dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
Leaked TPP Pushes ISP Content Filters, Kicking Users Offline
by Karl Bode 09:15AM Friday Nov 15 2013 Tipped by humanfilth See Profile
Wikileaks this week released a copy of the latest version of the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) that has been under construction behind closed doors for years. As we've long noted, the TPP attempts to take some of the worst aspects of U.S. copyright law and foist them upon the globe. Mike Masnick at Techdirt has a good take on what the TPP will do to copyright law in general, most notably making serious broad-scale copyright reform impossible.

Click for full size
On the broadband front, TPP continues the effort to make ISPs more liable for enforcement of copyright infringement on their networks. In other words, higher prices whether you pirate or not as the carrier passes notification, filtering and anti-piracy Whac-A-Mole support costs on to you.

Canadian law Professor Michael Geist points out that there's a rift forming between the United States and Canada on just how liable ISPs should be, with the U.S. and Australia pushing for greater content blocking and possibly broadband user account termination:
quote:
The US proposal, which enjoys support from Australia (and support for some provisions from Singapore, New Zealand, and Peru) features far more conditions for ISP limitation of liability that could lead to subscriber service termination and content blocking (Canada, Brunei, Vietnam, and Mexico oppose the approach). Under the U.S. model, specific actions are required for specific limitations of liability. For example, a limitation of liability for automated caching is subject to four requirements, including "removing or disabling access, on receipt of an effective notification of claimed infringement, to cached material that has been removed or access to which has been disabled at the originating site."
In addition to greater ISP liability and the continued attempt to block content or kick users offline (ideas we had seemed to be moving away from globally and here in the States as draconian and dysfunctional), the leaked TPP draft also includes a measure that could make life harder for companies like Aereo to challenge the cable TV status quo. Directly from the TPP:
quote:
[US propose: Notwithstanding Article QQ.G.16 [limitations and exceptions] and Article QQ.G.14.3(b) [over the air broadcasting reference], no Party may permit the retransmission of television signals (whether terrestrial, cable, or satellite) on the Internet without the authorization of the right holder or right holders of the content of the signal and, if any, of the signal.]
Based on all of these changes it's fairly apparent which industry is in the driving seat when it comes to getting these proposals included in the draft. The EFF also has an analysis of the leaked TPP you should probably read here.

view:
topics flat nest 

buzz_4_20

join:2003-09-20
Limestone, ME

6 recommendations

Ok, here's the plan.

We're going to cripple innovation, freedom and choice all for the sake of making sure a handful of companies keep getting to sell their crap without having to innovate.

Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
kudos:39

1 edit

Re: Ok, here's the plan.

You sir, are genius. And, may I add, quite innovative.
dra6o0n

join:2011-08-15
Mississauga, ON
Reviews:
·ITalkBB
Why don't we all volunteer physically and intelligently, replace the current internet with our own? LOL!

Have we ever did anything large scale, outside of 'community volunteering' on a really large scale project?

For instance why pay $100,000 to get programmers to make a game when we could get a large group of people to learn and cooperate to make codes for one?

It's open sourced in a way but that's not the point, the point is most things that we could pay to make things happen, can be physically done by hand and effort, if not for the 'legality' measures that the nation could have setup beforehand.

At one point we have these '3d printers' that companies are developing and they take investments to do so, but sometimes you see individuals who come out of nowhere and go "Here's a cheaper, easier, and interesting way to do it without spilling your guts for a company".
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: Ok, here's the plan.

That would be all fine and dandy until money gets involved.

Then the greedy will come in and the cycle will start again.

derek6795

@bgainc.com

Slingbox

With the way that's worded, you couldnt even use a slingbox. The only way you could watch TV on a mobile device away from home would be to use the cable/satellite co's own app.

Probitas

@teksavvy.com

1 recommendation

That's a killer for sure

Only way to fight this would be to tighten the belt and cancel, forcing them to relax. I can go without tv, anyone can really. This would also have a beneficial effect of increasing overall intelligence, health, and social strength. More reading, more moving around, more making real friends instead of pseudo friends over facebook.

timcuth
Braves Fan
Premium
join:2000-09-18
Pelham, AL

Re: That's a killer for sure

If (when) regulations like this go into effect, they may not have to kick me offline. I may just leave voluntarily.

Tim
axus

join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC

1 recommendation

It's sad when DMCA looks like a good law

Safe harbor provisions for ISPs are looking pretty good right now.

Classic case of onerous regulations being used to raise the cost of business, with no or negative benefit to the average person.
zod5000

join:2003-10-21
Victoria, BC
Reviews:
·Shaw

What's in it for Canada?

I don't get it. What do we get out of signing such an agreement. We're not a nation that leads the world in terms of content creation. We don't export that much music/tv/movies...

