EU Conceals Anti-Piracy Treaty Documents
Written by Ernesto on January 14, 2009The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) currently being discussed by several of the world’s leading countries, will undoubtedly lead to stricter ant-piracy legislation. The problem though, is that nobody really knows what it will entail. The EU refuses to make the drafts public, which makes it impossible for the public to review the documents before they are signed.
The degree of secrecy surrounding the ACTA negotiations is astonishing. Many institutions, the press and various individuals have requested that the participating countries provide an insight into their plans, but to no avail. It almost seems they are actively blocking the public from having their say, while in contrast they continue to receive input from anti-piracy lobbyists such as the RIAA and MPAA.
At this stage, little is known about ACTA, but what we do know is that the RIAA has put forward some radical proposals. One of their suggestions was to force ISPs to become ‘copyright cops’, ordering them to filter out pirated files on their networks, and making the ISPs liable if they fail to respond to the demands of copyright holders. That, in addition to the request for an official crime unit to track down and bust alleged pirates.
Most governments that have commented on the ACTA negotiations have refused to reveal any information about its contents, but were quick to refute rumors. According to the New Zealand government (ppt), ACTA is aimed at commercial piracy only, and no one has to be worried about getting their iPod through customs. Nevertheless, they also stress that “draft versions of the text will not be made available.”
According to the FFII, all this secrecy goes against EU regulations, and in response they have filed a complaint with the Ombudsman against the EU Council for concealing ACTA documents. “Making agreements to keep texts secret goes much further than allowed. The Council deliberately obstructs access to ACTA documents,” FFII analyst Ante Wessels commented. FFII requests that the documents should be made public. Alternatively, the EU could withdraw from the negotiations, they say.
Bottom line is this: we don’t know what the plans for ACTA are, and it is impossible to remedy this since requests for information are denied at all levels. There is no good reason to keep them secret either, other than to prevent the public and other institutions voicing their opinion on the proposal before it is signed. Convenient perhaps, but not very democratic.
Previously: Meet DtecNet – RIAA’s New Anti-Piracy Partners
Next: Franz Ferdinand Sends Web-Sheriff After Pirates
99 Responses
Assassination has been tactic used throughout history. The death of a single person could change everything. When things get out of hand, sometimes assassination could be the only answer. After all, things could have been different if only the bomb in the suitcase were placed closer to Adolf Hitler. Sometimes, though, the assassination is questionable. After all, was it really good that Julius Caesar was assassinated? Was it really good that Gavrilo Princip assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand, which set off World War I, resulting in the deaths of millions? Indeed, sometimes, assassinations are bad, for certainly we do not appreciate the assassinations of, for example, Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy, Benazir Bhutto, or Mohandas Ghandi. Yet, could we revile the assassination the same way if it were against a truly contemptable figure, like Robert Mugabe, Turkmenbashi (now dead already), and the current leaders of the RIAA? Perhaps, if truly horrible people were killed, then they would not be mourned, and perhaps it may even be helpful to the situation if such people were killed. Just something to think about.
(Note: I am not condoning any act of assassination, but I am saying that sometimes, assassinations have been positive in the past, and there is a chance that it still might be positive today).
Assassination has been tactic used throughout history. The death of a single person could change everything. When things get out of hand, sometimes assassination could be the only answer. After all, things could have been different if only the bomb in the suitcase were placed closer to Adolf Hitler. Sometimes, though, the assassination is questionable. After all, was it really good that Julius Caesar was assassinated? Was it really good that Gavrilo Princip assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand, which set off World War I, resulting in the deaths of millions? Indeed, sometimes, assassinations are bad, for certainly we do not appreciate the assassinations of, for example, Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy, Benazir Bhutto, or Mohandas Ghandi. Yet, could we revile the assassination the same way if it were against a truly contemptable figure, like Robert Mugabe, Turkmenbashi (now dead already), and the current leaders of the RIAA? Perhaps, if such truly horrible people were killed, then they would not be mourned, and perhaps it may even be helpful to the situation if such people were killed. Just something to think about.
(Note: I am not condoning any act of assassination, but I am saying that sometimes, assassinations have been positive in the past, and there is a chance that it still might be positive today).
I have never said that it warrants taking a human life. Read again: I am saying that there is a chance that the assassination of Robert Mugabe, Turkmenbashi (when he was still alive), or Kim Jong il, or the current BREIN, IFPI, and RIAA people might be positive to the situation. I am neither recommending nor condoning such an action. I am not saying that it is a good thing, or that anybody should do so, or that it is not a bad thing to do so. I am not, for example, suggesting another 1905 Russian Revolution wave of assassinations, nor am I suggesting another Viet Cong wave of assassinations, nor am I suggesting that any of the assassinations in the ongoing horrific Chechnya conflict is positive. They could, in all likeliness, be a bad thing, but I am saying that it is possible for it to be good. Note that I never said anything about its morality, but rather its effect.
