Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Privacy Your Rights Online

EU ACTA Doc Shows Plans For Global DMCA, 3 Strikes 406

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the works-for-baseball dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The European Commission analysis of ACTA's Internet chapter has leaked, indicating that the US is seeking to push laws that extend beyond the WIPO Internet treaties and beyond current European Union law. The document contains detailed comments on the US secret copyright treaty proposal, confirming the desire to promote a 'three-strikes and you're out' policy, a Global DMCA, harmonized contributory copyright infringement rules, and the establishment of an international notice-and-takedown policy."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

EU ACTA Doc Shows Plans For Global DMCA, 3 Strikes

Comments Filter:
  • More evidence that there is a real movement afoot for a global government with the goal of undermining the freedom and liberties of U.S. citizens.

    • by TheRaven64 (641858) on Monday November 30, 2009 @12:47PM (#30271070) Journal
      No, evidence that there is a movement afoot by the US government to undermine the freedom and liberties of citizens of the world. You already have a corrupt copyright regime, now you're trying to foist it on the rest of the world.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        ROW is already just as corrupt as the US.

        get your head out of your patriotic ass. corruption knows no country or ethnic boundaries. if you are human, you are corruptable.

        its a wave right now. all countries are joining in. they love it! their leaders, that is. the citizens all hate it. but their needs were NEVER important. any illusion of that was just that, an illusion.

        you are either in power or not in power. and those in-power right now are enjoying a huge rape-fest of those that are not in-power.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by palegray.net (1195047)
        Trust me, EU politicians are already quite interested in eroding your freedoms. This may be extra encouragement, but it's not exactly starting the fire.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Late Adopter (1492849)
        The US by no means has exclusive domain over this madness, the content industry exploits corruption wherever it is. Witness the 3-strikes law, which we don't even have yet in the US.

        This isn't about expanding any one country's paradigm, it's about imposing the worst-common-denominator.
      • by 5KVGhost (208137)

        Poor you. Last time I checked, the US was not part of the European Union.

        And the EU is notorious for disregarding the will of its citizenry in favor of whatever is convenient or profitable for the bureaucracy. Or for the governments of the larger controlling countries. The whole EU constitution process is a good example: An elaborate sham that deliberately avoided all that pesky interference by those backwards, unenlightened voters.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Carewolf (581105)

          Unfortunately for you. This is the EU analysis of a proposal by US to an international body, and thus all the ideas put forward are suggested by the US. So by your word; the US is trying to create a supernational government and are lobbying the EU to support the idea.

    • by Shatrat (855151) on Monday November 30, 2009 @12:47PM (#30271080)
      That's a bit unfair.
      The goal is undermining the freedom of all people.
      • by causality (777677)

        That's a bit unfair. The goal is undermining the freedom of all people.

        Why? Why would they prefer to rule with an iron fist over oppressed and unhappy masses when they could instead be revered as wise leaders of a happy, prosperous, free people? What makes the former scenario so much more appealing to our leaders than the latter? Are they just sociopaths (or if they are, is that alone really a satisfying explanation?)?

        I'd be interested in whether anyone can adequately explain that. Obviously it appears to be the case, but the "why" answer is either missing or unsatisfac

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by TheOrangeMan (884380)
      The way the summary reads it seems more like a U.S. initiative with the goal of undermining the freedom and liberties of global citizens...
    • by Yvanhoe (564877)
      s/US citizen/worldwide consumers of cultural products/
    • I think you've got that backwards. It's our government doing the undermining:

      indicating that the U.S. is seeking to push laws that extend beyond the WIPO Internet treaties and beyond current European Union law.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Wowsers (1151731)
      Global government led by the failing USA?

      Strange how both the crooked EU and USA have kept this quiet....
      http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/30/swift_tftp/ [theregister.co.uk]

      European home affairs ministers are today set to approve a transatlantic deal that will see them turn reams of private banking data over to US intelligence.

      The expected approval signals a remarkable diplomatic victory for Washington. The European Commission and the US had previously clashed over the Terrorist Finance Tracking Programme (TFTP).

