Journal
    Why didn't you post this in your original comment as twitter, or post another comment with the same account? Why reply to yourself like this?
  • by corsec67 ( 627446 ) on Monday May 26, 2008 @11:45PM (#23551627) Homepage Journal

    anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.


    And how exactly does that allow a treaty to remove a part of the constitution? (Crappy politicians defining words however the hell they want aside)

    See also Reid v. Covert [wikipedia.org]
  • by salesgeek ( 263995 ) on Tuesday May 27, 2008 @12:21AM (#23551893) Homepage
    Any provision of the constitution can be done away with by getting 51 Senators and the President to sign a treaty.

    FALSE. Treaties have the same strength as a law passed by congress, but are not exempt from the Constitution.
    "Our constitution declares a treaty to be the law of the land. It is, consequently, to be regarded in courts of justice as equivalent to an act of the legislature, whenever it operates of itself, without the aid of any legislative provision." -- Foster vs Nelson

  • redundant issue (Score:2, Informative)

    by uniquegeek ( 981813 ) on Tuesday May 27, 2008 @12:30AM (#23551947)
    There's already a system for dealing with illegal material, and there are very good reasons for requiring a warrant for such searches. The issue in question is already covered. Is this nonsense really necessary?
  • by thermian ( 1267986 ) on Tuesday May 27, 2008 @02:45AM (#23552741)
    How can a customs agent possibly determine the MP3s that I have are, or are not purchased with validity

    When it comes to checking all iPods, they can't. What is far more likely is that if they have you tagged for some other problem this will mean they can then have your iPod checked over for possible infringing material.

    I'm wondering whether they will be thinking that a full iPod means the content is pirated or not.

    Also, it's not just music that can be stored on a iPod, or similar music devices. You can store just about anything, so it will also be that they can look for non media content.
  • Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday May 27, 2008 @04:47AM (#23553309)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by Goldberg's Pants ( 139800 ) on Tuesday May 27, 2008 @04:59AM (#23553349) Journal
    A big fat shaft.

    What amazes me is it says about searching iPod's for illegal content... And in Canada currently it's LEGAL to download music. (Despite the CRIA's objections.)

    For so long I've been proud to live in Canada, but with that fucktard Harper at the helm they're trying more and more to make it America 2.
  • by s7uar7 ( 746699 ) on Tuesday May 27, 2008 @06:37AM (#23553849) Homepage
    I don't know if this is what you're looking for, but Swiss VPN [swissvpn.net] offer PPTP VPN for $5/month. I can't vouch for the service as I haven't used it, but the price looks good.
  • by alexo ( 9335 ) on Tuesday May 27, 2008 @09:01AM (#23554761) Journal

    A copied song--as it was not produced by the authorized agent--could be considered "counterfeit."

    Except that private copying of music is legal in Canada [cb-cda.gc.ca].

    the act of reproducing all or any substantial part of
            (a) a musical work embodied in a sound recording,
            (b) a performer's performance of a musical work embodied in a sound recording, or
            (c) a sound recording in which a musical work, or a performer's performance of a musical work, is embodied
    onto an audio recording medium for the private use of the person who makes the copy does not constitute an infringement of the copyright in the musical work, the performer's performance or the sound recording.


    Sonds to me like the assholes in power are trying to circumvent the laws for the benefit of American corporate interests..

    Time to contact your Member of Parliament [parl.gc.ca] and express your displeasure. Snail mail works best, no stamp is needed.
  • Re:CoRaF (Score:3, Informative)

    by Sigma 7 ( 266129 ) on Tuesday May 27, 2008 @11:44AM (#23557011)

    So a critical law which violates rights should still be allowed to stand?
    Including or excluding laws that put violent criminals in jail?

    Seriously, if you believe that the example I gave shouldn't be allowed to stand, you might as well give children a carte blanche to commit murder. The law in question was designed to prevent young offenders known to have a pattern of criminal behaviour from committing additional crimes. Within 24 hours of it being struck down, the individual stole a car and caused a car accident.

    Or a popular law which violates the rights of a minority should be allowed to stand?
    There is no such thing. The closest match is Quebec's language laws, and those aren't popular.

    By the way, did you read the copy of the charter in question?

  • by mosb1000 ( 710161 ) <mosb1000@mac.com> on Tuesday May 27, 2008 @12:28PM (#23557675)
    Those are exchange rates, not relative purchasing power.

    The exchange rate has little to do with purchasing power, since it is heavily dependent on trade. The exchange rate has gone up because the US has a trade defecit, which is flooding foregin markets with dollars. Add to this the fact that the dollar has long been overvalued, and it's not hard to understand why the exchange rate is falling. It is basically a market correction, which should utimatelly ballance out our trade defecit (as exchange rates fall, imports will decrease and exports will increase).

    Relative purchasing power must be determined by compairing some kind of price index (such as the CPI). Sorry to burst your bubble, but that's simply the only way to compare relative purchasing power. The exchange rate only effects the price of imported goods, and therefore does not say a lot about price levels in general. Especially when you consider that China fixes their exchange rate to the dollar, and all petrolium is sold in dollars.
  • by digitrev ( 989335 ) <digitrev@hotmail.com> on Tuesday May 27, 2008 @01:01PM (#23558153) Homepage
    Ah yes, how dare we obey our own laws. You ignorant fool, it doesn't matter if what we do in Canada is illegal in the USA, it matters if it's illegal in Canada. Want to change it? Too fucking bad. It's our country, you have your own.
  • Re:screwed. (Score:4, Informative)

    by CowTipperGore ( 1081903 ) on Tuesday May 27, 2008 @01:11PM (#23558361)

    The mp3s ripped from my CDs don't have a purchase date.
    Exactly. This would help identify you as a thief [wired.com]. You might also want to read the RIAA's letter [copyright.gov] to the US Copyright office in 2006. For those PDF-averse, here are some highlights:

    The Register was right in 2003 to be "skeptical" of the merits of any fair use analysis that asserts that space-shifting or format-shifting is a noninfringing use. ... This is particularly the case in today's market, where inexpensive legitimate digital copies of most types of works are readily available, and increasingly can be obtained through online download services. Where a market is functioning to serve the demand otherwise being fulfilled by unauthorized copying, the likelihood that the unauthorized copying is fair use is diminished.

    and

    Similarly, creating a back-up copy of a music CD is not a non-infringing use.

"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." - Voltaire

Working...