Exactly. The fucking govt. is ALREADY taking people's laptops. And if the law comes to your house...they will take every computer you have and remove the hard drives to "investigate" them. And the guys I know who have had this happen have all told me that when they finally got their stuff back it was ruined.

But back to the borders and flying...they are already taking people's laptops to search for "dangerous" literature that could be "terrorist" related. Just in case any of us wanted to actually read what the crazed muslims are preaching.

So if they are already doing mind and thought control by searching our computers...then what the fuck? Why not use that shit to stop piracy too?

FWIW, I won't take my laptop on another plane. I'll ship it overnight to wherever I'm going.

I doubt most consumers will know what it is about and how it effects them personally. Old people vote so I doubt there will be any huge groundswell.

It would be hard to be weaker then DMCA.

we argued back and forth in when one of those cases was mentioned on this forum

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=921742

why pretend your not aware of it now ?

It's great seeing how everyone here thinks this is about making them money. lol The only people this is going to make money is very large corporations, lawyers and governments. If you want an example of what this will look like look no further than this

Britain's new Internet law -- as bad as everyone's been saying, and worse. Much, much worse.

The British government has brought down its long-awaited Digital Economy Bill, and it's perfectly useless and terrible. It consists almost entirely of penalties for people who do things that upset the entertainment industry (including the "three-strikes" rule that allows your entire family to be cut off from the net if anyone who lives in your house is accused of copyright infringement, without proof or evidence or trial), as well as a plan to beat the hell out of the video-game industry with a new, even dumber rating system (why is it acceptable for the government to declare that some forms of artwork have to be mandatorily labelled as to their suitability for kids? And why is it only some media? Why not paintings? Why not novels? Why not modern dance or ballet or opera?).

So it's bad. £50,000 fines if someone in your house is accused of filesharing. A duty on ISPs to spy on all their customers in case they find something that would help the record or film industry sue them (ISPs who refuse to cooperate can be fined £250,000).

But that's just for starters. The real meat is in the story we broke yesterday: Peter Mandelson, the unelected Business Secretary, would have to power to make up as many new penalties and enforcement systems as he likes. And he says he's planning to appoint private militias financed by rightsholder groups who will have the power to kick you off the internet, spy on your use of the network, demand the removal of files or the blocking of websites, and Mandelson will have the power to invent any penalty, including jail time, for any transgression he deems you are guilty of. And of course, Mandelson's successor in the next government would also have this power.

What isn't in there? Anything about stimulating the actual digital economy. Nothing about ensuring that broadband is cheap, fast and neutral. Nothing about getting Britain's poorest connected to the net. Nothing about ensuring that copyright rules get out of the way of entrepreneurship and the freedom to create new things. Nothing to ensure that schoolkids get the best tools in the world to create with, and can freely use the publicly funded media -- BBC, Channel 4, BFI, Arts Council grantees -- to make new media and so grow up to turn Britain into a powerhouse of tech-savvy creators.

Lobby organisation The Open Rights Group is urging people to contact their MP to oppose the plans.

"This plan won't stop copyright infringement and with a simple accusation could see you and your family disconnected from the internet - unable to engage in everyday activities like shopping and socialising," it said.

The government will also introduce age ratings on all boxed video games aimed at children aged 12 or over.

There is, however, little detail in the bill on how the government will stimulate broadband infrastructure.

http://www.boingboing.net/2009/11/20...w-interne.html

Why do you think so? The ones suffer most from piracy today, is not the larger companies... Tom Cruise... no, it's the small guy. The one-man programmer. The cleaning lady... all those working hard for a penny. Not to mention all the losses in taxes, and so on.
In the end it's always the small and poor who suffer most, when the richer is attacked. Even Robin Hood would shake his head today. He stole back - not from..
You have to accept that someone are richer, if you want development. If everyone steal, there will be no one left to support welfare... but of course laws, that also protect the consumer and the poor.

Boinboing.net? Looks like tinfoil hat propaganda. Why can't people just face the truth, admit what they did, and stop blaming all others but themselves? The thieves and those supporting/sponsoring it, have created this. Not governments... and now they have also the nerves to whine and scare others about something they created? pfff..

Who's going to support the poor? lol That's hilarious. I spent a good bit of time in upscale restaurants back in the days. The cheapest fuckers were always the rich folks. They don't give away shit. The only reason they setup up charities is so they can put their money in tax free trusts and pay themselves out of it.

