Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Piracy EU Your Rights Online

ACTA Signed By 22 EU Countries 138

Posted by timothy
from the bad-acta-ors dept.
First time accepted submitter azrael29a writes "22 EU members signed the controversial ACTA treaty today in Tokyo. However, the signatures of the EU member states and the EU itself will count for nothing unless the European Parliament gives its approval to ACTA in June."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

ACTA Signed By 22 EU Countries

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Say no to ... (Score:5, Informative)

    by The Archon V2.0 (782634) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @02:00PM (#38831003)
    The people say "no", but their masters seem pretty eager to say "yes".
  • by icebraining (1313345) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @02:04PM (#38831061) Homepage

    A French MEP has quit the process of scrutinising ACTA for the European Parliament, calling the treaty's passage through the EU legislative system a masquerade.

    In a statement on Thursday, Kader Arif denounced the signing of ACTA (the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement) by the EU and 21 member states earlier in the day. He said the European Parliament was being undermined and the process was a "charade" in which he would no longer participate.
    (..)
    "I want to denounce as the greatest of all the process that led to the signing of this agreement: no association of civil society, lack of transparency from the beginning of negotiations, successive postponements of the signing of the text without any explanation being given, setting aside the claims of the European Parliament [despite those views being] expressed in several resolutions of our Assembly," Arif said, according to an automated translation of his statement.

    Arif said he had as rapporteur "faced unprecedented manoeuvres of the right of Parliament to impose an accelerated schedule to pass the agreement as soon as possible before the public is alerted, thereby depriving Parliament of its right of expression and the tools at its disposal to carry the legitimate demands of citizens".
    (...)
    "This agreement may [have a] major impact on the lives of our citizens, and yet everything is done [so that] the European Parliament has no say," Arif said. "I will not participate in this charade."

    http://www.zdnet.co.uk/blogs/communication-breakdown-10000030/mep-quits-acta-charade-in-protest-at-eu-signing-10025297/ [zdnet.co.uk]

  • by korgitser (1809018) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @02:09PM (#38831139)

    I am from Estonia and our internet community has managed to put the ACTA issues into the public debate here. The politicians still seem unwilling to tackle the issues raised; furthermore, it seems they were about to sign it without reading it - even to the point where our local RIAA lackey was the one explaining the "governments position" on the TV yesterday. I do not know where this will end and while our government seems to be afraid to say no, we will not go down without a fight.

  • by o'reor (581921) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @02:11PM (#38831159) Journal
    According to this article (in french) [numerama.com], the Member of the European Parliament in charge of the ratification process of ACTA, Mr Kader Arif, just resigned his position, saying that the whole process is just an anti-democratic farce.
  • by bonch (38532) * on Thursday January 26, 2012 @02:19PM (#38831269)

    You're responding to a repaste of a classic troll post [kuro5hin.org] from ten years ago.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 26, 2012 @02:26PM (#38831349)

    And for US citizens, you can sign a petition [whitehouse.gov] to challenge ACTA after being signed into law as an executive agreement -- which doesn't require approval -- when it covers intellectual property, which requires ratification in Congress. Techdirt has more information [techdirt.com].

    If you want to go further, you can contact Senator Ron Wyden [wikipedia.org], who also questions the constitutionality of ACTA [slashdot.org].

  • by blind biker (1066130) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @02:27PM (#38831363) Journal

    I do not know where this will end and while our government seems to be afraid to say no, we will not go down without a fight.

    The Poles are fighting it, too. [bbc.co.uk]

  • by bughunter (10093) <bughunterNO@SPAMearthlink.net> on Thursday January 26, 2012 @02:44PM (#38831603) Journal

    Since it's a treaty, like NAFTA, it's far easier to implement, far harder to challenge in court, and more powerful than an act of Congress. And it's global.

    ACTA vs. SOPA: Five Reasons ACTA is Scarier Threat to Internet Freedom [ibtimes.com] from the International Business Times:

    The SOPA bill was derailed because it required both houses of the U.S. Congress to pass it, and for President Barack Obama to sign it. Once approved, it would have been subject to challenge and could have been changed by future congresses.

    ACTA, on the other hand, was already signed by the United States on Oct. 11, 2011, and Obama was not required to get the approval of any outside authority to do so: not the Congress, not the Supreme Court, and not the American public.

