backtop


Print 128 comment(s) - last by jconan.. on Apr 27 at 11:59 PM


The ACTA draft suggest that non-profit activities that promote piracy on a commercial scale, such as hosting a torrent site or authoring P2P software is a criminal offense. This would indicate that the member nations may jail those who engage in these activities; this includes the U.S.  (Source: Psychology Today)

The draft also proposes that "imminent infringement" -- just preparing to infringe is a crime. This essentially implements a form of thought-crime punishments as it looks to punish for an offense that has not yet been committed.  (Source: DETR Nevada)
Other provisions include warrantless bootleg searches, and international web-takedown laws

For nearly two years now, DailyTech has been covering the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), a secret treaty masterminded by the U.S. government at the behest of media copyright protection organization.  

The treaty has many alarming terms -- warrantless border search and seizures of suspected infringed content, government internet monitoring, and more.  More alarming is the fact that the U.S. government, of the nations involved, was perhaps the most vocal in demanding that the treaty be kept secret from citizens worldwide.

That secrecy is finally over with the official release of the consolidated draft text [PDF] of the ACTA.  The treaty will be finalized by the participants -- Australia, Canada, the European Union countries, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the United States of America -- after this brief public review.

The new draft of ACTA has some interesting changes.  First, while it drops mention of a "Three Strikes" plan for kicking filesharers off the internet, it now mentions that government can enact legislation to "terminate or prevent an infringement" -- kick users off the internet.  Thus this in essence covers "three strikes" plans 
and a variety of other plans.  

It also provides support for legislation "governing the removal or disabling of access to information" -- essentially pushing for countries to drop website takedown laws similar to the provisions in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act in the U.S.

The draft also outlaws "the unauthorized circumvention of an effective technological measure" -- essentially making it illegal to circumvent Digital Rights Management technology, even on technology you own.  The only loophole is that the draft states that member nations "may provide for measures which would safeguard the benefit of certain exceptions and limitations to copyright and related rights, in accordance with its legislation."  This may allow more progressive nations to allow DRM-overriding, though it will likely not apply to the DRM-friendly U.S. government.

One good piece of news is that the draft has a "de minimis" provision on border searches, excluding from enforcement, "Small quantities of goods of a noncommercial nature contained in travelers' personal luggage."  This means that fears of border search and seizures of iPads or laptops will likely not be realized.  What it does mean is that people visiting countries with lax restrictions like China may be searched for bootlegs.

The draft enacts harsher punishments for recording new movies with a camcorder.  The draft mandates member nations to make camcording a criminal offense, but it was noted that "at least one delegation has asked for the deletion" of the demand.

One of the more alarming portions of the draft is its provision of "imminent infringement".  According to the draft, copyright holders can demand legal action, claiming infringement is "imminent" -- even if it hasn't occurred yet.  In essence this is creating the infringement form of thought-crime.

The bill also may in effect criminalize non-profit distribution of P2P engines or hosting of P2P sites.  It states that "willful copyright infringement" mandates criminal penalties when conducted "on a commercial scale", even if infringements "have no direct or indirect motivation of financial gain."  This means that The Pirate Bay folks may be the first of many rebel pirates to serve prison time.

All of these provisions will be effectively funded by taxpayer dollars of the member states.

As mentioned, the bill will be finalized later this year, so this is the one and only time for citizens to voice their opinions on it before it becomes law in the U.S., Europe, and elsewhere.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Voice Your Opinions?
By StraightPipe on 4/21/2010 3:09:50 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
As mentioned, the bill will be finalized later this year, so this is the one and only time for citizens to voice their opinions on it before it becomes law in the U.S., Europe, and elsewhere.


Where/how should we be voicing our opinions? this whole thing really blows goats, and I'd love to get everyone who hates it consolidated into a giant petition.




RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By xler8r on 4/21/2010 3:23:25 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, clarification on where to heckle please


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By RW on 4/22/2010 12:03:52 AM , Rating: 5
Those laws are made by some crazy CORPORATE SHIT FUCKERS.
Even if those laws will erase any illegal content from internet, every computer or device they will FAIL to increase the income of music and film producers just because:
1. there's music and movies people don't like and don't wanna hear see or buy
2. there's music and movies people nor like or dislike nor care about it but they can tolerate it if they hear the song on radio or occasionally watch the movie on tv, but they definitely not gonna buy it
3. there's music and movies people do like it but not as much to convince them to buy it
4. there's music and movies people do like it but don't have the money to buy it
5. there's music and movies people do like it have the money to buy it but won't
6. there's music and movies people do like it have the money to buy it and will buy it

All those copyright laws will fail just because they assume that most filesharers are found on nr 5 category which is wrong since most of them are found on categories from 1 to 4 and you can't make money from categories 1-4 since they whether don't wanna buy your stuff or don't have the money to do so.

So yeah EPIC FAIL here we come :)


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Samus on 4/22/2010 2:15:56 AM , Rating: 5
This thing is literally drafted from laws written 50 years ago. Applying yesterdays laws to todays crimes just because they're similar doesn't allow for accurate depiction of the crime.

Like the last bullshit law like these that passed saying joining somebody's unsecure linksys for free wireless is the same as breaking into their house in Florida.

This shit has GOT to end.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By jonmcc33 on 4/22/10, Rating: -1
RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Heizo on 4/22/2010 1:21:06 PM , Rating: 5
Actually, since wifi is broadcasting into my home - its more like saying:

The person upstairs is blaring their music, and since I choose to listen to it and yell back, I'm breaking into their home and stealing their music.

What a load of BS.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By hughlle on 4/22/2010 5:48:29 AM , Rating: 2
well said! i definately wouldn't fit into the "oh i can't download it so i suppose i'll go out and buy it"

i can't afford to buy dvd's at £20 a pop, that's a hell of an epensive evening.

as to music, i flat refuse to buy albums as every one out there, with it's two good songs that the radio forces down your neck, sits alongside the other 8 songs, all of which are generally crapo!

no mroe money for them from me, just a slightly unhappier member of society.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By JasonMick (blog) on 4/21/2010 3:25:41 PM , Rating: 5
Call your local Congresspeople and Senators' offices. A simple Google search will find their number. Tell your friends to call them.

Google search for petitions.

Write letters to the president (probably the least effective approach).

Donate the ACLU and/or EFF which will likely sue to protect citizens if the draft becomes law in the U.S.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/21/2010 3:40:58 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Call your local Congresspeople and Senators' offices. A simple Google search will find their number. Tell your friends to call them.


None of that works. Look at the Health Care debate. The most heated issue in decades drawing the MOST negative reaction by the people by far, and it still got rammed through. And make no mistake, the feedback Congresspeople got on that bill was overwhealmingly negative, and they still didn't care.

"We the people" is a dead and buried concept. They aren't listening to us, so they must be made to listen.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By ClownPuncher on 4/21/2010 3:52:28 PM , Rating: 5
"We" elected them, they are our representatives. We make them listen by not electing them again.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/21/2010 4:00:51 PM , Rating: 5
Sorry that's an outdated opinion. The problem is the government in total, not the people who run it. No matter who you vote in, for the most part, when they get to Washington they no longer truly "represent" you.

There's just too much money, too much politics, too much of...something. I don't know what it exactly is, but we have lost our way.

This is not America anymore. I don't know what it is, but I don't like it.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Machinegear on 4/22/2010 9:09:24 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
There's just too much money, too much politics, too much of...something. I don't know what it exactly is, but we have lost our way.


The elected representatives only make up a small portion of Washington, and these reps are the only part that gets recycled during elections. The congressional staff, the agencies, and the bureaucracy remain. So Washington never really changes, though it does grow.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By ipay on 4/22/2010 1:15:30 PM , Rating: 3
+1

America is no longer the land of the free, but the land of the politician.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By jconan on 4/27/2010 11:59:25 PM , Rating: 2
That's why people who believe in the land of the free should run to enforce the ideals of the founding fathers and hopefully they don't become politicians...

You won't be heard if you don't speak up.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Talon75 on 4/23/2010 5:18:30 PM , Rating: 3
You can thank lobbyists for this. Lobbying is legal bribery. It should be outlawed. Congressional jobs because less lucrative and then you see what happens.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Talon75 on 4/23/2010 5:19:54 PM , Rating: 2
become*

and yes, I know there's a preview button....


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By JediJeb on 4/21/2010 4:03:23 PM , Rating: 5
It is time "We The People" stood up with our votes. Honestly in the next six years we should have a complete turnover of both houses of congress. Vote every one of them out and start fresh, and let those know that if they aren't doing what we want they will be one term politicians.

But today the average citizen does not know what their power is because slowly and silently over the years classes like Civics and Government have been pulled out of the mainstream classes in school. When I was in high school Civics was a required class for all students, now at best it is an elective. Voting and government belong to the people, therefore it should be mandatory that everyone learn the basics of government and the Constitution and be required to pass a proficiency test on it before graduation. Ignorance is no excuse for shirking responsibility, especially in the governing of our country. Yet the government wants us to be lazy and not care about our responsibility, because it allows a very small minority of those who feel they have special privileges to maintain power and press their ideals upon an entire nation and to some extent the entire world. I say to every American, Wake up! You rule this country, not some bunch of power hungry pinheads. Let's do our job and reign them in now, before we are too late.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/21/2010 4:15:12 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
You rule this country, not some bunch of power hungry pinheads


Sigh... I can remember when I actually used to believe that. But sadly, no. No we don't anymore.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By BailoutBenny on 4/26/2010 12:45:26 PM , Rating: 2
How long did it take for you to become enlightened?

I realized this probably past the point where I should have myself, but luckily there was a lot of information out there to open my eyes once I stumbled across it.

I wonder how many realize that the Constitution was the actual first step to the current plight, designed specifically FOR the progressive ursurpation of power by the government. It was even marketed as such, though not many realized it.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Yucker54 on 4/22/2010 12:35:46 PM , Rating: 2
I thought it was the rich business CEO's that ruled the country? As far as I am concerned they do. The fact we get to 'elect' people into office is a mere illusion to let us think we have some say so...


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By room200 on 4/21/2010 5:15:03 PM , Rating: 4
It works. There were more of us that supported a healthcare bill who called. Simple as that. That's why it passed. The system works. It's just your perception that when it doesn't go YOUR way that it doesn't work.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/21/2010 5:18:56 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
There were more of us that supported a healthcare bill who called. Simple as that. That's why it passed. The system works.


Oh please. Don't even go there with that crock of lies.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By room200 on 4/21/2010 5:42:04 PM , Rating: 2
Really??? Point to your "evidence" that the majority of the calls received by senators were negative against healthcare reform. You can't can't just pull crap out of the air and expect everyone to accept it. The only lie is what you stated with no evidence. For what you stated to be true you have to believe that politicians voted the way they wanted without regard to their constituency. We know that's not true because all of them care about self-preservation. No, they in fact, voted exactly the way their constituency TOLD them to vote. Get over it.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/21/2010 6:01:55 PM , Rating: 5
"If the gate is closed, we will go over the gate. If the fence is too high, we will pole-vault in. If that doesn't work, we will parachute in. But we are going to get health care reform passed."

Nancy Pelosi

Here is your "representative" system at work. I mean, this doesn't even need translation. Basically if our representatives and the people are against something, well, screw off. We're going to push OUR agenda no matter what.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By eskimospy on 4/21/2010 6:32:13 PM , Rating: 4
That agenda WAS what the people voted for. In the only opinion poll that matters, the elections that put them in office, Democrats EXPLICITLY ran on implementing a health care plan of exactly this nature, and they won the largest majority that any party has had in a generation. It was, and has been one of the primary planks of the Democratic party's platform for half a century. So when the people had their chance to speak, they spoke overwhelmingly in two straight elections for just this sort of thing.

Why this is a surprise to anyone, or some sort of evidence our system doesn't work is beyond me. Party runs in large part on expanding health care to everyone, party does this when in office. Duh. If you don't like it, vote people in to repeal it. (note: good luck on that one)

Sorry guys, elections have consequences far greater than drummed up fear based upon ignorance and a call to your representative, as well they should. Our elected officials have terms of service specifically so that they can exercise their own judgment in the face of public opinion if they feel it is the right thing to do. Considering how poorly informed US public opinion is, particularly on this health care bill, this shouldn't be a shock to anyone.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/21/2010 6:37:03 PM , Rating: 1
Look if I have to be the bad guy and say it, fine, I will. Obama won because he's black, and he ran on being the exact opposite of George Bush.

Nobody voted for him for "health care reform". Get real.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By eskimospy on 4/21/10, Rating: 0
RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/21/2010 6:53:51 PM , Rating: 4
You Democrats running around calling everyone racists is getting really tiresome. If you seriously believe that Health Care played a bigger role in the elections than the first black presidential candidate in history, that's your prerogative. Welcome to DenialTown, population YOU.

Also nowhere did I say this was a bad thing, but because I simply pointed out the facts, I'm racist.

quote:
The guys against it lost, and they lost HARD.


No, we all lost. The entire country lost. This isn't a tennis match asshole, so stop cheerleading. We CANNOT sustain the debt levels we have now, let alone when this "reform" goes into effect.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By eskimospy on 4/21/10, Rating: 0
RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/21/2010 7:16:01 PM , Rating: 4
Right so it was just a coincidence the African American voter turnout this election was about four times higher than any other point in history ???

Yup, clearly I'm a racists for pointing out the glaringly obvious !!!

OH look here's another racist writing for the totally racist Washington Times !!

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/07/ob...

God this stuff must just disgust you huh ??

OH look, here is Obama himself being "racist" !!

"The decline of wages and incomes for African American families during the Bush era has been significant," Obama said. " So I think nobody has more of a stake in the reversal in these policies than the African American community does. And they can be the difference makers in a lot of these states."

quote:
As for your ideas on the debt and its relation to health care I have neither the time nor the desire to debate them with you.


I doubt you are equipped to. Seeing as how it was thousands of pages that neither you or I have read, and even some of those who voted for it now admit there wasn't even time to read it thoroughly.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By eskimospy on 4/21/2010 8:02:33 PM , Rating: 5
I love it. An article from the Washington Times in October of 2008 SPECULATING on how turnout would be is your evidence for 'African American turnout being 4 times higher than any other point in history'? Hahahahaha! You are a crazy idiot.

I've got a better idea, lets ask our good friends at the US census bureau what voter turnout looked like in 2008 and compare it to say... the most recent presidential election before that in 2004.

Excel spreadsheet for black turnout in 2004:
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/socdemo/voting/publ...

Excel spreadsheet for black turnout in 2008:
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/socdemo/voting/publ...

I'll give you the cliffs notes: Reported black voter turnout for Kerry was approximately 56%, and for Obama turnout was approximately 65%, an increase of 9%. By sheer numbers (not taking into account population growth), Obama experienced approximately a 13% increase in black votes (14 million in 2004, 16 million in 2008). With that in mind, your analysis of black voting patterns is off by approximately 387%, give or take. Obama's margin of victory in the election was about 10 million votes, or 5 times this amount. The idea that had he only won the election by 8 million instead of 10 would have changed the electoral outcome is far fetched... at best.

This data was not hard to find.

You simply don't have the slightest clue as to what you're talking about, but your latest post is a powerful example of what I mentioned earlier, you filling in the gaps in your knowledge with personal bias.

As for the health care bill, the vast, vast majority of the bill was unchanged for months, plenty of time to read it thoroughly. Furthermore Congressmen don't tend to read bills themselves anyway, that's what they have staff for. You know how the CEO gets an executive summary instead of reading through all 30 pages of your report?

If you apply the same level of ideology and intellectual rigor to your analysis of the health care bill as you did to your understanding of black voting patterns, it should be completely clear why I'm uninterested in discussing it with you.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Deafboy on 4/22/2010 4:53:25 AM , Rating: 2
Thank you for that excellent refutation, don't see enough of that on dailytech.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By room200 on 4/22/2010 4:26:44 PM , Rating: 2
As you can see, the facts don't matter. The idiots will rate a post down, not because it perfectly states facts, and refutes aflat out lie, but simply because they just hate what you said. LOL


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/22/2010 4:37:18 PM , Rating: 2
That's what happens when you go up against the 'Claimer77. Let's be honest, he just didn't make as good of an argument as I did. So he lost.

Plus I think the readers on Daily Tech are a bit more high brow than most sites, and they don't appreciate his brand of low blow, low down, race baiting. We see enough of that on the local news...


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By eskimospy on 4/22/2010 8:36:31 PM , Rating: 2
Dude, it's Dailytech. If it weren't for ignorant people shrieking about topics they have no knowledge of there wouldn't even BE a comments section.

Facts have never mattered here, but that should just tell you not to worry about the dumb things that dumb people say on internet message boards.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By BailoutBenny on 4/26/2010 1:42:37 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By BailoutBenny on 4/26/2010 3:21:52 PM , Rating: 2
Regardless of how off Reclaimer77's numbers were, the fact is Obama race baited and it paid off. Minority voter turnout was the highest it had ever been. He is race baiting again too, see the link I posted below.

As for the healthcare bill, Rasmussen, Gallup, and even various TV/newspaper polls all showed the majority sentiment nationwide was against the bill. Many politicians went on record about call ratios, some saying their offices reached 2:1 against or higher. And technically the bill didn't pass both houses, a different version passed each house and reconciliation was used to resolve the differences.

I know the majority of Congressmen don't read the laws they pass, aside from figuring how much pork their state gets so they know their re-election chances, but their job is to read the bills as written and then convey the substance of the bill to their constituency and then get feedback on whether to actually vote for it or not.

Instead, most didn't read the bill, most held conferences about how great it was, most ridiculed and insulted their constituency when questioned about the substance, and then passed it in spite of the public sentiment.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By rmclean816 on 4/22/2010 1:04:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Also nowhere did I say this was a bad thing, but because I simply pointed out the facts, I'm racist.


Your facts seem more like opinions.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By room200 on 4/21/2010 8:30:05 PM , Rating: 1
And therin lies the hidden truth that you've wanted to say all along. It's been below the surface of all of your comments about THIS president. It's the bottom line of the birther movement, the sudden outrage over taxes, losing our "freedoms", and we "want our country back chants". You finally said what you think. "This black guy won and I'm pissed." Where the hell has your outrage been over the last 10 years??? when this country was being spent to hell and deficits were going through the roof?

Let me ask you this; did any of the previous presidents win becuase they were white? If Reagan, Bush, or Clinton had been black men, would they have won? You should be able to answer becuase you absoultely know that Obama won ONLY because he was black. (And correction, he's half black and the one drop rule no longer exists).

Reclaimer77, seriously, I'm really disappointed in you. At least in the past, you've have arguments (even though I disagree with almost all of them) that attempted to articulate why you were against Obama. The fact is this; Obama won, get the hell over it and stop being such a damn crybaby.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/21/2010 9:39:21 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Let me ask you this; did any of the previous presidents win becuase they were white? If Reagan, Bush, or Clinton had been black men, would they have won?


Let me ask you this, did any of them RUN on being white ? Because you can't deny that, although a small one, Obama and his staff made race an issue.

quote:
And therin lies the hidden truth that you've wanted to say all along. It's been below the surface of all of your comments about THIS president.


Baseless slander.

quote:
"This black guy won and I'm pissed."


Wow.. ok honestly fuck you. I'm on record here of slamming McCain for not being a Conservative. This isn't about race. "My guy" didn't lose the election, I didn't even have a guy.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By room200 on 4/21/10, Rating: -1
RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By room200 on 4/21/2010 10:16:05 PM , Rating: 1
Let me ask you this, did any of them RUN on being white ? Because you can't deny that, although a small one, Obama and his staff made race an issue.

They all ran on race (are you familiar with the Southern strategy?). The Explain how they did that. I'm waiting. Be specific.


Baseless slander.


Really? You neglected to detail where all of your phoney outrage has been all of these years (why has it only come out now with THIS president). Point to any posts where you slammed the Bush administration the way you do now over their deficit spending while BUSH was in office. I dare you.

Wow.. ok honestly fuck you. I'm on record here of slamming McCain for not being a Conservative. This isn't about race. "My guy" didn't lose the election, I didn't even have a guy.

I won't respond to the fuck you part (you've lost the argument). We're not talking about McCain. McCain has been the one republican the Teapartyers can rail against. This must be about race because YOU ARE THE ONE WHO BROUGHT UP RACE. Are you that dense?


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/21/2010 11:00:56 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
YOU ARE THE ONE WHO BROUGHT UP RACE. Are you that dense?


So ? Big fucking deal. You don't get to pull the time honored Liberal tactic of beating someones argument by hatcheting them by smearing them with names like "racist" I refuse to play your stupid little game.

quote:
Really? You neglected to detail where all of your phoney outrage has been all of these years (why has it only come out now with THIS president).


All what years !?? I have only been on Daily Tech for like a year ! Not the past 8.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Hyperion1400 on 4/21/2010 11:35:19 PM , Rating: 2
Wow, I will gladly give up my votes to prove you wrong!

http://www.dailytech.com/CommentUser.aspx?user=248...

BAM! March 2008 was your first post, which gave you plenty of time to rail against Bush.

Also:

"Welcome to DenialTown, population YOU."


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By room200 on 4/22/2010 6:40:31 AM , Rating: 1
Wait, wait, wait....this is rich; you bring up race and make an untrue, racist, generalization, then state that you get to place the race card because liberals place the race card? Nevermind the fact that I never called you a racist (before your assinine "Obama won because he was black" nonsense).

Further, I'll my argumaent with this; I will not directly respond to you in the furure because I now know what lies beneath the surface of your anger and why you manage to turn a discussion about SSDs and video cards into a discussion on why Obama's at fault for whatever the post is of the day. You need to take a look in the mirror buddy and let go of the anger; telling people fuck you, calling them names, etc. should have been enough to get you banned from this site and I really don't understand why the hell the moderators let you get away with your garbage.

A little self-reflection goes a long way. Take care.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/22/2010 3:23:13 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I never called you a racist (before your assinine "Obama won because he was black" nonsense).


I never said he won just because he was black, that's what you wanted to hear. I also complimented his campaign strategy of riding the anti-Bush sentiment all the way to the bank. But, of course, you didn't even see that part. As soon as you saw "black", well that's it, proof positive of a "racist".

I'm done playing your little politically correct game. I refuse to be labeled something just because it's not polite, socially acceptable, or a popular opinion. Deep down, everyone knows race played a big part in the election, and pretending that everyone is above that is stupidity.

quote:
I will not directly respond to you in the furure


Good, that's the best thing I've heard all day. If you can't actually debate an issue without pulling the pathetic race card, you're doing me a favor.

quote:
I really don't understand why the hell the moderators let you get away with your garbage.


Because I bring a lot of hits to the site. I'm a celebrity. Let's face it, I'm kind of a big deal here.

Ok, all joking aside, maybe the people who run Daily Tech aren't goosestepping Liberal retards (like you) who seek to silence any thought that they don't agree with of offends their liberal sensibilities. Maybe, at least on the Internet, freedom of speech still matters.

quote:
You need to take a look in the mirror buddy and let go of the anger; telling people fuck you, calling them names, etc.


Right but it's ok going around calling people a racist based on absolutely nothing? Bad language is one thing, but attempting to destroy someones credibility on a knee jerk hot-headed reaction like you had.. well.. pot meet kettle ?

quote:
A little self-reflection goes a long way. Take care.


Practice what you preach. Thank you.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By room200 on 4/22/2010 5:46:54 PM , Rating: 1
I changed my mind.... You are copletely insane. Do you even know what being a racist is? In that one post of yours, you completely dismissed any of Barack's Obama's history and reduced him to being a color. Your assertion that he rode a wave of anti Bush sentiment, so what? Every politician does that. You get tired of one guy, so you're ready for something new. Wasn't the same true of Bush when Clinton left office?

You've lost every argument you put forth:

1. You claim that Obama won because he's black with no eveidence to back up the racist assertion, and offered up a speculatory article about what the election COULD be like, and eskimospy refuted you with ACTUAL CENSUS data. Since you couldn't refute that, you resorted to name-calling.

2. You claim that "nobody voted for Obama because of healthcare". False again. Many of people have preexisting health conditions and take healthcare personally. You cannot refute that.

3. You claim that politicians received more negative calls than positive calls but healthcare still got "rammed" through. You would have everyone believe that politicians do not have self-preservation at the forefront of their minds. You cannot and have not refuted this.

4. You said that none of the other politicians ran on being white, and I pointed you to the "Southern Strategy" which is historically proven. You cannot refute this.

5. I asked you to prove that you ranted about deficit spending when in the past when Bush was in office. You did not, and tried in a cowardly way to say you had not posted on this board when Bush was in office. This was a lie. You cannot refute this either.

Name calling is the place you go when you can't win an argument? Pathetic.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/22/2010 8:12:53 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Do you even know what being a racist is?


Wait wait, YOU are asking ME this ??? You are the one acting like I said "I hate Obama cause he's black". Did I use the "n" word ?? Hell I never even said I hated the man. I think YOU need to look up racism.

quote:
In that one post of yours, you completely dismissed any of Barack's Obama's history and reduced him to being a color.


NO I didn't. That's what you WANTED to see. And excuse the hell out of me for not writing a 200 page biography on the man before I made my point !!!

quote:
You've lost every argument you put forth:


NO actually my polling date here is strong. With several 3's, some 4's, and even a five. While you and others have some 1's or lower.

quote:
2. You claim that "nobody voted for Obama because of healthcare". False again. Many of people have preexisting health conditions and take healthcare personally. You cannot refute that.


Yeaaaah, I literally meant "NOBODY". As in not a single solitary person....sigh.

quote:
3. You claim that politicians received more negative calls than positive calls but healthcare still got "rammed" through.


Sorry but that's a fact. Go look up any poll you want, the majority of Americans DID NOT WANT THIS.

quote:
You did not, and tried in a cowardly way to say you had not posted on this board when Bush was in office. This was a lie.


Go to hell. I never said I didn't post when Bush was in office !! I said I only joined "like" a year ago. Because I couldn't remember exactly when I joined. So it was a whole whopping TWO years ago. But it was NOT the full eight that YOU accused me of. So who the hell was lying then ???

quote:
Name calling is the place you go when you can't win an argument? Pathetic.


Your whole argument is based on calling me a racist, which you cannot honestly do to someone you don't even know. Who the fuck are you to judge me like that anyway ?? It's a cheap and low tactic to label your opponent something so you don't actually have to debate them !!!

You know what room200, I have no idea what race you are and I don't care, because I absolutely HATE your guts and everything you have tried to do to me in this thread. How dare you !

How far do you really want to take this anyway man?? Because I can go forever on it. It's up to you.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By raf11 on 4/21/2010 11:04:31 PM , Rating: 2
I registered just to say that I'm glad to see the anti-obama/Democrat talk being refuted on here.

I didn't have a political opinion last year, openly refusing to even take in politics because of the fact that with an organization of any substantial size, it is really hard to get a full view of information as an outsider being fed limited information. I even defended Bush with this notion.

Later, after doing heavy research, I was disgusted to find out the misinformation put out that people believe. I am registered as no affiliation, and I have to say, the conduct among Republicans during the Health Care Reform debate nearly made me register as a democrat, and vow to never vote for a Republican ever. They are tying people's morals to their party affiliation, and then using it against them, and it is absolutely monstrous.

If I had based my political opinion on the comments I had read hear, I would have hated Obama and demonized every democrat as many do. I'm glad I held an open mind, and found out the facts for myself.

I look forward to seeing a two sided political debate in the future (If it even has to come up, this is a tech site, not a politics site, it actually gets pretty annoying to see it on here)


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By JediJeb on 4/22/2010 10:52:31 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Sorry guys, elections have consequences far greater than drummed up fear based upon ignorance and a call to your representative, as well they should. Our elected officials have terms of service specifically so that they can exercise their own judgment in the face of public opinion if they feel it is the right thing to do. Considering how poorly informed US public opinion is, particularly on this health care bill, this shouldn't be a shock to anyone.


So you say that our representatives pushed the agenda that the majority of citizens wanted, but also have the right to go against the majority if they think the majority is wrong. That really doesn't back up your statements that the majority of citizens really wanted what was in the current health care bill now does it. Maybe people wanted health care reform, but not what was rammed through. There is a difference. I can want my house painted a different color, but if you paint it green when I really wanted blue then I didn't get what I wanted did I? Maybe the majority of citizens in this country just got their houses painted green instead of blue and were told to just live with it.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By eskimospy on 4/22/2010 12:33:24 PM , Rating: 2
The two points are not at all in conflict. Sorry if I wasn't more clear. (typing on a phone).

My point is that in the poll which actually mattered, America endorsed this position. That's the support of the people.

My second point however was that the day to day opinions of Americans are irrelevant. We set up our system so that legislators could ignore these shifts on purpose. If it turns out this bill actually does not reflect our will,we can vote in people to change or repeal it. I for one find that extremely unlikely, but if that's the case so be it.

Long story short: opinion was for it when it mattered, and opinion currently is irrelevant. I was trying to make two separate cases for why the crying about our system was dumb.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By BailoutBenny on 4/26/2010 1:09:14 PM , Rating: 2
I'm going to defend Reclaimer77 a little bit here:

Rasmussen polls are pretty consistent that the reform was not wanted:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/pol...

Other polls too:
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/03/28/poll-finds...

In fact, a simple Google search will show that the general trend was Americans didn't want it.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By ilkhan on 4/22/2010 1:10:44 PM , Rating: 2
And in November the Dems are going to get kicked in the teeth. They've run the country into the ground and are trying to dig us further. But yeah, they did exactly what they were told us they were going to do.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By room200 on 4/22/2010 2:09:54 PM , Rating: 2
You know, your post means nothing without something to back it up. How have the democrats "run this country into the ground"? And try using some thoughts of your own (instead of Fox News talking points). Incidentally, If the democrats have run this country into the ground, what did Bush do when he was in office?, and were you angry about it? Did you yell and scream about HIM running this country into the ground and stealing your freedoms (you know with the warrantless wiretaps and that sort of thing?)... C'mon. I'm waiting.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/22/2010 3:10:32 PM , Rating: 2
Don't worry room, he's just another racist like me right ? No need to debate someone when you can just call them a name and "win".


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By raf11 on 4/22/2010 6:34:47 PM , Rating: 2
Reclaimer77, why are you acting like this? He is debating. At least contribute some factual points like Steve1981 is doing if you want to get somewhere. You were the one who made the claim on race, and then tried to escape from it by citing the race card being played. Your actual statement either does show some racial intolerance, or just ignorance of the whole matter altogether. Plus, your petty jab above does nothing to help anything or prove any points you may have. Why not just contribute points that you disagree with (That are true and based on fact, not opinion or exaggeration) - otherwise, your painting anyone else that may have your opinion in a less knowledgeable light, which makes that whole side look bad and less credible.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Machinegear on 4/22/2010 9:31:41 AM , Rating: 2
Using the socialist website, Huffington Post, as a reference, they reported " Organizing for America (OFA) surpassed it's goal of 100,000 phone calls to Congress, each one imploring representatives to vote for reform."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dawn-teo/ofa-healthc...

If you aren't familiar with OFA, it is a wholly paid arm of the Democratic Party. Here is their website:

http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/ofasplashfl...

While many of the phone calls, maybe even most, were for the health care bill, they were done by paid Democratic party employees. To conclude America wanted this health care bill passed because a few progressives sitting in a room made thousands of calls to congress in favor of the bill would be false.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By eskimospy on 4/22/2010 10:05:26 AM , Rating: 2
OFA called regular citizens asking THEM to call their congressmen, OFA did not call the congressmen themselves. This is the same thing that lots and lots of political groups of every ideological stripe do all over the country. So no, the calls did not come from paid staffers.

You honestly thought that article was saying a couple of guys in a room were sitting there with Nancy Pelosi on redial?


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Machinegear on 4/22/2010 12:01:50 PM , Rating: 2
You miss the entire point.

If you have to pay someone to call another to ask them to perform a task that they are not inclined to do by their own volition then you cannot say that the people being compelled to do that task actually want it.

For example, I give my dog a treat if he sits, but don't conclude for a second that the dog likes sitting. He liked the treat.

Eskimospy, I don't know if American's by-n-large wanted government health care funded by their neighbor's hard work or funded by borrowed money from China. What I do know is this Republic is in bad shape and both political parties are to blame... something has to give.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By eskimospy on 4/22/2010 12:11:51 PM , Rating: 2
Huh? What treat? They are called and asked if they would like to talk to their congressman, if they say yes then they do. If they say no then they don't. There is no reward for doing so and there is no penalty for declining. Your analogy is simply wrong.

You didn't understand what you were reading and drew an incorrect conclusion, case closed.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Machinegear on 4/22/2010 12:33:12 PM , Rating: 2
You must have a weak position to do the 'case closed' deal. Try debating, learning, instead of running away from a discussion. I'll resume...

A treat for someone could be knowing "their" side will win the health care debate. Many people still identify themselves as part of a team, whether that be the Democratic team or the Republican team. Another treat could be fulfilling a person's need to be wanted. So many older Midwest folks sitting at home buy house siding just to have a nice chat with the con man at their front door. They didn't want the siding, but, they did so to be agreeable and they liked the chat. I don't know what the need is for everyone who called in support of taxing their neighbor for their health care. But to assume they new what they were doing and wanted it cannot be concluded without hard data.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By eskimospy on 4/22/2010 12:57:26 PM , Rating: 2
What? Now you are saying the reward is that 'their' side would win? While that would be a dumb reason to have a pro health care preference, it would still be a reason that was their own. You are trying to make an argument that a substantial portion of 100,000 people did something to avoid being rude to a telemarketer. Riiiiiight.

furthermore,your original post said those calls to Congress came from paid democratic staffers. Regardless of your other invented reasons for why someone might call, the callers themselves were not paid staffers in any way, shape, or form. Therefore your original post was a falsehood.

I don't wish to discuss it with you because you are just pulling arguments out of thin air that have no evidentiary suport outside of your opinion. How can someone argue against that? What would be the point?


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By clovell on 4/22/2010 1:45:43 PM , Rating: 3
I disagree. It's simply organizing, marketing, campaigning - happens every day. This time the democrats won. Next time, the Tea Party can put people through to their senators.

Involving the disillusioned electorate in their government is not a bad thing; it's a very good thing. And if republicans are too lazy to get off their ass and call their senator, or get off their ass and help other people get off their ass - well, then they deserve to lose.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By MojoMan on 4/23/2010 12:22:38 AM , Rating: 2
Room 200, do you actually believe that the health care package that got pushed through was for the people? It was a corporate takeover using government by the large insurance companies. Really? Do Democrats actually believe this is not the case? So much for the Democrats being "for the people."

ALL of you seem to be caught in the left-right paradigm. You won't win by electing Republicans either. Vote both parties out, then you might START to get somewhere.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Steve1981 on 4/22/2010 10:01:44 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
There were more of us that supported a healthcare bill who called.


People certainly did support a health care bill of some sort; it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that our current system has significant flaws. However, support for the health care bill that actually passed is another story. Gallup polls certainly don't show it as having overwhelming support.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/127382/Americans-Views-...

With the populace split like that, I'd have been treading considerably more lightly on the matter. Of course as has been mentioned, the only polls that matter are the elections. It will certainly be interesting to see how the next set pans out (not that I support either party at this juncture).

quote:
The system works.


It works in a manner of speaking, although I would hardly say it works well. Of those that called, how many do you suppose actually read and understood the bill in its entirety? Maybe 1-2%? How well does a system work if people are calling to support something they don't understand?

Personally with an issue as big and important as health care, I would have rather seen a piecemeal approach versus an all or nothing approach. Not only does breaking it down into its component pieces make things easier to understand, it makes the process flow much more smoothly and it prevents bad pieces of legislation from passing simply because they got attached to good pieces. It's a shame things can't work that way in Washington.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By eskimospy on 4/22/2010 10:21:31 AM , Rating: 2
Unfortunately the piecemeal approach isn't really viable for a system as interconnected as health care. For example, the elimination of pre existing condition denials is broadly popular, but the individual mandate is not. If congress were to pass the elimination of pre existing condition denial without the mandate, the large influx of sick people without a corresponding increase in healthy ones would bankrupt them. So, you really can't have one without the other.

It's unfortunate that the legislation had to be like that, but I don't think there was a choice.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By eskimospy on 4/22/2010 10:44:50 AM , Rating: 2
Bankrupt the insurance companies I mean. Doh.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Steve1981 on 4/22/2010 11:04:36 AM , Rating: 2
Depends on how piecemeal we're talking.

No, not every single tidbit of the block of legislation that passed could stand on its own as a bill, anymore than you can have a road built without funding it.

But there is certainly no reason why a quick bill couldn't be passed to ban the practice of rescission. There is certainly no reason I see the tit-for-tat example you gave couldn't be an individual bill without wrapping it up in a few thousand pages of other legislation.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By eskimospy on 4/22/2010 11:37:27 AM , Rating: 2
Well eliminating recission was broadly popular also, so why not include it in a larger bill? I imagine complaints come from unpopular things taking a ride on more popular legislation. Can you give me an example of what you think should have passed separately that was unpopular?


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Steve1981 on 4/22/2010 12:33:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Well eliminating recission was broadly popular also, so why not include it in a larger bill?


Why bog it down by including it in a larger bill? Congress could have passed a ban on rescission in an hour and actually accomplished something beyond sitting and arguing the various points of an all or nothing bill. Who is served by making things more complicated than they need to be? Does it serve the people to make a massive bill that next to none of them will read, in spite of the fact that it will have a significant impact upon their lives? Did it help speed reform through Congress?

quote:
Can you give me an example of what you think should have passed separately that was unpopular?


Well, how about your earlier tit-for-tat example, combined with the subsidies for the poor to get coverage, and paying for said subsidies. It's a big piece to be sure, but understandable in and of itself. If it flies, it flies; if it drops, it drops. Don't hold other things that everyone agrees on hostage while hammering out more controversial legislation.

And then of course there were the so called sweetheart deals worked out in the back room. None of that BS either.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/03/19/eveningn...

Note: I understand you might not be inclined to trust the GOP when they howl, but I trust neither party.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By eskimospy on 4/22/2010 1:24:43 PM , Rating: 2
I haven't seen any evidence that the effective date of the ban on recissions would have ben different if it had passed alone.

Also, your example actually feeds into my point. If you make something mandatory you have to be sure everyone can comply if they are willing. To do otherwise just wouldn't work. While the level of subsidies are certainly up for debate I think it's clear that some people would be unable to afford unsubsidized insurance. Therefore, the subsidies needed to be tied in too.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Steve1981 on 4/22/2010 1:53:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I haven't seen any evidence that the effective date of the ban on recissions would have ben different if it had passed alone.


What evidence do you expect? It's a hypothetical situation. Simply put, I would wager it takes very little time to pass a small bill that everyone agrees on and that it takes much more time and argument to pass a 2000+ page bill loaded with items that many people oppose.

quote:
Also, your example actually feeds into my point.


Not exactly. I'll re-iterate: when I say piecemeal, I simply mean to logically break up that 2000+ page document into more manageable pieces that can be better debated upon their merits as well as understood by the public. I do not mean that it has to be 2000 single page bills. I agree that those specific items would have to be included together as they are intricately linked. However, those issues are only one part of the health reform bill that passed. They are also quite divisive, and IMO should be separated and debated separately from other issues that were in the bill.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By raf11 on 4/22/2010 6:45:11 PM , Rating: 2
I don't have my notes handy, but off the top of my head, I believe those kick-backs were revoked with the signing of the reconciliation bill.

While, I don't condone these deals at all, I recall from earlier research that those deals (Such as the Cornhusker Kickback) were made to states that handled larger amounts of medicare treatment (In proportion to other states), but again, I don't have my notes handy, but please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

However, what did bother me about the whole situation is the outrage over those deals by Republicans (From what I can recall, "deal" situations like these are not uncommon on either side, the you scratch my back I'll scratch yours isn't uncommon in politics, again, not that I condone it) - they publicized it being included and how the bill should be scrapped because of it, but did not give the same amount of attention when it was removed (Leaving many still angry about something that never even happened)


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Steve1981 on 4/22/2010 7:23:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I don't have my notes handy, but off the top of my head, I believe those kick-backs were revoked with the signing of the reconciliation bill.


I haven't seen anything saying those specific items in the CBS piece I posted (which was after the reconciliation process started) were scuttled. I know McCain threw up a last minute amendment to block them, but AFAIK that failed.

quote:
While, I don't condone these deals at all, I recall from earlier research that those deals (Such as the Cornhusker Kickback) were made to states that handled larger amounts of medicare treatment (In proportion to other states), but again, I don't have my notes handy, but please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.


If they're defensible, then let them stand on their own merit instead of burying them in two thousand pages of legislation! That's my whole point.

quote:
From what I can recall, "deal" situations like these are not uncommon on either side, the you scratch my back I'll scratch yours isn't uncommon in politics, again, not that I condone it


And that's why I despise the vast majority of politicians!


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By raf11 on 4/23/2010 9:28:46 PM , Rating: 2
The deals were repealed:

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/8...

I could probably cite a better source within the reconciliation bill itself, but am short on time.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Steve1981 on 4/26/2010 9:20:42 AM , Rating: 2
A deal was repealed. Not all of the deals.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By BailoutBenny on 4/26/2010 1:41:39 PM , Rating: 2
Perhaps they should never have included the pre-existing condition clause in the first place. There are many different options they could have considered, however the best option is the one where the government says this is none of our business.

Regulation is not the answer, the free market is.

Regulations have already started to cause many problems for people. Not understanding the difference between insurance and a 3rd party payer, which is generally how insurance is used today, is one problem (Employer provided plans with co-pays, mandated in some places for businesses over a certain size, union contracts with unsustainable health benefits). The increasing shortage of doctors is another along with the increasing wages of health care staff(Licensing restricting supply, unions and collective bargaining laws). Administrative fees because of all the paperwork is yet another(Prohibitions on payment plan options for doctors. Insurance licensing laws). Drug costs(FDA, patents, doctor kickbacks to prescribe certain drugs). Medicare and Medicaid, laws requiring mandatory treatment of patients visiting the ER regardless of ability to pay. The list goes on.

As with most things, the solution tends to be deregulation. The free market can and will provide "univeral access" to multi-tiered services at multiple price points.

"Universal access" is guaranteed by the dollar. A dollar, or sums of dollars, provides access to any good or service. Those that don't have dollars in sufficient quantities would still have options. Charity hospitals, donations and fundraisers, pro bono work from doctors, cash clinics, even low interest long term loans from banks. This worked in days gone by and it would still work today.

To solve the problem of cost:
Eliminate any mandates on coverage, including employer provided coverage. Eliminate any mandates on payment plans. Eliminate state licensing of doctors, which artificially lowers the supply of doctors, thus driving up their wages and prices in general. Eliminate the FDA and all corresponding drug patents, subsidies and regulations, which only drive up the cost of medicine while still allowing dangerous drugs to market, all with corporate welfare to boot. Eliminate Medicare and Medicaid.

Basically, get the government the hell out of healthcare if you ever want it to be affordable again.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/22/2010 7:57:28 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It works in a manner of speaking, although I would hardly say it works well. Of those that called, how many do you suppose actually read and understood the bill in its entirety? Maybe 1-2%? How well does a system work if people are calling to support something they don't understand?


Exactly! Everyone can get behind "health care reform". It sounds great, right ?

I wonder how the polling would have came out if they asked " do you want the government to take over health care, destroy 1/6'th of our private market economy during a recession, and fine or jail people who don't sign up for the government plan ?"

Pretty sure the results would have been a bit different.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Rookierookie on 4/21/2010 8:59:34 PM , Rating: 2
I will sum this up for you and many others above: Only your opinion matters and only your opinion represents that of the American people. Anyone who holds an opposing opinion is irrelevant and un-American.

Seriously, the world doesn't revolve around you. Turn off FOX news, go out, and get a life.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By StraightPipe on 4/21/2010 4:12:49 PM , Rating: 1
I was hoping for a consolidated effort.

there's gotta be something like stopacta.info were we can pool our efforts to shut this shit down...

I know it's an international movement, but surely we're not the only population in the world who has a major problem with the proposed draft.


RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By Azure Sky on 4/22/2010 11:11:34 AM , Rating: 2
really what the people says means DICK because the politicians dont care, they care how many bribes/incentives/gifts/exct they can get out of lobbyist for voting for and advocating whatever position the lobbyist lobbying for, DRM/DMCA type stuff is mostly pushed by the MPAA/RIAA and the makers of the DRM, because they cant adapt to the current market.

I could go on and on, but theres not much point at this time, This will likely become law, then get tweaked to give the MPAA/RIAA/EXCT more and more control of what we can do online and off.


Scumsuckers
By MrBlastman on 4/21/2010 2:35:36 PM , Rating: 5
How on earth can they come after someone because they "might" do something illegal. I'm sure many of us have a few illegal thoughts daily, but, very few of us actually act upon them.

Having the government try and preempt our potential illegal endeavors opens up a very dangerous precedent and precludes warrantless searches/seizures and even worse, wrongful imprisonment without factual proof to back up a claim.

In the past, you would need probable cause in the least to try and substantiate a search or arrest. This law wipes that out completely. If a particular lobbying group does not "like" what they see, they can have the threatening party locked up before they even have a shot at fair competition.

This act is bogus, the whole lot of it and it should be thrown out completely.




RE: Scumsuckers
By chaos7 on 4/21/2010 2:42:25 PM , Rating: 4
They may be on to you.

*puts on tin foil hat*


RE: Scumsuckers
By chrnochime on 4/21/2010 2:47:09 PM , Rating: 2
If this ever becomes law, I'd like to see ALL government officials who are visiting "lax" countries like China get searched thoroughly as well. Oh, also make sure they are sent through the full body scan twice, just to make sure `they're not hiding any bootlegs on them.

Wait I forgot, those full body micrometer scanner only provides sense of security.


RE: Scumsuckers
By bohrd on 4/21/2010 2:54:44 PM , Rating: 1
I'm not saying I agree with ACTA but you can be arrested for something you might do.

I think they are making no distinction between the act of preparing to share illegally and any other acts of preparing to do something illegal. Which may include copying a CD to your computer AND having file sharing software available to you.

For instance, it is illegal to plan a murder. And I personally would feel it's better to nip that one in the bud before it happens.

But I don't agree with restricting the internet with the judge, jury, and executioner a consolidation of corporations instead of an impartial body.


RE: Scumsuckers
By morphologia on 4/21/2010 3:10:28 PM , Rating: 2
Apparently there's no such thing as an impartial body, anymore.


RE: Scumsuckers
By geddarkstorm on 4/21/2010 3:30:08 PM , Rating: 2
Or innocent until proven guilty.


RE: Scumsuckers
By Camikazi on 4/21/2010 3:57:03 PM , Rating: 2
Weeeee Minority Report :) wait... that's not a good thing :/


RE: Scumsuckers
By Azure Sky on 4/22/2010 11:16:30 AM , Rating: 2
um, since I can remember that "innocent until proven guilty" lines been just that, a line, Let somebody accuse you of a crime, see if they treat you like your innocent till they proove your guilt, NOT GONNA HAPPEN, your guilty till you prove your own innocence PERIOD, specly if your a guy and its a girl/woman accusing you, you may as well toss in the towl and get ready for some jail lovin....


RE: Scumsuckers
By Ard on 4/21/2010 4:21:48 PM , Rating: 5
The problem is ACTA doesn't appear to require the requisite "substantial step" necessary in proving an attempt. Yes, you can be arrested/convicted for attempts or planning but the law requires proof that you were taking substantial steps towards that end. In this case, what's the substantial step? Is downloading a P2P program a sign of imminent infringement? What about browsing a torrent site? How about searching for an mp3?

All of these acts can give the impression of one looking to violate copyright law but they are also all examples of legal acts. I can use a P2P program to download free eBooks in the public domain. I can use a torrent site to locate a free, open source distro. And I can search for an mp3 with the intent to either buy it or stream it from the artist's website.

Much like buying a gun and bullets isn't indicative that I'm planning a murder, so too are those examples not indicative of me planning to infringe. In my mind, the only way to legally and legitimately show "imminent infringement" is to observe someone in the process of downloading a copyrighted work. Only then do you have your substantial step and the intent on the part of the infringer. If the download completes, infringement. If not, attempted infringement.


RE: Scumsuckers
By JediJeb on 4/22/2010 11:07:32 AM , Rating: 2
So you better not use your PC to listen to your music CDs because putting that CD into the drive would constitute preparing to rip the contents and upload them to the world.


RE: Scumsuckers
By Earthmonger on 4/21/2010 3:12:05 PM , Rating: 2
Damn; one more reason I'm glad I live in Norway these days; this heinous legislation won't fly here. I feel sorry for my family and friends still stuck in the US though, ouch.


RE: Scumsuckers
By dewlim on 4/22/2010 1:14:50 AM , Rating: 2
Minority report anyone? :)


Wrong
By Spivonious on 4/21/2010 2:54:23 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
As mentioned, the bill will be finalized later this year, so this is the one and only time for citizens to voice their opinions on it before it becomes law in the U.S., Europe, and elsewhere.


That's completely wrong. Nothing becomes law in the U.S. without debate in Congress, and either a majority and the President voting for it, or 2/3s majority voting for it, "international treaty" or not.




RE: Wrong
By bohrd on 4/21/2010 3:01:17 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly! The president can agree to anything he wants to, but it has to be approved by Congress.

I believe the author is pandering to paranoia with that statement.


RE: Wrong
By bhieb on 4/21/2010 3:15:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I believe the author is pandering to paranoia with that statement.

Of course he is look, consider the source.


RE: Wrong
By JasonMick (blog) on 4/21/2010 3:23:32 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Exactly! The president can agree to anything he wants to, but it has to be approved by Congress.

I believe the author is pandering to paranoia with that statement.


President Obama has endorsed the ACTA treaty. Additionally, both parties in Congress have shown support for the measure.

There will certainly be a debate, but it is certainly possible that it will sail through later this year, barring a public outcry on its more Orwellian provisions like "imminent infringement" (thought-crime).

Nothing paranoid about it. I've just described ACTA in depth, and as I mention here, it enjoys bipartisan support in Congress and the White House given prior comments.

There's absolutely NOTHING paranoid about letting people know the truth about ACTA, which they were long denied by the U.S. government for questionable reasons.


RE: Wrong
By geddarkstorm on 4/21/2010 3:34:05 PM , Rating: 2
Worst, they could tag this onto some other high profile legislation so we don't even notice it. Just like they did the student loans overhaul, putting it in the health care bill. I mean really, not even related at all, but no one could say anything or even debate the student loans stuff because it was buried in the larger issue. To vote one down would vote both measures down. It's a ridiculous practice.

It's woeful that people aren't paying attention to how things are run. Indeed, all you did was report the facts, the fact the treaty has gotten this far pretty much makes it a done deal. Though, maybe congress will tone it down?

I dunno, in the end, we'll have to see, but this is very disturbing crap.


RE: Wrong
By Reclaimer77 on 4/21/2010 6:11:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's woeful that people aren't paying attention to how things are run.


Enough do. But there's nothing that can be done about it anyway. If you protest, they accuse you of sedition. If you make plans, they call it a conspiracy. Or they just flat out ignore you and do what they want to anyway. So what's the point ??


RE: Wrong
By ClownPuncher on 4/21/10, Rating: 0
RE: Wrong
By Ard on 4/21/2010 4:31:45 PM , Rating: 2
Except in this case Congress isn't required to ratify this "treaty". I place treaty in quotes because ACTA is being treated as an executive agreement, which means it merely needs to be signed by the President to go into effect. The distinction, however, is that executive agreements only trump state law. Federal law, binding treaties, and the Constitution are still the law of the land. That said, there's nothing stopping Congress from passing legislation that effectively mirrors ACTA, thereby giving it the full force of law.

Disturbing, but true. This is no different than the passing of executive orders; it's just higher up in terms of supremacy.


Oh
By bill4 on 4/21/10, Rating: 0
RE: Oh
By ClownPuncher on 4/21/2010 3:56:02 PM , Rating: 2
Hundreds of trillions in global warming taxation? Canada? Kyoto? Hi, we are on the subject of ACTA, a treaty that looks like it will trample on the constitutions of every country that signs it.


RE: Oh
By justniz on 4/21/10, Rating: -1
RE: Oh
By kdogg4536 on 4/21/2010 9:36:09 PM , Rating: 1
The post was slammed for going off topic, as is yours.

truly,
Amerkin asshole


RE: Oh
By room200 on 4/21/2010 5:18:28 PM , Rating: 2
You do know that there are NO CREDIBLE, INDEPENDENT, scientists you can find who will say that global warming is a myth don't you?


RE: Oh
By bug77 on 4/21/2010 5:25:39 PM , Rating: 2
True, but the issue at hand is there is NO CREDIBLE, INDEPENDENT, scientists you can find who will say that global warming is man-made.


RE: Oh
By room200 on 4/21/2010 5:50:04 PM , Rating: 1
Really??? http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,249659,00.html

PARIS — Scientists from 113 countries issued a landmark report Friday saying they have little doubt global warming is caused by man, and predicting that hotter temperatures and rises in sea level will "continue for centuries" no matter how much humans control their pollution.

A top U.S. government scientist, Susan Solomon, said "there can be no question that the increase in greenhouse gases are dominated by human activities."


RE: Oh
By fatedtodie on 4/22/2010 7:52:49 AM , Rating: 2
Read your cult's guide it isn't global warming anymore, it is climate change. This way any weather that happens can support the "theory". Now even cold weather it "global warming".

You have to admire scientists that aren't even stopped by getting data that disproves their theory. Heck Al Gore got a Nobel Prize for data that has since been proven false by the same scientists Al Gore quoted.

Long live hypocrisy


Guys, listen to me... The point is Money...
By greylica on 4/21/2010 5:31:51 PM , Rating: 3
I'm a Brazilian person who is always reading DT and Anandtech, some serious Stuff is going on.
The fact of ACTA, and the Bill in England, is a consequence of the Iraqui/Afhganistan War.
WTF ?
Simple as it is, they wan't more money, England is in it's economic chaos, with 5X it's own tax in debts.
United States, possibly even worse.

ACTA is a simple consequence of a mighty Entertainment Industry position (lobby) paired with desperate politicians about how to find a way to adress the 'old' dominant position of the USA and England over other countries, lost during the war because of the economic consequences.
They will lost twice, because copyrighted Material is loosing importance in my life and in the life os a bunch of people whose are reading copyrighted Material is a problem to have. Then, the alternatives are inevitable -> free software and creative commons, Youtube with your own TV in Internet over ''oh, we have hdtv...''.
They are only disturbing citizens, I don't wan't to spend my time reading eulas with absurdities wrote on it, then I spend my time creating another kind of world, free stuff goes on here... Linux use is a good start point.




RE: Guys, listen to me... The point is Money...
By Chris Simmo on 4/21/2010 10:11:54 PM , Rating: 2
It is all to do with money. Unfortunately there isn't much left in the world that doesn't revolve around it. The people who represent you will be happy to trade your voice for the big dollars to silence you. It’s happening a lot these days.
This is just my opinion but the big money that the MPAA and other organizations spend, was spent on say a nice distribution engine, like steam or iTunes to allow easy access to the content they represent, may find themselves making money instead of spending it, and convert a lot of the downloader’s to legalize, if the price was right. I would be happy to pay $2.00 an episode of family guy to be able to get it unrestricted and immediately after first broadcast. Hell, if the local TV station wants to have a sook, pay them 10c out of the $2.00 a TV show to shut them up. I believe the creators actually deserve some cash for making something we enjoy so much. Though to be honest, the only reason I think people would love an engine like that now is due to them cracking down on it in the first place....But now is the time!
I do get my entertainment legally. I buy Bluray for the movies I like, I get my music through iTunes, and I buy games for my Xbox and Wii and computer (thank you steam!) TV shows are still a problem here in Australia. I can’t find (though I tried really hard) to find a legal source for TV shows. I want them within 2 weeks of release, and I want to be able to keep them, and I want them without advertising. I would be happy to buy the DVD’s but they take months to arrive, if they come at all. It’s almost like they are encouraging downloader’s by restricting content.
Money speaks way too much. I think the best thing would really be to have anyone in politics be a volunteer, or paid a set income, and any dollar that is made after that is scrutinized. Also Corporations over a certain size shouldn’t be able to make donations, and donations should be limited to a small figure. Then only people who truly wish to be the voice of the people will get through.
Oh and as for health care in the US, it is the only 1st world country in the world without a universal health care system. I guess it’s up to you guys how you want to treat your people in that regard though. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_health_care


By JediJeb on 4/22/2010 10:29:35 AM , Rating: 2
I like your idea on lower pay for government officials, and I had an idea even better. Make congressional service a draft. Teach government operation in the schools and require proficiency in it for graduation, then every citizen is in the pool to be drafted as a senator or representative. The government pays you what you would make in your job, or nominal fee if you are not employed, or your employer pays you and the government reimburses them much like jury duty is now. The only elected official would be president, and judges would still be appointed but no more career politicians in congress.

Honestly congress should not be passing bill after bill every single year. Hardly any new laws are actually needed and their only other responsibility is setting a budget and funding defense and other necessary basic services. Give everything else back to the states to handle so the local citizens can be more involved in the running of their lives. Federal government can then handle any disputes between the states, which is how the founding fathers of this country actually wanted it to be. Small, lean, efficient federal government, with oversight on the local governments who actually run most things. And not only states but counties, and cities taking responsibility for more and more narrow focus on the needs of the citizens they serve.


What about Linus Distros
By JediJeb on 4/21/2010 3:45:13 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
The bill also may in effect criminalize non-profit distribution of P2P engines or hosting of P2P sites. It states that "willful copyright infringement" mandates criminal penalties when conducted "on a commercial scale", even if infringements "have no direct or indirect motivation of financial gain."


This could be used to say that free distribution of Linux is illegal. Since many Linux Distros are passed along through P2P sites even those run by the publisher of the Distro itself. It would essentially make that form of downloading perfectly legal content now illegal.

Honestly any congressman who votes for this should be voted out of office at the next election. If only the general public can be informed of this in time.




Disgusting
By Ard on 4/21/2010 4:24:47 PM , Rating: 4
Words can't describe how disgusted I am with ACTA and the mindless support the US and the Obama administration are throwing behind it. It's wholesale US copyright imperialism and handing IP law to the content industry on a silver platter. Should this piece of garbage become law (limited though it may be as an executive agreement), we can pretty much kiss the majority of our rights goodbye unless Congress decides to grow some balls. Sadly, I don't expect that to happen.




Voice Your Opinions?
By JDeckard on 4/21/2010 8:18:24 PM , Rating: 2
All you malcontents are being called the next Timmothy McVey on the evening news every night.

America is not the nation it was 20 years ago. We are becoming China all too rapidly. Personally I think Dems and Repubs both gotta go.




RE: Voice Your Opinions?
By highlandsun on 4/22/2010 8:01:45 AM , Rating: 2
For what it's worth, I wrote to www.moveon.org to make stopping ACTA one of their new campaigns. Seeing how hard they worked to get Obama into office, it's probably like spitting into the wind. But maybe it's a place to start. (What the hell, they owe me *something* for contributing to them in the past...)

Any other suggestions?


Draft link doesn't work
By ET on 4/22/2010 4:32:15 AM , Rating: 2
I get a 404




RE: Draft link doesn't work
By ET on 4/22/2010 4:33:40 AM , Rating: 2
Link's broken!
By InternetGeek on 4/21/2010 3:42:41 PM , Rating: 3
Guys, either you posted the wrong link or this was an unintended link and the document was taken out of their site.




Go USA
By bug77 on 4/21/2010 4:52:18 PM , Rating: 3
Fiercely defend Hollywood while doing your best to send any trace of industry to China. That will secure your leadership in the 21st century. And if you can make a potential criminal of anyone touching a computer, that's just icing on the cake.




Real Legal Use
By Mr JB on 4/22/2010 8:25:13 AM , Rating: 3
So what happens to all the legal use of P2P such as sky player distribution etc. Many open source program are distributed by P2P.

Are these fools going to pay the bandwidth bills of non-prof fit software houses.




The F Word
By wiz220 on 4/21/2010 5:55:20 PM , Rating: 2
Well, it's finally happening, most of the civilized world is moving towards fascism. The governments of the world working solely for the good of corporations (aka corporatism). And to think, some out there said it was crazy to believe that giving corporations the same rights as an individual could have negative consequences. Well here we are, these companies have bought complete power over our government. If this law passes it'll be a sad day for citizens (at least the ones that are sentient).




hmmm
By sprockkets on 4/21/2010 6:45:56 PM , Rating: 2
"The more plumbing they install the easier it is to stop up the drain."

--Scotty




Psssst...
By Motoman on 4/21/2010 8:17:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
"the unauthorized circumvention of an effective technological measure"


...DRM isn't an effective technological measure. Hence, the fact that it has a 100% failure rate.




Boycott the big studios
By gorehound on 4/22/2010 8:07:35 AM , Rating: 2
Stop supporting the greedy Industry by only purchasing used products.ACTA The Anti-Consumer Trade Agreement sucks and it is like the beginning of a police state.It will take away freedoms we have all because of the lame greedy big media comapanies.
Bye Bye from my wallet.hope millions do the same to you.




Protest against media industry
By akse on 4/22/2010 8:24:34 AM , Rating: 2
Should get loads of people to stop buying movies, music and other forms of entertainment.. just as a precaution. Go to live gigs or something.. go to theatre instead of movie :)




Noes...
By Anoxanmore on 4/21/2010 2:43:07 PM , Rating: 1
Arrr, this is a sad day for us mateys, we must unite and stop this from occurin' Aye, me parrot concurs.




Three Strikes
By icanhascpu on 4/21/10, Rating: 0
"When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." -- Sony BMG attorney Jennifer Pariser














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki