Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government EU Your Rights Online

EU Commission: CETA 'Totally Different From ACTA' 112

Posted by samzenpus
from the a-rose-by-any-other-name dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

EU Commission: CETA 'Totally Different From ACTA'

Comments Filter:
  • Well, yeah. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Johann Lau (1040920) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @02:56AM (#40625253) Homepage Journal

    It has an E instead of an A. That's good enough, right?

    • The C has also been moved to the front of the name. Totally different thing.

      • Yes, rearranging the letters, as well as rearranging the order of the paragraphs within the act, along with an all-new preamble, means this is an all-new bill.

        Just do a 'compare documents' in Word and see for yourself. It reports one change, namely the entire document.

        Now hurry up and pass this one.

    • It's good to know there are people on this planet that have just as messed up of brain that I do.

      That was my absolute first thought, too, when I read the title.

  • European comisars (Score:5, Informative)

    by boorack (1345877) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @02:57AM (#40625257)
    What a bunch of fucks. It seems that we won't get rid of attempts of pushing more or less fascist copyright regulation (with censorship attached) until we get rid of them.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      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.

    • by umghhh (965931) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @03:53AM (#40625489)
      the good thing about that is that they show to everybody what bunch of fucks they are. The bad thing about this is that this hardly matters. It is as with kids - if t hey ask seemingly innocent question long enough they get an agreement not because we really agree but because we are tired of being asked the same question all t he time. The other problem there is that this is complex matter that does not affect lives directly so there is no majority that would go to EU Parliament with sticks and ropes to hand those assholes. I'd say - hang them all as they do not understand.
      • Re:European comisars (Score:5, Informative)

        by Spad (470073) <slashdotNO@SPAMspad.co.uk> on Thursday July 12, 2012 @04:24AM (#40625645) Homepage

        Don't confuse the EU Parliament with the EU Commission; the former are elected and do a pretty decent job of being representative of their constituents, the latter are unelected and do a pretty decent job of being representative of anyone who pays for lunch.

        • by Anonymous Coward

          Don't fall into that trap. Who appoints them? I don't know, but my guess is EU Parliament? Then they have the power to remove them and appoint someone different, therefore the problem and fault lies there. They try to pull the same crap here in the US ("Blame the unelected bureaucrat, it isn't our fault he's going so badly!") but rarely are these appoints for life (here in the US the only ones I know of are for the Supreme Court and there is a reason for that) so they can be replaced, and therefore any harm

          • Re:European comisars (Score:5, Informative)

            by TheRaven64 (641858) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @08:15AM (#40626757) Journal

            Don't fall into that trap. Who appoints them? I don't know

            And there's the reason why it's not worth reading the rest of your post. Why not educate yourself? The European Commission is appointed by the European Council, which is comprised of the heads of state of the various members. The indirection between them and the people you elect is huge. In the UK, for example, you vote for a Member of Parliament (MP). The party with the most MPs selects the Prime Minister (modulo coalitions), who is then the UK representative in the European Council. He, along with the other members, is responsible for appointing the members of the European Commission. So, my influence on the Commission is that I vote for someone who may have a vote for the person that has a vote to appoint the person who is supposed to represent me. In contrast, I have 4 MEPs who are supposed to represent me, of whom one is someone I respect and who I can rely on to act in my interests and the others presumably act in the interests of other members of my constituency.

          • Re:European comisars (Score:5, Informative)

            by henni16 (586412) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @08:26AM (#40626839)

            To quote wikipedia:

            One of the 27 is the Commission President proposed by the European Council[..] and elected by the European Parliament.
            The Council then appoints the other 26 members of the Commission in agreement with the nominated President, and then the 27 members as a single body are subject to a vote of approval by the European Parliament.

            So the parliament has an all-of-them-or-nobody right of approval for the whole commission whose members are picked by the heads of the member states' governments .

        • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

          by LittleImp (1020687)
          The EU Parliament is corrupt as hell too. It is basically a retirement home for politicians that their country has no use for anymore. Obviously because they do such a pointless job they need shitloads of money to do it.
          • by Anonymous Coward

            No. You're thinking of the Commission. (Yes you are!)

          • Re:European comisars (Score:5, Informative)

            by lordholm (649770) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @09:30AM (#40627343) Homepage

            This had maybe some point of truth to it in the 1970s when the EP was not directly elected. Most of the MEPs these days are pretty serious about what they do and becoming a MEP these days is not something that you get to become because you have been a politician for all your life.

            Many MEPs are also fairly young career MEPs such as for example Fjellner, Alvaro and in 't Veld. They choose to become MEPs (or rather to try to be elected as MEPs) because they where seriously interested in the EP politics.

            It is not 1970 anymore.

