EU Commission: CETA 'Totally Different From ACTA' 112
itwbennett writes "Slashdot readers will remember the hullaballoo that arose yesterday over a leaked version of CETA containing key clauses that were 'nearly identical to ones found in ACTA.' Now the European Commission is saying you shouldn't believe every leak you see and that the 'language being negotiated on CETA regarding Internet is now totally different from ACTA.' Well, maybe with the exception of language that appears in both CETA and ACTA but didn't 'originate' in ACTA and therefore doesn't count."
So? (Score:5, Insightful)
--Coder
Re:Didn't take long.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Normally bills that get rejected due to public outcry become riders on other, more socially acceptable bills.
I though it'd be the "Love Your Nation Act: Money For Bridges, and Orphans, and Puppies, and ACTA, and Rape Crisis Centres" act.
You wouldn't vote against money for bridges, orphans and puppies would you? And what are you, some kind of sick rapist who wants your victims to suffer?
Re:European comisars (Score:2, Insightful)
Why yes, but especially this De Gucht guy seems particularly bent on defending the position of certain large American industry organisations. Though that's still a bad one in a sorry lot; he might seem the black sheep but the rest of the flock sure ain't white either.
Wouldn't Be a Problem (Score:5, Insightful)
you shouldn't believe every leak you see
You know, that wouldn't be a problem if you would show the citizens the treaties you are considering subjecting them to.
Re:European comisars (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:So? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Didn't take long.. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's interesting to note that some MEPs might actually fall for this; they do not want to reject a good agreement because of one bad rider, no matter how hard they opposed ACTA. "Sure, I am not too happy about this clause regarding our firstborn, but on the whole this deal with the devil looks pretty sweet".
Re:So? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:So? (Score:5, Insightful)
The commission did not refuse, they kept asking the other parties to open up. However the US and Japan refused to open up the negotiations. The US claimed that national security was at stake.
Not that the commission handled things that good, and Karel's actions following the MEPs rejection is clearly a reason to sack him.
I would like to ask MEPs: Please subject Karel to a very intense smacking in the EP and if he does not amend his ways, fire him. Yes, I know that de jure you have to fire the entire EC, but you could just tell Barrosso, that he and the others will loose their jobs unless Karel is sacked.
This is why... (Score:5, Insightful)
...we need actual penalties on politicians who undermine the constitution and such likes.
Right now, they can try, try again until it gets through, because being a politician is one of the few jobs where failures have no consequences whatsoever.
Ah, you'll now say, "but come next election..." - obviously, that's not how it works. Next election, people will vote again based on posters and TV spots, not on a performance evaluation. Everyone knows that, including the politicians.
Secret negociations (Score:4, Insightful)
Countering it would be easy : be open ! Is it that hard to understand ?
Re:So? (Score:2, Insightful)
Do you know why this will never happen? Because it is the people who would be subject to this scrutiny that have to vote the law through, and why would they? This is the problem with representative democracy as it stands today: the people who make the rules have learnt how to bend the rules to their own advantage. Anyone who make it in politics is a career politician who has no knowledge of how it is to work for a living in the real world.