ACTA Treaty -- Anyone Heard of It

INRM

Philosopher
I
Joined
Jul 24, 2002
Messages
5,505
There's this anti-counterfeiting treaty called the ACTA treaty. The thing is being drafted up largely in secret -- it's only due to leaks that knowledge of it got out, and it's already being put into effect in Tennessee.

It involves fighting counterfeiting, and allows the government broad, sweeping power to monitor internet traffic, a 3-strikes law that legally bars people from going online for life, and even potentially internet filtering!

This worries me on a number of levels, especially the internet filtering -- it can be easily used as censorship! We could turn into China.

The fact that France already has a law like this incorporated to the best of my knowledge, and England is beginning to take the same course; Australia is testing Internet filtering software (which includes content filtering) which will be used for the whole country, in which nobody will be able to opt-out is not inspiring. This is a world-wide problem.

The ACLU doesn't seem to have much knowledge about this, however the EFF has an action-center set-up. This is a world-wide problem (Internet content filtering --as I said, multiple countries are considering similar things) -- if misused, the ability to search the web in an un-censored fashion can be a thing of the past.

At least, this is how I see it -- however I'm not alone. I'd like to hear what the members here think...


INRM
 
Last edited:
INRM said:
There's this anti-counterfeiting treaty called the ACTA treaty. The thing is being drafted up largely in secret -- it's only due to leaks that knowledge of it got out, and it's already being put into effect in Tennessee.
Click to expand...
Leaks....

and press releases...


http://www.ustr.gov/Document_Library/Press_Releases/2007/October/Ambassador_Schwab_Announces_
US_Will_Seek_New_Trade_Agreement_to_Fight_Fakes.html

Ambassador Schwab Announces U.S. Will Seek New Trade Agreement to Fight Fakes
10/23/2007


Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement will boost the fight against counterfeiting and piracy

WASHINGTON DC - In a major step in the fight against intellectual property rights (IPR) counterfeiting and piracy, U.S. Trade Representative Susan C. Schwab today announced the United States and some of its key trading partners will seek to negotiate an Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA).

“Global counterfeiting and piracy steal billions of dollars from workers, artists and entrepreneurs each year and jeopardize the health and safety of citizens across the world,” said Ambassador Schwab. “The United States looks forward to partnering with many of our key trading partners to combat this global problem. Today launches our joint efforts to confront counterfeiters and pirates across the global marketplace.”
Click to expand...

Google: Results 1 - 10 of about 45,000 for "Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement".

Very hush hush ;)
 
Well I'm very happy to hear that it has leaked out and is virtually public.

But doesn't it worry anybody about what the implications of this bill are? Extensive monitoring of the internet, potential censorship of the internet...

INRM
 
INRM said:
... and it's already being put into effect in Tennessee.
Click to expand...

Another red flag in the OP is that this is an international treaty you are talking about, but then you say it is already in effect in a single U.S. state. This is completely contrary to how the system of government in the U.S. works. States cannot enter into international treaties, only the federal government can.

INRM said:
Well I'm very happy to hear that it has leaked out and is virtually public.
Click to expand...

The quote was from a press release. This is the polar opposite of a "leak", it means they want everyone to know what they are doing.

INRM, I beg of you, can you please, please, please learn how to use Google, and stop posting these silly, silly threads that are easily answered with 30 seconds of searching?
 
Well Tennessee put some kind of law like this into effect. I assume it was based on the wording of ACTA.

I know states cannot enter into a treaty.

INRM
BTW: Assuming this is accurate, would you consider this to be a serious problem?
 
INRM said:
Well Tennessee put some kind of law like this into effect. I assume it was based on the wording of ACTA.

I know states cannot enter into a treaty.

INRM
BTW: Assuming this is accurate, would you consider this to be a serious problem?
Click to expand...
Please define "this " and "this"
 
G.W. Bush and the Trilateral Commission are now intercepting and reading all E-mail with the letter "N" in the subject line.

Assuming this is accurate, would you consider this to be a serious problem?
 
six7s,

When I say this... I mean the ACTA treaty and the details of it.

If it's true, what is your opinion?
 
INRM said:
Now it's even on wikipedia...
Click to expand...
Wadday mean NOW?

The press release that I linked to above dates from 23 October, 2007...

This ain't news INRM

Nor is it a conspiracy, a secret, or any such nefarious act on behalf of the NWO

Its merely one strategy, being considered by a few democratically elected governments (or maybe their agencies) of countries that are concerned about the theft of intellectual property
 
INRM, you are clearly worried about the issue. Have you written to your Representative and Senators, giving clear information about what you think and what should and should not be done?

No? Why not? Get off JREF and do something meaningful about your concerns.
 
six7s,

Just because a government is democratically elected doesn't mean that everything it does is democratic, or even ethical.

I should point out that this strategy is heavily influenced by large corporations (even though multiple governments are involved as well).

