The full ACTA texts

Have you read the ACTA text yet?

Knew it was out there but could not find it.	29.7%	[ 19 ]
Knew it was out there and read it.	21.9%	[ 14 ]
I thought it was a huge secret.	12.5%	[ 8 ]
At this point, I just want the gold.	35.9%	[ 23 ]
Total Votes:			[ 64 ]

[Chibi Halo]

While being pointed to another trade act on the site of the Office of the United States Trade Representative I did a little digging around and found something I'm sure a lot of us have been dying to get our hands on for days now. Since last October, the full ACTA text has been sitting on the site of the Office of the United States Trade Representative site. It's an interesting read to this point and really gives some insight into why we have SOPA and PIPA floating around. The portion of the text that everyone's freaking out about and focusing on is Section 5: Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in the Digital Environment. If you're not up for reading all twenty-five pages at the moment it's recommended, for purposes of this forum's discussions; misconceptions; and general freaking out, that you at least read Section 5.

The full supposedly still secret ACTA text.

So take a moment to read the text and discuss anything important that stands out to you.

[Sid Chastity]

I didn't know it was out. It makes me so nervous having people pass things behind my back, though. I really didn't like how secretive everything became.

[Chibi Halo]

Sid Chastity

I didn't know it was out. It makes me so nervous having people pass things behind my back, though. I really didn't like how secretive everything became.

The thing is, it's been sitting on that site since last October. I just don't think the general public knows the site exists or that we even had an Office of the United States Trade Representative. That's the thing. There are a lot of Free Trade agreements with a lot of countries out there on that site. Things like this and TPP are there for people to learn about and read.

[Chibi Halo]

Okay, so I did a quick read of the whole thing and I can't see where people are upset over this. I really can not see where in Section 5 people are upset over this. If anyone knows exactly which piece of the text is the problem then I'd love for you to point me into the right direction. Because right now the only problems I see resulting from this are the legislations that each country will enact to help enforce this.

I can see why both branches of Congress wanted SOPA and PIPA now but they were ignoring something important. They forgot about Article 28 paragraph 1 "Each Party shall encourage the development of specialized expertise within its competent authorities responsible for the enforcement of intellectual property rights." We already have such an authority responsible for the enforcement of intellectual property rights. We have the International Trade Commission. Now which bill out there in both branches of Congress wants to use the International Trace Commission? That's right, the OPEN Act.

[black-rose-of-your-heart]

BUMP!

thank you for posting this.

[Chibi Halo]

black-rose-of-your-heart

BUMP!

thank you for posting this.

No problem. I know in my general Google searches I would get more results for Many Acta the baseball player than this global trade agreement. I can see where it can be interpreted the wrong way by the legislative branches of the countries signing onto it to take it to mean they have to do things through their courts systems but other than that I really don't see where people are getting upset over this. Maybe I'm not reading something right but I just don't see it.

[Kilted]

Yeah, some of the really bad earlier stuff that was leaked has been taken out. The secrecy and one-sided nature of the negotiations wasn't good but its sort of the trend under Obama. The other main controversy now is that Obama is claiming he doesn't have to get it ratified by the Senate like treaties are supposed to be. Bush tried the same thing with an arms treaty and Biden forced him to put it up for vote. Wyden's attempting the same thing Biden did but with all the protests, it seems unlikely Obama would risk the senators voting against it.

[Rozalyn Paige]

This video explains it really well. Ignore the "SOPA" in the title, they talk about ACTA instead.

[Chibi Halo]

Kilted

Yeah, some of the really bad earlier stuff that was leaked has been taken out. The secrecy and one-sided nature of the negotiations wasn't good but its sort of the trend under Obama. The other main controversy now is that Obama is claiming he doesn't have to get it ratified by the Senate like treaties are supposed to be. Bush tried the same thing with an arms treaty and Biden forced him to put it up for vote. Wyden's attempting the same thing Biden did but with all the protests, it seems unlikely Obama would risk the senators voting against it.

All that political idiocy aside I do think some people are over-reacting because they only read the leaked stuff from back in 2008 before Obama was in office. This thing's been through at least eleven rounds of negotiations before it went to the signing stage. Heck, the September 2010 Tokyo Round text has been on the USTR site for over a year and the final text has been around since November of that same year and nobody's brought it up on Gaia until all the major SOPA talk.

[GoddessEyes9]

BUMP

Thanks!

[Chibi Halo]

GoddessEyes9

BUMP

Thanks!

You're quite welcome.

[Jayce Reinhardt]

Legal bump

[Chibi Halo]

You know I'm beginning to think if someone can't explain a bill or a trade agreement without the use of a cleverly done YouTube video then they really haven't read the text of the thing, have fallen for the hype, and can't answer which lines are the problems. Someone said earlier a lot of the problem areas that had been leaked were taken out or revised. Okay that's good and well but I still want to be pointed to the lines people still have a problem with. I've read all twenty-five pages and as I asked before I just don't see what's getting the collective undies of this forum in a knot. How can I effectively discuss things with everyone on this one if I don't see where people are having problems with this trade agreement.

I'm not saying videos are a bad thing but if you can only answer someone's questions with a video then it doesn't show me you have a decent understanding of the text and have read it. Prove me wrong that the thing to be popular in this forum is to pass around videos, toss out memes, act as though you're a political activist, and instantly hate on something without actually discussing the issue at hand. Hasn't happened yet.

[Valheita]

Well, I'm still reading through it but the first thing that has jumped out at me is their presumption clause. See, it's incorrect to assume that every copy downloaded is a lost profit. The download could have occured for many reasons.

1) The downloader could be sampling, and intends to buy later.

2) The downloader has already purchased (i.e. a movie on DVD) and is downloading a digital copy (i.e. an avi file for their Macbook Air with no DVD drive).

3) The downloader is replacing an existing copy, i.e. the movie the disc is on is scratched, or the CD installer for a video game is missing.

4) The downloader is doing so to avoid the installation of DRM, while still supporting the developers - i.e. buying a game protected by Securom then installing the pirated version.

It may be just me, and my own personal view, but the fact that ACTA doesn't consider these to be mitigating circumstances is a fair warning sign that it's not going to be a progressive solution.

/goes back to reading

EDIT: Erk. I do not like item 5 (Circumvention of technological measures). The one thing I like about my countries copy right laws is that we are legally allowed to create digital copies for our own personal use, i.e. backups - and can circumvent encryption to that end.

If I have purchased a DVD, my right to view what is on that DVD should not magically end when the DVD wears out. I should be able to take steps to ensure my continuing access to that content should I so chose.

[Son Of Primus]

Anti-ACTA petition