Google Lawyer Says ACTA Is 'Cultural Imperialism'
from the going-too-far dept
With the official release of ACTA finally out, it's good to see various organizations speaking out against the many problems found in the draft agreement. We've already covered the detailed arguments against ACTA supported by numerous organizations. And now, a Google lawyer, Daphne Keller, has spoken out harshly against ACTA as well, calling it "cultural imperialism" that had "metastasized" and "grown in the shadows, Gollum-like," from a document that was supposed to just be about dealing with counterfeit goods at the border, to a serious challenge to copyright laws around the globe. And, indeed, it is a form of cultural imperialism, in that it seeks to export certain aspects of US copyright law around the globe... while critically leaving out the consumer protections and necessary exceptions. I wonder if the USTR, who is negotiating the agreement on behalf of the US will put up Keller's words on their website next to the entertainment industry letters in support of ACTA that it's put on the USTR website? Or, does the USTR only listen to Hollywood on this particular topic?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: acta, copyright, daphne keller
Companies: google
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: O Rly?
Now, name 10 ways in which the government has screwed you over...
Where's is your logic? Do you work for Micro$oft or something?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: O Rly?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No, I'm pretty sure it's current incarnation was the intent all along.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Irrelevant objection to make Google appear to be for freedom.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Welcome to the new globalism
War is messy. Exerting your control through semi-willing compliance via one-sided trade agreements do what wars never could: they exert influence and control in a way that invites far less pushback. Trade is the new armed imperialism....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Welcome to the new globalism
I agree but do have to point out one thing. It works for material items, it does not work for information. Information doesnt have a material form, it is the song running incessantly through your head, one plus one equals two, a poem by T S Eliot, gossip, and any idea or concept. Information is intrinsically, and by it very nature, something that can not be embargoed. Any attempt to prevent the spread of information has historically not worked or caused the loss of infomation.
Humans are social creatures that for about 100,000 years as we have shared information. In 1440 the first movable type printing press was invented. By the late 1600's the printing press had spread all over europe. In on 10 April 1710 the Statute of Anne entered into force. Copyright is an artificial restriction on the flow of information that only came about due to the creation and spread of the printing press.
It is in our nature to share information, and any artificial attempts to prevent this sharing are doomed to failure. Which is why I dont really worry much about ACTA. In 20 years when ACTA is shown to be an total and complete failure that doesnt deter or even slow down infringement a smarter form of copyright will evolve. More than likely way before 20 years.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Welcome to the new globalism
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Welcome to the new globalism
Because it would be impossible for you to, instead, use your (Apple/Nokia/Symbian/HP Palm/MSFT/Samsung BADA) phone to call your (Facebook/Twitter/Foursquare/Gowalla/LinkedIn) friends at the (Pizza Hut/Domono's/Little Ceasars/Papa Johns) pizza place to come meet you at the (Ghost/Rain/Tangerine/TGIF/corner) bar and talk about new (Justin Bieber/Timberlake/Rihanna/50 Cent) riffs, from anywhere in the world.
All Google products have viable competitors, with low switching costs between them, and low barriers to entry in most cases. Nothing like Telecom, desktop OS, local utilities, Ticketmaster, or other monopolies. Study the differences between "monopoly" and "search industry market share".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Welcome to the new globalism
That is all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Welcome to the new globalism
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Quite frankly, I do not see this as a position by Google in support of the "little guy". Instead, I see it as a position in support of Google. Any benefit accorded to others by Google's position is purely coincidental, and not intentional.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Hmm. That would only be true *if* you're admitting that the gov't is picking one particular industry to prop up. That doesn't seem right, does it?
Besides, I didn't say it was surprising that Google is against ACTA. I said it was good that many companies are speaking out against ACTA, because the gov't had positioned this as "supporting industry."
Google, of course, is one on the other side, not because of some idealistic principle, but because of the most pragmatic consideration of all as a large corporate entity; namely, minimizing potential exposure to liability.
Who said otherwise?
Quite frankly, I do not see this as a position by Google in support of the "little guy".
Again, who said otherwise?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Quite frankly, I do not see this as a position by Google in support of the "little guy". Instead, I see it as a position in support of Google. Any benefit accorded to others by Google's position is purely coincidental, and not intentional.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cease and Desist !!
Prepare to receive a cease-and-desist letter from the Tolkien estate for your unauthorized use of their character.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Way to go Google!
One of the awesome things I've seen out of Google that encourages me to believe that their core DNA is still intact is their pull out from China and now this.
You may not like a company that makes money or competes, but Google is one of the few companies I know that is able to balance pure self interest/profits vs. 'do no evil'.
Freedom
P.S. If Google is evil, what does that make Steve Jobs/Apple - uber evil x 5? I don't see them speaking out against this... Oh that right, they are too busy going off on Adobe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Crimes against humanity
At which point everyone involved with this should be charged with crimes against humanity and all records of them and their families should be removed such that they "no longer exist".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Crimes against humanity
[ link to this | view in chronology ]