13 ms·

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

588 points by Flemlord 17y ago

petercooper 17y ago
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 Is there a confusion between an ISP and a Web site here? I've never heard the term "ISP" applied to companies that just run Web sites.
ErrantX 17y ago
This is a better article: http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4510/125/ http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4510/125/
tsally 17y ago
To: The profit mongering companies with lobbyists and idiotic politicians who cause legislation like this to be created. We'd like our internet back now. Sincerely, The Compter Scientists, the group of people who invented the internet.
- amichail 17y ago
  What effect would this have on the US economy?
- blintson 17y ago
  Bitching about it accomplishes nothing. I doubt there's anybody here who thinks this is a good thing, and even if there were, that sort of language persuades nobody. The smart thing to do is to write your congressman, and get people together to protest. Anybody here have any experience with politics and know what we could do to stop this?
  - tumult 17y ago
    Protesting does nothing. edit: I'm specifically talking about in-the-streets-marches kind of thing.
    - blintson 17y ago
      Then what? It's better than complaining on a website where everybody agrees with you. I'm going to do something. We've got to do something. The situation's bad enough as it is.
      - tumult 17y ago
        I don't know. We're probably fucked. If you believe you can stop this by writing to your congressperson or protesting: why do you think this is being done in secrecy? Obviously, they are fully aware nobody is going to like it. It will be enacted regardless. That being said, I would still like to do as much as I can to prevent it, or in the case that it's enacted, circumvent it or corrupt it to the point of uselessness. At this stage, I don't think there's much we can do just yet. We also can't be sure this report is accurate.
      - daeken 17y ago
        We find a silly case under this law that would've been legal previously, then get a few hundred thousand (or more) people to download it, willingly putting the content up in violation all at once. Civil disobedience isn't the best choice necessarily, but it can work quite well in situations like this.
        tumult 17y ago
        Why hasn't this worked for the DMCA?
        daeken 17y ago
        Little organization. There haven't been any well organized attacks on the DMCA, which is necessary for it to work.
      - pg 17y ago
        I agree with you. If the entire tech community was up in arms about this (assuming the treaty is really as bad as this article says), I think politicians would notice. They are not all in the pay of the movie business. The more neutral ones might wake up if it appeared the treaty was going to do net damage to the US economy.
  - aohtsab 17y ago
    You are right: bitching does nothing, yet writing our representatives is almost as bad. I interned for a certain senator a while back—all the letters that people sent in were recorded as tallies in a system, and the responses were typed up by office staff. By the way: most of the letters which were sent in were spam—the same letter with different signatures.
    - tumult 17y ago
      I don't actually see anything wrong with that. The problem is that they don't seem to do anything with the numbers they gather.
      - aohtsab 17y ago
        Very true. From what I understood, the data was nothing more than something for the senator to chew on.
    - danek 17y ago
      so there's no point in ever crafting a nice letter? good to know.
    - dkokelley 17y ago
      I think calling might be considered more effective. It shows that you are willing to invest enough time and actually make your concerns heard. I think they might weight calls like TV networks. Your 1 call counts as 1,000 people who wouldn't care to call. Of course the most effective thing to do would be to befriend your congressman personally. On a larger scale, organizing a sort of free internet seal of approval for all representatives could be even more powerful. If representatives know that voters would be more likely to vote for candidates with the seal of approval, then they might be persuaded to earn that seal.
    - JoeAltmaier 17y ago
      Spam? My signature is valuable, even if attached to a petition. Shame on you.
    - ascuttlefish 17y ago
- pg 17y ago
  The problem is not companies that are "profit mongering" (whatever that means). It's companies with obsolete business models that are willing to destroy the more dynamic parts of the economy in their fall.
  - amichail 17y ago
    But won't much stronger copyright enforcement allow these companies to survive?
    - tumult 17y ago
      Temporarily, it will allow certain parts of these established corporations to continue with their current model and still have some sort of revenue. Eventually, they will die. Whether or not something like ACTA will prolong or hasten their death (due to backlash) I'm unsure.
    - pg 17y ago
      History doesn't offer much encouragement. New technology is often opposed by existing interests that are threatened by it, but I can't think of a lot of examples where they've succeeded in holding it back for a significant time.
      - billswift 17y ago
        Japan retreated from the gun (and the outside world) for several centuries. Without an outside world to break in, they might still be there.
        johnaspden 17y ago
        And China put the brakes on all innovation.
        deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
        17y ago
- blhack 17y ago
  To: The profit mongering companies I believe the preferred nomenclature is "profiteering gluttons".
  - derwiki 17y ago
    someone's been watching 'Hackers'
    - blhack 17y ago
      Haha I did "The Hacker's Manifesto" for a speech contest in high school...it was just funny and a bit painful when that movie came out.
    - guitarjunkie 17y ago
      and the big lebowski
- stse 17y ago
  To: The Compter Scientists, the group of people who invented the internet. Hey, maybe you could invent some technology which actually provides some privacy and security instead of all this 80's tech? Sincerely, The Users, the group of people who use the Internet on a daily basis.
  - tsally 17y ago
    Everything needed to achieve a high level of security and privacy on the internet has already been invented. If you're looking for a reason why reality doesn't reflect this, you'll have to look at some other force besides the researchers.
    - stse 17y ago
      I'm glad to hear all solutions has been found. Still, last time I checked researchers actually had a lot of influence on the evolution of the Internet. Edit: What I'm really saying is that if there would have been an implemented, 'universal', solution that takes civil liberties into the digital world, then it would be much harder to take these liberties away. I really don't think most politicians understand neither technology nor the fact that they are in effect infringing civil liberties like anonymity protection, freedom of expression and secrecy of letters. Who's to blame for this? Probably no one and everyone, still sad to see though.
