ACTA Threatens Internet Freedom

[ubuntu27]

ACTA Treaty should concern every individuals who uses Internet including Open Source and Linux users. Onen of the reason being that we might lose our freedom to share linux distro over the internet.

The ACTA Copyright Treaty and Why You Should Care (http://www.infowars.com/secretive-acta-copyright-treaty-and-how-it-threatens-internet-freedom/)

After years of secrecy, the eighth round of talks aimed at drafting an international treaty called the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) recently concluded in New Zealand — and in the face of public pressure, a version of the text was subsequently made available to the public. The ACTA is neither a trade agreement nor one focused primarily on counterfeiting, but a copyright deal featuring provisions on Internet service provider and Internet company liability, DMCA-style notice and takedown requirements, legal protection for digital locks, and requirements for statutory damages that could result in millions in liability for non-commercial infringement — even heightened searches at border crossings.

Ever since the ACTA partners — among them the U.S., E.U., Canada, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, Morocco and Singapore — announced negotiations plans in October 2007, ACTA has been dogged by controversy over a near-total lack of transparency. Early talks were held in secret locations with each participating country offering virtually identical, cryptic press releases that did little more than fuel public concern. Now that the ACTA text is public, some might wonder whether there’s still cause for concern. Indeed, given widespread support for measures that target genuine commercial counterfeiting, some might believe it’s time to actively support ACTA. It’s not — at least not this version.

DRAFT OF SECRETIVE INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT TREATY LEAKED (http://www.alternet.org/media/146533/draft_of_secretive_international_copyright_treaty_ leaked_--_confirms_fears_about_internet_freedom?page=1)
On the table: losing internet access due to infringement allegations, and widespread data sharing across national borders.

Read the rest here (http://www.infowars.com/secretive-acta-copyright-treaty-and-how-it-threatens-internet-freedom/)

Related threads in UbuntuForums:

ACTA treaty aims to deputize ISPs on copyrights (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1459553)

Richard Stallman's ominous Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement warning... (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1116270)

Net Neutrality illustrated: so THAT'S what it means (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1314656)

Richard Stallman's Personal Home Page (http://www.stallman.org/)

[doas777]

ACTA must be opposed. ars had a really good write up on the release:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/04/acta-is-here.ars

[xc1024]

This should be stopped. I agree, but... Yes, unfortunately there's a but. What can we do to stop it? To stop this wave of cr*p coming our way we need to have the support of the unwashed masses. But how? They don't notice anything important going on around them until they loose a job or access to facebook. Still, we should try our best while we can. And after we cannot anymore, tinfoil hat on and door bolts locked.

[dmn_clown]

If you aren't pirating software, music, movies, or games you'll have nothing to worry about.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

If you aren't pirating software, music, movies, or games you'll have nothing to worry about.

That really isn't true.

The most terrifying bit about ACTA is that this is a treaty being negotiated in complete secrecy with absolutely no public consultation. All the powers working on this treaty are democracies. Here in Canada, I was brought up to trust that citizens form the government and have a say in what happens. The system may be a tad broken, but as long as the spirit of democracy exists, we're fine. The powers that be seem intent on changing that.

A lot of people use your argument to justify the DMCA, meanwhile, which seems to be logical until you read the details. That is an act which makes it illegal to break digital locks you legally own; to make it impossible for you to move content you own to a different medium or device. If you buy DRM-encumbered media on physical media and want it on a portable device, you need to buy it again. If you buy an ebook and want some text to speech software to read its contents to you, you need to buy the key to break that lock.

Imagine that was your own content. You have a picture you took on your own digital camera, magically locked down to that camera's ecosystem. To get your picture out of that camera, you need to pay some corporation a monthly fee for their DRM-encumbered decryption software that only runs on Windows. If you try to escape that trap, you're breaking the law.

[doas777]

If you aren't pirating software, music, movies, or games you'll have nothing to worry about.

They say the same thing about overzealous terror legislation, but in the long run, I am less free than i was 10 years ago. Are you trying to tell me that the loss of my freedoms is not an injury?!?

I value my privacy, but many people like yourself tell me that "If I don't have anything to hide, I don't have anything to fear from losing my privacy". I still value my privacy however, and when they take if from me, I feel injured and lessened, even though, i don't have anything to hide.

stop telling people that it is ok to take away rights that I value, just because you don't value them yourself.

[Shpongle]

They say the same thing about overzealous terror legislation, but in the long run, I am less free than i was 10 years ago. Are you trying to tell me that the loss of my freedoms is not an injury?!?

I value my privacy, but many people like yourself tell me that "If I don't have anything to hide, I don't have anything to fear from losing my privacy". I still value my privacy however, and when they take if from me, I feel injured and lessened, even though, i don't have anything to hide.

stop telling people that it is ok to take away rights that I value, just because you don't value them yourself.

this

[KiwiNZ]

Acta is seriously flawed. Also by placing responsibility on non judicial bodies such as ISP's Governments can say it wasn't our fault. The classic disassociation.

If the public has nothing to worry about then why is the USA so insistant on complete secrecy? New Zealand is in favour of opening the book of the treaty negotiations.

I am absolutely opposed to piracy in any form, but I am also opposed to this treaty.

[donkyhotay]

If you aren't pirating software, music, movies, or games you'll have nothing to worry about.

Except it's only for us peons. You know this isn't going to apply to major corporations or the government. Why should I have no privacy whatsoever to prevent me from doing something "illegal" while those in power retain their rights/privacy (and are most likely doing illegal stuff to boot). Take the 3 strikes rule, I'm certain if <name a major corporation> is accused of copyright violations 3 times that they won't be put on the internet blacklist. However if I get accused of copyright violations, regardless of whether I actually did it or not, I'm banned from the internet for life. Also if the government isn't doing anything illegal then they should be open about everything they do (it's supposed to be by the people, for the people). Why then are they being so close mouthed about this? Could it possibly be because their doing something illegal? Oops, gotta go, NSA is knocking on my door. Apparently this post is treasonous and I've been declared a terrorist. j/k