      TFTP began in secret following the 9/11 terror attacks. It allows US authorities to monitor SWIFT, the Belgian company that acts as clearing house for millions of daily transactions between European banks.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Shikaku (1129753)

      Do it. Make it into a law. It's called due fucking process.

      The RIAA only worked with lawsuits now because they are all CIVIL cases.

      If people start randomly getting arrested without due process for no reason like the RIAA randomly does with potshots, there will be hell.

      Make it into criminal cases. There will be blood of executives on the streets, I guarantee it.

      • by digitalunity (19107) <digitalunityNO@SPAMyahoo.com> on Monday November 30, 2009 @01:42PM (#30271754) Homepage

        I think you underestimate the pacifism of most Americans. They just don't care anymore.

        240 years ago the men that founded the USA were running away from what we have become. Freedom has given way to corporations needs and our ever more difficult struggle to maintain our standard of living. We need a revolt, but I just don't see that happening. Just look at even more repressed countries like Iran and North Korea.

        The time has come and gone to make peaceful change, but the country will have to descend much farther into the depths of hell before people will get off their ass and make a change.

    • by Abreu (173023) on Monday November 30, 2009 @02:32PM (#30272466)

      Now is the time to start financing the guys who work on the TOR and Freenet protocols

  • by tjstork (137384) <todd.bandrowsky@nOsPAm.gmail.com> on Monday November 30, 2009 @12:47PM (#30271074) Homepage Journal

    I don't think this treaty would pass in the US Senate. I would forsee the unlikely coalition of far rightists and far leftists actually collaborating to defeat this, just as they actually have on some other things.

    • Does it matter which side they are on? They are all owned by Lobbyists, instead of by voters..

    • Aha, but my understanding from earlier stories is that this is not being pursued as a regular treaty but instead as an executive agreement. Essentially the administration would agree to pursue regular legislation enacting these provisions, which only require a simple majority to pass, rather than a treaty that would require 2/3 of the senate. I doubt that anyone currently in the senate would burn the "political capitol" to filibuster to stop these from getting to the floor. Odds are they would break it u

  • Down with the white-man based one world government!

  • In the US even? I mean I know our politicians are bought and paid for, but wouldn't 3-strikes and you're cut off violate due-process? Granted I haven't read all the details, but it's a bit hard to when it's you know, hidden away from all.

    Time to fire up the printer and send off more letters to the Congress critters.

    • by wizardforce (1005805) on Monday November 30, 2009 @01:04PM (#30271308) Journal

      I would think that after all that has happened in the last decade, people would stop being so surprised when our bloated government abuses its power *again*.

    • by theCoder (23772)

      Due process? You're not going to jail. Your life and liberty aren't being threatened, only your Internet connection. It would be "administrative", like revoking your driver's license.

      Except you don't need an Internet license (yet), so this would be the Federal government telling private businesses (ISPs) that they cannot do business with a group of people. Nasty, but it has been done in some forms before, such as background checks for gun purchases and the no fly list. But those were done in the name

  • Obama ? Come on ! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Yvanhoe (564877) on Monday November 30, 2009 @12:54PM (#30271158) Journal
    On this point I am really saddened by the Obama administration. The 3-strikes-and-out is hugely unpopular including amongst artists. It is "lobbying for special interests" at its finest and really should not belong to the 21st century. There are already some countries who recognized access to internet as an opposable right.

    I thought now there were progressives in the White House and in Senate ? Does nobody want geeks' votes anymore ? How many pirate party will be necessary in order for this madness to end ?
  • by jekk (15278) <mcherm@mcherm.com> on Monday November 30, 2009 @12:56PM (#30271194) Homepage

    Dear Rest-of-the-World:

    I realize that you have already had to deal with an invasion of Iraq to eliminate imaginary "weapons of mass destruction" and a world-wide financial collapse (although, to be fair, you bear some of the responsibility for that one... after all YOU believed our our uncritical rating agencies). And we're still stumbling around on that ruining-the-planetary-climate issue. So I know it's a big favor to ask, but would you please, PLEASE restrain my country's insane leaders?

    Thanks...
    -- A Sane American.

