Senator Wyden Asks President Obama: Isn't Congress Required To Approve ACTA?

from the good-question dept

Wed, Oct 12th 2011 10:48am — Mike Masnick

As the US Trade Rep (USTR) under the Obama administration has made it clear that it has no intention of allowing Congress to ratify ACTA, but instead believes it can sign it unilaterally, we've finally seen someone in Congress notice that this appears to be unconstitutional. Senator Wyden has sent President Obama a letter asking some basic questions. From the letter:

Although the USTR insists that current U.S. law, and its application, conform to these standards, there are concerns that the agreement may work to restrain the U.S. from changing such rules and practices. As you know, the executive branch lacks constitutional authority to enter binding international agreements on matters under Congress's plenary powers, including the Article I powers to regulate foreign commerce and protect intellectual property. Yet, through ACTA and without your clarification, the USTR looks to be claiming the authority to do just that.

The letter also responds to the repeated claims of the USTR that it can have this signed as an executive agreement because it doesn't require changes to US law, by pointing out that's not the rule:

The statement by the USTR confuses the issue by conflating two separate stages of the process required for binding the U.S. to international agreements: entry and implementation. It may be possible for the U.S. to implement ACTA or any other trade agreement, once validly entered, without legislation if the agreement requires no change in U.S. law. But, regardless of whether the agreement requires changes in U.S. law, a point that is contested with respect to ACTA, the executive branch lacks constitutional authority to enter a binding international agreement covering issues delegated by the Constitution to Congress' authority, absent congressional approval.

Wyden details the situations under which the US can take part in binding international agreements, and points out that: "ACTA appears to be none of these." He then asks President Obama to make clear that ACTA creates no international obligations for the US:

Mr. President, if you allow the USTR to express your assent to ACTA, then the agreement can bind the U.S. under international law even without Congress' consent, because international law, not U.S. law, determines the binding effect of international agreements. According to many international law scholars, customary international law recognizes the ability of the chief executive of a country to bind its nation to an international agreement regardless of domestic legal requirements.

I request that as a condition of the U.S. putting forward any official instrument that accepts the terms of ACTA that you formally declare that ACTA does not create any international obligations for the U.S. -- that ACTA is not binding. If you are unwilling or unable to make such a clarification, it is imperative that your administration provide the Congress, and the public, with a legal rationale for why ACTA should not be considered by Congress, and work with us to ensure that we reach a common understanding of the proper way for the U.S. to proceed with ACTA. Thank you for your attention to this important matter.

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, barack obama, constitution, copyright, executive agreement, ron wyden, ustr

91 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 10:51am

Oh look... a grandstand... with Wyden on top of it.

Nothing is new under the sun. Just waiting for some Fox news "journalist" to allude to Obama as a Muslim to make the day compelte.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 10:51am

Ron Wyden is truly Google's bitch.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 10:53am

Ok.So what? And we believe that the RIAA and MPAA's employes on the hill, otherwise known as congressmen and senator's are NOT going to approve ACTA in its current form?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chris Rhodes (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 10:59am

Re:
0/10

Troll harder.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:02am

"Isn't Congress Required To Approve ACTA?"
Well senator, these bags of money seem to disagree with you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:03am

Re:
Perfect weather for Trolling isn't it�
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:04am

Re:
Yep. And obviously his staffers sent Pirate Mike a copy 'cause they love the free press. Go get 'em, boys!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:06am

Re:
Ooooo, good definition of ad hominem. Please work on a definition of "begging the question" for tomorrow.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
CanadianObserver, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:09am

POWNED
Haha! Obama got POWNED! Haha!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:18am

50% chance: Completely ignored by the administration.
50% chance: A previous statement, debunked long ago, is given as justification.

100% chance: ACTA will be enforced everywhere, whether they have the right to or not. It will cause several problems, and solve none.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike Waters, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:20am

WhiteHouse petition!
WhiteHouse.gov has an active petition to stop this nonsense!

