Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Privacy Your Rights Online

Full ACTA Leak Online 201

An anonymous reader writes "Following months of small Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement leaks, the full consolidated ACTA text has now been posted online. The consolidated text provides a clear indication of how the negotiations have altered earlier proposals (see this post for links to the early leaks) as well as the first look at several other ACTA elements. For example, last spring it was revealed that several countries had proposed including a de minimus provision to counter fears that the border measures chapter would lead to iPod searching border guards. The leak shows there are four proposals on the table."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Full ACTA Leak Online

Comments Filter:
  • Capable? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by symes ( 835608 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @09:00AM (#31596368) Journal
    It is the idea that all border guards will be able to easily discriminate the legality of content even if they were allowed access. Seriously, would I have to carry receipts, license docs, original packaging and so forth?
  • by Paul server guy ( 1128251 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @09:03AM (#31596424) Homepage []

    I'm typing up the whole thing, for easier reading, searching, copying

    Cool, Thank you. - And yes, please keep all of the original errors and typos, Law droids have all sorts of fun with those. "For lack of a comma the land was lost" and all of that..

  • One Small Leap (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sonicmerlin ( 1505111 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @09:09AM (#31596472)
    I'm just happy *someone*, *somewhere* had enough moral integrity to defy their corporate-led masters.
  • Re:Canada (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ironhandx ( 1762146 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @09:09AM (#31596476)

    Modded off topic, too bad theres not a -1 Wrong moderation.

    Back on topic: There are SOME decent provisions in the ACTA, however on the whole the entire thing needs to be torn up and burned. Start over with something reasonable and above board rather than having all this secrecy surrounding it. Even with leaks we can't trust our governments to continue in this despicable fashion.

  • Re:Capable? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by HungryHobo ( 1314109 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @09:39AM (#31596748)

    no no.

    all your content should of course be DRM'd.
    No need for receipts then.

    (who wants to bet someone actually proposed this at some point)

  • by HungryHobo ( 1314109 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @09:54AM (#31596898)

    if it's brutal enough I might not be against this one :D
    Some Microsoft programmer grabs a small chunk of GPLed code and well...
    But it probably doesn't mean that since that would be the most dangerous to companies which create large monolithic expensive projects.

  • by Pitawg ( 85077 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @09:55AM (#31596924)

    Someone with some music talent should put out a song with the text of the agreement used as lyrics, and charge the negotiators with international copyright infringement and distribution! NOW!

  • by oldspewey ( 1303305 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @10:47AM (#31597622)

    The choice is third world junk or nothing.

    I've found that in some cases, the "nothing" is actually the better alternative here. Rather than buying a cheap piece of crap that I can barely afford right now, I make a conscious decision to hold off and simply do without for a few months or maybe even forever. It's not always easy, but it brings a remarkable sense of peace when you figure out a way to be okay with less.

  • by Tokolosh ( 1256448 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @11:11AM (#31597970)

    ... Even with leaks we can't trust our governments to continue in this despicable fashion.

    On the contrary, I believe that we can put our full trust in the government to continue in a despicable fashion.

  • by Applekid ( 993327 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @11:30AM (#31598290)

    In this case, since it was effectively smuggled out, I'd wager that the leak was simply unable to get ahold of the source document and maybe all they had available was some hard copies. FSM bless them for the effort, I sure hope they don't get found out and made dead.

  • by mcgrew ( 92797 ) * on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @11:37AM (#31598384) Homepage Journal

    So the solution to the recession is to send what money you do have to another country?

    The middle class can't solve the recession, only the rich 5% who control 95% of the wealth can do that. The Waltons choose where your goods come from, as do those who own Best Buy, Target, etc.

    I'm too old to tilt at windmills. I leave that to the younger folks; I've tilted at anough windmillls in my life to know that resistance is futile.

  • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @11:49AM (#31598602)

    Actually, the US will be the ones that lose the most when ACTA gets enacted.

    Let's look at how copyright is enforced (or not). You will notice that in countries like the USA, the EU countries, Australia, Japan, in short, every country that doesn't really have any real problems, you have pretty good copyright and IP enforcement (good from the IP holders perspective). You don't really have a lot of power to get your IP enforced in countries that either have real problems (like, say, most countries ending in -stan) or countries that actually benefit from pretty much ignoring IP laws altogether (like, say, China).

    Do you think that will change when ACTA gets ratified?

    The US will have to enforce the IP of those countries. And they will, because these countries can and of course will prod them to. Can you imagine getting a DMCA takedown notice from China because they claim the rights to all film shot by a chinese citizen, and that dissident happens to be one? Think that's impossible?

