Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Censorship The Internet Politics

Rep. Darrell Issa Requests Public Comments On ACTA 186

Posted by timothy
from the how-do-you-really-feel? dept.
langelgjm writes "After repeated dismissals by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, Congressman Darrell Issa has taken matters into his own hands by posting a copy of ACTA online and asking for public comments. ACTA, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, is a secretly negotiated multilateral trade treaty with the potential for profoundly affecting the Internet. 'ACTA represents as great a threat to an open Internet as [do] SOPA and PIPA and was drafted with even less transparency and input from digital citizens,' Issa said."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Rep. Darrell Issa Requests Public Comments On ACTA

Comments Filter:
  • by HarrySquatter (1698416) on Thursday March 08, 2012 @10:31AM (#39287357)

    Both sides are bought and paid for by Big IP and Wall Street. This is why you saw virtually 0 votes against the DMCA (unanimous consent in the Senate and virtually no opposition in the House) and why many of the sponsors and co-sponsors of these Pro-IP bills are Republicans (lest you forget the originator of the DMCA in the House was Republican Howard Cobel, SOPA was introduced to the House by Republican Lamar Smith, etc). And also the RIAA CEO and Chairman from 2003 to 2011 was a long time staffer to various Republicans for 26 years before taking the RIAA CEO position.

  • by SpzToid (869795) on Thursday March 08, 2012 @10:33AM (#39287387)

    Hey AC, I googled a citation for what you're talking about, because I honestly had no clue. This is very interesting also.

    “It was just crushing to hear the chairman’s reason to not allow my testimony,” Fluke told ABC News. “I can understand that [the issue] is connected to religion, but I don’t understand how you can have an open conversation without hearing from the women who have been personally affected by this.”

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/rep-darrell-issa-bars-minority-witness-a-woman-on-contraception-2/ [go.com]

  • by HarrySquatter (1698416) on Thursday March 08, 2012 @10:34AM (#39287403)

    This agreement was written by the U.S. entertainment industry.

    No it was originally written by the entertainment industries of both the US and Japan and then the Canadian and EU entertainment industries joined in. I know it's popular to blame all such things entirely on the US but there is just as much complicity from other countries in these treaties than these one-dimensional criticisms would lead you to believe.

  • by LostCluster (625375) * on Thursday March 08, 2012 @10:41AM (#39287469)

    As I discovered looking for Obama's stand on the issue, the "rogue diplomat" who signed ACTA is the PotUS himself. This makes no sense...

  • by LostCluster (625375) * on Thursday March 08, 2012 @10:42AM (#39287497)

    Where was I January 29.... that's the day Obama signed ACTA and now we've only got the Senate remaining for a chance to keep the ball out of the end zone.

  • by elrous0 (869638) * on Thursday March 08, 2012 @10:55AM (#39287675)

    May just have something to do with the fact that the entertainment industry is one of Obama's biggest campaign contributors (or, as anyone else would call them, "bribers").

  • by Hatta (162192) on Thursday March 08, 2012 @11:00AM (#39287733) Journal

    And finally, since when was a student at a university considered an expert witness on anything like this? Seriously.

    Seriously? A female student at university is exactly the kind of person who is going to be most affected by government policies on birth control. That's exactly the kind of person you want lots of input from.

    Let's not forget that she was the oppositions ONLY witness at that hearing. Darrell Issa was only interested in shutting down debate. Shame on him.

  • How about this? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Idou (572394) on Thursday March 08, 2012 @11:22AM (#39288099) Journal
    This agreement was written by the global entertainment industry in order to advance their own interests at the expense of the freedoms that make a modern democracy possible. It was secured in the U.S. by the open bribery of the U.S. Congress and President. It has been foisted on the rest of the world through the hostile use of U.S. economic might, in illegal secret negotiations that violate the laws of almost every country involved.

    This single agreement represents the undermining of thousands of years worth of social evolution, and those in public office who support it should be immediately dismissed, criminally charged, and incarcerated for their remaining years on this Earth.

