Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

ACTA document leaked - The end of ATS

page: 4
52
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 9 2010 @ 08:53 PM
link   
Greetings ATS. In trying to find more up to date info on this topic, I managed to find a speech by one Michael Geist at the Washington College of Law. Besides somehow being a supporter of ACTA, the guy goes over some key points in the agreement and gives a little history about it. Others more knowledgeable about law than I might know if he's a big name in the process, but I can't say for sure. Either way, I found it both informative and infuriating.



EDIT: Killed redundant link and polished clunky formatting. Probably should've written this in Word first, and with less sentence fragments...

[edit on 9-7-2010 by Allargando]




posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 04:48 PM
link   
I have been reading the document. This is how it has been defining information related to video.


without authorization of the holder of copyright [or related rights] [or the theatre manager] in a [motion picture or other audiovisual work], [cinematographic work] [knowingly] [uses an audiovisual recording device to transmit or make] [makes] a copy of [, or transmits to the public] the motion picture or other audiovisual work, or any part thereof, from a performance of the motion picture or other audiovisual work in a motion picture exhibition facility open to the public.]


The use of the words make or transmit I think are the keys here. That means any one who makes a copy of, and the ISP who he uses to load the copy, then the ISP who again lets some one watch it.

I have not yet found where it says anything about cutting off a persons internet although be it I can see where an ISP would simply block sites that host videos.



posted on Jul, 10 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Here is more information that I think is relevant.


For greater certainty, the Parties understand that third party liability means liability for any person who authorizes for a direct financial benefit, induces through or by conduct directed to promoting infringement, or knowingly and materially aids any act of copyright or related rights infringement by another. Further, the Parties also understand that the application of third party liability may include consideration of exceptions or limitations to exclusive rights that are confined to certain special cases that do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work, performance or phonogram, and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the right holder, including fair use, fair dealing, or their equivalents.


The above could mean that by posting the link with the google or youtube buttons could make you or ATS a criminal by aiding in the distribution of material. But it gets worse.


Each Party shall enable right holders, who have given effective notification to an online service provider of materials that they claim with valid reasons to be infringing their copyright or related rights, to expeditiously obtain from that provider information on the identity of the relevant subscriber.


The above now means that the corp of rich PTB will be able to get any information your ISP has on you, and then of coarse use it against you in what ever way they see fit. The term sheeple is starting to have a new more ominous meaning.



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Allargando
 


Thanks for this

Very informative video, still haven't listened to it all yet



posted on Jul, 11 2010 @ 05:56 PM
link   
The people talking about setting up there own INTERNET make me laugh. You could set up a local net between a few computers and a few houses. But what are you going to do about the computer 5 miles down the road? Run your own wire to it. Remember you will still need wires or a radio signal to connect the computers on your net. If you use the phone company's wires you will get caught as soon as you turn it on. If you use a radio transmitter you will get caught as soon as you turn it on. People seem to forget that the computers have to be tied together soon how and if TPTB want it stopped it will be stopped.

TPTB are killing the Internet bit by bit slowly to easy the pain. But make no mistake the Internet is dieing. 10 or 20 years from now the Internet will be worthless to most people. Only Businesses and factories will have use for it. No blogs, no ATS, in fact little of anything. If TPTB want it stopped it will be stopped even if they have to send a Sidewinder into the server.
People need to understand that once the Internet is gone it will be gone forever and nothing will take its place. So this have to be stopped now before it is too late. As how to stop it I do not know. I am starting to think it may be too late already. Hope I am wrong on that.

Remember, there is no PLAN B



posted on Oct, 20 2010 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Not sure if you've seen these documents yet?

trade.ec.europa.eu... (public)

www.laquadrature.net... (confidential?)

Also check out project Skynet

www.partyvan.info...



posted on Oct, 21 2010 @ 03:08 PM
link   
This, this is bad, indeed bad.