I have never said that it warrants taking a human life. Read again: I am saying that there is a chance that the assassination of Robert Mugabe, Turkmenbashi (when he was still alive), or Kim Jong il, or the current BREIN, IFPI, and RIAA people might be positive to the situation. I am neither recommending nor condoning such an action. I am not saying that it is a good thing, or that anybody should do so, or that it is not a bad thing to do so. I am not, for example, suggesting another 1905 Russian Revolution wave of assassinations, nor am I suggesting another Viet Cong wave of assassinations, nor am I suggesting that any of the assassinations in the ongoing horrific Chechnya conflict is positive. In fact, I have even stated that they are sometimes definitely a bad thing, like the case of the assassinations of William of Orange (a leader of the revolt of the Netherlands) or Henry IV (the one that issued the Edict of Nantes). They are, perhaps, in all likeliness, a bad thing, but I am saying that it is possible for assassinations to be good. Note that I never said anything about what warrants it, but rather its effect – it is possible for it to have a good effect.
now thats some BS not making documents public for ppl to read before they are signed
@ Gouken
Yep, lobbying makes BS.. Money rules them all.
Dictatorship.
http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/acta/consultation_is...
sorry for the double post… seems there is quite alot of info about what they intend to discuss anyway, would be foolish to assume something positive will come out of it all.
http://www.digital.org.au/submission/ACTA.htm
Wow, it really seems like you do take this seriously. So, you must be one of those who "check in with TF." I guess it is making you scared, huh?
You know, murder was talked about already before. It was because it has happened once already:
http://torrentfreak.com/ex-mpaa-and-ifpi-anti-pir...
Be scared now, be scared, for doubtless thou art scared – wherefore dost thou reply to me, take this seriously, if thou be not scared?
* Mandatory IP filtering a flawed means of general IP enforcement
Avoiding the prescription of surveillance technologies for IP enforcement
Mandatory technical investigation and enforcement against alleged IP infringement – such as deep packet inspection – is technically immature and unproven. It may undermine the end users’ rights to privacy, create significant costs (which will inevitably flow through to consumers) and have other adverse implications. Mandatory requirements to use particular technologies or types of technology for IP filtering have no place in a multilateral treaty. More generally, ACTA should avoid promoting a surveillance culture and discourage the imposition of mandatory IP filtering of Internet traffic, unwarranted checks of digital storage devices such as notebook PCs, iPods or iPhones, without due process.
* Transparency and accountability
all stakeholders should see and comment on text before it is concluded
Some measures reportedly being considered in the ACTA negotiations have the potential to prejudice Australian consumers and a range of legitimate Australian businesses in order to benefit certain industries, sometimes in ways unintended and unforeseen by negotiators. Few stakeholders have had any opportunity to analyse the proposals in a serious way. The Australian delegation should urge that ACTA negotiations be more transparent, and that the proposals be available for analysis and comment by all stakeholders potentially affected, prior to the final rounds which conclude the text.
* Mandatory IP filtering a flawed means of general IP enforcement
Avoiding the prescription of surveillance technologies for IP enforcement
Mandatory technical investigation and enforcement against alleged IP infringement – such as deep packet inspection – is technically immature and unproven. It may undermine the end users’ rights to privacy, create significant costs (which will inevitably flow through to consumers) and have other adverse implications. Mandatory requirements to use particular technologies or types of technology for IP filtering have no place in a multilateral treaty. More generally, ACTA should avoid promoting a surveillance culture and discourage the imposition of mandatory IP filtering of Internet traffic, unwarranted checks of digital storage devices such as notebook PCs, iPods or iPhones, without due process.
* Transparency and accountability
all stakeholders should see and comment on text before it is concluded
Some measures reportedly being considered in the ACTA negotiations have the potential to prejudice Australian consumers and a range of legitimate Australian businesses in order to benefit certain industries, sometimes in ways unintended and unforeseen by negotiators. Few stakeholders have had any opportunity to analyse the proposals in a serious way. The Australian delegation should urge that ACTA negotiations be more transparent, and that the proposals be available for analysis and comment by all stakeholders potentially affected, prior to the final rounds which conclude the text.
* Mandatory IP filtering a flawed means of general IP enforcement
Avoiding the prescription of surveillance technologies for IP enforcement
Mandatory technical investigation and enforcement against alleged IP infringement – such as deep packet inspection – is technically immature and unproven. It may undermine the end users’ rights to privacy, create significant costs (which will inevitably flow through to consumers) and have other adverse implications. Mandatory requirements to use particular technologies or types of technology for IP filtering have no place in a multilateral treaty. More generally, ACTA should avoid promoting a surveillance culture and discourage the imposition of mandatory IP filtering of Internet traffic, unwarranted checks of digital storage devices such as notebook PCs, iPods or iPhones, without due process.
Note: this is taken from the link below this post!
* Presumption of innocence
no enforcement, civil or criminal, without independent findings of infringement
The presumption of innocence should not be displaced by mere allegations of infringement. Infringement of an Intellectual Property (IP) right is only ascertainable by a properly convened court of competent jurisdiction. No property should be forfeited, no access to any service terminated, nor any personal information of consumers disclosed, without the fundamental protection of independent judicial oversight. Criminal liability should be reserved for the most serious cases, that is where there has been direct, intentional, commercial scale copyright piracy or trade mark infringement.
* Transparency and accountability
all stakeholders should see and comment on text before it is concluded
Some measures reportedly being considered in the ACTA negotiations have the potential to prejudice Australian consumers and a range of legitimate Australian businesses in order to benefit certain industries, sometimes in ways unintended and unforeseen by negotiators. Few stakeholders have had any opportunity to analyse the proposals in a serious way. The Australian delegation should urge that ACTA negotiations be more transparent, and that the proposals be available for analysis and comment by all stakeholders potentially affected, prior to the final rounds which conclude the text.
* Mandatory IP filtering a flawed means of general IP enforcement
Avoiding the prescription of surveillance technologies for IP enforcement
Mandatory technical investigation and enforcement against alleged IP infringement – such as deep packet inspection – is technically immature and unproven. It may undermine the end users’ rights to privacy, create significant costs (which will inevitably flow through to consumers) and have other adverse implications. Mandatory requirements to use particular technologies or types of technology for IP filtering have no place in a multilateral treaty. More generally, ACTA should avoid promoting a surveillance culture and discourage the imposition of mandatory IP filtering of Internet traffic, unwarranted checks of digital storage devices such as notebook PCs, iPods or iPhones, without due process.
Note: this is taken from the link below this post!
* Presumption of innocence
no enforcement, civil or criminal, without independent findings of infringement
The presumption of innocence should not be displaced by mere allegations of infringement. Infringement of an Intellectual Property (IP) right is only ascertainable by a properly convened court of competent jurisdiction. No property should be forfeited, no access to any service terminated, nor any personal information of consumers disclosed, without the fundamental protection of independent judicial oversight. Criminal liability should be reserved for the most serious cases, that is where there has been direct, intentional, commercial scale copyright piracy or trade mark infringement.
* Transparency and accountability
all stakeholders should see and comment on text before it is concluded
Some measures reportedly being considered in the ACTA negotiations have the potential to prejudice Australian consumers and a range of legitimate Australian businesses in order to benefit certain industries, sometimes in ways unintended and unforeseen by negotiators. Few stakeholders have had any opportunity to analyse the proposals in a serious way. The Australian delegation should urge that ACTA negotiations be more transparent, and that the proposals be available for analysis and comment by all stakeholders potentially affected, prior to the final rounds which conclude the text.
* Mandatory IP filtering a flawed means of general IP enforcement
Avoiding the prescription of surveillance technologies for IP enforcement
Mandatory technical investigation and enforcement against alleged IP infringement – such as deep packet inspection – is technically immature and unproven. It may undermine the end users’ rights to privacy, create significant costs (which will inevitably flow through to consumers) and have other adverse implications. Mandatory requirements to use particular technologies or types of technology for IP filtering have no place in a multilateral treaty. More generally, ACTA should avoid promoting a surveillance culture and discourage the imposition of mandatory IP filtering of Internet traffic, unwarranted checks of digital storage devices such as notebook PCs, iPods or iPhones, without due process.
Note: this is taken from the link below this post!
In relation to the first point it would appear that IFPI/RIAA and related companies such as DtecNet would be in violation if that was included in the agreement
It is just another law to make stupid inconsequential things illegal so they have more reason to invade your home without reason, making more normal people the 'bad guys' and making /other/ normal people scared so they pass more laws and the cycle repeats until we have a damned one world government and there is no hope of escape.
If somebody would leak ACTA draft to Wikileaks, the world might be a little bit better place.
Assassination has been tactic used throughout history. The death of a single person could change everything. When things get out of hand, sometimes assassination could be the only answer. After all, things could have been different if only the bomb in the suitcase were placed closer to Adolf Hitler. Sometimes, though, the assassination is questionable. Was it good that Julius Caesar was assassinated? Was it good that Gavrilo Princip assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand? Sometimes, assassinations are bad, like the assassinations of Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy, Benazir Bhutto, or Mohandas Ghandi. Yet, could we revile assassination the same way if it were against a contemptable figure, like Robert Mugabe, Turkmenbashi (now dead already), and the current leaders of the RIAA? Perhaps, if truly horrible people were killed, then they would not be mourned, and it might not be bad; perhaps it may be helpful to the situation if such people were killed. Just something to think about.
