site Search:


 
   
story category
With SOPA Postponed, Attention Shifts to ACTA
As Activists Try to Keep Momentum Going
by Karl Bode Monday 23-Jan-2012 tags: legal · business · legislation · world
As we've discussed, the ACTA took all of this country's worst copyright ideas --many of them enshrined in the controversial DMCA -- made them considerably worse, then foisted them upon much of the globe with little to no real public discussion. With SOPA temporarily derailed due to public disgust, attention is now shifting to the entertainment-industry-written awfulness that is the ACTA. Combined with the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) these agreements do a number of things, but most notable for our readership is the effort to ensure ISPs must be held liable for the content shared on their networks.

SOPA opponents are hoping some activism can rub off on attempts to stop the ACTA and TPP, and have started a new petition trying to erode ACTA support. Poland meanwhile is reviewing their decision to sign off on ACTA after the websites of the prime minister, parliament and other government offices were taken offline by Anonymous. Apparently the combination of the attacks combined with public outrage caused Polish leaders to rethink their position:

And Michal Boni, the minister for administration and digitization, acknowledged in a radio interview Monday that the government had failed to hold enough consultations with the public on the matter. An opposition party, the Democratic Left Alliance, also called on the government to not sign in it in a gesture of solidarity with those who warn it could hurt Internet freedom.

While there were victories had last week, the mindset and dysfunctional global political systems that allowed SOPA/PIPA to exist in the first place remain intact. It's driven by a United States entertainment industry that stubbornly refuses to adapt to the broadband age and has resorted to burning down the house in an effort to save the baby: passing awful protectionist laws to prop up dying middleman legacy business models, regardless on the repercussions for free speech, free markets, artist payouts or the proper functioning of the Internet.

As SOPA has shown, the growing U.S. public disgust at the actions of the government, MPAA and RIAA (now operating as one unified organization) could prove particularly toxic in the upcoming U.S. Presidential elections. Such actions are even less popular across the pond where citizens are already sensitive about their leaders becoming errand boys for American interests.

view: topics flat text 
Post a:

Romney2012
Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe in
Premium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4

Most countries not even part of ACTA

Only a small number of countries are even part of the treaty process for the ACTA.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Count···greement

Parties involved:
Australia, Canada, the European Union, Japan, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States

Parties already signed:
United States, Australia, Canada, Japan, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, and South Korea

Parties still deciding to sign:
European Union, Mexico, Switzerland

The 2 major pirate nations - China and Russia aren't even involved.
--
The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
»www.politico.com/2012-election/

MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
kudos:4
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable

Re: Most countries not even part of ACTA

Thanks for posting the WikiPedia link which does a reasonable job of summarizing the facts of ACTA, which is pretty much a prereq for having a discussion.

I skimmed it and it looks like it's basically an international deal which establishes a new international body via treaty, that essentially codifies practices that are already in place in the USA and other countries. Really not anything new.

The basic disagreements with this are:

a) the negotiations were secret
b) it infringes on basic communications freedom which is a human right.

Item (b) is the most interesting, because it brings up the basic question of: should copyright law apply to and be enforced upon digital content on the Internet? Proponents couch this in terms of intellectual property protection as a basic right of property owners.

Opponents couch this in terms of a basic right for free communication on the Internet, free of ISPs and others checking for and controlling access to copyrighted content.

I don't think there's much disagreement on the rules about non-digital content being ripped off and sold on the Internet, the real disagreement is about digital content delivery.

The idea that copyrighted digital content should be allowed to be uploaded, downloaded, and copied, as long as it's for free, is pretty far out on the scale of how countries and governments are acting right now. A few smaller countries have said this is OK (I forget which ones in Europe -- Switzerland maybe?) but the vast majority are still believers that copyright law should be applied to digital content on the Internet.

Now opinions: (I think the above is pretty factual)

Karl's comments on the content owners not catching up to market realities are exactly correct. However I don't think simply allowing free copying of copyrighted digital content is the answer to kicking the content owners in the ass and forcing them to face up to market realities. I think it's going to be quite a bit more complex process than that. I suspect that in 10 years we are still going to have copyright enforcement and laws around digital content. The way progress is made in a free market is often ugly and certainly not smooth. A lot of angst and creative destruction happens. But if we simply pull the plug on copyright enforcement for digital content that would be too severe a move to allow the market to take care of the change.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: Most countries not even part of ACTA

I would have to disagree with your statement about not allowing free copying of digital content for the following reasons:

1.) It is advertising for the artist.
2.) Artist can still make money off of Free just like people that post videos on uTube, create games and other software and then distribute it for free do. Did you read articles about the lifestyle of the Mega guys? How did they make their millions if they are giving stuff away (regardless who made it)? That within itself is a testament to the fact that "free" digital content can be monetized greatly.

I believe the real problem is the middlemen as Karl pointed out. Every single music artist out there has an opportunity to make, deliver and profit (handsomely) without the help of the RIAA utilizing the internet. Sure the RIAA has a strong hold on radio stations and music distribution, but that can be changed.

Movies on the other hand make millions of dollars in the box office and a majority of them are profitable as the industry itself if very profitable. And this is before they are released on DVD. Releasing the movies as free digital media after DVD release would not "kill" the movie industry. Would it hurt them? Yes, would it make actors, producers and distributors all of a sudden stop doing what they love and make good money at doing? No. Not a single one would stop because they will only make 10 million this year instead of 20 million.

Software and games I believe have the easiest time of all monetizing a free digital distribution system and I think they have and it has been shown many times over if you stop and look around.

In the end, things dont even have to be totally free, but they can be near free or extremely cheap compared to what they are now.

And all this coming from a person that will not even watch a DVD of a pirated movie nor will I install pirated software on a computer I use/work on, much less download the stuff. That view of mine may change some day, especially if the theirs dont, but only time will tell that.
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
kudos:4
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable

Re: Most countries not even part of ACTA

There's nothing stopping anyone from doing everything that you said, right now. A copyright allows the owner to distribute and license their works any way they choose to, including free and freely copyable, and including direct-to-consumer or via middlemen/distributors.

Why don't they all go the free/direct route? Or better said, why don't they all? (because some do, as you pointed out.) Because it's better for them if they don't.

What you are suggesting is that you, a random consumer, knows better than they who own the business, the channels, the creative process, etc, etc, etc, how they should do things. And you go further to say this should be codified into law.

It's really easy for you to say "oh just take 1/2 the profit you used to, you're fine because you still have profit". That doesn't really work in the real world.

The free market is not stupid. If artists, distributors, software/game writers, etc. could do better by distributing content for free, they would. Some do distribute some for free. Some have business models that allow them to.

What you are proposing is actually changing the law and how it's enforced, which would force everyone to change their business model rapidly. This is why I say it's too sudden a change to the foundational models of a market and would cause huge disruption.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: Most countries not even part of ACTA

Where did I say anything about "codifying it in law"?

The problem with your assumption is that you are implying that the artist actually has a say in any of this to actually compete.

Example: I would not argue that in the case of music the best way is succeed is through the RIAA, but that is simply because of the mob like control they have over everything in the entire distribution and content creation processes. Try making it in the music industry, even if you are very good, without signing on with the "organization". After signing on, see how much "freedom of expression" you really have in what you get to produce and release. Even with Youtube and the internet it is still a very tough gig. Not impossible, but you would probably be better off buying lotto tickets.

I'm not proposing any sudden changes. As you pointed out right holders can easily give up their rights to their content as they see fit. They can choose to simply give it all away and put it in the free domain at any time and begin monetizing the "free" model. Not a single law would have to change immediately, just the business model which is really the problem to begin with.
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
kudos:4
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable

Re: Most countries not even part of ACTA

the "codifying it into law" comment has to do with the push here to essentially legalize digital piracy, by gutting all attempts to enforce copyright protection on the Internet for digital content. If you do that, you are essentially codifying into law what should be a business choice by the content owner, that is whether to allow copying or not.

The problem with your assumption is that you are implying that the artist actually has a say in any of this to actually compete.

This is the "I signed this contract and now I regret it, so it must be your fault!" argument. Like people who got sub prime mortgages for houses they couldn't afford and then defaulted, and blamed the mortgage companies.

No one is holding a gun to an artist's head and telling him/her they have to sign on with a label, distributor, etc. They make a business choice at some point to sign on or not, for how long, under what terms, etc. It's not true that there is "mob like control". Lots of artists do their own thing without Vito Corleone giving them "an offer they can't refuse".

It's the classic business decision: do you want to maintain ownership and control, and grow at a slower pace, or do you want to give up some control and ownership and leverage an established distribution channel to blow up faster? You decide, you choose, and you live with your choice.

Romney2012
Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe in
Premium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4

Re: Most countries not even part of ACTA

said by MyDogHsFleas:

It's the classic business decision: do you want to maintain ownership and control, and grow at a slower pace, or do you want to give up some control and ownership and leverage an established distribution channel to blow up faster? You decide, you choose, and you live with your choice.

That is always the issue when an unknown artist signs with a music company - become well known and gets rich quick thru the music company's very expensive promotion activities. But when an artist really hits it big, they get greedy too and no longer want to pay their cut of the revenues to the music company. So they whine and whine about how they are being ripped off. Cry me a river - too bad.
--
The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
»www.politico.com/2012-election/


coldmoon
Premium
join:2002-02-04
Broadway, NC
Reviews:
·Windstream
said by Romney2012:

Only a small number of countries are even part of the treaty process for the ACTA.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Count···greement

Parties involved:
Australia, Canada, the European Union, Japan, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States

Parties already signed:
United States, Australia, Canada, Japan, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, and South Korea

Parties still deciding to sign:
European Union, Mexico, Switzerland

The 2 major pirate nations - China and Russia aren't even involved.