        • by manu0601 (2221348)

          Don't confuse the EU Parliament with the EU Commission; the former are elected and do a pretty decent job of being representative of their constituents, the latter are unelected and do a pretty decent job of being representative of anyone who pays for lunch.

          And the unelected commission is the only one that can propose a law. The elected parliament cannot.

      • by Nyder (754090)

        .... It is as with kids - if t hey ask seemingly innocent question long enough they get an agreement not because we really agree but because we are tired of being asked the same question all t he time. ....

        That makes you a very crappy parent.

      • ...It is as with kids - if they ask seemingly innocent question long enough they get an agreement not because we really agree but because we are tired of being asked the same question all the time...

        Yes, but I can't send the Commission to its bedroom to think about how it chooses to communicate with me.

      • It is as with kids - if t hey ask seemingly innocent question long enough they get an agreement not because we really agree but because we are tired of being asked the same question all t he time.

        When my kids do this I tell them if they ask again it is going to be time to go sit in the the time out char and when they do ask it again they go right in. It cures them of that problem after only a couple of times. Too bad we can't do it with politicians, as it requires swift immediate action. Maybe if they got voted out of office more often it wouldn't be but they count on constituents having the memory of a gold fish.

        • by CCarrot (1562079)

          It is as with kids - if t hey ask seemingly innocent question long enough they get an agreement not because we really agree but because we are tired of being asked the same question all t he time.

          When my kids do this I tell them if they ask again it is going to be time to go sit in the the time out char and when they do ask it again they go right in.

          ...wow, you're not fooling around, are you? Re-purposed barbeque? Firepit? Inquiring minds want to know! :)

          It cures them of that problem after only a couple of times.

          Once would be enough for me, I would think...

      • I'd say - hang them all as they do not understand.

        Oh come on, that's just plain unreasonable.

        Much of the draconian copyright regulation within Europe is advocated by the French government, so the appropriate penalty involves a guillotine.

    • by Abreu (173023)

      Meanwhile, here in Mexico, the federal government of lame duck president Felipe Calderón, just signed ACTA [cnn.com], ignoring a Senate resolution to reject it.

  • So? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by coder111 (912060) <coder@rr[ ]l.com ['mai' in gap]> on Thursday July 12, 2012 @03:00AM (#40625269)
    European Commission are corporate whores. They don't really care about wants and needs of the people and never ever had. How is this news? They had same kind of "screw everyone, we'll do what we want" attitude when it came to software patents several years ago.

    --Coder
    • Re:So? (Score:4, Funny)

      by gruntkowski (1743014) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @03:27AM (#40625403)
      'Mother should I trust the government?'
      Pink Floyd was soooo right.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      They are basically unelected drones with over reaching powers. Until EU starts functioning like the USA with some degree of "responsibility to your constituents" we are screwed.
      • by Anonymous Coward

        You don't want to function like the US either. All that means is their "responsibility" is to whichever lobbyist pays them the most while they make empty promises to the supposed "consituents" they serve and still do whatever the heck they want as long as it gets them a nice big donation.

      • Re:So? (Score:5, Informative)

        by jez9999 (618189) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @05:35AM (#40625981) Homepage Journal

        Are you kidding me? The problem with the EU Commission is that it's *too much* like the US government. You think the US 2-party system has ANY accountability to the voter whatsoever?

        • Re:So? (Score:5, Interesting)

          by dkleinsc (563838) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @09:20AM (#40627243) Homepage

          You think the US 2-party system has ANY accountability to the voter whatsoever?

          I've always thought it would be kinda interesting to follow an idea from ancient Athens: After someone holding political office had his term end, he was immediately put on trial for his actions while in office, and could be personally punished for those actions (e.g. a treasurer who was caught embezzling funds could have his own property confiscated).

          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward

            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.

  • by Sasayaki (1096761) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @03:01AM (#40625273)

    The ACTA/etc folks are just like that sleazy guy in the bar.

    They have "negs", designed to make you feel bad and insecure about yourself. Piracy is costing the American economy billions. You're the most beautiful woman/man in this bar. You wouldn't steal a handbag. Of course I have no STIs. You wouldn't steal a car...

    They'll buy you drinks and they'll tell you any lie you want to hear. They're an astronaut. They drive a Porche. The wording of CETA is totally different from ACTA.

    They'll lie out their arses no matter how many times you say no, because all they need is one yes and they've fucked you.

  • by acidfast7 (551610) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @03:10AM (#40625315)
    and make sure they don't get elected again. meet in the city center in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ... oh, and somebody bring those "fireworks" left over from Euro 2012
    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 12, 2012 @03:37AM (#40625445)

      You must be mistaking the EU for a democracy.... the European Commissioners are not elected but appointed and things have to get pretty extreme before they can be held accountable

      • by acidfast7 (551610) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @04:13AM (#40625591)
        I never said it was a democracy. However, when one looks up an EU Commissioner, the first three pieces of information are State, Party, and Name. When you don't vote for the party, the individual has no power. And, when you have 5-7 parties/country, each really wants to keep their percentage of votes, so they'll keep "their" Commissioner in line or face the consequences at the polls. A protest just gets the message across in a more rapid manner.
        • by sFurbo (1361249)
          Aren't you talking about the European Parliament? They are directly elected from the countries, and they are the ones who rejected ACTA. The commission, on the other hand, is picked by the governments of the individual countries (IIRC), which makes them two steps removed from direct elections. Much of the politics of EU for the last half decade or so has been the parliament wrestling power from the commission and bureacrats.
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward

          No no, this is completely wrong.
          It does not matter how many votes the party has. The commissioner is in his/her seat and makes the decisions.
          Each commissioner has a working field, so it is not that they are deciding together and outvoting eachother.

          Commissioners are appointed in a "we from this country grant that country the commissioner for xxx when we can get the one for yyy" fashion,
          and then internal to the country a suitable person is found in the circles of retired politicians.
          These politicians usual

      • by FhnuZoag (875558)

        Commissioners aren't life positions. The previous commissioners lasted respectively 5 years, 1 year, 4 years, 1 year, 1 year. Gucht came in during 2010. Presumeably when everyone runs out of patience with him, he might be persuaded to go spend some time with his family.

      • by FhnuZoag (875558)

        It can't be *that* extreme if the last few guys to hold this position lasted an average of 2 years.

  • by PerformanceDude (1798324) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @03:12AM (#40625323)
    Honestly, I am surprised they tried again this quick. Normally the politicians let such a controversial issue die down and then slips it under the radar when no-one is watching. This will be interesting to watch....
    • by Sasayaki (1096761) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @03:17AM (#40625341)

      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?

      • by JaredOfEuropa (526365) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @04:37AM (#40625721) Journal
        And that is more or less what this thing has become: a rider. The controversial IP-related clauses from ACTA are getting shoehorned into an otherwise normal trade agreement. They hope that MEPs will not reject the entire deal because of a "bad but small part", to paraphrase one MEP who said she isn't sure whether or not to reject the CETA if the ACTA clauses get tacked on. But that's exactly what MEPs should be crystal clear on: if they reject an agreement, they must also reject anything that has the agreement tacked on as a rider. There's good reason to be clear on that right now; it means that the people negotiating CETA know that they should not add the ACTA stuff if they want to have any hope of the agreement passing parliament. And it is pretty much the only way MEPs can effectively influence the contents of the agreement.

        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".
      • by sFurbo (1361249) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @05:19AM (#40625899)
        The European Parliament have been pretty stubborn about such things before, e.g. refusing to accept the entire commission because of one or two unacceptable elements.
      • It's the American Way. Why do you think they have the USA PATRIOT Act? It's almost as bad as "Vote Republican for Jesus" in the Bible Belt; Utter, utter FUD.
    • Meus subcriptio est nocens Latin quoniam bardus populus reputo is sanus callidus

      If I'm not mistaken, something along the lines of:
      "My signature is bad Latin because stupid people think it sounds clever."

    • by FhnuZoag (875558) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @05:22AM (#40625917)

      I think that's a pretty inaccurate view. IIRC, what actually happened was that this bill was drafted back when ACTA appeared to be succeeding, and so ACTA was used as a template for it. Now that ACTA has failed though, expect to see some serious revisions, or else this bill will never make it through parliament.

  • Because 'CETA' !== 'ACTA'. Next article, please!
  • by Bob9113 (14996) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @03:40AM (#40625457) Homepage

    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.

    • by Hentes (2461350)

      Exactly. If they want to prove that thereal treaty is different, then show it to us.

  • GTFO.

    That is all.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    This is outrageous. This is NOT democracy. This pisses over all European values and laughs while doing so.

    The European Parliament must demand that the EU Commission resigns immediately!

    They have done it in the past, and they can do it now. This behaviour is simply UNACCEPTABLE.

    The European Parliament MUST keep on fighting the EU Commission for as long as those paid saboteurs are intent on turning this planet into a giant prison where all pursuit of culture creation, happiness and quality of life is subservi

    • by lexa1979 (2020026)
      I totally agree with this, but the whole Parliament has to agree also... Do we simply begin by sending them email or directly calling them (maybe http://piphone.lqdn.fr/?setlang=en [piphone.lqdn.fr] will be available soon, as it was for ACTA) asking for them to get rid of this screwing commission ?
      • by Cederic (9623)

        Been there, done that. One of my MEPs, Bill Newton Dunn wrote to his constituents,

        ACTA (the Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement)

        MEPs experienced a prolonged deluge of emails from geeks around the world - but less than forty came from the East Midlands - using identical wording arguing that the ACTA treaty should be destroyed because of dangers to their personal freedom.