(Note: I am not condoning any act of assassination, but I am saying that sometimes, assassinations have been positive in the past, and there is a chance that it still might be positive today).
obvious troll is obvious
That- is possibly the most ridiculous thing i have heard on torrentfreak. No amount of badgering filesharers warrants taking a human life.
I have never said that it warrants taking a human life. Read again: I am saying that there is a chance that the assassination of Robert Mugabe, Turkmenbashi (when he was still alive), or the current BREIN, IFPI, and RIAA people might be positive to the situation. I am neither recommending nor condoning such an action. I am not saying that it is a good thing, or that anybody should do so, or that it is not a bad thing to do so. I am not, for example, suggesting another 1905 Russian Revolution.
I have never said that it warrants taking a human life. Read again: I am saying that there is a chance that the assassination of Robert Mugabe, Turkmenbashi (when he was still alive), or the current BREIN, IFPI, and RIAA people might be positive to the situation. I am neither recommending nor condoning such an action. I am not saying that it is a good thing, or that anybody should do so, or that it is not a bad thing to do so. I am not, for example, suggesting another 1905 Russian Revolution wave of assassinations, nor am I suggesting another Viet Cong wave of assassinations, nor am I condoning any of the ongoing horrific assassinations in the Chechnya conflict. They could, in all likeliness, be a bad thing, but I am saying that it is possible for it to be good. Note that I never said anything about its morality, but rather its effect.
I have never said that it warrants taking a human life. Read again: I am saying that there is a chance that the assassination of Robert Mugabe, Turkmenbashi (when he was still alive), or Kim Jong il, or the current BREIN, IFPI, and RIAA people might be positive to the situation. I am neither recommending nor condoning such an action. I am not saying that it is a good thing, or that anybody should do so, or that it is not a bad thing to do so. I am not, for example, suggesting another 1905 Russian Revolution wave of assassinations, nor am I suggesting another Viet Cong wave of assassinations, nor am I condoning any of the ongoing horrific assassinations in the Chechnya conflict. They could, in all likeliness, be a bad thing, but I am saying that it is possible for it to be good. Note that I never said anything about its morality, but rather its effect.
wtf thats not fair atleast give us a chance to share our opinions you dicks… :@
thats a fowl ball homie….
Wake Up . Wake up !
Your world is changing, you will get in prison for duplicating media or Software in future, so don't believe what you are told, everything is told to tell you what to do, to make you not do what you want to do (thats why they keep the bill hidden until the act is passed). Everything is told for you to degenerate. Everything is told to keep you away from telling.
Choose Now , Choose WakeUp
PEVOU
Preventing Victims of Unjustness, *no obligations*
its sick, its like telling people not to breath
one more step towards the new world order
Okay, I second this. Lets just assassinate the asses who head RIAA and be over with it.
dxtr
http://stuckinframes.blogspot.com
yeah thats why i have terrabytes of movies/games/music/tv shows. Because im retard3d.
im gonna go take my retard3d self over to the couch to watch another commercial free tv show instantly on my hdtv hooked up to my htpc.
idioth.
Yeah lol there's already eco-terrorism so it was only a matter of time until someone comes up with the idea of anti-copyright terrorism. But seriously Roze, there's nothing where an assassination would be less useful. Sure it would have been cool if someone had assassinated Hitler but that's because his power laid in his demagogic personality. Those copyright guys are no one. Do you even know the names of any of the RIAA, MPAA, IFPI … heads? Even if one of them died he could just be replaced by another one without any damage to the organization (you would probably even help them since they would have some reeeeaaaal good propaganda now). What really hurts them is bad publicity, low effectiveness, leaked documents (media sentry emails …) etc.
Laws seek to balance the rights of all citizens living within them. As you all know, law, the industries and the legislature's check in with TF and other similar sites from time to time to take the current pulse of the copyright infringement community. It makes it easier to craft legislation when you understand better the civil malfeasance you must legislate against. Now that you are openly discussing arson (yesterday) and murder (today) as an apt response to property protection……it doesn't get much more helpful than this. Thank you for this. Really.
Haven't bothered to make an Intense debate account yet as you're afraid of all the thumbs down you'll get?
You should try it, as it would bolster your claim (which I find dubious) that you are something other than a troll.
Say hi to Big Brother for me! :)
I don't work in any of the industries affected by this piracy. I don't have any secret vested interests here, other than expressing what I think is right, morally and legally. I don't get paid for expressing my opinion and it's not that hard to see where all this is eventually going. But yes. Your thumbs down terrify me. LOL
How goes those pro-gun laws then?
oh gnoes thumbs down?! AHHHH!!