    Changelog:
    elrous0 - original comment
    Idou - revised to blame global entertainment and added some action items
  • by tj2 (54604) on Thursday March 08, 2012 @11:57AM (#39288659)

    Don't take this wrong, but you're a fool.

    "Minority", in this case, refers to the fact that she was a witness for the Democratics, the minority part. It has nothing to do with her ethnicity. Try reading the actual article next time. Feel free to ask if the big words confuse you. If all else fails, try looking at a picture of Sandra Fluke and telling us all how you came to the amazing conclusion that she's black. Really, I'd like to know.

    Re: expert witness. Do you consider a random group of *male* religious figures more expert in the area of health care than someone who actually has experience using contraception? I'm curious as to why you're not opposed to their presence at the hearing. Also, I'm pretty sure that anyone affected by a proposed law does (or should) have standing to testify as to how it would affect them.

    Finally, those religious organizations don't seem to have a problem with paying for Viagra prescriptions, which they've been doing for a number of years. I have no proof, but I very strongly suspect that few if any of the recipients of that particular drug only use it when they are having a sexual experience strictly for procreative purposes.

    Despite their efforts at re-framing this as a matter of religious persecution, it's health care. We don't allow people to have juveniles handle rattlesnakes (even if their parent's religion says it's important), and it's okay (or mandatory) to provide medical care to badly injured kids despite Mom & Dad's belief that a little prayer will fix that arterial bleeding right up, so religious belief does not trump the law. The legislation *never* said that a religious organization had to provide it to their members, but had to make it available to their employees. Or do you believe that every employee of the Catholic health services (650+ hospitals) is a member in good standing of the Catholic church?

  • by jmac_the_man (1612215) on Thursday March 08, 2012 @12:41PM (#39289367)
    Here's a BETTER citation, for what ACTUALLY happened. http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/gop-dems-played-games-over-sandra-fluke/408036 [washingtonexaminer.com] In short, the Republicans decided on having this hearing, so they told the Democrats it was happening and asked the Democrats who to call as a witness. Being the minority party, they get one witness. The rule is that the Democrats had until three days before the hearing to come up with their witness so they have time to prepare questions and whatnot. The day before the hearing, the Democrats say that they want two witnesses, Rev. Barry Lynn, head of Americans for Separation of Church and State, and Fluke. The Republicans say they can't have both, so they pick Rev. Lynn. Then the Democrats tried to switch their choice back to Fluke, and THAT what was denied.

    Issa would have let her testify if the Democrats had given the committee time to prepare questions to ask her, like they were supposed to.

  • by jmac_the_man (1612215) on Thursday March 08, 2012 @12:50PM (#39289501)

    Let's not forget that she was the oppositions ONLY witness at that hearing. Darrell Issa was only interested in shutting down debate. Shame on him.

    The Democrats had originally asked for Rev. Barry Lynn (head of Americans United for Separation of Church and State) to be invited, and the Republicans invited him. The Democrats changed their minds and told Lynn not to show up, because they'd rather make an issue out of Fluke being denied. Shame on you.

    A female student at university is exactly the kind of person who is going to be most affected by government policies on birth control. That's exactly the kind of person you want lots of input from.

    Fluke is a 30 year old woman. She lives in a $500,000 house, which she can afford because she has a career as a liberal agitator. She went to Georgetown specifically because she wanted to hassle the Catholic institution over the teachings of the Church on birth control. She's EXACTLY the kind of woman who should be paying for her own birth control.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 08, 2012 @02:16PM (#39290709)

    > ultra-Orthodox Jews are opposed to organ transplants

    No, we are opposed to those specific organ transplants where the current medical definition of death is not consistent with our traditional definition of death AND the organ must be harvested quickly after death. (That is, we consider the situation to be murdering the donor.) We are not opposed to kidney transplants (as the donor is still alive) or cornea transplants (as the death-to-harvest duration is not critical).

  • by peragrin (659227) on Thursday March 08, 2012 @02:19PM (#39290765)

    Democrats. -- entertainment industry

    Republicans military industrial complex

    Wall street both

    The other 95% of Americans well someone has to pay all the above people.

Make headway at work. Continue to let things deteriorate at home.

Working...