    Now that it has been signed, the legislative and judicial branches of the U.S. government also have little ability to challenge or amend the treaty, and Americans would be subject to a whole new scheme of laws, restrictions and regulations that could have them facing fines or jail through a process that would likely exist entirely outside the scope of the American justice system.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 26, 2012 @03:17PM (#38832053)

    I've been on the big protest on Wednesday, and as of now several more protests are being planned throughout the country. There's one for tommorow in Warsaw.

    What I can't understand is what the fuck is our prime minister doing, thinking he can ignore the voice of tens of thousands of angry people on the streets. It's basically the biggest protest in 30 years, and that previous one was the whole "Solidarnosc" thing.

    We are fucking outraged at our gov't.
    They will not get re-elected.

  • PETITION EUPARL ! (Score:5, Informative)

    by unity100 (970058) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @03:58PM (#38832559) Homepage Journal

    if you are situated on an eu member country, or, live/work in an eu member country, or, is employed by a company that is registered inside eu, you have the right to petition european parliament. you also have the right if you are citizen of a country that is an official candidate for eu.

    Petition euparl from below link. tell them to fuck this shit :

    https://www.secure.europarl.europa.eu/aboutparliament/en/petition.html [europa.eu]

    this is no joke petition - its official petition form of euparl itself. just drop your real name, address while petitioning.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 26, 2012 @04:13PM (#38832755)

    Try the search with "how acta kills your job"; it returns a slew of pages, such asHow ACTA Kills Your Job [qummunismus.at].

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 26, 2012 @04:13PM (#38832761)

    That legal analysis is incomplete and misleading. In the United States, laws and treaties get their power based on the Constitution and the number of branches of government that sign off on it. So here they are:

    1. The Constitution is always the top and anything inconsistent with it is void. Only the People have the power to change the Constitution.

    2. Two signatory branches. These are things that have been approved (or in the case of bills overridden of veto power) by two branches usually Laws and Treaties. If two of these conflict, the earlier in time is void; although the usual practice is to say they don't conflict. So, if you don't like a treaty, a law has to be passed to get rid of it or another treaty put in place to override it (in many cases, the government just stops enforcing it, but it is still on the books until one of the former happen). Also, anything below that conflicts with this level is also void.

    3. One signatory branch. These are things that have been approved by one branch. These are things like resolutions or executive agreements. If two things at this level conflict, then the earlier one is void. However, you also need to take in account as to whether the branch in question had power to enact it. Additionally, if the action conflicts with any of the above, then it is also void.

    4. No signatory branch. These are things that have not been approved by any branch. They lose to any of the above.

    With the ACTA, having been signed by the president is at level (3). This means that all the legislature has to do is try to pass a law to get rid of ACTA or refuse to enact those laws. The President cannot force them to enact laws through a level 3 action; however, the various government agencies will be required to carry it out until something of a higher priority or same priority at a later time happens.

    Additionally, some of the doom and gloom proposed under this treaty are not legal scenarios because the Constitution always wins, and many laws on the books prevent them, which beat ACTA (unless it is ratified).

  • Re:Say no to ... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 26, 2012 @04:55PM (#38833251)

    How can you tell? The final version still isn't publicly available. Whose word are you believing?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 26, 2012 @05:17PM (#38833469)

    Sadly not. Germany's chancellor Angela Merkel couldn't bend over more for her American heroes. Germany doesn't need to be bullied. The conservative party just needs to find a way to get ACTA past the populace without catapulting the Pirate Party into all state parliaments at the earliest opportunity. The conservatives are also somewhat hampered by their junior partner, the liberal democrats, whose Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger is head of the ministry of justice and annoyingly appears to have a spine. If it weren't for these minor obstacles, Germany would have been on that list.

  • Re:Say no to ... (Score:5, Informative)

    by rhook (943951) on Thursday January 26, 2012 @09:46PM (#38835651)

    Obama claims he is against SOPA and PIPA yet he signed ACTA last year.

    http://www.webpronews.com/president-obama-doesnt-support-sopa-but-signs-acta-2012-01 [webpronews.com]

If you think the system is working, ask someone who's waiting for a prompt.

Working...