by tomorrow, mostly all of you will be breaking the law.

[Fallen-Angel Risen-Demon]

I hope to god Anonymous takes down the asshattery that is the ACTA. They've apparently declared a state of war.

Anonymous is long-dead now.

u mad?
OT: I don't full understand but it's tomorrow today...
So am I breaking the law yet?

 

[Lavi]

BTW, Canadians, don't worry. The USA may have two parties, but we have three (biggies), and face it, we'll never have a majority. The parties know if they do something, anything, we even remotely dislike, they lose what little majority they have.

Not to mention Canada doesn't really worry about piracy because its so low compared to our population.

 

[jthm]

Um...how are they doing this? How are they going to void every civil liberty? Because I missed that part.

That's the point, chief. Welcome to the discussion.

Now go read the other 10 pages to see the answer to your questions.

From what I can see it's the same stuff they do with music. So what is the big deal?!

With music, they attach tracker programs to the torrents, monitor downloads. This allows them to scan your computer without your consent or you having downloaded anything, and it includes a lot more than just music and movies. For instance, by viewing my post, you have an unauthorized copy of a nintendo trademark in your cache. You are violating the terms of ACTA. See, your computer saves the images it runs into when you browse. It's doing it right now and it saved my avatar image (Mario) to your temporary internet files and cache in case you revisit the site. Congrats, you're prosecutable.

I can see how that may be a problem, but it's there choise if they do prosicute you. So in that situation they can try me, but they wont because it would be stupid.

Spellcheck. Choice, prosecute. That's just an example though. Every time you look at a website, your computer saves the images in the cache. Nintendo might be above this sort of thing, but how about porn sites? Just by viewing them, they have a chance to say you stole from them and take you to court. Do you think they'd hesitate to file charges if they stood to make money off you? Legally they're in the right. Unless you live in Australia, it's expensive defending yourself in court, even if you win. How about Gamespot or some failed webcomic artist or that video you watched on youtube that had a song in it that the RIAA owns and hadn't asked youtube to take down yet? Letter of the law is really broad here.

 

[Scarecrow]

I'd imagine it'll be a bit of a non issue. Mainly because the act, in its current wording, is almost totally unenforceable. By doing this, they'd force ISP's to shut down the accounts of at least 70% of Western internet users, which is just insane. There's no way America and other western nations, stalwarts of the free market as they are, would risk causing such a huge cash leak in the internet industry.

Now, I'm not saying don't be worried, or don't fight it, but I doubt this is the foretold end of the internet, just based on how deranged anyone would have to be to actually fully enforce it.

It's good to see that this place has got some smart people left.

 

[Flying-Emu]

Anonymous is long-dead now.

I disagree, if you're a person on the internet and you're not giving away all your details then you're anonymous

Anonyomous will never truly die

Yes, yes, yes, but the actual ORGANIZATION of Anonymous fell apart after the oldfags got bored with it. Either a new generation of Channers is going to have to take up the flag, or Anon isn't going to be able to do shit against this.

u mad?

As a Chan-fearing forumite, I'll gladly say "no."

 

[Cobbs]

The method is flawed, the goal is flawed. Pirates contribute more to the entertainment industry than non-pirates. When will they realize?

Is flawed your way of saying the first step to 1984?

First step? More like a fucking marathon to 1984. This is absolutely terrible, and if it wasn't a treaty would be breaking several pre-existing US laws, and presumably their equivalents in other countries.

EDIT: Also,

great googly boogly. i went to watch the video, only to be greeted with the warning that "This video has been blocked in your country due to copyright" :S

 

[jthm]

Well if its passed then its time to do a massive cleaning of my computer. When is it supposed to be voted on or whatever?

It isn't. That's why it's a treaty, not a bill. It's one of a multitude of treaties that will be briefly summarized for our corrupt congress (who have been told by friendly, paying lobbyists to sign it), who will then sign it into law and pat each other on the back for their bipartisan action.

 

[Scarecrow]

Um...how are they doing this? How are they going to void every civil liberty? Because I missed that part.

That's the point, chief. Welcome to the discussion.

Now go read the other 10 pages to see the answer to your questions.

From what I can see it's the same stuff they do with music. So what is the big deal?!

With music, they attach tracker programs to the torrents, monitor downloads. This allows them to scan your computer without your consent or you having downloaded anything, and it includes a lot more than just music and movies. For instance, by viewing my post, you have an unauthorized copy of a nintendo trademark in your cache. You are violating the terms of ACTA. See, your computer saves the images it runs into when you browse. It's doing it right now and it saved my avatar image (Mario) to your temporary internet files and cache in case you revisit the site. Congrats, you're prosecutable.

I can see how that may be a problem, but it's there choise if they do prosicute you. So in that situation they can try me, but they wont because it would be stupid.

Spellcheck. Choice, prosecute. That's just an example though. Every time you look at a website, your computer saves the images in the cache. Nintendo might be above this sort of thing, but how about porn sites? Just by viewing them, they have a chance to say you stole from them and take you to court. Do you think they'd hesitate to file charges if they stood to make money off you? Legally they're in the right. Unless you live in Australia, it's expensive defending yourself in court, even if you win. How about Gamespot or some failed webcomic artist or that video you watched on youtube that had a song in it that the RIAA owns and hadn't asked youtube to take down yet? Letter of the law is really broad here.

I don't think so. I would all be to hard to enforce. And you know what, I don't care. The whole thing has being blown way out of proportion. I know that I might have spelled that wrong, but I am tired and I don't really care any more.

 

[jthm]

Anonymous is long-dead now.

I disagree, if you're a person on the internet and you're not giving away all your details then you're anonymous

Anonyomous will never truly die

The very nature of the internet (connectivity) makes true anonymity difficult and increasingly impossible.

Yes, yes, yes, but the actual ORGANIZATION of Anonymous fell apart after the oldfags got bored with it. Either a new generation of Channers is going to have to take up the flag, or Anon isn't going to be able to do shit against this.


THIS

u mad?

As a Chan-fearing forumite, I'll gladly say "no."

More like U sad?

 

[jthm]

Um...how are they doing this? How are they going to void every civil liberty? Because I missed that part.

That's the point, chief. Welcome to the discussion.

Now go read the other 10 pages to see the answer to your questions.

From what I can see it's the same stuff they do with music. So what is the big deal?!

With music, they attach tracker programs to the torrents, monitor downloads. This allows them to scan your computer without your consent or you having downloaded anything, and it includes a lot more than just music and movies. For instance, by viewing my post, you have an unauthorized copy of a nintendo trademark in your cache. You are violating the terms of ACTA. See, your computer saves the images it runs into when you browse. It's doing it right now and it saved my avatar image (Mario) to your temporary internet files and cache in case you revisit the site. Congrats, you're prosecutable.

I can see how that may be a problem, but it's there choise if they do prosicute you. So in that situation they can try me, but they wont because it would be stupid.

Spellcheck. Choice, prosecute. That's just an example though. Every time you look at a website, your computer saves the images in the cache. Nintendo might be above this sort of thing, but how about porn sites? Just by viewing them, they have a chance to say you stole from them and take you to court. Do you think they'd hesitate to file charges if they stood to make money off you? Legally they're in the right. Unless you live in Australia, it's expensive defending yourself in court, even if you win. How about Gamespot or some failed webcomic artist or that video you watched on youtube that had a song in it that the RIAA owns and hadn't asked youtube to take down yet? Letter of the law is really broad here.

I don't think so. I would all be to hard to enforce. And you know what, I don't care. The whole thing has being blown way out of proportion. I know that I might have spelled that wrong, but I am tired and I don't really care any more.

If you don't care, why did you respond in the first place?

 

[ShadowsofHope]

BTW, Canadians, don't worry. The USA may have two parties, but we have three (biggies), and face it, we'll never have a majority. The parties know if they do something, anything, we even remotely dislike, they lose what little majority they have.

Not to mention Canada doesn't really worry about piracy because its so low compared to our population.

True enough. It's the little things like in which make me fond of our nation once again.. at least, until one of those three decides to be a prick and completely blackout parliament so no opposition can have a say until it is too late.. *Cough* Harper *Cough*.

 

[QuantumT]

I'd imagine it'll be a bit of a non issue. Mainly because the act, in its current wording, is almost totally unenforceable. By doing this, they'd force ISP's to shut down the accounts of at least 70% of Western internet users, which is just insane. There's no way America and other western nations, stalwarts of the free market as they are, would risk causing such a huge cash leak in the internet industry.

Now, I'm not saying don't be worried, or don't fight it, but I doubt this is the foretold end of the internet, just based on how deranged anyone would have to be to actually fully enforce it.

It's good to see that this place has got some smart people left.

That this is probably the conclusion isn't the point. It's the fact that they CAN that matters.

Anyway, for anyone who wants to do something but is lazy, I found an easy form letter that you can fill out.

Easy senator letter [https://secure.eff.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=383]

It's an easy letter to fill out that will email your senators (who have to vote to ratify any treaty) about your concerns with ACTA. It literally takes less than two minutes to fill out.

