TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

We Need Copyright Reform, Not ACTA!

As a Member of the European Parliament, I very much welcome the increased attention the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) has received in the past weeks. It has taken a while for massive outcry to emerge, but we are seeing protest voices getting louder and louder.

The internet is a great tool to alert politicians to all the dangers of this treaty, just as the internet was a tool to mobilize people against the SOPA and PIPA bills in the US. For any lobby to be effective, however, it must be fact based. Misinformed criticism helps those supporting ACTA.

The dangers and threats of the ACTA treaty are shared by free-speech advocates and access to medicine groups alike. ACTA is seeking to deal with a number of widely differing issues, and hence does not do a good job at any of them. Additionally, there are serious concerns about the collateral damage that ACTA would cause.

Regrettably, concerns by businesses, NGO’s and politicians have not led to a better result. This is partly due to the intransparant way in which ACTA has been established and negotiated. As a democratically elected representative, I believe it is not the role of government to protect outdated business models, and I do believe it is our job to ensure democratic oversight.

Besides zooming in on the details of what ACTA will and will not do, taking a step back and looking at the broader picture is also important. As someone who advocates copyright reform, notably the harmonization of copyright laws in Europe, I do not believe stricter enforcement of outdated systems is helpful or relevant. Enforcement is not even possible in many cases, and not without violating people’s fundamental rights.

Yet there is a big push towards enforcing outdated legal structures of copyright by the entertainment industry. ACTA will lock any signatory country into a system of copyright enforcement, leaving the democratic process disadvantaged to enact necessary reform of our laws to suit the digital age.

The fast development of the information society and all the innovations we have seen in the last 15 or so years have changed the way we live. People can enforce their fundamental rights of access to information, and free speech with the help of the internet. Human rights violations are documented and shared across the world, and the way we access and share information and culture such as news, music and films has changed forever. Most copyright rules were developed for the printing press and codified internationally before radio had even been invented.

Some of the most important EU laws regulating the internet were established before social media and peer-to-peer sharing took off. The E-commerce Directive of 2000 and the Copyright Directive of 2001 were enacted without foresight of the new services which were developed over the last 10 years. Time and time again, it has been proven that the Directives and their national implementations do not suit the digital age that followed directly afterwards. The fragmentation of European copyright puts the EU, which is widely known for its wealth in culture, at a competitive disadvantage in comparison to the United States.

Copyright and E-Commerce need to suit the needs of the advanced information society we now live in. To enable a flourishing Digital Single Market in Europe, we need to analyse case-law of the last 12 years regarding the internet, hear from creators, innovators and consumers. If we want to serve consumers, artists and businesses well, we need to find a new balance in copyright. Every aspect of copyright needs to be discussed: the exclusive rights, limitations and exceptions, collective management, enforcement, etc. Only then should we discuss how to enforce the new found balance on the international arena, such as with ACTA.

ACTA must not be passed. Let’s focus on reform to allow for the opportunities of the internet to bloom, instead of allowing outdated business models to limit the free market, and to criminalize audiences. Additionally, health threats as a result of counterfeit medicine deserve a better solution than ACTA. Join me in voicing your concern with this treaty, so we can establish flexible copyright rules which are fit for the 21st century.

About The Author

Marietje Schaake is a Member of European Parliament (D66/ALDE Group). She is a member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET), as well as the Committee on Culture, Media and Education (CULT).

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • DutchCitizen

    D66 has got my vote in the Dutch elections! Well done miss. One of the very few politicians who knows her subject and uses her knowledge to make her own plan, not use the plan of someone else (read: Hollywood/USA). Good job

    • Anonymous

      Of course, D66 wasn’t interested in copyright reform during the period where they actually had some power and responsibility. Instead, they’ve eagerly helped the further encroachment on our privacy, and gave us none of the democratic reforms they promised us.

      Hell, this is exactly why we need democratic reform. I’ll trust someone like Marietje. I won’t trust a political party any more than I’ll trust a corporation.

      • Kees Aak

        http://www.privacybarometer.nl/ — compares dutch political parties by how they voted for privacy issues, which is closely related to how they approach and how much they care for freedom and privacy on the internet.

        D66 scores bad, but not as bad as major other parties. GL, SP and PvdV score better.

    • Anonymous

      If passed, the EU will be bound by ACTA, while the US will NOT be bound. Isn’t this reason enough to reject ACTA from the perspective of a MEP? All MEPs should demand that President Obama submit ACTA to US Congress for ratification so that it is binding under US law. See See http://keionline.org/node/1115 and http://kdvncm.blogspot.com

      • Ugly American

        The US government doesn’t even treat average US citizens fairly – no reason to believe it will act differently with others. ACTA is just another symptom of the US government’s insanity and obsession to control the entire planet.

        If there were any fairness in the world, the US government would be fitted for a straitjacket – a counterfeit made in China, of course… <3

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Straitjacket-rear.jpg

        • DutchGuest

          A straitjacket made in China, put on by a Russian nurse, and then doped up to the eyeballs with Haloperidol by a Cuban or Korean nurse.
          With the national anthem playing in the background for added effect ;-)

      • http://profiles.google.com/zerianis10 Christopher Kidwell

        Well, there are quite a few different opinions on THAT subject….. by framing this as an ‘executive agreement’, some people are saying that perhaps this actually would be binding on the United States.

        Some people are saying that it wouldn’t. I ain’t seen no consensus as of yet on the subject.

        • IDIOCRACY

          All the more reason not to pass it.

        • Anonymous

          There is no disagreement that ACTA will NOT be binding on the US under US law. The question that people disagree on is whether ACTA will bind the US under international law. If Obama bound the US under international law, then he may have violated the US constitution as he would need Congress approval to bind the US. Otherwise, the US is not bound at all and other countries will be pissed off. (Sometimes these non-binding agreements are called “memoranda of understandings”).

