European Parliament Committees Reject ACTA As IP Backlash Grows 98
An anonymous reader writes "Earlier today [Thursday, May 31st], three European Parliament committees studying the
Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement — the Legal Affairs Committee
(JURI), the Committee for Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) and the
Committee for Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) — all voted
against implementing ACTA. Michael Geist reports
on how the strength of the anti-ACTA movement within the European
Parliament
is part of a broader backlash against secretive intellectual property
agreements that are either incorporated into broad trade agreements or
raise critical questions about prioritizing IP enforcement over
fundamental rights including votes and reports opposing these deals in
the Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and Mexico."
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile, in Greece, Spain, Ireland, Portugal and Italy...
Re:Proud (Score:4, Insightful)
I said it before, and I'll say it again. The EU's problems are the result of a political structure and cannot succeed due to lack of sufficient federalization.
America figured this out 225 years ago. How long will it take for Europe?
Re:Proud (Score:5, Insightful)
Looking at the USA, one can only hope it will take forever.
Re: (Score:1)
It's not the system's fault people keep voting in corrupt individuals to positions of power.
Re:Proud (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, no. I've no illusion on that. Any system that can be "fair" is going to be gamed by the corrupt. The only way to ensure corrupt individuals can't do that is a dictatorship, and yea... I don't think I need to expand on why that won't help any.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with the US and to a lesser extent UK systems is that it is practically impossible for political parties to get any meaningful say in politics at a national level. Even if such a system also makes it easier to vote communists and/or
Re: (Score:2)
The same federalization the tea party is screaming about out of their red faces.
Re:Proud (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The EU has its origins in a four country agreement for the free trade of steel and coal, through the EEC into what it is today.
As far as I remember my history classes, it was a six-country agreement [wikipedia.org]. Although arguably preceded by the Benelux (three countries) itself shortly preceded by some sort of economic agreement between Luxembourg and Belgium.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure because they made an economic structure (the euro) without the political structure (a common economic policy) so if they want a United States of Europe all they have to do is add a federal government. But Europe doesn't want that, being English or French or German isn't the same as being a Californian or Texan or New Yorker. They're not just different states, they're different countries. "I'm European" doesn't mean the same as "I'm American" and most likely never will. If you try forcing them together
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You don't need a big government to enforce a common fiscal policy across Europe. You do need unanimous agreement and we're lacking there.
While fiscal policy is a big thing, it's not the only thing that a federal government does. We already have European legislation (most of which is actually recommendations), European currency (a sub-set of the EU countrues actually), and we're still struggling to get the fiscal bit sorted out. UK, being very protective and nationalistic, doesn't really help. The PIGS, bein
Re: (Score:2)
The PIGS, being really bad at finance and good at grabbing money from other states, don't really help either - they like the status quo, they're big spenders and cannot realistically be kicked out of the eurozone, so they'll keep spending as much as possible, what are the others gonna do?
The way in which the Euro crisis is always spun into a simple morality story is very amusing. Greece and Spain, for example, got into their current situations while following very different courses.
Why can't everyone just export tons of shit like the Germans? Here's a hint: You can't export anything without someone else importing.
The actual nature of the global economic system doesn't allow for convenient and simple fairy tales to be told, so it is ignored in favor of a story little minds think they can p
Re: (Score:2)
> You don't need a big government to enforce a common fiscal policy across Europe. You do need unanimous agreement and we're lacking there.
The requirement for unanimous agreement is what killed the Confederation. It won't work for the EU either.
Re: (Score:2)
When the Articles of Confederation were passed nobody in America wanted a federal government either. However history sort of imposed itself. States were running their own armies, there were treaties and tariffs between states and foreign powers and even border disputes and skirmishes between states.
It was pretty clear to the Founders this was going nowhere. Federalism has problems, sure. But without a federal government the colonies were falling apart.
Eventually Europe will realize that their current struct
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't say it was going to be easy. However the alternatives are going to be worse.
Re: (Score:3)
I said it before, and I'll say it again. The EU's problems are the result of a political structure and cannot succeed due to lack of sufficient federalization.
The EU was created in the hope that a 'beneficial crisis' would allow them to force centralised control onto people who didn't want it.
It's currently breaking apart because that was a fscking stupid idea. No-one wants to be told what to do by French and German politicians in Brussels.