 

[JEBWrench]

Love the foil-hat crowd, really. Since I don't pirate, file-share, or use P2P networks (except for their lawfully intended purpose, ie Skype), I'm not so worried about the Trilateral Commission or the Bilderberg Conference or ACTA bringing Hulkamania down on me.

Regardless of whether this passes or not, I do believe that this is ought to be the required way for all treaties to be handled.

 

[ANImaniac89]

First, tomorrow is the start of nothing if you do download crap thing without paying your where already breaking the law.

Second, the ATCA meetings are set to finalize sometime in September

Third, ATCA isn't about criminalizing downloads, Its about giving the governments of the world the unholy power to void everyone civil liberty so they can keep sucking the dicks of the greedy cooperations that are butthurt over the internet.

Forth, your going about this all wrong, starting random scare attacks on forums are not the way to prevent this, come on I'd expect this shit from 4chan

Um...how are they doing this? How are they going to void every civil liberty? Because I missed that part.

Maybe its just me but I see the government using an international treaty to bypass the law in order to make ISP's inform on their customers as a bit of a violation of civil liberty,but like I said maybe its just me.

 

[Sworm]

I'll send you an IM as not sure linking to stuff as such is allowed in the forums.

If you could forward the message to me I would be very grateful

If I could get a forwarding of the forward (is that a fast forward?)

And I wonder how Switzerland is going to try and justify this to the population. or if they will at all...

This would be interesting If I wasn't completely screwed.

 

[Lavi]

BTW, Canadians, don't worry. The USA may have two parties, but we have three (biggies), and face it, we'll never have a majority. The parties know if they do something, anything, we even remotely dislike, they lose what little majority they have.

Not to mention Canada doesn't really worry about piracy because its so low compared to our population.

True enough. It's the little things like in which make me fond of our nation once again.. at least, until one of those three decides to be a prick and completely blackout parliament so no opposition can have a say until it is too late.. *Cough* Harper *Cough*.

*Cough* This time he'd get an instant election the second parliament resumed and his party would lose a substantial amount of seats. *Cough*

 

[Scarecrow]

Um...how are they doing this? How are they going to void every civil liberty? Because I missed that part.

That's the point, chief. Welcome to the discussion.

Now go read the other 10 pages to see the answer to your questions.

From what I can see it's the same stuff they do with music. So what is the big deal?!

With music, they attach tracker programs to the torrents, monitor downloads. This allows them to scan your computer without your consent or you having downloaded anything, and it includes a lot more than just music and movies. For instance, by viewing my post, you have an unauthorized copy of a nintendo trademark in your cache. You are violating the terms of ACTA. See, your computer saves the images it runs into when you browse. It's doing it right now and it saved my avatar image (Mario) to your temporary internet files and cache in case you revisit the site. Congrats, you're prosecutable.

I can see how that may be a problem, but it's there choise if they do prosicute you. So in that situation they can try me, but they wont because it would be stupid.

Spellcheck. Choice, prosecute. That's just an example though. Every time you look at a website, your computer saves the images in the cache. Nintendo might be above this sort of thing, but how about porn sites? Just by viewing them, they have a chance to say you stole from them and take you to court. Do you think they'd hesitate to file charges if they stood to make money off you? Legally they're in the right. Unless you live in Australia, it's expensive defending yourself in court, even if you win. How about Gamespot or some failed webcomic artist or that video you watched on youtube that had a song in it that the RIAA owns and hadn't asked youtube to take down yet? Letter of the law is really broad here.

I don't think so. I would all be to hard to enforce. And you know what, I don't care. The whole thing has being blown way out of proportion. I know that I might have spelled that wrong, but I am tired and I don't really care any more.

If you don't care, why did you respond in the first place?

because...because...I'm so lonely.

 

[Sworm]

because...because...I'm so lonely.

Aren't we all somewhere deep inside... Aren't we all...

 

[QuantumT]

Seldon has pointed out that we don't have the privacy that we think we do online. Well maybe we should change that. Four states place some level of limitations on what ISPs can do, but only Minnesota goes to the lengths that I think most of us would be satisfied with.

Minnesota Statutes 325M .01-.09 (actually a fairly concise and understandable bit of legalese itself) summarized

Prohibits Internet service providers from disclosing personally identifiable information, including a consumer's physical or electronic address or telephone number; Internet or online sites visited; or any of the contents of a consumer's data storage devices. Provides for certain circumstances under which information must be disclosed, such as to a grand jury; to a state or federal law enforcement officer acting as authorized by law; pursuant to a court order or court action. Provides for civil damages of $500 or actual damages and attorney fees for violation of the law.

 

[silversun101]

Well, I'm sending this to anyone I know with an email address. The more exposure this gets the bigger the backlash will be.