Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Patents Government News

EFF, Public Knowledge Sue Over Secret IP Pact 104

Cowards Anonymous writes "The Electronic Frontier Foundation and Public Knowledge have filed a lawsuit against the Office of the US Trade Representative in an attempt to get the office to turn over information about a secret Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement treaty being negotiated to step up cross-border enforcement of copyright and piracy laws. ACTA could include an agreement for the US, Canada, the European Commission and other nations to enforce each others' IP laws, with residents of each country subject to criminal charges when violating the IP laws of another country, according to a supposed ACTA discussion paper [PDF] posted on Wikileaks.org in May."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

EFF, Public Knowledge Sue Over Secret IP Pact

Comments Filter:
  • Show us the money! (Score:5, Informative)

    by mfh ( 56 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @08:05AM (#25069895) Homepage Journal

    Why hide it if it's beneficial to the elected people? Isn't that your argument for trampling our rights, each and every time? If you have nothing to hide...

    • by freenix ( 1294222 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @08:29AM (#25070189)

      ACTA is something that has not seen public debate and that's remarkable for such sweeping and draconian legislation. Because the U SAP at RIOT ACT was passed without time for legislators to actually read it, and torture is AOK bills, I'm not surprised by much the US does anymore.

      What, exactly do they tell EU and Asian officials to make shit like this happen? It looks like they convinced/bribed key legislators that this is all dry technical stuff best handled by subject matter experts and then stuffed the panels with copyright/IP warriors. The sad fact is that most legislators are too old to realize the implications of the laws they are producing. John McCain, who has never used email, may be sadly typical. Protest will surprise these legislators and start to convince them there's more to this than dry technical details.

      • Corruption (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 19, 2008 @08:47AM (#25070427)
        The U.S. government has become EXTREMELY corrupt.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Pichu0102 ( 916292 )

          Government everywhere are always extremely corrupt, it's just the US government lately hasn't been covering their tracks. Don't worry, they'll learn soon and start covering their tracks again.

      • by Artraze ( 600366 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @09:42AM (#25071141)
        > John McCain, who has never used email,

        Wow... Not to go too off-topic here, but I'm surprised people are still parroting that. It's been rather clearly shown that McCain understands and uses email he just can't type it himself. Here's an article from 2000 [forbes.com]; ctrl-f "Vietnam" to jump to the relevant paragraph.

        Back on topic, age has nothing to do with it. The fact of the matter is that most Americans do not care about these copyright issues. Most are only barely aware of their existence. It's therefore not too surprising that most people in office don't really care either. If this became a hot issue than you can damn well expect that the politicians would start caring, but right now things like health care and what-have-you are what count.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Nursie ( 632944 )

          Given that several millions of americans are breaking the law in this area, one would think they'd look at it.

          OTOH, that never made anyone reconsider drug policy.

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by Artraze ( 600366 )

            Politicians make laws in the same way that PHB's manage people. They make the laws and if you break them it's because you're a criminal. After all, they made the laws to protect you, don't you want to be protected?

            The trouble is that they make the laws with (mostly) good (but very ignorant) intentions. When they see people frequently breaking the law they think it's more a matter of law enforcement not having the right tools to stop the crime. Therefore they increase law enforcement's power. It would b

            • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

              by cdrguru ( 88047 )

              Murder is one of those things that no matter how many public service advertisements come on television, people seem to just keep getting killed. Law enforcement is powerless to stop it. Tens of thousands of people are murdered each year on the average.

              Should laws against murder be considered bad because the enforcement isn't having much of an effect?

              • by Anonymous Coward

                'cos there's 40 million copyright breakers in the US at a time.

                If you had that many murderers, you'd not have 40 million people!

              • by Nursie ( 632944 )

                Murder does actually seem to be a cultural thing. The UK has roughly 1/6 the murder rate of the US.

    • by bill_kress ( 99356 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @11:28AM (#25072761)

      Exactly what I thought. This day and age, virtually anything our government keeps from it's people is due to some sort of corruption.

      Even military secrets aren't a very big deal any more because nobody can do much to counter them anyway.

      There still is certainly time-sensitive information like specific troop tactics and attack locations, but nobody's going to question that (Yet whenever you question secrecy of some government project, that's the straw-man that is thrown up)

  • ACTA (Score:5, Informative)

    by Elektroschock ( 659467 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @08:14AM (#25069993)

    ACTA is TRIPs+. Who wants to understand what it is really about should read the Susta draft report of the European Parliament Trade Committee [europa.eu].