Sometimes, assassinations of people without recognizable names were actually helpful to a cause, which may be good or bad, but helpful to the cause regardless.
Ho Chi Minh stated, "Do not engage in military operations; that will lead to defeat. Do not take land from a peasant. Emphasize nationalism rather than communism. Do not antagonize anyone if you can avoid it. Be selective in your violence. If an assassination is necessary, use a knife, not a rifle or grenade. It is too easy to kill innocent bystanders with guns and bombs, and accidental killing of the innocent bystanders will alienate peasants from the revolution. Once an assassination has taken place, make sure peasants know why the killing occurred.”
400 government officials were assassinated in 1957 alone, and one estimate says that 20 percent of South Vietnam's village chiefs had been murdered by the insurgents. Although they can continue replacing their people, it will send a message to everybody.
For example, in Russia, the assassination of the Tsar's uncle Grand Duke Sergei Aleksandrovich made the Tsar grant new concessions.
Sometimes, assassinations of people without recognizable names were actually helpful to a cause, which may be good or bad, but helpful to the cause regardless.
Ho Chi Minh stated, "Do not engage in military operations; that will lead to defeat. Do not take land from a peasant. Emphasize nationalism rather than communism. Do not antagonize anyone if you can avoid it. Be selective in your violence. If an assassination is necessary, use a knife, not a rifle or grenade. It is too easy to kill innocent bystanders with guns and bombs, and accidental killing of the innocent bystanders will alienate peasants from the revolution. Once an assassination has taken place, make sure peasants know why the killing occurred.”
400 government officials were assassinated in 1957 alone, and one estimate says that 20 percent of South Vietnam's village chiefs had been murdered by the insurgents by 1958. Although they can continue replacing their people, it will send a message to everybody.
For example, in Russia, the assassination of the Tsar's uncle Grand Duke Sergei Aleksandrovich made the Tsar grant new concessions.
Ireland & two fingers to the EU FTW!!!!1
Obey your Masters EU. We are _supposed_ to live in a democracy. You will be held to account.
With a bit of luck they will create something like the DCMA where it`ll end up fukking themselves over a la Obma/Cain.
EU = Fukkin p0wer hungry n00bz.
Sometimes, assassinations of people without recognizable names were actually helpful to a cause, which may be good or bad, but helpful to the cause regardless.
Ho Chi Minh stated, "Do not engage in military operations; that will lead to defeat. Do not take land from a peasant. Emphasize nationalism rather than communism. Do not antagonize anyone if you can avoid it. Be selective in your violence. If an assassination is necessary, use a knife, not a rifle or grenade. It is too easy to kill innocent bystanders with guns and bombs, and accidental killing of the innocent bystanders will alienate peasants from the revolution. Once an assassination has taken place, make sure peasants know why the killing occurred.”
400 government officials were assassinated in 1957 alone, and one estimate says that 20 percent of South Vietnam's village chiefs had been murdered by the insurgents by 1958. Although they can continue replacing their people, it will send a message to everybody.
For example, in Russia, the assassination of the Tsar's uncle Grand Duke Sergei Aleksandrovich made the Tsar grant new concessions.
Although their cause (both the Viet Cong's and the ones participating in the Russian Revolution of 1905) may be questionable, their assassination that they carried out definitely did advance their cause.
Oh, I guess you were just kidding when you said, "you all know, law, the industries and the legislature's check in with TF and other similar sites from time to time."
Oh, I guess you were just kidding when you wrote (and I quote), "you all know, law, the industries and the legislature's check in with TF and other similar sites from time to time" (emphasis added).
Oh, I guess you were just kidding when you wrote (and I quote), "you all know, law, the industries and the legislature's check in with TF and other similar sites from time to time" (emphasis added).
Any citizen of the EU states should write a letter to their respective secretary or representative in Brussels. This can’t possibly be the way the EU goes. We see already that they use the U councils to get laws passed that won’t be accepted by the populations of single states.
So you just go to Brussels, have all the ministers decide for themselves without asking or even considering the public opinion and then you go back to your country and go “Look it’s EU law I can#T do anything about it.” This only happens because WE let it happen. I’ll find my representative right now and write him an email. This shit has to stop.
Ombudsman?
Is that a normal english term.
Sure it *can* do good but so could Mitch Bainwol's (yeah i looked it up) secretary bending over so he gets distracted, forgets to log out of his email account and someone gets the chance to leak his world dominion plans … It's all possible. But it's at least imaginable that there is someone even worse than the current RIAA head. Of all the possibilities to change something assassination is just one of the worst. Especially with your dedication to this cause (at least if you are "the same in thine own act and valour as thou art in desire") you could surely help it more by developing a new awesome file sharing protocol, becoming a politician yourself, leaking stuff etc.
"play fair!" whine the pirates.
lol
That has all been tried before. Anything different today? I see not a bit of difference. We can come upon new results only by new methods.
Yes, but you don't hear it too often. Sort of a organizational title.
Same here, you just gotta hate the EU. It forces everything on you but freedom. Our youth protection laws here in Germany used to be just fine – no one complained. Then the EU comes by demanding underage pr0n, prostitution etc. to be illegal and now it's almost like you're in the U.S. …
Not to mention the billions they take just to invite even more cr4ppy countries. Romania, Bulgaria … jeeez.
Just look at Switzerland; not in the EU and doing better than most member states.
Typo: ant-piracy legislation
Glad you're looking forward to the specter of a police state (and eventually, world). As I'm not.
"We can come upon new results only by new methods." Now how was that again? "I am not condoning any act of assassination" Kinda quick change of mind isn't it? Well go ahead with your assassination of Mitch Bainwol, it's not me so i don't really care. But i keep telling ya, you're gonna have some other random greedy guy replace him in no time.
Where are the muckrakers? Every other document in the world gets leaked and exposed.
Where are the congressional hearings? Will Democrats stand for this?
I am waiting for someone to be held accountable in hearings in front of a congressional committee.
“Mr. So-in-so, why are you negotiating a secret treaty and keeping it secret?”
This guy, whoever he is, could be made an example of!
I am not condoning it. I am saying that there is a possibility that it may be helpful.
Yeah, yeah i know – let's say you just wouldn't mourn if he tripped and broke his neck but that renders your post unnecessary since it wouldn't be you who changed anything. Either it's a good thing to kill him, then you should do or somehow support it or it's not and then you shouldn't.
I have not made any statement either way about whether it is good to kill him. However, the statement that I have made, that it might change the situation, for the better, or for the worse (this, of course, is not any support for such an act) is useful knowledge.
i don't agree with any erosion of our privacy but i do see the inherent humor in someone complaining that the dog bit them after they kicked it.
No really, assassinating anyone is a bad idea. What better way to get past your enemies than by killing them instead of proving them wrong? What's your definition of positive? A short lived time when file sharers would be free because copyright holders were shocked/afraid followed by increased attempts at stopping piracy because it's causing militancy in the youth? Violence only causes more violence which only causes more problems leading to a solution where only one side exists that can only harm.
Also, to answer your question, yes they would be mourned. Even the most detestable person in the world has someone who loves him/her.
P.S. I hope you like Valkyrie, it wasn't great but decent for a historical movie.
That doing something could possibly cause something else seems pretty much like common knowledge to me. Merely stating that without bringing any arguments for either sides isn't more helpful than saying you actually don't know what to do.
Roze should assassinate himself.
Yeah, we all know your a dude.
It has been announced that Internet 2 is coming and Piracy will be almost impossible after that happens anyway. Go look it up on googlevid. So we had better make the most of this last little bit of freedom we have as the present internet is basically going to wither away. and die. leaving us with a new ultra fast and ultra boring heavily monitored internet service. microsoft are working on fingerprint recognition software to be incorporated with all keyboards in the not to distant future which means we will one day not be able to go online without being scanned. So thats it folks, I think i will go back to reading books, get rid of the tv and just have a prepaid mobile internet service to do my banking and emails etc..
So i do not really care what the eu legislate. Freedom hahahahahahahahahaha.
p.s.
Watch george carlin on"who owns america" youtube if any of you are confused about the above.
Roze, you’re a fu*kingg mor0n
This is what you get when you abdicate your national sovereignty to an international body. (It's things like this that motivate people to be skeptical of the UN as well.)
Goddamn, I hope Rose is a troll. He's doing an awesome job posing as a moronic "COPYWRITE IZ EVIL LOL" crusader, but I'm afraid he's serious.
Even if the people are not able or willing to stop this the Bloodlines will brake the backs of the Souls of the EU bastards for this. The involved politicians are going to pay a big, big price for planning this because some small industry friendly face or name demanded this during one of their orgies/swinging parties. The same goes for everyone. Beware for supporting this act all of you advocates and big software companies you play to lose.
The families who rule the world have designed it a long time ago – this thing called free sharing of Knowledge and Knowledge related products. This site and others like it are only the first subtle but significant wave of a sea of logistical changes to hierarchy of the Civilization. Who every stands in their way will not only fail and lose everything they are and own, but also be with forces of the Dark (both symbolically and really as well). So Mr. CEO, Are you ready to lose your empire, your very own Quality of Life, the morality of your Soul?
