ACTA Text Leaks; US Caves On ISPs, Seeks Super-DMCA 246
An anonymous reader writes "Given the history of ACTA leaks, to no one's surprise, the latest
version of the draft agreement (PDF) was leaked last night on KEI's
website. The new version — which reflects changes made during an intense week of negotiations
last month in Washington — shows a draft agreement that is much closer
to becoming reality. Perhaps the most
important story of the latest draft is how the
countries are close to agreement on the Internet enforcement
chapter. In
the face of opposition, the US has dropped its demands on secondary
liability for ISPs but is still holding out hope of establishing a
super-DMCA with digital lock
rules that go beyond the WIPO Internet treaties and were even rejected
by US courts."
Copyright Law Reform (Score:5, Insightful)
We only get once chance to defeat ACTA.
Re:Copyright Law Reform (Score:5, Insightful)
Unless we defeat it. Then we'll get another chance, ad infinitum, like one of those timeless creatures of evil that will never truly die.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless we defeat it. Then we'll get another chance, ad infinitum, like one of those timeless creatures of evil that will never truly die.
Dammit. I thought we'd heard the last of SCO and Darl...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
True evil is always Undead.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
That's the price of Liberty, eternal vigilance.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Copyright Law Reform (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What is this "chance to defeat ACTA" of which you speak? The process has been specifically designed to keep us excluded it's too far along to change.
At this point, the best we can hope for is wisdom from countries that are less concerned about the freedoms of their corporations and more concerned about the freedoms of their citizens.
You're obviously new to Earth.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
'The process has been specifically designed to keep us excluded it's too far along to change'
You FORCE inclusion of yourself by holding the fucks responsible for this hostage or killing them outright.
Let me point you to the two places you need to go - Hollywood, and the Northeastern USA.
These two places are responsible for this. If you KILL THEM, this nonsense will go away.
It's that simple.
Re:Copyright Law Reform (Score:5, Interesting)
"We only get once chance to defeat ACTA."
No we don't. We have several chances, the most likely one being a full-out armed insurgence against the government.
Remember Mr Discovery Building and what he said? There will be bloodshed coming very soon.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The US already has a DMCA law, and if ACTA comes about, wouldn't that just mean that other countries have to have DMCA?
Let me guess... you're American aren't you? Why should the rest of the world have to suffer under the same shitty IP regime you guys have?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you American? If yes, then that is partly why you're not as concerned. There are many countries that don't have similar laws that are within ACTA, let alone DMCA type laws. Its also going to be much harder to defeat ACTA if copyright and IP laws are standardized across many countries.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I am American and am very concerned.
Re:You can't have it both ways. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:You can't have it both ways. (Score:5, Insightful)
Our PRIMARY export right now is "entertainment". The word is placed in quotations, because it is hardly entertaining to anyone with a lick of sense. Only the brainwashed, ignorant masses can actually PAY for the drivel pumped out from Hollywood and the music industries. I might consider paying them to STOP PRODUCING!
Ah, another snob with poor taste who believes everything everyone else likes is crap, that he's somehow the enlightened one, and wishes with every fiber of his being that everyone else would just WAKE UP.
Re:You can't have it both ways. (Score:4, Informative)
Our PRIMARY export right now is "entertainment".
No it isn't. Not by a long shot.
The most recently available number for total hollywood studio revenues is $42.3 billion in 2007. [npr.org]
Total US exports were a hair over $1 trillion in 2009. [wikimedia.org]
So even if every single cent hollywood made came from exports, they would still be a drop in the bucket.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
if you think information goes only one way then you don't understand any society.
Information is not just an export, but an import as well.
Surely not (Score:5, Funny)
ACTA Text Leaks
Surely not. That would be infringing their copyright.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
105. Subject matter of copyright: United States Government works Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government, but the United States Government is not precluded from receiving and holding copyrights transferred to it by assignment, bequest, or otherwise.
http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#105 [copyright.gov] It's not copyrighted.
Re: (Score:2)
In the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Fortunately the only copyright law that applies to the US is US copyright law.
Duh.
**sigh** (Score:5, Insightful)
We're getting awfully close to needing the 4th box...
Re:**sigh** (Score:4, Insightful)
The US isn't the world. China won't give a shit, and they are building the military hardware to allow them to continue not giving a shit for generations to come.
Re: (Score:2)
ACTA is discussed by:
Australia, Canada, the European Union, Japan, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States.
Which is pretty much the more important countries and factions of the world.
ACTA isn't JUST about internet filesharing, but also about counterfeint pharmacuticals and other stuff. So keep that in context/
Re:**sigh** (Score:5, Insightful)
ACTA isn't JUST about internet filesharing, but also about counterfeint pharmacuticals and other stuff.
You, sir, are the dream of the ACTA negotiators.
The whole point of bundling "file sharing" with "counterfeit pharmaceuticals" is so that you can get the same sort of penalties for both. I don't think anyone will disagree that labeling sugar pills as some vital drug is a huge danger, but the way ACTA is written, a generic is also considered "counterfeit". Likewise all the following are treated the same by ACTA:
Re:**sigh** (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That would be funny. But it isn't going to happen. Instead, there will be NO safe haven for liberty. Just a boot, stomping on a human face, forever, as Orwell would have it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The current prospect is that you also get to pay for the privilege of having your face stomped.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:**sigh** (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:**sigh** (Score:5, Insightful)
The officials dont pay attention even when it IS election time (remember the US mid-term elections are comming up soon).
Heck, even if GOD himself came down from heaven, stood in front of congress and asked for an end to draconian copyright and IP policies, the congressmen and senators would STILL favor the large briefcases full of money they get from Disney, Fox, Warner, Paramount, Sony, Universal etc.
Re:**sigh** (Score:4, Funny)
They would probably tell god that his residence in the holy land 2000 years ago disqualifies him for US citizenship and thus he has no standing to sue.
Re:**sigh** (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
and lots of them.
~
Time to get encryption working (Score:4, Informative)
Now is really the time to get encrypted, decentralized networks with Onion routing working at a practical level and not just for academic enjoyment. I've had great expectations in GNUnet, but apparently it is pretty hard to port. Freenet has also never convinced me whenever I tried it. Are the technical obstacles really so hard to overcome? What about pervasive email encryption with automatic installation and more widespread use of SSL? What is holding all these technologies back?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
just two examples:
German police raid home of man who operated Tor server [theregister.co.uk]
German Cops Raid Home of Wikileaks and Tor Volunteer [wired.com]
I heard of others in forums, where the police put down whole server farms -.-
welcome to the real world...
WIFI MESH (Score:3, Interesting)
Every time someone on slashdot posits a global wireless mesh they get beaten back because of how slow it'll be to transfer several gigs of porn over it. Last I checked the information that we need to know, to liberate from censorship, was basic text, heck a lot of it is currently representable in ASCII. So what if we step back a decade to the age of the text only bulletin board. At least these BBs will be automatically backed up, re-routed and physically located nowhere, so will be uncensorable.
Re: (Score:2)
Not being turned on by default in any of the major os installs?
If gmail, outlook, and whatever gets used on ox and ubuntu had it enabled by default, so that the public key was attached to every email sent to new address, and every address with a known public key got a encrypted mail, then perhaps it would happen.
But as it is, people have to make a conscious choice about using encrypted email, and so it just do not happen. Hell, people do not use seat belts even tho it takes perhaps just a extra second or tw
Re:Time to get encryption working (Score:5, Insightful)
Encrypted is not really complicated, use https sites and turn encryption on in your torrent client. Anonymity is hard, really hard. For open P2P networks encryption without anonymity doesn't really help anything, everyone can connect and collect data as a peer. Some of the issues are:
1. Anything like TOR and Freenet has lots of overhead due to relaying
2. Latency is also hurt, and it's also dangerous for timing attacks
3. You can collect statistical data, it's difficult to hide patterns
4. You can "isolate" nodes and then track all their traffic
On top of that, you get endless amounts of flak for being a "free haven" for all sorts of $boogeymen. That drives away developers, users, funding, everything. Many people would actually prefer they caught "real" criminals rather than create the true information anarchy. Total anonymity means no consequences, so on top of those you get endless waves of spam and trolls and they can post far more offensive things than they could on slashdot. If someone created it, you would long for the good old days when the worst you could get linked to is the goatse.cx guy.
Re: (Score:2)
- Onion routing: has too little exit nodes and too many hops severely reducing the available bandwidth. The throughput and latency are too high to replace the internet for anything but basic sites and communication.
- Pervasive email encryption: requires cooperation from a lot of parties, who have their own interest in reading your mail (Google with advertising for example). It will only work when you can reliably send encrypted mail to anyone and know for sure they will be
Re: (Score:2)
Another problem with end-to-end encryption of email is that it is largely incompatible with webmail. My mail server uses SMTPS and IMAPS to talk to my client. It will talk TLS to any remote mail server that supports the STARTTLS extension. The only parties that can intercept mail sent in this way are those operating the servers, those who compromise the server, and those who compromise either the sending or receiving client. If you use end-to-end encryption, you reduce this to those who compromise the c
Re: (Score:2)
SSC is only more secure if you've exchanged keys offline, otherwise it doesn't protect against MITM attacks. Somewhat more secure? Maybe, but still wide open.
Encryption wont protect you from informants. (Score:4, Insightful)
Now is really the time to get encrypted, decentralized networks with Onion routing working at a practical level and not just for academic enjoyment. I've had great expectations in GNUnet, but apparently it is pretty hard to port. Freenet has also never convinced me whenever I tried it. Are the technical obstacles really so hard to overcome? What about pervasive email encryption with automatic installation and more widespread use of SSL? What is holding all these technologies back?
Once something is made significantly illegal and if the government is motivated enough, they'll pay their informants to infiltrate your private encrypted network and capture the IP addresses that way. The informants will host the exit nodes.
And of course... (Score:4, Funny)
Since this effects all of us in a huge way, there will be some sort of referendum which will see what the PEOPLE want and not just the corporation-bribed governments.
Experts say it'll happen on the 30th of Feburary at Half Past Never.
Re:And of course... (Score:5, Interesting)
Not that it's surprising that this happens, but it is a bit surprising that our "diplomats" are allowed to sign agreements that our own court system has already determined to be illegal. Though in this instance it appears they're not just signing off on it, but pushing for it.
Should try them for treason when they get back stateside ;)
American Idea (Score:2)
Who cares if your American diplomats sign any agreements, it's your government that created and is forcing ACTA on the majority of the world!
It's not "treason" when your country desires it, at least your court system still believes the US is a republic. For how long is another question.
Re: (Score:2)
The same Senate whose campaign contributions come from the very same companies that are pushing for ACTA in the first place?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Once we've got a treaty, there is huge pressure to enact it into law.
And treaties of this type aren't simply ratified, laws must be written to bring the country into compliance. That's where the pressure lies - we've got the treaty, now we have to change our laws to match.
Current copyright law is a perfect example of how this process works - look up the Berne Convention.
terrible effects for software patents (Score:5, Informative)
ACTA has many bad parts, such as entrenching DRM and the deadly effects of pharmaceutical patents, but it also has terrible effects for software patents:
http://en.swpat.org/wiki/ACTA_and_software_patents [swpat.org]
http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Criminalising_patent_infringement_is_draconian [swpat.org]
Re:terrible effects for software patents (Score:4, Informative)
* ACTA would impose the DMCA's "no circumventing DRM" clause everywhere
* ACTA imposes 3rd party liability for infringement everywhere (it already exists in the US & much of Europe)
* ACTA creates ISP safe harbors (plus notice & takedown), but raises the bar for qualification, e.g. ISPs must have some plan to curtail repeat infringement by subscribers
* ACTA offers statutory damages to copyright holder, as well as actual damages, and as Jammie Thomas can tell you, that wipes out any relevance to damage
* ACTA targets transferring pharmaceuticals across the border, which is mostly designed to get those going from Canada to the US
* ACTA requires criminal penalties for "willful" infringers, and their aiders/abettors, which is looser than the current US standard
* The forfeiture provision for large scale infringers is vague enough to possibly be a problem
* ACTA has broad
China, India, Pakistan, Brazil [michaelgeist.ca], New Zealand, & Japan [michaelgeist.ca] really don't like it for a lot of reasons [thestar.com]. To a some extent, the developing world doesn't like it because it would cost policing resources enforcing copyright/trademark when the resources are needed for more important activities, like stopping crimes. The US & Western Europe are the largest proponents.
If it's in the treaty it will supersede U.S laws (Score:5, Insightful)
the US ...is still holding out hope of establishing...rules that go beyond the WIPO Internet treaties and were even rejected by US courts.
That would be precisely why the forces of intellectual darkness and their minions within the U.S. government are pushing for this with such rabidity, and in such secrecy. Unless it's flat-out unconstitutional (a much, much narrower standard than simply "illegal"), anything in this treaty will supersede U.S. courts and U.S. law.
"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little...ah, fuck it. We do the unconstitutional immediately, too."
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Executive agreements obviously cannot violate the Constitution. Since the Reid v. Covert decision, the U.S. has made it explicit that although the U.S. intends to abide by a treaty, if the treaty is ruled in violation of the Constitution by f
Enough is enough (Score:4, Insightful)
If the DMCA provision passes, I promise that from that point I won't spend a single cent on anything made by anybody who supports or takes advantage of it, and that I will make every effort discourage other people and companies from purchasing those things.
All my money will instead go on software, hardware and music without DRM and under liberal licenses, as well as organizations that oppose this kind of legislation. I will especially contribute to any attempts to eliminate patents and heavily restrict copyright.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wikileaks is not the victim. (Score:2, Interesting)
Feargal Sharkey, CEO of lobby group UK Music, told a conference in London this week that it was time for the music and technology industries to set aside their differences and strive instead toward a common goal: nothing less than the total global domination of British
Re: (Score:2)
Not to get too political here, but those of us in the know knew that this sort of thing was going to come up when we voted for Obama since we were well aware of Biden's industry-friendly attitude. Unfortunately, it was this or some of the worst, laughable "politicians" you could ever consider to be put into a President
Re:YOU VOTED FOR THIS (Score:4, Insightful)
Particularly since the alternative would have done exactly the same thing.
Re: (Score:2)
There were several alternatives that would not have, we just chose to completely ignore them.
Re:YOU VOTED FOR THIS (Score:5, Interesting)
Why do you blame Democrats for the DMCA? The bill was introduced into the House by a Republican [wikipedia.org], it faced pretty much zero Republican opposition in the House and had unanimous support in the Senate. Oh and let's not forget that the current head of the RIAA is a former Republican staffer and GOP lobbyist. So exactly why is it the Democrats fault despite the fact that this bill was introduced and had basically universal support from the Republicans in Congress?
Re:YOU VOTED FOR THIS (Score:5, Insightful)
I find this so funny... letting the people just blame one of the two parties in America and bickering about it amongst yourselves seems to me to be the ultimate weapon politicians devised to keep you under their rule.
No I did not (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Copyrights and patents must be abolished (Score:5, Insightful)
This has to be drilled into everybody's heads.
Copyrights and patents must be abolished, they are part of the death of economies, just like governments regulations, taxes, subsidies, wars, corporate involvement, corruption, stimulus borrowing/printing/spending and bailouts.
All of the above things are killing the economies, these things are making industrialized world uncompetitive and jobs are leaving and no amount of cash can be spent to make the industrialized world competitive again ever because the reason cannot be simply removed by spending.
The reason of the underlying structural breakage of economy is lack of useful production/manufacturing jobs, whose loss has resulted from lack of competitiveness. Competition is the only correct solution to this problem, and copyrights, patents, regulations, wage laws, taxes, subsidies, bailouts, stimulus, wars, corporate corruption are all tied to one main entity: government.
Government is the ultimate force with the power to compel people to do what they do not want to do, and it does so because it craves power, through people who join the government because they crave power, and for them gov't is the ultimate way to get power and money by sharing with corporate friends.
Government involvement in economy must be removed completely and that is the only way to remove incentives to corrupt the government, spending all the money in the world on buying the gov't should NOT buy you a free ride and destruction and structural removal of any competition.
This comment is the actual answer to the question: what the fuck happened to the economy?
That is unrealistic. Copyright and patents should not be abolished. They just shouldn't last forever. They should last X amount of years that society agrees upon, not an arbitrary number decided by the copyright holders themselves but a number of years decided by that individual culture or that society.
Re:Copyrights and patents must be abolished (Score:5, Interesting)
it's called a crisis. In a crisis situation rules change, if they don't then that 'unrealistic' situation will actually meet reality, and reality will win, and there will be no economy left to speak of, while the rest of the world would just completely ignore any position a country, whose economy fell apart takes, and they'd be correct not to care. Losers do not tell winners what to do.
Re: (Score:2)
No, they just whine about their best. Winners go home and fuck the prom queen.
Re: (Score:2)
And you can bet that the rules won't change back once the crisis is over.
Hitler used an economic crisis to jump start the police state that was Nazi Germany.
And just to avoid an exclusive godwin, this is also how Senator Palpatine turned into Darth Sidious.
Taking advantage of a crisis to usurp power is an old trick.
Re: (Score:2)
The powers have been usurped, but in a funny way, you are arguing against yourself.
My position is that gov't must give back all of the power it usurped over the years, the powers that it never was supposed to have, the powers that destroy economy.