Additionally, some proposals for this ACTA Treaty call for internet filtering, which in the hands of an unethical government can be a way to enforce censorship.


SezMe,

As a matter of fact, I have written my representatives numerous times...


INRM
Post 1701
 
Last edited:
INRM said:
six7s,

Just because a government is democratically elected doesn't mean that everything it does is democratic, or even ethical.
Click to expand...
Really? Well, bugger me! Of all the thngs I didn't know. I didn't know that the most!

INRM said:
I should point out that this strategy is heavily influenced by large corporations (even though multiple governments are involved as well).
Click to expand...
Why should you? Do you have evidence of something sinister at work?

INRM said:
Additionally, some proposals for this ACTA Treaty call for internet filtering, which in the hands of an unethical government can be a way to enforce censorship.
Click to expand...
So?

Please, INRM, recognise that this is the Computers and Internet forum, not Conspiracy Theories.

Stop beating around the bush and insinuating nonsense like a CTist (are you a CTist?)

If you have evidence to support your stance/opinion/concerns/fears/whatever then come straight out and say it - concisely and coherently

Otherwise, please stop trolling this forum
 
six7s,

Why should you?
Click to expand...

Because you stated it was a strategy considered by some democratic governments. You did not say that a lot of large companies are heavily influencing the process.

Do you have evidence of something sinister at work?
Click to expand...

Well the fact that the countries involved have taken various measures to keep specific elements of this treaty secret does make me wonder.

Generally when governments are doing the right thing they don't usually resort to secrecy; however it is very common when governments are in the process of doing something unethical that they do resort to secrecy.

Please, INRM, recognise that this is the Computers and Internet forum, not Conspiracy Theories.
Click to expand...

Oh, so a country adopting censorship of the internet is an unfounded conspiracy theory? You make it seem as if no country has ever done this before...


INRM
 
INRM said:
Because you stated it was a strategy considered by some democratic governments. You did not say that a lot of large companies are heavily influencing the process.
Click to expand...

Ummm... did you read my question?

I did not ask you to merely repeat the comment in slightly (insignificantly) different words

I did ask why you felt compelled to point out that "this strategy is heavily influenced by large corporations"... Do you have a reason for making this seemingly inane point?

INRM said:
Well the fact that the countries involved have taken various measures to keep specific elements of this treaty secret does make me wonder.
Click to expand...
Wondering is good

Idle speculation can be good

Insinuating, without any evidence, that there is some covert agenda being perpetrated by clandestine affiliates of the NWO is dumb

INRM said:
Generally when governments are doing the right thing they don't usually resort to secrecy;
Click to expand...
I notice that you have (un)surreptitiously slipped in a proviso there...

Don't usually, eh? Well, well, how very convenient for your (non) argument

INRM said:
however it is very common when governments are in the process of doing something unethical that they do resort to secrecy.
Click to expand...
You started this thread with (old) news of a 'problem', which you defined merely by employing some very broad (i.e. vague) brush strokes

Unless you quit with the sweeping generalisations and start to provide some detail, and soon, expect the replies to slow to a trickle

INRM said:
Oh, so a country adopting censorship of the internet is an unfounded conspiracy theory? You make it seem as if no country has ever done this before...
Click to expand...
No

What I said was:
Its merely one strategy, being considered by a few democratically elected governments (or maybe their agencies) of countries that are concerned about the theft of intellectual property
Click to expand...

That you want/need to infer that I imply such irrelevant nonsense does little to further your hitherto baseless objections to ACTA

Other than perhaps paranoia and/or arguments from ignorance, is there a base to your 'concerns'?
 
Last edited:
six7s,

1.) From what it would appear, you were speaking as if it was only a strategy that some democratic governments thought of. I was pointing out that it was not just a government strategy and that large corporations were involved.

My point is is that big businesses influence on governments can be quite extreme, and is not always ethical, and is sometimes causes governments to behave in a manner contrary to democracy.

It's we the people, not we the lobbyists :)


2.) Did I even say NWO once? I was stating that I have a worry about the matter because of the government keeping portions of this bill secret. Secrecy can, in some cases, be a sign of misconduct -- Especially when this pertains to governments. Historically, governments mired in misconduct, generally acted under enormous secrecy.


3.) Actually, I suppose you're partially right. All governments keep secrets, even democratic ones. However the degree of secrecy dramatically increases when the government is doing something it's not supposed to be doing. Governments in which gross misconduct takes place tend to employ massive amounts of secrecy.


4.) You accused me of espousing a conspiracy theory about the use of internet-filtering to enforce censorship. I was simply pointing out that this is not some unfounded worry, there has been at least one country which has done this -- China. Australia, recently has also passed a bill which could include nationwide IP-filtering software which nobody can opt out of -- granted the claim is that they only intend to filter out spam, viruses, and illegal content (although they don't exactly define clearly what illegal content is).


INRM
 
six7s,

I haven't found any more information. I was wondering if anybody had something...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom