Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 26th Jan 2012 22:50 UTC, submitted by kragil
Internet & Networking I promise we'll have more on ACTA next week, but for now, I'm too busy to properly cover the subject. In any case, the European Commission signed it today, but that means little - each individual member state's parliament still has to ratify it, and if one votes against it, it's over. The European Parliament has to accept it too - not a done deal either. My opinion on the matter is clear.
Order by: Score:
Well...
by obsidian on Fri 27th Jan 2012 08:55 UTC
obsidian
Member since:
2007-05-12

... three steps forward (with the fight against SOPA), and two steps back with this.

Hopefully one of the countries in Europe will vote against this, thereby sinking ACTA.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Well...
by anda_skoa on Fri 27th Jan 2012 09:53 UTC in reply to "Well... "
anda_skoa Member since:
2005-07-07

Hopefully one of the countries in Europe will vote against this, thereby sinking ACTA.


I am putting more hope on the European Parliament.

Each individual country's government is too easy to "persuade" and when the negative aspects of ACTA are finally reaching the population they will just blame the EU as usual.

And influential parties in most member nations have tightly controlled voting procedures, e.g. every member of parliament associated with the same party is told how to vote on certain issues.

This is a lot less problematic on the EU level, since factions in the EU Parliament consist of representatives of parties from all over the place.
The of course share common goals but no centralized control structures or enforcable voting loyalties.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Well...
by darknexus on Sat 28th Jan 2012 05:49 UTC in reply to "RE: Well... "
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

I am putting more hope on the European Parliament.

Each individual country's government is too easy to "persuade" and when the negative aspects of ACTA are finally reaching the population they will just blame the EU as usual.

And influential parties in most member nations have tightly controlled voting procedures, e.g. every member of parliament associated with the same party is told how to vote on certain issues.

This is a lot less problematic on the EU level, since factions in the EU Parliament consist of representatives of parties from all over the place.
The of course share common goals but no centralized control structures or enforcable voting loyalties.


Funny thing is, even being from the US (and not too proud of it at this point) I've never understood the whole party system. Why, exactly, are people too damned afraid to vote what they think, instead of what they're told? Voting only works if people have the guts to do it right, and the party system makes a mockery of the whole process no matter where it's instituted.
edit: typos.

Edited 2012-01-28 05:50 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Well...
by Thom_Holwerda on Sat 28th Jan 2012 09:53 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Well... "
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Why, exactly, are people too damned afraid to vote what they think, instead of what they're told?


And yet, with 8 parties in our Dutch parliament, we have more choice than Americans have with 535 seats in Congress.

Think about that for a second.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Well...
by darknexus on Sat 28th Jan 2012 13:40 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Well... "
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

" Why, exactly, are people too damned afraid to vote what they think, instead of what they're told?


And yet, with 8 parties in our Dutch parliament, we have more choice than Americans have with 535 seats in Congress.

Think about that for a second.
"

Thought about it, but not clear what you're trying to convey as I know very little about the Netherlands. Do you mean to say that, in the Netherlands, people don't always vote the way their precious parties tell them to? Or did you mean that, while they do vote so, at least there are more choices of which Mafia controls you?

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Well...
by Neolander on Sat 28th Jan 2012 09:55 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Well... "
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Well, you can have political parties with freedom of expression inside of them. It typically happens inside of smaller parties here.

It is just that not all of them are this way. Some employ mafia-like techniques to make their members vote "the right way". Though luckily, members do not accept this all the time.

Edited 2012-01-28 09:55 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Well...
by twitterfire on Sat 28th Jan 2012 18:24 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Well... "
twitterfire Member since:
2008-09-11


Why, exactly, are people too damned afraid to vote what they think, instead of what they're told?


People aren't afraid, people are stupid. Even bright, clever people can be stupid and act stupid. People don't think much about future. And even if they do think, they think in terms of money or whatever, not in terms of rights.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Well...
by zima on Thu 2nd Feb 2012 23:19 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Well... "
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

even being from the US (and not too proud of it at this point) I've never understood the whole party system [...] Voting only works if people have the guts to do it right, and the party system makes a mockery of the whole process no matter where it's instituted

Some amount of inertia (lasting one parliamentary term for example - or less, if gov falls apart and early elections are called), consistency of sorts, isn't bad and helps prevent chaos ...that's the whole point of people forming cooperatives of various kinds, also parties. Which, by themselves, don't automatically preclude right choices (sure, from time to time we get something ...awkward; but that's still probably "the least of evils")

