They're already trying to revive ACTA

[Harald B]

Just days after EU Parliament overwhelmingly rejected ACTA, it turns out that Canada and Europe are trying to put the same stuff into the Canadian-European Trade Agreement.
And that's not just a figure of speech, either. Check out Michael Geist's analysis to see how the relevant parts of ACTA have quite literally been copied paragraph by paragraph. This kind of arrogance is simply disgusting, is what it is. Spread the word.

[ted12]

Scandalous!

[Johro]

Up to you to stop it Europe. Canadians probably wont be pushing against it. Our law enforcement has already publicly stated that, even though there are laws against it, they wont waste time and tax dollars actively pursuing internet copyright infringement. So even if we do create new legislation, it probably wont change anything here. Just another tacked on charge for people caught doing other stuff.

[GaryCXJk]

Cool, they're reviving some law that will most likely cost Europe a few million Euros in a time where four of the twenty members are in a recession. Great job!

Also, for those who don't know, that was sarcasm.

[RetroVortex]

Man. I disliked goverments in general.

But now I'm really starting to fucking despise them. To hate them with every fibre of my being.

If this stupidity goes any further, then I may have to become an anarchist!
(... okay so maybe not that far. But I will be very mad, and refuse to vote. XD)

EDIT: I mean there are a probably a million other more important issues to take care of at this very moment, but they spend their time lobbying this bullcrap.

>;/

[Haggis]

Let's start a country of our own. "We the people of Telltalalalalalalalia..."

[coolsome]

And I will be the first lady!

[Darth Marsden]

Only if I can be a General in the Army. With one of those awesome military suits that impress the ladies.

[ted12]

I call being the Archduke of Blecchistan. (What Blecchistan is, I have no idea.)

[GuybrushWilco]

Originally Posted by Johro

Up to you to stop it Europe. Canadians probably wont be pushing against it. Our law enforcement has already publicly stated that, even though there are laws against it, they wont waste time and tax dollars actively pursuing internet copyright infringement. So even if we do create new legislation, it probably wont change anything here. Just another tacked on charge for people caught doing other stuff.

I'd be careful with that complacency. This would be a binding law of the land vs oral statements by current law enforcement, so even if they do not actively pursue it now, what is to stop them from doing so later? or future members law enforcement?

[Johro]

I'm aware of that. The thing is, the population, as a whole, isn't terribly afraid of such a threat. It was different when it was America, which would act on such a law and would have affected the websites we visit. Yes, I'm aware that one could lead to the other, but seriously, the bulk of the American public doesn't look upon Canada and the European countries as shining examples. Truth, in the eyes of most people educated through the media, Europe is full of crazy people and Canada is full of idiots. Try to argue, but we, in Canada, watch the exact same TV shows and movies as the USA. I see what they see. Trust me, it's like there's a law which states that, through the media, no other country is allowed to be glorified or have any attributes better than the USA(with the exception to Holland).

Okay, back on track. It is difficult for the people here to be afraid of such threats when, even at the height of Napster, Limewire, etc, they didn't do anything. The law enforcement seem very determined to stick to life threatening situations. I mean shit, marijuana may not be legal here but it sure the hell seems like it. No one seems to give a shit unless people are selling to kids or run a grow op. You can smell it everywhere. I get tourists asking me all the time if it's legal. "No, but no one really cares, just don't light up right in front of the police or a school". Welcome to Canada, where the police don't do anything but help people who need help or prevent people from hurting others. Imagine such a bizarre concept!(sorry to let the cat out of the bag, we only have the same media related laws of the USA to be able to watch the same TV and movies as you guys; to appease the lawyers)

You are correct though, there's nothing that says that this wont change one day.

[Haggis]

All your wishes are granted, as long as I can be the nation's Chief Chronicler and Overall Pretty Cool Guy.

Originally Posted by GuybrushWilco

even if they do not actively pursue it now, what is to stop them from doing so later? or future members law enforcement?

Well... they might try a few cases to set an example, as the RIAA (blegh) did by suing individuals for millions, but I think they might be wary of the public outcry that would follow. Unless they shut down the internet (and if we ever get governments that do that, we're as good as doomed already), there'll likely be a lot of protests, perhaps even boycotts (remember this is big business we're talking about, and if there's ever one that tries to stupidly enforce an ACTA-like law, we can all agree to stop buying their stuff; yes, I'm that naive).

That said, I do get uncomfortable whenever I see those powerful lobbies get what they want, but it's important to remember that no matter what, you'll still have your personal integrity. Nobody can tell you what to do, nobody can force you to do something that goes against the basic rights human beings should have. And together we are strong.

...wait, what was this about again? I got carried away there...

[FrankT]

BWAHHH!!

[GuybrushWilco]

Originally Posted by Johro

I'm aware of that. The thing is, the population, as a whole, isn't terribly afraid of such a threat. It was different when it was America, which would act on such a law and would have affected the websites we visit. Yes, I'm aware that one could lead to the other, but seriously, the bulk of the American public doesn't look upon Canada and the European countries as shining examples. Truth, in the eyes of most people educated through the media, Europe is full of crazy people and Canada is full of idiots. Try to argue, but we, in Canada, watch the exact same TV shows and movies as the USA. I see what they see. Trust me, it's like there's a law which states that, through the media, no other country is allowed to be glorified or have any attributes better than the USA(with the exception to Holland).

Okay, back on track. It is difficult for the people here to be afraid of such threats when, even at the height of Napster, Limewire, etc, they didn't do anything. The law enforcement seem very determined to stick to life threatening situations. I mean shit, marijuana may not be legal here but it sure the hell seems like it. No one seems to give a shit unless people are selling to kids or run a grow op. You can smell it everywhere. I get tourists asking me all the time if it's legal. "No, but no one really cares, just don't light up right in front of the police or a school". Welcome to Canada, where the police don't do anything but help people who need help or prevent people from hurting others. Imagine such a bizarre concept!(sorry to let the cat out of the bag, we only have the same media related laws of the USA to be able to watch the same TV and movies as you guys; to appease the lawyers)

You are correct though, there's nothing that says that this wont change one day.

First of all, I was not trying to take any jabs at Canada, if that i what you thought, since you seemed rather defensive. I will ignore the gross generalizations and stereotyping in your post, and just get back to the original topic. The whole situation makes me think about boiling frogs in a pot. If you throw a frog into a pot of boiling water, it will of course jump out immediately, but if you throw a frog into cold water, and very gradually increase the temperature, it will boil and die. Of course any culture or society is susceptible to this.

[Haggis]

Originally Posted by GuybrushWilco

If you throw a frog into a pot of boiling water, it will of course jump out immediately, but if you throw a frog into cold water, and very gradually increase the temperature, it will boil and die.

Wrong! http://www.snopes.com/critters/wild/frogboil.asp

That doesn't mean that the comparison couldn't still hold water, but...

Of course any culture or society is susceptible to this.

I am inclined to disagree. You speak of generalizations, yet you lump entire groups of people together into cultures and societies. History has shown that there are countless frogs (I am speaking of human beings) who have escaped when they noticed the water getting warmer, for instance in World War 2 (yeah, yeah, I know, Godwin's law...) there were people who saw what was going on and decided they wouldn't be a part of it. Then there were the frogs who stayed behind, not because they didn't notice the water getting hotter, but because they simply didn't care.

My point is that we all have an individual conscience and accompanying responsibility. There will always be those who just shrug and carry on, then there are others who - sooner or later - take action. With many water-leaping frogs from the latter category, you can form a powerful army of frogs.

[coolsome]

I am sick of all these acronyms that will destroy the internet unless I sign something or retweet this!

[Haggis]

Next thing you know they'll come up with an act called Regulation On Fiduciary Law, Copyright, Online Piracy, Theft (Ex Rel).

No idea what it means, but it would make for a great acronym.

[Alcoremortis]

I have a comic that's mildly relevant. But only mildly because if it were too relevant then I wouldn't be doing my job.

[GuybrushWilco]

Originally Posted by Haggis

Wrong! http://www.snopes.com/critters/wild/frogboil.asp

That doesn't mean that the comparison couldn't still hold water, but...


I am inclined to disagree. You speak of generalizations, yet you lump entire groups of people together into cultures and societies. History has shown that there are countless frogs (I am speaking of human beings) who have escaped when they noticed the water getting warmer, for instance in World War 2 (yeah, yeah, I know, Godwin's law...) there were people who saw what was going on and decided they wouldn't be a part of it. Then there were the frogs who stayed behind, not because they didn't notice the water getting hotter, but because they simply didn't care.

My point is that we all have an individual conscience and accompanying responsibility. There will always be those who just shrug and carry on, then there are others who - sooner or later - take action. With many water-leaping frogs from the latter category, you can form a powerful army of frogs.

I don't disagree with anything you have said, except for your statement that I was speaking in generalizations. I was was trying to say that any individual is susceptible to it, regardless of where they are from. I point is that I disagree with the notion that one shouldn't worry about it, because it might not be enforced, because you can count on the good people in power not to enforce it. I agree that there are always individuals who will take action, I just question whether they will do it now when it's easily doable, or wait until things get ugly, because it doesn't seem so bad right now.

[Jennifer]

Originally Posted by Johro

sorry to let the cat out of the bag, we only have the same media related laws of the USA to be able to watch the same TV and movies as you guys; to appease the lawyers

The problem with having laws like this is that government from other countries can use them against the people from your country. Take Kim Dotcom of Megaupload for example. He was arrested on charges that his Megaupload service promoted piracy by the US by way of the FBI in New Zealand, and his assets were seized, and his hard drives were copied. New Zealand courts found the seizure to be illegal. This makes the US government's attempts to extradite Dotcom to the US harder, since the FBI was found to be in violation of New Zealand law. The ACTA laws make it possible for governments of other countries to make charges and order the seizure of assets against people like Kim Dotcom. These laws would make it impossible to fight extradition hearings, since the FBI's actions would never have been found to be illegal had ACTA laws been in effect at the time. And, taking your country as an example, if you are extradited on anti-piracy charges, it would be a lot harder to fight an anti-piracy battle in the United States than it would be in Canada. Although, even if a person in Canada who had their hard drives and assets seized by the US via the FBI wasn't extradited and the case was tried in Canada, the ACTA laws would make it difficult to fight there as well.