Added: 1003 days ago by Mardod | Posted in: Politics | 18 Comments

Rating:

 

Share:     Embed:     Fave:    

Item added to your favorites.

You must be logged in to add to your faves. Use the login box on this page or click here to regsiter.

<div align='center'><a href='http://www.kontraband.com/blog/17456/So-Long-Interweb-Freedoms/'>So Long Interweb Freedoms</a><br><div align='center'></div><br><a href='http://www.kontraband.com/blog'>See more like this on kontraband.com</a></div>

Peeping Tom, I mean Uncle Sam, wants to see your bewbs. Now.

Let's play a little "what-if" game. Imagine a time where the RIAA or MPAA were legally able to force ISPs to hand over information regarding suspected, but unproven illegal activity. Imagine if corporations could legally force a newspaper or blogger to reveal a confidential source who blew the whistle on a dangerous product. Imagine border patrol agents given the legal and technical tools to scan your entire hard drive without your knowledge in order to inspect its contents for illegal music downloads. Or perhaps federal law enforcement authorities compelling companies who employ cloud computing technology to allow access to your confidential records.

Not possible you say? That may change if the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) is completed, ratified, and enforced. ACTA is the result of several months of negotiations between the U.S., several European countries, Japan and Switzerland, initially. Since negotiations began, many additional countries are now taking part. The goal is to establish a new legal framework to secure copyright protections internationally and boost efforts against counterfeiting of protected materials. This would be accomplished by creating a new independent world body which would lay out both the rules and the method of enforcement to ensure that member nations would comply. ACTA would be an opt-in treaty for member countries, so if they do not care for the provisions they will not be bound by them.

You may be asking yourself aren't there already groups who do this? The answer would be yes. Most products that carry a patent or copyright fall under at least one of two different world bodies, the World Trade Organization (WTO) or the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Both of these entities lay out rules for the proper handling of protected works and procedures for when the rules are not adhered to. The body which would be created by the ACTA would presumably co-opt those duties and assume them for itself. And as far as that opt-in piece goes, IP Justice, a group that advocates for civil liberties on the net, argues that:

After the multi-lateral treaty's scope and priorities are negotiated by the few countries invited to participate in the early discussions, ACTA's text will be "locked" and other countries who are later "invited" to sign-on to the pact will not be able to re-negotiate its terms. It is claimed that signing-on to the trade agreement will be "voluntary", but few countries will have the muscle to refuse an "invitation" to join, once the rules have been set by the select few conducting the negotiations.

Sound a bit worrisome? That is just one aspect of the Act which has caused consternation among privacy and civil liberty groups as well as those who have been working for years to advocate for looser restrictions on copyright. Not aided by this is the fact that virtually all of the bargaining between the key players has been in secret. A draft of the agreement surfaced last May when someone close to the talks leaked a copy of them online.

So what does this mean for you? Actions that were once considered unethical could become illegal. Private actions could come under the scrutiny of agents of the state. Have you ever downloaded a song from your iPod to a friend's computer? Ever looked at pr0n online or shared a few moments with a cam girl? Want the government to know about it? Most citizens are completely unaware these deliberations are even occurring. It's also why, typically, negotiations like this are conducted in public and with the input of all parties who could be affected by changes in trading policy.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a non-partisan, non-profit organisation that works in the area of digital rights, has been following this issue since news of its existence was brought into the public sphere and written a number of reports on what they fear could be abuses of the system. From the lack of transparency to what they see as a sort of end-run around already existing penalties on non-compliance in favor of far more draconian levels of punishment. The EFF also notes:

While little information has been made available by the governments negotiating ACTA, a document recently leaked to the public entitled "Discussion Paper on a Possible Anti-counterfeiting Trade Agreement" from an unknown source gives an indication of what content industry rights holder groups appear to be asking for...the creation of...mandatory network-level filtering by Internet Service Providers and for Internet Service Providers to terminate citizens' Internet connection on repeat allegation of copyright infringement (the "Three Strikes" /Graduated Response) [emphasis mine], so there is reason to believe that ACTA will seek to increase intermediary liability and require these things of Internet Service Providers. While mandating copyright filtering by ISPs will not be technologically effective because it can be defeated by use of encryption, efforts to introduce network level filtering will likely involve deep packet inspection of citizens' Internet communications. This raises considerable concerns for citizens' civil liberties and privacy rights, and the future of Internet innovation.

Many felt transparency concerning the details of ACTA would be forthcoming after the change in political leadership in the White House. However, the Obama administration has claimed the ACTA negotiations fall under the heading of state secrets and they will not disclose the details until they are complete. They will, however, have to pass through Congress for approval before being enacted. That's where you come in.

If you think more light is required in these talks, then say so. I normally side with Democrats on issues of trade, but since the enactment of agreements like NAFTA (which passed with large Democratic support), I've been more cautious and would encourage you to do the same. These are your rights. Don't let them be traded away without your knowledge.

Added: 1003 days ago by Mardod | Posted in: Politics | 18 Comments

Rating: