22 EU states sign the ACTA ‘Internet censorship’ treaty
thenextweb.com
thenextweb.com
In the west the oligarchy does everything in secret, their motives are largely unclear, and they keep everyone focused on culture war issues that never get resolved and celebrity like gossiping about politicians. Meanwhile, the lobbyists and the rest of the oligarchy write absurdly complex bills and pass them in obscurity.
In Russia it's a bit of a hybrid of the western and eastern system.
Everything else being equal, a well defined opponent is much easier to fight that a vague one, or one that presents itself as your friend.
INTA represents amongst others our good friends Rackspace, eBay, GoDaddy (surprise!), Yahoo, Microsoft, etcetera.
See http://quintessenz.at/doqs/000100011699/2011_12_15,Eu_Commis... for an official documentation of that.
Like most of the times in history when such powers were "lawfully" provided to governments or special groups within society it might not be the government(s) bringing in such foul regulations it's the ones that follow after them who will fully exploit these unconstitutional measures.
Let's hope that the Stop ACTA movement will take up speed and people will listen before these rules are ratified by the countries.
Otherwise soon a very few will make some extra billions exploiting society while we all will pay with our civil rights, or freedom and certainly also with hundreds of billions of our monies.
http://lubbockonline.com/interact/blog-post/bert-knabe/2011-...
here are more sources on the matter
The reason for the confusion is that PAP (Polish Press Agency) reported this "news" today, giving the wrong date, and all the major news outlets re-reported it without checking (how hard is it to go to the ECJ website?). TVN24 has now published a correction, but the information has already spread and now many people think ACTA has been made illegal.
The truth is that the ECJ has never made any ruling about ACTA. It has only ruled that ISP filtering is illegal in the EU, but that is not directly in contradiction with ACTA.
Furthermore, I see nothing in ACTA that contradicts the ECJ ruling (ACTA does not say anything specific about ISP filtering) and I haven't seen any serious source claim that this ruling makes ACTA illegal.
>Aha. If an ISP only keeps IP logs for a month, or doesn't do so at all, then the copyright holder is without any recourse. You can't hand over information you don't have.
and again
>whilst ISPs may be ordered to hand over information on infringers, there is nothing requiring them to gather information to do so, and there is a specific clause
I guess they don't know about the Data Retention Directive (2006) then. Where I live in the EU ISPs keep data for the max 2 years.
http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/economy/i_property/acta1201.htm...
UPDATE: in case you want to contact them too, here's the list ... http://bit.ly/AkFjG6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8Xg_C2YmG0 is something you can show around.
Sorry for the language, but I'm really pissed off that my country is on that list.
Sure they do - they're there for their own personal gain. The second-most important thing is the benefit of their "campaign contributors" - in other words: the companies/people that bribe them.
My country is on the list too.