Google D.C. Talk on ACTA on 11th JanAdded: Saturday, January 9th, 2010
Category: Recent Headlines Involving File Sharing > Ridiculous Criminal Trials
Tags:ET, Extra Torrent, p2p, BitTorrent, Google, website, extratorrent.com, ACTA, D.C
The whole fuss about ACTA, Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, and the new ground rules about data exchange and sharing copyrighted materials on the internet is one step closer to overwhelm the users of Google and all who are interested in the future of rights on the matter of sharing. Google is attempting to take the reshaping of the ACTA and the view of the advocates and country officials into his own hands by starting talks with them and trying to change the rules to hopefully our benefit. Google is entering a discussion that is going on between the major countries of the world including U.S. and many others. The reason why Google has entered the debate is that many global companies from the field of technology are concerned about the impact that ACTA could have on the innovations that the companies are trying to implement and that the future of the users is in trouble.
Google is interested in our thoughts on the matter. No, it’s not a trick, they are giving us a place to state our questions about the current ACTA and to make the whole story about it a little bit clearer. Off course I must give you some explanations about why is this important.
ACTA is currently on the side of the copyright owners of the movies that we share and the eBooks, music albums and software that we use every day. They are forbidding the use of torrent software and other kinds of downloaders that can make the industry lose millions and yet they do not define the actual products that are being forbidden. There is no clear statement about the basic structure of the programs not even a defined kind of programs that are not allowed for use. They just ask what program was used and after you answer they say well that one is not allowed, sorry. It would not be true if I would say that the whole idea of an agreement is false. The agreement is needed to define what can be an intellectual property of a company and till which point does it stay that. Also there should be a way to define what action can be called a violation of that agreement.
All in all, ACTA should change to the benefit of the majority which would be us the users, without affecting the companies in some greater way. Well, except losing money on the materials we decide to share or on the programs we decide to make for our own use. For example software to transfer data from one PC to another or to transfer data to our copyrighted phones or iPods or mp4players or any other device without their software. Or programs to crack their code and change the software of those devices as we see fit after purchasing the device fair and square.
The discussion will take place on Monday, January 11th, 2010 at 4:30 P.M. at Google D.C. 1101 New York Avenue, NW 2nd Floor.
So, to be part of these discussions or make your voice be heard please feel free to post your questions here.
The panel will discuss important questions like the following ones:
- Will ACTA preserve the existing balance in intellectual property laws, providing not just enforcement for copyright holders but also appropriate exceptions for technology creators and users?
- Will it undermine the legal safe harbors that have allowed virtually every Internet service to come into existence?
- Will it encourage governments to endorse “three strikes” penalties that would take away a user’s access to the Internet?
Other already placed questions are:
- Why is ACTA so secretive?
- Who does the ACTA enforcement benefit?
- How on earth does ACTA enforcement of 'geographical indications' and protection of artificial interoperability barriers (technical market segmentation) comply with a 'Free Trade'-objective?
- How's the relation between ACTA and privacy?
The questions are on the spot and you should add your own.
I personally think this is a good step towards a better future for us, the real owners of the Internet, the people for whom it was meant.
Off course if you want to read some more on this matter you can read Rob Pegoraro’s article on this matter, you can access it here.
9th January, 2009.
Saturday, January 9th, 2010
|posted by (2010-01-09 19:47:44)|
|interesting read....thanks sam|
|thanks for sharing Zoran|
|thanks a lotsss|
keep it coming
we got lots of valuable information from this section
|Interesting, I wonder what will happen next?|
|posted by (2010-01-10 01:49:52)|
|Thanks ZOR4N, OMG I agree with Google!!! I guess pigs do fly.|
|posted by (2010-01-10 07:40:00)|
|Gr8 one ZOR4N...|
Keep up the gud job...
|posted by (2010-01-10 09:04:35)|
|cool thanks for the info|
|another fine article here on et, well done mate, thanks|
|i wonder whether this is gonna work out..!!|
|Google is a giant and has lots of political influence imp glad they are throwing their weight around for us.|
|posted by (2010-01-11 00:05:32)|
|I don't believe Google is throwing its weight around to help torrent users. I believe Google is trying to allay a law suit against its commerical entities irrespective of whether it can win or not - law suits are expensive. Basically Google is the largest torrent search engine on the planet. A simple Google search will reveal any torrent you want! |
What Google is trying to do by participating in these talks is create business networks which will allow it to stay on the inside of these negotiations in order to know what is happening. And to be seen to be "helping" the situation of torrent usage and not working against it. I don't believe Google care one way or the other about p2p file sharing. What they are trying to do by being at these negotiations is avoid a larger "can of worms".
From what I understand the creation of ACTA has been done underhandedly by all countries where the laws are slowly being instituted. In Australia it is being done by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT). No government has created a separate statutory authority to handle this issue quite simply because that would take an act of parliament to do so. This way all governments the world over can start the implimentation of ACTA and once it has a foothold and has entered everyone's psyche they can create a statutory authority ie people will just say it is there anyway who cares if there is a proper government department.
I believe we need to beat ACTA at their own game. Realise that these laws are more than likely going to come into play but work at a way to lessen their impact. For example make sure that the laws are so specific in their authoring so that when a case goes to court no lawyer can make a "point of law" argument interpretting the law to mean this when it was written to mean something else. This way there is no precedents set increasing the jurisdictional power of the initial law.
So yes we need to submit questions and we need to be in on the ground floor of the authoring of these statutes. We need to argue that ACTA's ability to look at our ISP records without our consent contravenes the privacy laws. If ACTA then uses the Homeland Security laws to do so we need to get those reworked. If we conduct a business from home then we argue that ACTA getting out ISP records is an infringement on our abilty to "free trade" and earn an income. If that is impeeded then the IRS laws are broken. We must be free to earn a living and we cant earn a living if ACTA can get out ISP records because that is corporate espionage. Without an income we can't pay tax.
We need to get smarter. If laws are written, make them super specific so that they are nearly useless. If you read what they got sites like Pirate Bay and Mininova for, you will see it was so wishy washy that it wasn't until they had to present all their information that they could get them. ACTA was fishing and the current weak laws allow them to do so.
ACTA came into existence with very little jurisdiction. They are self proclaimed. At the moment they are piggy backing on other legal entities such as DFAT in Australia. Until ACTA can get itself full legal status in all countries jointly trying to instigate these laws (Australia, Canada, the European Union (represented by the European Commission, and the European Union President), Japan, Jordan, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland, the United Arab Emirates, and the United States) there can be no cross border or geo blocking of sites world wide. And once again I argue this will impede trade and as such contravene many trading laws world wide.
Whilst we may not be able to stop ACTA as too many countries are involved world wide, we can limit their power by approaching our members of government (especially those in opposition - they want our votes) and getting them to see our side. We need a specific approach working on IRS, Trade, Privacy and Freedom of Speech laws. Don't specifically target p2p and torrents etc but other side issues which add weight to our argument.
I can't see any good coming from ACTA as I believe those behind it are trying to protect their "mountain of cash" and not the rights of users.
|its either us are them - they want to control tha world - and the rest of us just want to live in it|
|posted by (2010-01-11 07:35:33)|
|Thanks Zoran good post|
|posted by (2010-01-11 09:23:30)|
|Amazing Zor4n like always,thank you very much for your article.|
|you sound very informed kazz, but if Google helps us out indirectly that's fine with me.||
Most Popular Stories