      - tsally 17y ago
        Still, last time I checked researchers actually had a lot of influence on the evolution of the Internet. The last time you checked must have been in the 80s then. If researchers still controlled the development of the internet, would we be having a debate about net neutrality? Politically I agree with you, but you vastly overestimate the power of researchers.
        stse 17y ago
        Maybe I should put my location (Sweden) in my profile and hopefully it's just the cultural differences that make you come across as arrogant. I do think there are some organization (ISOC, "IETF", IAB) who might not share your opinion and I guess the last time I checked was back in 2005 when DNSSEC was first implemented for the .se TLD.
olefoo 17y ago
The mechanism is wide open for abuse. If this regime comes to pass, I would expect different groups to be issuing bogus takedown notices against competitors... Imagine if PETA activists started nailing the public IP's of meatpacking companies with allegations of copyright infringement... or imagine that you're in the middle of a complex court fight and your law firm, and most of your lawyers home and mobile ips are shut down in a coordinated attack...
- derwiki 17y ago
  I had a conversation similar to this topic with a friend this weekend, but about net neutrality. I contended that certain restrictions put on the internet would be so obtuse that there is no way they could be enforced -- this seems like one of them. I'm not sure PETA would do that, because they're a legitimate organization that could have action taken against them. But that's an interesting point: if every IP address was reported, how do they enforce or verify it? Personally, they can pry my internet from my cold dead hands.
  - regularfry 17y ago
    PETA may be a legitimate organisation, but the people involved may well have friends who perform actions which, while it is obviously impossible to condone them, your honour, do support their cause.
- dschobel 17y ago
  Right but the take down notices would require that you own some IP to allege infringement upon and have the resources to actually produce a non-frivolous legal missive. I really doubt this is going to be some grand populist legal tool.
  - olefoo 17y ago
    I think you missed the part where the takedown happens without the need to prove anything. And it's easy enough to gin up something. Also most activist groups generate a fair amount of media content. Content which is likely to be monitored by the people most likely to be in their sights. And if someone mildly technically knowledgable gets involved you could really cause trouble. Imagine the havoc that could be wreaked by AT&T disconnecting Verizon. Or shutting down Dreamhost. Instant disconnection on accusal is a recipe for stupid things. Hell, someone would probably set up a linkbait news posting to a webpage that they claim is protected ip and have a script issue automatic disconnect requests to everyone who views the target page.
aohtsab 17y ago
Here's Wikileaks' coverage: http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Proposed_US_ACTA_multi-lateral_intellectual_property_trade_agreement_%282007%29 http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Proposed_US_ACTA_multi-lateral_int... Maybe it's worth toying with the idea of setting up a private ISP—a pre-emptive underground? This situation is absolutely ridiculous.
- iheartmemcache 17y ago
  As I understand it, you'd still have to buy transfer from a tier 1 provider, who'd cut you at the first sign of pressure from the federal government. Logistically, how would one go about doing this?
  - tumult 17y ago
    You could start another internet. Wouldn't be very useful at the beginning, though.
    - stse 17y ago
      I don't think you guys get that this law affects how you provide access to a communications network. It doesn't matter if you have your own service provider or network, you are still going to have to comply with the laws. The entire point of this treaty is to hold the provider accountable for how people use their services.
      - vorador 17y ago
        Well, what if this new network has no notion of provider ? I mean, would it work with a peer-to-peer network ?
        forensic 17y ago
        sure, how are you going to link computers together? the only way that i can see this working is a NCLB improvised device-to-device network, which is actually a great idea that the tech giants are terrified of because they want to keep their proprietary lockdowns on everything
pg 17y ago
If this report is accurate, this treaty would be the biggest threat to the startup business that I've seen. How can we tell if it's accurate?
- CapitalistCartr 17y ago
  The involved governments have refused to disclose to their own citizenry the contents of the treaty they're negotiating "for us". That leaves us with only leaks to work with. This is all the accuracy you get, as long as our governments can get away with such gross abuses.
  - jrockway 17y ago
    It doesn't matter what they negotiate, treaties do not become US law. See, for example, Medellen v. Texas: http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/Medellin.html http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/Mede... "We conclude that neither Avena nor the President’s Memorandum constitutes directly enforceable federal law that pre-empts state limitations on the filing of successive habeas petitions." If they want this to become law in the US, they will have to follow the usual process. If they want criminal sanctions without trials, as the treaty proposes, the Constitution will have to be rewritten. (The fact that enforcing these laws will be technically impossible is another annoying issue.)
    - btilly 17y ago
      It doesn't matter what they negotiate, treaties do not become US law. Your link does not support that claim. What the link says is that some treaties are self-executing. Those are automatically US law. Others are not self-executing, and require legislation to be passed. The ruling is that the Vienna convention is not self-executing, and therefore needs legislation to come into effect. Whether this particular copyright treaty would be self-executing depends on a court ruling on the details of the treaty. Given that lawyers are involved in drawing it up, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see them design it to be self-executing in the USA. As for the Constitution, I'm so used to seeing attempted and actual end runs around it that I wouldn't be confident that it will stop them from enacting the copyright rules they want.
robak 17y ago
Thank you Obama! That's a real change! Great thanks goes also to American Cattle that voted for this communist! Good job! And no worries, Chinese will be an oasis of freedom of speech once Mr. President is done with the US Constitution.
tdonia 17y ago
so, i'm curious, what are the best arguments for this? the reason i ask is that it seems like the rules, as they currently exist, are valid on paper but illegitimate in practice. is it really worth it to extend the illusion of copyright protection to the rest of the planet knowing full well that it's got little hope of succeeding? or is there a way to argue that the system, as it works in the U.S. is a success?
