
TPP treaty (ACTA all over) provisions leaked. - rst
http://boingboing.net/2012/08/25/leaked-tpp-the-son-of-acta-w.html
======
Sniffnoy
Please link directly to the article, rather than to boingboing's link to the
article: [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/tpp-creates-
liabilitie...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/08/tpp-creates-liabilities-
isps-and-put-your-rights-risk)

~~~
vog
This has been done, but nobody seems to care about that HN entry:
<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4434154>

Maybe the title was badly chosen.

------
norswap
> Requirements for Internet intermediaries to filter all Internet
> communications for potentially copyright-infringing material.

Each time I read something like that, I wonder if they really realize the cost
needed to achieve efficient filtering.

~~~
bad_user
They aren't interested in efficient filtering. Laws such as these are only
selectively applied and are meant to give them leverage in negotiations and
take-down requests ... after a treaty such as this one gets implemented, a
content distributer will not think twice about complying with a DMCA takedown
request. And such services will end up paying licensing fees even if all the
hosted content is legit, simply because of the risk associated.

~~~
001sky
_Laws such as these are only selectively applied_

Laws architected not be obeyed but to abused are totally unacceptable.

~~~
bad_user
Well, of course. But we end up with such laws because the politicians don't
have the technical knowhow do understand the full implications and the
lobbyists don't really care as long as it's in their advantage.

~~~
001sky
This has the whiff of a law architected by the lobbyists. The politicians, as
you put it, "don't really care as long as it's in their advantage."

The pre-meditation is particularly worrisome.

------
tomjen3
How is behind these things? It seems that they won't stop until they are dead
-- any hope that they are getting old or have other illnesses?

~~~
beedogs
This kind of shit is the reason I pirate all major-label and big studio
content I want. I refuse to help feed their legal machine. I still pay for
third-party, independent content. Anything else is fair game. I consider this
approach to be far superior from a moral standpoint.

Everyone really ought to be doing the same. Stop feeding the MPAA/RIAA.

~~~
AlisdairO
...why not just refuse to watch their stuff?

~~~
Karunamon
What's the difference? Either way, you're not giving them money.

~~~
majormajor
Because if you think it has enough value for you to watch it, but refuse to
pay for it, you're not really protesting anything. You're just being a jerk.
It isn't taking a principled stand to do something which helps your own wallet
at the expense of the people making the content you watch.

For clarification, since I seem to have worded that unclearly: if your protest
is indistinguishable from simply being greedy, don't be surprised if your
message gets lost. If you think it's worth protesting, go all the way.
Otherwise how am I supposed to tell that you really think your reason to
protest them outweighs—even to you—your reason to watch the stuff they create?

~~~
Karunamon
>You're not really protesting anything.

Sure I am. I'm protesting giving money to people who campaign against my
interests.

Nobody (save for you) has said that taking a stand has to be an exercise in
self flagellation.

------
piffey
They'll never give up. Better patch the meatspace bug and write a software
workaround.

------
Monotoko
This one has been moving since 2005, slowly but steadily. Oddly the US isn't
an original signatory: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-
Pacific_Strategic_Economi...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-
Pacific_Strategic_Economic_Partnership)

------
lancewiggs
The linked leaked text seems to be from February 2011. Is this the current
text I wonder?