    In return you get zip, nada, rien from China. Yes, they'll sign it and yes, they'll even pay lip service to it. Copying is still sky high? Boo hoo. We are really sorry. We will even stage a token sting. And even punish the guy(s) we catch to the utmost extent. Want him hanged? No problem, think we care or what? Satisfied? Ok, now buzz off.

  • by inKubus ( 199753 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @11:58AM (#31598786) Homepage Journal

    This has the hallmarks of an acid test. Global law negotiations done in secret, under the guise of treaty...exactly the way we don't want it to go. From here there will be more laws in secret and the only way you'll find out you've violated them is that you don't have the required permit on your passport and you're accosted at the border. This is exactly how the global fascists (corpratists) want it. Without control over global travel, they cannot control the flow of goods and information. Each intersection of borders is a profit gradient. If goods are allowed to pass by osmosis, they lose all the leverage they could use to pump wealth back and forth between countries while taking a cut off the top. Sooner or later, they have it all.

    There are basically two forks in this road: one, where there is a single world democracy with the corporations below that rule of law and the other where there are separate country laws (like there are now) and the corporations flit above them BUT prohibit the individual. That's where we're headed now.

  • by SilentSandman ( 1488023 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @12:19PM (#31599132)

    "clearly"? ... considering how far this has already gone, I am guessing it's not quite clear enough.

  • by shentino ( 1139071 ) <> on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @12:50PM (#31599628)

    That doesn't change the fact that *classifying* the sucker on grounds of national security is a bunch of bullshit.

  • by unity100 ( 970058 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @01:56PM (#31600706) Homepage Journal

    The "EU as a whole" did not reject ACTA, the European Parliament did. The council of ministers and the commission are the ones propagating ACTA, and the ones involved in the negotiations. Unfortunately, the European Parliament has a tendency to fold when it come down to it, and the council of ministers usually wins. The council of ministers is composed of national government ministers. The national governments are however rarely held responsible for any of the decisions of the council of ministers, hell most people probably have no idea what the council of ministers is. That needs to change.

    dear swedish penguin,

    as of last year, european parliament has the power to ratify any treaty that is made by european commission, including ALl the ministers and bureaucrats and whatnot. furthermore, no treaty, decision can come into being without being ratified by european parliament. AND european parliament can also cancel treaties made prior to acquiring that power. (that was the power they used to cancel SWIFT agreement in which bush&co coerced europe into disclosing bank transfer details europeans did with americans to us government).

    with the latest resolution, Eu parliament already blocked numerous stuff from the acta treaty. isp liability, 3strikes, internet connection severance without court decision etc etc. because of that, the countries whose ministers would accept acta would have to face a dilemma ; either secede from european union, or refuse the treaty.

    but that doesnt mean we are in the clear yet. we need to push hard.

  • Re:Not too bad (Score:3, Insightful)

    by slashdotjunker ( 761391 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @02:18PM (#31601018)
    Not too bad, huh?

    Even if the treaty was blank pages I would be against it. The content of ACTA is irrelevant. The process used to create ACTA goes against what I believe are cornerstones of our society and the treaty should be killed for that alone. Any non-negative or even overtly positive terms of ACTA would not balance out the long term damage to our society caused by allowing ACTA to live.

    I might sound like some kind of hardliner who is unwilling to compromise, but that's not true at all. Here is my compromise. If you just let ACTA die quietly, then I'm willing to let those involved in the creation of ACTA go free instead of sending them to jail.
  • by The Mighty Buzzard ( 878441 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @02:21PM (#31601084)
    Which would be precisely why it isn't done that way.
  • Re:Not too bad (Score:4, Insightful)

    by 2obvious4u ( 871996 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @03:19PM (#31602022)
    What if your country only believes in 7 year copyrights? What if your country believes that copyrights stifle innovation?
  • Re:Not too bad (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Jenming ( 37265 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @05:04PM (#31603622)

    Then you probably shouldn't be entering a trade treaty designed to protect IP...

  • Re:Reality check (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Andorin ( 1624303 ) on Wednesday March 24, 2010 @11:21PM (#31606976)

    First off, anyone under 30 that has ever downloaded music or a movie is never going to accept anything that forces them to pay for crap.

    Generalization. I can just as easily say that most people who use p2p regularly are more active collectors who are more likely to buy something, despite the fact that they can get it for free, because they know that creators have to eat too.

    On a tax basis if everyone universally stops paying for media, there will be a huge hit in revenue collected by governments.

    Nope. If someone downloads a movie, the money they could have spent on it is more likely to go somewhere else than just sit in their wallet. Net financial effect: Zero.

    The rest of your post is pretty much invalidated by the above.

You know, Callahan's is a peaceable bar, but if you ask that dog what his favorite formatter is, and he says "roff! roff!", well, I'll just have to...