Laws don't stop a damn thing. Do you really think anyone gives a fuck about you wearing a seat belt other than maybe your immediate loved ones? NO, then why do we have a seat belt law? To protect the insurance industry and generate revenue for the government. That's it. They don't give a shit about you. So whats going to happen? They will create laws, fuck up a bunch of peoples lives because they downloaded a song, and make the government and lawyers involved money. In addition to giving some wannabe dogooders something to do with their life while they follow you around on the internet and snoop through your computer trying to find some reason to fine or throw your ass in jail.

All this bullshit just opens up a whole can of worms you don't want opened. Next it will be the major sites wantng in on it for people linking to their artcles, NAACP, ADL, etc, etc. Before you know you want even be able to say "Go Fuck Yourself" ..

And don't forget that this is a "treaty" as in every country signed on will have say and participate in the "laws" including China and the likes. So if you break a "law" that China wants enforced then you can bet the US will enforce it because they want theirs enforced.

There is a lot of hypothetical support here for a mechanism to defeat copyright theft. However the secret parts of this treaty could contain outright bans on certain types of free expression.
Its also hard to see how we could rely on ISPs to properly ID a paid download vs a sharing download. They could easily throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Not to mention the probability of a segregated internet, where we would need ISP approval to distribute content, & ISPs deciding not to transmit legal material, just to be on the safe side.

Funny you say that, because Bill Gates are not only the richest, but also probably the most pirated. Still, he can afford to give billions to Africa... yeah, I know... some americans could also need the money, but I think the african kids need it more..

The small programmer, working on his own, risk taking his hole living form him, because some jerk decided to crack his software and distribute it. Or what about the solo model, working her ass off on her own? She's forced out of the job.. or just sell her work cheap to bigger companies, who can afford laywers and marketing... How can you "justify" that?

Well, I'm using seat belt because of my own safety, and I give a shit about they give a shit. What insurance companies gain from it, is not going to stop me, no matter the law.

Yes, unfortunately, there will be consequenses when crimes expand. It's already predicted long time ago. It's history repeatingn itself... And who do we blame? The one with the cookie or bomb in his hand - or the one telling him to stop?

This is a great win for the RIAA/MPAA. But if you really think this will bring back the adult industry from the fathomless depths you are sadly deluded.

The day ISPs can choose what data can move over their networks is the same day we lose our ability to speak freely over the entire internet.

Wikepedia gets it right -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Co...rade_Agreement

Actually, you can also say the same about ISPs and their owners. They do not really care about your privacy. They care about making money on selling bandwidth - and keep their costs down.

Ah yes the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. Such warm hearts they have for those poor black folks. I wonder why it is a certain other wealthy individual was kicked out of Africa when he was actually curing diseases rather than spreading them.

Again this is not going to help those people in the least. It will still take just as much money for you to get something done about it as it would before this treaty. The only reason they (the governments) want this treaty is so they can start to reach across boarders.


That's right, you do it because you choose to do it. You shouldn't have to do ANYTHING because others think you should or shouldn't do it as long as you are not harming someone else in that process. So why have I been pulled over twice in this year because I didn't have my seat belt on? Because those "policy enforcers" feared for my life? Or were they generating revenue for the city? How do the insurance companies benefit? Accident claims which cost them money..


What crimes have expanded? As far as I know thieves go back to the beginning of time have the 1 million laws on the book stopped that yet?

There has never been so much piracy as now, and you know that. In the beginning of days, they simply cut the head off the horse thieves. Today, they will cut off some cables..

I don't know how these laws will work, that depends on the enforcement. But I'm sure if they first shut down the obvious domains and servers, it will have major effect. Then take it from there... I think a tax funded free broadband and free digital public "libraries" for everyone, is the right solution. Something controlled, like the classic libraries. Doesn't that sound good?

Ah we get to the real goal of it all. No, turning the internet into a controlled TV style library doesn't sound good to me. Sorry. I very much like being able to have access to ALL information not whatever information someone else wants me to have access to.

I have probably 150+ VCR tapes from years ago where I recorded various movies back in the day. I remember much of my entire childhood having copied music tapes. So whats the difference? I live in Music City and I've had this conversation/argument more times than you can imagine with music executives, artists, agents, etc. For years I tried getting some well connected industry people to embrace the internet and even gave the solution to do it. But they were stuck in the same old mentality or hating it and directing all their money and energy in hunting down college students who downloaded their music and putting them on "show trials" fining them ridiculous amounts of money. It's stupid and it's not going to solve anything.

Lol @ anyone who believes this is about protecting copyright, stopping pirates etc....

This is about control, about silencing those opposed to the system, about stopping the alternative media,....