I'm sending the link to some popular YouTubers like PhillyD, Shane Dawson, WhatTheBuck, and ShayTards. (PhillyD is most likely to talk about it on his news show).



posted on Oct, 21 2010 @ 03:16 PM
link   
The internet is going nowhere, it has become a living thing, and too big for anyone to stop. How funny some think the government can stop this beast they themselves created and unleashed, rofl.



posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 01:58 PM
link   
If it gets as intrusive as taking your computer, at an airport, to search it, then it will be so outragously wrong that it will be quite useful in formenting the political resistance that is badly for wider political change. That's to say "democracy renewal" across most of the English speaking world.
Ultimately there is very little we subjects-citizens will do about it if big buisness wants it so bad. But at the same time its good to remember every cloud has a silver lining.



posted on Oct, 22 2010 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Can you imagine what would have happened if cooking had been developed like software or books or music or movies?

I'm so glad that some people still share...recipes...and such.
I'd hate to have to eat rice for dinner. No salt. Someone patented adding it.

Beans for dinner again, no salt, no spices, no hambone ever,

rice for dinner. Water to drink. Not at the same time.

Copyright laws suck.



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 05:46 PM
link   




^well worth the watch.
edit on 26/10/10 by ghostsoldier because: yo



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Johnze
Good luck trying to police the near infinite amount of VPS out there in nations where our laws do not apply.

EVEN A CHINAMAN CAN DOWNLOAD MOVIES

if he knows what he's doing, the internet is impossible to police. Why not take a stroll through TORPARK?


If this information is true and correctly summarized...

They don't need to police every single one. Its the threat of such actions and the ability to act upon those threats which is significant. The ones that they make examples out of will be enough to terrorize people into falling back into line. It will also provide the ability to legally harass and sensor those who try to spread information which the government does not want spread. Three strikes and your out? No internet...forever?! How easy do you think it would be to "find" copyrighted material on "specific" computers which is deemed inappropriately acquired.

I understand that, if used appropriately, this ruling would protect those whose work is being stolen and also will aid in monitoring dangerous people and info that may be coming into or out of the country. However, these agencies are being run by human beings. That's all they are, just imperfect human beings...with their own agendas.

As someone who travels a LOT with her laptop in tow holding various items, which are not only sensitive business documents but also personal information not for some Joe-Schmo airport-security guards eyes...I am angered by this. I don't have anything illegal, I am not a copyright material stealer, I am not a criminal. Why do I automatically become guilty until proven innocent as I walk through the airport gate.

I am going to research this more and try to hold my anger about this until I can see it with my own eyes.

Edited to add: I'm just gonna show up at the Airport tomorrow in my underwear. I think it would save a lot of time. And then Mr. security agent won't have to troll my computer to see what I have.

Why am I so angry about this? I am going to go out into the sunshine for awhile and try to adjust my attitude. I am so fricking mad about this.
edit on 26-10-2010 by idunno12 because: !



posted on Oct, 26 2010 @ 07:42 PM
link   
Hmmmm, lets say that this went into effect, but some countries dissagreed and put out thier internet anyways. OK, lets say JO BLOW in usa tapped into said internet sites. So tell me, what are they going to do? run around in an unmarked van with an antenna sticking out trying to find or catch you in the act of useing such sites. Thats like finding a needle in a haystack. They would have to monitor said signal or signals to catch you. and on top of that you are not always on said sites to be caught. Are they going house to house to personally check every computer on planet earth to catch you. The gov't would have to have you click on something and it puts a tracker in your computer. SO PLEASE CLICK HERE TO BE SAFE OF SUCH ACTIVITY. I would be careful as to what i clicked on on my computer from now on. To click could mean a tracker device is planted. WHO knows, maybe just to click on the internet gives you a tracker device put in your computer. Or maybe the new computers are equipped with such a device like all new cars have a chip implanted in them to be tracked and all it has to be is activated. ALL cars since 2005 have such chips in them and all police have to do is get the licience no# of a stolen car and activate the chip and track it on GPS to pick up the car or the thieves driving it.






top topics



 
52
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join