ACTA To Be Signed This Weekend 277
We've been following the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement for over three years, from its secretive beginnings, to the controversy and debate that followed, and to the document it eventually evolved into. Now, Japan has announced that the agreement will finally be signed on Saturday during a ceremony that follows an anti-piracy symposium on Friday.
"The negotiation has been carried out among Australia, Canada, the European Union and its Member States, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland, and the United States, and reached a general agreement at the negotiation meeting held in Japan in October 2010, followed by the completion of technical and translation work in April 2011. ... The signing ceremony will be attended by the representatives of all the participants in the ACTA negotiations, and those that have completed relevant domestic processes will sign the agreement. The agreement is open for signature until May 1, 2013."
sigh (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:sorry, no lube left, suggestions? (Score:4, Insightful)
Let them have their fun. It's not entirely irrelevant, but near enough. For decades, sharing has been villified as piracy. And bans on the activity have proven time and again to be impractical to enforce. ACTA doesn't change any of that. If you aren't already, get used to being thought a criminal. And don't sweat about the possibility of being accused and threatened. The odds of it happening are low. Numbers are on our side.
We'll just have to wait for the older generations to lose power. They won't admit that sharing is not evil and not theft, not unless they take one hell of a beating over the issue, which they probably won't. Once they're gone, we'll ditch these idiotic laws. Be nice if it happens sooner, through the election of Pirate Party politicians, but it will happen eventually, one way or another, as mortality catches up with them.
meanwhile in Mexico (Score:4, Interesting)
Mexican Senate has already voted to not let president sign ACTA, yet, mexican IP officials and the content industry local representatives frequently make public statements about Mexico signing ACTA.
They will be at the Japan's signing ceremony as witnesses, but a few congress members haven't officially informed about recent developments concerning ACTA.
It's still as obscure as it was at the begining of the negotiations.
...like we needed a hole in the head. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, that is pretty much exactly what will happen.
ACTA has been more or less authored by the content industry ... and all of us who aren't in the US are getting this rammed down our throats. There's no public consultation, and they won't release the text of this for the most part.
But you can bet your ass this will be used to force really excessive controls on the rest of the world (at the behest of the US content industry), and then it will be brought back to your own lawmakers with a "see, we need to be
Yeah, so... (Score:5, Insightful)
... how's that 'representative democracy' working out for 'ya? Feel represented yet?
Representative democracy workin' fine (Score:2)
how's that 'representative democracy' working out for 'ya?
Its working out extremely well if anti-counterfeiting legislation is near the top of our list of concerns.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is, that's only the case for a tiny, insignificant minority of the "represented". In other words, they represent a tiny minority. Which is not really what I'd consider the goal of a representative democracy.
Re:Yeah, so... (Score:4, Insightful)
Representative democracy only works when people pay attention to government, and vote accordingly. When was the last time you voted or even contacted your representative based on copyright? I never have. Maybe I should, but there are other things I care about more.
Re: (Score:3)
What, you don't think artists want longer copyrights?
Depends on who you count as 'artists'. If you include writers, then actually most of us want shorter copyrights. It gives us a much stronger bargaining position with our publishers if they keep needing more new material because they're unable to make profits from huge back catalogues. Most writers only get a tiny trickle of royalties from books over 10 years old, but for the publishers that's a huge number of small trickles with almost no associated costs.
I suspect it's similar for musicians. If the
Re: (Score:2)
That sentiment doesn't really pass the economics sniff test. The publisher is going to pay you a percentage of the lifetime value of your work. If the lifetime value goes down via shortened copyright time, they're going to pay you less...
Re: (Score:2)
What, you don't think artists want longer copyrights?
Depends on who you count as 'artists'.
I think he meant con-artists.
Re:Yeah, so... (Score:4, Insightful)
Representative democracy only works when people pay attention to government, and vote accordingly. When was the last time you voted or even contacted your representative based on copyright? I never have. Maybe I should, but there are other things I care about more.
Most people vote based on what they are told by the media. A minority of people vote based on properly informed and developed opinion.