Not turning internet into a library, but putting library onto internet. It's a voluntary system, where royalties are paid, and others can make use of the free market mechanism and pay their taxes. It worked before, so why not now? Because you want it ALL for free?

Pay taxes to what? Are you aware that not one cent of your income taxes goes to fund the federal government? It all goes to pay the interest on a debt run up by printing off pieces of paper. Voluntary=free. Royalties from what? Are you describing a socialist internet? Let the government tax and pay out to those who contribute? lol What has worked before?

As I pointed out not one cent of your income taxes goes to fund the federal government. What does fund them? Running up the credit card (national debt) turning everyone into economic slaves. No I don't want to pay more out to anyone unless I CHOOSE to do so. I pay for what I use. I pay monthly for my son to download his music. I pay for various subscription I feel are worth it for me and my business. I have to figure out how to make a living and I don't expect the government or anyone else for that matter to figure out how I can. I don't need them making laws in my favor to do so. I do need laws that will hamper my business just to make other special interest parties means of earning easier.

What I described is what they want to do. They want to turn the internet into a subscription based environment like your TV. If you have this idea in your head that it's going to be easy for the average person to get in on this little scheme you are sadly mistaken. Before you jump on board with something like this why don't you try to setup your own radio station or television station. Have a look at all of the regulations, stipulations, costs and hoops one has to jump through. All of it will stifle the innovation and only make the same old companies richer. This plan is for big corporations not for little guy. They want you on big corp payrolls not working for yourself. They want to scale it down to where they have control and if they don't like what you are doing they can and will shut you down. With this treaty that's not just your local government that's EVERY government can and will shut you down.

Here we pay taxes, and it's used on public schools, hospitals, libraries... I can't see why a "digital" library is not an option, when everything else is funded and works. I'm not describing a fully socialist model, but something everyone can be happy with. A world of piracy, anarchy, is not going to make anything better..

Well, your national debt is a question of electing the right leaders and your personal debt is about priority and sense. If it fails, it still do not justify stealing for the purpose of over-consuming.

If you want to give the little man chances, then you also have to stick up for his rights to protect his own work. Piracy is taking away both economy and freedoms.

Don't get me wrong. I do not want a fully government controlled internet. However, the time is now "I told you so" - and if fingers are to be pointed, I know where to point them.

Where is here? Because here in the US there is this misconception you pay income taxes to fund those things but that is not the case. Thats the way they sell it to you but thats not what happens. What pays for schools? Property taxes. What pays for state employees? Sales taxes. What pays for health care? Insurance. What pays for the US federal Government? Running up the credit card since 1933.



Again I don't know where you're from but can you give examples of the right leaders?


There are 1 million laws on the US books. I'm assuming that you aren't in the US but do you really think that somewhere mixed in those 1 million laws there's not already something they can use? How about as an industry policing yourselves? Where I primarily make my money that's how we do it. If there's a scammer running around he/she always gets outed by the community and dealt with. One was recently put away for years do to the "community" policing ourselves and using what laws were already there.

On that same note. One "corporation" whom everyone thought they could trust turned out to have been robbing us all for years.

I'll expand on this one a bit further. For many of those years our community raised red flags on this scamming that was being done. During all of that time everyone within the company said it wasn't so. years and millions of stolen dollars later they finally fess up. Selling out the lone gunman and trying to make amends acting as if they never had any idea of what was going on. What do you think is going to happen to this lone gunman and said publicly traded company? Probably nothing to the company. Because you see if you are a scammer you can hide behind a corporation and all liability is on a fictitious entity. If we want to go after the lone gunman we have to do it on our own.

To expand on this one even further. We already have a "governmental body" per se which is suppose to oversee the particular company in question. If you haven't figured it out already it's (snapnames) well all of us including you pay $.20 per domain to ICANN for said oversight. What are they doing? Planning their next conference at some exotic location. A perfect example of how paying dues for oversight gets nothing. They are nowhere to be seen in all of this.

I live in Denmark. There is no such thing as perfect or 100% right leaders, but without a A/B wing, there are many parties and they have to negotiate. The taxes are high, but during a lifetime, you get "paid back" with free schools, medical care and lots of other welfare things. And freedom is still intact... Hell, we can even get porn movies at public libraries, because it's "part" of the culture. And since you mention it; even the nazis are allowed to speak and they got government funded money for radio broadcasting, because free speech is above anything else.

So my idea of a controlled digital library, is not about controlling the flow of information, but to control the flow of money. The right people should get paid, and funding can only be administrated by someone chosen by the people. Additionally, give a minimum free broadband for everyone. Rest is free market - a voluntary model.. This will ensure economy for everyone, no matter what they choose - but piracy can never be part of that equilibrium.