          At least that is my understanding after some reading. There is an article out there by a law professor named Sean Flynn that describes it all. Search for “Sean Flynn Acta”

    • Ugly American

      Good job, indeed – if only we had such sane politicians in the U$A instead of MAFIAA prostitutes like Barry Soetoro & Co.

      Fuck ACTA to hell and back.

      • Dfjk

        I’d have to agree! ACTA, is taking away our love of the internet and seperating us D:

  • Pingback: We Need Copyright Reform, Not ACTA! | Shine Servers Blog

  • Pingback: Notrackingme | Proxy » Blog Archive » We Need Copyright Reform, Not ACTA!

  • Anonymous

    lots of “political speech” without any details on how copyright is to be changed

    I hope one point gets brought up in the discussion: I don’t want european taxes to be used to profit american corporations.
    if Hollywood wants copyright enforcement they should pay for it themselves. That should stop their bullying pretty fast.

    • http://gene-poole.tumblr.com Gene Poole

      Berne Convention, that’s why. ACTA is basically Berne Convention II: Electric Boogaloo.

      Berne Convention is like God’s “As above, so below” rule. Everyone signed the Berne Convention, and they have to respect identical copyright rules around the world, to standardize it. So one country can’t say “fuck you, we’re dropping copyright law to 20 years, and you can suck it” or they’ll face economic pressure that can eventually turn into embargoes and hit the economy hard. It also prevents them from saying “you pay for it” because then said country isn’t fulfilling their responsibility per the agreement, and down the same path we go.

      Unfortunately I don’t think the Berne Convention can be repealed unless all countries agree to it, if then, and I don’t see the US doing that, so we’re stuck with it forever. Which is the same as ACTA. All the more reason to kill it before we are stuck with it.

      • http://profiles.google.com/zerianis10 Christopher Kidwell

        With all due respect, the Berne Convention can be dropped out of by any country just by having their ‘Congress’ (or whatever they call it) repeal it.

        Fact is that the Berne Convention shouldn’t have been signed by anyone in the first place.

        • http://gene-poole.tumblr.com Gene Poole

          See above though. They can drop out of it, but then the repercussions come in the forms of refusing to trade with them by the rest of the ‘free’ world, under economic pressure of the US. You’ll do as the US says, or you’ll be snubbed. Pretty drastic consequences in the real world for standing up to the bully.

    • AnonyMouse

      Hollywood are paying for it themselves they are buying our politicians.

      • Anonymous

        that is far too cheap.
        and in the end the taxpayer still pays

  • Pingback: We Need Copyright Reform, Not ACTA! | TorrentFreak

  • PlatinumC

    Good to see more and more politicians taking a firm stance against ACTA and copywrong overall.
    Well written articlr as well.

  • reformist

    with all this s**t going down in the recent weeks, does anyone else see in the near future the possibility of a parallel internet? One without a police state?

    • Anonymous

      there is some infrastructure for that already
      until now there just hasn’t been the need for it.

    • http://gene-poole.tumblr.com Gene Poole

      There’s already a few alternative internets out there, not that hard to access either. I’m not going to point you to them, lest they get the same press (and the same censorship) and USEnet did, but they’re there. I think some digging on Wikipedia will bring you to them. Think “internet censorship”

  • http://culturalliberty.org/blog Crosbie Fitch

    Demand liberty, not a reform of the 18th century privilege. That means abolition, not some limp-wristed term reduction and token relaxation to make parodies.

    http://culturalliberty.org/blog/index.php?id=283

  • PRIVACY is priceless to me

    What we really need is a global full-scale revolution, what we need is to get definitively rid of religion, capital and state so to reach the next level of civilization.

    Never believe anything coming out the mouth of a politician, especially an USELESS paid-for-nothing euro-deputy with immunity from a USELESS criminal party.

    ANARCHY NOW!

    • Guest

      You can’t get rid of things like that. You need to educate people and then they will stop believing in invisible men, polititians, patriotism, etc.

      • Arguz666

        Agreed, but the sentiment of anarachy is always usefull. Anarchy is more of a blind force like anonymous or evolution. We need more pissed off people, as foot soldiers for the intelectual leaders behind the revolution. It’s how every major shift in politics started. Just get some juiced up guys in the streets with molotovs and zero fear for authority just to symbolize the anger sparked by the injustice of what is happening.

    • Ain

      Anarchy will get you no-where. And why abolish religion? The fact people can choose their beliefs is freedom of speech, the very thing we’re fighting for.

      • Anonymous

        choosing myths before facts is dangerous

        religion is a psychological disorder that should be treated.

        • Anonymous person

          But religion is hope. My parents are christian. My mothers brother (my uncle) died in a car crash. She holds onto the hope that he’s in the hands of god now. I love religion, I’m glad it helped my mum get past her greeving.

          If people want to believe in a god, let them. It’s a social meeting, masses of people meet up to thank god/gods for their lives. It’s better to have hope in a god than believe your friend has only science to help her through cancer (once again, relating to a friend of my mothers … yes, she died of cancer in the end, but the hope kept both of them stable to enjoy the rest of her days rather than worrying).

          I’m just say… religion isn’t ALL that bad. :-

        • Beelzebub

          Are you a trained psychiatrist? Do you have empirical evidence backing that up? That religion is a “psychological disorder”?

          I’m an atheist but I find that a pretty offensive view of people. But my being offended is irrelevant. So lets break apart what you said.