- tumult 17y ago
  Whenever you see legislation that is massively in opposition of common sense and the well-being of a people, just think to yourself, jacuzzi full of money.
  - johnaspden 17y ago
    OK, to rephrase the question, what will the people accepting the jacuzzis full of money use as arguments?
    - tumult 17y ago
      "Sorry, can't hear you, busy soaking in my jacuzzi full of money."
tshtf 17y ago
Last week MI5 in the UK argued against the 3-strikes filesharing laws as they would encourage private citizens to use cryptography better in their filesharing efforts. If this treaty goes through it very well could be the harbinger of the widespread adoption of darknets, better censorship-resistant networks, and even more creative use of cryptography and networking technologies. Rather than trying to affect legislative change (which is a viable strategy too), some may wish to consider disruptive technologies which will render treaties such as this irrelevant.
- dschobel 17y ago
  Excellent point. People have become accustomed to an unfettered flow of media and information. They're not just going to throw their hands up and go back to the pre-napster days of walled media gardens.
  - lucifer 17y ago
    Excuse my (regrettable) cynicism, but people were accustomed to various other things as well and I don't recall their even bothering to throw up their hands in the post 911 Patriot Act regime when they were taken away.
    - jrockway 17y ago
      The things that were taken away were not things most people think they need. Most people assume they will never be suspected of a crime, and they are usually right, so why bother getting upset about "rights"? The internet is different. It's something people use and rely on every day. If encryption is outlawed, there are no more cell-phone networks, online banking, online shopping, credit card transactions, wifi, etc. Most people are not going to be too happy about that. Censoring the Internet or going after file-sharers is also not going to work. IPv4's "keyspace" of unique addresses is too small; as soon as disconnections become legal, bittorrent clients will start forging the UDP source IPs. (Some ISPs have egress filtering, but does every ISP on the entire planet? If not, then anyone can make it look like you are sharing a file anytime they want.) To make this treaty take effect in the US as written, the Constitution will have to be rewritten. Politicians are much too lazy for that, so I am not worried.
dschobel 17y ago
EFF's statement: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/11/leaked-acta-internet-provisions-three-strikes-and- http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/11/leaked-acta-internet-pr...
tocomment 17y ago
Maybe vote it up on Reddit[1], that might spread some awareness, or submit it to Slashdot. [1] http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/a0nnp/secret_copyright_treaty_leaks_its_bad_very_bad/ http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/a0nnp/secret_cop...
- peregrine 17y ago
  I'd also Twitter bomb it. Make it a trending topic so it can show up on CNN. :)
- Splines 17y ago
  This post has more momentum and is getting more attention. http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/a0o98/obama_administrations_suicide_pact_revealed_a/ http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/a0o98/obama_admini...
  - stse 17y ago
    Stupid title, as ACTA predates the Obama administration.
gruseom 17y ago
Cory Doctorow, Michael Geist, and the EFF are three pretty credible sources. Nevertheless, something doesn't feel right about this. My guess is someone's leaking a draft or a proposal in an attempt to influence the negotiations, probably someone who knew it would kick up a shitstorm. As well it should. I'll go out on a limb and predict nothing much comes of this. Edit: after reading more about it, I learned that ACTA is a treaty process that's been going on for years. It's hard to see how something this draconian ever gets ratified in all these countries.
- forensic 17y ago
  This. I don't know who is running the show but obviously this leak has ulterior motives of some kind. The elites are always planning further lock down on their slave populations, it's really just a question of whether the public is sufficiently conditioned to accept it at some particular moment.
ericwaller 17y ago
ISPs have to cut off the Internet access of accused copyright infringers or face liability. DMCA is the new DOS
CulturalNgineer 17y ago
This is hopefully some huge hoax. But if it isn't it should (and deserves to) create and real worldwide firestorm. This cannot stand and they can't possibly be stupid enough to try to make it stand! But beware their "fallback" positions! And the devil is in the details. They may just feel that by putting out such an outrageous proposal they can fall back to a merely disgusting and slimy one.
lucifer 17y ago
Lets organize a network strike: Drop all net activity (specially e-commerce) for a day to send a message that we all have a say in this matter.
chrischen 17y ago
How do they expect to make other countries adopt US-style takedown rules?
CulturalNgineer 17y ago
There are much better solutions to deal with these issues without trying to turn ISP's and Website administrators into the second-string secret police! I know it's a real problem and does deserve attention. But it's one thing if some guy is trying to sell millions of digital copies of the latest Madonna video from some motel in Eastern Europe, but it's quite another if someone uses a few snips of songs in a video he's doing for YouTube! I've experienced PERSONALLY what I would consider a smart approach and a dumb approach on this. I did some 30 second little YouTube videos to promote a thing I'm doing... and in a couple of them I used snippets from a couple of popular songs... I'm fairly naive and didn't think much of it because I wasn't selling the videos, but I was promoting my thing (fortunately very benign so that wasn't an issue)! Though it could be a fair concern... Anyway, to make a long story short... Their YouTube algorithms or whatever found 'em and did their robot "thing"... but here's the interesting surprise! On one (with a clip for a Barbara Streisand song) they just added a little button to the bottom of my video identifying the song with a link for purchase! I was fine with that and so were they!(it was Sony) A smart approach! But for the other, with a great guitar clip from Jeff Beck, they just stripped the audio from my 30 second video... which I suppose was in a way fair... but all that ended up happening is I had a useless video... and they lost an opportunity for some sales... I forgot the publisher on that one... but it was a damn good video! This obviously doesn't cover all issues but the point is that there are much wiser approaches that this abominable plan. But politicians are like very stupid carpenters. They only understand hammers... so everything becomes a nail to be pounded into the ground.
eugenejen 17y ago
I can't help to start a facebook group "Stop Obama Administration to destroy Internet". I see there are a lot of ACTA related groups already formed. All groups should join together if the content is confirmed.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
