Customs now "Private Copyright Infringement Enforcement"??

KookyMan · May 27, 2008

Hey all.

Just thought some of you would like to see some snippets of an article that was posted regarding Canada. According to the article, the US as well as EU are involved in this as well.

Source: Canada.Com

From the article:

OTTAWA - The federal government is secretly negotiating an agreement to revamp international copyright laws which could make the information on Canadian iPods, laptop computers or other personal electronic devices illegal and greatly increase the difficulty of travelling with such devices.

The deal could also impose strict regulations on Internet service providers, forcing those companies to hand over customer information without a court order.

Called the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), the new plan would see Canada join other countries, including the United States and members of the European Union, to form an international coalition against copyright infringement.
Click to expand...

....

The deal would create a international regulator that could turn border guards and other public security personnel into copyright police. The security officials would be charged with checking laptops, iPods and even cellular phones for content that "infringes" on copyright laws, such as ripped CDs and movies.

The guards would also be responsible for determining what is infringing content and what is not.

The agreement proposes any content that may have been copied from a DVD or digital video recorder would be open for scrutiny by officials - even if the content was copied legally.
Click to expand...

....

Anyone found with infringing content in their possession would be open to a fine.

They may also have their device confiscated or destroyed, according to the four-page document.

The trade agreement includes "civil enforcement" measures which give security personnel the "authority to order ex parte searches" (without a lawyer present) "and other preliminary measures".
Click to expand...

These are just three snippets taken from the first page, of three. Definitely worth a read for those who travel across borders frequently.

As for my personal opinion:
Now as if we didn't have enough reason to keep track of what we carry, now we even have to be cautious of whats on the machine? Why do I so see Customs saying, "Ok, now we're gonna run a 'Windows Genuine' check on your machine to make sure its a legal copy of Windows. I don't care if your only coming to Canada for an hour to see a friend, your carrying your laptop, it best be 100% legal and provable."

I am talking about this on another forum, where someone mentioned who is going to be paying for this; Yes, the taxpayers are going to be paying for the enforcement of copyrights of companies who aren't paying for it themselves, and don't even need to say that someone is breaking copyright. This is like throwing a net across the border, and trying to catch people without any suspicion what-so-ever. Especially since the border agents have the call of what is or is not legitimate. Boy, talk about not wanting to piss off customs agents anymore. You do, they'll search your device and "find" "illegal" material, and confiscate it.

Isn't there something somewhere about not having the same entity be the investigator, judicator, jury, and "executioner"? Should we just start calling Customs agents "Street Judges."

(Reference to Judge Dredd)

sukarof · May 28, 2008

What sick mind comes up with these kind of ideas...
So, if I have a big file (made with portable Truecrypt) lets say named "nghryut" what happens then? Anyone using encryption software are automatically banned from that country? Or do they steal your laptop?

caspian · May 28, 2008

sukarof said:

What sick mind comes up with these kind of ideas...
So, if I have a big file (made with portable Truecrypt) lets say named "nghryut" what happens then? Anyone using encryption software are automatically banned from that country? Or do they steal your laptop?
Click to expand...

You could always split the TrueCrypt volume into 100 MB sections, zip it, upload it to Rapidshare, and then join on the other side of the border, hehe. I tried splitting a small volume and rejoining it just to see, and it worked. I was simply amazed.

KookyMan · May 28, 2008

sukarof said:

What sick mind comes up with these kind of ideas...
So, if I have a big file (made with portable Truecrypt) lets say named "nghryut" what happens then? Anyone using encryption software are automatically banned from that country? Or do they steal your laptop?
Click to expand...

Well, first they would have to prove it is an encrypted file. But I love that first question. I don't know who comes up with them. I'm guessing the ??AA Exec's in their dreams, as suggested by the article.

sukarof · May 29, 2008

Since it is so easy to bypass their search for copyrighted material makes one wonder what the point is really.
As I see it it is just a PR trick to scare average joe.
The last tremors of old dying dinosaurs paving the ground for Big Brother.

HandsOff · Jun 3, 2008

sukarof said:

As I see it it is just a PR trick to scare average joe.
The last tremors of old dying dinosaurs paving the ground for Big Brother.
Click to expand...

More that that, maybe. It could be paving the way to start a campaign (again) against strong encryption. The idea, I think, is just to put the concept of enforcement out there often enough that it takes on the aura of an old problem that we need to come to grips with. They gloss over the enforcement inequities and people do not understand what they are actually saying...

There may be real issues of concern here, but this is just a power grab. Can you imagine there being popular support for this measures? Yeah...keep us posted on this one. Gotta keep these guys on a short leash!

spy1 · Jun 6, 2008

https://secure.eff.org/site/Advocac...gbb3.app8a&cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=383

In October 2007 the United States, the European Community, Switzerland and Japan simultaneously announced that they would negotiate a new intellectual property enforcement treaty, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, or ACTA. Australia, the Republic of Korea, New Zealand and Mexico have joined the negotiations. Although the proposed treaty's title might suggest that the agreement deals only with counterfeit physical goods (such as medicines), what little information has been made available publicly by negotiating governments about the content of the treaty makes it clear that it will have a far broader scope, and in particular, will deal with tools targeting "Internet distribution and information technology." To date, disturbingly little information has been released about the actual content of the agreement. However, despite that, it is clearly on a fast track; treaty proponents want it tabled at the G8 summit in July, and completed by the end of 2008.

The Fact Sheet released by the Office of the United States Trade Representative, the arm of the US government that is negotiating the treaty, states that it will involve a new international standard of IP rights enforcement, and international cooperation including sharing of information between signatory countries' law enforcement agencies. A document recently leaked to the public entitled "Discussion Paper on a Possible Anti-counterfeiting Trade Agreement" from an unknown source and with an unclear status, includes a number of detailed proposals -- including new legal regimes to "encourage ISPs to cooperate with right holders", criminal measures, and increased border search powers, and raises considerable concerns for citizens' civil liberties and privacy rights.

Despite the potentially significant harmful impact on consumers and Internet innovation and the expedited timeframe in which the treaty is being negotiated, the citizens that stand to be directly affected by the treaty provisions have been given almost no information about its real contents, and very little opportunity to express their views on it.

In February, the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) asked for public comments with a short deadline of March 22, on the proposed treaty. Apart from the little information in the request for comments, citizens were given only a one and a half page "Fact Sheet" on ACTA, which failed to inform the public of its substance -- making the comment process a leap in the dark.

Given the speed with which this treaty is being negotiated, and its potentially significant impact, the lack of transparency in the negotiation process and failure to provide citizens with an opportunity for informed consultation is extremely concerning. But there is still time to change this.

Contact your Senator now -- urge them to shed some sunlight on the contents of ACTA and to give citizens an opportunity for meaningful consultation. It's your Internet too!
Click to expand...

(Form will be on the page linked to above for your contact info). Pete

HandsOff · Jun 7, 2008

Naturally the negotiations are being rushed. After all, how would it look if the people defending the role of the ISP's are conducting their negotiations from a jail cell?

-HandsOff

Log in or Sign up

Customs now "Private Copyright Infringement Enforcement"??

KookyMan Registered Member

sukarof Registered Member

caspian Registered Member

KookyMan Registered Member

sukarof Registered Member

HandsOff Registered Member

spy1 Registered Member

HandsOff Registered Member

Log in or Sign up

Customs now "Private Copyright Infringement Enforcement"??

KookyMan Registered Member

sukarof Registered Member

caspian Registered Member

KookyMan Registered Member

sukarof Registered Member

HandsOff Registered Member

spy1 Registered Member

HandsOff Registered Member

Useful Searches