Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

Philwelch
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:33 am UTC
Location: RIGHT BEHIND YOU

Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Philwelch » Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:22 am UTC

From http://www.boingboing.net/2009/11/03/secret-copyright-tre.html:

The internet chapter of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, a secret copyright treaty whose text Obama's administration refused to disclose due to "national security" concerns, has leaked. It's bad. It says:
* That ISPs have to proactively police copyright on user-contributed material. This means that it will be impossible to run a service like Flickr or YouTube or Blogger, since hiring enough lawyers to ensure that the mountain of material uploaded every second isn't infringing will exceed any hope of profitability.
* That ISPs have to cut off the Internet access of accused copyright infringers or face liability. This means that your entire family could be denied to the internet -- and hence to civic participation, health information, education, communications, and their means of earning a living -- if one member is accused of copyright infringement, without access to a trial or counsel.
* That the whole world must adopt US-style "notice-and-takedown" rules that require ISPs to remove any material that is accused -- again, without evidence or trial -- of infringing copyright. This has proved a disaster in the US and other countries, where it provides an easy means of censoring material, just by accusing it of infringing copyright.
* Mandatory prohibitions on breaking DRM, even if doing so for a lawful purpose (e.g., to make a work available to disabled people; for archival preservation; because you own the copyrighted work that is locked up with DRM)


More at http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4510/125/.
Fascism: If you're not with us you're against us.
Leftism: If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

Perfection is an unattainable goal.

User avatar
tzvibish
Posts: 1031
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 3:16 pm UTC
Location: In ur officez, supportin ur desktopz
Contact:

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby tzvibish » Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:27 am UTC

I can't say I'm shocked.

This is war that can't be won, and I think anyone that really understands the Internet knows this. The government will just be throwing money and regulation at a problem that won't ever go away. It would be like re-enforcing the Prohibition right now. It might make sense, but it isn't really possible to enforce without your costs widely outpacing your benefits.
Image
-Featuring the Comic Strip XKCD!

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby The Reaper » Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:57 am UTC

OBEY

User avatar
MiB24601
Posts: 714
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 11:13 pm UTC
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby MiB24601 » Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:04 am UTC

Since the ACTA is being negotiated as an executive agreement rather than a treaty or a congressional-executive agreement, I'm curious as to what would happen if congress simply did not alter title 17 to reflect ACTA. Whether executive agreements are like treaties and would supersede existing federal statutes hasn't been decided yet and I'm not sure which way the courts would decide.
"There's no point being grown-up if you can't be childish sometimes." - The Fourth Doctor, Doctor Who

User avatar
Not A Raptor
Posts: 417
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 4:06 pm UTC

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Not A Raptor » Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:16 am UTC

Hmm... Anybody going to take it to the hilarious extremity of this and accuse government sites' content of copyright infringement?
Van wrote:I like simple games.

Like Wizardry.

WARNING: Is acting like NaR.
Kellsbells: NAR is a sillypants
Not_A_Raptor: :p
Kellsbells: That is my expert assessment

User avatar
netcrusher88
Posts: 2166
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:35 pm UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby netcrusher88 » Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:21 am UTC

Not A Raptor wrote:Hmm... Anybody going to take it to the hilarious extremity of this and accuse government sites' content of copyright infringement?

Well, you could always file a DMCA notice against one of the weekly presidential address videos on YouTube and Google would be forced to take it down but that might be a federal crime and I hear the White House has pretty good lawyers.
Sexothermic
I have only ever made one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it. -Voltaire
They said we would never have a black president until Swine Flu. -Gears

User avatar
Maduyn
Posts: 162
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 9:37 pm UTC

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Maduyn » Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:44 am UTC

I predict massive backlash and the administration folding.

Then the republicans will pick this up and wave it around as a banner.
Saying that unless this is implemented it will cost us millions of jobs.
I was once asked why i am a pacifist.
I simply said "Because I have finally understood what it is to die"

Bright Shadows
Posts: 645
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 2:56 pm UTC

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Bright Shadows » Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:51 am UTC

('_')
Government oversight of this would not be the only thing sucking up money or jobs, should this be enacted and followed through in a measurable way on. It would be a real damper for P2P services of all sorts, and those are kind of a big deal.

http://www.alexa.com/topsites

Not funny. Not at all.
Image

User avatar
MiB24601
Posts: 714
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 11:13 pm UTC
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby MiB24601 » Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:01 am UTC

Not A Raptor wrote:Hmm... Anybody going to take it to the hilarious extremity of this and accuse government sites' content of copyright infringement?

netcrusher88 wrote:Well, you could always file a DMCA notice against one of the weekly presidential address videos on YouTube and Google would be forced to take it down but that might be a federal crime and I hear the White House has pretty good lawyers.


Yeah, that's covered by 17 U.S.C. § 512(f) and while you wouldn't be criminally liable, it would probably cost you a whole lotta money.
"There's no point being grown-up if you can't be childish sometimes." - The Fourth Doctor, Doctor Who

User avatar
Zorlin
Posts: 949
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 2:31 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Zorlin » Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:02 am UTC

MiB24601 wrote:
Not A Raptor wrote:Hmm... Anybody going to take it to the hilarious extremity of this and accuse government sites' content of copyright infringement?

netcrusher88 wrote:Well, you could always file a DMCA notice against one of the weekly presidential address videos on YouTube and Google would be forced to take it down but that might be a federal crime and I hear the White House has pretty good lawyers.


Yeah, that's covered by 17 U.S.C. § 512(f) and while you wouldn't be criminally liable, it would probably cost you a whole lotta money.

hypothetically, you could totally get away with this. encrypted, anonymous VPN, anyone?
Mysterious wizard rabbit of unknown proportions.

Check out #xkcd-hugs movie night! Watch movies with your fellow xkcdians.

Meaux_Pas wrote:You're all mad.

User avatar
Cynical Idealist
Posts: 1124
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:48 pm UTC

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Cynical Idealist » Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:13 am UTC

Bright Shadows wrote:('_')
Government oversight of this would not be the only thing sucking up money or jobs, should this be enacted and followed through in a measurable way on. It would be a real damper for P2P services of all sorts, and those are kind of a big deal.

Yes, P2P is kind of a big deal, but...you didn't link any sites really connected with P2P.
The internet removes the two biggest aids in detecting sarcasm:
1)The tone of voice
2)the assumption that the other person is sane
Elvish Pillager wrote:See? All the problems in our society are caused by violent video games, like FarmVille.

User avatar
MiB24601
Posts: 714
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 11:13 pm UTC
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby MiB24601 » Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:14 am UTC

netcrusher88 wrote:Well, you could always file a DMCA notice against one of the weekly presidential address videos on YouTube and Google would be forced to take it down but that might be a federal crime and I hear the White House has pretty good lawyers.

MiB24601 wrote:Yeah, that's covered by 17 U.S.C. § 512(f) and while you wouldn't be criminally liable, it would probably cost you a whole lotta money.

Zorlin wrote:hypothetically, you could totally get away with this. encrypted, anonymous VPN, anyone?


Not really. To make a valid DMCA notice (i.e. one that the service providers would be necessitated to act upon), you would need to identify yourself as described by 17 U.S.C. § 512(c)(3)(A). Sure, you could give fake information but then the user would respond to the ISP and when the ISP tried to check on the notifier, the jig would be up.
"There's no point being grown-up if you can't be childish sometimes." - The Fourth Doctor, Doctor Who

psyck0
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:58 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby psyck0 » Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:18 am UTC

Woooo Canada.

Jesus, what a shitload. Come on, Obama, don't do it!

User avatar
Sockmonkey
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:30 pm UTC

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Sockmonkey » Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:38 am UTC

We can't do it against gov sites but can we do it against gov personell?

User avatar
Maduyn
Posts: 162
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 9:37 pm UTC

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Maduyn » Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:42 am UTC

Sockmonkey wrote:We can't do it against gov sites but can we do it against gov personell?


"I'm sorry mister president but you cant access the internet cause you are alleged to have violated copyright laws" - Internet czar
I was once asked why i am a pacifist.
I simply said "Because I have finally understood what it is to die"

User avatar
Zorlin
Posts: 949
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 2:31 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Zorlin » Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:57 am UTC

MiB24601 wrote:Not really. To make a valid DMCA notice (i.e. one that the service providers would be necessitated to act upon), you would need to identify yourself as described by 17 U.S.C. § 512(c)(3)(A). Sure, you could give fake information but then the user would respond to the ISP and when the ISP tried to check on the notifier, the jig would be up.

All I saw was that it needed "A physical or electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed."

You'd use a real email address, but one that you had only accessed anonymously and such. Make an identity. It doesn't have to be real.

The service providers wouldn't be necessitated to act upon it, but YouTube has taken videos down without the notices being valid before.
Mysterious wizard rabbit of unknown proportions.