Re: (Score:2)
I hate to say this, because it will certainly be flamed, derided as only half true, or worse, but...
The federalization of the US was a slipperly slope. The problem with any federalizing body is that said body tries to mandate things out of the component parts, above and beyond what the terms of said federalization were at the time of signature.
Take for instance, the US, as per you example.
In the US, a hotbutton topic is that of "state rights". Our constitution states that any power not explicitly granted b
Re: (Score:1)
I wouldn't necessarily blame this on the federalization, other countries (eg. Switzerland) seem to be doing reasonably well with a similar system. It would be interesting to see whether such a system could work throughout the EU and is IMHO a sine qua non for me to even consider joining that union.
Re: (Score:2)
"Our constitution states that any power not explicitly granted by said constitution or its amendments is retained by the component states, or the people."
Nah. Here's what the 10th Amendment says:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
I wish people would actually read the 10th amendment. The word "explicitly" appears nowhere. While it was debated at the time of adoption it was not inclu
Re: (Score:2)
Excuse me, that's the 14th amendment.
Re: (Score:1)
Leave the Eurozone. Don't recall that anyone actually forced you to give up your native currency.
Don't borrow. Don't recall that anyone actually forced your governments (or your fellow citizens) to borrow more than they could afford.
You
Re: (Score:2)
Leave the Eurozone. Don't recall that anyone actually forced you to give up your native currency.
By "anyone" you mean "no one", right? I'll leave the Eurozone. Where do I sign?
Don't borrow. Don't recall that anyone actually forced your governments (or your fellow citizens) to borrow more than they could afford.
If you read my original post, you'll find that I say our governments were actually forced/corrupted into it. The people borrowed money that was wilfully offered to them by the banks. People thought it was OK. Actually, it was the responsibility of the banks/governments to make a decent financial management and prevent unbalances. The common guy is not a financial expert, that's why we pay all those overpaid "experts" in banks
Re: (Score:2)
So, the banks held guns to your head and made you borrow money?
Somehow, I don't think so.
Do remember that the people being bribed with OPM would've screamed to high heaven if your governments had said twenty years ago "sorry, lads, but this is unsustainable - we can't afford it, you can't afford" and then stopped borrowing mon
Re: (Score:3)
As you should imagine, PIIGS is an insult for those who live in those countries. Please abstain from using that term, in the name of a sane discussion.
So, your solution is basically individualistic. Suffer and emigrate. I beg to disagree. I'd rather suffer jumping out of the Euro, at least we would be free and could devalue our debt into oblivion. But that will set fire to the whole Eurozone, so I strongly suspect Germany won't like it very much. If the idea spreads, they may be convinced to allow the Eu
Re: (Score:2)
Leave the Eurozone. Don't recall that anyone actually forced you to give up your native currency.
Actually yes, if you want to be part of the EU (And get all the benefits of free trade etc...) then you have to join the Eurozone eventually.I believe only Denmark and the UK have the option not to, the others have to eventually. Not joining the EU when you're a tiny country in the region will put you at a massive disadvantage.
To keep us buying their products big time, they lend us money.
Don't borrow. Don't recall that anyone actually forced your governments (or your fellow citizens) to borrow more than they could afford.
Well no, but fundamentally by joining the eurozone you have the same strength of currency as say, Germany. This makes your goods as expensive as German goods, despite the German good
Re: (Score:2)
Leave the Eurozone. Don't recall that anyone actually forced you to give up your native currency.
Actually yes, if you want to be part of the EU (And get all the benefits of free trade etc...) then you have to join the Eurozone eventually.I believe only Denmark and the UK have the option not to, the others have to eventually. Not joining the EU when you're a tiny country in the region will put you at a massive disadvantage.
Sweden found another way to stay out of the euro(and haven't seen any truly negative sideffects of doing so). We signed the Maastricht Treaty but said treaty has certain requirements before allowing a nation to join the euro and puts no obligations on the signatories to attempt to fulfill the requirements. So Sweden did not adopt the euro because the populace turned it down in a general referendum and Sweden has ever since simply chosen not to fulfill the requirements for joining the euro.
Another problem
Re: (Score:2)
Another problem many Southern European countries face is a relatively high corruption and a very large black economy(the figures I've seen so far estimates that the black economy in Greece is about 40-45% of GDP). That is a huge problem because even if there is enough taxable economy to successfully run the country it is simply not getting to the government.And typically the people that will manage evade taxes is not the grassroots population. An example I saw from Greece is that to get a doctors appointment you are expected to bring a small bribe or you will be waitlisted forever and that doctor will often declare an income just below taxable levels and thus pay little to no income tax. Contrast this with Scandinavia and Germany where bribes and corruption is thankfully very rare and the black economy is also similarly small in comparison so most of the taxable income makes it to the Government who can then properly run the country.
You're right. Funny how the troika that "rescued" Ireland, Portugal and Greece are a lot more concerned about privatising the public services at low cost and ending all social benefits than they are about fighting corruption and cutting, for example, useless defence expenses (Greece buys a shitload of weapons from Germany).
Also funny how Goldman Sachs was involved with the right-wing Greek government cooking the books to be able to join the Euro, but, somehow, an ex-top executive from Goldman Sachs was a
Re: (Score:2)
Sweden found another way to stay out of the euro(and haven't seen any truly negative sideffects of doing so). We signed the Maastricht Treaty but said treaty has certain requirements before allowing a nation to join the euro and puts no obligations on the signatories to attempt to fulfill the requirements. So Sweden did not adopt the euro because the populace turned it down in a general referendum and Sweden has ever since simply chosen not to fulfill the requirements for joining the euro.
It is interesting about Sweden, but I know most new entrants to the EU are obliged to join the eurozone if they want to join the EU. See here on the right for a map [wikipedia.org].
It might be that the EU decided to change the rules for new entrants, being that when Sweden joined, the EU was something totally different to the political behemoth it is today. Now being part of the EU requires the Euro, which benefits Germany quite nicely really.
Either way, thanks for the insight, always appreciated :)
Re: (Score:2)
did America vote to reject ACTA?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Proud (Score:5, Interesting)
The euro may or may not collapse but the EU will survive in some form or the other, there's been far too many positive gains by being a 500 million people market rather than 27 countries with their own odd rules. Even very worst case I suspect the southern countries get kicked out/leave and the northern/eastern countries stay. There are after all despite the PIIGGS over 20 countries who haven't fucked their economy. Besides, it's not like they could turn this around if they just paid attention to it. Right now if they increase taxes and impose cutbacks their economy tanks more and they get less taxes and more people on unemployment. If they decrease taxes to kick start the economy their public deficit goes to hell and the markets shut them down. Right now they're at the bottom of a deep, deep pit and only has to sit still and hope the world economy recovers so they're able to climb out. Meanwhile they might as well reject bullshit like ACTA.
Re: (Score:1)
there's been far too many positive gains
Like the fact that we slaughter our entire fauna when a cow has to sneeze? Like the fact that genetically modified crops are literally forced down our throats? Like that fact that no member state has any control over their own money anymore? Like the fact that some local fish have already gone extinct? Like the fact that co-housing is almost forbidden? If you are not a company, what positive gain is there?
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, it's great. The entire house of cards is on the verge of collapse, but at least our bureaucrats found the time to vote this shit down.
Meanwhile, in Greece, Spain, Ireland, Portugal and Italy...
That's the typical tactic of the Copyright Industry. Try to avoid attracting attention. Point to other issues while in the backrooms advancing their own agenda.
In case nobody noticed: ACTA did more for raising interest in European Parliament, its workings, its effects on national legislation than any of the EC-sponsored campaigns put together. How many teens, tweens knew about INTA, LIBE and JURI?
It also helped to create a large sense unity among those opposed to ACTA and all it stood for.
Note that in coun
Re:Proud (Score:5, Insightful)
The entire house of cards is on the verge of collapse, but at least our bureaucrats found the time to vote this shit down.
Actually, it's the elected representatives (in the European Parliament) who are voting it down, and who have repeatedly expressed their opposition to the secretiveness of the negotiation process and to what has resulted from those negotiations. The unelected bureaucrats (European Commission and its ilk) were largely in favor, and actively participated in those secret negotiations.
Many things would have worked out differently (drastically different in a few cases) if the EU were run more democratically. And reducing the democratic deficit is probably an essential step (not the only one, of course) towards exiting the present fiasco.
Federal Europe (Score:2)
Approved. Sorry not to have mod points to + you... ;-)
H.
P. S. is european federalism taboo to the extent you are obliged to post AC?
Re: (Score:2)
I thought you would be proud to live in the EU, not to leave the EU.