        Western industries, on the other hand, argued strongly that they need protection from counterfeiting and from free downloading from the internet. But they were too logical and they failed to deluge MEPs in a similar way.

        The result was an overwhelming defeat for the treaty. I was one of the few who defied the torrent and voted in favour because I believe that if you have to pay for something in a shop you should also pay for it on the internet, but geeks say everything should be free on the internet.
        The Commissioner says the treaty is not dead and will be brought back.

        Afterwards, triumphant geeks emailed from around the world. Two geeks unwisely gave their game away, by warning about their next targets, the EU-Canadian free trade agreement and also "INDECT" which is a research project in the area of intelligent security systems performed by several European universities since 2009 and funded by the EU.

        Amongst the rebuttals, references and insights my reply contained, I did query whether he was corrupt or merely ignorant. Sadly his reply suggested he had no intention of learning about the underlying issues, and actually stated that ACTA opponents "prefer to buy for free".

        I've now queried whether he's a cunt or not, but haven't had a response.

  • by Laglorden (87845) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @04:48AM (#40625769) Journal

    So, the wording that appears in both documents have been copy-and-pasted from somewhere else?

    Sorry, I mean, the words have been STOLEN from another source, those filthy filthy pirates!!!

    • So, the wording that appears in both documents have been copy-and-pasted from somewhere else?

      Sorry, I mean, the words have been STOLEN from another source, those filthy filthy pirates!!!

      Please see sig...

  • by Pecisk (688001) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @05:03AM (#40625851)

    Sounds like usual '**** off, we know what we are doing, and errr, we didn't copied ACTA text there, it just happened to to be there! So, nothing to worry about, no ACTA!' when someone is caught red-handed. And sorry, no official draft available for everyone to analyze - no trust.

  • Politicians always tell the truth, especially when it's about secretly negotiated treaties, right?
  • This is why... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Tom (822) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @05:44AM (#40626029) Homepage Journal

    ...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.

    • Politics is a force that's moving into some direction. Politicians are just faces that speak for that force. I have no idea what it is, but I know politicians are not important. Look at the last 12 years in US. In reality, nothing changed, it's just following the flow, and things are happening and ending naturally.. one dude is not influencing those changes in any way.

      Or look at the fcked up countries. In those, you have politicians that are really in power. In those cases, they run the country solely for p

      • by Tom (822)

        Politicians are just faces that speak for that force.

        Wrong. That is part of the whole picture. A single politician is just a face. But their entire profession is that force.

        It's not an accident that in most western countries the two major parties have become pretty much identical. It's not a coincidence that they get closer and closer to an even split in votes. This is the system that guarantees them the maximum reliability and predictability.

  • Those lines could have been written by a highschool student!

  • by Jahta (1141213) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @06:25AM (#40626241)

    "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."

    -- from (the aptly titled) Won't Get Fooled Again

  • by Yvanhoe (564877) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @07:19AM (#40626471) Journal
    As long as they will insist on negotiating without transparency, it will be fair to criticize the process and to base our opinion on leaks.

    Countering it would be easy : be open ! Is it that hard to understand ?
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Why they don't talk about is that -completely against currrent beliefs- the EC is trying to force a 20-year copyright term extension on Canada, from the Life+50 to Life+70.

    It should be obvious this does not benefit the artist; a potential dollar discounted 51 years even at a 2% compound interest rate is not worth much today.

    It does benefit the large Copyright warehouses, since owning Intellectual Property is free - there is no intellectual property tax - you can fill your warehouse to the rim.

    But for the C

  • by Jason Levine (196982) on Thursday July 12, 2012 @10:51AM (#40628019)

    In the last one, they hit you over the head first and then take your wallet.

    In this one they take your wallet after hitting you over the head.

    See? Totally different!

  • by RobertLTux (260313) <robert@noSpam.laurencemartin.org> on Thursday July 12, 2012 @11:35AM (#40628441)

    If they really had the "rocks" they would have a site (backstopped by a good CDN network) where folks could see the current text
    IN THEIR CHOICE OF LANGUAGE as it is being written.

  • Can't we throw these assholes in jail, or kill them or something, just to put an end to this madness? They obviously don't care at all how unpopular or harmful this legislation is, or else they would have given it up (what's this? their third attempt?).

A penny saved is a penny to squander. -- Ambrose Bierce

Working...