Check out #xkcd-hugs movie night! Watch movies with your fellow xkcdians.

Meaux_Pas wrote:You're all mad.

User avatar
Sockmonkey
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:30 pm UTC

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Sockmonkey » Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:01 am UTC

Copyright my ass, it's copywrong.
Yes I'm going to pun hell.

sje46
Posts: 4730
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:41 am UTC
Location: New Hampshire

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby sje46 » Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:08 am UTC

I was there when the Internet was good. When it was the Wild West, where you could say anything you wanted under an anonymous mask, and no one could do anything. I was there when every site was treated equal. I was there when you could listen to every song in the world, and learn every thing in the world. I was there in the good times and the bad times. I have seen images no human should ever see. I have had instantaneous conversations with people all around the world, about every possible topic. I could photoshop any kind of porn I wanted. I watched movies before they came out. I have raided with Anonymous. I have made sockpuppets. I have had pretend sex with strangers on IRC. I uploaded illegal music videos on youtube I have seen a man pull his anus open for the entire world. I have vandalized Wikipedia, I have seen Flintstones porn. I have led revolutions. We were the astronauts of our age, delving deep into the terrors of the human mind, lifted to the heights of human creativity, unfettered by censorship. Back then, the Internet met something. Back then, the Internet were our lives. The police couldn't stop us. The RIAA and MPAA couldn't stop us. The government couldn't stop us. Chris Hansen couldn't stop us. We were Gods.

But all beautiful things have to end. I'm grateful I was able to experience while it actually meant something.

I guess I'll go read a book, or something.

RIP Internet. 1969-2009

Not cool, not funny, not a good legislation.
Note: I have only done like, half those things.
General_Norris: Taking pride in your nation is taking pride in the division of humanity.
Pirate.Bondage: Let's get married. Right now.

User avatar
videogamesizzle
Posts: 358
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 3:32 am UTC
Location: Rockford, IL
Contact:

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby videogamesizzle » Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:19 am UTC

*sighs* Well Internet ol' buddy ol' pal.
It's been a good run.

Although we can be sure that the Internet will fight this as hard as they (we!) can.
Look at me still talking when there's SCIENCE to do!
Silvyr wrote:I fucking love cocaine. I wish I could buy it somewhere...

User avatar
folkhero
Posts: 1775
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:34 am UTC

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby folkhero » Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:25 am UTC

You know OP, just by posting this you're threatening national security Napolitano is going to come down hard on your ass.
<end sarcasm, begin seething rage>
Obama trying to cloak this under the veil of national security is a sad, sick joke. Wasn't he going to have the most transparent administration in history? He's lost the little credibility he still has with me. Punishing people as harshly as cutting out their internet access based on accusation alone: that's counter to everything America stands for. For further questions, just ask my signature.
To all law enforcement entities, this is not an admission of guilt...

User avatar
Zorlin
Posts: 949
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 2:31 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Zorlin » Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:27 am UTC

sje46 wrote:Note: I have only done like, half those things.

I've only done like, 100% of those things...
Mysterious wizard rabbit of unknown proportions.

Check out #xkcd-hugs movie night! Watch movies with your fellow xkcdians.

Meaux_Pas wrote:You're all mad.

User avatar
videogamesizzle
Posts: 358
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 3:32 am UTC
Location: Rockford, IL
Contact:

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby videogamesizzle » Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:30 am UTC

folkhero wrote:Obama trying to cloak this under the veil of national security is a sad, sick joke.
Yeah.
Hey, Obama.
I thought you were pretty cool, what with all your hope and whatnot.
Essentially killing the Internet like this isn't a good thing.
Obama, I am disappoint.
Look at me still talking when there's SCIENCE to do!
Silvyr wrote:I fucking love cocaine. I wish I could buy it somewhere...

User avatar
MiB24601
Posts: 714
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 11:13 pm UTC
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby MiB24601 » Wed Nov 04, 2009 6:00 am UTC

MiB24601 wrote:Not really. To make a valid DMCA notice (i.e. one that the service providers would be necessitated to act upon), you would need to identify yourself as described by 17 U.S.C. § 512(c)(3)(A). Sure, you could give fake information but then the user would respond to the ISP and when the ISP tried to check on the notifier, the jig would be up.

Zorlin wrote:All I saw was that it needed "A physical or electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed."