nzmsv 17y ago
Well, sooner or later the Internet will go the way of radio and TV: megacorps only. Once there's a critical mass of people using a medium who don't really care about it, and just consume what's available, it is only a matter of time. The question is, what comes next. Maybe it's mesh networks, maybe private satellites, maybe something else entirely. Of course, the new network will initially be slow, and for geeks only. Then there will be explosive growth. Then it will be regulated into oblivion. And the cycle will repeat itself.
btilly 17y ago
Thank Biden for this. Seriously, he has been a long time friend of the content industries. Ever since he was nominated I've been looking for something like this to happen.
- regularfry 17y ago
  ACTA has been in negotiation for years. This is nothing new.
  - roc 17y ago
    It's been through six rounds of negotiation (a few days each round) across two years. Not really twisting in bureaucratic hell, the way your emphasis on 'years' paints it. And the fact that all these insane provisions have survived five previous rounds of negotiation certainly shouldn't provide any comfort.
yason 17y ago
I see this as a perfectly logical next step: the demands eventually grow outrageous enough that it's all just begging for a huge backfire. The potential difference between the old fashioned copyright business and the new wave is growing. In order to keep things balanced as the new wave is gaining more energy the old business must expend an equal amount of energy to compensate for this change. That's why when old structures are breaking they first resist until the last straw, and then come down collapsing.
ubernostrum 17y ago
Prediction: the treaty at the moment is deliberately bad in order to provoke outrage and allow parties to the talks to negotiate a "better" compromise. So, say, "three strikes" will get thrown out or, more likely, modified to include an appeal process, and anticircumvention provisions will quietly get ratcheted up as the other side of the "compromise".
- nazgulnarsil 17y ago
  upvoted for political realism rather than the kneejerk reactions that politicans have been taking advantage of for centuries.
chaosprophet 17y ago
Okay, this one reeks of Classic American Arrogance (as in on the part of the Government). You guys can enforce whatever stupid policy you want within your country, but what makes you think you can get all other countries to join with you??? I hardly think you will be able to convince 10 countries to sign that treaty.
- johnaspden 17y ago
  So the freedom of the world now depends on the European Union, which we know is corrupt. Is there any way to buy shares in whatever method media giants use to bribe European politicians?
- pwmanagerdied 17y ago
  You obviously haven't been paying attention, then. Internationally there is a ton of support among governments and industries for measures like this to be taken; the general lack of support among the public hasn't been very relevant.
  - chaosprophet 17y ago
    Yeah, I wasn't reading fully. Frankly I'm stunned that there is this much support, even from Asian countries, whom I thought would not like adopting something as restrictive as this.
- gruseom 17y ago
  The internet, startups, and the values favored by most people in this thread are even more Classic American than the tendencies you deride. The US is complex. The US government is complex. Angry reductionism sheds no light.
ErrantX 17y ago
As I read it this is no longer about Copyright any more; it is about certain government positioning themselves, their lawmakers and their major companies into a situation where they wish to control the internet. This is a bad thing. I am a supporter, generally, of the idea of copyright (it needs a review, sure) but this is just silly...
marze 17y ago
You have to expect it will be bad if they won't even say what is in it because doing so would "threaten national security". They must think everyone is an idiot if they will believe that.
- nazgulnarsil 17y ago
  they'd be right to think that.
tybris 17y ago
This seems like speculation. Also, completely out-of-line with Obama's support of net neutrality and a poorly timed economic disaster.
chunkyslink 17y ago
fuck the US Government ! Screwing it up for the rest of us again. thanks very much
DanielBMarkham 17y ago
I am dubious that such language will appear in any kind of treaty in the future. I'm not calling BoingBoing a liar, but I find it hard to believe that the U.S. is going to pass laws or engage in treaties that destroy some of its greatest companies. Either these provisions are misunderstood, they are proposed amendments that nobody thinks will be in the final language, or they are interpretations by folks looking to sabotage the negotiations. If I had to guess I'd say the latter, but that's just intuition. My call based on one article? Flame bait for nerds. Show me some more sources and we'll see if this develops into something worthy of all the yelling and shouting. Even if this is true -- multi-source, people. It's much too easy for "leaks" to be more manipulative in nature when the internet is one big echo chamber.
raquo 17y ago
I hope this will be on major news channels ASAP.
jrwoodruff 17y ago
I'm a little late to the party here, but a lot of people are obviously angry about this. Skimming the comments, it looks like a lot of 'end-of-the-internet' speculation. Not if we can help it. If you're in the U.S., please write your representatives and let them know how dangerous this is. This is still a country ruled by its people, for its people. Even if this is a hoax, it will let your elected officials know copyright law is a serious issue in their district, and hopefully treat it as such. Find out who your reps and senators are at this link, and write! http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml
Shamiq 17y ago
I think the time is ripe for some creative destruction.
jacoblyles 17y ago
I could imagine this coming from any administration and any congress in my lifetime. Very little has changed no matter how often the parties swapped, and no matter how pretty the speeches were. The content industries continue to be powerful lobbyists, to our detriment. We are constantly relearning the lesson: don't trust politicians. Democracy is a machine for serving concentrated interests at the expense of the general well-being Hopefully our champions will stop this. However, there will be no idealistic debate behind the scenes on the topic of what constitutes the public interests. There will only be politicians silently weighing what is in their own personal interest. As it always has been, and as it always will be.
albemuth 17y ago
I wonder what happens if the 'infringement' occurs over an open wifi network, how can one be made accountable if anyone can use your connection? Even if they enforced it by a hardware fingerprint or something, laptops can be stolen, and who the hell is going to enforce no open wifi networks!? The outrage!
yread 17y ago
I think it's enough of a reason to build community networks. You are just connected to friends over wifi and they are connected to some other friends. As long as it stays distributed enough that would be ok.