That said, I am ready to welcome Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and Mexico in the EU, but I'm a bit surprised it didn't pop up in the news. Information is not what it used to be ;-)
Re: (Score:1)
Personally, I'd like to see a trade zone involving countries at or near the Arctic circle.
Great Idea! Let's call it the Arctic Circle Trade Agreement. Since Alaska qualifies, let's get USTR Ron Kirk to fax us all a copy of the IPR Chapter we can just sign off on. Oh. Hmmm... maybe we shouldn't discuss this so openly... what if the public finds out?
Re: (Score:2)
another example why i'm proud to leave in EU :)
Should I be ashamed of being a Canadian?
The end is nigh (Score:5, Funny)
What?! A legislative body actually voted AGAINST corporate interests? I guess the end of the world IS coming this year...
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
It's a last act of defiance before the corporations liquidate the EU and sell it to China.
Re: (Score:2)
See if it sticks and you'll have a good gauge of how much the corporate state is in control in the E.U.
You notice in the U.S. something like ACTA doesn't even hit the papers anymore. It's accepted without question.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:The end is nigh (Score:5, Insightful)
Going back to my last post, the depressing thing about the SOPA story is just how big the protest had to get before anyone in the media would pay any attention. Then the protest was demonized (often in a "pro-piracy" light). Then the protest had to even get BIGGER before it was treated fairly at all. The protest even had to get BIGGER THAN THAT before our idiot congresspeople paid any attention.
This is what I am talking about... it shows how much the corporate state gets listened to (and automatically treated as having the "correct" opinion) as opposed to your every day person that is supposed to have a voice. In that way the SOPA fight was very disturbing... you have to have a petition with millions of signatures before your own representative will even take your call.
Re: (Score:1)
Then they started working on SOPA II, only with a different name [to include both child molestation and terrorism], and supposedly with 'fixes' to the problems brought to their attention with SOPA.
Meanwhile, the US gov't is working, in secret, on another IP treaty with South American countries.
Re: (Score:2)
It's the same here in the UK, you only have to look at the minutes from Jeremy Hunt as the Leveson enquiry into Murdoch's regime of corruption yesterday.
Jeremy Hunt said in an e-mail or two something along the lines of "The public mood seems to be against Murdoch's empire right now, so we have to look at how we can approve this deal without that being a problem".
It's like he outright believes, in his mind, that he has to do what his corporate masters said, and despite being completely and utterly 100% aware
Reason to hope (Score:1)
Thanks, /. After a morning of depressing news stories, this one made me smile. It even gives me hope that my government (Canada) might make the same realization before their next attempt to ram some US-written legislation through!
Re: (Score:2)
"Yankee Go Home !!!"
Re:Reason to hope (Score:4, Insightful)
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I'm sorry....but I LOL'd for real on that one.
Harper will never stand up to US interests. NEVER. Between working hard to put the corporation over the citizen and bending over & taking the long dong of whatever legislation the USA proposes up his ass with a grin, we're slowly watching the erosion of the "Canada" that we all know and love.
We the people don't mean shit anymore to the powers that be.
Vive la revolution!
Re: (Score:3)
You know, you're 100% correct. If the revolution came, those doing the uprising are likely to die. And I'd still be standing with them in the fight....quite bluntly, I'd rather die in the fight to be free (again, IF it ever got to that point) than live oppressed by a corrupt regime.
But that's me. You can be a slave to your corporate and US-Government overlords.
Sometimes standing up for what is right is more important than anything else.
Re: (Score:2)
I get it. The system is corrupt, but the system will be corrupt after you fix the system anyway, so why bother?
Fucking shitheads like you are as much of the problem as those putting the corporation over your freedom.
Grow some stones, or get the fuck out. Your choice.
Re: (Score:2)
So says the anonymous coward.
And look....obviously I'm not suggesting that we take to the streets today and kill em all.
But the bottom line is...freedoms are being eroded today. Canada, USA, wherever...its all the same. We are actively losing our current freedom in the name of security, corporate interests, etc.
You know, a little over a couple hundred years ago, there was a group of people being royally fucked by England. And instead of taking it in the ass, they rose up and changed the fucking system, p
Re: (Score:2)
"It even gives me hope that my government (Canada) might make the same realization before their next attempt to ram some US-written legislation through!"
That wont happen until you kick out George Harper. Wait, no, that's not right, Stephen Bush? nope, er, yeah, Stephen Harper, that's the one. Sorry, the two are indistinguishable in all but smugness, whereas Mr Harper looks extremely smug about how he managed to get away with electoral fiddling, Bush always looked a bit gormless instead.
Your last government
Re: (Score:3)
Here's hoping that these EU parliamentary committees can make their objections stick.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
According to the BBC article [bbc.co.uk] on the matter:
So it seems reasonably likely that the offici
Re: (Score:2)
Knowing the European Parliament, some minor symbolic thing will be changed, it will be hailed by bought off parliamentarians as a major victory, and it will be passed. No attention will be paid to parliamentarians who stand by their principles, usually from parties dismissed as "radical" and "extreme" by mainstream media.
Re: (Score:2)
Knowing the European Parliament, some minor symbolic thing will be changed, it will be hailed by bought off parliamentarians as a major victory, and it will be passed.
The European Parliament cannot change anything about ACTA. Either it passes it ("gives ascent"), or it rejects it.
Birthday Party talk (Score:1)
At birthday parties it's always big fun to point out you'd have to pay royalties to Warner Music Group if you performed "Happy Birthday To You" in public (park, restaurant still catering to other patrons, bar, etc.) due to the song being copyrighted in the year 1935 CE. I have not talked to anyone who thought that wasn't over the top.
Nowadays, everyone is a printer, is a recording studio, is a publisher, is a CD replicator plant, etc. etc. More and more people that are active on the Internet will run with t
IP is the new "gold" (Score:5, Interesting)
And patents is something perfect from the standpoint of the investor: The cost to generate one can almost get to zero but the profits can reach low Earth orbit (using the calculations of the RIAA)
(P.S: Damn you, Google translator. Brazilian->English translation sucks)
Re: (Score:3)
Quanto à caipirinha obrigado mas eu não tenho o costume de beber. E por favor, você escrevendo como um "malandro carioca" aí
Re: (Score:2)
Well, the RIAA's primary business has to do with copyrights, not patents.
Patent enforcement is a costly business - an infringement suit runs about $2 million to bring these days. So no it is not a zero risk investment.
Re: (Score:2)
The important thing is you have understood
Good for them (Score:5, Insightful)
prioritizing IP enforcement over fundamental rights
This is the part that gets me. I'm all for punishing thieves. I'm not for slaughtering someone in the courts, cutting off their internet, and vilifying them in the media because they downloaded a couple songs and the episode of Game of Thrones that they missed.
To me, Big Media isn't sending the message of "we're being hurt by copyright infringement", the're saying "hey, we have enough money to buy off significant portions of governments, it'd be a shame to put it to use in a productive manner (like by streamlining and expanding digital distribution to give people what they want...)"
Re: (Score:1)
Let's start by referring to these acts as 'copyright infringement' instead of 'theft'. The two are *not* one and the same, despite what the RIAA/MPAA and their many international clones would like you to believe. Downloading a TV show is not the same as going into HMV and stealing a DVD off the shelf.
Having said all that, I agree entirely with you - "gaming" the system (effectively buying legislation through closed door, private negotiations) with things like the ACTA,
Exactly six years since the Pirate Bay raid... (Score:5, Interesting)
Today is the sixth anniversary of the Swedish police's raid on The Pirate Bay, as evidenced by the "This Day on Slashdot" on the front page. That was not the reasons for the founding of the Swedish Pirate Party, which had happened 5 months earlier, but it was the first time they got any media attention and their membership grew by hundreds of percents on a single day. Three years later, in spring 2009, the case was being negotiated in the district court and the attention from that is probably what let the party enter the European parliament.
Now, another three years have passed and two Pirate Party MEPs have spent years inside the parliament. Today one of them had her draft opinion, which was extremely critical of ACTA and recommended the parliament to reject the treaty, accepted as the opinion of the ITRE committe. The other Pirate Party MEP was one of the votes against a pro-ACTA draft opinion in a very close vote in the JURI committee. The draft opinion was rejected, with the result that ITRE also recommends the parliament to reject ACTA.
Is this what they call "the long tail"?
Re: (Score:2)
Is this what they call "the long tail"?
No.
The author is trying to save his "period" key. (Score:2)
Anyone else find this difficult to read because it is one huge sentence? I like the message but the structure sux.