          To measure any kind of disorder you need some kind of normal standard to measure against. In this case, when we look at the whole human population of earth, we find that the norm is for a person to believe in god, or to hold some kind of religious belief. It’s more likely that we atheists are the ones going against our nature and being closer to having the disorder. Being and atheism doesn’t leave you with much – if you’re an intelligent person and you think deeply about what you have left when you deny your belief in god you are left with no choice but to face existentialism and nihilism. That’s a miserable state of affairs, and can be quite a harmful way to live, believe me nihilism nearly killed me.

          It makes sense that human beings need to be able to believe in the purpose of their own being and in their own existence, otherwise it becomes difficult for us to live. It’s likely that we actually evolved in this way, that having and feeling purpose allowed us as intelligent beings to live as we do.

          The only true nihilist is a dead nihilist. If we believe there is no purpose in life, which is probably the case, then we choose death. Because it is easier. And because there is no purpose to anything we do. We need purpose. We like meaning in our world and we see it everywhere, religion is the natural extension of that. It fills a hole, perhaps in a primitive way but who’s saying we are not fucking primitive? It’s important to remember that good things have come from religion and it continues to offer good things. If a person feels that their life means something because they believe in God, and that gets them out of bed every day, then that’s a good thing.

          There are plenty of things within religion that are worth attacking – the homophobia, the misogyny and oppression etc, but attacking the very belief in god makes you sound like an angry teenager who’s fapped a little too much over Dawkins and not done enough thinking for himself.

        • http://joshesforchange.wordpress.com/ Josh C

          “Religion” (actually spirituality if you think about it) saved my life and helps me create using a gift I wouldn’t otherwise know how to use. Is that really the work of a psychological disorder?

        • http://7-books.net/ John

          “religion is a psychological disorder that should be treated”? What unutterably ignorant tripe. I expect you also believe that TVs are plastic boxes with little people running round inside them. The belief that there is no more to life than our few, coarse material senses tell us could be considered a “psychological disorder”, but religion? No. Despite its myriad funny interpretations it is an attempt to see the big picture that clearly exists, however much our material world tries to hide it from us.

          I think it was the scientist Heisenberg who said: “Not only is the Universe stranger than we think, it is stranger than we can think”

        • Anonymous

          of course there are things out there that we cannot (yet) understand, but that is what science is for

          religion is anti-science, their believes are the same as some goat hoarders 4000 years ago and they refuse to change it despite evidence to the contrary (see evolution, big bang theory, theory of relativity etc.)

          that is a VERY dangerous mindset

          i’m not saying all religious people are bad, of course not.
          but without religion good people would do good things and bad people would do bad things, it needs religion to have a good man do bad things.

        • http://7-books.net/ John

          @ anonymous
          Certainly people do bad things in the name of religion, just as they do in the name of science – Joseph Mengele springs to mind. Does that make science “a psychological disorder that should be treated”?

          I don’t see science and religion as being in conflict at all: the former tries to make sense of the material world and the latter does the same for the immaterial one. Some materialists will claim the latter does not exist, while ironically many scientists claim that the former does not exist. Both help us to understand what is going on in what we perceive to be the Universe, but which may well turn out not to be such a thing at all. Science most certainly does not have a monopoly over the truths involved in all this.

          Frankly, I think most religious strife is deliberately engineered by priests for ulterior motives such as power and land grabbing, whipping up religious fervour as a smokescreen. So yes, much harm is done in the name of religion, but that is the fault of the priests, not of religion; just as the scientific horrors inflicted on innocent people by the likes of Mengele are the fault of them, not of science. However, because religion offers people an eternal future of joy rather than just an explanation of the world’s mechanics, it has much greater importance for them, which makes them vulnerable to the religious rabble-rousers. Which again, is not the fault of religion per se.

        • Anonymous

          @John
          with science you (usually) accept evidence, even if it contradicts your previous believes and change your believes according to the new data.
          that is what is fundamentally missing in religion, the “knowledge” of religion is the same as it was for goat herders 4000 years ago when they wrote “the holy book” (i’m going off mostly the top 3 monotheistic religions as example here, since those are the ones i know best with my cultural background)

          now, of course, humans are humans, so there are also people that do bad things without religion, no question about it. being atheistic or agnostic does not automatically make you a better person.
          as i’ve sad, without religion bad people will do bad things, and good people will do good things. it takes religion to use good intentions to do bad things (like letting AIDS run rampant in Africa, or denying fellow citizens basic rights)

          religion is bad because it forbids you to think about it.
          it has a solution, for example it tells you what you have to expect in the afterlife, you should not think about other possibilities, since that would be blasphemous, you have to accept what religion tells you without any proof. THAT is a dangerous mindset, that makes you into the kind of person that blows himself up because some religious figure said so.

          now of course, religion doesn’t have a monopoly on this, most dictatorships especially with a leader cult like nazi germany, stalinistic soviet union or north korea function the same way, even if not driven by a theistic concept (you could count worship of the leader as a theistic concept), but religion is the system that is not seen as bad like those examples in “the west” (unless of course it is the “wrong” religion)

          if humankind finally overcomes all superstitions and religions and tries to see the world for what it is, it would be a much better place.

      • Anonymous

        The only use for Anarchy is to destroy something before you build something else and then only in extreme situations.

      • Rekrul

        And why abolish religion?

        Religion and its followers have been responsible for more death and suffering than pretty much anything else, other than disease and natural causes.

        • Anonymous

          And for most of history, most people have been in a religion. That’s not a fair way to draw a sample.

          It would be just as easy to say that humans are jerks, and some of them abuse religion like they abuse anything else.

        • Anonymous

          but religion has been used as justification for most of the cruelty in our history

          sure, even without religion there would be wars (because humans just are like that), but religion makes everything worse

        • Anonymous

          Yes, because Stalin, Hitler and all those other people were our heroes whereas MLK Jr, Malcolm X, many others were people who spread chaos and disruption throughout the world.

          you’re judging all for few.

