If Negotiators Still Don't Want To Release ACTA, It'll Still Get Leaked

from the leaky-old-boat dept

Wed, Jul 14th 2010 11:51am — Mike Masnick

So, we now know for certain that the ACTA negotiators' promise of "transparency" over negotiations was an outright lie. They fought it every step of the way, falsely claiming that if the draft were public, some members would leave the table. It was only after a pretty massive smack down from the EU Parliament and the fact that the draft was already leaked that negotiators finally agreed to release a draft that left out lots of pertinent information.

But what was most interesting is how negotiators have acted since then. First, they pretended that the released draft proved all the complaints about ACTA were unfounded, but the details showed something quite different, which has even supporters of stronger intellectual property crying foul.

And how have negotiators responded? Rather than living up to their promises of transparency, they've gone back into secrecy mode. They admitted that the draft release was a one time deal, which was made even clearer when the last meetings concluded without a release of the new draft -- and not even a mention of the fact that they wouldn't be releasing it.

Of course, this is the internet age, and keeping stuff secret tends to backfire badly. Via Michael Geist we've learned that the latest ACTA draft has been leaked once again. You can read it below:

Clearly, some of the parties involved in the negotiations agree that the drafts should be public, and the more some (we've heard it's mainly the US negotiators) want to keep the document secret, the more ridiculous they look. What's even more ridiculous, of course, is how the US negotiators keep denying reality. They claim they're being transparent, when they're not. They claim that the release answered all questions, when it clearly did not. They claim that the concerns of various groups are unfounded, but have failed to respond to their questions. It's as if they think that as long as they keep saying stuff, someone somewhere will believe them. That's not quite how it works.

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, leaks, negotiations

32 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Dark Helmet (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 11:59am

Sigh...
"That's not quite how it works."

Sadly, in the world of national and/or global politics, that's EXACTLY how it works. Proof by assertion has turned into a very powerful tool in the world of corporate media controlled by governments....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- :Lobo Santo (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 12:04pm
  
  Re: Sigh...
  To paraphrase Dilbert:
  Ignorance is like nuclear power--it can be be used for great good or great evil; and you don't want to get any on you.
  ; P
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ryan, 14 Jul 2010 @ 12:07pm
  
  Re: Sigh...
  Interesting, I knew of that as the Big Lie. Glad to know the official term for it.
  
  Although, these lies are certainly propagated willfully by the government and not the media; the mainstream media are so lazy now, and it's much easier to simply roll over for government instead of starting a fight. But it's malice in the first case and apathy in the second.
  
  And of course the only reason why it works is because people are stupid, lazy, and unwilling to question their own stances or to actually develop their own opinions on policy; easier to just identify with some popular group and become indoctrinated by their group ideology, or just ignore it altogether.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Dark Helmet (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 12:37pm
    
    Re: Re: Sigh...
    "Although, these lies are certainly propagated willfully by the government and not the media; the mainstream media are so lazy now, and it's much easier to simply roll over for government instead of starting a fight. But it's malice in the first case and apathy in the second."
    
    Sorry, but I don't agree. In our system of government in which people move freely between industry positions and appointed government offices, they're all the same people. Don't even get me started on how the same bankers that sit on the boards of these companies also lend the government money through the Fed....
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 4:34pm
  
  Re: Sigh...
  Does the average shlub really give a crap about what they are *allowed* to do with stuff they bought?
  When will these MAFIAA execs (and the politicians they bought)
  realize that they are the only ones who care even remotely?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 5:02pm
    
    Re: Re: Sigh...
    "When will these MAFIAA "
    
    More like the maRIAA.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 5:02pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Sigh...
      or maybe mafRIAA
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
lavi d (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 12:04pm

Inheritance

That's not quite how it works.
Assuming that a lot of the driving force behind ACTA comes from the entertainment industry,
...and the entertainment industry is built on illusion and the "willful suspension of disbelief",
...we really shouldn't expect much else from their actors at the USTR, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
lavi d (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 12:06pm

