Secret documents leaked: The government wants to control the Internet
Holy shit! Who’s controlling the World Wide Web? Someone save our Internet!
Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) negotiations continued yesterday, November 3rd in Seoul, Korea and, while no text has been officially released, rumors of the U.S.’s secret ACTA documents have raised serious concern.
Later yesterday afternoon, Boing Boing reported the following excerpts from the supposedly leaked secret document:
- 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)
Professor Michael Geist, Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law at University of Ottawa, writes that the draft text is modeled on the U.S.-South Korea free trade agreement. He says the principles in the documents will include a requirement to hold third-parties liable for copyright infringement (i.e. no more safe harbor rules for ISPs).
Gizmodo reports that the U.S. is pushing for a new global IP enforcement regime:
Countries who sign up to the U.S promoted plan would have to force ISPs to proactively police copyright on user-generated content, cut off those accused (or face liability), and put “graduated response” clauses in customer contracts. An example of a graduated response is France’s “three strikes and you’re out” law.
This means no more sharing music or movies, because if you’re caught three times, you’re banned from the Internet for up to two years.
Americans are not alone; EU citizens should also be affronted. The EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) reports that,
Thee 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.”
Furthermore the secrecy has been going on for years. Last fall the EU council of ministers refused to release the ACTA documents , even to the FFII (Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure).
And you may want to sit down, but this should come as no surprise: In 1996 the BBC reported that the U.S. millitary is behind the injudicious root.
It seems that they’ve gone BEYOND anything modeled in a free trade-agreement, because by “anti-counterfeiting trade,” they mean anti-copyright treaty, right? This is 19th century ideology for 21st century technology! It can’t be possible to police the Internet to this extent, can it?
Will we have to redefine the terms “inter” “web” and “net” to mean “sterile” “patrolled” and “monopolized?” If any part of this proposed legislation comes to pass, expect the pace of modern science and technology to come to a screeching halt– along with every other business that uses the Internet to spread information and create new ideas– to name a few: education (particularly private), advertising and media…. this website won’t be the only one with expensive legal issues.
If you are a smart and important politco, don’t become an ACTA member country. Let’s hope the people who keep the Internet alive will somehow be more powerful than a mass of silver-haired men in striped suits. Or, perhaps it is time for us to build a pirated Internet 2.0.?
Or just unplug…
Posts on this topic from around the world:
Gizmodo, ReadWriteWeb, TorrentFreak, BoingBoing, Slashdot
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by CourtneyBMyers, CourtneyBMyers. CourtneyBMyers said: Holy shit! Who's controlling the World Wide Web? @trueslant http://tinyurl.com/y8f7ank [...]
Don’t be too dramatic, please. I mean really, do you expect everything to come to “a screeching halt” because of this (not-even-proposed) legislation? The web’s far reach includes users who won’t be subjected to this not-even-proposed legislation. Thus, the flow of illegal materials on the web may (but probably won’t) even be slowed down. Further, monitors ALREADY watch over the flow of public to private materials in the US to prevent pirating (hence why we’ve all heard about or know someone that was/is involved in lawsuits for thousands of dollars over some illegally downloaded songs). But how many lawsuits has the government been subjected to because of an invasion of privacy as a result of these monitors? Zero. And finally, the first line of the legislation clearly indicates that it’s going to target user-contributed materials and websites, i.e youtube. But that’s already happening…there are movie/music video take-downs everyday on that site because of illegal uploads.
In France, a modified system, based on three strikes, already exists. And you know whose complaining? Whiney kids like you who are too cheap to buy music legally on itunes or napster (or afraid to buy music illegally), or the mobsters that control the pirating of intellectual property that costs the state millions of dollars each year. Oh, and this cost gets passed on to the consumer in the form of taxes. This isn’t even touching on the money that the entertainment industry is losing annually to prevent pirating. For an informed discussion, go watch last week’s 60 Minutes — legally, of course.
How can you even suggest that this legislation won’t slow down the flow of information?
I know we already have monitors on the web, and the fact that people have been thrown in jail or fined thousands of dollars for pirating music/moves is despicable. And yes, I realize people are pulling information off of Youtube every day for copyright infrigement. But its their loss because than that content will simply not be seen. If it doesn’t exist in the free Internet space, it won’t exist at all.
I understand that there are deep economical webs interlacing governments and corporations that loose huge profits to pirated entertainment. And that this loss of profits, may in some twisted way lead to higher taxes… but I already pay taxes everyday for free things and I’m okay with that. Best to make it official and give us free Internet like Finland and Sweden….how about free health care through taxes while we’re at it!
Right now we are at a tipping point in terms of free distribution through applications like Spotify and Hulu winning over AOL Time Warner and Virgin Records. The idea that our Internet could be controlled, or patrolled to the extent mentioned above is frightening to a generation raised on the accessibility and free access to information in all its forms- be it youtube or online encyclopedias.
Instead of controlling/patrolling the Internet, companies should be figuring out a way to profit and further create from the open source innovations that come out of a free Internet space, social media and civic participation tools.
This accessibility– this open sharing of information is championed by the proponents of open source and open standards. It has led to some of the most popular innovations of our time. Do you honestly think a 20 year old college kid could’ve created Facebook without access to the PHP language derived from these standards?
And would our government have jails filled with pirate music sharing kids? Because its obvious that this sharing of content will not stop. According to McAfee, closing Pirate Bay this summer led to a temporary 300% increase in the number of file-sharing websites. Supply & Demand.
By the way, 60 minutes gives away their content for free– on the Internet.
If I am a whiny kid, you are what? Draconian?
In response to another comment. See in context »This was deemed classified in the united states because of “national security”? The irony is that this “secret” document is only secret in the US by order of the President. In France, also considering ACTA, this document is available for public viewing and comment. I find it ironic that the administration that promised more open and honest communication has championed an international treaty that has an intention of destroying one of the greatest marvels of the modern world- the internet- by way of secrecy and backroom dealing in ways that might even be considered unconstitutional if enacted as a federal law.
This is really about multi-billion dollar global corporations manipulating world governments as little more than puppet figureheads. Obama… will comply, Canada… will comply. And these companies have this kind of power because WE collectively fund their ability to abuse us, a single $.99 track at a time… a single $19.99 movie at a time.
You’re not going to stop buying music, going to movies, supporting the RIAA and MPAA. You’ll be in line for the heartwarming Christmas blockbusters, and then again from the action packed summer blockbusters – no matter how badly they suck.
And those industries will use the profits from those seasons to continue to pass oppressive laws that protect their interests while eroding your liberties.
Putt your head back up your butt takeonme
You’re right in one regard — a bill focused on stymying illegal downloads and illegal IP on the web would inherently slow down the overall transfer of information on the web. However, the (not even proposed) legislation would target ILLEGAL materials. The internet has and always will be used to disseminate information. I simply don’t buy into your scare tactics when say that this (legal) aspect of the web will be hindered because of the legislation. Look at the language of the text before you make Orwellian conspiracy theories. It looks specific, clear, and targets certain areas only. An expansion could theoretically impede on Constitutional rights undoubtedly, but that isn’t being proposed, is it?
You say that we are on a breaking point; that companies must learn to get around the dissemination of illegal materials flowing on the web. I feel that companies have: Hulu and Napster are perfect examples, which you mentioned. They offer consumers a great, legal option. But what about the other sites that host bootlegged movies, or limewire? I simply don’t agree with you that, because millions of people take advantage of this, there shouldn’t be some repercussions. Or that companies don’t have the right to protect their property from these illegal avenues. I offer an analogy: I live in NYC. I can go to Canal St. and pick up a fake rolex or purse for my girlfriend, or a bootlegged dvd. No one could possibly deny that, simply because these products are available on a mass-scale, that Louis Vuitton doesn’t have the right to sue these vendors, or that the government shouldn’t monitor the area for trade violations or tax evasion, etc. Why shouldn’t they be given this same right on the internet? Call me draconian, but there’s nothing wrong with endorsing protections that stymie this sort of illegal activity.
And you really, really need to stop with your scare tactics –jails filled with kids who downloaded illegal materials? Where do you get this stuff! The French approach, would most likely be adopted since they’re way ahead of us on internet protectionism, is probably even more just, in a sense, than a steep monetary fine. They simply cut off your internet after three warnings, and you can go on a probationary status after a certain amount of time. Is that really that unfair? And so what if more than 300 new file sharing sites have popped up? I live in city where jay-walking is common — if a cop catches me in the act, he can, technically, give me fine. Everyone is aware of this, and yet we take the risk anyways. That doesn’t mean that it should be considered legal or that cops should turn the other way, or that they don’t have a right to give me a ticket.
[...] Read more here: Courtney Boyd Myers – Robot Girl – Secret documents leaked: The … [...]
stymying? stymie? no idea what is happening.
anyhow, i don’t know much about it. i think that if takeonme is accurate, then i have to agree with him, but the implementation may be too expensive. kind of like the health care bill. i like the idea of universal health care, but it sounds overly expensive. while we are on the list of shit we want, how about making cars and planes invincible so you can’t die in a car crash. might be expensive, but just pass the f-ing law.
The truth is OUR government would prefer the Chinese and Iranian style of internet….which is based on total government control of content…..
….just like obama and his band of leftist henchmen would like to shut down free speech on the radio….they would equally like to stop the free uncontrolled flow of information on the internet….
…it has nothing to do with stealing music
I am not quite sure how you think she is using scare tactics? A little over dramatic? yes, but if we do decided on net 2.0. I want to be able to type my email and password in the address bar and have it take me to my email(Sorry I had to put that, something I have always wanted).
Back to what I originally had to say. People will always find a way to work around the system. It is absolutely imperative that “companies figure out a way to profit and further create from the open source innovations that come out of a free Internet space, social media and civic participation tools”.
I can tell you how it works for me. Cd comes out, I download it, it passes inspection, buy it. CD is not up to par, then I leave it at that. Its a great system! I get to only put my vote(dollar)where it matters. I never feel short changed with my product. Oh sure, you can say “What about the artist? What about all the money they lose?” Well lets take Lil Wayne. How many Cadillac’s does he have now? I am not sure, but I can tell you with his record for highest selling album, most downloaded song, 3 multi-platinum records, richest rap star pretty much ever. I don’t think my method is much different from others. If that is the way I use the system, are you going to literally cut my tethers to the outside world? Leave me with only local news? Where they only talk about, shit that is so old, that it ceases to go by the term “news” but “Dribble”. Then they try to put some spin on it likes its new and exciting. OH MY GOD! Teenagers have sex now? They send each other naked pictures? Since when? Don’t worry I am sure they will tell you at 3,5,9,and 11.
“We get guns, they will get bigger guns. We get Kevlar, they get armor piercing rounds.” People will always find a way around(Do some research on the video game “Spore” and how wonderful “DRM” is). There has to be a better way then having your ISP drive up internet prices, hire more people, and monitor a planet of data. I am not sure what that is, but I know it has to be a new, efficient, be able to work as fast as this century, and old people have to be afraid of it.
Sorry my thought are kinda speratic. Caffeine is a wonderful drug that must be procured everyday(anyone have any?).I only had 5 minutes to fit everything I thought should be said(Trust me there is a lot more I can say).