        • Anonymous

          the pope with his anti condom policy kills more people than Hitler and Stalin combined

          as i said above, it doesn’t need religion for good men to do good things
          but it takes religion to have a good man do bad things.

    • Rohe

      Anarchy will bring you nowhere. At a point everybody would need to do something to survive. Just sitting around doesn’t feed you, your kids and the sick. I saw reports on the web from people who went into very rural areas to get off civilization and I don’t want to live a 16hour day like that.

      As soon you have any sort of civilization you depend on someone else. And then the **corruption** begins, when you find out that you are the only one that can do something. We don’t need Anarchy, we need to create systems that doesn’t foster corruption of character.

  • Anonymous

    well done to her. however, it’s no good telling us. it’s like telling gran how to suck eggs, as the saying goes.

    i would have thought that one of the main issues with all of these type of bills is that only governments and the various entertainment industries are able to attend, comment and assist in their writing. the first things to stop is the total lack of transparency and the complete one-sided approach employed to ‘fix’ things. unless all parties are present at discussions and those discussions are made available to the public at all times, there will never be a sensible solution. after all, it is the general public that gets affected the most. they are the ones that lose the rights of freedom, speech etc. they are not the ones that hold back innovation. that’s done by ‘backward thinking, frightened of the future’ company execs and politicians that are too old to understand what they are restricting!

  • http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes

    It’s so heartening to hear from an MEP who’s NOT a member of the Pirate Party trashing ACTA as well as current CopyWrong and Patent laws. All of these only serve the interests of big business to the detriment of scientific knowledge, innovation and human development.

    We do indeed require a new set of laws fit for 21st Century society and we depend on you Marietje and your colleagues to deliver that positive future to us. And to do so sensibly, reasonably and MOST importantly with a fair opportunity for ALL concerned to become a responsible member of a fair society.

    Locking down knowledge for the sake of possible future profits is unacceptable. We call for freedom Marietje.

    Thank you for your understanding. I’m genuinely impressed and hopeful thanks to you.

    • Anonymous

      What with the millions of us taking the stand against SOPA, PIPA and ACTA then Politicians can smell potential voters like a shark can smell blood.

      One thing we can say about Rick Falkvinge is that he is in this Copyright War for the long haul and leads were others follow.

      Still it is nice that we are finally getting some attention at long last even if it has taken a political party, a religion, an Internet blackout and millions of us screaming like crazy people!

      • http://7-books.net/ John

        Yes. We should remember that the now universally approved concept of Environmentalism was initiated by ‘nutbag tree huggers’, not mainstream politicians. As soon as the ‘nutbag tree huggers’ begin gaining mainstream followers the mainstream politicans begin to ‘smell votes’, and that is when the real change begins. All parties have their place in this process, including even little old us. Every cry from every ‘nobody’ on sites like this adds to the number of votes smelled by the lawmakers.

        Change is initiated by wide-eyed visionaries, driven by ordinary people, and implemented by vote-seeking politicans. That is how it works; and it does seem to be working here slowly. The end result must be for all information to be freely available to all; this should be an intrinsic right of the people, on a par with the right to breathe the air around us.

        Those who produce ‘content’ must find a new way to earn from it, other than ‘selling’. Google seems to manage OK, giving us instantaneous information for nothing that could potentially be more valuable than the total entertainment industry’s annual turnover.

        Until now politicians have valued bribes from the entertainment industry more highly than votes from the people. But I think that is beginning to change, and the isolated cases like this one will inexorably turn into a flood . This will sweep away the grasping, corrupt media middlemen who are trying to turn our (yes, OUR) internet into their own private, tightly-controlled cable TV channel. And I think we can all cheer for that.

  • PelouzeTF

    Why is it that so many websites profiting from copy-written material under the “user uploaded” loop hole……(even though a substantial portion isn’t user uploaded) have “this website is copy-written” all over their website and would fight tooth and nail to enforce it ?……………….you know, just wondering ???????

    • http://tinyurl.com/ANoiXioNA-personal-info ANoiXioNA

      i was “”just wondering ??????? “” …. PelouzeTF
      Are you twisting..in an attempt to influence shallow minded morons..again ?

      or is it a ……Hypocrisy game… ?…..
      if so…..my turn….
      Piracy is a problem…hmmmm .. I call …”"hypocrite”"
      record profits all round….. I win.

      http://www.scribd.com/doc/79846477/The-Sky-is-Rising

      • Rohe

        I don’t like the argument “Someone else is paying, so I can freeride on them” or “they make enough money off someone else”. This isn’t a very positive view where the society “should” develop into.

        I rather have an album legally for $1 and a movie streaming for $0.10 (which is far away from the current prices), and a provision, that if you can’t buy or see anything digital where you are living, that its legal until someone creates something legal.

        This would force them to invest instead of going the old game of “limitation”. There is surely a demand. They should be forced to act on it.

        • http://tinyurl.com/ANoiXioNA-personal-info ANoiXioNA

          a) the argument YOU said I use…. i don’t
          b) Fair price for anything that can be copied endlessly at zero cost is … ?

          The monetizing models already exist….. or…..to make a point….
          How much did you pay to read this article ?

          advertisers are paying … but you “”freeride”"

        • Rohe

          @ANoiXioNA If you show me the advertiser model for a freehoster or magnet link I could follow your argument

        • http://tinyurl.com/ANoiXioNA-personal-info ANoiXioNA

          @Rohe

          To make another extremely obvious point……
          Would you download this article via “”a freehoster or magnet link”" ?
          or…..
          do you accept the ads and visit the source to download the article ?

