Remember How ACTA Wasn't Supposed To Be A 'Major' Change To Copyright Laws?

from the yeah...-not-so-much dept

One of the excuses given by the various trade representatives negotiating the ACTA treaty for the fact that they were keeping it quite secret, was that it wouldn’t represent any significant change to copyright laws, and thus it was no big deal. Yet, the various drafts of the proposed treaty have suggested otherwise. TorrentFreak examines one of the latest leaked drafts and notes that it would require agreeing nations to change copyright laws concerning damages, pushing judges to consider every unauthorized file to be considered as a lost sale for the calculation of damages. This is a key point that plenty of folks have made clear over the years: assuming that every shared file would have been a lost sale is absolutely false. Putting that into the law and suggesting judges use that false concept as a basis for calculating damages is quite troubling. In the meantime, we’re still trying to figure out why ACTA is even necessary? And… on top of that, no one has yet explained why industry lobbyists have been integral to the negotiations, but the public and public interest groups are being blocked from any information based on bogus national security claims.

Filed Under: , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Remember How ACTA Wasn't Supposed To Be A 'Major' Change To Copyright Laws?”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
26 Comments
Ima Fish (profile) says:

we’re still trying to figure out why ACTA is even necessary?

Because the copyright industry wants draconian laws in place but the legislatures of the world are hesitant to pass them in fear of pissing off their constituents. So this back-door approach compels the laws to be passed and lets the legislators off the hook because they can say that they “have to enact the laws to be in compliance with the treaty. It’s completely out of our hands.”

And… on top of that, no one has yet explained why industry lobbyists have been integral to the negotiations, but the public and public interest groups are being blocked from any information based on bogus national security claims.

This one is even easier. Because the copyright industries do not want the public and public interest groups getting in the way. God, how hard was that?!

TheStuipdOne says:

Re: Re:

You know … if this treaty goes into effect in the US then 100% of the blame rests on the US Senate. Sure negotiations take place. The president will sign off on it because he’s shown himself to have very close ties with the RIAA. But then the senate has to approve it … and they don’t have to. So flood your senator’s mailboxes with requests to vote against ACTA

Ima Fish (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

if this treaty goes into effect in the US then 100% of the blame rests on the US Senate.

Sure, you could blame the Senate. But your incorrect assumption is that the system is fair and works for us. Or to put it another way, that the Senate looks out for our bests interests and that it really does have a choice in this matter. It’s doesn’t and doesn’t. The copyright industry wants these laws and will get these laws. The Senate is just a cog in the wheel.

yogi says:

Democracy?

Is the U.S. even a democracy anymore? Why pretend?

I suggest the next election be conducted by an open auction: the highest bidder will get to choose the president. The bidding will also include specific laws.

That way everyone will know who paid for what.

This will save a lot of time and money for the candidates and the parties.

It will also be a truly honest election as compared to the BS election system currently in place where millions of idiots vote for president based on looks and marketing ability.

Now that is change I can believe in…

yozoo says:

Its the Chaney way

“no one has yet explained why industry lobbyists have been integral to the negotiations, but the public and public interest groups are being blocked from any information based on bogus national security claims.”

Reminds me of Chaneys Secret Energy summit where experts like Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling helped shaped American Energy Policy in secret (prior to being convicted of fraud of course), hidden from the undue scrutiny of the meddelsome American People.

Malcontent says:

the answer is simple

Stop listening to music from the evil companies.
Don’t buy it.
Don’t support it.
And, for heaven’s sake, don’t STEAL it.

Let the evil companies crash and burn, wondering what went wrong all the way down…

Don’t EVEN get me started on why we should have let the BANKS all crash and burn…

Eponymous Coward says:

Business as usual, kids.

I’m agreeing with the AC above. Laws aren’t put in place to help or protect the people anymore. They are enacted for two reasons, to serve the interests that finance re-election campaigns and to occasionally placate, but never serve, the individuals that listen to the re-election campaigns. That’s how we got half of the ridiulously Onerous laws on the books at present.

Grizzly says:

Re: Business as usual, kids.

If senators pay more attention to the big-money interests than to their constituents, it’s because the big money interests actively (even aggressively) keep their points of view in front of the senators. The constituents, meanwhile, sit back and voice their opinions on blogs that the senators never see, but DON’T get politically active themselves. If you don”t like the way your senator has voted or has said he plans to vote, WRITE to him/her. One letter may not change a senator’s vote, but a flood of them will.

Anonymous Coward says:

Transparency is the opposite of secret.

Anything negotiated in secret is a major change to change a balance of power.

They can negotiate it all they want, but it doesn’t mean citizens will sign on to it.

Transparency, on the other hand, breaks secrets. If it wasn’t about a nefarious landgrab of power, it wouldn’t be secret!

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...