Yes, indeed. We need policing. But it should not be a bro club, but something that establish best practise, with respect to free market and the limits. Not only laws, but also ethical, especially how to deal with piracy.

A slave who thinks he's free is the best slave.


And you think that your culture will overrule China's?

I'm sure the Jews would have been glad to hear that as they were marched into the gas chambers and acid showers.


Control of the flow of money.. lol Yeah they'll love that. That's what they are best at. What qualifies you as deserving of said money? You can't figure out how to make money so you just expect to get paid is that it? Isn't that socialism? There's nothing free-market in anything you are talking about. You'll feel better about the government taking a portion of your earnings to stop someone else taking a portion of your earnings? I get it.


It's not about that and it will never be about that.

Here's a good "royalty free" book I suggest you and everyone else for that matter read.

"Listen, Little Man!" reflects the inner turmoil of a scientist and physician who had observed the little man for many years and seen, first with astonishment, then with horror, what he does to himself; how he suffers, rebels, honors his enemies and murders his friends; how, wherever he acquires power "in the name of the people," he misuses it and transforms it into something more cruel than the tyranny he had previously suffered at the hands of upperclass sadists. "

http://www.listenlittleman.com/

I don't agree with what you say but I'll die for your right to say it
Voltaire

As long the public sector is not too big and as customer stimulate competition, then you have a free market. Libraries have been around since the ages before internet and computers, and in all political systems. The purpose is first of all, to provide everyone free access to information and culture. It's the same "service" pirates claim they provide. The difference is, that libraries pay royalties to those contributing and that pirates do not provide tax income to fund it.... Sure, you can say some "get paid", but it is not because they can't figure out to make money. Paying them for doing nothing, i.e. social welfare, is not the exactly better alternative. And as I said; it is voluntary. Anyone can choose if they want to operate on the free-market, and if they want their work to be published on libraries. And if you didn't know: You do not go into the public library, deliver the goods, and then get paid. It's just like any other market; there must be some demand for it...

If you compare this model with socialism, then I think you misunderstand the concept. The purpose is not to control information, but to ensure free and broad information. But since we are also talking about peoples livinghood, there must be someone to administrate the flow of money, and no one better than the ones chosen by the people can do that. That's true democracy.


Well, it's fraud, so I think it should be treated like scam.

It's a nice "concept" but that's not how it's going to be. These people take what you want tell you thats what you are going to get and then turn it into a profit and control mechanism for them.. The above article in whats happening with the British bill is the prime example.

Did you get in your vote in for the EU President?


http://www.listenlittleman.com/

No, that shows the difference between protect and serve. You can still protect some people from theft, and at the same time serve others welfare. Sure, you also need profit - otherwise everyone will go bankrupt :)

Protect and serve. That's what they say about that "policy enforcer" who pulls me over for not wearing my seat belt isn't it? Grant it the officers heart might be in the right place but "he's just doing his job" as he writes that ticket making me pay for my sins of not wearing a seat belt.. When these "militias" in Britain start raiding peoples homes because someone downloading a song I'm sure it will be "we're just doing our job." Just like Hitlers SS officers were "just doing their job."

The only people bankrupting me is the government. They've already spent more "for me" this year than I will likely profit. Oh but I don't need to worry about that they put that on the credit card...

Honestly my whole point in this entire conversation is to try and get you to realize that we can't just keep on adding more and more "laws." Where does it all end?

As I've said several times before we already have over 1 million laws here in the US. We have 4% of the population and more than the entire World behind bars. Over 60% of which are there from non-violent offenses of "policy breaking." So now we are going to add an entire new level of "laws" on top of those? Why don't we all just lock everyone up and take turns playing "corrections officer."

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/n...ure-for-us.ars

looks like i was right again, law got gutted, and it both ways i predicted

funny thing with all that EU and mexico still refuse to sign, so it could get even more watered down.

This is bad.

This is a disaster in the making.

"There's many a slip 'twixt the cup and the lip"
:2 cents:

suppose you snap a few pics of your wife in the bathtub holding your infant child... at the border they search your digital files and lock you up like FOREVER for kiddy porn?

(disclaimer on ---> absolutely NO insult intended...)

but why would you even consider taking that with you 'on the road' (just back them up and delete them before you go)

or taking those pic's while travelling and know that you may be searched (take them if you must, e-mail or upload them to yourself, delete them)

heh, guess I just can't envision myself getting 'caught' with something like that

anyways....

sucks that ACTA got watered down, but in reality I suppose I knew it would.

.