          _______________________________________________________

          YOU make a false statement ….. about what I said
          Then expect me to prove the obvious…. or you “”could not follow my argument”"

          I can’t follow ….. you are arguing with stuff … YOU made up

      • Anonymous

        yea you have a realy good point there they are just some stupid egoists try to rule everything they can so they can get everything they can but common they make BILLIONS of money and they want just more WTF now we actually can make big money from them and they make millions and it doesnt mather if we do this or not they just stay rich ok some millions lost but they are still rich.
        and thats why they want to spy on us WTF.
        i say no against ACTA,SOPA AND PIPA.
        free mega-upload and the piratebay.
        and free our rights of privacy.
        we can stop them if we work together just remember:

        We are Anonymous
        We are Legion
        We do not Forgive
        We do not Forget
        Expect us.

    • Danny

      Peloser I’m sure your mother must have taught you about sharing.

      Have you ever lent a CD or DVD to a friend? If you have then you have done exactly what many people do when they upload user content to such sites, sharing.

      • PelouzeTF

        She did, I wasn’t very good at it though because people in general are awful at returning borrowed things so I probably just said it was already lent out if they asked.

        Not sure if “lending one physical copy of a piece of media to one person” has much in common with websites that profit from sharing with millions – although I’m sure there is a very tenuous link that people here use.

  • Pingback: We Need Copyright Reform, Not ACTA! – TorrentFreak - End Of Internet » End Of Internet

  • Cyke1

    copyright reform? yea right less it has all crap pipa/sopa and acta crap in those reforms the big corp won’t even want to hear of it

    • Anonymous

      the corporations don’t decide laws.

      well, they do, but they shouldn’t, so screw what they want to hear

      • Anonymous

        Their solution is simple. Give the general population what they want while protecting artist creation and right to profit.

        File sharing is what the people want and as well demonstrated media creation is flourishing like never before while profit is booming. Problem? No…

        Artists should see some sales decline when there are now more artists about. Then good media will benefit much more than weak and bad media, Media should of course not be rewarded if it sucks.

        • http://gene-poole.tumblr.com Gene Poole

          You know, I don’t even think it’s filesharing the public wants. I think what the public wants is easy access to the media they want. People don’t mind paying for things if it’s cheap. 15 dollar movie tickets and 30 dollar blurays that are full of ads you and piracy warnings you can’t skip, though, are not worth it.

          If they released a Netflix/Steam style service for movies, when the movies were released, I could see piracy rates dropping. You just need to make it easier to use than downloading torrents.

    • http://gene-poole.tumblr.com Gene Poole

      They completely rejected the OPEN Act, because the Act that was supposed to “stop foreign piracy” (their words) didn’t do anything to stop anything on our shores and made an entirely foreign trade issue. Go figure.

  • http://tinyurl.com/ANoiXioNA-personal-info ANoiXioNA

    @Marietje Schaake…. agree 100%
    Copyright is the problem……not current enforcement as ACTA suggests.

    If we are to move the debate from ..”"something wrong with enforcement .. lets make laws”" to “”Something wrong with copyright .. lets reform”"
    The term “copyright theft” needs eradicated,exposed as factually false propaganda.
    File sharing is not equal to copyright theft….
    What does “stealing copyright” even mean ?

    This is a propaganda war currently being waged by over-protectionists.
    The media corps have an interest in pushing the propaganda.
    Some politicians have an interest in pushing the propaganda.
    The propagandist needs to be exposed publicly as a liar… facts are not on their side.
    What Piracy? The Entertainment Industry is BOOMING!

    • http://gene-poole.tumblr.com Gene Poole

      I think this one’s a pretty good link, too.

      http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/02/03/you-will-never-kill-piracy-and-piracy-will-never-kill-you/

      read it quick before the MAFIAA has it censored, it advocates piracy and tells you how to stream The Hangover 2, so it’s obviously evil.

      • http://tinyurl.com/ANoiXioNA-personal-info ANoiXioNA

        +1 …. sensible article.

      • Jmorse43508

        I read that article, and it makes a lot of very good points.

        Only trouble is those for whom it is directed at are just going to “put their fingers in their ears and start yelling.”

        By the time they choose to listen to everyone else out there, though, it will be too late for the MAFIAA. Adapt or die has been the phrase used; it seems they would rather die than change their business model.

        The so-called pirates will always stay a few steps ahead of them.

  • Pingback: We Need Copyright Reform, Not ACTA! | We R Pirates

  • Ivi

    There is only one solution for counterfeid good: Stop outsourcing production to other contries. Everyone except China will be happy. USA will have more employed people.

    • Anonymous

      you make it sound like counterfeit goods are a problem

      • Rohe

        I never understood that either. Those people who buy and wear expensive good know your fakes from 100 miles distance. So the only ones you fool with your $10 rolex is your very simpleton friends who really “believe” that you can buy a $10.000 watch.

        The fashion industry understood, that a $40 knock-off dress at “cheapstore” isn’t even remotely cutting into the sales of the $400 original dress. Those people live in different realities and nobody is really harmed.

        Instead of knocking the sites down, you should tax them and control them like normal stores. Many of them wouldn’t be in business, if they had to abide usual business regulations like everybody else. Selling knockoffs is currently often in the hands of criminal organizations. If you force them to become legal taxpayers, many of their business will falter.

        • Rekrul

          The fashion industry understood, that a $40 knock-off dress at “cheapstore” isn’t even remotely cutting into the sales of the $400 original dress.

          Correction: The fashion industry used to understand that knock-offs weren’t a problem. Now they’re pushing for designs to be copyrighted.