Require that the Senate ratify the ACTA treaty rather than making it effective by Executive Order. http://wh.gov/4PW
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Daddy Warbucks, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:21am

Law & Ignore
Too bad the Constitution is in the way with all its pesky laws, Obama is cutting off his nose (making it The Leader) to spite his face.

This President's arrogance knows no bounds,
Kill Lists,
Telling Congress to F Off,
Pushing the DOJ to ignore the Laws (F&F, Wiretapping US Citizens, Writing its own Warrants, etc),
Starting a War without any consideration to the Constitution.

Just try and stop him. Even when Wyden is correctly acting in his capacity, he still gets lambasted by Obama groupies, the comments on this post are a perfect example.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Daddy Warbucks, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:24am

Re: Law & Ignore
Correction: "Some" comments on this post...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
qhartman, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:28am

Proud, but skeptical
It makes me proud to be an Oregonian that so often Wyden and Defazio seem to be the only legislators making a stand against stupid crap like this. I'll be surprised if it makes a difference, they seem to get ignored or steamrolled more often than not, but at least they seem to be trying.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
hothmonster, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:30am

Re: Law & Ignore
i don't really think the Doj needed much of a push...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:31am

Re: Proud, but skeptical
I'd like to order a couple of Wydens for my state, is Oregon going to be making any more or do you guys want the monopoly on politicians with heads outside their asses?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Doe, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:32am

Re:
Grandstanding or not, the fact is, he is trying to put a stop to the WH usurping powers granted to congress by the US Constitution. Regardless of his motive being pure or otherwise, ACTA needs stopped and congress needs to step in or forever be the door mat to the WH.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:32am

Re: Law & Ignore
Too bad the Constitution is in the way with all its pesky laws, Obama is cutting off his nose (making it The Leader) to spite his face.

This President's arrogance knows no bounds,
Kill Lists,
Telling Congress to F Off,
Pushing the DOJ to ignore the Laws (F&F, Wiretapping US Citizens, Writing its own Warrants, etc),
Starting a War without any consideration to the Constitution.

Just try and stop him. Even when Wyden is correctly acting in his capacity, he still gets lambasted by Obama groupies, the comments on this post are a perfect example.

Starting a war? I think I must have missed that one. What war did Obama start?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DH's Love Child (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:37am

Re: Re: Proud, but skeptical
I'd like to order a couple of Wydens for my state, is Oregon going to be making any more or do you guys want the monopoly on politicians with heads outside their asses?

The problem isn't politicians with their heads up their own asses, it's that they have their heads up their corporate masters' asses.

ps I'm glad to have recently moved to Oregon.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Meh, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:38am

Re: Re: Law & Ignore
I think he means the libya action, you know nato, drone strikes etc. it was a military action using US Armed forces and equipment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Tonspiracy Cheorist, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:39am

Re:
Look at how hard the copyright goon squad is hitting these comments. With anti-corporate sentiment running high and big elections coming up, they don't want to risk someone going off the rez and trying to score points with the voters by making a stink on this. Much better to sneak it in quietly.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:39am

Re: Re: Law & Ignore
Libya
[ link to this | view in thread ]
GeneralEmergency (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:45am

Obama's ignorance of the Constitution...
.

...is a gift that just keeps on giving.

.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:46am

I'm afraid that my reasons for entering into a binding international agreement without the consent of Congress are classified.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:51am

I forsee an 'accident' coming for someone....
It's only possible to push back so much against those in power, before they start pushing as well.

While our pushing looks like 'Occupy Wallstreet' or Wyden standing up to the President, you'll never see their pushing until it's too late.....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:52am

Re: Obama's ignorance of the Constitution...
To be somewhat more fair, the overreach of executive authority is just a continuation of the last administration's policy. Bush never intended to run this through Congress either, and the secret negotiations for ACTA were set up under his administration.

Obama can hardly be said to be ignorant of the Constitution. He's just ignoring it willfully.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
MrWilson, 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:52am

Re:
Our political system may be a sham, but our sham has procedures that must be followed under penalty of large campaign contributions.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Hephaestus (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 11:55am

Sign the petition
we petition the obama administration to:
require that the Senate ratify the ACTA treaty rather than making it effective by Executive Order.

[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 12:01pm

Sen. Wyden
Go Wyden!!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 12:05pm

Re: Re: Law & Ignore
Don't forget Yemen...

(CBS/AP) WASHINGTON - The New York Times says the Obama administration has intensified the covert U.S. war in Yemen, hitting militant suspects with armed drones and fighter jets.

The newspaper says the accelerated campaign has occurred in recent weeks as conflict in Yemen has left the government there struggling to cling to power.

Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/06/09/501364/main20070252.shtml#ixzz1OoccDVRf
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jon Lawrence, 12 Oct 2011 @ 12:06pm

Re: WhiteHouse petition!
I love how I've tried signing up/creating an account to sign petitions there 3 times and it somehow never sends me the confirmation email. Glad they're making it easy. /sarcasm
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 12:24pm

How long before Wyden is called a racist?
How long before Wyden is called a racist? This is an excellant way to avoid dealing with the substance of the issue.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 12:42pm

Re: POWNED
Its spelled pwned not powned. If your going to use the word please spell it correctly.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
S, 12 Oct 2011 @ 12:53pm

Re: Re: Obama's ignorance of the Constitution...
And Obama specifically campaigned on the premise he would stop what Bush began; that man is a hypocrite and a scum bag far worse than both of the shrubs combined.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jon, 12 Oct 2011 @ 12:54pm

Re: Re: Proud, but skeptical
Unfortunately, Wyden isn't really representing Oregon any more, since he lives in New York with his wife most of the time. Kind of a running joke here in Oregon.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jay (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 1:03pm

Re: How long before Wyden is called a racist?
What I expect is that during this winter, right before the holidays, Obama is going to sign the ACTA.

Calling it now.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 1:08pm

Re: Re: Re: Law & Ignore
Don't forget Yemen...

(CBS/AP) WASHINGTON - The New York Times says the Obama administration has intensified the covert U.S. war in Yemen, hitting militant suspects with armed drones and fighter jets.

The newspaper says the accelerated campaign has occurred in recent weeks as conflict in Yemen has left the government there struggling to cling to power.

Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/06/09/501364/main20070252.shtml#ixzz1OoccDVRf

Outrageous. He should just invite them over to the White House for dinner and reason with them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Almost Anonymous (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 1:09pm

Re:
Do NOT give them any ideas!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Almost Anonymous (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 1:11pm

Re: Sen. Wyden
Yeah, everytime I think this guy can not be any more awesome, he goes and proves me wrong.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
HrilL, 12 Oct 2011 @ 1:13pm

Re: Re: Law & Ignore
Ever hear of this country called Libya? Yeah Obama started that war without even consulting with congress. They posed no direct threat to our nation thus he had no authority to use force against anyone in that country.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 1:18pm

Re:
Not only classified but also trade secrets and intellectual property
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Mighty Buzzard (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 1:46pm

Re: Re: POWNED
Nice one! It's spelled it's not its and you're not your. Hilarious if that was intentional and even more hilarious if it wasn't.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Mighty Buzzard (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 1:51pm

Re: Re: Obama's ignorance of the Constitution...
Dude, doing something you personally ripped on the previous administration for is not "just a continuation of the last administration's policy". It is hypocrisy of the highest order.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Mighty Buzzard (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 1:58pm

Re: Sign the petition
Hell, I've been signing president@whitehouse.gov up for all my spam for over a decade now. No way am I giving them anything but an unverifiable, throw-away address that would be useless for a petition.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
blaktron (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 1:58pm

Re: Re: Re: POWNED
Actually, 'it is' is abbreviated as 'its' since 'it's' describes a possessive.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 1:59pm

Re: Re: Re: Proud, but skeptical
Kind of a running joke here in Oregon.

Maybe in the crowd you run with, but not in my crowd. Wyden is well respected, has done, and likely will continue to do a lot of good work for Oregon. He has his imperfections as we all do, but he's far from a joke.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Mighty Buzzard (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 2:03pm

Re: Re: How long before Wyden is called a racist?
Congress really should have someone on standby to arrest him if he attempts to sign it. Would make for political hilarity. Or at the very least, obtain a court order expressly barring him from signing it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Mighty Buzzard (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 2:06pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: POWNED
You have that backwards. His, hers, its. He is he's, she is she's, it is it's.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
blaktron (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 2:16pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: POWNED
You are correct sir, i stand here bathed in wrong =D
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 2:19pm

Re: Read the foreign affairs manual
This problem is bigger than ACTA. This is standard operating procedure.

Google for "11 FAM 721" and read the entire section 721 (it's not that big). It grants great leeway in deciding what international agreements can be made without a treaty, and it doesn't make much distinction regarding article I, or II issues (especially when there are no legislative hurdles to enactment) . The manual in a wishy-washy way says that it's nice to consult congress sometimes in deciding what type of agreement to use. But it doesn't require it, nor does it say that they have to listen or obey the opinions of congress during their consultation.

They're playing by the book (unfortunately, it's a book that they wrote).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Mighty Buzzard (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 2:24pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: POWNED
Well just be quick with it. I'm almost certainly going to need my turn soon.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BentFranklin (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 2:25pm

It's no coincidence Ron Kirk is from Texas.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 2:47pm

Re:
Whoever keeps "flagging" posts simply because they contradict the Techdirt groupthink should stop it. It's petty.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Onnala (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 2:48pm

Re: Re: Proud, but skeptical
Technically you need to order up a Portland Oregon. Sense what your getting is the left leaning guys that the city is sending you.

Watch a show called Portlandia... while it kind of goes to some extent to be overly funny, it's still hitting the barn wall.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 2:49pm

Regardless of whether the White House can, should, or will sign the agreement, they'll have a hell of a time implementing or enforcing it without Congressional cooperation.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 2:53pm

Re: Re: Read the foreign affairs manual
This problem is bigger than ACTA. This is standard operating procedure.

Google for "11 FAM 721" and read the entire section 721 (it's not that big). It grants great leeway in deciding what international agreements can be made without a treaty, and it doesn't make much distinction regarding article I, or II issues (especially when there are no legislative hurdles to enactment) . The manual in a wishy-washy way says that it's nice to consult congress sometimes in deciding what type of agreement to use. But it doesn't require it, nor does it say that they have to listen or obey the opinions of congress during their consultation.

They're playing by the book (unfortunately, it's a book that they wrote).

Oh goodness!!!! Why this would mean that Mike's suggestion that there is a Constitutional issue is, is, ....... FUD??? Oh that couldn't be..... could it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 2:58pm

Re:
Regardless of whether the White House can, should, or will sign the agreement, they'll have a hell of a time implementing or enforcing it without Congressional cooperation.

What makes you think anyone in the Senate other than Wyden has an issue. You may note from the vote on the jobs bill that they're not exactly reticent when it comes to bitch-slapping the President.

Wyden is Google's pet senator and they wind him up and send him out as their messenger boy on issues that may affect there business.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 3:16pm

Re: Re: Re: Read the foreign affairs manual
There's still constitutional issues. Even if we were to assume that the manual is not giving out unconstitutional instructions (very arguable), you can still question the interpretation of the manual.

For instance, here's the wording specifying which non-treaty agreements are allowable:

...
(2) Agreements Pursuant to Legislation

The President may conclude an international agreement on the basis of existing legislation or subject to legislation to be enacted by the Congress;
and
(3) Agreements Pursuant to the Constitutional Authority of the President

The President may conclude an international agreement on any subject within his constitutional authority so long as the agreement is not inconsistent with legislation enacted by the Congress in the exercise of its constitutional authority. The constitutional sources of authority for the
President to conclude international agreements include:
(a) The President's authority as Chief Executive to represent the nation in foreign affairs;
(b) The President's authority to receive ambassadors and other public ministers;
(c) The President's authority as "Commander-in-Chief�; and
(d) The President's authority to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed."

I imagine that the administration could argue that ACTA could fit under either of these categories. However I would argue that #2 refers to actual instructions from congress to make an agreement, not just an agreement that doesn't require additional laws. And # 3 requires that the subject be limited to matters within presidential responsibility. I suppose they could argue that this is just part of the president's authority to see that the laws are faithfully executed.. But I would argue that that authority does not grant the president authority to hobble congress's ability to change the law.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Any Mouse (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 3:23pm

Re: Re: Re: Read the foreign affairs manual
Oh goodness!!!! Why this would mean that Mike's suggestion that there is a Constitutional issue is, is, ....... FUD??? Oh that couldn't be..... could it?

You do mean Senator Wyden, of course. You still fail at trolling.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lao Zee Phuk, 12 Oct 2011 @ 3:25pm

Re: Re: WhiteHouse petition!
Same thing here, never got any confirmation e-mail.

Are they filtering out people who have at some point criticized the Obama administration?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lao Zee Phuk, 12 Oct 2011 @ 3:31pm

Re: Re: Re: Obama's ignorance of the Constitution...
I so agree with you! We've been had BIG TIME, by the greatest con-artist ever!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 3:38pm

Re: WhiteHouse petition!
international treaties cannot be enacted by executive order.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 3:43pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Law & Ignore
or mind his own business. just because someone asks for assistance doesn't mean you have to give it. Usually, people consider their own situation before committing to spending millions of dollars on something.

Oh, you mean we are and have been operating in the red? For how long? Unemployment is at what percent? The banks are doing what?

I'm sorry mr leader of yemen, but we cannot help you at this time. THe most we can do is send you some advisors to teach you how to treat your populace so they don't rise against you. Don't expect it to work for too long, tho, [its not going so well for us back home]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeffrey Nonken (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 4:18pm

Re:
We need a new law. Godwin's Law only covers Nazis and Hitler. We need one for Muslims and terrorists.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeffrey Nonken (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 4:20pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: POWNED
Don't use up the hot water!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeffrey Nonken (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 4:23pm

Re: Re: Proud, but skeptical
Unfortunately I live in the capital of liberalism, California.

Oregon is starting to sound better all the time. I hear they might even have weather there.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael, 12 Oct 2011 @ 4:55pm

Re: Re:
Anyone can get these documents.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
athe, 12 Oct 2011 @ 5:24pm

Re: Re:
Yeah, the content industry just have more wind up toys than everyone else...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bergman (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 5:32pm

Re: Re:
Presidents have faced impeachment for less.

What would it say about the goals of the Democratic party if every President they manage to elect does something that warrants being impeached?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bergman (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 5:33pm

Re: Re: Re: WhiteHouse petition!
That would be illegal, given it's a government site.

Of course, if nobody ever broke the law, nobody would have ever invented police.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bergman (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 5:36pm

Re: Re: Law & Ignore
Obama set a bit of a dangerous precedent for U.S. law in his assertion, if it is allowed to stand.

By Obama's reasoning, if Al Qaeda had used drones or missiles instead of airliners on 9/11, they would not have committed an act of war nor a hostile act. Because bombing someone by remote control isn't an act of war (since if it were, he'd need Congress to approve his doing it within a certain span of time).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bergman (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 5:38pm

Re: Re: Obama's ignorance of the Constitution...
Which would make him both a domestic enemy of the Constitution and an oathbreaker.

Breaking an oath is what they impeached Clinton for, after all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bergman (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 5:40pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Read the foreign affairs manual
And what if Congress were to pass a binding resolution with a veto-proof majority overturning or forbidding ACTA?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bergman (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 5:43pm

Re: Re: How long before Wyden is called a racist?
But the question is, if the President lacks the lawful authority to sign ACTA into effect, how would his signing it be any different, in a binding and/or legal sense than, say, you or I signing it?

To implement it, Congress must be involved. Unless Obama's next "refinement" to extraordinary rendition will be to allow foreign police forces to enter the U.S. to make arrests for ACTA violations?

In case you didn't notice, that would meet all of the legal criteria for a Treason charge.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jay (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 5:50pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Read the foreign affairs manual
What's the likelihood of that happening?

The better question here is why would Obama do this than get the rubber stamp from Congress?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BearGriz72 (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 5:53pm

Re: Re:
"The 9/11 Coralary to Godwin's Law"?

See Also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law#Corollaries_and_usage
http://randomactsofpatriot ism.blogspot.com/2011/08/godwins-law-and-my-corollary.html
http://isaacs.newsvine.com/_news/2009/03 /14/2546893-isaacs-corollary-to-godwins-law
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BearGriz72 (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 5:55pm

Re:
Bite Me!
Senator Ron Wyden makes me proud to be an Oregonian. How many other states can say that about one of their senators?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 12 Oct 2011 @ 6:29pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Read the foreign affairs manual
And what if Congress were to pass a binding resolution with a veto-proof majority overturning or forbidding ACTA?

Keep dreaming.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BearGriz72 (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 7:00pm

Re: Re: Re: Proud, but skeptical
Define: weather...

If "Today's forecast, showers, followed by rain. Tomorrow: rain, followed by showers" doesn't faze you, and/or you love the smell of rain, & you think people who use umbrellas are either wimps or people from California. Then you know you're from Oregon.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rekrul, 12 Oct 2011 @ 7:22pm

Re: Re: Re:
Presidents have faced impeachment for less.

Didn't anyone tell you? Trying to impeach the president is now considered an act of terrorism.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BearGriz72 (profile), 12 Oct 2011 @ 7:31pm

Re: Sign the petition
Signed @ http://wh.gov/4PW
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rekrul, 12 Oct 2011 @ 7:31pm

"Dear Senator Wyden,

If I sign it, that makes it legal.

Now kindly fuck off and stop bothering me.

Sincerely

King Obama"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Karl (profile), 13 Oct 2011 @ 3:29am

Re: Re:
Wyden is Google's pet senator

Not surprisingly, this is a total lie. Let's look at Wyden's contributors:

1. Nike Inc - $42,200
2. FoxKiser - $33,600
3. Berkshire Hathaway - $30,625
4. Intel Corp - $24,850
5. Ospraie Management - $24,000
6. Blue Cross/Blue Shield - $23,650
7. McKool Smith PC - $23,500
8. Mary Kay Holding Corp - $21,600
9. Oregon Health & Science University - $20,700
10. Providence Health & Services - $20,450
11. Akin, Gump et al - $19,868
12. M Financial Group - $19,650
13. Amir Development - $19,200
13. Apollo Advisors - $19,200
15. Steptoe & Johnson - $18,645
16. Platt Electric - $18,600
17. Patton Boggs LLP - $18,450
18. Tonkon Torp - $17,750
19. Banfield Pet Hospital - $17,700
20. Oaktree Capital Management - $16,900

Google isn't even in the Top 20; in fact, no internet idustry is.

On the other hand, his #1 contributor is Nike - one of the companies who instructed ICE to seize websites, and a notoriously overreaching IP protectionist. If Wyden really was the "pet senator" of his contributors, he wouldn't be standing up against ACTA, the seizures, or PROTECT IP.

"Pet senator" more accurately describes Patrick Leahy, the Democratic senator from Vermont who sponsored the PROTECT IP act. Let's take a look at his top 20 contributors:

1. Technet - $81,961
2. Girardi & Keese - $72,000
3. Time Warner - $62,150
4. Walt Disney Co - $45,150
5. Vivendi - $35,706
6. Microsoft Corp - $31,750
7. Law Offices of Peter G Angelos - $29,050
8. Intellectual Ventures LLC - $28,400
9. Comcast Corp - $25,250
10. National Amusements Inc - $23,500
11. Google Inc - $21,100
12. Oracle Corp - $21,000
13. Nix, Patterson & Roach - $20,181
14. Sony Corp - $19,000
15. NorPAC - $18,962
16. Warner Music Group - $17,150
17. General Electric - $16,750
18. Bergman, Draper & Frockt - $16,400
19. National Fraternal Order of Police - $16,250
20. DLA Piper - $15,550

In other words, out of his top 20 contributors, fully half of them are companies that are directly pushing for stronger IP laws.

Of course, Google also makes Leahy's list... unlike Wyden's. Ironic that you don't call Leahy "Google's pet senator." I guess you only make that accusation when that Senator doesn't agree with you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
yeah, 13 Oct 2011 @ 4:09am

Re: Re:
Whoever squats on techdirt blog to get the first comment for trolling should stop it. It's not just petty.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
yeah, 13 Oct 2011 @ 4:12am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: POWNED
You see, trolls? This is how we spot you - you NEVER admit you are wrong. My guess is that The Mighty Buzzard and blaktron aren't trolls...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Oct 2011 @ 5:54am

Re: Re: Re:
Perhaps you need to also consider that Facebook is opening a huge data center in Prineville and Google's server farm is located in The Dalles.

http://oregonbusinessreport.com/2010/12/transcript-sen-wyden-business-summit-remarks/

There are more effective ways t grease the skids than maxing out on campaign contributions.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Oct 2011 @ 10:04am

Re: Re: WhiteHouse petition!
I like how after creating an account and logging in, the 'sigh petition' button is still greyed out....

Obviously they don't want people to be able to sign up or sign the petitions, as that would indicate that people aren't happy with what they are doing....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 13 Oct 2011 @ 10:06am

This guy Wyden doesn't stop to impress me. I can see some mainstream media attempts to discredit and destroy him.

Still, good work. I'm not American but I'm seriously thinking of giving him the monies to spend with his polls. Does he have a flattr button? *troll face* No rly, I'm serious ahahaha
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Karl (profile), 14 Oct 2011 @ 8:08am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Perhaps you need to also consider that Facebook is opening a huge data center in Prineville and Google's server farm is located in The Dalles.

Interesting, especially as the link you posted only mentioned this in passing, as evidence of job creation there. It did not mention anything about any bills that helped this along - unlike the logging or biomass industries, which Wyden explicitly connected to Washington policies.

It's also interesting how this would make Wyden a "pet senator" of Google, and not Jeff Merkley, the other Senator from Oregon. Nor, for that matter, do you mention Greg Walden, Earl Blumenauer, Peter A. DeFazio, or Kurt Schrader - the House members from Oregon.

You also fail to mention that Google has data centers in Seattle, Chicago, Houston, Miami, two in Atlanta, four in California, and three in Virginia. I guess all the Senators in those states are also "pet senators," right?

And besides - who cares what Google thinks? The outrage over ACTA is not driven primarily by Google, or any other tech company. The ones who have the biggest concerns are civil liberties and consumer rights groups: the EFF, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, the Future of Music Coalition, the Liberty Coalition, the CDT, the Open Content Alliance, the Sunlight Foundation, OpenTheGovernment.org, Public Knowledge, and Change Congress. Op-ed's against it have appeared even in conservative magazines like Forbes. Not to mention the huge opposition to the treaty from the European Union, Mexico, China, and pretty much the entire Third World.

Presenting everyone who is opposed to ACTA as "a tool of Google" is spreading FUD, pure and simple.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch (profile), 18 Oct 2011 @ 7:40am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Proud, but skeptical
That's not fair, it's only like that for 10 months out of the year, at most. July and August are quite nice!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
freedom, 29 Jan 2012 @ 10:44am

great article on ACTA's legality
http://www.lasisblog.com/2012/01/28/acta-a-treaty-by-any-other-name/
[ link to this | view in thread ]