Democracy is subject to the same 'forces', the same social manipulations and psychology, that underlie advertising. Advertising works and is well worth the billions that are spent on it. Advertising works just as well for 'informing' the public on how they should vote as it does for getting products off of the shelf.
Therefore 'representative' democracy will always be representative of the will of easily manipulated people who are fed false information. Well-informed political debate and dialectic are kept as far away from democracy as possible.
Re: (Score:2)
Most people vote based on what they are told by the media.
So do you, unless you are one of those people who votes based on black helicopters and other conspiracies that no one ever reports.
This argument is flawed (Score:2)
Until we design a decision making process that works with selfish lazy greedy ignorant people, we won't get anywhere. I believe it can be done, using ideas like ant colony optimization or err
Re: (Score:2)
Because it's way harder to replace a human system once the errors add up to the point where the system breaks down. If that happens with my computer, I throw it out and buy a new one. Now try that with a government.
If that worked, the landfills would be crawling with politicians.
Re: (Score:2)
However, if you can design a decision making system (probably assisted by computers) that makes let's say 1
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I believe it can be done, using ideas like ant colony optimization or error detection or correction. We can make electronics work with a certain percentage of flaws- so why not human systems?
Because people aren't ants and the problems are more complex.
Re: (Score:2)
So, what do you suggest? Representative democracy might have its problems (which are fixable to some extent by tweaking its structure), but the alternatives are worse.
i.e. what was your point? Do you want monarchy?
I don't understand why you were modded up that much.
Re: (Score:2)
Selective suffrage [rationalskepticism.org].
But as usual I guess people will shoot me down for daring to suggest that some people shouldn't be allowed to vote. How horriffic.
Re: (Score:2)
In general, when considering whether "some people shouldn't be allowed to vote", the first people to be put on the list of "not allowed to vote" should be the ones who favour the idea that "some people shouldn't be allowed to vote".
Or did you really mean "some OTHER people shouldn't be allowed to vote"?
Re:Yeah, so... (Score:4, Interesting)
Ron Paul.
That's why you vote for Ron Paul who is very specific about States being more autonomous (because the federal government has no authority for pretty much anything it does at this point), and thus having more competition between government laws and Congressman/Senators should really live in their States now, with all the technology they must not be allowed to live in Washington DC and to do their business there. They should be required to live in their States, where people have more direct access to them AND this would force the lobbyists to come to every one of the States, to go visit 50 States (or at least half), and this would be more obvious and easy to track and to see how a Congressman/Senator changes his mind once the path of a lobbyist goes through his State.
Re:Yeah, so...lets have e-government (Score:2)
There they will be represented by a life size screen and a 100 W speaker.
And all without leaving home-town and electoral district!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Exactly. There should be no reason for these guys all to fly to Washington DC, all to assemble in one room.
Get them onto the Internet, connect them into a virtual room, have this thing broadcast over youtube.
NO MORE PRIVATE BS CONVERSATIONS.
Record everything they do. Anything that's not recorded must be illegal for them. Force them to live in places that they are supposed to represent.
Have a huge ass LCD screen in every city of the State, constantly showing what the elected officials are doing.
They better
Re:Yeah, so... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Which third of senators are you expecting to put up a fight? Are you expecting the Democrats to rise up in rebellion against their President? Or are you expecting the Republicans to take a sudden lurch towards lax international property law, against the will of some of the US' biggest businesses?
Write to your representatives and let them know how you feel; but don't expect much.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
And what big business would be against ACTA? At best, it could move a senator to the "don't care" category, but certainly not to the "opposed" position.
For that, he'd have to have the interests of the people in mind.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I am happy because every time I test this hypothesis, it is consistent with what I'm told.
Or perhaps I'm too authoritarian to accept without critical thought the largely unfounded contradictions of random people on the internet?
Lovely! (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Man.. it would would be nice if the US was second best at anything I care about (other than number of fighter jets, executions, people in prison and money shoveling)... and technically the US is second best at money shoveling, since the EU has a larger economy, combined, than the US... sure it's not a country, ok, you can't lose them all.
The US emits more pollution than the EU and china combined, despite having just over half the economy (PPP GDP) of the two combined. The US uses 7 times as much water pe
Imaginary Property Warriors (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
This is what the world will become, not just the US. Look at the ridicululous b.s. Apple has been able to pull over iPad and iPhone intellectual property, claiming ownership of any thin rectangular tablet device. Europe just passed a copyright extension specifically to give more money to the owners of the Beatles copyrights. And let's not forget that the original draconian copyright regime isn't called "the Berne convention": it's a European creation, rammed down everybodys throat at the insistence of Eur
Re: (Score:2)
Well, when you have a rich population whose most unique valuable facet is their bourgeois capacity to obtain higher education qualifications, and to produce creative works without fear of going bankrupt, then it's a natural step to staunchly defend intellectual property. I mean, if people only value tangible goods and labour, then you're screwed.
Luckily for them, people do value intangible goods very highly. They often just don't realise it, or care to admit it.
Re: (Score:2)
Two words ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Civil disobedience.
No, I'm not a "pirate" and I don't steal stuff from "Rights Holders" and "Intellectual Property" evangelists. However, I do advocate boycotting them and everything they're selling for pushing draconian "legislation" such as ACTA. This sort of crap is not adding value to the world.
Nobody *needs* anything they're selling.
Don't buy it. Don't use it. Find other suppliers. There's plenty of them if you'd only look! Teach 'em how to rot in hell. Don't go there or play their game, and convince your friends not to as well.
They're slime, they're acting like slime, and you need not put up with actions such as theirs. They're also co-opting your government and legal system against you.
Just don't buy their !@#$. Watch 'em fade into history as they should.
Re: (Score:2)
Civil disobedience.
No, I'm not a "pirate" and I don't steal stuff from "Rights Holders" and "Intellectual Property" evangelists. However, I do advocate boycotting them and everything they're selling for pushing draconian "legislation" such as ACTA. This sort of crap is not adding value to the world.
Nobody *needs* anything they're selling.
Don't buy it. Don't use it. Find other suppliers. There's plenty of them if you'd only look! Teach 'em how to rot in hell. Don't go there or play their game, and convince your friends not to as well.
They're slime, they're acting like slime, and you need not put up with actions such as theirs. They're also co-opting your government and legal system against you.
Just don't buy their !@#$. Watch 'em fade into history as they should.
Civil disobedience is not boycotting or finding other suppliers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is if your 'other supplier' is the Pirate Bay.
Yes, but then that is not "boycotting" is it. It is using it and not paying anything towards the cost of its creation.
Now the vast majority of the money you have saved by doing this is taken from companies or people I could not give a shit about, but a very minuscule percentage will come from someone like me who just needs to work to get by in life and those minuscule percentages soon add up. It is very easy to say "screw em" to those people too and that they deserve it for signing a contract with Sony or w
Re: (Score:2)
No, I'm not a "pirate" and I don't steal stuff from "Rights Holders" and "Intellectual Property" evangelists. However, I do advocate boycotting them and everything they're selling for pushing draconian "legislation" such as ACTA
That's not civil disobedience, unless they've added a constitutional amendment requiring you to buy a certain amount of stuff from IP holders every year.
Petition created at Whitehouse.gov (Score:5, Informative)
The Obama administration has made it possible to create petitions which, if they get sufficient signatures, will be
responded to and potentially acted on. I've created one at http://wh.gov/4PW which I encourage all to read and
sign if they agree with it. We can defeat this!
Re: (Score:3)
The Obama administration has made it possible to create petitions which, if they get sufficient signatures, will be responded to and potentially acted on. I've created one at http://wh.gov/4PW [wh.gov] which I encourage all to read and sign if they agree with it. We can defeat this!
I am signer number 2! Only 4998 more needed to get an official response! "SLASHDOTTING" might actually count for something at last!
Re: (Score:2)
Too bad you're so far down the page. A whopping 3 responses so far. This is one of the few times I wish posts would flow upward, or cause an editor to make an update to the original post...
Re:Petition created at Whitehouse.gov (Score:5, Insightful)
requires sigin to vote.. ok
pop up form incompatible with android touch kybd. ( click text area , lose kybd focus)
use slide out kybd
Sends validation mail.... ok
It's not a link, I have to copy and paste
Drops me to 404 page
Move to laptop, try again
Still, not a link, but copy paste better on laptop, whitehouse.gov says
Please login, requests email and password... ( I didn't ever get prompted for a password )
request lost password
New validation link, ( still not hot, copy paste)
OK, logged in
back to
click "signin" and my choices are "Sign out" and "Forgot Password"
Now I will try logout and log back in.. will see if that works
I get the feeling they don't actually want people to sign these things.
Re: (Score:2)
This x10.
WTF.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's a good idea. I'm tempted to set up the UK equivalent, (it's http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/ [direct.gov.uk] if anyone wants to beat me to it).
Of course the UK version needs 100,000 signatures, rather than 5,000, but it's still possible. I hope Slashdotters from other countries do so on their equivalents, where available.
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/09/committee_cannot_debate_epetitions_without_more_time/ [theregister.co.uk]
Signed, site half-slashdotted (Score:2)
Done. I had to reload the page a couple of times for the "petition tool" to display correctly. Probably the server is overloaded...
Of course, we are naive to believe that the O'bummer administration (or any administration) will pay attention to opinions that it dislikes. Don't expect this to change anything...
Re:Symptoms? (Score:2)
"Sign this petition" is greyed out for me, IE 7 or FireFox 6. It says to sign in, but at the bottom is says Welcome {me} and I can't sign in - only sign out. Is this what everyone else is seeing?
Re: (Score:2)
We have the same system in the UK .... All petitions with enough signatures get considered... and the ones they don't agree with get considered and rejected
Brilliant system of voter appeasement
Norway (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No thanks. We have this thing here, where we get sunlight (hours of it!) every single day of the year - sounds crazy, but I like it.
Re: (Score:2)
Derp.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Kill the insane duties on motor vehicles, then we'll talk. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
To the US Government. (Score:2)
Fuck You.
Put me in jail.
I defend the second amendment with cold hard steel.
Re: (Score:2)
We see your cold hard steel and raise you a sherman tank
Re: (Score:2)
A Sherman? Why bother with that when you can track down his location using his ISP, fly a drone there, and blow it to smithereens with a missile?
Oh, wait, whoops, our targeting is a little off. Hope this guy's neighbor's next-of-kin doesn't mind too much. (If you think that doesn't happen, read Al Jazeera.)
ACTA is part of the new world order (Score:2)
So now you know the countries that are part of this. Consist of less than half of the world population. Hardly what the people wants.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Obviously. That's why you don't vote for the guy who can only give canned answers and fancy speeches.
The Republicans are bad, but they can't get away with as much. If Bush or another Republican was pulling this BS the major media would be crucifying them. That's pretty much the only difference between parties. If it's a Democrat, the media ignores as much as they can, and tries to spin everything to be positive. . .if it's a Republican, it's the only time the media does it's job, making sure that every act
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Obama 2012! (Score:4, Insightful)
You should get into the fertilizer business with that amount of bullshit. Bush kidnapped and tortured people on a whim, stole hundred of billions of dollars from the nation in the form of unfunded wars and mandates, and still got reelected. Obama told schoolchildren that they should stay in school, and was excoriated in the media for Soviet brainwashing. He tried to reimburse doctors for helping patients write a living will, and was accused of setting of Nazi Death Panels. The guy can't get away with doing good things.
Republicans can do whatever the hell they want, because their wing of the media owns the party and would never do anything to hurt them. The liberal wing of the media still takes Democrats to task when they do something wrong (watch Rachel Maddow for a week if you don't believe it), while the conservative media makes shit up to criticize them for whenever they try to do something right.
Re:Yours is deeper and browner (Score:4, Insightful)
Liar, liar, liar.
[Torture] is continued today under Obama.
Lies. Rendition is still occurring, which is bad, but torture is not.
Are banks and automobile companies really so different? Not to mention there is Libya...
Banks were bailed out by Bush, liar. The car companies paid back most of their loans, and even if they hadn't, the money would have gone towards employing Americans during a recession instead of sabotaging Medicare with an unfunded prescription drug benefit. And Libya has cost the US about $1 billion dollars, compared to Iraq which has cost over $1 trillion.
Methinks you have dropped all context [regarding Obama speaking to school children], as well as misunderstanding what "the media" did.
By all means, liar, explain how Obama talking to school children really was an act of brainwashing.
The Death Panels part came not from doctors writing wills but from forming, well, panels deciding how much care people would get - or not.
LIAR! The Death Panels crap started over a section of the bill that would have provided optional will-writing services to people over a certain age, or with life threatening conditions. They then kept the lie going even after that section was dropped from the bill, because imbeciles like you were eating it up so well.
Honestly, it is mind-boggling the way Republicans throw up a wall of lies when faced with criticism. Do you really believe that repeating your lie enough will make it true?
UH, GUYS? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Worse than that - the "Death Panel" was originally proposed by Sen. Johnny Isakson of Georgia - Republican. Something similar had strong Republican support as early as 2003, but the Republican
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Really?
I don't see Fox News, which is traditionally not really a big backer of Obama, go apeshit about this ACTA signing. You think it would have been the other way 'round if a Rep was in charge?
Re: (Score:2)
Possibly because a Treaty "signing" is pretty much meaningless under US law.
We signed Kyoto remember?
Until the Senate ratifies it, Obama's signature means nothing at all. (and in the case of Kyoto, after Bill had Al sign it, Bill didn't even bother to present it to the Senate for ratification, knowing it wouldn't be ratified).
Re:Obama 2012! (Score:5, Insightful)
Are you serious??
Obama has been bombing Libya for months now without invoking the war powers act.
If Bush had done that the Democrats would have organized marches with millions of participants protesting.
Those millions just sit at home because it's "their guy" that is doing it this time.
By the same token many of the Republicans that supported Bush's actions with respect to Iraq are now pissed off at Obama. Sure he's violating the war powers act and they can catch him on a technicality, but you sure as hell know they'd have been fine with Bush if he had violated it.
Its all about "my team" vs. "your team" anymore. Americans don't stand on principle, they just proudly wear the label for their side that they belong to. And they belong to that side because they've always belonged to it.
Its sickening.
And of course both of our political sides happily sell us out to the Movie and Music industry, even though they're small potatoes compared to industries that'll be harmed by these brain dead laws and treaties.
Re:Obama 2012! (Score:5, Insightful)
Invading Iraq on a WMD/Terrorist pretext is wholly different proposition to providing air support to an in-progress popular rebellion.
I'm not American, I don't care for Obama particularly, but the Libya actions seem to be attracting praise from people *worldwide*, whereas the Iraq debacle has ruined the reputation of the US the world over. This particular area is not something that you can or should reduce to partisan politics.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Iraq debacle? You mean the successful invasion of Iraq for the purpose of deposing the convicted mass murderer and general crackpot Saddam Hussein
Oh, was that the lie they eventually settled on? I lost track after the fifth time they changed the pretext for Bush and Cheney's Excellent Adventure.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
That's the one, the one where various parts of the US government and military scrambled for as many cooked-up reasons as they could grasp in order to justify a military campaign against a country that was no threat, with a rag-tag band of allies who were drawn into it largely under the protest of their people and pretty much present just to make it look like the US wasn't taking unilateral aggressive action.
The Iraqi people are probably better off now. Probably, after tens or hundreds of thousands of deaths
Re: (Score:3)
Iraq debacle? You mean the successful invasion of Iraq for the purpose of deposing the convicted mass murderer and general crackpot Saddam Hussein,
You probably should turn of Fox News Channel. The President and his administration did not sell the war to the American people "For the purpose of deposing Saddam Hussein."
after receiving proper authorization in the US gov't, international approval in the UN, and including a large multinational force?
Cheney through Bush LIED to the world claiming weapons of mass destruction. "There are stockpiles we know where they are" "Mobile chemical factories" "Niger aluminum tubes" etc etc the list goes on and on. All a bunch of lies.
You mean the debacle that has resulted in less than 4800 allied deaths in 8 years?
That is the number being diseminated by Fox News. But if you get your head out of Fox News nether region
Re: (Score:2)
And what about the tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis that died when the US government wasn't able to prevent the ethnic cleansing that occurred when Saddam was deposed? Or would you rather ignore that problem?
Re: (Score:2)
So you are saying democrats are better in politics
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, where politics is defined as getting people in the media to trumpet your cause and agree with everything you say.
And most definitely Bill Clinton was far better at politics than either Obama or Bush. Although this is partly because he realized that "his team" wouldn't come after him for things like welfare reform and that by giving the republicans much of what they were asking for with said reform, he could neutralize complaints from their base. Although being thwarted with respect to debating Clinto
Re: (Score:2)
Obama has been bombing Libya for months now without invoking the war powers act.
And Pakistan. And Yemen. And Somalia. And who knows where else...
Re: (Score:2)
Firstly the war powers act doesn't apply to this situation, that's not just the current Presidents view that's been the view going back to at least Clinton. Secondly, tens of thousands of people died in the ethnic cleansing that follow President Bush's incompetent and ill advised conquest of Iraq where he didn't send enough personnel in to prevent it from happening.
And it might be sickening, but it doesn't make the crimes committed at Abu Ghraib, GITMO and numerous black sites any less crimes against humani
Re: (Score:2)
At first I thought you were delusional. but no, you're just trolling.
Re: (Score:2)
Really, since when is torturing people by order of a head of state not considered to be a crime against humanity? And seriously, considering the fact that he's owned up to ordering the torture, it takes some pretty substantial delusion to believe that he isn't a war criminal that needs to be brought to the Hague for trial.
Re: (Score:2)
http://flowingdata.com/2009/11/26/fox-news-makes-the-best-pie-chart-ever/ [flowingdata.com]
I love Fox news. I'm so sad I cannot receive it here in the UK!
Re: (Score:2)
The President is very much a figurehead - he wields no real power whatsoever. He is apparently chosen by the government, but the qualities he is required to display are not those of leadership but those of finely judged outrage. For this reason the President is always a controversial choice, always an infuriating but fascinating character. His job is not to wield power but to draw attention away from it.
Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
Re: (Score:3)
You can't blame this one just on the US. The EU was also involved, but unfortunately, the EU isn't really all that democratic. The Europarliament may have objected to ACTA on various occasions, the negotiators continued anyway.
I hope this still requires parliamentary ratification. No idea whether it'll be the national or EU parliament, but I hope they take a very critical look at it. I think it'd be a very constructive signal if they rejected ACTA. I hope that'll prevent these kind of secret, uninformed neg
Re: (Score:2)
So cholera was replaced with pest.
Did anyone expect anything else? C'mon, be honest...
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone who thinks the other guy wouldn't have signed this is living in fantasy-land.
I doubt there was a single person in the last election cycle with a realistic chance of becoming president who wouldn't have signed this. And I doubt any of the serious people in the current election cycle are any better.
Re: (Score:2)
Are all our bitches now.. You'll enforce our IP laws and fucking like it. And we might pretend to enforce your IP laws if it suits us. But i wouldn't bet on it if an american company is involved.
Don't bet for it for the future, though. It's not like the creation of new IP is a monopoly of US... and while US companies will be busy fighting among themselves and the rest of the world (Apple, Oracle, Google, ) the rest of the world won't stop, watch and eat popcorn, "Berne convention" or ACTA be damned.
Re: (Score:3)
A brief search on the BBC reveals that they do talk about it- rarely.
Last article that mentions it (in passing): 21/09/2010.
Before that: March 2010.
Then: April 2009.
Then: July 2008.
And all the articles seem to be written by the same two columnists; not exactly by the current affairs journalists.
Like you say; it stinks.
Re: (Score:2)
This is why HDCP was dead-in-the-water, and most video links to monitors are not encrypted.