      • Rohe

        @Rekrul All the last tries in front of courts failed. Some big time designer wanted to protect his last designs from the fast cheapshops. One tried to copyright his shoe designs and failed too.

        The knockoff game is a different one. In fashion, the cheapstore doesn’t say its the big name brand. The knockoffs try to hide that fact to mostly stupid people who believe they get a Fucci bag for $30.

  • http://twitter.com/AndyPPUK Andrew Robinson

    Thanks to Marietje Schaake for being brave enough to post here. One thing I’ve discovered from setting up the Pirate Party here in the UK is that, contrary to popular belief, politicians are mostly sensible, intelligent, honest people who do their job because they want to make the world a better place. Of course there are those who see everything purely in terms of their life’s goal of destroying the evil that lurks on the other side of the left/right divide, and some who would rather enjoy a nice free lunch than think about ethics, but mostly it’s actually nice, sensible, clever people, doing what they think is right.

    The great thing about copyright reform when you compare it to other grassroots movements is that it’s not a capitalist dream, a socialist utopian issue, or anything to do with the left/right divide, and it won’t destroy anyone’s economy. It’s simply a sensible reaction to the inevitable (and apolitical) march of technology.

    I’m convinced that I’ll live to see the Pirates get everything they want… not because we will win elections and form governments, not because the people will rise up and throw off the chains that the MAFIAA use to bind them, simply but because people like Marietje Schaake will listen to us, think about what we have to say, and come to the conclusion that we are right.

  • Goest

    good to read! in my country (the country of fries), politicians who are in phase with their times, are note born yet.

    • http://twitter.com/AndyPPUK Andrew Robinson

      Goest, you have been born, you just haven’t realised you are a politician yet!

      • Goest

        good point, and although it’s not an excuse for staying passive, i find the younger generations in a better position to change the world than mine is.

        • http://twitter.com/AndyPPUK Andrew Robinson

          To some extent, I think you’re right, the younger generation are better placed to take part in politics, but I’ve found an odd reluctance to take the step of moving from online activism to real-world politics. Several times, I’ve met young people who said to me ‘I wish we had a pirate candidate I could vote for here’, and my reply is always the same: “It’s you, go get your name on the ballot paper”.

          There’s a perfectly natural fear of not being the right person, and a feeling of not having ‘permission’ to get involved in what society always presents as something done by middle-aged, wealthy, opinionated people who operate within long-established, well funded organisations. So, my message to you is that yes, the younger generation is better placed to change the world, but you are well placed to give them the gentle nudge they need to actually do it, and therefore: It’s you. Go get your name on the ballot paper.

          Setting up a new political movement is an odd process. It takes an unusual blend of stubbornness, belief in the democratic process, and lack of fear of failure (as well as some public speaking ability) to get involved in setting up something that might take 20 years to gain any traction. We need sensible mainstream politicians like Marietje Schaake in the Pirate movement, but we’ll only attract that kind of person 10 or 20 years down the line when we have become a permanent part of the political landscape, and we have party structures, campaign funds, local offices and all the other fixtures and fittings in place. Don’t worry if you’re nothing like Marietje Schaake, you don’t have to be like that to get involved, the job at this stage is to marshall the (often very opinionated, intelligent and argumentative people) who are early adopters and get the party to the stage where the more middle-of-the-road people are not afraid to join.

  • Anonymous

    It is nice to hear from an EMP and Marietje Schaake has certainly said many nice words there. The only fault I can make is that one should always spell “internet” with a capital I to highlight respect for a powerful topic.

    Covering various points then I see that Poland plans to not only reject ACTA but also to ensure it is not passed on the European level. ACTA protests are starting to spread across Europe as can be seen here…
    http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120203/01072617645/watch-out-widespread-protests-against-acta-spreading-across-europe.shtml

    Anonymous I noticed did have some regret over targeting the European Parliament website when they were really aiming for the European Commission but a certain 4 IP rotating server system made that difficult. It least that website shut-down for a few hours made their ACTA protest heard.

    As to copyright in general then yes we clearly need a massive overhaul of current copyright laws to fit a future digital age. My current main concern is that while rights owners should control their creation then they should NOT control the market as they do now when that only leads to exclusive agreements and monopolies.

    I don’t even know why Politicians listen to the RIAA these days. The Internet and other technical advances have allowed a vast independent market to flourish which is one that is open and with fair competition. This is a whole creation, publication, advertising, distribution and sales medium. The RIAA are now the smaller force and they are only interested in protecting their monopoly by trying to kill Indie supply like DaJaz1.

    The MPAA has been even slower than the RIAA to adapt to the new market which is directly why piracy seized the innovation and flourished simply by giving people what they want in terms of media when they want it and how they want it. This is a beautiful thing to see but lawful media can win once they fight piracy at its own game.

    Even now piracy works great for the MPAA when people still buy media they like and such free promotion has caused the MPAA a 65% income increase between 2000 and 2010.

    So why do they aim to fight piracy? It is ironic they call us “thieves” when this Copyright War is not over money but over control. They do believe in absolute Copyright enforcement and it ticks them off to see free citizens doing what they want when they want. Even worse is that piracy becomes the perfect excuse for harsher laws for increased control and even their attempted Internet “land grab”

    I could go on all day about Copyright problems but my point would be why don’t Politicians simply step back and investigate the revolution going on? There is no rush for new laws seeing that the MPAA are making loads of profit and the music business is blooming into a free market where artists can control their own media.

    STEP BACK. DO NOTHING. ONLY FIX REAL PROBLEMS. I see no problems here when we all want successful media creation and artist profit.

  • Paul Hill

    Or maybe just no copyright, best to cut the beasts head right off!!

  • Jimbo

    as long as governments are able to be ‘encouraged’, businesses are able to influence and everyone else is able to be excluded, there will be no changes to what is in place but there will be extras added to enhance what is already in place. until the public, (you know, the people that voted for these governments, the governments that are supposed to represent the people) are allowed to have representation in all talks concerning the things that affect the public the most (like losing freedom, being guilty unless able to prove innocence, being adversely treated), but few others, things wont change!

  • Anonymous

    What we need are REAL politicians. Not the bought and paid for corrupt idiots we have today.

  • http://web.ncf.ca/shawnhcorey/ Shawn H Corey

    There is no such thing a intellectual property. Copyright has _never_ benefited the artist; it has only created monopolies for those who buy the copyright from the artist and resells it at outrageous prices. The sooner we get rid of it, the better the world will be.

    • uuuuuuuu

      > . Copyright has _never_ benefited the artist

      This right here is complete nonsense. This is why people will never take us seriously; coypright absolutely does benefit artists. What we need to tackle is copyright that extends beyond author’s lifetimes; THAT kind of copyright does not benefit artists, it just benefits large corporations.

      • Anonymous

        the problem with copyright today is that it doesn’t belong to the creative people, they have to sign it away to get a deal with the MAFIAA middle-men

        make it untradeable, limit it to 5-25 years and most of the problems go away.

        same with patents.

      • http://gene-poole.tumblr.com Gene Poole

        It’s not complete nonsense, it’s historical fact. The most beneficial times, culturally speaking, are when Copyright is not being enforced. Right now we’re in a renaissance that started around 99 when Napster came into being. Wonder why?

        Is it really conceivable that artists will stop producing art if there isn’t any copyright? Artists don’t create for money, they create because they need to. It’s not like Copyright gets abolished, and all of a sudden movie producers get jobs making pig-iron.

        Royalties are nice, but they’re not the purpose of Copyright. And in this day, free advertising benefits artists more than royalties. Artists don’t even need the studios/publishing houses anymore, and that’s why the industry is fighting this so hard.

        I don’t think it will be possible to abolish copyright, at least, not anytime soon…people are too used to the established method. But that standard, that process, isn’t written in stone, and it isn’t necessary.

        • A rather typical artist

          Pah. We artists create for a number of reasons. Because we like it. Because we enjoy movies/music/literature/whatever and want to give something back. Because we want to be part of it. Because we are vain, and want people to acknowledge our skill and talent.

          … and because we, like most other people, like to make money.

          Money (or the hope of money) is not the only, or necessarily the primary, reason. But it’s definitely a reason, sometimes an important reason, why we do the things we do. Some people who create for money do sloppy work. Other people who create mainly for money are among the very best at what they do.

          But living among artists, I assure you, one reason I wouldn’t list is that we “need” to create.

          We don’t, most of us, see.

        • http://gene-poole.tumblr.com Gene Poole

          @A rather typical artist

          Money comes from different sources, however.

          While it’s true that someone creating a work can receive royalties for use of their copyrighted work (music as an excellent example), such royalties are a trifle. Even for TV/Movie performers, franchise rights don’t amount to a great deal, even over a long period of time.

          The real money is in sales, and the internet does not cut into profits. If anything, it helps.

          Internet piracy equals exposure. An up and coming artist needs to worry about anonymity more than piracy. At least if people are sharing your product, they’re getting your name out there. You can use that to leverage your brand, and make a lot more money than you could have without the internet, specifically because it gives you a lot more options.

          If you’re an author, musician, TV or movie producer, you didn’t have many options to get your product out there, except by going through studios, publication houses. They controlled who your product was sold to, and they had the power to either make it a success or a failure (just look at Mike Judge’s Idiocracy for an example of how to make sure something fails at the box office)

          But with the internet, you control the distribution. Yeah, people will copy and share it, but it gets it out there. If you’re an author, piracy of your ebooks doesn’t mean you’re losing money, it means you’re bringing new readers to your work, people who are going to be more likely to go out and find a copy of your work the next time they’re in a bookstore. If you’re a musician, while your mp3s might be ripped off, they can’t pirate your concert tickets, or the experience of a concert when you come to their area, and more people will buy tickets because they actually ~know~ about you. That means more t-shirt sales, more ticket sales, more revenue, than if you whiled away quietly, holding your copyrights to yourself.

          Do you see? piracy isn’t a problem for artists, it’s an opportunity.

        • A rather typical artist

          That’s a rather naïve view when confronted with reality, I’m afraid. With very, very few exceptions, what e.g. an author can do with the internet is to put the work out there for a very small number of readers, unless he or she is already well known. The internet doesn’t, yet, hurt the typical artist much.

          But it’s not exactly a help either. In my country (not an English-speaking one), with a population of more than ten million inhabitants, not one single writer has managed to get known through the internet. Even the half-hearted marketing a publisher does for a mid-list author is far more effective. A smaller part of something is more than a large part of almost nothing.

    • http://gene-poole.tumblr.com Gene Poole

      In all actuality, it’s not really been about money, either. It’s about censorship.

  • Anonymous

    Ligitimacy is the achilies heel of the copyright industries.

    They are flush with money and massively flush with political power; but, their message that a perpetual corporate monopoly over global intellectual property is good or even safe social policy quickly comes accross to affected citizens like a particularly repulsive buckett of warm dog vomit next to the salad bowl. After all, it is not a long leap of insight for individual citizens to realize that it is they who pay the perpetual monopoly premium; and, that it is they who endure the arbitrary restrictions on product availability and use; and, that it is they who have sufferred the loss of the public domain.

    This problem with legitimacy has forced copyright holders to promote and protect their interests via the most non transparent and non democratic political processes (think of the way the Hadopi law in France and the Three strikes laws in the UK were forced through the legistatures in the dead of night with minimal opportunity for public input.)
    It is clear that in respect to recent copyright legislation, European and American politicians have tried awfully hard NOT to inform or involve their public electorates.

    This speaks, however, to the fragility and vulnerability of those who promote the existing values of copyright law; and, have staked their futures on preventing public interest reforms. We have been witnessing recently the progressing activation
    of large and articulate and increasingly angrier volumes of the electorates resisting the corporate agenda on copyright legislation. (Think the recent experience with SOPA and PIPA.) Both politicians and the content industries face huge risks as a result of this increasing citizen activism. The copyright monopolies have been dealt a losing hand to the extent that the debate about copyright enforcement and copyright reform can be made to occur increasingly in the open light of day. Do we know at this point the likely scale and intensity of public resistence?

    If all the copyright industry can do is continue the old worn policies of working through top cronyn politicians for increased coercions to protect their outdated previledges; all the while seeking to avoid scrutiny of the damages that those previledges inflict on every citizen of the society, then both the copyright industry and the politicians that have protected it run the risk of finally having to answer to new masters.

  • Pingback: ACTA Activists Organize Street Protests – iProgrammer - End Of Internet » End Of Internet

  • Pingback: In the News: 2012-02-04 | Klaus' Korner

  • Pingback: We Need Copyright Reform, Not ACTA! | Best Seedbox

  • Pingback: We Need Copyright Reform, Not ACTA! | TorrentForce Blog

  • Dex

    Europe-wide Protests against ACTA on 11.02, we expect you :P
    https://www.accessnow.org/policy-activism/press-blog/acta-protest-feb-11

  • Noone

    Nice to see our voices finally being heeded.

    As a side note & a little amusement to help get the message across see this http://www.newyorker.com/humor/2012/02/06/120206sh_shouts_weinstein amusing post.

    The best humour is always the closest to the truth they say!

  • aleina mohanty

    I voted for D66 in the last elections and I’d do it again!

    http://goo.gl/jAqHd

  • http://www.r-gate.net/ Mohamd Tair

    The only use for Anarchy is to destroy something before you build something else and then only in extreme situations.

  • marietjeschaakefan

    With people like Marietje I am proud to be Dutch again. Marietje you’re awesome. Tell those ‘plucheklevers’ to get lost!

  • http://www.simondewey.co.uk/ Simon

    Well written. I think there will always be a way for Artists to make their money. It’s just that the middlemen are upset that they’re not getting a share

    Simon Dewey
    http://www.simondewey.co.uk

  • MaybeIamcool

    You’ve heard our words! ACTA must not pass. All people have entertainment on this internet, the internet is entertainment and fun. There is nothing and no need for the internet to lose music and all of it’s music, images, website, video etc. The internet is useless by the time, there is no need for computer anymore.

  • Will_the_man123

    How about abolishing all intellectual property laws:
    http://mises.org/journals/jls/15_2/15_2_1.pdf

  • Pingback: | Kalex's Tome

  • http://twitter.com/Wolverineks wolverine

    if the only way you can make money is by having the government run around with guns threatening people that use your product, you seriously need to rethink your business model…..

  • Pingback: H3bus's Bleuarg » Blog Archive » Réactions officielles à propos d’ACTA

  • http://web.ncf.ca/shawnhcorey/ Shawn H Corey

    We need copyright eliminated, not reformed.

  • Pingback: STOP ACTA! « screenhugger

  • Anonymous

    The pressure is rising, sign this avaaz petition so they can take it to Brussels.
    http://www.avaaz.org/en/index.php

  • Anonymous

    Only now are people finally trying to stop ACTA. This thing was first written years ago and from the very start it was a bad idea, yet nobody did anything about it. This proves that people need to be more aware of things that take our freedoms away and stop them as soon as possible instead of ignoring the problem before it becomes a real threat.

  • Pingback: Poland suspends ACTA ratification – Warsaw Business Journal - End Of Internet » End Of Internet

  • Pingback: Necesitamos una reforma a los derechos de autor, no ACTA | Tecnocápsulas

  • Pingback: Vi har brug for reformer af ophavsret, ikke ACTA. dSeneste

  • Pingback: UK to take part in weekend protests against Acta – ComputerWeekly.com - End Of Internet » End Of Internet

  • Pingback: business model innovation design » Pinboard bookmarks for February 6th

  • Pingback: Useful for me » Blog Archive » We don’t need ACTA, we need copyright reform! Current copyright laws are outdated !

  • Pingback: Links – MSNokia Passes Blame, Bill Gates pushes GMOs, Open Access news | Techrights

  • Pingback: We Need Copyright Reform, Not ACTA! - Torrent News and articles - Zombie Torrents – Ultimate Torrents Downloads

  • Pingback: Massive Street Protests Wage War On ACTA Anti-Piracy Treaty | TorrentFreak

  • Pingback: Massive Street Protests Wage War On ACTA Anti-Piracy Treaty | Emmashare

  • Pingback: Marietje Schaake: Me vajame autoriõiguse reformi, mitte ACTA-t « juhuslikud mõtted

  • Pingback: ACTA is a Threat to Legislative Freedom in Europe « juhuslikud mõtted

  • Pingback: ACTA: ¿SOPA para todos o “no es lo que parece”? « gugamayer

  • Pingback: Massive Street Protests Wage War On ACTA Anti-Piracy Treaty | Hosting In

  • Guest
  • Guest
  • guest
  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • The Pirate Bay Isn’t Down Completely, Just Having a Few Issues

    Twitter and Facebook, not to mention the TorrentFreak inbox, are currently alive with complaints that The...

  • Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

    Freedom of speech is a highly valued commodity, but should people be allowed to say whatever...

  • Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.