Ah...but unless checked, this small stream could turn into a raging river with unintended consequences. Better to object to this nonsense now so a real treaty can be negotiated that takes into account ALL stakeholders across the board in all countries involved.

The time where the public allows unfettered, special interests to force legislation and treaties without a voice is quickly coming to an end and I look forward to seeing how a real protest of ACTA will turn out.

At the very least, a large enough protest will force the debate into the open. It is interesting to note that a little sunlight can have profound implications towards better laws all around...
--
Returnil - 21st Century body armor for your PC

cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Frontier FiOS
said by Romney2012:

Only a small number of countries are even part of the treaty process for the ACTA.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Count···greement

Parties involved:
Australia, Canada, the European Union, Japan, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States

Well it's good to know that only a small number of countries are on board. It's bad to know that said countries are essentially any country that really matters.

Augustus III
If Only Rome Could See Us Now....

join:2001-01-25
Gainesville, GA

Re: Most countries not even part of ACTA

said by cdru:

said by Romney2012:

Only a small number of countries are even part of the treaty process for the ACTA.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Count···greement

Parties involved:
Australia, Canada, the European Union, Japan, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States

Well it's good to know that only a small number of countries are on board. It's bad to know that said countries are essentially any country that really matters.

zing! and there we have it folks.

Dreamaway

@as13285.net
Parties involved:
Australia, Canada, THE EUROPEAN UNION, Japan, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States

The EU consistes of some of the richest 27 countries, infact (not paying attention to a small few) most of the 1st world seems to be affected

Romney2012
Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe in
Premium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4
Poland thumbs nose at Anonymous tactics. To sign ACTA on Thursday.

»www.businessinsider.com/poland-a···2-1?op=1

ctgreybeard
Old dogs can learn new tricks
Premium
join:2001-11-13
Bethel, CT

"resorted to burning down the house ...

in an effort to save the baby"

I disagree, they are killing the baby to save the burning house.
--
Old dogs can learn new tricks!
WHT

join:2010-03-26
kudos:3

Re: "resorted to burning down the house ...

said by ctgreybeard:

in an effort to save the baby"

I disagree, they are killing the baby to save the burning house.

BINGO! Well said!
meeeeeeeeee

join:2003-07-13
Newburgh, NY

Re: "resorted to burning down the house ...

Closer... but actually, they are killing the baby in order to make the house burn down FASTER.
CXM_Splicer

join:2011-08-11
kudos:1

Re: "resorted to burning down the house ...

They are trying to put the fire out with gasoline and have accidentally drown the baby in it.
meeeeeeeeee

join:2003-07-13
Newburgh, NY

Re: "resorted to burning down the house ...

Are you sure it was an accident? Maybe they were "protecting" the baby from abuse like the government "protected" the children in the Koresh compound in Waco.

PhoenixAZ
Get A Mac
Premium
join:2004-01-04
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:1

Ugh

When are people going to learn? Isn't this getting a bit too ridiculous?

Simba7
I Void Warranties

join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT

Hmm.. Just how far does this "rabbit-hole" go?

I wonder.. Especially when alot of people are finding out just how ugly SOPA is.. and just now finding out about ACTA.

All I can say is, prepare for the massive sh*tstorm when people around the globe go "WTF did you sign us up for?" to their politicians.

Hello11112

@fanshawec.ca

Re: Hmm.. Just how far does this "rabbit-hole" go?

""WTF did you sign us up for?" to their politicians."

There say "I don't know I just singed it, was I supports to read it?"
chgo_man99

join:2010-01-01
Schaumburg, IL

with that in mind whats the danger of using us based seedbox

for torrenting?

I signed up with malyasian based emyhost to replace useless usenet for occasional downloading, but after I signed up I noticed my server IP points to myvirpus that is based in the us?
CXM_Splicer

join:2011-08-11
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

Well said

said by Karl0:


It's driven by a United States entertainment industry that stubbornly refuses to adapt to the broadband age and has resorted to burning down the house in an effort to save the baby: passing awful protectionist laws to prop up dying middleman legacy business models, regardless on the repercussions for free speech, free markets, artist payouts or the proper functioning of the Internet.

Love that description Karl!! My sentiments exactly, Kudos to you.

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

Signed the petition

I suggest everybody sign the petition posted on the article. It only takes one minute to make an account.

Monday, 04-Jun 23:09:58 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.