588 points by Flemlord 17y ago

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 Is there a confusion between an ISP and a Web site here? I've never heard the term "ISP" applied to companies that just run Web sites.

ErrantX 17y ago

This is a better article: http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4510/125/ http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4510/125/

tsally 17y ago

To: The profit mongering companies with lobbyists and idiotic politicians who cause legislation like this to be created. We'd like our internet back now. Sincerely, The Compter Scientists, the group of people who invented the internet.

amichail 17y ago
What effect would this have on the US economy?
blintson 17y ago
Bitching about it accomplishes nothing. I doubt there's anybody here who thinks this is a good thing, and even if there were, that sort of language persuades nobody. The smart thing to do is to write your congressman, and get people together to protest. Anybody here have any experience with politics and know what we could do to stop this?
- tumult 17y ago
  Protesting does nothing. edit: I'm specifically talking about in-the-streets-marches kind of thing.
  - blintson 17y ago
    Then what? It's better than complaining on a website where everybody agrees with you. I'm going to do something. We've got to do something. The situation's bad enough as it is.
    - tumult 17y ago
      I don't know. We're probably fucked. If you believe you can stop this by writing to your congressperson or protesting: why do you think this is being done in secrecy? Obviously, they are fully aware nobody is going to like it. It will be enacted regardless. That being said, I would still like to do as much as I can to prevent it, or in the case that it's enacted, circumvent it or corrupt it to the point of uselessness. At this stage, I don't think there's much we can do just yet. We also can't be sure this report is accurate.
    - daeken 17y ago
      We find a silly case under this law that would've been legal previously, then get a few hundred thousand (or more) people to download it, willingly putting the content up in violation all at once. Civil disobedience isn't the best choice necessarily, but it can work quite well in situations like this.
      - tumult 17y ago
        Why hasn't this worked for the DMCA?
        daeken 17y ago
        Little organization. There haven't been any well organized attacks on the DMCA, which is necessary for it to work.
    - pg 17y ago
      I agree with you. If the entire tech community was up in arms about this (assuming the treaty is really as bad as this article says), I think politicians would notice. They are not all in the pay of the movie business. The more neutral ones might wake up if it appeared the treaty was going to do net damage to the US economy.
- aohtsab 17y ago
  You are right: bitching does nothing, yet writing our representatives is almost as bad. I interned for a certain senator a while back—all the letters that people sent in were recorded as tallies in a system, and the responses were typed up by office staff. By the way: most of the letters which were sent in were spam—the same letter with different signatures.
  - tumult 17y ago
    I don't actually see anything wrong with that. The problem is that they don't seem to do anything with the numbers they gather.
    - aohtsab 17y ago
      Very true. From what I understood, the data was nothing more than something for the senator to chew on.
  - danek 17y ago
    so there's no point in ever crafting a nice letter? good to know.
  - dkokelley 17y ago
    I think calling might be considered more effective. It shows that you are willing to invest enough time and actually make your concerns heard. I think they might weight calls like TV networks. Your 1 call counts as 1,000 people who wouldn't care to call. Of course the most effective thing to do would be to befriend your congressman personally. On a larger scale, organizing a sort of free internet seal of approval for all representatives could be even more powerful. If representatives know that voters would be more likely to vote for candidates with the seal of approval, then they might be persuaded to earn that seal.
  - JoeAltmaier 17y ago
    Spam? My signature is valuable, even if attached to a petition. Shame on you.
  - ascuttlefish 17y ago
pg 17y ago
The problem is not companies that are "profit mongering" (whatever that means). It's companies with obsolete business models that are willing to destroy the more dynamic parts of the economy in their fall.
- amichail 17y ago
  But won't much stronger copyright enforcement allow these companies to survive?
  - tumult 17y ago
    Temporarily, it will allow certain parts of these established corporations to continue with their current model and still have some sort of revenue. Eventually, they will die. Whether or not something like ACTA will prolong or hasten their death (due to backlash) I'm unsure.
  - pg 17y ago
    History doesn't offer much encouragement. New technology is often opposed by existing interests that are threatened by it, but I can't think of a lot of examples where they've succeeded in holding it back for a significant time.
    - billswift 17y ago
      Japan retreated from the gun (and the outside world) for several centuries. Without an outside world to break in, they might still be there.
      - johnaspden 17y ago
        And China put the brakes on all innovation.
        deleted 17y ago
        [deleted]
        17y ago
blhack 17y ago
To: The profit mongering companies I believe the preferred nomenclature is "profiteering gluttons".
- derwiki 17y ago
  someone's been watching 'Hackers'
  - blhack 17y ago
    Haha I did "The Hacker's Manifesto" for a speech contest in high school...it was just funny and a bit painful when that movie came out.
  - guitarjunkie 17y ago
    and the big lebowski
stse 17y ago
To: The Compter Scientists, the group of people who invented the internet. Hey, maybe you could invent some technology which actually provides some privacy and security instead of all this 80's tech? Sincerely, The Users, the group of people who use the Internet on a daily basis.
- tsally 17y ago
  Everything needed to achieve a high level of security and privacy on the internet has already been invented. If you're looking for a reason why reality doesn't reflect this, you'll have to look at some other force besides the researchers.
  - stse 17y ago
    I'm glad to hear all solutions has been found. Still, last time I checked researchers actually had a lot of influence on the evolution of the Internet. Edit: What I'm really saying is that if there would have been an implemented, 'universal', solution that takes civil liberties into the digital world, then it would be much harder to take these liberties away. I really don't think most politicians understand neither technology nor the fact that they are in effect infringing civil liberties like anonymity protection, freedom of expression and secrecy of letters. Who's to blame for this? Probably no one and everyone, still sad to see though.
    - tsally 17y ago
      Still, last time I checked researchers actually had a lot of influence on the evolution of the Internet. The last time you checked must have been in the 80s then. If researchers still controlled the development of the internet, would we be having a debate about net neutrality? Politically I agree with you, but you vastly overestimate the power of researchers.
      - stse 17y ago
        Maybe I should put my location (Sweden) in my profile and hopefully it's just the cultural differences that make you come across as arrogant. I do think there are some organization (ISOC, "IETF", IAB) who might not share your opinion and I guess the last time I checked was back in 2005 when DNSSEC was first implemented for the .se TLD.