I know 100% that this activity is the creation of middle men and not of those who are in "power". Because alpha – the people are in power, and beta -as a detail, believe it or not, there are the Families who own the Banks, Natural Resources, History in general – and neither of those support in any measurable fraction this activity.
So take care and do not support the middle men, even if you find some file changing software to be unethical – as I do personally – do not limit the choices of others, but rather stay neutral all the way. Your "positive" action will certainly see you and your surroundings crashed.
Best wishes – the Half-Elven.
They must all change now, they must all change now,
They must all change now, or they shall all be doomed.
The holy spirit shall doom them all to hell,
And it shall be the end of the sinner's game.
It is possible that vengence may now need to be taken. It is possible that their eternal trip to hell may now need to be hastened.
it was published in october last year, so it's no longer secret
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do...
You are all pretentious twats. The whole debate is just one big shipload of BS. Whatever they are up to, it is just not reasonable to demand access to work in progress, even before EU parliament gets to see it. Butbutbut … parliament wont do anything! Well, there was a constitution that was voted down by wankers after some nice US funded campaign and a lot of help from Murdoch press. The same wankers that now want to see themselves as defenders of freedom, HAH! Farking idiots.
Oh, and to that Irish dimwit, Ireland would be nowhere without the EU, but what the heck, just pay back what you got from EU and then get lost…
LOL, imagine that. How convenient!
anonweb.pro.tc
TBH, it doesn't matter what is contained within the ACTA documents. It will simply not work.
Up yours, EU.
To the contrary, this is what you get when you utilize privacy laws to take something you know is intended for sale without paying for it, regardless of the medium and despite seeing what the consequences will inevitably be. In the years ahead, the people who hid anonymously while taking others property will be regarded as to why we lost our fast, free network. None of this started until after 2000 and Napster. It's a fitting legacy for pirates. You deserve it and history will be witheringly accurate in condemning you for it.
Much of the time, things are not based on reason or "proving wrong," but rather on power. So what if one denounces Phillip II? The inquisition would still be in full force, which listens not to reason, but only threats to power.
It is not new knowledge, but it does bring it to attention.
Okay, so it is not new knowledge, but it does bring it to attention.
Poor Roze.
She switched off her real meds to generics to save a few bucks and this is what happened. LOL
"Vengence may now need to me taken." LMAO
This is largely a moral and legal issue, Roze. It will be settled in the courts, the legislatures and eventually in the ballot box. Now go take your medicine.
Haha, well Roze has become rather Biblical lately…
When I was introduced to Mozart's Don Giovanni.
"Biblical" is indeed the proper response to these sinners.
For is it not possible that these sinners may now need to be sent to hell?
They are bad, and that is settled. So it is time already to be Biblical, for these sinners are doomed to hell, and it is possible that the will of the holy spirit may now need to be carried out.
Well, I was introduced to Mozart's Don Giovanni. "Change or be doomed" – right at 1787, right before the French Revolution.
"Biblical" is indeed the proper response to these sinners.
For is it not possible that these sinners may now need to be sent to hell?
They are bad, and that is settled. So it is time already to be Biblical, for these sinners are doomed to hell, and it is possible that the will of the holy spirit may now need to be carried out.
Well, I was introduced to Mozart's Don Giovanni. "Change or be doomed" – 1787, right before the French Revolution.
"Biblical" is indeed the proper response to these sinners.
For is it not possible that these sinners may now need to be sent to hell?
They are bad, and that is settled. So it is time already to be Biblical, for these sinners are doomed to hell, and it is possible that the will of the holy spirit may now need to be carried out.
Well, I was introduced to Mozart's Don Giovanni, which is an opera based on (or a remake of) earlier texts, ballets, stage dramas, and operas, also all called Don Giovanni. "Change or be doomed" – 1787, right before the French Revolution.
"Biblical" is indeed the proper response to these sinners.
For is it not possible that these sinners may now need to be sent to hell?
They are bad, and that is settled. So it is time already to be Biblical, for these sinners are doomed to hell, and it is possible that the will of the holy spirit may now need to be carried out.
Well, I was introduced to Mozart's Don Giovanni, which is based on (or a remake of) earlier works, also all called Don Giovanni. "Change or be doomed" – 1787, right before the French Revolution.
"Biblical" is indeed the proper response to these sinners, whom the holy spirit already doomed to hell. It is possible that the will of the holy spirit may now need to be carried out.
Well, I was introduced to Mozart's Don Giovanni, which is based on (or a remake of) earlier works, also all called Don Giovanni. "Change or be doomed" – 1787, right before the French Revolution.
Well, I was introduced to Mozart's Don Giovanni.
Well, I was introduced to Mozart's Don Giovanni, which is an opera based on (or a remake of) earlier texts, ballets, stage dramas, and operas, also all called Don Giovanni. "Change or be doomed" – 1787, right before the French Revolution.
