Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

"ACTA"


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 elmongo2

elmongo2

  • Members
  • 878 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana, USA
  • Local time:06:27 AM

Posted 29 January 2012 - 10:00 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting_Trade_Agreement

1.The agreement aims to establish an international legal framework for targeting counterfeit goods, generic medicines and copyright infringement on the Internet.

2.Would create a new governing body outside existing forums.

Sounds pretty disturbing to me. Kinda like that "One-world government" thing that people like to dismiss as a bizarre conspiracy that can never happen.
People do dumb things. And I'm not talking about paying too much for car insurance either.

BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 groovicus

groovicus

  • Security Colleague
  • 9,963 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Centerville, SD
  • Local time:05:27 AM

Posted 29 January 2012 - 02:19 PM

How about the actual text?
http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/economy/i_property/pdfs/acta1105_en.pdf

Way better to read it for one's self than trust that wikipedia properly summarized the content.

#3 elmongo2

elmongo2
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 878 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana, USA
  • Local time:06:27 AM

Posted 29 January 2012 - 03:09 PM

Fair enough. But the main issue I have with it is that it basically tells the participating country what it is required to have its government do to implicate this agreement. And it does this without any say by the people of the nations that are participating in it.

"Each Party shall ensure that enforcement procedures are available under its law....."

I also dont see any mention of due process. If you spot that please point that out to me.

Also, "Article 9: Damages" is already part of copyright law here. An international agreement isnt even necessary to ensure that it is enforced in a civil court.
People do dumb things. And I'm not talking about paying too much for car insurance either.

#4 Bezukhov

Bezukhov

    Bleepin' Jazz Fan!


  • Members
  • 2,738 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Providence, R.I.
  • Local time:06:27 AM

Posted 29 January 2012 - 08:54 PM

"Due process? We don't need no stinking due process!"

Let us take a look at this barrel of laughs. Here is the first joke, known affectionately as "Article 12, Section 2:

Each Party shall provide that its judicial authorities have the authority to adopt provisional measures inaudita altera parte where appropriate, in particular where any delay is likely to cause irreparable harm to the right holder, or where there is a demonstrable risk of evidence being destroyed. In proceedings conducted inaudita altera parte, each Party shall provide its judicial authorities with the authority to act expeditiously on requests for provisional measures and to make a decision without undue delay.

Inaudita altera parte AKA ex parte means that an accuser goes before a Judge and says "We heard a rumor that some people might have a suspicion that there is an outside chance that elmongo2 could possibly have downloaded a song that we have the rights to". And you? You are never told that someone has charged you with a crime, nor are you given any opportunity to defend yourself.

And what happens next? From Article 25:

1. With respect to the offences specified in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 of Article 23 (Criminal Offences) for which a Party provides criminal procedures and penalties, that Party shall provide that its competent authorities have the authority to order the seizure of suspected counterfeit trademark goods or pirated copyright goods, any related materials and implements used in the commission of the alleged offence, documentary evidence relevant to the alleged offence, and the assets derived from, or obtained directly or indirectly through, the alleged infringing activity.

"...related materials and implements" means that they take your computer, and if you want it back you have to grovel before a Judge and prove that you didn't pirate anything.

Ahh, the Fifth Amendment. ("No person...shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...) We hardly knew ye...

Edited by Bezukhov, 29 January 2012 - 08:55 PM.

To err is Human. To blame it on someone else is even more Human.

#5 elmongo2

elmongo2
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 878 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana, USA
  • Local time:06:27 AM

Posted 30 January 2012 - 10:48 PM

Looking at this from that perspective, it sounds eerily similar to the Patriot Act, which flat-out violates the US Constitution.
People do dumb things. And I'm not talking about paying too much for car insurance either.

#6 myrti

myrti

    Sillyberry


  • Malware Study Hall Admin
  • 33,784 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:At home
  • Local time:01:27 PM

Posted 21 June 2012 - 06:52 AM

Looks like ACTA is not gonna make it to the European Union. The last committee has decided to reject it today as well, there are no committees in favour of ACTA anymore. This very likely means that it will also be rejected in the european parliament as it has been rejected by many other national parliaments before. ACTA will not happen here.

regards myrti

is that a bird?  a plane? nooo it's the flying blueberry!

If I have been helping you and haven't replied in 2 days, feel free to shoot me a PM! Please don't send help request via PM, unless I am already helping you. Use the forums!

animinionsmalltext.gif

Follow BleepingComputer on: Facebook | Twitter | Google+


#7 S3cS3arch3r

S3cS3arch3r

  • Members
  • 142 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:EU
  • Local time:01:27 PM

Posted 10 July 2012 - 06:22 AM

After accepting ACTA in the Australia, Canada, Japan, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea and the US, the Europpean Union voted against ACTA with overwhelming numbers:
- 478 against,
- 39 in favor,
- 165 abstentions..

The main problem is, that the ACTA laws could be interpreted in such broad ways, chances are very real that the privacy-infringements against EU inhabitants do not weigh against the copyrights of a few large companies.

IMHO, ACTA means that both governments and companies could monitor web-traffic in a way postal services could track us by opening ALL our mail.
I'm no judge, I never studied laws, but something just doesn't seem right about that...

Although the European Parliament voted against it with overwhelming numbers, the European Committee is now testing / judging ACTA against European laws at the European house of justice, and will return the treaty to the Parliament as soon as possible, so "the fight ain't over till it's over.."


Just my 2 cents,

\0/
-Sec




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users