olefoo 17y ago

The mechanism is wide open for abuse. If this regime comes to pass, I would expect different groups to be issuing bogus takedown notices against competitors... Imagine if PETA activists started nailing the public IP's of meatpacking companies with allegations of copyright infringement... or imagine that you're in the middle of a complex court fight and your law firm, and most of your lawyers home and mobile ips are shut down in a coordinated attack...

derwiki 17y ago
I had a conversation similar to this topic with a friend this weekend, but about net neutrality. I contended that certain restrictions put on the internet would be so obtuse that there is no way they could be enforced -- this seems like one of them. I'm not sure PETA would do that, because they're a legitimate organization that could have action taken against them. But that's an interesting point: if every IP address was reported, how do they enforce or verify it? Personally, they can pry my internet from my cold dead hands.
- regularfry 17y ago
  PETA may be a legitimate organisation, but the people involved may well have friends who perform actions which, while it is obviously impossible to condone them, your honour, do support their cause.
dschobel 17y ago
Right but the take down notices would require that you own some IP to allege infringement upon and have the resources to actually produce a non-frivolous legal missive. I really doubt this is going to be some grand populist legal tool.
- olefoo 17y ago
  I think you missed the part where the takedown happens without the need to prove anything. And it's easy enough to gin up something. Also most activist groups generate a fair amount of media content. Content which is likely to be monitored by the people most likely to be in their sights. And if someone mildly technically knowledgable gets involved you could really cause trouble. Imagine the havoc that could be wreaked by AT&T disconnecting Verizon. Or shutting down Dreamhost. Instant disconnection on accusal is a recipe for stupid things. Hell, someone would probably set up a linkbait news posting to a webpage that they claim is protected ip and have a script issue automatic disconnect requests to everyone who views the target page.

aohtsab 17y ago

Here's Wikileaks' coverage: http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Proposed_US_ACTA_multi-lateral_intellectual_property_trade_agreement_%282007%29 http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Proposed_US_ACTA_multi-lateral_int... Maybe it's worth toying with the idea of setting up a private ISP—a pre-emptive underground? This situation is absolutely ridiculous.

iheartmemcache 17y ago
As I understand it, you'd still have to buy transfer from a tier 1 provider, who'd cut you at the first sign of pressure from the federal government. Logistically, how would one go about doing this?
- tumult 17y ago
  You could start another internet. Wouldn't be very useful at the beginning, though.
  - stse 17y ago
    I don't think you guys get that this law affects how you provide access to a communications network. It doesn't matter if you have your own service provider or network, you are still going to have to comply with the laws. The entire point of this treaty is to hold the provider accountable for how people use their services.
    - vorador 17y ago
      Well, what if this new network has no notion of provider ? I mean, would it work with a peer-to-peer network ?
      - forensic 17y ago
        sure, how are you going to link computers together? the only way that i can see this working is a NCLB improvised device-to-device network, which is actually a great idea that the tech giants are terrified of because they want to keep their proprietary lockdowns on everything

pg 17y ago

If this report is accurate, this treaty would be the biggest threat to the startup business that I've seen. How can we tell if it's accurate?

CapitalistCartr 17y ago
The involved governments have refused to disclose to their own citizenry the contents of the treaty they're negotiating "for us". That leaves us with only leaks to work with. This is all the accuracy you get, as long as our governments can get away with such gross abuses.
- jrockway 17y ago
  It doesn't matter what they negotiate, treaties do not become US law. See, for example, Medellen v. Texas: http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/Medellin.html http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/Mede... "We conclude that neither Avena nor the President’s Memorandum constitutes directly enforceable federal law that pre-empts state limitations on the filing of successive habeas petitions." If they want this to become law in the US, they will have to follow the usual process. If they want criminal sanctions without trials, as the treaty proposes, the Constitution will have to be rewritten. (The fact that enforcing these laws will be technically impossible is another annoying issue.)
  - btilly 17y ago
    It doesn't matter what they negotiate, treaties do not become US law. Your link does not support that claim. What the link says is that some treaties are self-executing. Those are automatically US law. Others are not self-executing, and require legislation to be passed. The ruling is that the Vienna convention is not self-executing, and therefore needs legislation to come into effect. Whether this particular copyright treaty would be self-executing depends on a court ruling on the details of the treaty. Given that lawyers are involved in drawing it up, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see them design it to be self-executing in the USA. As for the Constitution, I'm so used to seeing attempted and actual end runs around it that I wouldn't be confident that it will stop them from enacting the copyright rules they want.

robak 17y ago

Thank you Obama! That's a real change! Great thanks goes also to American Cattle that voted for this communist! Good job! And no worries, Chinese will be an oasis of freedom of speech once Mr. President is done with the US Constitution.

tdonia 17y ago

so, i'm curious, what are the best arguments for this? the reason i ask is that it seems like the rules, as they currently exist, are valid on paper but illegitimate in practice. is it really worth it to extend the illusion of copyright protection to the rest of the planet knowing full well that it's got little hope of succeeding? or is there a way to argue that the system, as it works in the U.S. is a success?