  • Obviously (Score:2, Insightful)

    by ShieldW0lf ( 601553 )

    There are too many old people waving money around, not enough young people to do the work to keep society operating, and not enough cheap oil to cover the missing labour. The old people have a sense of entitlement, and they lack the sense of interconnection that would preclude them from sacrificing our future on the alter of their comfortable old age.

    So, the agenda is going to be, deprive the young of more and more, paying particular to attention to young immigrants who haven't been indoctrinated into the

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by mfh ( 56 )

      The old people have a sense of entitlement, and they lack the sense of interconnection that would preclude them from sacrificing our future on the alter of their comfortable old age.

      Malachai: What has the Lord commanded?

      Isaac: In the dream the Lord did come to me, and he was a shape, it was He Who Walks Behind the Rows, and I did fall on my knees in terror, and hide my eyes lest the fearfulness of his face strike me dead! He told me all that has since happened, he said, "Joseph has taken his things and fled

    • by Peter Simpson ( 112887 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @08:49AM (#25070453)

      ...but minus the fistful of dollars...

      To put it succinctly: we're pissed off, too.
      I'm not at all happy about what's been happening to our civil rights, our constitution or our country's image in the world. The last eight years have been a boon to the corporations and a disaster for the rest of us. Our elected officials are either too lazy, too stupid, too scared or too much beholden to the corporations. It is on their watch that the PATRIOT act, the TSA and the DMCA have been passed.

      So, it's not just the young who lose, it's all of us. Some of us old geezers feel just like you do.

      And by the way, you're damn right we have a sense of entitlement. Entitlement to do what we want, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. Entitlement to human rights and fair use of copyrighted material. Entitlement not to be treated as suspected terrorists every time we board an aircraft.

      Bitter? No, just angry, and hoping more people get that way. Democracy only works if you make it work.

      • by MindKata ( 957167 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @09:38AM (#25071099) Journal
        "Democracy only works if you make it work."

        That statement is so true and its not something I fully realized, even just a few years ago. I had thought that as my ancestors and people like them had fought so long and hard to finally win Democracy. Then surely as we now have Democracy, we therefore much now just keep Democracy. I didn't realize there are people constantly trying to undermine Democracy for their own gain and so over time, Democracy has to be constantly defended against these people.

        The people trying to undermine Democracy for their own gain are almost by definition people without empathy towards others. They actually choose to violate Democracy for their own gain.

        Its good to see that there are still groups around that will stand against the people who undermine Democracy. I have never been that interested in politics until this year, but the almost constant news in 2008 has shown me that 2008 should go down in history as the start of a massive move towards a global Big Brother. This year has finally shown me the danger of letting this minority of powerful people undermine Democracy. Its sad that in every generation, we have to suffer this minority of power seekers constantly trying to dominate others and undermine Democracy for their own gain.

        "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed, and hence clamorous to be led to safety, by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary." - H.L. Mencken (September 12, 1880 - January 29, 1956) ... it was true in his time, and sadly its still true now.
        • by flyingfsck ( 986395 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @10:24AM (#25071769)
          Actually, 2008 is the year that the USA became a Socialist state and nationalized a big chunk of its economy. Most other things are minor compared to this.
          • by ultranova ( 717540 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @12:50PM (#25074179)

            Actually, 2008 is the year that the USA became a Socialist state and nationalized a big chunk of its economy. Most other things are minor compared to this.

            I think that this comment perfectly demonstrates the problem. Warmongering, corruption, ever more absurdly draconian copyright laws, the slow decay of democracy, violations of human rights - all those are minor things compared to how closely the leaders of the country follow some particular economic ideology in the middle of an economic crisis. It's just insane.

            Nothing matters as long as the Invisible Hand can work unhindered, come Hell or high water. It's the current western equivalent of Sharia law: absurd, and most people don't want it, but there's always a vocal minority which wants to pass it anyway.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by ShieldW0lf ( 601553 )
        I'm not at all happy about what's been happening to our civil rights, our constitution or our country's image in the world. The last eight years have been a boon to the corporations and a disaster for the rest of us. Our elected officials are either too lazy, too stupid, too scared or too much beholden to the corporations. It is on their watch that the PATRIOT act, the TSA and the DMCA have been passed. So, it's not just the young who lose, it's all of us. Some of us old geezers feel just like you do. And
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by dave562 ( 969951 )
          You're obviously pretty bitter, but you make a good point. I had a conversation with my parents a couple of months ago. They are baby boomers, my dad was born in 1946 and my mom in 1950. They were right there when things were falling apart. They watched Kennedy stand up and get shot. They watched MLK stand up and get shot. They watched RFK stand up and get shot. I asked them why they didn't do anything about it. Their answer was the same answer about why you aren't doing anything about it, and why I
        • "The decision to treat children and families as an individuals preference rather than the most pressing social need of all left society facing a future where there isn't enough population to sustain the infrastructure."

          You're saying it is everyones obligation to find a mate, fuck and reproduce...that if they don't, they are somehow letting society down?

          What about those that don't want to have kids...that would not make good parents and turn out criminal kids? What about people that just don't find a good

          • I guess I'm shocked...I've ever seen it put forth before that people should feel an obligation to have a family and raise kids.

            I frankly, don't see the need to. I don't have any kids (that I know of)...and if I had, I wouldn't have reached the level in life that I am at now. I don't need kids for support...I'm saving, puttin g back for retirement.


            That's because you're an idiot. Do you understand supply and demand? Do you understand that when you are old, there will be a massive demand for young peo
        • And now you think your hard work and your pieces of paper are going to magically deal with these issues, because you are entitled to the retirement your parents had, even though you didn't bear the large families that support such a retirement.

          Well, personally I'll be more than happy to die when I can't live for myself anymore.

          Thing is, the best thing that can happen is that we manage to divest ourselves of responsibility for you old bastards and turn our limited resources to caring for and creating more young people. The worst thing that can happen is that we exhaust what little we have in a misguided attempt to care for you as our civilization spirals towards oblivion.

          The absolute worst thing we can do right now is create any more young people. Have you noticed that land area, ocean area, available landfill volume, oil production, etc. isn't keeping pace with the size of your brood?

          Why do you think the property values are going down? It's not specultation, it's surplus. There aren't enough people to fill the houses, therefore, they are practically worthless. You'll be trading your deeds for a hunk of bread before it's all done, if anyone is even interested.

          Yes, yes it is surplus that home values are down. It takes a certain amount of capital to buy a house. Fewer people have that kind of capital, in many cases because ignorance -- of their sexual options and

        • by moxley ( 895517 )

          My guess is that you don't even know him; yet you're throwing all of these sweeping generalizations against "his generation," (tell me, which generation is he from? Which generation are you from)?

          Seems to me I could make sweeping generalizations against you based on how you are attempting to blame the complacency and procrastination of the general public on some undefined "other generation" that you have assumed he is part of and has participated in, instead of getting outside of your comfort zone and doing

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        The last eight years have been a boon to the corporations and a disaster for the rest of us....It is on their watch that the PATRIOT act, the TSA and the DMCA have been passed.

        Bush has screwed up a lot of things, but you can't blame him for the DMCA:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DMCA [wikipedia.org]
        " ...signed into law by President Bill Clinton on October 28, 1998,.."

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by cayenne8 ( 626475 )
        "I'm not at all happy about what's been happening to our civil rights, our constitution or our country's image in the world. "

        Not to mention, it won't be too long till we lose the last generation of people that lived under and know what it was like to live before the current times of expected loss of privacy, sanctioned ovt. spying, and going to the airport before there were strip searches or metal detectors. (I remember the days of always going to the gate to greet incoming guests, and to see them off fr

    • I'm a young person who would like to wave some (small amount) of money around.

      Does anyone know who is taking action on this issue in Canada (aside from Michael Geist)?

      I'd like to give them money.

      • If you want to take action, work on breaking our dependence on their central infrastructure. Look into how you can get people involved in setting up mesh networking in your area, then do it. You do that, you totally take the existing controls out of the loop.

        Waving money around isn't going to accomplish squat. The things that need to be done run contrary to the things that create scarcity, control and profit, so people motivated by money aren't going to be interested. Save your money to buy the raw mat
  • by Chrisq ( 894406 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @08:19AM (#25070053)
    Its meaningless in the case of the UK anyway. Once you give the right to a foreign power to extradite anyone without having to produce evidence why, even if they have never left the UK or committed a crime in this country then this is permitted by default anyway.

