Posted on 11/04/2009 9:35:36 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
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)
looks like crap
Digital rights management.
It is the technology that prevents you from copying a DVD or putting an iTunes song on anything but an apple player.
Most DRM can be circumvented and it is probably/maybe legal for personal use at this time.
Actually this started under Clinton. You also might recall as a gesture of trust to harmonize our copyright between the US and Japan the US gave them a copy of all pending patients.
Maybe that is what Clinton’s lawyer was stuffing in his pants at the National Security Archive center.
The internet killed Gore, Kerry and Dan Rather. It is killing, as I type this, Gore and Obama. They must stop the free flow of ideas and speech or become obsolete.
Their strength used to be in an impenetrably huge bureaucracy, against which the average citizen - or even citizen group - was no match. The internet changed all that, and gave us the power we had when government was small.
They must stop the free flow of ideas and speech or be obliterated by truth. They are in a fight for their lives. What they don’t know is a lot of other people feel that way too, which is why there are ammo shortages.
I can run any digital feed into my pc and create a .wav or .mp3 file.
It is a fact that a form of this program was begun before Obammy came to office. HOWEVER, the current commies have altered the aims&means to achieve this usurpation to include more empowerment fro the central governmental authorites in America.
“Digital Rights Management”
The means to prevent you from copying the works you bought. DVDs have this in the form of CSS. Just copying the files from the DVD to your hard drive will normally result in unplayable files. The encryption of CSS must first be cracked. That’s easy, but illegal, even if you’re making a backup (normally legal) or format shifting (also normally legal) to your hard drive or iPod.
DRM has been severely abused for anticompetitive means and used to take away our fair use rights to copyrighted materials.
We already have an industry-purchased law enforcing DRM called the DMCA. This will go even further.
Hmm it seems to work fine but here is the article
Negotiations on the highly controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement start in a few hours in Seoul, South Korea. This week’s closed negotiations will focus on “enforcement in the digital environment.” Negotiators will be discussing the Internet provisions drafted by the US government. No text has been officially released but as Professor Michael Geist and IDG are reporting, leaks have surfaced. The leaks confirm everything that we feared about the secret ACTA negotiations. The Internet provisions have nothing to do with addressing counterfeit products, but are all about imposing a set of copyright industry demands on the global Internet, including obligations on ISPs to adopt Three Strikes Internet disconnection policies, and a global expansion of DMCA-style TPM laws.
As expected, the Internet provisions will go beyond existing international treaty obligations and follow the language of Article 18.10.30 of the recent U.S. – South Korea Free Trade Agreement. We see three points of concern.
First, according to the leaks, ACTA member countries will be required to provide for third-party (Internet Intermediary) liability. This is not required by any of the major international IP treaties – not by the 1994 Trade Related Aspects of IP agreement, nor the WIPO Copyright and WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty. However, US copyright owners have long sought this. (For instance, see page 19 of the Industry Functional Advisory Committee report on the 2003 US- Singapore Free Trade Agreement noting the need for introducing a system of ISP liability). (Previously available at http://www.ustr.gov/new/fta/Singapore/advisor_reports.htm.)
Second and more importantly, ACTA will include some limitations on Internet Intermediary liability. Many ACTA negotiating countries already have these regimes in place: the US, EU, Australia, Japan, South Korea. To get the benefit of the ACTA safe harbors, Internet intermediaries will need to follow notice and takedown regimes, and put in place policies to deter unauthorized storage and transmission of allegedly copyright infringing content.
However, contrary to current US law and practice, the US text apparently conditions the safe harbors on Internet intermediaries adopting a Graduated Response or Three Strikes policy. IDG reports that:
“The U.S. wants ACTA to force ISPs to “put in place policies to deter unauthorized storage and transmission of IP infringing content (for example clauses in customers’ contracts allowing a graduated response),” according to the [leaked European] Commission memo.”
Let’s reflect on what this means: First, the US government appears to be pushing for Three Strikes to be part of the new global IP enforcement regime which ACTA is intended to create – despite the fact that it has been categorically rejected by the European Parliament and by national policymakers in several ACTA negotiating countries, and has never been proposed by US legislators.
Second, US negotiators are seeking policies that will harm the US technology industry and citizens across the globe. Three Strikes/ Graduated Response is the top priority of the entertainment industry. The content industry has sought this since the European office of the Motion Picture Association began touting Three Strikes as ISP “best practice” in 2005. Indeed, the MPAAand the RIAA expressly asked for ACTA to include obligations on ISPs to adopt Three Strikes policies in their 2008 submissions to the USTR. The USTR apparently listened and agreed, disregarding the concerns raised by both the US’s major technology and telecom companies and industry associations (who dwarf the US entertainment industry), and public interest groups and libraries.
How does this fit with the oft-repeated statement of the USTR that ACTA will not change US law, which justified the decision to negotiate ACTA as an Executive Agreement outside of regular US Congressional oversight measures? That remains to be seen.
The safe harbors in the US Copyright law require ISPs to adopt and reasonably implement a policy for termination of “repeat infringers” “in appropriate circumstances”. US law currently gives ISPs considerable flexibility to determine what are “appropriate circumstances” justifying the termination of a customer’s Internet account. If the leak reports are correct, this would no longer be true. Instead, ISPs would be required to automatically terminate a customer upon a rightsholders’ repeat allegation of copyright infringement at a particular IP address. Could the USTR be relying on the somewhat specious distinction between a Three Strikes law, and its implementation by a policy adopted by ISPs as part of a gun-to-the-head self regulation regime?
According to IDG, the leaked European Commission memo also states that the US Internet chapter is “sensitive due to the different points of view regarding the internet chapter both within the Administration, with Congress and among stakeholders (content providers on one side, supporters of internet freedom on the other).”
That’s hardly surprising, given that the ACTA text appears to leave the door open for major changes to the existing national Internet intermediary liability regimes that have been the global status quo since the mid 1990s, and which have underpinned both tremendous Internet innovation, and citizens’ online freedom of expression and the rich world of user generated content that we take for granted today.
European citizens should also be concerned and indignant. As reported, the ACTA Internet provisions would also appear to be inconsistent with the EU eCommerce Directive and existing national law, as Joe McNamee, the European Affairs Coordinator of EDRi notes:
“The Commission appears to be opening up ISPs to third party liability, even though the European Parliament has expressly said this mustn’t happen,” McNamee said, adding that ACTA looks likely to erode European citizens’ civil liberties.”
Last, but by no means least. ACTA signatories will be required to adopt both civil and criminal legal sanctions for copyright owners’ technological protection measures, in line with the US-Korea (and previous) FTA obligations. They will also be required to include a ban on the act of circumvention of technological protection measures, and a ban on the manufacture, import and distribution of circumvention tools. This will reduce the flexibility otherwise available to countries drafting these sort of laws under the WIPO Copyright Treaty and WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty. The majority of WIPO’s Member States rejected the circumvention device ban sought by the US delegation in the draft Basic Proposal for the 1996 WIPO Copyright Treaty. Because ACTA is intended to create new global international IP enforcement standards, including these provisions will allow US negotiators to achieve what they have not been able to do to date – ensuring that the US’s overbroad implementation of the WIPO Internet Treaty TPM obligations becomes the global standard.
This should give all citizens - and the ACTA countries negotiating in their names - pause for thought.
Also great coverage of what this means for other countries: Cory Doctorow at Boing Boing; Michael Geist (Canada); Kim Weatherall at LawFont here and here and Electronic Frontiers Australia (Australia); and InternetNZ (New Zealand).
Related Issues: Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement
[Permalink]
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/11/leaked-acta-internet-provisions-three-strikes-and-
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/11/leaked-acta-internet-provisions-three-strikes-and-
http://www.lawfont.com/2009/11/04/acta-here-we-go-again/
http://www.lawfont.com/2009/11/04/geist-on-acta/
http://internetnz.net.nz/media/media-releases-2009/internetnz-alarmed-by-latest-acta-leaks
Sorry these were what I meant to send
Thanks for that. Important stuff. I have put it up on the website too.
This would be like the phone company being required to ensure we don’t discuss confidential information or the US Postal Service ensuring we don’t mail confidential information. These liberals are idiots and dangerous to this country.
Interesting that Australians and New Zealanders are posting this. Makes one wonder how much protest elsewhere we will see.
It would depend on the wording of the treaty. If you put DRM on your works, then forgot the code needed to free them, then it could be illegal for you to break your own DRM to get to your own works.
Remember, DRM can be anything. It doesn't even have to be effective. Since what we write here is by law copyrighted at the moment we write it I am applying DRM to the following sentence:
"DRM Sucks!"
If you select the text between the quotes, you just broke the DRM I used to protect my copyrighted comment without my permission. I didn't give my permission, so, seriously, you just broke the law. Idiotic, isn't it?
I promise not to turn you into the copyright cartel for reeducation. It doesn't really matter though, since they think copyright is only for big corporations. They honestly don't care about the copyright of the average person, and have violated it repeatedly with a "So sue us" mentality.
Kissinger said you can bypass the constitution via the use of treaties.
Sure what website?
So, just “accusing” a person or organization is enough for “punishment”? That’s denial of Due Process.........................
The Australians seem to be a freedom loving bunch so I am glad to see they are making waves. I guess the New Zealanders are really starting to make some waves too with recent remarks the pc world is whining about.
It also went on in the Clinton administration.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.