"Biblical" is indeed the proper response to these sinners, whom the holy spirit already doomed to hell.
For is it not possible that these sinners may now need to be sent to hell?
They are bad, and that is settled. So it is time already to be Biblical, for these sinners are doomed to hell, and it is possible that the will of the holy spirit may now need to be carried out.
Well, I was introduced to Mozart's Don Giovanni, which is based on (or a remake of) earlier works, also all called Don Giovanni. "Change or be doomed" – 1787, right before the French Revolution.
"Biblical" is indeed the proper response to these sinners, whom the holy spirit already doomed to hell.
Well, I was introduced to Mozart's Don Giovanni, which is an opera based on (or a remake of) earlier texts, ballets, stage dramas, and operas, also all called Don Giovanni. "Change or be doomed" – 1787, right before the French Revolution.
"Biblical" is indeed the proper response to these sinners, whom the holy spirit already doomed to hell.
For is it not possible that these sinners may now need to be sent to hell?
They are bad, and that is settled. So it is time already to be Biblical, for these sinners are doomed to hell, and it is possible that the will of the holy spirit may now need to be carried out. It is possible that the will of the holy spirit may now need to be carried out.
Well, I was introduced to Mozart's Don Giovanni, which is an opera based on (or a remake of) earlier texts, ballets, stage dramas, and operas, also all called Don Giovanni. "Change or be doomed" – 1787, right before the French Revolution.
"Biblical" is indeed the proper response to these sinners, whom the holy spirit already doomed to hell.
For is it not possible that these sinners may now need to be sent to hell?
They are bad, and that is settled. So it is time already to be Biblical, for these sinners are doomed to hell, and it is possible that the will of the holy spirit may now need to be carried out.
Well, I was introduced to Mozart's Don Giovanni, which is an opera based on (or a remake of) earlier texts, ballets, stage dramas, and operas, also all called Don Giovanni (of course, copyright nowadays would consider that prohibited a derivative work). "Change or be doomed" – 1787, right before the French Revolution.
"Biblical" is indeed the proper response to these sinners, whom the holy spirit already doomed to hell.
For is it not possible that these sinners may now need to be sent to hell?
They are bad, and that is settled. So it is time already to be Biblical, for these sinners are doomed to hell, and it is possible that the will of the holy spirit may now need to be carried out.
It will be settled in the courts, the legislatures and eventually in the ballot box.
But it also must be settled by the will of the holy spirit.
It will be settled in the courts, the legislatures and eventually in the ballot box.
But it also must be settled by the will of the holy spirit. The will of the holy spirit is a truth of the world, one that cannot be viled; so let it be exposed, and it may be possible that it may now need to be carried out.
It will be settled in the courts, the legislatures and eventually in the ballot box.
But it also must be settled by the will of the holy spirit. The will of the holy spirit is a truth of the world, one that cannot be veiled; so let it be exposed, and it may be possible that it may now need to be carried out.
you sound like a two bit cult leader.
take your meds.
i don't agree with any erosion of our privacy
Oh yes you do, you sinner. You shall be in hell eventually. (Note: it is possible that the sinner's journey to hell may need to be hastened).
Écrasez l'Infâme! Crush the infamous thing!
Roze
Well, I was introduced to Mozart's Don Giovanni, which is an opera based on (or a remake of) earlier texts, ballets, stage dramas, and operas, also all called Don Giovanni (of course, copyright nowadays would consider that an illegal derivative work). "Change or be doomed" – 1787, right before the French Revolution.
"Biblical" is indeed the proper response to these sinners, whom the holy spirit already doomed to hell.
For is it not possible that these sinners may now need to be sent to hell? It is a simple truth of this world, one that cannot be obscured.
They are bad, and that is settled. So it is time already to be Biblical, for these sinners are doomed to hell, and it is possible that the will of the holy spirit may now need to be carried out.
Écrasez l'Infâme! Crush the infamous thing!
Roze
However I sound, I speak only truth, for it is the truth of this world that the industry scum shall eventually all go to hell, and it that it is possible that it may be needed to hasten this process.
Écrasez l'Infâme! Crush the infamous thing!
Roze
I am not so serious about doing it myself, but I am serious about the fact that it is possible that vengence may now need to be taken (for others, not myself) – for I do not see myself as half a courageous person as to be able to do such a thing, but I do have hopes for the idea.
Écrasez l'Infâme! Crush the infamous thing!
Roze
Fine, i guess we can finally agree on that :)
Doesn't matter, you'll go to hell eventually.
8 references to this post
Responses are closed
All remaining responses will continue to be archived. Use the TorrentFreak forums if you want to discuss something.