If described accurately, the provisions outlined in secret negotiations on copyright amount to a sovereign coup - an usurpation of basic rights and freedoms by a corproate government entity. Don't take my word for it. The provisions include:
- ISPs have to proactively police copyright on user-contributed material (which basically makes it impossible to host user-created material, because of the cost of this)
- ISPs have to cut off the Internet access of accused copyright infringers or face liability (which effectively terminates the presumption of innocence)
- rules that require ISPs to remove any material that is accused -- again, without evidence or trial (which effectively eliminates freedom of speech or the press)
- Mandatory prohibitions on breaking DRM, even if doing so for a lawful purpose
Michael Geist has more, and in addition: "Further coverage from IDG and Numerama. Update II: InternetNZ issues a press release expressing alarm, while EFF says the leaks "confirm everything that we feared about the secret ACTA negotiations." Electronic Frontiers Australia provides an Australian perspective on the ACTA dangers. Update III: There are additional articles and postings from around the world (Germany, Italy, Sweden, UK, New Zealand, the Netherlands, U.S., Germany, Italy) as well as coverage from some of the most popular websites (Gizmodo, ReadWriteWeb, TorrentFreak, BoingBoing, Slashdot). Update IV: See additional posts on Day two of the ACTA talks (Criminal provisions) and Day three (transparency)." Mark Federman says it's time to write your politician - I already have, but in a matter of the disenfranchisement of the people, it turns out, the people don't have a say, and I don't think writing a stern letter will be enough. I hope I'm wrong.
- ISPs have to proactively police copyright on user-contributed material (which basically makes it impossible to host user-created material, because of the cost of this)
- ISPs have to cut off the Internet access of accused copyright infringers or face liability (which effectively terminates the presumption of innocence)
- rules that require ISPs to remove any material that is accused -- again, without evidence or trial (which effectively eliminates freedom of speech or the press)
- Mandatory prohibitions on breaking DRM, even if doing so for a lawful purpose
Michael Geist has more, and in addition: "Further coverage from IDG and Numerama. Update II: InternetNZ issues a press release expressing alarm, while EFF says the leaks "confirm everything that we feared about the secret ACTA negotiations." Electronic Frontiers Australia provides an Australian perspective on the ACTA dangers. Update III: There are additional articles and postings from around the world (Germany, Italy, Sweden, UK, New Zealand, the Netherlands, U.S., Germany, Italy) as well as coverage from some of the most popular websites (Gizmodo, ReadWriteWeb, TorrentFreak, BoingBoing, Slashdot). Update IV: See additional posts on Day two of the ACTA talks (Criminal provisions) and Day three (transparency)." Mark Federman says it's time to write your politician - I already have, but in a matter of the disenfranchisement of the people, it turns out, the people don't have a say, and I don't think writing a stern letter will be enough. I hope I'm wrong.
Today: 1 Total: 17 [Direct link] [Share]