Also you are wrong, the gov't was able to take away all of those powers from people once, regardless of the Constitution, so it must be really easy to usurp those powers and to turn people into slaves. I don't think it's ever a problem for a gov't to slowly nibble
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, he was illustrating your point with relevant examples from history and the movies (I would have chosen more history, myself, but I suppose more people are into Star Wars ;).
You've made some massive, idiotic leaps and assumptions about the parent's position that simply are not implied.
He was simply saying that using a crisis to enact "crisis measures" which become permanent is an old political trick. He was not speaking for or against one way or another (though, frankly, your idea is no better than th
Re: (Score:2)
Although I think that we need some people pushing hard for copyright abolition for balance.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your private union is your private matter. Having gov't imposed regulations simply undermines economy and kills competition, whatever the competition is. You are faced with reality: other economies are much more competitive and the reasons have been listed. It is really your choice.
The government is broke, USA cannot repay gov't debt, any single % point up in the t-bills (which are all short term) would result in 134billion dollars more of interest. The debt will NOT be repaid, it will be printed, so the do
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I see, so saying that I am a 'fucking moron' clearly puts a historic perspective on my statement and makes it 'obviously untrue'. You have solved the mystery, good for you.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
According to the "trade balance" view of economy, selling your house/furniture/gadgets/clothes/food to your neighbours to replace it all by a pile of gold made you richer.
According to the "trade balance" view of economy, as son as some good leaves the country to be replaced by some gold, something positive happened. As soon as some good entered the country and some gold left it something bad happened.
This view of economy is so moronically stupid it is frightening.
According to the "government is evil" view o
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You are just misunderstanding the problem.
The gov't owned property is nobody's property, so it can be polluted.
Gov't must NOT OWN PROPERTY, all property (ocean, land, air, radio spectrum, whatever) and assets, must be in private hands, and then any pollution problem would be solved between owner of the land anybody who'd attempt to destroy that property.
BP, as an example, got permission to drill in the Gulf, in fact over 30K drilling happened there, near 3000 oil drilling/producing rigs are there right now.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, companies are polluting privately owned property too. I don't even know why you went on this government owned property business because it's just simply not true and is irrelevant.
See, the problem you are having is that there is an imbalance in power between a company and all the people affected by it, who may not even know they are being affected. Sure, a single owner might be able to do something, or they might not. I mean, is a single owner going to be able to enforce that he doesn't want pollut
Re: (Score:2)
You can pollute in your kitchen all you want, but if the pollutions spreads from your kitchen to a kitchen of a guy below you (say it's an apartment building) and you are leaking water and throwing sewage at him, he now has a reason to take you to court and it's between two property owners.
This problem you have, is that you want to stop a company from polluting on their property, I don't know why, it's their property. The real question is this: if your property is adjacent to his and you get the pollution
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So I take the company to court and...what are they going to tell him? The only thing they can tell him is not to pollute on my property. Easy enough for them to deal with. They'll still be polluting on other people's property. They'll probably be polluting the water supply to. Well, I don't own the water supply, the water company does. And if the water company doesn't care, then I just have to deal with it. Maybe it pollutes the food supply. I don't own the food supply, so I can't do anything about
Re: (Score:2)
So I take the company to court and...what are they going to tell him? The only thing they can tell him is not to pollute on my property. Easy enough for them to deal with. They'll still be polluting on other people's property. They'll probably be polluting the water supply to.
- a working justice system, which I did not bother describing, would have more authority than 'just telling'.
You are caught with some trivial substances on you in most countries today, you can go to jail, and you didn't even hurt anybody. Why do I have to come up with an entire working justice system to make a point?
If your water supply is polluted you take it up with whoever provides you with your water, and they have to take it up with whoever pollutes it, why is that difficult to see? You probably can
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And that collective will is called, you guessed it, government.
That collective is called 'the people'. Government is supposed to be of/for/by the people but it clearly isn't anymore.
I'm not really trying to defend parent even though I can find some philosophical common ground with him. I, however, do not think the solution is getting rid of all regulations, I think it would be more reasonable to actually start *applying* existing law equally to everyone first. Two things would happen then. Corporations would stop breaking them, and we'd find a whole lot of laws tha
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's because nobody has to pay for environmental damage unless they are forced to.
Tragedy of the commons.
Look up "externalities".
Incidentally, the Ruhr region of Germany solves this by making polluters pay for the privilege.
Re: (Score:2)
If you are replying to my comments, then I don't understand your point.
My point is precisely that there must be NO COMMONS.
Everything must be owned privately, then any problems are problems between private owners, and I don't think a private owners would lobby to set a liability cap on damages caused by an oil spill in his private property, or do you think people are actually stupid about things like that? Do you come home and take a dump on your kitchen table? What if your guest did, would you be all for i
Re: (Score:2)
"The blood-letting isn't working! The patient is still sick! What should we do?"
"More blood-letting! The problem is that we simply haven't done enough blood-letting."
Face it: any solution that calls for an extreme, over-simplified answer is going to be wrong, period. The same is true for the crowd that says almost no government as it is for the crowd that says government solves everything.
Re: (Score:2)
you are confused of-course.
In a sane system, BP would at least have to BUY that part of the ocean before it could pollute it OR it would have to pay someone, who is the actual owner to drill there and they'd have no liability caps. The gov't owning anything is a disaster, it always is because gov't consists of people who take bribes and generally are bad at what they do. Most importantly they are not the owners of the 'common resources', so why should they care? Do you understand that YOU wouldn't care ab
Cease and desist! (Score:3, Insightful)
My point is precisely that there must be NO COMMONS.
I am hereby giving notice that you have been discovered inhaling air, some of which was within the air rights of my property at the time that I bought it (it's your job to figure out whose air the wind blew toward you -- especially if you want to know whom to sue if it's polluted, and you can prove it was that specific breath that made you sick...).
Further unauthorized use of this privately owned asset shall be grounds for litigation. I hope your lawyer's
Re:Copyrights and patents must be abolished (Score:4, Insightful)
Nice rant but totally unrealistic. Economies can't grow without limits as the raw materials are not boundless.
Manufacturing jobs will always be eliminated over time as automation replaces people. The US right now has the largest manufacturing output of any nation in history, and it's doing it with only 8% of its population. The US output is larger than China, India and Brazil combined.
White collar jobs are headed the same way as software replaces people.
So what is left? Simply make do public sector jobs funded by taxation on productive work. There isn't any other possible outcome.
Re: (Score:2)
The US output can only be measured in real terms by the trade balance numbers, GDP is meaningless, the way it's counted is meaningless and it became more meaningless with bailouts and stimulus spending and printing.
Manufacturing jobs are automated, but while they are eliminated in the USA (the latest job growth in private sector of about 60K jobs was all in service sector, which does not help the trade imbalance at all), in China, Malaysia, Singapore and the rest of Asia these jobs are growing.
The reasons o
Re: (Score:2)
Best regards,
- a citizen of a country "in transition"
Re: (Score:2)
My friend. You are comparing Enron to gov't today, realize that
1. Enron never was in a free market of any kind at all, you are talking about ENERGY sector! Billions, tens of billions of gov't subsidies and regulations and various laws and you must be crazy to believe this has anything to do with free market.
2. Same for Comcast. AT&T by the way, was given a priority by gov't to own a nationalized phone cable system, but forget AT&T. Gov't is OWNED by these industries: energy, military, banking, ins
Re: (Score:2)
Complete deregulation would be horrible. Demonization of all regulation is wrong. People abuse. Companies abuse.
Limite
Re: (Score:2)
My point stands, learn.
Complete deregulation would be horrible. Demonization of all regulation is wrong. People abuse. Companies abuse.
- USA has this little document, it really only is a few pages, it's called The Constitution. The Constitution says that people have all rights because they have them always, not because somebody grants the people these rights, this is different from say, Russia, where Constitution grants rights. In the USA Constitution lists what Gov't can and cannot do, that's the main purpose, because Constitution is a Federal paper, which then has to be ratified by separate States. If a State do
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Copyrights and patents must be abolished, they are part of the death of economies, just like governments regulations, taxes, subsidies, wars, corporate involvement, corruption, stimulus borrowing/printing/spending and bailouts.
LOLFR, if I didn't know about your posting history, I would've assumed you were just trolling for libertarians. I can only assume your brain has been addled by the lead in your toys and the chemicals in your toothpaste that proper government regulation and inspection would have preve
Re: (Score:2)
you can assume all you want and have your little ad hominems all day long, it doesn't change the facts, but I think we don't need to carry on this dialog, because it's not one.
Re: (Score:2)
That's just silly, the parent comment was not a troll, it makes sense. Arguing with ACs is silly because there are armies of them and you don't know who's who.
Re:Congratulations, Media conglomerates (Score:4, Insightful)
There, fixed that for you.
Remember who is really driving this, it's not about enforcing current copyrights at home, ACTA is about enforcing US copyright laws and indefinite copyright in other nations.