If it becomes ossified, with scarcely any variety and false contrasts ("even"?), that's another issue - but it can be largely avoided (come on, this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Parties'_seat_share_in_Polish_Sejms.png is the recent history of my political landscape - 3 largest parties in present parliament didn't even exist 15 years ago, and 3rd largest is a new phenomena; only too bad the volatility means this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Beer-Lovers'_Party lovely one from '91 didn't make it ;( ...BTW, a recent photo from my parliament: http://kyon.pl/img/20900,sejm,pl,polityczne,politics,acta,V_mask,po... )

Edited 2012-02-02 23:23 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Well...
by Doc Pain on Sat 28th Jan 2012 18:02 UTC in reply to "RE: Well... "
Doc Pain Member since:
2006-10-08

I am putting more hope on the European Parliament.


Maybe put more hope on the individual national states' government. Signing something "in" the EU doesn't imply it's automatically valid for all the states of the EU. Eurpoean right has to be transformed into national right, which might take some time. Time for the people to wake up their "representatives" in the government.

Each individual country's government is too easy to "persuade" and when the negative aspects of ACTA are finally reaching the population they will just blame the EU as usual.


Of course, because people do only receive "EO right" as far as those have become national rights. Some are good, others are plain stupid. No matter which governments you compare, one is more stupid than the other. :-)

And influential parties in most member nations have tightly controlled voting procedures, e.g. every member of parliament associated with the same party is told how to vote on certain issues.


Correct. Furthermore, the political parties are highly influenced by the economy ("lobbying"), even though most of them do deny it. Individuals have no place in this "controlled situation" as they might act deviantly.

Example: In the basic law for the the federal republic of Germany, there's a sentence reading as: "The democratic parties participate in the forming of the political will of the people." Reality is: They are forming that will (or better, they exercise it instead or on behalf on the people). That's why no "higher ranks" in politics are chosen by normal people. It's a thing totally happening within the few parties we have, and those are influences, well... I may say controlled by industry, banking, clerical and economy organisations.

So to come back to the main context: What do you expect to happen? For the loobyists ti give up the "higher good" of profit for more democracy? Ha!

This is a lot less problematic on the EU level, since factions in the EU Parliament consist of representatives of parties from all over the place.
The of course share common goals but no centralized control structures or enforcable voting loyalties.


As I said, I really fear that those representatives in EU parliament already have their "lobby chip" implanted.

Again the question: What do you expect from people who sign a list for having applied a meeting or assemply that didn't even happen, getting several hundred Euros for that, and confronted with their misbehaviour, running away, calling security or simply stating: "I am entitled to." Do not expect them to be any different than national, regional or municipal politicans. They're all (i. e. 99,9% of them) for the "higher good". They do not bite the hand that feeds them candy. Instead, they bite the hand that keeps them alive whenever possible. :-)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Well...
by cyrilleberger on Mon 30th Jan 2012 08:10 UTC in reply to "RE: Well... "
cyrilleberger Member since:
2006-02-01

"Hopefully one of the countries in Europe will vote against this, thereby sinking ACTA.


I am putting more hope on the European Parliament.

Each individual country's government is too easy to "persuade" and when the negative aspects of ACTA are finally reaching the population they will just blame the EU as usual.
"

That might be true, but the government might not be in full control on the validation process. For instance, in France, if ACTA requires a change in the constitution, it would require the agreement of both houses in the parliament, and currently the upper house is controlled by the opposition, and the socialists are usually against the strong anti copyright laws.

The main advantage of a block at the parliament level is that it would block ACTA for all EU countries, instead of just one.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Well...
by Laurence on Fri 27th Jan 2012 10:32 UTC in reply to "Well... "
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

... three steps forward (with the fight against SOPA), and two steps back with this.

I'd say more than 2 steps back as the potential for this could be far more damaging than SOPA.

Not only is this just the start of a global initiative to legislate ACTA worldwide, but it also incorporates active monitoring at the heart of the proposal. This means that you are being watched, regardless of your moral compass and regardless of your intent to pirate; you are still being watched just in case you do.

I swear the MPAA and RIAA are doing a great job at destroying the "innocent until proven guilty" doctrine that we were once proud of.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Well...
by Soulbender on Fri 27th Jan 2012 13:02 UTC in reply to "RE: Well... "
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Come on people, you are forgetting the greater good: profit!
It's all for the greater good.

Reply Score: 2

A petition against ACTA
by Janvl on Fri 27th Jan 2012 12:24 UTC
Janvl
Member since:
2007-02-20

I can only advise all of you to sign this petition:
http://www.avaaz.org/en/

It might help, the Avaaz network has over 10.000.000 members.

Reply Score: 1

they ratified
by jabbotts on Fri 27th Jan 2012 13:06 UTC
jabbotts
Member since:
2007-09-06

parlimentary observer resigned in protest but most signatories put it on the dotted line. ACTA, because everyone should have the opertunity to double over the desk and take it from the US.

Reply Score: 2

Profit is for the better good...
by hakossem on Fri 27th Jan 2012 13:35 UTC
hakossem
Member since:
2005-07-15

Profit is for the better good... as long as there is competition. This is the base of our economy and what is leading the economic growth for the last two hundred years.
Intellectual property, as it is today, is used to avoid competition.
When the president and governments are fighting against competition, we shouldn't be surprise the economy goes bad... ACTA will only make it worse.

Reply Score: 1

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

In the last 200 hundred years we stumbled on ways to use on a mass scale essentially free energy, basically "stealing" it from the past (that's mostly where such http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Human_welfare_and_ecological_foot... crazy levels come from), and also from the future (by spoilage, making productivity of "future hectares" much lesser) - that's pretty much it.

Oh, and all this time it has been exploited by pretty much monopolies; with great abuses until govs - mostly do representing people in the end - stepped in ...still, we'd better settle on more sane sources (and on less waste - there's no good reason, for quite a few places on that graph, to use ~2 times more for no better effect), otherwise it might get really messy.

Reply Score: 2

How to fight ACTA
by twitterfire on Fri 27th Jan 2012 13:46 UTC
twitterfire
Member since:
2008-09-11
So...
by crhylove on Fri 27th Jan 2012 19:51 UTC
crhylove
Member since:
2010-04-10

...Where do I move that still has basic civil liberties? The moon?

Reply Score: 1

RE: So...
by Pro-Competition on Fri 27th Jan 2012 20:23 UTC in reply to "So..."
Pro-Competition Member since:
2007-08-20

...Where do I move that still has basic civil liberties? The moon?


Not if Newt Gingrich has anything to say about it! ;^)

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: So...
by blitze on Fri 27th Jan 2012 20:40 UTC in reply to "RE: So..."
blitze Member since:
2006-09-15

Try Mars but better get in quick, once the moon becomes the 51st state, they'll be eyeing Mars. ;)

Bunch of Fascist Pricks. Yeah world - lets bend over and take one for Uncle Sam if not, we can expect some warm and fuzzy Depleted Uranium to keep us comforted with. When are these people being tried for crimes against humanity???

Reply Score: 2

RE: So...
by Lorin on Sun 29th Jan 2012 06:45 UTC in reply to "So..."
Lorin Member since:
2010-04-06

The way things are going, China.

Reply Score: 1

RE: So...
by zima on Thu 2nd Feb 2012 23:48 UTC in reply to "So..."
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Oh come on, have some perspective. The entity at hand, the EU, is still at least one of the most decent around, civil liberties around.

And as for the Moon... it generally tends to have fundamental problems with allowing such basic rights as the one to life - or at least, it doesn't make breathing easy ;p

Reply Score: 2

v How dare they!
by jefro on Fri 27th Jan 2012 20:43 UTC
Lucky You!
by fretinator on Fri 27th Jan 2012 21:58 UTC
fretinator
Member since:
2005-07-06

As a proud American, I'm just letting you Yurpies know that you better pass this or else we may not let you vote for our president next time. You have been warned!

Reply Score: 2

EU Consensus works... for once
by kateline on Sat 28th Jan 2012 11:44 UTC
kateline
Member since:
2011-05-19

It's unbelievable the EU still hasn't ratified some sort of constitution or procedure for decision-making beyond the totally unworkable consensus model. Still, this might be the one case in which consensus works for the best!

Reply Score: 0

Maiden has it :D
by twitterfire on Sun 29th Jan 2012 03:02 UTC
twitterfire
Member since:
2008-09-11

Iron Maiden - The Trooper

You'll take my freedom but i will download too!!
You'll close megaupload but i'll use filestube!!
So when you are wondering how to fuck
You better run, SOPA it's a crap!!

Reply Score: 2