Time to "Act" on A.C.T.A

Discussion in 'privacy general' started by spy1, May 6, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. spy1

    spy1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Posts:
    3,139
    Location:
    Clover, SC
    http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2009/05/06

    "May 6th, 2009
    Government Still Blocking Information on Secret IP Enforcement Treaty
    Broken Promises from the Obama Administration Keep Americans in the Dark About ACTA

    Washington, D.C. - Two public interest groups today called on the government to stop blocking the release of information about a secret intellectual property trade agreement with broad implications for privacy and innovation around the world.

    The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Public Knowledge said that the April 30th release of 36 pages of material by the United States Trade Representative (USTR) was the second time the government had the opportunity to provide some public insight into the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), but declined to do so. More than a thousand pages of material about ACTA are still being withheld, despite the Obama administration's promises to run a more open government.

    "We are very disappointed with the USTR's decision to continue to withhold these documents," said EFF Senior Counsel David Sobel. "The president promised an open and transparent administration. But in this case and others we are litigating at EFF, we've found that the new guidelines liberalizing implementation of the Freedom of Information Act haven't changed a thing."

    EFF and Public Knowledge filed suit in September of 2008, demanding that background documents on ACTA be disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Initially, USTR released 159 pages of information about ACTA and withheld more than 1300 additional pages, claiming they implicate national security or reveal the USTR's "deliberative process." After reconsidering the release under the Obama administration's new transparency policies, the USTR disclosed the additional pages last week, most of which contain no substantive information.

    However, one of the documents implies that treaty negotiators are zeroing in on Internet regulation. A discussion of the challenges for the pact includes "the speed and ease of digital reproductions" and "the growing importance of the Internet as a means of distribution."

    Other publicly available information shows that the treaty could establish far-reaching customs regulations over Internet traffic in the guise of anti-counterfeiting measures. Additionally, multi-national IP industry companies have publicly requested that ISPs be required to engage in filtering of their customers' Internet communications for potentially copyright-infringing material, force mandatory disclosure of personal information about alleged copyright infringers, and adopt "Three Strikes" policies requiring ISPs to automatically terminate customers' Internet access upon a repeat allegation of copyright infringement.

    "What we've seen tends to confirm that the substance of ACTA remains a grave concern," said Public Knowledge Staff Attorney Sherwin Siy. "The agreement increasingly looks like an attempt by Hollywood and the content industries to perform an end-run around national legislatures and public international forums to advance an aggressive, radical change in the way that copyright and trademark laws are enforced."

    "The USTR's official summary of the process, released last month, recognized the lack of transparency so far while doing nothing to broaden stakeholder input or engage public debate," said International Affairs Director Eddan Katz. "The radical proposals being considered under the Internet provisions deserve a more transparent process with greater public participation."

    Litigation in the case will now continue, with USTR asking U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer to uphold its decision to conceal virtually all of the information that EFF and PK seek concerning the ACTA negotiations.

    For the documents released so far:
    http://www.eff.org/fn/directory/6661/329 "

    Have you responded to that action alert I posted above? Because I can tell you, right now and without any doubt whatsoever, that if that bill is over a thousand pages, then there's not a single legislator out there who will read it before voting on it.

    I can similarly guarantee that if they're hiding the contents of this thing that it will be a privacy/Constitutional nightmare when finally presented.

    ACT on this: https://secure.eff.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=420 Pete

    http://www.alarmandmuster.com/Home.html
     
  2. axle00

    axle00 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2008
    Posts:
    92
    I fully agree with you, and I don't think people really understand how bad things are going to get in the next few years. The privacy front, is just one of the many battles we face. They are literally hitting us with multiple attacks from all angles. It is an understatement to say that we are in for some tough times in the very near future.
     
  3. vizhip

    vizhip Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2009
    Posts:
    83
    I just dropped a note to both of my senators and my representative, so maybe they will be able to shed a little more light on what this is about if they can...

    Regards -
    -Bob
     
  4. caspian

    caspian Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Posts:
    2,301
    Location:
    Oz
    Sickening! I wonder what would happen if some hackers started spying on politicians and their families and distributed all their personal information? I wonder how they would look at privacy issues then?
     
  5. vizhip

    vizhip Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2009
    Posts:
    83
    I know of a case like that from back in 1992... The Secret Service got involved...

    Needless to say, the spying stopped... but only one served time...

    Regards -
    -Bob
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.