    • by wizardforce (1005805) on Monday November 30, 2009 @01:03PM (#30271288) Journal

      It's not the rest of the world's jo to restrain our leaders. It is OUR JOB to restrain our leaders.

      • by garcia (6573) on Monday November 30, 2009 @01:27PM (#30271574) Homepage

        I think the majority of Americans thought that they corrected the mistakes they made 9 and 5 years ago when they elected the most recent idiot to office. Unfortunately they just brought a whole new idiot with a whole different secret agenda.

        Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

      • by jedidiah (1196)

        The rest of the world is responsible for it's own people.

        Nothing can become "global law" without the cooperation of willing lackeys.

        In this respect, Obama is no more responsible than Sarkozy or Berlisconi.

      • by muuh-gnu (894733) on Monday November 30, 2009 @01:33PM (#30271634)

        In order to do your job, you'd have to vote them out of office. But you cant vote them out because your system in practice allows only two parties. The US hasnt had a third party winning somwhere since more than 100 years. 300 Million citizens and only _two_ fscking parties to vote for, every god-forgotten country-so-small-you-cant-find-on-the-map from the Balcans would laugh its collective ass off about calling that "democracy".

        Add to that the fact that, at least regarding copyright, the two US parties basically agreed to form a cartel (MAFIAA isnt called MAFIAA for nothing), and youre simply out of luck.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by jpmorgan (517966)

          This is a common point, but it's not really true.

          Yes, at general elections there are, practically speaking, only two options. However, the US has a very open primary system. I'm not American, but my understanding is that all one has to do is check 'Democrat' or 'Republican' on voter registration forms to be allowed to participate. At primaries there ARE a broad range of ideas and philosophies presented. So yes, the final choice is between two... but those two are in turn selected through a democratic proces

        • It's not the two party system that is the problem it's something that both parties (and even hypothetical 3rd parties) have in common: greed.

          Our politicians are almost all for sale to the highest bidder - typically rich Corporations with agendas that will usually harm Americans.

          For a million dollars or more the politician becomes the full time servant of their new Corporate masters and stops serving the Citizens.

          Note that this problem is insolvable since the politicians would have to approve of any solution

    • by TheRaven64 (641858) on Monday November 30, 2009 @01:19PM (#30271482) Journal

      would you please, PLEASE restrain my country's insane leaders?

      We'd love to, but right now we're having trouble restraining our own insane leaders. I'm not sure quite how we ended up with leaders - I thought I was voting for people to represent me, not lead me.

  • by Skuld-Chan (302449) on Monday November 30, 2009 @01:00PM (#30271260)

    So say you get kicked off the net - how do they enforce this? Just off the top of my head I can think of a dozen ways to browse the net semi-anonymously (coffee shop, library, college, neighbors wi-fi etc etc). Not to mention having internet access at work - does that mean I'd be denied employment world-wide for messing around on the net?

    • by Monkeedude1212 (1560403) on Monday November 30, 2009 @01:11PM (#30271378) Journal

      It starts with RFID chips being implanted into everyone, which is then used only for convenience (like purchases) and then slowly becomes more and more integrated into everyday life. All of your information will be stored on this device and you will be tracked by the Government always. You will end up needing your chip to log into /. (.) Eventually you'll need it to even Access the internet. And then, once they find that you are abusing their laws, they just shut off your RFID, leaving you absolutely helpless in the world because you won't be able to do anything.

      THEN they put Flouride or something in the water to make people forget. And then we find out they faked the Jupiter Landing! And then Copyright Laws become even more strict and Insane then they are now, And then Apple Gets arrested for being too Open Source and everything goes to hell!!!!

      ITS NOT TOO LATE! REVOLT NOW!

    • by AndrewNeo (979708)

      As far as I know, the way the 3-strikes laws are supposed to work are only to disconnect your home ISP access. You're not 'banned' from the internet entirely, just from subscribing to it as a resident. I'm not so sure how this treaty works, though.

  • versus

    millions of teenagers who are
    1. technologically astute
    2. media hungry
    3. POOR

    let them pass any goddamn law they want. who fucking cares?

    its nothing more than damage to route around, like the internet was designed to do

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I care, when I voice an unpopular opinion and those in power cut off my internet access because "I've been downloading media" regardless of the reality of the situation.

      • to point out that their INTENT is malicious and requires vocal opposition

        but i am merely pointing out that regardless of their intent, they can have no real world effect

        the intent of an ant might be to eat you, but who cares: its just an ant

        governments do plenty of vile things in this world. however, in this specific arena, they are paper tigers: all bark and no bite. it is in fact a chance to laugh at their absurdity and make fun of their ineffectualness. of all the evils they could be fighting: corporate

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by debrain (29228)

      its nothing more than damage to route around, like the internet was designed to do

      The media barons out there are saying "Internet piracy is nothing more than damage to route around or snuff out, like the global media conglomerates were designed to do."

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by melikamp (631205)

      By successfully censoring commercial art and removing it from the Internet, these clowns only help us to popularize the free-as-in-freedom art. I agree: let them pass more copyright laws if they so desire. Unlike with patents, nothing of value will be lost.

    • by mounthood (993037) on Monday November 30, 2009 @01:17PM (#30271450)

      versus

      millions of teenagers who are
      1. technologically astute
      2. media hungry
      3. POOR

      let them pass any goddamn law they want. who fucking cares?

      its nothing more than damage to route around, like the internet was designed to do

      Consider the war on drugs before you boast. The US is willing to damage millions of people even if the outcome they want is virtually impossible. (And like the war on drugs, the people will favor harsh treatment for "pirates" also.)

      • yes (Score:4, Interesting)

        by circletimessquare (444983) <circletimessquare AT gmail DOT com> on Monday November 30, 2009 @01:25PM (#30271552) Homepage Journal

        your random grandmother or soccer mom will lose their internet access for what leachers on their insecured wifi do or what their children's friends do

        and all the while the real action will move further underground, further encrypted, steganographed, obfuscated, made sparse, and otherwise evolved to be more and more resistant to any sort of inspection, interception or even tracking

        thank you, governments of the "free" west, for breeding the ultimate untraceable file sharing network due to your overzealous protection of your corporate executive friends in dead media industries. fucking blind fools

        it does you no good, assholes, to be the losers in the game of technological progress, and not even know it

        one should know when they are defeated

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        Comparing the effects of widespread piracy of music and movies on a population and the effect of hard drugs is ridiculous. Lots of media is absolutely terrible and may be said to "rot your brain", but many, many of the kinds of drugs that are illegal really ruin people's lives and make them completely unemployable and a drain on the world.

        I'm sure most of the population will get behind a law against life-wrecking hard drugs, but I can't see them rallying to stop piracy as hard. The negative side effects j
  • By all means, let's get writing, mailing, whatever. Set up a petition, a FB group and spam our MP's silly. I'm just a little vague on who to reach. Anyone with experience got some contact info for the various member states (EU, Canada, NZ, etc etc)?

  • by paulsnx2 (453081) on Monday November 30, 2009 @01:16PM (#30271446)

    By 2025 (at the current rate of advance sustained over the last 30 years) a TB of disk storage will cost about a penny. For $100, you will be able to buy a hard drive that will hold 2.5 *centuries* of HD video. While that might not be enough to hold all of mankind's copyrighted media, it will be more than enough to hold more media of whatever format will be in use in 2025 than a person could reasonably consume in their lifetime.

    http://brownzings.blogspot.com/2009/11/disruptive-change.html [blogspot.com]

    The point is, if we copyright any and every scrap of content produced, and maintain the same sorts of restrictions on such content that we enforce at the current time plus all the restrictions of the ACTA.... We will have no legal way to use a storage card we might get as a prize in a Cracker Jack box, much less a drive we actually buy.

    And if people can carry around cheap storage sufficiently large to simply clone everyone's media libraries who they might meet, to sort out what they want later, who needs the Internet to "pirate"? (Thus what would be the real use of "Three Strikes"?)

    When I write a joke, it is copyrighted. But jokes are so easy to repeat, and so hard to track that there isn't any way I can be paid for each time my joke gets retold. When media becomes easier to pass along than a joke, how can anyone require a payment for each retelling? There are other ways to be compensated, and the entertainment industry is going to have to learn to live with Moore's Law just like any high tech company does. Learn to leverage the efficiencies they gain with better technology to offset the loss of revenue that occurs as technology eliminates sources of income.

    Live Concerts, Movie Theaters, endorsement deals, Shirts, and other value adds (plus who-knows what value adds might arise in the future) may be where the entertainment industry will have to go. Cheap (and I don't mean $10, or $5, or even $3) downloads of non DRM movies would bring in plenty of income from those that simply don't want to bother with other services.

    Life is tough as technology takes away your income. But we are not going to kill the advance of technology, as much as the entertainment industry would like us to.

  • I thought the whole point of ACTA as a secret agreement was that it could be implemented by merely tweaking enforcement of existing law. I know of no element of US law that supports the 3 strikes notion. If Congress won't play ball, ACTA could fall apart no matter what the various international executive branches agree to.

  • by zmollusc (763634) on Monday November 30, 2009 @01:19PM (#30271474)

    The little guy who sells bootleg dvds in order to support terrorism. Damn pirate bay have been cutting into his profits.

  • Equal Enforcement? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by r_jensen11 (598210) on Monday November 30, 2009 @01:19PM (#30271478)

    Just for curiosity's sake, could we ensure the following if these laws get passed?

    Company A becomes convicted of copyright infringement 3 times
    Company A loses permanent access to the internet

    I'm sure that Time Warner, Sony, et. al. have all been convicted of copyright infringement at least 3 times. Can we have their access to the internet permanently revoked?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by schon (31600)

      Just for curiosity's sake, could we ensure the following if these laws get passed?

      Company A becomes convicted of copyright infringement 3 times
      Company A loses permanent access to the internet

      Why on earth would you want to do that? Why give corporations benefits that individuals don't get?

      Remember - the three strikes makes no mention of conviction - they want you to be cut off based on accusation. The entire point is to skip the courts and due process.

  • 3 strikes? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by andy1307 (656570) on Monday November 30, 2009 @01:23PM (#30271536)
    Thank god they're following baseball rules. It could have been worse. It could have been cricket.
  • by KitsuneSoftware (999119) on Monday November 30, 2009 @01:27PM (#30271572) Homepage Journal

    As a self-employed game developer, I own the copyright on all the stuff I sell. While I can recognise the need for a unified global copyright system (and unified global laws on sales and export/import tax), my sales model assumes I can sell any given product for 10 years, and I would be perfectly happy if copyright durations were reduced to that. That said, 10 years may well be optimistic, and I doubt I would have any problems if it was reduced to 5 years. Anyone in a who must make their money back quickly is in the same boat — the rest of the profits are just "keeping score".

    From what I've seen, this treaty is not going to make the world a better place, it's going to make it worse, especially given how little most people know about IP law (patent != copyright != trademark != database right != industrial design right != geographical indication != trade secret). Short duration IP-monopoly-rights are non-issues for rapidly moving industries, and shorter durations make it easier to move faster.

  • There will always be places that will say "no thanks" to this kind of stupidity for several rerasons:

    1) They have some sense (rare but possible)
    2) They don't like US.
    3) Their laws wouldn't allow
    4) Their Constitution wouldn't allow.
    5) They don't want outsiders telling them how to do things specially if they can't do themselves.
    6) All of above? :)

  • by w0mprat (1317953) on Monday November 30, 2009 @04:40PM (#30274300)
    If internet piracy goes away, people will move to phyiscal media.

    You see there isn't a respectable IT firm anywhere in a developed nation that doesn't have a bit of a 'Swap Club', sharing pirated material by USB drives, SD cards and cheap terabyte class drives around the office. Back in the day they shared stuff on CD-R because the internet was rubbish. Now these things are now ubiqutous, inexpensive and expendable. Terabyte range drives are less than 10c per gig for a while now, if you find a good deal.

    What happens when these things inevitably become alot smaller and alot cheaper?

    What really scares me is what might be done to try to control this form of piracy.

The biggest mistake you can make is to believe that you are working for someone else.

Working...