    When will we get a government that cares about our people more than appeasing the playground bully?
    • by JosKarith ( 757063 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @08:28AM (#25070171)
      Good luck with that. Who's gonna stand up to America - Labour? The Tories? Maybe the Lib Dems? The Green party would, but there's no hope of them getting anywhere.
      The Labour party is shafted anyway. Gordon Brown's desperate clinging to power is exacerbating the mess left in the wake of Tony B.Liar. The Tories are at the highest popularity since Maggie's heyday and Labour are too busy fighting each other to do anything about it.
      So we end up being at the mercy of EU bureaucrats who just rubber stamp anything to make their lives easier and wonder how we got in this mess.
    • When will we get a government that cares about our people more than appeasing the playground bully?

      When someone pries it from their cold, dead hands.

  • by neonprimetime ( 528653 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @08:22AM (#25070083)
    The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) filed comments offering suggestions for the trade agreement. Among its recommendations: Countries should allow investigators to treat piracy like organized crime, giving IP enforcement efforts additional resources used to fight organized crime. The RIAA also wants laws requiring ISPs to remove infringing materials posted by subscribers, the trade group said in its comments.

    Organized crime?
    • by unity100 ( 970058 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @08:23AM (#25070099) Homepage Journal
      They mean themselves.
    • by oahazmatt ( 868057 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @08:25AM (#25070137) Journal

      Organized crime?

      You have playlists, don't you? That's pretty organized right there.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      Do they picture a bunch of people running a hidden music speakeasy upstairs of some dingy storefront? I know piracy is somewhat 'organized' in China with the bootleg market, but I did not think most of that stuff occurs everywhere this abomination would affect. I've never been able to drive down the road, knock 4 times on a door and get myself a $2 copy of whatever the kids are listening to nowadays.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by dave562 ( 969951 )
        You've obviously never been to the hood. There are plenty of people in America who can't afford to pay the retail cost for the newest CDs but who do have the newest CDs. I can say this now because I'm no longer involved in it, but about five years ago I made a decent amount of money helping a guy in south central maintain his DVD production facility. He had three, 7-disc towers of DVD burners that were cranking out the latest movies. They also did standard audio and MP3 CDs filled with whatever people w
    • by dave562 ( 969951 )
      Yes, organized crime. Although they could go after YOU for copying a few CDs, they are really interested in the people who make a living selling pirated IP. The people who ride the train through the hood selling the latest movies and music. The people who setup sites on the internet where anyone can download whatever they want. The people in foreign countries who make software available for little more than the cost of the CD it is burned onto. In many cases those people are organized criminals.
  • Hmmm. (Score:4, Funny)

    by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @08:31AM (#25070213)

    Ignorance of the law isn't a defense.
    So all you need to do after you make the laws. Is put them on display in the Cellar, where the lights have gone out and so have the stares, in a locked filing cabinet, in a disused bathroom, with a sign on it saying beware of the leopard. And you are liable for breaking a law.

    Ignorance of the law should be a defense if you can prove the government tried to make it so you wouldn't know it.

    • by v1 ( 525388 )

      be sure you put it in the bottom drawer of the cabinet, just to be sure.

    • Ignorance of the law isn't a defense.

      It is if I'm on jury duty.

      • by G00F ( 241765 )

        I'm with you. If on jury duty I chose right vs wrong more than law. Or does the punishment fit the crime.

        • "I'm with you. If on jury duty I chose right vs wrong more than law. Or does the punishment fit the crime."

          I've heard it said that when you are in the jury box, you are one of the most powerful people in the US.

    • Ignorance of the law should be a defense if you can prove the government tried to make it so you wouldn't know it.
      We don't need to go that far. When the law is a profession with specialties, ignorance must be a defense to any reasonable person.

  • by mlwmohawk ( 801821 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @08:40AM (#25070319)

    This is the most worrisome part of it all. No oversight, no public control.

    The only advantage is that it isn't technically constitutional and can be corrected with a more "pro-rights" legislature.

  • by mlwmohawk ( 801821 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @08:46AM (#25070405)

    I am so pissed off at this administration. They just simply don't care, regardless of what they say, about the constitution or the laws of the country, or even the intensions of the founding fathers.

    They make "law" by executive order, which are held as valid unless challenged by the courts or the legislature, then stall the legislature with fillibuster so that no corrective action can take place. Then fight every challenge up to the supreme court, which takes years.

    So, in essence, the president is a king because although there is "balance of power" the time between executive order and any sort of push back is years, and the span of time, they have reaped the benefits of the unjust actions.

    Disgraceful, but effective, this needs to be stopped some how. I think that, unfortunately, means passing laws that limit the effectiveness of the presidency.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      sounds like you think there should be some legal document written to force the president to accept that his decisions should be bound by common law and to explicitly protect the rights of citizens.

      I think the right of habeas corpus should also be reinstated for all....

      hang on, this reminds me of something:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_carta

    • by PhilipPeake ( 711883 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @09:14AM (#25070781)

      Executive orders are an affront to the constitutional principles of the US Constitution.

      This is NOT a power of the President as enumerated by the constitution. It has been tolerated by congress and the judiciary because they see it as useful. If very fast response to some issue is needed an executive order can be made in hours, as opposed to days, weeks, months or years if it has to be passed by congress. From that point of view, it is reasonable to allow this power.

      What is wrong with it is that the orders are permanent. IMHO, it should work like this:

      Executive orders should automatically expire after one year or at the end of the presidency, whichever comes first. A president *may* renew an order, but only one he has issued. No president may renew an order issued by a predecessor, either in word or effect (no re-writing it in his own words) - if congress thought it a good idea, there has been time to convert it into (real) law.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by mlwmohawk ( 801821 )

        I would go further:

        executive orders last 6 months, then they must be approved as if they were laws by simple majorities of both houses.

        • That was effectively what I was saying.
          We could argue over whether its 6 or 12 months, but the principle is the same -- the order will expire, but may be renewed (how many times?) by the same president - no games by changing a few words, if any part of the effect is the same as a previous order - its invalid.

          They will ALL expire permanently when the presidential term expires (4 years max)and the effect of the order may not be incorporated in any new order, ever again.

          To become permanent, it must be passed i

          • That's not particularly helpful - at times it may be necessary to reinstate an executive order when an identical situation arises. For instance, in 1862 Abraham Lincoln issued an order establishing military courts in Louisiana. Let's assume that, under your system, such an order has since expired (as it was no longer necessary). Now imagine some hypothetical situation in the future where military courts are again needed in Louisiana - they could not be instituted by an executive order. (I'm not commenting o

        • One of my other thoughts was that these orders should probably be provisional for (say) 30 days. During that time the Supreme Court *must* review them and declare them constitutional.

          If they are not reviewed, or if found unconstitutional after 30 days, they are void, and any convictions or penalties on individuals are rescinded - with appropriate compensation.

    • by dave562 ( 969951 )
      The balance is the court system. 12 people in the box. Laws are worthless if the citizenry isn't willing to convinct the people who violate them because they recognize that the laws are ill conceived. It just takes an informed and compassionate citizenry to maintain balance in the country.
  • It is vitally important that people write letters [rocknerd.co.uk] - actual paper letters, with a stamp - to their MPs, Congressmen or equivalent. MAKE NOISE.

  • National policy should not be determined by foreign policy.

    I'm a Canadian and I do NOT approve this underhanded political maneuver.

  • by dermond ( 33903 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @09:40AM (#25071111)
    How ACTA kills your job [qummunismus.at]

    Intellectual Property" is called the The Oil of the 21st Century". Workers here are told that strong protection of that the protection of this so called property" is necessary for our economy and a means to protect jobs. Nothing could be further from the truth.

    With the ACTA-negotiations, the protection of this IPR should be made stronger once again. What is really behind it?

    Global corporations need to maximize their profit. One way to do this is to offshore production into countries with lower wages. There is one problem with this approach. By transferring know-how into these countries there is the risk that these countries will produce product on their own and this breeds competitors [1]. And competition is bad for profits. Thus the global corporations need to find a way where they can utilize the cheap labor while protecting them self from competition.

    Where the enforcement of copyright only protects them from direct clones the protection of trademarks ensures that only those who have the financial power to run a marketing campaign on a global scale can sell products at inflated prices. The most important tool is the enforcement of patents. This allows to protect" abstract ideas which potentially cover a wide range of similar products and technology.

    So while it is true that IPR protection is good for the european economy" the workers here will not benefit from it. It will increase the profits of the global corporations but it will increase the trend towards offshoring protection. Your boss will get rich but you will loose your job.

    It will not help the developing countries neither as it ensures that the profits are extracted out of this countries while access to cheap medicine and other goods is prevented. Most developing countries now oppose the WTO-TRIPS treaty as they are now forced to implement it. This is why ACTA was started. Now that the developing countries are ware of the neo-colonial effects of IPR it is not possible to conduct the IPR protection within the WTO anymore. So the rich countries decided to take it in their own hands.

    ACTA is a way of economic warfare that is pursued against developing countries and against the working people in Europe, the US and Japan at the same time.

    This should help to explain why the negotiations are held in complete secrecy.

    Franz Schaefer, September 2008

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by cliffski ( 65094 )

      yawn.
      since when does copyright only defend huge evil global corporations? I'm a one man company and without copyright, I'd be out of a job. Don't spin such bullshit to pretend that all IP is TEH TOOL OF TEH SATAN, in some lame attempt to excuse mass copyright infringement.

      If you are Chinese and own factories, it makes sense not to care about IP. If you are educated and in the west, only a suicidal maniac tries to undermine IP, it's what your economies are built on these days.

      • by Nursie ( 632944 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @10:12AM (#25071577)

        "If you are educated and in the west, only a suicidal maniac tries to undermine IP, it's what your economies are built on these days."

        Not all of it.

        "IP" is multifaceted and in some forms (masses of trivial software patents) starts to strangle the very industry it's supposed to serve. There are companies that patent these useless "inventions" and sue others as there sole business model, there are many companies that feel they have no choice but to keep patenting every little thing so that when they inevitable step on someone else's patents they have something to trade or countersue with.

        Patents are granted too easily and are getting in the way of progress, they need to be undermined.

        Copyright now extends far too far, it is supposed ot be a limited term, it is a social contract between producers and consumers, such that both parties win. One side has recently pushed their powers far too far.

        Trademarks, as applied to internet addresses, have resulted in rulings where people with legitimate uses for domain names have been walked all over by companies that decide they want it for their new product.

        The economy of the west and individual IP holders would not be badly affected by reduced copyright terms, weakened trademark rights (or weakened trademark enforcement) and restrictions on what is and is not patentable.

      • Bleh (Score:4, Insightful)

        by unity100 ( 970058 ) on Friday September 19, 2008 @10:32AM (#25071883) Homepage Journal
        with your logic, you can easily justify feudal overlordship.

        feudal overlordship provided a system that those serfs living under it had been assured of jobs. even though it was little short of slavery.

        you think that you are happy you have a job. and maybe, you may be happy with what you get, and it may make you live a comfortable life - or so you think - . but, i assure you, you are very probably getting WAY lower than what GNP (or any assessable value) you produce.

        its due to bad distribution of wealth, monopolization - corporatism, basically.

        IP laws of this date protect this. not protect you at all. you dont have the power to market any copyrighted stuff you may hold efficiently, nor you have the cash to protect your interests, and it wont be any different when shit like ACTA, or copyright cops come. they will be so busy protecting prioritized, big corporations that, you, as citizen or small business, will have to shove your copyrights up in your ass, at best.

        so dont even think that there is anything for your interest in such bought-out laws.
      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by zzsmirkzz ( 974536 )

        since when does copyright only defend huge evil global corporations? I'm a one man company and without copyright, I'd be out of a job

        And are you, the little guy, involved in the secret negotiations of this treaty? I doubt it. Is there even a representative of the little guys involved in the secret negotiations of this treaty? Again, I doubt it. So, in effect, your straw-man argument is lacking, as the only way to ensure that the treaty is for the benefit of little guys, is for some of them to be there and have their voices heard. Which is, sadly not the case.

        To answer your question; Copyright law only defends the the huge evil global c

  • If this treaty goes through, citizens of each signatory country will be subject to the longest terms and the strictest restrictions among those of all the countries that sign the treaty. It means Canadians will have to follow the DMCA, and websites such as Project Gutenberg will not be able to publish public domain books if they're otherwise still under copyright in a signatory country.

    This is bad.

If all the world's economists were laid end to end, we wouldn't reach a conclusion. -- William Baumol

Working...