Also

That's not quite how it works.
It seemed to work OK for Microsoft at IEEE with Office Open XML...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
iamtheky (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 12:19pm

"Progress in negotiations on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) Trade will be debated with Commissioner Karel De Gucht in the Civil Liberties
Committee (Tuesday)"

And we got it day of this time, I am liking the LIBE and their leadership more and more every day.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jim, 14 Jul 2010 @ 12:21pm

What should we do?
I keep reading about ACTA and everything that's terrible about it. I want to know what I can do as a citizen. I see a lot of hype around how bad this is going to be, how it's circumventing certain legal processes in the way it is being done, and all I seem to get out of it is "we cannot stop this." Is that really true or am I misinterpreting things? Is the best I can do to contact my state reps with my concerns over this thing? Surely there's something we can do besides read about this and despair.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 12:35pm
  
  Re: What should we do?
  If enough people can crowd around the white house in protest then you might stand a chance.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 12:35pm
  
  Re: What should we do?
  Very little of what you are likely reading is anything more than "the sky if falling" hype of the type intended to create a "moral panic". On occasion some legitimate points are raised, but rarely by those prone to hype.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 12:44pm
    
    Re: Re: What should we do?
    Yeah, because 95+ year copy protection length is just a bunch of hype.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - jjmsan (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 1:02pm
    
    Re: Re: What should we do?
    I am so happy to read this. Since you have to be privy to the details of the agreement in order to say this, perhaps you can provide answers to all those worrying questions.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- chris (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 12:39pm
  
  Re: What should we do?
  I want to know what I can do as a citizen.
  
  you could write a letter to the whitehouse:
  http://www.publicknowledge.org/action/whitehouse_acta
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - :Lobo Santo (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 12:43pm
    
    Re: Re: What should we do?
    "you could write a letter to the whitehouse:"
    Yes, that way when the government stops pretending it's not a fascist regime they'll have your name on the list of dissidents...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - chris (profile), 15 Jul 2010 @ 12:01pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: What should we do?
      Yes, that way when the government stops pretending it's not a fascist regime they'll have your name on the list of dissidents...
      
      it's a big list.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 12:53pm
    
    Re: Re: What should we do?
    Actually, I am surprised the Republicans have not made an issue of the RIAA et.al.'s ownership of several White House Offices and the fact that they have their very own, bought and paid for Vice President. If the Republicans want a populist issue, this one could be ready made for them.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Jay (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 5:06pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: What should we do?
      The RIAA gives too much money to the Republicans and Democrats alike. Basically, all of the major ones are bought off for their campaigns.
      
      Why be the one politician to rock the boat?
      
      Better to let them die their slow agonizing deat by getting everything they want.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Free Capitalist (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 12:42pm
  
  Re: What should we do?
  Definitely contact your U.S. Senators and your representative in the House. You may also consider a letter to the White House or the USTR. The concern many have is that by labeling this as an "executive agreement", its acceptance does not require debate or ratification in Congress. Let your reps know you don't appreciate their being sidelined in legal debates that affect their constituents.
  
  Many other people take issue that the very name "Anti Counterfeiting Trade (executive) Agreement" implies that the discussions are focusing only on criminals profiteering on counterfeited goods. The formal draft release made it perfectly clear that copyright enforcement is a major subject.
  
  I'm reading the latest draft and kind of amused they're retaining the "copyright piracy" term (right after counterfeiting) to describe all copyright infringement. Again this is misleading, as mass copyright infringement for personal use is freeloading gluttony, not theft or profiteering - no actual product is lost, nor any sale intercepted.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 12:57pm
  
  Re: What should we do?
  Yes, there is something you can do. Spread the word far and wide. Link to it on your blog. Pass it on to your twittering friends. Mention it to your coworkers. And do so in a way that they in turn will pass it on.
  