tumult 17y ago
Whenever you see legislation that is massively in opposition of common sense and the well-being of a people, just think to yourself, jacuzzi full of money.
- johnaspden 17y ago
  OK, to rephrase the question, what will the people accepting the jacuzzis full of money use as arguments?
  - tumult 17y ago
    "Sorry, can't hear you, busy soaking in my jacuzzi full of money."

tshtf 17y ago

Last week MI5 in the UK argued against the 3-strikes filesharing laws as they would encourage private citizens to use cryptography better in their filesharing efforts. If this treaty goes through it very well could be the harbinger of the widespread adoption of darknets, better censorship-resistant networks, and even more creative use of cryptography and networking technologies. Rather than trying to affect legislative change (which is a viable strategy too), some may wish to consider disruptive technologies which will render treaties such as this irrelevant.

dschobel 17y ago
Excellent point. People have become accustomed to an unfettered flow of media and information. They're not just going to throw their hands up and go back to the pre-napster days of walled media gardens.
- lucifer 17y ago
  Excuse my (regrettable) cynicism, but people were accustomed to various other things as well and I don't recall their even bothering to throw up their hands in the post 911 Patriot Act regime when they were taken away.
  - jrockway 17y ago
    The things that were taken away were not things most people think they need. Most people assume they will never be suspected of a crime, and they are usually right, so why bother getting upset about "rights"? The internet is different. It's something people use and rely on every day. If encryption is outlawed, there are no more cell-phone networks, online banking, online shopping, credit card transactions, wifi, etc. Most people are not going to be too happy about that. Censoring the Internet or going after file-sharers is also not going to work. IPv4's "keyspace" of unique addresses is too small; as soon as disconnections become legal, bittorrent clients will start forging the UDP source IPs. (Some ISPs have egress filtering, but does every ISP on the entire planet? If not, then anyone can make it look like you are sharing a file anytime they want.) To make this treaty take effect in the US as written, the Constitution will have to be rewritten. Politicians are much too lazy for that, so I am not worried.

dschobel 17y ago

EFF's statement: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/11/leaked-acta-internet-provisions-three-strikes-and- http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/11/leaked-acta-internet-pr...

tocomment 17y ago

Maybe vote it up on Reddit[1], that might spread some awareness, or submit it to Slashdot. [1] http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/a0nnp/secret_copyright_treaty_leaks_its_bad_very_bad/ http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/a0nnp/secret_cop...

peregrine 17y ago
I'd also Twitter bomb it. Make it a trending topic so it can show up on CNN. :)
Splines 17y ago
This post has more momentum and is getting more attention. http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/a0o98/obama_administrations_suicide_pact_revealed_a/ http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/a0o98/obama_admini...
- stse 17y ago
  Stupid title, as ACTA predates the Obama administration.

gruseom 17y ago

Cory Doctorow, Michael Geist, and the EFF are three pretty credible sources. Nevertheless, something doesn't feel right about this. My guess is someone's leaking a draft or a proposal in an attempt to influence the negotiations, probably someone who knew it would kick up a shitstorm. As well it should. I'll go out on a limb and predict nothing much comes of this. Edit: after reading more about it, I learned that ACTA is a treaty process that's been going on for years. It's hard to see how something this draconian ever gets ratified in all these countries.

forensic 17y ago
This. I don't know who is running the show but obviously this leak has ulterior motives of some kind. The elites are always planning further lock down on their slave populations, it's really just a question of whether the public is sufficiently conditioned to accept it at some particular moment.

ericwaller 17y ago

ISPs have to cut off the Internet access of accused copyright infringers or face liability. DMCA is the new DOS

CulturalNgineer 17y ago

This is hopefully some huge hoax. But if it isn't it should (and deserves to) create and real worldwide firestorm. This cannot stand and they can't possibly be stupid enough to try to make it stand! But beware their "fallback" positions! And the devil is in the details. They may just feel that by putting out such an outrageous proposal they can fall back to a merely disgusting and slimy one.

lucifer 17y ago

Lets organize a network strike: Drop all net activity (specially e-commerce) for a day to send a message that we all have a say in this matter.

chrischen 17y ago

How do they expect to make other countries adopt US-style takedown rules?

CulturalNgineer 17y ago

There are much better solutions to deal with these issues without trying to turn ISP's and Website administrators into the second-string secret police! I know it's a real problem and does deserve attention. But it's one thing if some guy is trying to sell millions of digital copies of the latest Madonna video from some motel in Eastern Europe, but it's quite another if someone uses a few snips of songs in a video he's doing for YouTube! I've experienced PERSONALLY what I would consider a smart approach and a dumb approach on this. I did some 30 second little YouTube videos to promote a thing I'm doing... and in a couple of them I used snippets from a couple of popular songs... I'm fairly naive and didn't think much of it because I wasn't selling the videos, but I was promoting my thing (fortunately very benign so that wasn't an issue)! Though it could be a fair concern... Anyway, to make a long story short... Their YouTube algorithms or whatever found 'em and did their robot "thing"... but here's the interesting surprise! On one (with a clip for a Barbara Streisand song) they just added a little button to the bottom of my video identifying the song with a link for purchase! I was fine with that and so were they!(it was Sony) A smart approach! But for the other, with a great guitar clip from Jeff Beck, they just stripped the audio from my 30 second video... which I suppose was in a way fair... but all that ended up happening is I had a useless video... and they lost an opportunity for some sales... I forgot the publisher on that one... but it was a damn good video! This obviously doesn't cover all issues but the point is that there are much wiser approaches that this abominable plan. But politicians are like very stupid carpenters. They only understand hammers... so everything becomes a nail to be pounded into the ground.

eugenejen 17y ago

I can't help to start a facebook group "Stop Obama Administration to destroy Internet". I see there are a lot of ACTA related groups already formed. All groups should join together if the content is confirmed.

