Originally posted by budskiNo need for evidence, just a suspicion!
No more net access.

We lived without net before, and people will if the needs arise live without it in future. They cannot stop you using, dial up and all those things.

But sick, these laws will only be used against the weakest people as usual.

Yea..Obama.. "The Pro-Internet Guy" strikes again.

Can this guy do anything right?

I am actually going to feel a little sorry for him when the history books are written.

-Edit- now I KNOW this wasnt ALL Obama...but the fact of thematter is he has kept this secret, open transparency at its finest. Lets see howit plays out, because i have a real hard time believing that they will shut down the internet because of this, cause anyone and everyone who has ever used the internet has infringed on copyrighted material at least once. Gotta have that new Hannah Montana Movie.

[edit on 4-11-2009 by Common Good]

Some of us have moaned for the last 20 years for copyright reform. Perhaps if the naysayers and industry shills had been paying attention rather than crying about illegal downloaders being thieves they would have seen this coming. You cannot say that you were not warned.

The fact that the terms of this Treaty have been hidden from the scrutiny of the Public under the guise of "National Security" has had me peeved from Day 1. I'm glad someone finally leaked this to the press.

This is unacceptable, but not a surprise considering the number of RIAA/MPAA lawyers added to the Presidential Cabinet or given positions in the Justice Department.

Burden of Proof should fall upon the Copyright Holders wishing to protect their IP. Without providing Proof, they are falling woefully into the realm of unconstitutionality. Also, this is extremely burdensome on the ISPs, making them Cops and Enforcers of International Law when our Courts have routinely upheld that ISPs are not responsible for what their End-Users do.

This is like saying that Car Manufacturers need to enforce Traffic Laws, and will be held accountable when someone uses a car manufactured by them to speed, drive drunk, or drive while texting!

This is like saying that Gun Manufacturers need to enforce Gun Laws, and will be held accountable when someone uses a gun in a crime, or a felon is in possession of a firearm!

What this Treaty is demanding is reprehensible on every level. It's clear that the only reason it was given secrecy under the guise of "National Security" is because no one in their right mind would tolerate even the discussion of such! I am appalled that our Government is seriously considering this!

For who's benefit is this Treaty? It certainly isn't for the benefit of the People.

I wasn't sure if this document covered fair use policy? I'm not sure how they can enforce this without shutting down half the internet.

So in essence what they are really distracting is peoples abilities to swap information on the net?! To stop the ability to rise up against the Government should it go out of control with corrupt ways?!

It makes me wonder why we dont ask congress to call an emergency cession or basically do whatever it takes to take back control of our country... FOR OUR COUNTRY.

Unbelieveable!

Originally posted by Seiko
I wasn't sure if this document covered fair use policy?

It actually undermines Fair Use. The Fair Use Act of 1976 has taken one severe hit after another in the last decade in a systematic attempt to undo the provisions and rights that it granted to the People. The DMCA of 1998, the NET Act of 1997, and the CTEA of 1998 have sadly all but removed Fair Use.

thanks a lot rockefellar you f'n douche.

anything else you want to screw us on?

how about my girlfriend? should i hand her over to you too?

[edit on 11/4/2009 by mahtoosacks]

His own country loses if he does this.

how much money does e-business account for today?

from Amazon to eBay to online retailers....

e-commerce is HUGE.

And then think of the web developers, DBAs, web designers, html integrators..............

That's a massive chunk of employement!

As long as i can still play my CoD 4 and Soon to be MW2 and others can play their WoW i dont realy care what they do!!!

Nazi Zombies Rule!!!!!!

MessOnTheFED!

once again, for the reading impaired, the proposal for this is that it is to be WORLDWIDE with the same rules applying to everyone.

Yes, this means the UK as well - hasn't Peter Mandelson already proposed something similar?
If he has a hand in it, you can bet we in the UK will be signed up before th ink is dry on the "treaty"

For all those who speak smugly of "we did withouut net access before" all this means is that you'll go back to the same level of not knowing anything about the goverment as you did before.

That's something they want badly - control of the net - does it not occur to people to wonder why?

Current Internet and telephony technology is a joke. Look up professor Hartmut muller and his g-com telephone. This phone allows for instantaneous communication between parties all over the solar system without radiation, antennas or a service provides. More than a decade has passed now since he publicly showed this technology.

Why don't you ask your politicians why this isn't installed in every phone.

I thought I would point out something...as all is not lost...yet, any way.

Article VI, paragraph 2, "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

The same part of our Constitution that makes the Sovereignty of States bow to the Supreme Court, also protects against Treaties that violate Federal Laws or conflict with the provisions contained within the Constitution and it's Amendments.

However, there is no penalty for enacting Legislation or Treaties that are inherently unconstitutional. Our government does it all the time...and because of the backlog of cases before the Supreme Court it will take at least a decade before the Supreme Court rules the Treaty unconstitutional, rendering it null and void.

However, if this Treaty is enacted, you will see a rise of Private Internets Deep Webs, and Darknets that will operate parallel to the Public Internet.

And that is something those considering this Treaty should take into consideration. Right now, the Public Internet allows for transparency. If IP Violations occur, you can track the source of that violation and take legal measures. If you take away the Public Internet, the same IP Violations will occur, perhaps even in greater numbers, but hidden from view and in such a way that it can not be tracked or stopped. This is not a solution to any IP problem, but will only make the problem significantly worse.