I dunno... why do we need to jump on everyone elses copyright bandwagon. What's in it for us?
a1_Andy
Premium
join:2005-12-29
Oshawa, ON

Re: What's in it for Canada?

With our PM right now whats in it is potential profits on investments for politicians and their friends at the taxpayers expense again. (like everything our current PM does).
EdmundGerber

join:2010-01-04
kudos:1

Re: What's in it for Canada?

As soon as obama gives him his pipeline you can be sure Canada will get it up the ass with everything the entertainment industry wants.

humanfilth

join:2013-02-14
cyber gutter
Insider trading is only illegal when the commoners do it.

The politician will say its not insider trading since their investments are being managed by a third party, so the politician doesn't know what they are investing in.

Its funny when the politician can detail his investments(standard one of: $10,000 on the Keystone pipeline or Enbridge northern gateway), but denies telling his manager where to place the bets.
--
Knowledge and curiosity are not crimes and those who are curious should not be treated like criminals.. »www.eff.org/https-everywhere

firephoto
We the people
Premium
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA
said by zod5000:

I don't get it. What do we get out of signing such an agreement. We're not a nation that leads the world in terms of content creation. We don't export that much music/tv/movies...

I dunno... why do we need to jump on everyone elses copyright bandwagon. What's in it for us?

Why is cannabis illegal and why is the United States mentioned whenever the question arises with one of you public officials.

We offer cookies, other countries smile!

The better question is, since it should be the will of the people (all of the people), why is it hidden from the people and of no benefit to even most of the people?
--
Say no to astroturfing. go to their profile, start ignoring posts and ignoring what's not true.
Bengie25

join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI
Reviews:
·Solarus

Basics

In much or all of Europe, Internet access is a basic human right. Not in "free", but in "can't be taken away, unless you're not paying your bill".

We need that passed in the USA. Less about "The Internet", and more about mediums for communication. No one should be able to be removed from a common form of communication, except if that person can be shown to cause direct harm to that communication platform or non-payment.

What I mean by "direct harm" is like someone purposefully using their connection to disrupt other customers ability to communicate. So intent would have to be shown and it would have to directly detrimental to other customers.
Bengie25

join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI

TPP

TPP sounds like a conspiracy to collude to screw over customers. How is this not criminal?

David
I start new work on
Premium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
kudos:101

Re: TPP

there used to be a saying once...

"to be a average crook rob a bank, to be a good crook get elected/appointed."

Free Man

@161.113.14.x

regulate VPN

This almost guarantees some level of regulation or prohibition on VPN to some jurisdiction that is not a signer of this piece of trash. Otherwise they can't enforce the law, right? Some day I'll be able to tell my grandchildren about the era when we had a free, open internet (they won't believe it). It will remind us of the olden days, when we had factual TV news and daily pictures of the people who died in our wars.
Either VPN will be prohibited or made useless, or the internet will be partitioned into those who signed this treaty and those who didn't. At least there will be some other use for the multi petabytes the NSA is storing away in Utah.

anon_anon

@comcast.net

If you can't pass SOPA...

Then write it into an secret international treaty, pass the treaty, and when the voters complain about how their rights have been destroyed pass the buck saying that they had no choice because it was such an important international treaty and so sorry, the laws shall never be revoked because that means violating the treaty.

Just another way for multinational corporations to permanently override the sovereignty of nations.
Expand your moderator at work

fuziwuzi
Not born yesterday
Premium
join:2005-07-01
Atlanta, GA

You know it is bad when...

... the Administration won't even allow Senators and Congressmen to have open access to the agreement. They have to be nearly stripsearched, are forbidden from taking notes, get a limited amount of time and only the Senator or Congressman can "see" it, not anyone from their staff. Yet, all the lawyers from the MPAA/RIAA, Sony, Comcast/Universal, etc. get an online logon/password to view it at any time they want, can freely copy, alter, etc. The Administration is also claiming they can sign this treaty and enforce it without approval from congress. Just who is running the government? (stupid question).
--
Teabaggers: Destroying America is Priority #1

elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO

Re: You know it is bad when...

yea treaties do not work that way
congress has to approve it

fuziwuzi
Not born yesterday
Premium
join:2005-07-01
Atlanta, GA

Re: You know it is bad when...

It will end up going to SCOTUS, and given their corporate-friendly nature of late, it doesn't look good for people who actually believe in the US Constitution.
--
Teabaggers: Destroying America is Priority #1
Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30
Mesa, AZ
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Cox HSI
said by elios:

yea treaties do not work that way
congress has to approve it

Actually it has to be ratified by the senate, according to the constitution.

Obama disagrees though, he ratified ACTA by himself without letting anybody look at it. That's right, ACTA is now law in the US just because one man said it would be law. That is basically dictatorship.