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

nzmsv 17y ago

Well, sooner or later the Internet will go the way of radio and TV: megacorps only. Once there's a critical mass of people using a medium who don't really care about it, and just consume what's available, it is only a matter of time. The question is, what comes next. Maybe it's mesh networks, maybe private satellites, maybe something else entirely. Of course, the new network will initially be slow, and for geeks only. Then there will be explosive growth. Then it will be regulated into oblivion. And the cycle will repeat itself.

btilly 17y ago

Thank Biden for this. Seriously, he has been a long time friend of the content industries. Ever since he was nominated I've been looking for something like this to happen.

regularfry 17y ago
ACTA has been in negotiation for years. This is nothing new.
- roc 17y ago
  It's been through six rounds of negotiation (a few days each round) across two years. Not really twisting in bureaucratic hell, the way your emphasis on 'years' paints it. And the fact that all these insane provisions have survived five previous rounds of negotiation certainly shouldn't provide any comfort.

yason 17y ago

I see this as a perfectly logical next step: the demands eventually grow outrageous enough that it's all just begging for a huge backfire. The potential difference between the old fashioned copyright business and the new wave is growing. In order to keep things balanced as the new wave is gaining more energy the old business must expend an equal amount of energy to compensate for this change. That's why when old structures are breaking they first resist until the last straw, and then come down collapsing.

ubernostrum 17y ago

Prediction: the treaty at the moment is deliberately bad in order to provoke outrage and allow parties to the talks to negotiate a "better" compromise. So, say, "three strikes" will get thrown out or, more likely, modified to include an appeal process, and anticircumvention provisions will quietly get ratcheted up as the other side of the "compromise".

nazgulnarsil 17y ago
upvoted for political realism rather than the kneejerk reactions that politicans have been taking advantage of for centuries.

chaosprophet 17y ago

Okay, this one reeks of Classic American Arrogance (as in on the part of the Government). You guys can enforce whatever stupid policy you want within your country, but what makes you think you can get all other countries to join with you??? I hardly think you will be able to convince 10 countries to sign that treaty.

johnaspden 17y ago
So the freedom of the world now depends on the European Union, which we know is corrupt. Is there any way to buy shares in whatever method media giants use to bribe European politicians?
pwmanagerdied 17y ago
You obviously haven't been paying attention, then. Internationally there is a ton of support among governments and industries for measures like this to be taken; the general lack of support among the public hasn't been very relevant.
- chaosprophet 17y ago
  Yeah, I wasn't reading fully. Frankly I'm stunned that there is this much support, even from Asian countries, whom I thought would not like adopting something as restrictive as this.
gruseom 17y ago
The internet, startups, and the values favored by most people in this thread are even more Classic American than the tendencies you deride. The US is complex. The US government is complex. Angry reductionism sheds no light.

ErrantX 17y ago

As I read it this is no longer about Copyright any more; it is about certain government positioning themselves, their lawmakers and their major companies into a situation where they wish to control the internet. This is a bad thing. I am a supporter, generally, of the idea of copyright (it needs a review, sure) but this is just silly...

marze 17y ago

You have to expect it will be bad if they won't even say what is in it because doing so would "threaten national security". They must think everyone is an idiot if they will believe that.

nazgulnarsil 17y ago
they'd be right to think that.

tybris 17y ago

This seems like speculation. Also, completely out-of-line with Obama's support of net neutrality and a poorly timed economic disaster.

chunkyslink 17y ago

fuck the US Government ! Screwing it up for the rest of us again. thanks very much

DanielBMarkham 17y ago

I am dubious that such language will appear in any kind of treaty in the future. I'm not calling BoingBoing a liar, but I find it hard to believe that the U.S. is going to pass laws or engage in treaties that destroy some of its greatest companies. Either these provisions are misunderstood, they are proposed amendments that nobody thinks will be in the final language, or they are interpretations by folks looking to sabotage the negotiations. If I had to guess I'd say the latter, but that's just intuition. My call based on one article? Flame bait for nerds. Show me some more sources and we'll see if this develops into something worthy of all the yelling and shouting. Even if this is true -- multi-source, people. It's much too easy for "leaks" to be more manipulative in nature when the internet is one big echo chamber.

raquo 17y ago

I hope this will be on major news channels ASAP.

jrwoodruff 17y ago

I'm a little late to the party here, but a lot of people are obviously angry about this. Skimming the comments, it looks like a lot of 'end-of-the-internet' speculation. Not if we can help it. If you're in the U.S., please write your representatives and let them know how dangerous this is. This is still a country ruled by its people, for its people. Even if this is a hoax, it will let your elected officials know copyright law is a serious issue in their district, and hopefully treat it as such. Find out who your reps and senators are at this link, and write! http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml

Shamiq 17y ago

I think the time is ripe for some creative destruction.

jacoblyles 17y ago

I could imagine this coming from any administration and any congress in my lifetime. Very little has changed no matter how often the parties swapped, and no matter how pretty the speeches were. The content industries continue to be powerful lobbyists, to our detriment. We are constantly relearning the lesson: don't trust politicians. Democracy is a machine for serving concentrated interests at the expense of the general well-being Hopefully our champions will stop this. However, there will be no idealistic debate behind the scenes on the topic of what constitutes the public interests. There will only be politicians silently weighing what is in their own personal interest. As it always has been, and as it always will be.

albemuth 17y ago

I wonder what happens if the 'infringement' occurs over an open wifi network, how can one be made accountable if anyone can use your connection? Even if they enforced it by a hardware fingerprint or something, laptops can be stolen, and who the hell is going to enforce no open wifi networks!? The outrage!

yread 17y ago

I think it's enough of a reason to build community networks. You are just connected to friends over wifi and they are connected to some other friends. As long as it stays distributed enough that would be ok.