Secret Treaties


A little while back Martin Bosworth sounded the alarm on the Obama administration's typically gutless approach to Net Neutrality, Copyright and the creeping control apparatus of the military infotainment complex:

Tech bloggers, Internet rights advocates, copyfighters,and fair use supporters have been beating the drum for months now on the dangers of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), a massive updating of global policy regarding piracy, copyright laws, and the like that could have dire consequences for the Internet as we know it. Much of ACTA has been completely hidden from the public - the negotiations have been secret, the documents classified, the information locked down and only obtained through leaks and hearsay. What we have learned has been distressing - if implemented, ACTA would force U.S. Internet service providers (ISPs) into the role of copyright cop, enforcing a "three strikes" strategy against users accused of downloading "illegal" content, and extending the Digital Millenium Copyright Act beyond the borders of the U.S., turning the EU into our unwilling partners in crime. Here's a great rundown of opposition to ACTA from across the Internet, as well as a video lecture from BoingBoing detailing how dangerous it is. (Warning: It's pretty technical and wonky, but I have faith you guys can follow along.)

Meanwhile, a few days ago, several consumer groups wrote the FCC and asked them for clarification on a statement made by the FCC's Julius Knapp, who said that even with net neutrality as the law of the land, it would be okay for ISPs to prioritize voice and video traffic over other kinds under the heading of "reasonable network management." This is odd, given that it's a looser interpretation of the rules than was the case under former commission chief Kevin Martin - a die-hard friend of the telecom industry who nevertheless voted to penalize Comcast for violating the principles of a free Internet when it blocked access to BitTorrent. Current chairman Julius Genachowski has been all smiles and cheer about the importance of net neutrality and has promised to protect it - so where does this come from?

Let's start with the obvious. Consider how much money Hollywood and big entertainment companies feed to the Democratic party. However, it's not nearly as much as that donated by big telecom companies, such as all-time heavyweight champ AT&T. If money talks and bullshit runs the mile, you would think that ISPs-which have repeatedly rejected the role of "content cop"-would have more of a say. So why play along with this?

Now two Senators have stepped up -- Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Bernie Saunders of Vermont -- to demand that the text of the ACTA be made public. This is the kind of crap that can't survive sunlight very well so well done Sens Brown & Saunders.


Nat Wilson Turner November 25, 2009 - 1:15pm
( categories: Net Neutrality )

This kind of thing is the worst - a key weakness in the Constitution is that treaties are the supreme laws of the land. Any further secret industrialist/globalist stunts like this will work like 'ratchets' to claw away sovereignty permanently.

And best of all in this case, to a transnational authoritarian nest of weasels.

There are a lot of people on this site sympathetic to transnational authority structures. Somehow everyone fails to realize how these structures are always captured by mindless corporatists every single time. The ONLY good thing to come out of the EU so far is the Swedish Pirate Party captured a European Parliament seat. Please read the Neo-ConOpticon report on new EU transnational security structures. The administration of complete surveillance for copyright & symbol righteousness enforcement is gonna be run by the same transnational security corporations. See also some stuff on Wikileaks in recent weaks about pouncing & sifting thru copyright violators thru surveillance en masse.

The EU is a criminal complex; its new president was installed by fiat of a stupid treaty confirmed by dubious elections. More evil treaties and machinations are coming for the United States, all hatched in attempted secrecy that fortunately, for now, can still leach out over Internets.

--
Hongpong.com

HongPong November 25, 2009 - 6:25pm

... "a criminal complex" is ridiculous and insulting. It also demonstrates an abject failure to understand 20th century European history as well as the power that the EU parliament enjoys at this point.

I am not happy about the transnational security framework but the EU allows me to travel all across continental Europe without ever having to subject to border controls. This is a very real and tangible improvement of freedom of movement that came about within my lifetime. On the other hand whenever I am crossing into the US I and my family gets pulled out of the car because the border goons don't know what to make of my reentry permit.

quax November 26, 2009 - 12:21pm

Just in time for an epic lol this British Independence Party guy rips apart the EU and that Baronness lady who was somehow appointed as Foreign Minister-type slot. Super funny and quite well put... it's democracy vs bureaucracy!


Cross border travel is cool but a parallel unelected bureaucratic government is dangerous. The EU Parliament has pretty marginal powers -- parliaments traditionally have freedom of speech protections but this clip proves it is not taken seriously by the leadership. The EU's Commission is much like the Soviet Politburo, and from whence did its design arrive? The Nazis considered very EU-like structures to administer Europe as well. If I'm misunderstanding 20th century European history, who invented this structure and its anti-democratic, anti-referenda leanings? What is its geopolitical function?
--
Hongpong.com

HongPong November 27, 2009 - 6:21pm

The Democratic Party, not the freedom we enjoy on the internet. The Democrats parrot net neutrality rhetoric and then turn around and endorse "throttling," as mentioned in the article.

But better yet, we now see ACTA coming to fruition. I read about this and figured there were very good people following it who would let us know when the time came. Well, it's here.

I knew that The Money Party boys would have some trick up their sleeves to shut down all dissent. That is their goal. Who would demonstrate after local police and federal authorities deploy SWAT teams, tazers and so forth to routinely beat down folks for simply showing up to demonstrate. Now, the sequel, the kill shot, make everyone on the internet a criminal - forget fair use, this trumps that bit if free speech. Make it so nobody wants to run a web site because to do so means being a cop and to fail at that role means a charge from the copyright scum lords.

Here's the good news. Screwing with the internet is the new third rail of U.S. politics. This is the one medium where people feel free to dissent and where they can do so effectively.

The fools behind this have sowed the wind, now they're going to get their clock cleaned in ways that will stun them -- boycotts, new legislation barring any more of this, alternatives to the media giants behind this, campaigns to disconnect all local service to the Telco's, etc. etc. It's all pretty easy stuff to do ON THE INTERNET and once started, it won't even begin to slow down until many of the business behind this are in ruins.

Something like this was destined to happen. The palpable greed and hypocrisy of the bipartisan coalition of crooks who rule this country will be on open display - digitally - all over the world.

Michael Collins November 25, 2009 - 9:04pm

I'm so burned out from the last decade's seemingly pointless political struggle that I haven't felt the old wind at my back in a long time. Protecting the internet is one thing we can get the right-wingers and the progressives to come together on.

Nat Wilson Turner November 26, 2009 - 2:23pm

This is a toxic formula for the internet. Users are at risk since the internet folks will be out in force to nail as many "violators" as possible. Site owners will be totally screwed by having to be content cops non stop and, failing that, having the charge of copyright violation brought down on them. It will be interesting to see what impact this has on "fair use." I suspect it overrides it completely.

The purpose of ACTA is to shut us up. They have FISA. They're after net neutrality. And the House passed the prequel to the type of control ACTA offers, 'violent radicalization bill'.

They're lining their ducks up and it will all be "legal."

(Note: I left this in the wrong place before and just now noticed and made it a 'reply,' which was my original intent;)

Michael Collins November 27, 2009 - 4:00pm

They wire the entire world up in a form of hive mind, then corral all official and commercial information behind a paywall. What does it leave? Everyone outside creating and passing around whatever is not official and commercial? Talk about the law of unintended consequences.
The difference between evolution and revolution: When the old can adapt to the new, the future is a continuation of the past. When the old cannot adapt to the new, the future is a reaction to the past.

brodix November 27, 2009 - 8:53pm

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.