Um, shit. (Copyright and the internets)

[Strike Witch]

A Secret Copyright Treaty has been leaked for Internet content.

Crazy shit.

Secret copyright treaty leaks. It's bad. Very bad.

The internet chapter of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, a secret copyright treaty whose text Obama's administration refused to disclose due to "national security" concerns, has leaked. It's bad. It says:
* That ISPs have to proactively police copyright on user-contributed material. This means that it will be impossible to run a service like Flickr or YouTube or Blogger, since hiring enough lawyers to ensure that the mountain of material uploaded every second isn't infringing will exceed any hope of profitability.
* That ISPs have to cut off the Internet access of accused copyright infringers or face liability. This means that your entire family could be denied to the internet -- and hence to civic participation, health information, education, communications, and their means of earning a living -- if one member is accused of copyright infringement, without access to a trial or counsel.
* That the whole world must adopt US-style "notice-and-takedown" rules that require ISPs to remove any material that is accused -- again, without evidence or trial -- of infringing copyright. This has proved a disaster in the US and other countries, where it provides an easy means of censoring material, just by accusing it of infringing copyright.
* Mandatory prohibitions on breaking DRM, even if doing so for a lawful purpose (e.g., to make a work available to disabled people; for archival preservation; because you own the copyrighted work that is locked up with DRM)

So yeah.

[Wings of Fire]

That's too draconian to ever be passed by a sane democracy.

[Havoc]

Never gonna happen. Next.

[Nate]

I fail to see how any of this is a problem. Or how it is different to what's already going on.

1) Is already happening. I think he's exaggerating what 'proactively police' means. Youtube already does a lot of work in this area.
2) Is already happening. My friend Kale's internet was cut off (and the ISP made moves towards charging him with copyright infringment) because he was caught downloading a porn film through a P2P program.
3) Is already happening. ISPs already take down material that infringes copyright. As for the rest of the world, they're talking through their arses.
4) Is already happening. It is illegal to break DRM, at least on the level that it breaches terms of service.

Full of shit, all of it.

[Sekto Springs]

Given the steady decline of general freedom on the internet, I would not be surprised if some of these come to pass to be as cut-throat as they claim. Not all of it, but the thing about Youtube I could believe, considering it becomes less about "you" and more about "tube" every day. I've already had two videos removed for infringing copyright, and one video's audio removed under a puffed up exchange law that, upon having explained to me, made me even more confused as to how exactly I was stepping on anyone's toes.
Now Youtube even integrates advertisements into the videos, and not just annoying little banner ads, but video commercials you are forced to watch beforehand. At first they only did this on channels sponsored by said companies, now they're doing it to everyone.

Certain countries are having their IP's restricted from websites, such as PirateBay. Not all countries follow the same diluted statutes of freedom that ignorant Americans' are granted, so I can't really say whether or not this impediment on their freedom is outrageous. I can say, however, that if such freedoms were denied over here, there would be hell raised. Or at least I hope there would be, nobody wants to revolt anymore, it seems we'd all rather just 'endure' it while those in charge slowly condition us to crappier and crappier circumstances.

[abe619]

wouldn't happen , atleast not where i live.

[used:)]

Certain countries are having their IP's restricted from websites, such as PirateBay. Not all countries follow the same diluted statutes of freedom that ignorant Americans' are granted, so I can't really say whether or not this impediment on their freedom is outrageous. I can say, however, that if such freedoms were denied over here, there would be hell raised. Or at least I hope there would be, nobody wants to revolt anymore, it seems we'd all rather just 'endure' it while those in charge slowly condition us to crappier and crappier circumstances.

No, some of them want to revolt, just for the most retarded of reasons.

And yeah, that sounds shitty, but I don't think it's gonna happen.

[Disgruntled Intern]

I sure hope animated kiddy porn isn't copyrighted.

I BET OANST AGREE

[Sekto Springs]

No, some of them want to revolt, just for the most retarded of reasons.

Because Hot Topic tells them to?

[Nate]

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/11/...rians-outrage/

A much more sober and less dramatic article about this issue, which somehow ends up being far more worrying. Apparently it's not just an American proposal; this is an international working group coming up with new rules. On the one hand, it seems like Cory Doctorow has missed the point of some of the rules (he didn't mention the three-strikes bit, for instance), but it is deeply worrying that something as universal and important as copyright would be discussed in secret, rather than obtaining public opinion.

[Pilot]

Yeah, HERE YOU GO DRM POLICE-- CHECK MY GENERIC COBY BRAND MP3 PLAYER AND DETERMINE THAT ALL MY SONGS ARE 100% LEGAL.

Imbeciles.

Thank you Nate.

[Munch's Master]

The bit I like best is

That the whole world must adopt US-style "notice-and-takedown" rules that require ISPs to remove any material that is accused -- again, without evidence or trial -- of infringing copyright. This has proved a disaster in the US and other countries, where it provides an easy means of censoring material, just by accusing it of infringing copyright.

Making laws for other countries now.


I don't know whether to believe this is genuine but I could see it happening. I find it absurd how copyright infringement can carry such massive fines and prison sentences, when far more serious crimes can quite easily result in lesser consequences due to dubious mitigating circumstances.

[Nate]

Making laws for other countries now.

When it's an international agreement formed by a number of countries, it hardly counts as the US forcing its views on the rest of the world.