ACTA Treaty Released 205
roju writes "The full text of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) was released today. It differs from the earlier leaks in that the negotiating stance of each country has been scrubbed. Preliminary analysis is up at Ars, which warns that 'Several sections of the ACTA draft show that rightsholders can obtain an injunction just by showing that infringement is "imminent," even if it hasn't happened yet.'"
Prior restraint? (Score:5, Insightful)
"Several sections of the ACTA draft show that rightsholders can obtain an injunction just by showing that infringement is "imminent," even if it hasn't happened yet."
Isn't that called "prior restraint"?
infringement is "imminent," (Score:4, Insightful)
So we should lock folks up not because they have committed a crime, but because they might commit a crime in the future.
Buy stocks in companies that build jails . . .
Re:Too much hysteria from the peanut gallery. (Score:5, Insightful)
I wouldn't call it a review of the draft: It doesn't really say all that much about it. Most of the text is spent insulting those that disagree with the author's views.
Who knows, he might be right, but the text doesn't really resemble a good review.
this is a declaration of war (Score:5, Insightful)
on your rights, on your freedoms, and on the richness of your culture
not by artists, but by an entrenched oligopoly of a dying distribution network (replaced by the internet)
the proper response to this declaration of war is not via legal means. all legal means have been corrupted bought and sold by entrenched corporate interests
the proper response is complete subversion of all media on the internet
we can't beat them in the legal arena. not because our legal arguments are inferior. indeed, they are superior. but we can't compete on the same playing field in terms of financial influence over our legislative bodies
so we will instead starve these assholes to death by destroying all of their sources of income: complete ubiquity of their media on the internet, free and higher quality (no DRM) than their locked up bullshit that only punishes the common man (it certainly doesn't punish pirates)
let the war being: tens of millions of poor, technological sophisticated, and media hungry teenagers versus a couple thousand lawyers
it's going to be a rout and we're going to win this war, by destroying these corporate interest that impoverish our culture and imperil our rights and freedoms by draining their finances
it is no longer good enough to merely ignore this bullshit. it is incumbent upon anyone with a sense of morality to outright destroy media corporations for the crimes they are inflicting on our cultures
Re:Prior restraint? (Score:5, Insightful)
Think about the SCO case: Perhaps SCO should have gotten an injuction to prevent anyone from distributing any version of Linux while the courts figured it all out. After all, they were claiming copyright infringement, exactly the type that would be covered in this treaty. SCO even brought the case to full fruition. This is 100% the type of case that can be subject to being enjoined. Imagine if that happened, and the judge decided that everyone that didn't have an SCO license also needed to take their Linux servers down for infringment.
The answer is to NOT have prior restraint, and sue for damages later if that is the case.
Re:Not a big change (Score:3, Insightful)
Trademark != Patent != Copyright.
As I point out in a post below, just imagine if the judge in the SCO case used this treaty as a basis, then he could have enjoined anyone from distributing (or using) Linux that didn't already have an SCO license. It *was* specifically a copyright issue, just like this treaty covers.
I just can't wait... (Score:3, Insightful)
Hate this fuckin' planet so hard. Let me off.