[LINK] itNews: 'ACTA treaty mauled in hearings'
francisoconnor3 at bigpond.com
Mon Mar 26 10:56:15 EST 2012
The copyright 'industry' has consistently added to the scope of copyright, restricted 'fair use', and thrown out due process over the years ... with the abject help of politicians and other supposed to represent the people they are supposed to protect from this type of ravenous greed ... with little or no comeback for the person on the street.
Still that's the way of things in politics and business nowadays:
You want to add decades onto the scope of the copyright you licensed for a pittance from the original author for a lesser period, "No problem ... the little guys can pay for what had previously been free, and who cares about the author."
You want to add more fees and charges to the already confusing myriad of fees and charges you charge for simply doing the accounting things you would have built into your cost structures in the good old days, "No problem ... the little schmucks won't kick at another fee or charge."
You want to put up the price of your utility bills, "OK, no problem ... I mean the public are the suckers who are going to pay for it."
It's all laissez faire as far as the politicians and bureaucrats go ... and all roses for business which basically gets what it wants from them.
No wonder electoral results like Queensland occur ...
The problem is that, with our party system, no matter who we vote for they are in the pockets of the rich and powerful ...
Just my (embittered) 2 cents worth ...
On 26/03/2012, at 8:12 AM, Roger Clarke wrote:
> ACTA treaty mauled in hearings
> John Hilvert
> Mar 23, 2012 2:01 PM (2 days ago)
> Power to rights holders is a reason not to ratify agreement, say critics.
> Academics have savaged the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA)
> treaty over the power it affords intellectual property rights
> holders during a second round of joint committee hearings in Canberra.
> Associate Professor Kimberlee Weatherall said the treaty - if
> ratified by Australia - would extend new powers to rights holders,
> despite assurances given by the Department of Foreign Affairs and
> Trade (DFAT) and representatives of the Attorney-General's office.
> While she accepted that ACTA's ratification would not involve new
> legislation, Weatherall said the treaty expanded the reach of
> existing laws that governed commercial-scale infringements.
> Laws relating to these types of infringements are currently dealt
> with by individual countries per directions in the existing World
> Trade Organisation agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual
> Property (TRIPS).
> Weatherall called for ratification of the ACTA to be delayed or
> canned altogether on grounds including that the agreement's
> provisions aren't accepted as a legitimate basis for international
> intellectual property standards and that there are few benefits and
> many costs for Australians in the treaty.
> She also argued the treaty was tainted by narrow consultations,
> redundant in the face of existing multilateral forums, and did not
> counter-balance powers given to rights holders with user rights of
> In addition, Weatherall said that ratification could undermine
> regional relations with major trade partners that had expressed
> concerns over the treaty, such as China and India.
> Weatherall received some support from fellow academic Dr Hazel Moir,
> who attacked the Government and DFAT for failing to outline the "net
> benefit" of ratifying the treaty.
> Moir said the main beneficiaries of ACTA were overseas firms and that
> there was a general lack of research to support ratification of the
> Moir also attacked the validity of research before the committee by
> rights holders that detailed lost business and the price of
> infringement on the music industry.
> Meanwhile, Australian National University College of Law associate
> professor Dr Matthew Rimmer attacked a DFAT National Interest
> analysis [pdf] as inadequate and unsatisfactory.
> He said DFAT failed to explain how mandatory and discretionary
> obligations imposed by the treaty would be implemented in practice.
> Rimmer also sought explanation of the so-called ACTA Committee's
> ability to change rules and standards, arguing its existence could
> subvert international standards and enact tougher enforcement regimes
> with little external scrutiny, causing fragmentation to intellectual
> property laws.
> Roger Clarke http://www.rogerclarke.com/
> Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd 78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA
> Tel: +61 2 6288 1472, and 6288 6916
> mailto:Roger.Clarke at xamax.com.au http://www.xamax.com.au/
> Visiting Professor in the Faculty of Law University of NSW
> Visiting Professor in Computer Science Australian National University
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
More information about the Link