  The more people think of ACTA as an horrible thing, the more likely supporting it will be seen as political suicide by the politicians. And even if it passes, the more people dislike it, the greater the opposition and the greater the chance it will be repealed, ignored, or willfully and openly defied.
  
  (This comment is licensed under Creative Commons CC0; feel free to pass it along too!)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hephaestus (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 12:31pm

Thats been out for a couple days now ...
read section 2.16.6 - it basically makes it legal to seize your property for allegedly infringing.

It gets far worse the further you read into the document.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jay (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 1:05pm
  
  That's nothing...
  Look at 2.2 Damages:
  
  Basically whatever number the rights holder makes up is the amount you have to pay.
  
  Let's not even think about the fact that market value may be overpriced. Nosiree bob... You price it, it's a consideration. I swear, you can tell that there isn't one economist on the US side.
  
  Damn... trying to read this only depresses me. Especially with knowing that Japan (major economic recession) and the US (majorly in the hands of the big CEOs) can't be made to see reason, only that this enforcement strategy will weaken their country on the whole.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Hephaestus (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 1:58pm
    
    Re: That's nothing...
    "Look at 2.2 Damages: Basically whatever number the rights holder makes up is the amount you have to pay. Let's not even think about the fact that market value may be overpriced."
    
    I read a copy of this from another source. The whole document is a nightmare that uses all the failed enforcement, penalty, and re-education techniques of the past 100 years. It is basically a stick to wave at the public and say "now you have to buy our crap, you have no choice!"
    
    Here is a bit of history. Years back the IRS was seizing properties left and right. It caused a backlash and basically the IRS was slapped down because of its abusive methods. This will cause the same thing.
    
    If I wanted to create a document to cause a backlash and swing the copyright to what it is supposed to be, this is what it would look like. It has so many constitutional violations there is no way for it to stand the legal system of the US or the EU.
    
    It is going to piss off pretty much everyone. Police are not going to want to arrest a mother of four and give her kids to the state for listening to music or watching movies. ISP's are not going to want to do deep packet inspection to prevent infringement (I think ISP's as copyright enforcers is still buried in there, I was reading the old one and this new version side by side, I might be wrong).
    
    Risk aversion will also kick in and cause people to err on the side of caution. This in turn will create a huge surge in the usage of Creative Commons Licenses. People will use less music from the labels on youTube and the like. People will start setting up databases dedicated to freely usable media.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jul 2010 @ 1:32pm

Take off and nuke this agreement from orbit, it's the only way to be sure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Hephaestus (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 1:58pm
  
  Re:
  I liked the movie "Aliens" ;)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
R. Miles (profile), 14 Jul 2010 @ 1:42pm

Grammar correction notice
"Still Get Leaked" should be "Still Gets Leaked".

Unless you're trying to help AT&T customers. ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NAMELESS ONE, 14 Jul 2010 @ 5:12pm

and dont even try this in canada
ONLY way it could get made law is if the prime minister ( whose in minority govt) uses the not withstanding clause and suspends TONS of CIVIL RIGHTS
like about 9 that i can count easily....FAIL
no EPIC fail and i concur if you want a revolution to truly begin this is the type a crap to get things rolling

remember remember the 5th of november
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Keven Sutton, 14 Jul 2010 @ 5:13pm

France
So this is how france becomes a totalitarian state.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
drew (profile), 15 Jul 2010 @ 3:01pm

re: that's not quite how it works
It's how it's worked for the UK government for the last ten years (and probably the next few).
Just deny any contrary stories and never actually address any issues raised. Feed this to your pet reporters and go back to your desk, job done.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gene Cavanaugh (profile), 15 Jul 2010 @ 5:15pm

Telling a lie often enough.....
For those too young to remember (surely no one is interested in history! Why not just repeat it?), Hitler said "if you tell a lie often enough, people will believe it" - then proved it was true.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]