That's 17 U.S.C. § 512(c)(3)(A)(i). There are five other parts under 17 U.S.C. § 512(c)(3)(A). The big one is 17 U.S.C. § 512(c)(3)(A)(iv), which says that notification must include information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party, such as an address, telephone number, and, if available, an electronic mail address at which the complaining party may be contacted.

You couldn't just use an e-mail account, if the service provider was following the statute exactly and no further.. However, if the service provider decided just to let someone use an e-mail address, then that would be up to them, much like in your youtube example here:

Zorlin wrote:The service providers wouldn't be necessitated to act upon it, but YouTube has taken videos down without the notices being valid before.


You'd hope that youtube would decide to follow the more strenuous notification measure specified under the service provider exception (aka 17 U.S.C. § 512) but if they do just keep letting you use an e-mail address like they apparently did in the above example, then yeah, fake notifications are going to keep happening.
"There's no point being grown-up if you can't be childish sometimes." - The Fourth Doctor, Doctor Who

Philwelch
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:33 am UTC
Location: RIGHT BEHIND YOU

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Philwelch » Wed Nov 04, 2009 6:09 am UTC

videogamesizzle wrote:
folkhero wrote:Obama trying to cloak this under the veil of national security is a sad, sick joke.
Yeah.
Hey, Obama.
I thought you were pretty cool, what with all your hope and whatnot.
Essentially killing the Internet like this isn't a good thing.
Obama, I am disappoint.


Ready for a blast from the past?

Randall Munroe wrote:Please support Barack Obama.

I want, for once, someone I can vote for not because I dislike the other candidate, but because I’m proud of mine. Obama is the real thing.

Obama has shown a real commitment to open government. When putting together tech policy (to take an example close to home for xkcd) others might have gone to industry lobbyists. Obama went to Lawrence Lessig, founder of Creative Commons (under which xkcd is published) and longtime white knight in the struggle with a broken system over internet and copyright policy. Lessig was impressed by Obama’s commitment to open systems — for example, his support of machine-readable government information standards that allow citizens’ groups to monitor what our government is up to. Right now, the only group that can effectively police the government is the government itself, and as a result, it’s corrupt to the core. Through these excellent and long-overdue measures, Obama is working to fight this corruption.

Cite

Where is your gold-plated messiah now?
Fascism: If you're not with us you're against us.
Leftism: If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

Perfection is an unattainable goal.

Bright Shadows
Posts: 645
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 2:56 pm UTC

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Bright Shadows » Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:11 am UTC

Cynical Idealist wrote:
Bright Shadows wrote:('_')
Government oversight of this would not be the only thing sucking up money or jobs, should this be enacted and followed through in a measurable way on. It would be a real damper for P2P services of all sorts, and those are kind of a big deal.

Yes, P2P is kind of a big deal, but...you didn't link any sites really connected with P2P.

<_<
Misuse of the term. My bad.
All of them are essentially based around people communicating, sharing files of varying sorts, and so on amongst themselves. All of them also happen to be very hard to comb through effectively to find copyrighted materials, let alone find out who put them there. Wiki especially. Anyway, the sharing of files from a non-centralized distributor tripped me up there.

Actual P2P stuff would be rather in a tight spot too, though.
Image

User avatar
folkhero
Posts: 1775
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:34 am UTC

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby folkhero » Wed Nov 04, 2009 9:11 am UTC

Philwelch wrote:Where is your gold-plated messiah now?

When I was reading the article, my mind did think back to the Randall endorsement, thinking it was a tad ironic. I didn't remember his justification for supporting Obama, that was just delicious.
To all law enforcement entities, this is not an admission of guilt...

User avatar
netcrusher88
Posts: 2166
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:35 pm UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby netcrusher88 » Wed Nov 04, 2009 9:44 am UTC

Because there have been no attempts to make government data more available and usable, right? And no provision in the largest economic stimulus package in history to provide data about how it is being spent and accountability for it? (Contrast TARP, another massively expensive economic package of a sort that had absolutely no accountability or tracking built-in and was originated by the previous administration.) And certainly not a well-formatted, easily viewable or usable breakdown of where standard budget funds go.

ACTA and its bizarre (or is this actually at all unusual for international negotiations?) secrecy predates the Obama administration by well over a year. I don't like it and I do feel somewhat betrayed by the continuance of the secrecy around it, but give credit where credit is due - there remains no irony in voting for Obama in part because of a promise of open government, because that's been at least in part kept.
Sexothermic
I have only ever made one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it. -Voltaire
They said we would never have a black president until Swine Flu. -Gears

Philwelch
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:33 am UTC
Location: RIGHT BEHIND YOU

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Philwelch » Wed Nov 04, 2009 10:05 am UTC

Yes, because it's "open government" for your administration to keep these provisions secret due to "national security", and the now-revealed provisions totally live up to what we'd expect from a candidate who "went to Lawrence Lessig, founder of Creative Commons (under which xkcd is published) and longtime white knight in the struggle with a broken system over internet and copyright policy".
Fascism: If you're not with us you're against us.
Leftism: If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

Perfection is an unattainable goal.

User avatar
Darkscull
Posts: 798
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:46 am UTC
Location: Now where I want to be

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Darkscull » Wed Nov 04, 2009 12:41 pm UTC

It's not perfect, but in general this administration is better than the previous one, and better than the opposition would be.
That isn't to say stop complaining, because they will always need kicks in the arse to push them to do better, but the lack of some improvements doesn't negate the other improvements that have been made.

I wonder how many people who have been disappointed in various ways by the Obama administration will punish them by voting for the undoubtedly worse* opposition.
Because that's really productive.



*as in, if open government is important to you, the republicans aren't going to do better. That's the same with a lot of things and incontrovertible (whether or not those things are important/necessary is the opinion bit).
Physicists do it in an excited state.
m/bi/UK/Ⓐ/chaotic good
b. 1988 d. 20xx

Philwelch
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:33 am UTC
Location: RIGHT BEHIND YOU

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Philwelch » Wed Nov 04, 2009 1:07 pm UTC

The entire promise of Obama is that he's positively good, not just the lesser of two evils. He promised hope and change. He promised he would be different.

If it was merely John Kerry or Hillary Clinton pulling this shit, it would be equally outrageous but not as much of a betrayal. From Obama, this is a stab in the back. We didn't think we were electing just another politician, but that's what we ended up with. Obama held himself to a higher standard and failed to meet it.
Fascism: If you're not with us you're against us.
Leftism: If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

Perfection is an unattainable goal.

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Heisenberg » Wed Nov 04, 2009 1:20 pm UTC

Darkscull wrote:It's not perfect, but in general this administration is better than the previous one, and better than the opposition would be.

How many times am I going to be asked to accept flowers that smell like cat urine because the previous flowers smelled like shit? Sigh.

I'm disheartened by the fact that according to Geist, the US proposed these measures. But doesn't the Senate have to ratify any treaty? Not that they have any idea what the internet is, but it would make me feel better if we can fire anyone who votes for this bullshit.

Philwelch
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 5:33 am UTC
Location: RIGHT BEHIND YOU

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Philwelch » Wed Nov 04, 2009 1:23 pm UTC

Heisenberg wrote:
Darkscull wrote:It's not perfect, but in general this administration is better than the previous one, and better than the opposition would be.

How many times am I going to be asked to accept flowers that smell like cat urine because the previous flowers smelled like shit? Sigh.

I'm disheartened by the fact that according to Geist, the US proposed these measures. But doesn't the Senate have to ratify any treaty? Not that they have any idea what the internet is, but it would make me feel better if we can fire anyone who votes for this bullshit.


We can fire anyone who votes for this bullshit? Ha! I sure hope your Senator will have better opposition than mine do, because our President sure won't.
Fascism: If you're not with us you're against us.
Leftism: If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem.

Perfection is an unattainable goal.

User avatar
Darkscull
Posts: 798
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:46 am UTC
Location: Now where I want to be

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Darkscull » Wed Nov 04, 2009 1:34 pm UTC

Heisenberg wrote:
Darkscull wrote:It's not perfect, but in general this administration is better than the previous one, and better than the opposition would be.

How many times am I going to be asked to accept flowers that smell like cat urine because the previous flowers smelled like shit? Sigh.


When all the other flowers stab you in the face with their stabby stabby thorns, and you have to have flowers, then take the cat piss ones and start working on trying to improve that variant of flower until it smells like good government.
Physicists do it in an excited state.
m/bi/UK/Ⓐ/chaotic good
b. 1988 d. 20xx

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Diadem » Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:47 pm UTC

I think it has become clear and undeniable now: Obama is evil. We thought he would be an improvement over Bush. We thought he would restore democracy. But it is clear now that only his rhetoric is different. His policies are indistinguishable.

America is well and truly fucked. The world is well and truly fucked.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby The Reaper » Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:11 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:I think it has become clear and undeniable now: Obama is evil.

told ya so.

User avatar
Hawknc
Oompa Loompa of SCIENCE!
Posts: 6986
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:14 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Hawknc » Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:21 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:I think it has become clear and undeniable now: Obama is evil. We thought he would be an improvement over Bush. We thought he would restore democracy. But it is clear now that only his rhetoric is different. His policies are indistinguishable.

America is well and truly fucked. The world is well and truly fucked.

Ordinarily I'd stay out of this, but this here bothers me. Shades of grey, people, shades of grey. You built Obama into the Messiah last year, nobody's going to live up to those expectations. All politicians have to make compromises to get things done and none are going to live up to every campaign promise. I mean yeah, you should always expect them to do better, but c'mon, evil? Seriously? Don't you think that's just a wee bit over the top?


Alternatively your entire post could have been sarcastic, in which case I retract the above and demand sarcasm tags for this forum.
ImageImageImageImageImage

User avatar
Velict
Posts: 609
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:07 pm UTC
Location: Icecrown Citadel

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Velict » Wed Nov 04, 2009 4:58 pm UTC

Darkscull wrote:It's not perfect, but in general this administration is better than the previous one, and better than the opposition would be.
That isn't to say stop complaining, because they will always need kicks in the arse to push them to do better, but the lack of some improvements doesn't negate the other improvements that have been made.

I wonder how many people who have been disappointed in various ways by the Obama administration will punish them by voting for the undoubtedly worse* opposition.
Because that's really productive.



*as in, if open government is important to you, the republicans aren't going to do better. That's the same with a lot of things and incontrovertible (whether or not those things are important/necessary is the opinion bit).


Continued support of Obama is implicit acceptance of his policies. There's really no way around this truth, regardless of whether or not "the opposition" would be worse. Vote for a third party, form a third party, or simply publicly protest Obama's policies.

User avatar
setzer777
Good questions sometimes get stupid answers
Posts: 2762
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 9:24 am UTC

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby setzer777 » Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:27 pm UTC

Velict wrote:
Darkscull wrote:It's not perfect, but in general this administration is better than the previous one, and better than the opposition would be.
That isn't to say stop complaining, because they will always need kicks in the arse to push them to do better, but the lack of some improvements doesn't negate the other improvements that have been made.

I wonder how many people who have been disappointed in various ways by the Obama administration will punish them by voting for the undoubtedly worse* opposition.
Because that's really productive.



*as in, if open government is important to you, the republicans aren't going to do better. That's the same with a lot of things and incontrovertible (whether or not those things are important/necessary is the opinion bit).


Continued support of Obama is implicit acceptance of his policies. There's really no way around this truth, regardless of whether or not "the opposition" would be worse. Vote for a third party, form a third party, or simply publicly protest Obama's policies.


Well, it's accepting that (to the person voting for him) the lump of all of his policies is preferable to the lump of all the policies of his opposition in the two-party system that *will* win if he doesn't (and that this isn't offset by whatever advantages voting for a third-party would have).
Meaux_Pas wrote:We're here to go above and beyond.

Too infinity
of being an arsehole

User avatar
Ixtellor
There are like 4 posters on XKCD that no more about ...
Posts: 3112
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 3:31 pm UTC

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Ixtellor » Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:47 pm UTC

The Sky is falling!!!!!

Declaring the death of the internet on one leaked piece of paper?

Whats with the over-the-top, doomsday, hysterical, dramaqueen reactions?

You (you know who you are) sound exactly like the anti-gay marriage crowd. "Its the end of civilization!!!"

Maybe if you come back to reality for a bit, you might make a more rational prediction.

Here is my prediction: You don't notice any difference in the internet aside from maybe not being able to 2-click illegally download copywritten material. It might take you having to search for the new Ugandian website of the day where to find your illegal downloads.
Or worst case scenario -- You might have to actually pay for digital copies of copywritten materials. The horror, the horror


Ixtellor

P.S. "ARGH they passed the Matthew Shepard act, we are all doomed!!! Doomed I say!!! The horror!!! "

P.P.S. Lets all put on our big boy pants and act like rational adults now.
The Revolution will not be Twitterized.

User avatar
Sockmonkey
Posts: 1214
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 11:30 pm UTC

Re: Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

Postby Sockmonkey » Wed Nov 04, 2009 6:49 pm UTC

The problem with it isn't losing our illegal downloads. It's that it will put a stranglehold on the creativity of all the little guys.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bbluewi, eran_rathan, Gwydion, Yahoo [Bot], Zamfir and 21 guests