Dontgonearthere
19-07-2008, 10:23
In case you havent heard (which seems likely, given the almost total lack of coverage, and the secretive way this thing is being worked out), ACTA is basically the RIAA/MPAA's wet dream, creating an international copyright enforcement agency with (apparently) Judge Dredd-like authority.
The idea is that, since its a treaty, nobody gets to actually vote on this except a few select people involved in the spawning of this monstrosity.
The main issues I've seen brought against it are allowing unwarranted searches of 'digital media' (IE: Laptops, MP3 players, etc.) at national border crossings, 'with probable cause', where 'probable cause' is defined as having digital media. Whats more, should you be discovered to have 'possibly illigal material' your devices can be confiscated and destroyed.
Lovely, eh?
I expect even Faux News'll have a hard time supporting this, once it goes into effect.
Anyway, apparently the RIAA has submitted a wishlist for the treaty, viewable here:
http://www.keionline.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=190
I'm not too sure about the source's reliability (never heard of them, myself), but should this be true...Well, here's a few lovely highlights:
n territories with high rates of production of pirated optical discs, provide for a system of licensing prior to the manufacture or export of optical discs, as well as the import or export of manufacturing equipment, and manufacturing materials, including optical grade polycarbonate, "stampers" and "masters."
"Excuse me, sir, is that a blank CD-R? You're under arrest."
Provide that goods that have been determined to be pirated or counterfeit by competent authorities at the border shall be destroyed, except in exceptional cases.
I keep seeing that scene in Judge Dredd where he blows up the illigally parked sports car.
Provide that courts shall confiscate and destroy the equipment used for the manufacture of pirated goods in order to ensure that infringing parties do not repeat their illegal activities,
No more importing DVD burners, flash drives, CD/DVD R/RW's.
F.Evidentiary Standards
Parties shall:
1. Provide that the person whose name is on the protected material is presumed to be the relevant right holder.
2. Provide that proof of ownership may be obtained by means of an affidavit, unless this issue is placed into question by material evidence to the contrary.
3. Provide that the presumption of ownership may be rebutted only if the defendant is able to provide concrete evidence to the contrary.1
4. As a deterrent to groundless defenses, award plaintiffs full costs and fees for overcoming frivolous challenges to titles.
That whole section is just...Ugh. I dont know if I should laugh, cry, or vomit.
2. Compel manufacturers of optical discs in their territory to maintain complete and accurate records to enable right holders and public authorities to trace the person or entity that ordered the infringing discs.
While we're at it, lets put audio/visual transmitters on each and every CD produced anywhere. Then when somebody tried to pirate something, the FBI could snipe them from the specially built International Anti-Piracy Enforcement Towers. IN SPACE.
Require internet service providers and other intermediaries to employ readily available measures to inhibit infringement in instances where both legitimate and illegitimate uses were facilitated by their services, including filtering out infringing materials, provided that such measures are not unduly burdensome and do not materially affect the cost or efficiency of delivering legitimate services;
Anybody in high school after 2000 was probably subject to the horror of High School internet filtering. Guess what this is proposing?
5. Require Internet service providers or other intermediaries to restrict or terminate access to their systems with respect to repeat infringers.
Now we're banning Little Johnny from the internet forever because he downloaded a song.
6. Establish liability against internet service providers who, upon receiving notices of infringement from content provides via e*mail, or by telephone in cases of pre-release materials or in other exigent circumstances, fail to remove the infringing content, or access to such content, in an expeditious manner, and in no case more than 24 hours;
Thats what one might refer to as a legal 'can of worms'. Or maybe a legal 'can of flesh-eating zombie parasite worms. With rabies.'
7. Establish, adequately fund and provide training for a computer crimes investigatory unit.
ISP's are the police now?
Those are just my skim-through highlights, of course. And none of this is CONFIRMED to be in the treaty as yet. Of course, since the treaty is essentially being discussed behind closed doors with no public access, there's not much that can be confirmed anyway.
However, if the treaty itself is 1/10th as bad as this, its still terribly dissapointing that the people who came up with this were actually elected into office.
One would think that this would be something that pretty much anybody, conservative OR liberal, regardless of who you're voting for in the election, or what country you come from, would oppose. I'm not too familiar with the European constitutions, but something tells me that the majority of the population of the countries this treaty is going to affect will be none to pleased when they discover that they're suddenly subject to laws written not by their own governments, but by lobbyists from the USA, trying to enforce some kind of all-powerful 1984-esque international copyright police.
tl;dr:
:soap:
The idea is that, since its a treaty, nobody gets to actually vote on this except a few select people involved in the spawning of this monstrosity.
The main issues I've seen brought against it are allowing unwarranted searches of 'digital media' (IE: Laptops, MP3 players, etc.) at national border crossings, 'with probable cause', where 'probable cause' is defined as having digital media. Whats more, should you be discovered to have 'possibly illigal material' your devices can be confiscated and destroyed.
Lovely, eh?
I expect even Faux News'll have a hard time supporting this, once it goes into effect.
Anyway, apparently the RIAA has submitted a wishlist for the treaty, viewable here:
http://www.keionline.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=190
I'm not too sure about the source's reliability (never heard of them, myself), but should this be true...Well, here's a few lovely highlights:
n territories with high rates of production of pirated optical discs, provide for a system of licensing prior to the manufacture or export of optical discs, as well as the import or export of manufacturing equipment, and manufacturing materials, including optical grade polycarbonate, "stampers" and "masters."
"Excuse me, sir, is that a blank CD-R? You're under arrest."
Provide that goods that have been determined to be pirated or counterfeit by competent authorities at the border shall be destroyed, except in exceptional cases.
I keep seeing that scene in Judge Dredd where he blows up the illigally parked sports car.
Provide that courts shall confiscate and destroy the equipment used for the manufacture of pirated goods in order to ensure that infringing parties do not repeat their illegal activities,
No more importing DVD burners, flash drives, CD/DVD R/RW's.
F.Evidentiary Standards
Parties shall:
1. Provide that the person whose name is on the protected material is presumed to be the relevant right holder.
2. Provide that proof of ownership may be obtained by means of an affidavit, unless this issue is placed into question by material evidence to the contrary.
3. Provide that the presumption of ownership may be rebutted only if the defendant is able to provide concrete evidence to the contrary.1
4. As a deterrent to groundless defenses, award plaintiffs full costs and fees for overcoming frivolous challenges to titles.
That whole section is just...Ugh. I dont know if I should laugh, cry, or vomit.
2. Compel manufacturers of optical discs in their territory to maintain complete and accurate records to enable right holders and public authorities to trace the person or entity that ordered the infringing discs.
While we're at it, lets put audio/visual transmitters on each and every CD produced anywhere. Then when somebody tried to pirate something, the FBI could snipe them from the specially built International Anti-Piracy Enforcement Towers. IN SPACE.
Require internet service providers and other intermediaries to employ readily available measures to inhibit infringement in instances where both legitimate and illegitimate uses were facilitated by their services, including filtering out infringing materials, provided that such measures are not unduly burdensome and do not materially affect the cost or efficiency of delivering legitimate services;
Anybody in high school after 2000 was probably subject to the horror of High School internet filtering. Guess what this is proposing?
5. Require Internet service providers or other intermediaries to restrict or terminate access to their systems with respect to repeat infringers.
Now we're banning Little Johnny from the internet forever because he downloaded a song.
6. Establish liability against internet service providers who, upon receiving notices of infringement from content provides via e*mail, or by telephone in cases of pre-release materials or in other exigent circumstances, fail to remove the infringing content, or access to such content, in an expeditious manner, and in no case more than 24 hours;
Thats what one might refer to as a legal 'can of worms'. Or maybe a legal 'can of flesh-eating zombie parasite worms. With rabies.'
7. Establish, adequately fund and provide training for a computer crimes investigatory unit.
ISP's are the police now?
Those are just my skim-through highlights, of course. And none of this is CONFIRMED to be in the treaty as yet. Of course, since the treaty is essentially being discussed behind closed doors with no public access, there's not much that can be confirmed anyway.
However, if the treaty itself is 1/10th as bad as this, its still terribly dissapointing that the people who came up with this were actually elected into office.
One would think that this would be something that pretty much anybody, conservative OR liberal, regardless of who you're voting for in the election, or what country you come from, would oppose. I'm not too familiar with the European constitutions, but something tells me that the majority of the population of the countries this treaty is going to affect will be none to pleased when they discover that they're suddenly subject to laws written not by their own governments, but by lobbyists from the USA, trying to enforce some kind of all-powerful 1984-esque international copyright police.
tl;dr:
:soap: