As much as I think the concept of copyright is a good and useful thing, the way it is currently used it can die in a fire already and maybe a new thing can take its place.
But this is only the evils we already knew about. Are there any new horrors hidden within?
and I’m sure no one can assess the agreement in whole - who know’s how many contradictonary clauses are hidden within this tl/dr text monster?
Are there any limits to the scope of “who is a copyright holder?” After all everything is copyrighted at the moment of its creation under Berne.
This scheme sound terribly vulnerable to DoS attacks by hacktivists and strip-mining of ISP customer data by identity thieves.
One would probably come out more sane reading the mad scrawlings of a lovecraftian tome than the full text of the TPP.
Well I’m not sure I buy that argument. When the Affordable Care Act was on the table, dozens of our elected representatives complained that it was too long and hard to read. It may not be your job to read it, but it’s somebody’s job - activists for example. I’m willing to accept the Readers Digest version, myself.
I agree, someone should have a qualified overview. But the treaty was cobbled together in many workgroups and multiple sessions, and the participants were most likely pressured by dozens of special interest lobby groups to include some specific wording. I doubt that the negotiated treaty is consistent.
I suspect that with many would-be signatory countries, the scope of the treaty might exceed the authority of the officials who would need to sign off on it. These I think are the technicalities which people might want to look at. They might invalidate your countrie’s ability to sign into it.
So when this passes we can take down every video on youtube - not to mention netflix and network sites - by claiming to have copyright over it and we are legally immune from reprecussions of doing that? I’d like to get this confirmed. Maybe we’ll need to make ourselves a numbered corporation first?
It’s misleading. I just got done skimming the IP section of the treaty. It says you can’t sue the ISP for taking down something pursuant to a bogus claim. You can still sue the person who filed the claim. From the actual text.
Each Party shall ensure that monetary remedies are available in its legal system against any person that makes a knowing material misrepresentation in a notice or counter-notice that causes injury to any interested party as a result of an Internet Service Provider relying on the misrepresentation.
Also it doesn’t extend terms to 75 years. It’s still 70. As far as I can tell the IP section would require absolutely no changes to U.S. law. It’s purpose seems to be exporting U.S. IP law or something very close to it to the other signatories.
As soon as it’s signed I think we should all start filing copyright claims willy-nilly against everyone.
Okay, that makes far more sense then opening up a free-for-all. I mean, in practice big entertainment companies make bogus takedown requests all the time and hobbyists just aren’t in any position to fight back, so it’s still shit, but at least it’s not pants-on-head stupid.
So organized exploitation is better than equal rights, because it protects the status quo?
Looking back, when I said:
What I should have said was, “So it’s totally shit? Damn, I was hoping for pants-on-head stupid.”
Depends. Are the pants nice?
Normally such treaties need to be accepted by a parliament vote before they can take effect. I’m not holding my breath that this will stop TPP.
My daughter looks adorable when she puts pajama pants on her head at bedtime. (“night hat”)
It might still exceed their authority. When governments abdicate lawmaking to international corporations there might be constitutional issues.
Our new PM began expressing support for the TPP before assuming office, and just after winning an election with a majority partially on claims of impartiality on the TPP.
So anyone expecting Canada’s young, fresh, re-branded and optimized for optics “Liberal” government to do anything but accept (with the worst terms of any signatory, as befits a resource rich nation with an extraction economy) this treaty without comment should have known better?
“We have to pass it to find out what’s in it!”
Gonna needs some Ex-Lax to help with that. Lots of it.
