XNemesis
join:2002-11-16
Kitchener, ON
| If ACTA get's passed are we EFF YOU SEE KAYED?
Was just reading about it here @ boing boing
»www.boingboing.net/2009/11/03/se···tre.html
quite disturbing. Will this just pass secretly and then we're all screwed? |
|
Croaker
join:2009-10-01
Ottawa ON | Yup, only needs some bureaucrat to sign off.
Does not need to pass through parliament. |
|
HiVolt
30
Premium
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON
clubs: | reply to XNemesis
What does that have to do with Canadian internet users? |
|
Abattoir
join:2008-03-27
Ottawa, ON
 ·TekSavvy Solutions..
 ·Cogeco Cable
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to Croaker
Sorry, but any change to the Copyright Act or any other Canadian law must go through Parliament first. Signing a treaty is to ratifying it as dating is to marriage.
The real danger is that ACTA will be used as a forum for policy laundering, just like WIPO. When CRIA and others pushing for ever-stronger copyright laws can't get their way by lobbying Parliament directly, they get their friends in Washington to push these treaties down our throats. Then, once they are signed, Ministers can say we 'have to live up to our international obligations' and pass all the laws they need to ratify the treaty.
Still, at the end of the day, everything has to go through Parliament. We are making a difference, we just have to keep up with the pressure. |
|
Croaker
join:2009-10-01
Ottawa ON
| reply to HiVolt
It's a global DMCA on 'roids!
Once this is signed we give up our sovereignty on such matters as privacy and copyright.
Canadian negotiators should be recalled if they have exceeded their mandate. If they haven't - then we should be contacting Harper to voice our reservations.
This does not need to pass through parliament. I'm stunned something this evil if even being considered by our representatives... |
|
Abattoir
join:2008-03-27
Ottawa, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Cogeco Cable
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to HiVolt
said by HiVolt  :What does that have to do with Canadian internet users? Umm....everything? Graduated response, mandatory notice-and-takedown, global DMCA, no fair use exceptions, censorship by copyright - take your pick. |
|
Abattoir
join:2008-03-27
Ottawa, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Cogeco Cable
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to Croaker
said by Croaker :This does not need to pass through parliament. I'm stunned something this evil if even being considered by our representatives... Again, yes it does if it is to have any force in law. |
|
Croaker
join:2009-10-01
Ottawa ON
2 edits | Not according the Michael Geist it does not. At least as reported today in the Ottawa Citizen.
I'll grab the paper and get back in two...
EDIT: As a federal trade agreement it does NOT need parliamentary approval. It will also superceed other international agreements like WIPO et al...
EDIT2: I'm also getting a little pissed at the apparent lack of ethical conviction this generation of political leaders have shown at all levels of government. |
|
ymboc
join:2003-02-22
Ottawa, ON | reply to XNemesis
I figure they don't need parliamentary approval to sign the agreement but certain aspects of its implementation should be required to go through the parliamentary process. |
|
El Quintron
Could you spare a consulting gig?
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Acanac
| reply to XNemesis
Michael Geist just gave the lowdown on CBC's as it happens... I've attached the interview, because the twitter link is being swamped. |
|
Croaker
join:2009-10-01
Ottawa ON
| reply to ymboc
I don't see how it could survive with the EU.
I'd like to think our parties here will realize it's poison and distance themselves accordingly. It's shameful that Canada is seen to be a US ally in this matter. We stood for something better at one time.
Finally, I wonder how this plays with NAFTA? I seem to recall sovereignty provisions being in place to guard against such nonsense. |
|
Abattoir
join:2008-03-27
Ottawa, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Cogeco Cable
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to Croaker
said by Croaker :Not according the Michael Geist it does not. At least as reported today in the Ottawa Citizen. I'll grab the paper and get back in two... EDIT: As a federal trade agreement it does NOT need parliamentary approval. It will also superceed other international agreements like WIPO et al... EDIT2: I'm also getting a little pissed at the apparent lack of ethical conviction this generation of political leaders have shown at all levels of government. The Government has the ability to sign any treaty they see fit, but in order for any treaty to have the force of law, it must be ratified by Parliament. To ratify the treaty, they have to introduce bills to create or change the laws of Canada. This is how the process works.
For example, Canada signed the WIPO Internet treaties, but we never ratified them. They have no force of law in Canada whatsoever. Another famous example was when the United States signed, but never ratified, the Kyoto Protocol. |
|
Croaker
join:2009-10-01
Ottawa ON
| It's not a treaty - it's a TRADE AGREEMENT.
As such, it does not need parliamentary approval. That's what makes this evil - it says it's one thing but actually is another beast.
It circumvents our political process. The feds no longer have the excuse of - duh, we didn't know that.
Hopefully, Canada will withdraw from this process or make it more transparent and represent our position. And, if this is our position than I'm looking forward to our next election. I know an MP who will need to find other employment...
El Quintron has provided a decent reference. |
|
Croaker
join:2009-10-01
Ottawa ON
| reply to Abattoir
said by Abattoir :For example, Canada signed the WIPO Internet treaties, but we never ratified them. They have no force of law in Canada whatsoever. Quite right and it needs never to be ratified. We have laws already in place which are aligned and in some areas exceed WIPO. Ratification only results in unnecessary loss of sovereignty. |
|
Abattoir
join:2008-03-27
Ottawa, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Cogeco Cable
·Bell Sympatico
| reply to Croaker
said by Croaker :It's not a treaty - it's a TRADE AGREEMENT. As such, it does not need parliamentary approval. That's what makes this evil - it says it's one thing but actually is another beast. It circumvents our political process. The feds no longer have the excuse of - duh, we didn't know that. Hopefully, Canada will withdraw from this process or make it more transparent and represent our position. And, if this is our position than I'm looking forward to our next election. I know an MP who will need to find other employment... El Quintron has provided a decent reference. Treaty. n. a contract in writing between two or more political authorities (as states or sovereigns) formally signed by representatives duly authorized and usually ratified by the lawmaking authority of the state
You will find many Trade Agreements here, including NAFTA:
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_treaties
Trade agreements are treaties. There is no process capable of changing the laws of Canada other than through Parliament. Signed treaties, including trade agreements, have no force in law until they are ratified by Parliament. This is fundamental to any Westminster-based parliamentary system.
No person has the authority or capability to legally obligate Canada to create or change any law, not even the Prime Minister himself.
You're right that it helps to circumvent political debate, though. Ministers can just point to the signed treaty and say 'well, we signed it, so now we have to ratify it'. This is the real problem.
So, even if/when DFAIT comes back from Mexico in 2010 with a signed ACTA treaty in hand, all is not lost. We still have the chance to convince Parliament to turn it down. It's a long slog, though, and Hollywood lobbyists are never going to give up. We'll have to keep up the fight to defend Canada's interests. |
|
anony me
@speakeasy.net | reply to Croaker
This will be as effective as NAFTA. |
|
El Quintron
Could you spare a consulting gig?
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Acanac
| I don't think anyone here is saying this is the end of the world, I've already got freenet up and running, stunnel is on my high priority list... but its such an un-necessary escalation of encryption, charter challenges in order to kill an industry that should already be dead.
I could write more but I'm fighting with getting moblin on this usb key 
--
They vilify us, the scoundrels do, when there is only this difference, they rob the poor under the cover of law, forsooth, and we plunder the rich under the protection of our own courage. |
|
Croaker
join:2009-10-01
Ottawa ON
| reply to Abattoir
said by Abattoir :You're right that it helps to circumvent political debate, though. Ministers can just point to the signed treaty and say 'well, we signed it, so now we have to ratify it'. This is the real problem. So, even if/when DFAIT comes back from Mexico in 2010 with a signed ACTA treaty in hand, all is not lost. We still have the chance to convince Parliament to turn it down. It's a long slog, though, and Hollywood lobbyists are never going to give up. We'll have to keep up the fight to defend Canada's interests. This is consistent with I've said. Why you need to be a dick err, pedant is beyond me.
You must realize that a majority government will pass this easily if it's allowed to get that far. This is why we must communicate disapproval while parties are jockeying for favor.
This is very much something to worry about NOW. The last thing the IP lobby needs is yet another agreement to be ratified which goes against our national interest.
What's most galling to me is that our internet and IP position is seen to be firmly with the US. That's unacceptable and not reflective of our society.
The federal position should be clearly stated. Saying oops after the fact doesn't cut it! |
|
Croaker
join:2009-10-01
Ottawa ON
| reply to El Quintron
said by El Quintron :I don't think anyone here is saying this is the end of the world, I've already got freenet up and running, stunnel is on my high priority list... but its such an un-necessary escalation of encryption, charter challenges in order to kill an industry that should already be dead. It very much is the end of the world because we will have left it worse for the next generation.
There is no need to criminalize the citizenship. There is no need to protect multi-nationals from our own entrepreneurs. Nothing in our constitution says that only big business is allowed to prosper.
Copyright is particularly evil in that it controls the thoughts and expression of unborn citizens. Imagine, we provide equal employment opportunity to all yet reserve the right of expression to a few. Simply because they were born before them. Future generations are forever precluded from calling a mouse Mickey. What right do we have to constrain future generations of society thusly? It's madness. |
|
El Quintron
Could you spare a consulting gig?
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Acanac
| reply to XNemesis
So turns out I've corrupted my key or something and Moblin is being a total bitch so it looks like I'm feeling chatty after all.
Exaile which is the new player I've installed is just fucking brilliant. Speaking of copyright.
There are several issues we need to be concerned about, one is certainly sovereignty seeing as American publishes are now in the business of making international law.
The other more concerning point is increased surveillance. This a genie you can never put back in the bottle. Once those DPI boxes go on they never go off.
Same with CCTV Cameras, there were a few in the entertainment district a few years ago now they're everywhere, they've been everywhere for even longer in Britain.
Speaking of Britain there are laws there that require you unlock your encryption if asked. Is there going to be more of the same here?
A few points of many we should be concerned about.
--
They vilify us, the scoundrels do, when there is only this difference, they rob the poor under the cover of law, forsooth, and we plunder the rich under the protection of our own courage. |
|
