ACTA - You thought SOPA was bad?

Flying Dice wrote:FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU-

Why America.

Why.

The fun thing about all this? ACTA is actually a violation of human rights.

How to act against ACTA.
Seriously, read it.

Fucking damn it.

This is why Anonymous is a fundamental part of free speech. If the strongmen won't listen, the Legion will take out their earplugs. Some nation needs to be formed so that we don't need to deal with these idiotic douchba

Spoiler:

We could always remind the governments of the world that we could probably go into a mass revolution, likely with the support of a good chunk of the military forces.

Slag wrote:We could always remind the governments of the world that we could probably go into a mass revolution, likely with the support of a good chunk of the military forces.

...Is it wrong that I've already thought of ways to overthrow the US?

Isn't that right, Loud Whispers?

How many of these things are there? Is the people who make these things plan to flood so many of these bills into the system that one will eventually get by?

What do they think the people who are addicted to websites like Facebook and Youtube are going to do if they make it impossible for these sites to function?

How can these things even be considered when the government is supposed to be protecting citizens, not acting as corporate slaves?

Don't these publishers know that if they crash a huge part of the economy people are going to buy less things, not more?

I don't understand...

Whitefoxsniper wrote:I don't understand...

If it helps, think of the people proposing the whole thing as Outer Gods. Beyond comprehension by default, their ways are alien and maddening, and they threaten our way of life with every action.

Wait, that's distressingly accurate, actually.

MY DYSTOPIAN FUTURE ISN'T SO BAD AFTER ALL NOW, IS IT LOUD WHISPERS?

Whitefoxsniper wrote:How many of these things are there? Is the people who make these things plan to flood so many of these bills into the system that one will eventually get by?

Thing is, this isn't a U.S. bill. It's an international trade treaty that has already been signed by a number of nations, including the U.S., and which was written and signed in near-complete secrecy, because the censorship and human rights violations were part of a trade treaty, which does not have to be made public. For those of us in the nations which have already signed, it is too late, barring armed revolt. Most of the effort at the moment is dedicated to convincing the EU parliment to not sign it. Of course, with enough pressure, it is always possible that we could force our governments to withdraw from it, but that would take sacrifices that a lot of people don't want to make.

More and more people are going to stop caring if they just spam this shit like this. You could see in comments in blackout day when people complained about protesting for no reason.

Necro910 wrote:MY DYSTOPIAN FUTURE ISN'T SO BAD AFTER ALL NOW, IS IT LOUD WHISPERS?

Well I guess since everyone would be dead, it would still suck.

Would probably suck less than having no internets though. MAGMA AWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYY

Best part:

Trees are flammable here

EDIT: LOOOKY HEERE, AAN UPDAETEEE

Spoiler:

Necro, if you do plan on going on an apocalyptic magma arson campaign, be sure to include molotov popcorn. It would make my day

Gas+Styrofoam=Napalm
Napalm+Popcorn= https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLTZctTG6cE

Who exactly is allowed to claim copyright infringement? Only companies, or can individuals? If the latter, we could probably beat these assholes at their own game. It's not like a lot of big companies don't need their own websites to function.

Corporations will probably kick down Uncle Sam's door for this law to pass.

Individuals will probably be ignored.

Every good anarchist knows to keep their napalm recipes close to their hearts.

But basically what it is is that ACTA is the framework that, if bills like SOPA or PIPA passed, would allow them to be enforced, and would prevent them from being declared unconstitutional (at least in the U.S.), because treaties take precedence over the Constitution. So what it has become now is a war of attrition between the government and companies that benefit from censorship against the people and companies that are harmed by censorship.

I figure, if we can attack the companies behind the law like the RIAA, MPAA, and other such places, basically the folks who are sending money the government's way to make this shit go down, we can hurt that supply of money going to the government and they will have a harder time saying no to the people because they won't have their golden parachutes be so big and effective.

Slag wrote:Who exactly is allowed to claim copyright infringement? Only companies, or can individuals? If the latter, we could probably beat these assholes at their own game. It's not like a lot of big companies don't need their own websites to function.

To quote from the draft itself:

ACTA wrote:right holder includes a federation or association having the legal standard to assert rights in intellectual property;

Also, governments have the obligation and authority to do what is 'necessary' to stop, deter, punish and remedy piracy, copyright infringement and counterfeit goods. So do authorized third parties. And right holders.

One thing that really bugs me about all this stuff, other than of course the obvious censorship and crap, is how these laws seem intended to take the responsibility of copyright protection and shove it on the governments and third parties. Websites have to police their own customers so that unrelated companies' copyrights are protected. Governments have to police the entire internet.

Isn't it the copyright owner's responsibility to do this junk? They're the ones that should send out the cease and desist orders. They're the ones that should bring forth copyright infringement cases. Not other people.

Kaijyuu wrote:One thing that really bugs me about all this stuff, other than of course the obvious censorship and crap, is how these laws seem intended to take the responsibility of copyright protection and shove it on the governments and third parties. Websites have to police their own customers so that unrelated companies' copyrights are protected. Governments have to police the entire internet.

Isn't it the copyright owner's responsibility to do this junk? They're the ones that should send out the cease and desist orders. They're the ones that should bring forth copyright infringement cases. Not other people.

^